Navy's newest "One hitter quitter"

Amazing! If the torpedo had 7 more ounces of powder, I believe it would have actually split the destroyer in half..... which it just about did.

wow amazing

An even better destroyer killer is an H.M.A.S (Australian) air craft carrier. Just ask the survivors of the Frank E. Evans (DD-754). It did break the destroyer in two. (Ref.-H.M.A.S. Melbourne)

Ok, now we know what a one-shot-stopper looks like. Anyone care to conceal carry one? Awesome and I'm only sad we don't have toys like that.

21 feet long 21 inches in diameter. About a ton and a half. 800 to 900 lbs of RDX based explosives in the warhead. 55 knots plus, wire guidance, passive and active sonar seeking too.

wow

next time we catch terrorists tooling around the ocean in a destroyer we can sink em fast before they get on a plane or something....

oh wait

should we really be planning on fighting WW4 on the sea and not in some cramped dirty city?

Propaganda. There are too many gaps in the video to know anything about what happened.

I like it.

When to we put it to use? There are some russian targets in the black sea blockading georgia.

Does anyone know how hard it is to get a sub through the bosporus without being detected?

Old story. The torpedo did not actually hit the ship, it was detonated underneath the ship. This caused a giant air bubble to come up in the middle of the ship. Then the weight of the ship itself caused it to crack in the middle.

should we really be planning on fighting WW4 on the sea and not in some cramped dirty city?

Click to expand...

Because the next war always looks just like the last one...

Check out these pages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_48_torpedo

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/mk-48.htm

http://bubbleheads.blogspot.com/2008/02/mk-48-torpedo-not-just-for-skimmers.html

http://www.navy.gov.au/weapons/torpedoes.html

http://www.usscasimirpulaski.com/tourmiddlelevel.htm

Spyder1911 is right, the warhead detonated below the keel, causing the ship to be unsupported and she broke her own back. Nothing unusual, though. That's been the model for high yeild torpedos for a while. There hasn't been a naval vessel built yet that can take its own weight, so the weapons just exploit that weakness.

What I'd really fear at sea, would be a Shkval !

Just remember 2 things: 1. there are only 2 kinds of ships built in our world; submarines and targets. 2. mechanical engineers build weapons, civil engineers build targets.

In the war between weapon designer and armor manufacturer, the weapon always wins in the end.

That's what we in the submarine service call a "21 inch countermeasure"! Don't waste time shooting off little noisemakers to distract an enemy torpedo, send a couple of those things in his direction to give HIM something to worry about while you finish settling his hash.

Hi, guys
In 1982 Argies sunk many England ships with Exocet misiles with one shot.Again shot placement rule, rather caliber.

There is one more little thing at play in torpedo warfare that hasn't been mentioned, which is the incompressibility of water.

When there is a detonation under an air-filled boat, the shock-wave goes in the path of least resistance....which is straight up through the boat. The 'bubble' thing might actually lift the ends up and finish the breaking, but I think the shock-wave does the initial destruction.

Read about limpit mines where the concept is exploited to great effect.

the Mk-48 ADCAP torpedo is an amazing weopon...

it actually detonates below the enemy ships and vaporizes the water their. The ship is raised up from the force of the explosion and when it comes back down, there's no water there to support the keal....hence she is broken in half and goes to the bottom very quickly.

They have actually been in the fleet for many years, and it's still thee "top shelf" weapon. Not likely to be improved upon any time soon as the money isn't there to develop "cold war" weapons. They have actually never been fired in a hostile engagement.

There has only been one modern (nuclear) submarine torpedo engagement in a hot war, when the HMS Conqueror plugged the Argentine Cruiser General Belgrano during the Falkands war. Fortunately for the Argentines, the Brits shot a spread of ancient Mk 8 torpedoes and though some 300 were killed, they managed to abandon ship.

If they had used a modern torpedo, they certainly would have lost all hands.

There was a big stink about this sinking as the Belgrano was outside of the 200 mile 'cross this line and you're toast' zone the Brits had declared. The Conqureror was tracking the Belgrono steaming towards the Falklands, and reported in for instructions. None other than Maggie Thatcher (Mrs. Brass Balls herself) authorized the attack. Apparently the Belgrano had turned coarse and was heading away, but little did they know their fate was sealed.

I guess they played chicken with the wrong Prime Minister.

Anyone care to conceal carry one?

Click to expand...

Easy, if you can hide it underwater...

I guess a nuclear submarine is the ultimate CCW...

I guess a nuclear submarine is the ultimate CCW...

Click to expand...

and of course, no one is going to confirm or deny that they do or do not carry much more potent weapons than their torpedoes.

if Iran keeps going on the path they're on, they may just find out what it's litke to play hard ball in the big leagues yet..... and if they do, they will forever regret it.

Strange tale of the General Belgrano, origionally the USS Phoenix (CL-46)
a Pearl Harbour survivor. Sold to Argentina in 1946, she was uparmed with Sea Cat missiles in the 60's.
An American WW2 cruiser sunk by a British sub, using WW2 Mk8 #4 torpedoes!

Ironic!!!

Oneshooter
Livin in Texas