JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Yeah, but mine was better. :cool:
Really, Dude...?

Big Lebowski_Sobchak.jpg
 
I mean.. the Russians have something like this already; the Club K missile system, a launcher that's inside a standard shipping container... and then the Danes have the Stanflex system Club-K-Container-Missile-System-3.jpg Club-K-Container-Missile-System-1.jpg

IMG_1695.jpg Stanflex-002.jpg

The USN has the MK41 VLS; such a system could be ideal for filling what used to be the cargo/fish holds of a trawler or light freighter type of cargo ship

Mk-41-VLS-004.jpg
 
I mean.. the Russians have something like this already; the Club K missile system, a launcher that's inside a standard shipping container... and then the Danes have the Stanflex system View attachment 1424934View attachment 1424935

View attachment 1424936View attachment 1424937

The USN has the MK41 VLS; such a system could be ideal for filling what used to be the cargo/fish holds of a trawler or light freighter type of cargo ship

View attachment 1424938
I was just reading something earlier this week (some might call this an example of the Simulation Hypothesis - but that's another discussion for a different time) describing the use of Q-ships during both World Wars by both sides to the conflicts. Q-ships were basically heavily-armed merchant steamers with concealed weaponry (much like ☝️these ☝️shipping container missile systems). The idea behind the Q-ship was to lure an opposing submarine to the surface to engage the (ostensibly merchant) Q-ship, thereby saving the sub's limited number of torpedoes and instead using its deck gun, whereupon the Q-ship would then drop the ruse de guerre and fire upon, and often sink, the unsuspecting submarine. The Q-ship fell out of favor following WWII, being considered against the Laws of War, and also the fact that later (nuclear-powered) submarines did not need to surface at all to attack surface ships.
 
I was just reading something earlier this week (some might call this an example of the Simulation Hypothesis - but that's another discussion for a different time) describing the use of Q-ships during both World Wars by both sides to the conflicts. Q-ships were basically heavily-armed merchant steamers with concealed weaponry (much like ☝️these ☝️shipping container missile systems). The idea behind the Q-ship was to lure an opposing submarine to the surface to engage the (ostensibly merchant) Q-ship, thereby saving the sub's limited number of torpedoes and instead using its deck gun, whereupon the Q-ship would then drop the ruse de guerre and fire upon, and often sink, the unsuspecting submarine. The Q-ship fell out of favor following WWII, being considered against the Laws of War, and also the fact that later (nuclear-powered) submarines did not need to surface at all to attack surface ships.
Very similar concept that I'm presenting. Actually might be very useful against say... a certain nation trying to control the South China Sea... ;)

Edit. Try picking out the one cargo ship full of such missiles like the Club K from the rest of the cargo ships traversing South China Sea... :s0140:
 
Very similar concept that I'm presenting. Actually might be very useful against say... a certain nation trying to control the South China Sea... ;)
Pretty sure that could result in an escalation of hostilities that no one wants...
Edit. Try picking out the one cargo ship full of such missiles like the Club K from the rest of the cargo ships traversing South China Sea... :s0140:
At which point, a certain nation trying to control the South China Sea would just "open up" on any (and possibly every) cargo vessel in the area.
Then, see my supposition immediately above...
 

Upcoming Events

Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Arms Collectors of Southwest Washington (ACSWW) gun show
Battle Ground, WA

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top