Jim McLaughlin
February 2nd 06, 04:13 AM
"Fred J. McCall" > wrote in message
...
> "BlackBeard" > wrote:
>
> :David E. Powell wrote:
> :>
> :> Name a successful combat use of the torpedo you mention.
> :
> : The Kursk.
>
> I don't count 'own goals' as a successful use. Weapons that kill the
> user before they even attempt a shot are generally considered to be a
> bad deal....
>
>
(newsgroups trimmed)
Assuming that the Kursk tragedy involved the Shkval (sp?) torpedo, rather
than a more conventional torpedo.....
The fUSSR / Russians designed and built the weapon. One might think they
knew its operational details and its quirks, an were better trained in its
storage, fueling and use than anyone else.
If the Kursk incident was a Shkval (sp?) malfunction / accident, it does not
bode well for effective
use of the Shkval (sp?) in combat by the Iranians.
--
Jim McLaughlin
Reply address is deliberately munged.
If you really need to reply directly, try:
jimdotmclaughlinatcomcastdotcom
And you know it is a dotnet not a dotcom
address.
...
> "BlackBeard" > wrote:
>
> :David E. Powell wrote:
> :>
> :> Name a successful combat use of the torpedo you mention.
> :
> : The Kursk.
>
> I don't count 'own goals' as a successful use. Weapons that kill the
> user before they even attempt a shot are generally considered to be a
> bad deal....
>
>
(newsgroups trimmed)
Assuming that the Kursk tragedy involved the Shkval (sp?) torpedo, rather
than a more conventional torpedo.....
The fUSSR / Russians designed and built the weapon. One might think they
knew its operational details and its quirks, an were better trained in its
storage, fueling and use than anyone else.
If the Kursk incident was a Shkval (sp?) malfunction / accident, it does not
bode well for effective
use of the Shkval (sp?) in combat by the Iranians.
--
Jim McLaughlin
Reply address is deliberately munged.
If you really need to reply directly, try:
jimdotmclaughlinatcomcastdotcom
And you know it is a dotnet not a dotcom
address.