if you have to ask.... the Falklands War witnessed the sinking of HMS Sheffield by Exocet launched by Argies.

Sinking[edit]
Sheffield was first detected by an Argentine Naval Aviation patrol aircraft Lockheed SP-2H Neptune (2-P-112) at 7:50 AM on 4 May 1982. The Neptune kept the British ships under surveillance, verifying Sheffield's position again at 8:14 and 8:43. Two Argentine Navy Super Étendards (3-A-202 and 3-A-203) both armed with Exocets took off from Río Grande, Tierra del Fuego at 9:45 and met with an Argentine Air Force tanker KC-130H Hercules at 10:00 hours.

At 10:35, the Neptune climbed to 1,170 metres (3,840 ft) and detected a large and two medium-sized contacts at the coordinates 52°33′55″S, 57°40′55″W map. A few minutes later, the Neptune contacted both Super Étendards with this information. Flying at very low altitude, around 10:50, both Super Étendards climbed to 160 metres (520 ft) to verify these contacts, but, not finding any, decided to continue. 25 miles (40 km) later they climbed again and, after a few seconds of scanning, the targets appeared on their radar screens.[4][5]

Both pilots loaded the coordinates in their weapons systems, returned to low level, and after last minute checks, launched their AM39 Exocets at 11:04 from 20 to 30 miles (32 to 48 km) away from their targets. The Super Étendards did not need to refuel from the KC-130 again, which had been waiting, and landed at Rio Grande at 12:04. Supporting the mission were an Argentine Air Force Learjet 35 as a decoy and two IAI Daggers as the KC-130 escorts[4][5]

At approximately 10 a.m. on 4 May, Sheffield was at defence watches, second degree readiness, as part of the British Task Force dispatched to the Falkland Islands during the Falklands War. Sheffield had relieved her sister Coventry as the latter was having technical trouble with her Type 965 radar.[6] Sheffield and Coventry were chatting over UHF. Communications ceased until an unidentified message was heard flatly stating "Sheffield is hit".[6]

The flagship, Hermes dispatched the escorts Arrow and Yarmouth to investigate, and a helicopter was launched. Confusion reigned until Sheffield's Lynx helicopter unexpectedly landed aboard Hermes carrying the air operations officer and operations officer,[6] confirming the strike.

Sheffield picked up the incoming missiles on her Type 965 radar (an interim fitting until the Type 1022 set was available), and the operations officer informed the missile director, who queried the contacts in the ADAWS 4 fire control system.[6] The launch aircraft had not been detected as the British had expected, and it was not until smoke was sighted that the target was confirmed as sea skimming missiles. Five seconds later, an Exocet hit Sheffield amidships, approximately 8 feet (2.4 m) above the waterline on deck 2, tearing a gash in the hull.[6] The other missile splashed into the sea half a mile off her port beam.[7]

Damage caused by the missile impact severed the high-pressure fire main on board. The resultant fire caused by burning propellant ignited diesel oil from the ready-use tanks in the engine room, and other inflammable materials used in the ship's construction. These fires burned unchecked for a number of days after the ship was abandoned.

The MOD Board of Inquiry on the sinking of the Sheffield concluded that: "Evidence indicates that the warhead did not detonate".[10] Some of the crew and members of the Task Force believe that the missile's 165 kilogram warhead had detonated.[6] This was supported by a MOD re-assessment of the loss of the 'Sheffield' which reported in Summer 2015. In a paper delivered to the RINA Warship Conference in Bath in June 2015 it was concluded that the Exocet warhead did detonate inside 'Sheffield', with the conclusion supported by analysis using modern damage analysis tools not available in 1982 and evidence from weapon hits and trials conducted since the end of the Falklands Campaign.[11]

This post has been edited by TechSuper: Mar 11 2016, 01:53 PM

i think it's not aft bridge per se... it's for heli ops

A6 standard comes with which barrel, 39 cal or 45 cal? my wet dream is paladin with 52 cal barrel

on most ships that have heli ops, they'll have some sort of bridge just for that purpose. and it does not involved in navigation of the ship.

they employ jacket cooling, that makes them Maxim heavier that modern machine guns of the same calibre.


The Maxim gun was invented by Sir Hiram Stevens Maxim in 1883, and was the first recoil-operated machine gun.[1] It has been called "the weapon most associated with the British imperial conquest".[2]
The mechanism of the Maxim gun employed one of the earliest recoil operated firing systems in history. The idea is that the energy from the recoil is used to eject each spent cartridge and insert the next one, in lieu of a locked bolt or a lever mechanism. This made it vastly more efficient and less labor-intensive than previous rapid-firing guns, such as the Mitrailleuse, Gatling, Gardner, or Nordenfelt, that relied on actual mechanical cranking. It also decreased the gas buildup in the barrel, allowing the gun to fire more bullets over an extended period of time without overheating the barrel. The Maxim gun design required water cooling, giving it the ability to maintain its rate of fire for far longer than air-cooled guns. The disadvantage of this was that it made the gun less flexible in attack than the lighter air-cooled weapons.

Trials demonstrated that the Maxim could fire 600 rounds per minute.[3] Compared to modern machine guns, the Maxim was heavy, bulky, and awkward. A lone soldier could fire the weapon, but it was usually operated by a team of men. Apart from the gunner, other crew were needed to speed reload, spot targets, and carry and ready ammunition and water. Several men were needed to move or mount the heavy weapon

It was not Russian invention, rather the Russkies bought the license to manufacture them

it's not only the Russ way laa. everyone else who had snow oso use wat

aaah fark!!! up goes insurance

hahaha lawak this UN. of course it's in the argies waters but does it belong to them argies? does argies has effective control over the island the last few hundred years

itu pun nak gaduh ke?
kereta pun, dari kilang naik car carrier. xde sapa bising.
reasons? mileage, guarantee, bla bla bla, etc etc.

even argies recent tries to get ex-spanish mirage f1's oso kena blocked by UK. kesian argies. hahahaha

Brimob, Kopassus, Denjaka and Paskhas aren't they?

thus reminds me of the Manila tourist bus fiasco

She was from Fisheries Department, hence the Siakap.

y don't ypu enroll in the military before looking down on the guys who put their lives for us?

This post has been edited by TechSuper: Apr 4 2016, 10:44 AM

i would like to see him do that bro. hahaha!
Jom ke laut jom! if he scared to join any navy / mmea / polis marine vessels, i can tumpang him on board one of mine.

don't forget to claim all expenses from Respubliki Philippinski oso

single engine jets won't be enough to ensure safe passage between air bases in Peninsular to Borneo and return. Remember the Skyhawks of yonder years which crashed in SCS? TUDM learnt from that hence no single engine jets

Not tasked for Air Superiority right?

indeed. and the the requirement is MRCA, correct? heavier payload, further range, superior performance, etc, etc

MiG-29N