Japanese trawler scuttle fail

[petej]

Firing above the water line... It caught on fire and they had to hose it down LOL

[Davel]

Why though - surely still the same ending and it's full of fuel anyway which they expect to dissipate in the sea.

Wouldn't a fire help burn some of it off?

[davepoth]

doogz said:

From the holes, doesn't look like they were trying too hard to
sink it, it looks like they were having a laugh!

Certainly doesn't look like the mighty artillery shell I would have expected. Hopefully they'll go completely OTT and call in an airstrike next.

[Ian Lancs]

It's already at the bottom of the ocean....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17635346

[Mojocvh]

It would be interesting to see if the projectiles were single or double ogival...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogive & http://www.if.sc.usp.br/~projetosulfos/artigos/Nos...

during WW2 [and beyond] the British led the design and use of the double ogival rocket projectile.

Basically the projectile [not rocket motor] could be shaped to give a greater chance of a hit when used against seaborne targets.

The double ogival projectile would stablise in the air, but when it hit the denser water the momentary pressure change along the length of the projectile would impart either a pitch up [ship] effect or pitch down [sub] effect.

In practice this meant on surface targets they had a "second" chance of a hit if they aimed short [or if they mis-aimed and went high]


...I wonder if the shell impacts in the picture were missed/ricochets and the ship is actually heavily holed underwater.

[englisharcher]

Why wasn't it towed in for salvage?

[Nuclear Biscuit]

englisharcher said:

Why wasn't it towed in for salvage?

Probably would have cost more than the salvage value.

[Simpo Two]

Mojocvh said:

The double ogival projectile would stablise in the air, but when it hit the denser water the momentary pressure change along the length of the projectile would impart either a pitch up [ship] effect or pitch down [sub] effect.

In practice this meant on surface targets they had a "second" chance of a hit if they aimed short [or if they mis-aimed and went high]

I can understand a short shot ricocheting off the water and thence to target, but how does a long shot hit the water before the target?

[anonymous-user]

I'm sorry, but in 2012, shouldn't we really be recycling these things?

the report said "fears it had diesel onboard". So sinking it miles offshore and that's all fine then? Smacks of a bit of nimbyism to me !

Could they have just put it under tow, (the weather conditions looked more than favourable for doing so) and dragged it somewhere for the several hundred tonnes of steel to be recycled?

[Simpo Two]

Max_Torque said:

I'm sorry, but in 2012, shouldn't we really be recycling these things? the report said "fears it had diesel onboard". So sinking it miles offshore and that's all fine then? Smacks of a bit of nimbyism to me !

Not really; the main thing is to stop any pollution of coasts and fishing grounds.

Max_Torque said:

Could they have just put it under tow, (the weather conditions looked more than favourable for doing so) and dragged it somewhere for the several hundred tonnes of steel to be recycled?

No doubt cost of tow exceeds cost of scrap (or they would have taken it back to its owners), and anyway, marine bacteria eat diesel so for this 'drop in the ocean' it's really no big deal. And wrecks make nice great condos for marine life

[Oakey]

Do you possibly have a larger image? Struggling to see that one!

[Sheets Tabuer]

I think the water was to try and encourage it to sink.

[Mojocvh]

Simpo Two said:

I can understand a short shot ricocheting off the water and thence to target, but how does a long shot hit the water before the target?

"If" I read you correctly-it doesn't-it hits the ship above the waterline!
the whole principal was to use the deflection of the projectile once in the water for a desired effect, ie under waterline strikes to flood the ship, if they actually hit the ship, well OK [flak suppression].

[Ledaig]

I wouldn't be surprised if they were using it as a little bit of target practice/training for the crew. As long as it went to the bottom at some point the job was completed.

[Simpo Two]

Mojocvh said:

Simpo Two said:

I can understand a short shot ricocheting off the water and thence to target, but how does a long shot hit the water before the target?

"If" I read you correctly-it doesn't-it hits the ship above the waterline!

I reda it several times... you talked about the shape having effect when the shell hit 'denser water'. Does the shape of the shell make for a non-parabolic flight in air?

[spitfire-ian]

englisharcher said:

Why wasn't it towed in for salvage?

According to the BBC website they contacted the owner and he wasn't interested.

[Mojocvh]

Simpo Two said:

Mojocvh said:

Simpo Two said:

I can understand a short shot ricocheting off the water and thence to target, but how does a long shot hit the water before the target?

"If" I read you correctly-it doesn't-it hits the ship above the waterline!

I reda it several times... you talked about the shape having effect when the shell hit 'denser water'. Does the shape of the shell make for a non-parabolic flight in air?

"the denser water" inducing a momentary pressure change as the projectile enters the water causing a deflection of the warheads path.

[buggalugs]

Pretty spooky that it's been drifting alone for so long. I wonder how many ships there are just floating around like that?

[Simpo Two]

Mojocvh said:

"the denser water" inducing a momentary pressure change as the projectile enters the water causing a deflection of the warheads path.

Absolutely. Got that. But how does it influence the 'over' option?