|
INS Hanit damage revealed for the first time
[Copy link]
|
|
Reply #8 matamata's post
misil pertama dikelirukan olh BARAK dan dipesong kearah lain tapi tak sempat nak pesongkan misil kedua. dengar serita misil pertama dihalakan oleh BARAK ke kapal lain dan kapal tu tenggelam.
misil pertama dikelirukan oleh barak?? Barak ni bukan sistem SAM ka? tugas dia kan memusnahkan sasaran udara, bukannya mengumpan peluru berpandu. lain la chaff atau pengumpan peluru berpandu macam nulka.
Pastu, ada tak pengesahan cerita misil pertama dihalakan oleh BARAK ke kapal lain dan kapal tu tenggelam?
menurut sumber wa, sistem pertahanan udara kapal ni tak diaktifkan langsung sebab depa tak dapat threat notification yang Hizbollah ada memiliki peluru berpandu anti kapal. itulah sebabnya Barak dan sistem CIWS gagal berfungsi. sistem ESM kapal mungkin dapat mengesan pancaran radar peluru berpandu ketika peluru berpandu dalam homing phase, tapi selalunya dalam masa tu, sudah terlambat untuk menghidupkan sistem pertahanan udara kapal.
sama ceritanya macam cerita USS Stark. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #17 bravotwozero's post
sistem CIWS amat bahaya jika diletakkan pada "auto" mode. dia akan jadi cowboy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #19 bravotwozero's post
errr... If I'm not mistaken, IFF are not radar but a system that interrogate between each other and that info are incorporated into the radar info and displayed together on the radar screen. That's how the radar operator can differentiate between friendly vessel and foe. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #20 matamata's post
in this case, it's not over or even underestimating the enemy. its the failure of their intelligence agencies to report or share the info with each other. more to inter service rivalries.
If I'm not mistaken, the army knew that hizbollah possess anti ship missiles but has never relayed it to the navy. Mossad of course, only gives info on the need to know basis. hence the disaster. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barak diorang ni VL ke pakai pelancar peti tu? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #23 tin's post
IFF is a RADAR.....RADAR divided into two categories
1. Primary = u transmit and received from the same platform/antenna....u use the same signal
2. Secondary = u transmit from a platform then received from another platform....thats why die panggil interogator dengan responder....interogator kat kapal kita contohnya dan responder dekat aircraft.....u received a different signal from another party.....
Secondary radar are useful when u switching off ur surveillance radar...special EMCON policy...ur IFF still on (unless u switched it off).....ur IFF can give u eyebrow picture in ur radar screen
[ Last edited by bravotwozero at 19-10-2007 02:11 AM ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Israel Navy Faults Humans, Not Technology, for Ship Attack
By Barbara Opall-Rome, Tel Aviv
Nearly months after a Hizbollah-launched missile struck Israel抯 premier warship off Lebanon抯 coast, an inquiry has validated Navy and industrial contentions that technology was not to blame for arguably the most embarrassing failure of the Summer 2006 war.
Findings from an exhaustive post-war probe into the C-802 attack on the INS Hanit determined that operational readiness deficiencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #26 bravotwozero's post
I see...
Thanks for the info |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by tin at 17-10-2007 09:08 AM
ESM kapal mungkin dapat mengesan pancaran radar peluru berpandu ketikapeluru berpandu dalam homing phase, tapi selalunya dalam masa tu, sudahterlambat untuk menghidupkan sistem pertahanan udara kapal....
Thats why most of ESM libraries are filled with Aircraft radar and not Missile radar.....for early warning..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #22 tin's post
I agree, it is dangerous......but that is the risk that the commander of the ship has to take....it is his call.....balancing between risk of friendly fire and protection against incoming missile.......tough call though.....
but again it is war situation readiness should be at the highest.....but everybody hv their own opininion on this..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #21 tin's post
I'm not really sure about this and frankly speaking that i'm military idiot , but it actually been discussed by TEMPUR mag. about afew month ago(not really sure which month) peace. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #32 matamata's post
please don't call yourself and idiot. everybody is learning and sharing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tgh keje nih...ular skjap, bos tak masuk...ok nanti balik umah saya chek blk TEMPUR keluaran bila.... it actually very intresting... adios, bos dah masuk |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ababel This user has been deleted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Korek punya korek, aku dah dpt, baca TEMPUR keluaran jun 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long range anti-ship missiles such as the Harpoon and Exocet and presumably the C802 are programmed to be sea-skimmers until the last moment when they execute a "pop-up" manuver and then turn abruptly down unto the target. Although this ensures that the damage remains above the water line, it is a very successful technique that totally confuses threat radars and last ditch defence systems such as the Phalanx. Against this type of manuever, decoys and jammers are more effective. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #37 mentosonline's post
only Harpoon do the POP UP thing, n not the exocet.......... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
apa pun israel dah kalah kat lubnan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|