Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Aegis System can not survive marine traffic, so Missiles Planes Subs Warships?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Istana
    Posts
    362
    My Reputation Points: 51 / Power: 0

    Default Aegis System can not survive marine traffic, so Missiles Planes Subs Warships?

    Repeatedly proven that US Navy Aegis Combat System ships can not even safely navigate themselves in a single piece through the Peace Time Marine Traffic's. And they crashed commercial ships, killed themselves, make oil leakage, caused search and rescue, cost $, and caused their own commanders to be "you are fired!". No face to whole NATO.

    So what's the true war effectiveness of these Invincible $ Trillion $ Aegis Combat Systems, against Missiles, Torpedos, Guided Bombs, warplanes, warships, submarines etc?

    If commercial ships can slam into them, why not Missiles? Torpedos? Sea Mines? What about commercial planes and suicide Drones diving 911 strikes on them?

    Is this a sadistic joke? Paying tax dollars to buy $ Trillion $ of these?

    Can Iranian Navy not run explosive packed speed boats at US Navy Aegis ships? What about Drones? Are Missiles really necessary to kill them, when you can do it by running ships at them!?
    From the Istana
    president 多你等
    Thank you
    0.34% 7,269 votes

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    22,240
    My Reputation Points: 381 / Power: 0

    Default Re: Aegis System can not survive marine traffic, so Missiles Planes Subs Warships?

    motherfucking loser, aegis is not for navigating. Fuck your mother.
    The Worker's Party is the best opposition party.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Istana
    Posts
    362
    My Reputation Points: 51 / Power: 0

    Default Re: Aegis System can not survive marine traffic, so Missiles Planes Subs Warships?

    Quote Originally Posted by steffychun View Post
    motherfucking loser, aegis is not for navigating. Fuck your mother.
    So?

    Can not survive navigation can still win war?

    To defeat Aegis no need to worry about using missiles, cargo ship is sufficient is it? Mother Fucker?
    From the Istana
    president 多你等
    Thank you
    0.34% 7,269 votes

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,145
    My Reputation Points: 226 / Power: 0

    Smile Re: Aegis System can not survive marine traffic, so Missiles Planes Subs Warships?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Tan View Post
    Repeatedly proven that US Navy Aegis Combat System ships can not even safely navigate themselves in a single piece through the Peace Time Marine Traffic's. And they crashed commercial ships, killed themselves, make oil leakage, caused search and rescue, cost $, and caused their own commanders to be "you are fired!". No face to whole NATO.

    So what's the true war effectiveness of these Invincible $ Trillion $ Aegis Combat Systems, against Missiles, Torpedos, Guided Bombs, warplanes, warships, submarines etc?

    If commercial ships can slam into them, why not Missiles? Torpedos? Sea Mines? What about commercial planes and suicide Drones diving 911 strikes on them?

    Is this a sadistic joke? Paying tax dollars to buy $ Trillion $ of these?

    Can Iranian Navy not run explosive packed speed boats at US Navy Aegis ships? What about Drones? Are Missiles really necessary to kill them, when you can do it by running ships at them!?
    Conceit lah.

    Think damage to US warship would have been averted had a torpedo been fired and the oil tanker sunk (even @ close range)... But not good PR if that happened (China will immediately revoke US freedom of navigarion rights and maybe UN investigation for murder on warship captain etc)...

    Perhaps for too long, others have given way to US warships out of fear/respect but nowadays, everyone expects US warships to follow marine traffic codes all the same.
    "The measure of a man is best defined by his sincerity, not the thickness of his wallet, nor the opulence of wealth" ~ Matthew 25:40: "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'"- (NIV)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Istana
    Posts
    362
    My Reputation Points: 51 / Power: 0

    Default Re: Aegis System can not survive marine traffic, so Missiles Planes Subs Warships?

    Quote Originally Posted by bic_cherry View Post
    Conceit lah.

    Think damage to US warship would have been averted had a torpedo been fired and the oil tanker sunk (even @ close range)... But not good PR if that happened (China will immediately revoke US freedom of navigarion rights and maybe UN investigation for murder on warship captain etc)...

    Perhaps for too long, others have given way to US warships out of fear/respect but nowadays, everyone expects US warships to follow marine traffic codes all the same.


    Global Pause for US Navy Operation after their series of Inapt collisions. In local language it is call Loong Piak (crashed into the walls) :

    http://www.thesundaily.my/news/2017/...lision-updated

    US navy pauses operations after 10 sailors lost in collision (Updated)
    Posted on 22 August 2017 - 12:30am
    Last updated on 22 August 2017 - 08:26am
    Print

    WASHINGTON: The US Navy declared a worldwide pause in its operations on Monday after the latest in a series of accidents left ten sailors missing and five injured.

    Chief of Naval Operations Admiral John Richardson ordered an "operational pause" to allow a "comprehensive review" of practices after the destroyer USS John McCain was hit by a merchant tanker off Singapore.

    "As you know this is the second collision in three months and the last of a series of incidents in the Pacific theatre," Richardson said.

