"Jim" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

So...only the superstructure will easily catch fire when hit by an
incendiary...well, that's a step up.

In the old days of lesser defensive technology, warships were built
with a "When in doubt, make it stout" philosophy.

Now-a-days the idea is not to get hit in the first place. We have a
very technology based (and reliant) military today from equipment for
ground troops to ships and airplanes. Critics aside, for the most
part it works, minimizes risks and saves lives when compared to the
old, brute force methodologies.

Eisboch

I appreciate the theory of not getting hit, and I am sure those who have
high-powered, supersonic, anti-ship missiles do, too. I think an
aluminum superstructure is a mistake on a capital warship.

I think the Sheffield was mostly steel and the aluminum in question was a
high magnesium content alloy. Aluminum does not burn, but does lose
strength at about 500 degrees and melts at 1500 degrees. The Sheffield
did not have vertical fire barriers as American ships do.
I thought it was about 750 degrees that Alum. started to puddle up.

600 in a vacuum.

"Boater" wrote in message
...

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:


That is a common misconception, the HMS Sheffield was made entirely of
steel.


Supplied by the lowest bidder...


A slippery one you be.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
That is a common misconception, the HMS Sheffield was made entirely of
steel.

Supplied by the lowest bidder...


A slippery one you be.

Eisboch




Not enough.
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 11:27:14 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Aluminum does not burn

And just how would you describe rapid exothermic oxidation then ?

Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 11:27:14 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Aluminum does not burn

And just how would you describe rapid exothermic oxidation then ?




The steam coming off SW Tom when his eTec blows up?

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Don White wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
""UglyDan®©T"" wrote in message
...
"Boater" wrote:
I appreciate the theory of not getting hit, and I am sure those who
have
high-powered, supersonic, anti-ship missiles do, too. I think an
aluminum superstructure is a mistake on a capital warship.


The USS Belknap was built in the 60's and she had an aluminum
superstructure, Wasn't too much left of her, except the hull after the
collision with the Kennedy. UD

Quite a few modern naval ships have steel hulls and aluminum
superstructures. They just aren't supposed to crash into an aircraft
carrier.

Eisboch

Seems to me the Brits had a problem with Aluminum superstructures on
their warships in the Falklands War..
The French built Exocet missle caused major fires.


That is a common misconception, the HMS Sheffield was made entirely of
steel.


Supplied by the lowest bidder...

And the union welders would not weld in the verticle fire partitions.
Sad.

Calif Bill wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Don White wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
""UglyDan®©T"" wrote in message
...
"Boater" wrote:
I appreciate the theory of not getting hit, and I am sure those who
have
high-powered, supersonic, anti-ship missiles do, too. I think an
aluminum superstructure is a mistake on a capital warship.


The USS Belknap was built in the 60's and she had an aluminum
superstructure, Wasn't too much left of her, except the hull after the
collision with the Kennedy. UD

Quite a few modern naval ships have steel hulls and aluminum
superstructures. They just aren't supposed to crash into an aircraft
carrier.

Eisboch
Seems to me the Brits had a problem with Aluminum superstructures on
their warships in the Falklands War..
The French built Exocet missle caused major fires.

That is a common misconception, the HMS Sheffield was made entirely of
steel.

Supplied by the lowest bidder...

And the union welders would not weld in the verticle fire partitions.
Sad.



I see you let Zell out of the locked ward.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 11:27:14 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Aluminum does not burn

And just how would you describe rapid exothermic oxidation then ?




Magnesium does a rapid exothermic oxidation. Magnesium melts. One of the
reasons it is so hard to weld magnesium.

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Don White wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
""UglyDan®©T"" wrote in message
...
"Boater" wrote:
I appreciate the theory of not getting hit, and I am sure those who
have
high-powered, supersonic, anti-ship missiles do, too. I think an
aluminum superstructure is a mistake on a capital warship.


The USS Belknap was built in the 60's and she had an aluminum
superstructure, Wasn't too much left of her, except the hull after
the
collision with the Kennedy. UD

Quite a few modern naval ships have steel hulls and aluminum
superstructures. They just aren't supposed to crash into an
aircraft carrier.

Eisboch
Seems to me the Brits had a problem with Aluminum superstructures on
their warships in the Falklands War..
The French built Exocet missle caused major fires.

That is a common misconception, the HMS Sheffield was made entirely of
steel.

Supplied by the lowest bidder...

And the union welders would not weld in the verticle fire partitions.
Sad.

I see you let Zell out of the locked ward.

How did you get out?

Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 11:27:14 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Aluminum does not burn

And just how would you describe rapid exothermic oxidation then ?




Very fast spreading and destructive rust.