Quote:
Originally posted by Daless2
I appreciate the representation Joe has put up and understand the rational and need behind it. I think most do.
|
I assumed that we all realized this too. I certainly did. I just thought that I'd provide these links about the sink-ex in question since someone asked for more info about the target ship. The images are some of the best for a sink-ex that I've seen.
The only reason that I had these links was that some old shipmates of mine from the US Navy and I have been discussing various types of sink-exercises and someone sent these links to me.
You see, a destroyer (USS HAYLER DD-997) that we commissioned and served on has recently been decomissioned. We just learned that it may become a target for a future sink-ex. So, we've been discussing our feelings about this and the different types of weapons that may be used. Some of the former crew are writing congress to try and alter such plans, while some of us think that this is a fitting end to a ship's career (as opposed to rotting away in mothballs, being scrapped and turned into rebar and pop cans, or worse being sold to another country).
Anyway, many of us felt that a torpedo hit such as this cool Australian one was the best choice since there are fewer flames than with the missile and gun exercises, and becuase the ship was afterall an anti-submarine warfare platform most of the time. Though, since HAYLER did fire Harpoons and Tomahawks in her twenty-year history, maybe Joe and his group ought to sink her that way too. Bombs from jets would be okay. No guns, however! As an old Gunners Mate, I can tell you that the 5-inch guns of today would prolong the ordeal. Now bring out a battleship and that's a different matter.
Tom