The Sheffield almost proves Moskav wasnt sunk by Ukraine

[DarthTrader]

Lastly in my urgent call to keep an open mind about Moskva sinking. The Sheffield is an unarmored destroyer that was 1/3rd as heavy as Moskva (which was heavily armored).

The Sheffield took 6 days to sink in the rough seas of the Atlantic.

The Moskva sank in less than. A day in relatively calm waters.

The exocet warhead is about 80% as massive as the Harpoon which the Neptune is supposedly derived from.

How does a 3x heavier ship with actual armor (structural support) sink so quickly from a missile that hit a much weaker ship and took 6 days to sink?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Lastly in my urgent call to keep an open mind about Moskva sinking. The Sheffield is an unarmored destroyer that was 1/3rd as heavy as Moskva (which was heavily armored).

The Sheffield took 6 days to sink in the rough seas of the Atlantic.

The Moskva sank in less than. A day in relatively calm waters.

The exocet warhead is about 80% as massive as the Harpoon which the Neptune is supposedly derived from.

How does a 3x heavier ship with actual armor (structural support) sink so quickly from a missile that hit a much weaker ship and took 6 days to sink?

How does a 3x heavier ship with actual armor (structural support) sink so quickly from a missile that hit a much weaker ship and took 6 days to sink?

Russian design, Russian construction, Russian crew.

 

[DarthTrader]

How does a 3x heavier ship with actual armor (structural support) sink so quickly from a missile that hit a much weaker ship and took 6 days to sink?

Russian design, Russian construction, Russian crew.

Tell Nazi Germany they get a consolation prize. Their best German engineering was beat by "Russian design, Russian construction, Russian crews."

You're a know-nothing fucking moron.

Oh and the Sheffield was sunk by a single missile above the water line lol. Guess that makes the UK a bag of shit too? And the US, since the DGs are the same hull designs as Arleigh Burke.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Tell Nazi Germany they get a consolation prize. Their best German engineering was beat by "Russian design, Russian construction, Russian crews."

You're a know-nothing fucking moron.

Oh and the Sheffield was sunk by a single missile above the water line lol. Guess that makes the UK a bag of shit too? And the US, since the DGs are the same hull designs as Arleigh Burke.

Their best German engineering was beat by "Russian design, Russian construction, Russian crews."

DURR......

 

[Mac-7]

Tell Nazi Germany they get a consolation prize. Their best German engineering was beat by "Russian design, Russian construction, Russian crews."

Russia got s little help from American weapons, the Russian winter, and adolph hitler

 

[Confederate Soldier]

Russia got s little help from American weapons, the Russian winter, and adolph hitler

There also was a gazillion of them.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Tell Nazi Germany they get a consolation prize. Their best German engineering was beat by "Russian design, Russian construction, Russian crews."

You're a know-nothing fucking moron.

Oh and the Sheffield was sunk by a single missile above the water line lol. Guess that makes the UK a bag of shit too? And the US, since the DGs are the same hull designs as Arleigh Burke.

Oh and the Sheffield was sunk by a single missile above the water line lol. Guess that makes the UK a bag of shit too?

If that helps you cry yourself to sleep tonight, Ivan.

 

[DarthTrader]

Oh and the Sheffield was sunk by a single missile above the water line lol. Guess that makes the UK a bag of shit too?

If that helps you cry yourself to sleep tonight, Ivan.

You are just too stupid to know anything about Naval engineering

 

[Mac-7]

There also was a gazillion of them.

Traditionally russian engineering can be pretty good

they often build simple rugged machines

but russian society is a mess

 

[Confederate Soldier]

No armor is best armor.

What I mean by that is, missiles, shells, etc have to pen the armor, and that penetration sets off the explosive inside of the vehicle/vessel. The light weight of the Sheffield kept it afloat because it offered better bouncy, and post penetration damage wasn't as bad.

Remember, a shell doesn't have to have a massive explosive power to be destructive, it just has to penetrate the thick metal.


When a ship is ammo racked, there is tremendous explosive power, so this helped too. The heavy steel likely ruptured in the blast/penetration, and the immense weight of the armor helped it sink to the bottom. Calm waters actually would help it sink faster than rough waters, because the water would fill up inside faster than if it was sloshing around everywhere.

And plus... Why would Russia bomb their own flagship?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You are just too stupid to know anything about Naval engineering

Post the Russian video.

 

[DarthTrader]

Traditionally russian engineering can be pretty good

they often build dimple rugged machines

but russian society is a mess

US idea that Russians build low quality came from their vehicle performance in ww2.

The Germans were so overwhelming with firepower that vehicles had less than a 20 hour life span. Hence the infamous T34 and its by-design 17 hour lifespan transmission.

They were enormously pragmatic. The US did the same thing with Shermans. The difference was the operational tempo meant the Shermans could be repaired in the field. Because the US operational tempo in WW2 about 1/6th that of the Eastern front.

 

[Anathema]

Who cares how it was sunk, so long as it is where it belongs… at the bottom of the ocean, permanently.

 

[DarthTrader]

No armor is best armor.

What I mean by that is, missiles, shells, etc have to pen the armor, and that penetration sets off the explosive inside of the vehicle/vessel. The light weight of the Sheffield kept it afloat because it offered better bouncy, and post penetration damage wasn't as bad.

Remember, a shell doesn't have to have a massive explosive power to be destructive, it just has to penetrate the thick metal.


When a ship is ammo racked, there is tremendous explosive power, so this helped too. The heavy steel likely ruptured in the blast/penetration, and the immense weight of the armor helped it sink to the bottom. Calm waters actually would help it sink faster than rough waters, because the water would fill up inside faster than if it was sloshing around everywhere.

And plus... Why would Russia bomb their own flagship?

What you said is absolutely retarded.

Armor on a ship prematurely detonated the munitions trying to penetrate the armor and it acts as extra structural support which keeps the ship from breaking up when damaged.

 

[DarthTrader]

Post the Russian video.

No. Because you can literally Google it and every major news outlet has posted it. Go search for it fucking retard.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No. Because you can literally Google it and every major news outlet has posted it. Go search for it fucking retard.

Should I Google, "Russian video that proves the Moskva was sunk by a torpedo"?
Or "Look at the fucking Russian idiots losing a crappy ship"?

 

[DarthTrader]

Should I Google, "Russian video that proves the Moskva was sunk by a torpedo"?
Or "Look at the fucking Russian idiots losing a crappy ship"?

No dumb ass. And that isn't what I said. I said the video evidence proves the ammunition had not exploded and the Moskva was already heavily listing near to breaching the rail.

 

[Confederate Soldier]

What you said is absolutely retarded.

Armor on a ship prematurely detonated the munitions trying to penetrate the armor and it acts as extra structural support which keeps the ship from breaking up when damaged.

I'm sorry, when were you in the navy? The missile penetrated the armor, it didn't detonate it as it hit the metal. When trying to take out armored targets, you select a munition that does post pen. damage, not impact damage. Even then, a round with enough explosive filler could literally rupture the steel, and could have ignited the ammo rack. Once an ammo rack explodes, the ship is done for. It is entirely possible.

Again, please explain to me,

1. Who sunk the ship then?

2. With what?

3. Why?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I said the video evidence proves the ammunition had not exploded and the Moskva was already heavily listing near to breaching the rail.

Your ships are so crappy it doesn't even take a secondary explosion to sink them?

 

[DarthTrader]

Your ships are so crappy it doesn't even take a secondary explosion to sink them?

I'm American.