    "This trend demands more forceful action. As such I have directed an operational pause be taken in all of our fleets around the world."

    US Defence Secretary James Mattis, on a visit to Jordan, said Richardson's "broader enquiry will look at all related accidents, incidents at sea, that sort of thing. He is going to look at all factors, not just the immediate one."

    There was no official word on how long the disruption to the world's most powerful navy, active in all of the world's oceans, might last. But some US media suggested the pause would last for a day.

    Ten US sailors were still missing after the John McCain collided with a tanker Monday, tearing a large hole in its hull in the second accident involving an American warship in two months.

    The badly damaged destroyer limped into port in the city-state of Singapore in the afternoon under escort after the dramatic pre-dawn accident, which sent water flooding into the vessel.

    A major search involving ships and aircraft from three countries was launched for the missing sailors after the McCain hit the Alnic MC in the busy shipping lanes of the Singapore Strait, near the Strait of Malacca.

    Analysts said the accident, so soon after June's collision off Japan involving a US warship, raised questions about whether the US Navy was overstretched in Asia as it seeks to combat Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea and North Korea's nuclear ambitions.

    The US Navy said there was "significant damage to the hull" of the warship in the latest collision, which led to flooding of crew sleeping areas, machinery and communications rooms.

    "Damage control efforts by the crew halted further flooding," they said in a statement after the John S. McCain arrived at Changi Naval Base in the city-state.

    A helicopter took four of the injured to a Singapore hospital with injuries that were not life-threatening while the fifth did not need further medical attention, the navy said.

    The 154-metre vessel could still sail under its own power after the collision at 5.24 am with the Liberian-flagged tanker, which was slightly bigger at 600 feet. Two other vessels escorted it into port, AFP journalists saw.

    The warship had been heading for a routine stop in Singapore after carrying out a "freedom of navigation operation" in the disputed South China Sea earlier in August around a reef in the Spratly Islands, sparking a furious response from Beijing.

    The vessel is named after US Senator John McCain's father and grandfather, who were both admirals in the US navy.

    McCain himself, who as a naval pilot was shot down during the Vietnam War and held prisoner, welcomed the review.

    "I agree with Admiral Richardson that more forceful action is urgently needed to identify and correct the causes of the recent ship collisions," he said.

    "I expect full transparency and accountability from the Navy leaders as they conduct the associated investigations and reviews."

    'Thoughts and prayers'

    President Donald Trump tweeted: "Thoughts & prayers are w/ our @USNavy sailors aboard the #USSJohnMcCain where search & rescue efforts are underway."

    Ridzwan Rahmat, a naval expert at Janes by IHS Markit, said initial indications suggested the US warship may not have been obeying rules designed to separate maritime traffic passing through the Singapore Strait.

    With the accident coming soon after the freedom of navigation operation, he told AFP that it raised questions "whether there is crew fatigue setting in, whether or not the tempo of operations by the US Navy in this region is getting too fast".

    "Are they doing too much within this region with North Korea, and Japan and then now in the South China Sea?"

    Singapore, Malaysia and US ships and aircraft were all involved in the hunt for the missing sailors.

    The tanker involved in the collision, which was used for transporting oil and chemicals and weighed over 30,000 gross tonnes, sustained some damage but no crew were injured, and Singapore said there was no oil pollution.

    In June, seven American sailors died when the destroyer USS Fitzgerald collided with a Philippine-flagged cargo ship in a busy channel not far from Yokosuka, a gateway to container ports in Tokyo and nearby Yokohama.

    The dead sailors, aged 19 to 37, were found by divers in flooded sleeping berths a day after the collision tore a huge gash in the side of the Fitzgerald.

    A senior admiral announced last week that the commander of the destroyer and several other officers had been relieved of their duties aboard their ship over the incident.

    Both the USS John S. McCain and USS Fitzgerald are part of the US Seventh Fleet based in Yokosuka. — AFP
    From the Istana
    president 多你等
    Thank you
    0.34% 7,269 votes

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    13,448
    My Reputation Points: 458 / Power: 0

    Default Re: Aegis System can not survive marine traffic, so Missiles Planes Subs Warships?

    good article... i think fap should place order for a dozen

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    26
    My Reputation Points: 10 / Power: 0

    Default Re: Aegis System can not survive marine traffic, so Missiles Planes Subs Warships?

    Quote Originally Posted by steffychun View Post
    motherfucking loser, aegis is not for navigating. Fuck your mother.
    Aegis is supposed to see and fight ships few hundred km afar and even sink them. But it is unaware of those right ahead of it own collision path. That is very convincing.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    123
    My Reputation Points: 22 / Power: 0

    Default Re: Aegis System can not survive marine traffic, so Missiles Planes Subs Warships?

    Pentagon now shitlessly frightened that their Aegis ships had all been hacked by Kim Jong Un causing these losses!


    http://www.straitstimes.com/world/un...erattack-fears


    US warship collisions raise cyber-attack fears
    The USS John S McCain as seen in Changi Naval Base on Aug 22, 2017.
    The USS John S McCain as seen in Changi Naval Base on Aug 22, 2017. ST PHOTO: KEVIN LIM
    PUBLISHED23 MIN AGO
    FACEBOOK0TWITTERWHATSAPPEMAIL
    SINGAPORE (AFP) - A spate of incidents involving US warships in Asia, including a deadly collision this week off Singapore, has forced the navy to consider whether cyber attackers might be to blame.

