BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

Keyser Soze

On 6/19/17 1:09 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 13:00:00 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/19/17 12:05 PM, wrote:

I am still waiting for more information before I start jumping to
conclusions.
I have seen the track of the freighter but I have not seen that laid
down over the track of the destroyer. There is a lot of chatter out
there but not much that has been confirmed.

As for the ship itself, WWII pretty much proved big heavily armored
"battleships" were just bigger targets. They were really only useful
for shore bombardment. Light and fast is better than slow and tough
because armor seldom actually stood up to a large naval rifle in the
first place. Most naval museums seem to show a piece of armor over a
foot thick with a bullet hole in it. These days the hole is likely to
be through the deck anyway, even from a missile.

Well, I'm betting on lack of knowledge of what happens or can happen at
sea, too much dependence on computer monitors, and not enough time on
ship operations simulators, assuming the navy uses them.

There may be too much dependence on technology but unless things have
really changed there was no shortage of drills and actual experience
on a ship. I doubt there are any simulators. There may be a shortage
of experienced sailors tho as turnover is a big problem in all of the
services.

Hmm. The U.S. maritime trades unions have big time ships operation
simulators for training. So do some European nations. Some years ago, I
got to "drive" (and crash) a tanker on one of the union simulators.