    While some experts believe that being able to engineer such a collision would be unlikely, given the security systems of the US Navy and the logistics of having two ships converge, others say putting the recent incidents down to human error and coincidence is an equally unsatisfactory explanation.

    The USS John S. McCain collided with a tanker early on Monday (Aug 21) as the warship was on its way for a routine stop in the city-state, tearing a huge hole in the hull and leaving 10 sailors missing and five injured.

    The Navy announced on Tuesday that some remains were found by divers in flooded compartments on the ship.

    Get The Straits Times
    newsletters in your inbox

    SIGN UP
    The Chief of US Naval Operations Admiral John Richardson said on Monday that he could not rule out some kind of outside interference or a cyber attack being behind the latest collision, but said he did not want to prejudge the inquiry. His broader remarks suggested a focus on "how we do business on the bridge".

    "We're looking at every possibility," Richardson said, when asked about the possibility of a cyber attack, adding "as we did with Fitzgerald as well".

    Just two months earlier in June, the USS Fitzgerald and a Philippine-flagged cargo ship smashed into each other off Japan, leaving seven sailors dead and leading to several officers being disciplined.

    There were also two more, lesser-known incidents this year - in January USS Antietam ran aground near its base in Japan and in May, USS Lake Champlain collided with a South Korean fishing vessel. Neither caused any injury.

    Admiral Scott Swift, commander of the US Pacific Fleet, has refused to rule out sabotage in Monday's incident, saying all possibilities are being examined.

    "We are not taking any consideration off the table," he told reporters in Singapore onTuesday, when asked about the possibility of a cyber attack in the latest incident.

    HIGH TENSIONS

    Analysts are divided on the issue, with some believing US Navy crews may simply be overstretched as they try to tackle myriad threats in the region, and pointing to the difficulties of sailing through waterways crowded with merchant shipping.

    But others believe something more sinister may be going on.

    Itar Glick, head of Israeli-based international cyber security firm Votiro, said the spate of incidents suggested that US Navy ships' GPS systems could have been tampered with by hackers, causing them to miscalculate their positions.

    "I think that hackers could try to do this, and if they are state sponsored they might have the right resources to facilitate this kind of attack," he told AFP.

    Glick, who says he used to work on cyber security for Israeli intelligence, said that China and North Korea would be the most likely culprits.

    Tensions are running high between North Korea and the US as Pyongyang makes strides in its weapons programme, conducting two successful intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) test launches in July.

    Pyongyang has also been blamed for recent cyber attacks, including the 2014 hack of Sony Pictures and the theft of millions of dollars from the Bangladesh central bank.

    The US has repeatedly accused China of carrying out cyber attacks on American companies, particularly to steal intellectual property. Beijing however says it is also the victim of such attacks.

    'SPOOFING'

    Glick pointed to a recent incident in June of apparent large-scale GPS interference in the Black Sea to illustrate that such disruptions are possible.

    The interference - known as "spoofing", which disrupts GPS signals so ships' instruments show inaccurate locations - caused some 20 vessels to have their signals disrupted, according to reports.

    Jeffery Stutzman, chief of intelligence operations for US-based cyber security firm Wapack Labs, told AFP he thought the possibility of a cyber attack being behind the latest incident was "entirely possible".

    "I would be very doubtful that it was human error, four times in a row," he said, referring to the four recent incidents.

    Still, other observers believe such a scenario to be unlikely.

    Zachary Fryer-Biggs, from defence consultancy Jane's by IHS Markit, said that even if something went wrong with the GPS system of a ship, other safety mechanisms should stop it from crashing, such as having people on watch.

    "The collision only occurs if several other safety mechanisms fail," he said.

    Daniel Paul Goetz, from US-headquartered cybersecurity firm Lantium, added that causing a collision would be complicated, as it would involve knowing the exact location, speed and bearing of both ships involved.

    Goetz, who says his background is in US military intelligence, also pointed to the level of technology used to protect the navy from such threats.

    "The US military uses a GPS system that is highly secured, highly encrypted - the chances that somebody could take over US military ship is very close to zero," he said.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Serious Gun Robbery Failure Video - in our country u can not earn $$$$ so I rob
    By matamafia in forum The Courtyard Café
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-10-2016, 05:25 PM
  2. Replies: 42
    Last Post: 29-03-2012, 03:22 AM
  3. Not enough pump stations, so CNG cars can switch to petrol
    By Leepotism in forum The Courtyard Café
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-12-2011, 07:44 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 25-01-2011, 09:51 AM
  5. Old Dog Thief's Heart can not withstand 16.Sept.2008 Excitment
    By uncleyap in forum The Political / Serious Zone [no rep deductions]
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 15-09-2008, 08:26 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •