# HMCS Huron  To Be Sunk



## cplcaldwell

From CBC.ca  . Shared Under the Fair Dealings Provision of the Copyright Act, RSC.



> *Navy ship to be sunk during target practice exercise
> Last Updated: Thursday, November 16, 2006 | 11:16 AM PT
> CBC News *
> 
> A Canadian warship that has been tied up at the dock at CFB Esquimalt since 2001 will be towed out to sea off the west coast of Vancouver Island next year and used for target practice.
> 
> HMCS Huron was commissioned in 1972 and saw service in the Persian Gulf during the first Gulf War.
> 
> If it gets environmental approval, the navy will tow the decommissioned destroyer to a firing range 100 kilometres out in the Pacific Ocean next May. There the Canadian and U.S. navies will open fire and send the 34-year-old ship to the bottom, Cmdr. Stan Bates says.
> 
> "We're currently planning a surface-to-surface missile firing, using a missile fired from one of our frigates as well as strafing runs by aircraft and possibly a submarine firing as well."
> 
> The navy says this will be the first time it has used one of its ships for target practice. In the past, it's sold old vessels for scrap or turned them into artificial reefs for divers.
> 
> Rob Huebert, a military historian at the University of Calgary, says a lack of parts and too few sailors sealed Huron's fate.
> 
> "We did not have enough personnel to properly man her, so that ultimately her systems deteriorated to such a point that economically it made more sense to get rid of her rather than keeping her on as one of the four destroyers."
> 
> Huron was officially retired from service last year.


----------



## JDnav

hha... Wouldnt it serve better purpose if it was salvaged for steel and parts rather than sunk for practice


----------



## Sheerin

I'm assuming most of the parts that would be of any value will have been stripped prior to the sinking.


----------



## navymich

Sheerin said:
			
		

> I'm assuming most of the parts that would be of any value will have been stripped prior to the sinking.



Yep, posted most of the sailors elsewhere already.  I think they left some MARS officers though.  It's that whole training-to-be-a-CO thing and going down with the ship.  ;D


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

JDnav said:
			
		

> hha... Wouldnt it serve better purpose if it was salvaged for steel and parts rather than sunk for practice



And what of the training opportunity this presents for the US and Canadian Navies? Its not everyday you get to see the effect of your weapons on an actual ship. The training opportunity this provides far outweighs the value of some scrap metal and questionable parts. 



			
				navymich said:
			
		

> Yep, posted most of the sailors elsewhere already.  I think they left some MARS officers though.  It's that whole training-to-be-a-CO thing and going down with the ship.  ;D



I know of a few they could put onboard from the east coast. LOL


----------



## rmacqueen

I will remember her fondly, well, at least the mess. :cheers:


----------



## jollyjacktar

I am sure there will be lots of usefull data that will be collected from this shoot.  I agree it will be good for the morale to see the effects of our current weapons against a real target.  It may also be frighenting to see how fast and messy she goes down too, especially for the 280 guys on this coast.  But part of me feels bad for her to go out in this manner too, she would make a good home for the assorted beasties in the sea if she was sunk for a reef.  I imagine there will be conflicting feelings for former members of the ship's company.  

I hope it is a good show.  I was on the Athabee for a surface standard missle shoot against a hulk target off Rosey Roads in 98.  The missle failed during launch and was a washout.  They did not try for a second shot as it was felt that the dollar factor was too great shoud a second launch bugger up.  From what was explained this was something that had not been successfully attempted before.  There was a great amount of work that went into the planning and preparation.  Needless to say there were many in that world who were upset with the outcome.  For me being my first time at sea, it was a good show with lots of smoke and noise.


----------



## drunknsubmrnr

You were lucky. The previous time we tried on Atha-B we were only saved from a Blue-on-Blue by a missile failure.

It's too bad about Huron, but she never worked right out of TRUMP anyway. She was the last one to get out of refit, and got all of the kit the other units rejected.


----------



## fear-acfhuinn luinge

There goes my first ship.


----------



## tasop_999

She served well, belched fire from her stack, and broke down alot, but she was a Canadian ship.  Time to lob some Harpoons into her and call her a flaming datum.  SAWS Shoot!


----------



## Torlyn

navymich said:
			
		

> I think they left some MARS officers though.



Hmm...  Maybe that's what they meant by "first command training sail" last week at Venture...  ;D


----------



## Navy_Blue

If this gets the go ahead maybe we can get approval to right off the two old steamers at NED in Dartmouth.  It think at least one of the O boats hasn't been spoken for too.  The east coast could benefit from an ex like this too.  It would be nice to put some holes in them with the different guns (.50, 57mm and 76mm) and take pics of interior damage.  Our people at the DC schools could have more recent info than the Falklands and the Gulf.  Keep your shots above the water line and this could be possible.  I imagine they would have the Huron closed up to condition Zulu to get the most out of the exercise too.  Put some shoring up and flood a space below and prove our shoring procedures.  Set up one of the spaces to show the kids why secure for sea\battle.  Take it a step further and get Discovery involved (add some $$$) and you could have a pretty good documentary on modern naval warfare.  Ultimately they will become fish habitat just smaller pieces of fish habitat  ;D.


----------



## Crown-Loyal

Wow, that would be interesting to see the navy go at her. I will pay someone to smuggle me aboard a ship to watch it happen  ;D Or maybe I will row my 12 foot aluminum harbour craft fishing boat out into the ocean and lob some molitov cocktails at her. But i would prefer to watch from a warship.   here is to the Huron, from a civvie who understands that sometimes when navies can't fight other navies they have to fire on their own. just kiding.


----------



## flames9

Late 90's while I was on the ALG or VAN we participated down south in a similar event. Was rather boring to be honest. The ship that was the target was stripped of everything including fuel (duh) thus there was no huge explosions or anything.  Took quite awhile before she sunk.


----------



## NCRCrow

Great post...Navy Blue

SAWS SASS


----------



## Sheerin

umm, what exactly is _Condition Zulu?_


----------



## 284_226

Sheerin said:
			
		

> umm, what exactly is _Condition Zulu?_



The highest condition of watertight integrity.  Hatches and doors are marked as to their importance to keeping the ship afloat, and if condition Zulu is announced, all watertight doors/hatches marked X-ray, Yankee and Zulu are closed immediately.  Ships normally steam in condition Yankee, and are in condition X-ray while alongside.


----------



## CrazyCanuck

Surface to suface, strafing and shot at by a sub, isn't that a bit of overkill? I know all that's good for training but can that old ship actually take that much punishment? Her back won't break after the first Harpoon and leave nothing for the plane and sub?


----------



## eurowing

I like the idea of a gallant ship going to serve one final time.  Don't you think it is a more noble end than being cut up into razor blades?

The only thing better IMHO would be to turn her into an artificial reef, but I can settle for a few good explosions.  Wish I could be there.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Boater said:
			
		

> Surface to suface, strafing and shot at by a sub, isn't that a bit of overkill? I know all that's good for training but can that old ship actually take that much punishment? Her back won't break after the first Harpoon and leave nothing for the plane and sub?



Again....why would it be overkill. The chances for a ship to actually practice what they are trained to do are few and far between. The training this would provide, not to mention the morale boost would do wonders.


----------



## navymich

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> The chances for a ship to actually practice what they are trained to do are few and far between.



Oh come on now Ex-D.  There's nothing like a day of shooting at a Killer Red Tomato to hone one's skills.  :


----------



## CrazyCanuck

Well disregarding the fact that it is a training mission, isn't that a lot of ordanance to sink one ship?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Boater said:
			
		

> Well disregarding the fact that it is a training mission, isn't that a lot of ordanance to sink one ship?



And what better way then to hone our skills.....so if we have to do it for real we won't might not have to expend a lot of stuff that goes bang. BTW how do you know it will require a lot of ordanance? Have you taken part in a sinkex before? Another point....training missions as you casually put it is how we get good at our jobs and save lives when it counts. If my ship or any other ship can determine a better way to sink with less, or how to repair battle damage before we lose a ship, if we can actually see the type of damage a Harpoon or 57/76mm shell does to a ship we refine our procedures. This is what counts....


----------



## aesop081

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> And what better way then to hone our skills.....so if we have to do it for real we won't might not have to expend a lot of stuff that goes bang. BTW how do you know it will require a lot of ordanance? Have you taken part in a sinkex before?



Wish they would let us do some OTHT with the fisheads for this sinkex......


----------



## Command-Sense-Act 105

x


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

None of the naval folks here are arguing against the chance of using this as a training opportunity, we would welcome the chance to do so as well as previously suggested by Navy_Blue which is checking the damage control aspect, something very critical for us in the navy. When we are done the fishes can gladly have it.

No more 3"70s or 3"50s with the retirement of the last steamers.

4 Kirovs built, 2 are left and I don't think the will be used as a target any time soon. That would be a lot of stuff that goes bang.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

I went aboard one of the DE when they were stripping her to be a artificial reef, remember looking at what I thought was a heating vent approx. 1’ wide and 6” high, until I realized it was solid Brass!!! Turned out to be a wave guide for the Radar!! Diving on her was quite something.

The cost of cleaning her for scrapping would likely outweigh the money received by scrapping the hull, which is why the US is sinking their carriers the same way. Hopefully they will strip it down a fair bit though before.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

They always strip what they can to make as less as an enviromental impact as possible.

If there was any hint of a threat to the enviroment we would not be sinking these ships.


----------



## CrazyCanuck

[/Quote]And what better way then to hone our skills.....so if we have to do it for real we won't might not have to expend a lot of stuff that goes bang. BTW how do you know it will require a lot of ordanance? Have you taken part in a sinkex before? Another point....training missions as you casually put it is how we get good at our jobs and save lives when it counts. If my ship or any other ship can determine a better way to sink with less, or how to repair battle damage before we lose a ship, if we can actually see the type of damage a Harpoon or 57/76mm shell does to a ship we refine our procedures. This is what counts.... [/Quote]

I didn't say i knew how much ordance it would take I was wondering how much it would take, as my profile states i'm a civi so i have therefore never been on a sinkex, let me rephrase my question to this; in a modern naval battle how much firepower is required to sink a modern warship?


----------



## navymich

Boater said:
			
		

> I didn't say i knew how much ordance it would take I was wondering how much it would take, as my profile states i'm a civi so i have therefore never been on a sinkex, let me rephrase my question to this; in a modern naval battle how much firepower is required to sink a modern warship?



I'm sure estimates on that will range all over the scale.  It's going to depend on what they use, where they hit it, and what condition the ship is in (ie X, Y or Z).  I would think that if you left it in DCC 'X' and gave it a good hit midships just below the waterline, it wouldn't take much.  Any NWTs, or others, to give some more accurate analogies?


----------



## Roadracer

In the early 90's I was a crewmember of HMCS ALGONQUIN while conducting a heeling trial alongside in Halifax. While I don't know the specfics of what went wrong (not my part ship) the event went horribly awry and the ship started to flood uncontrollably. 

Major factors in saving the ship were the prompt and proper responses of the damage control teams and calling a tug (one of the Glen boats) to push us against the jetty so we couldn't go down. 

After the event, while mustering lockers in 13 mess so that the crew's personal items could be cataloged as damaged, I noticed that items in the tops of lockers on the port side had suffered water damage. I am 6' tall and had to reach up onto these shelves! Lots of water in that space!

Relevance here? I agree, any sort of hit below the waterline is going to be close to fatal in a hurry if left unchecked. Above the waterline? With HURON stripped of wiring (and it's flamable and poisonous insulation) she will likely take pretty good punishment. 

I believe doctrine calls for xxxxxxx hits in order to consider an opposing modern frigate out of action.


----------



## Cronicbny

I think it's safe to say that she will be put to bed with a Mk48 torpedo. Ships of this size are quite resilient to capsizing completely with strictly above the waterline attacks. 

During a similar event on a US Knox class frigate a few years back - she took thousands of rounds from a Block 1B CIWS, several hundred 5 inch rounds, a couple dozen 76mm rounds and a single (but well aimed) 40mm HE and remained afloat (Basically, the brunt of the AWW systems (short of missiles) from two Arleighs, one OHP and a committed MCDV). It took the old "48" to bring her down.

For maximum training I think it only makes sense that she will be in DCC 'Z' until the fateful torp ends the day.


----------



## CrazyCanuck

Roadracer said:
			
		

> In the early 90's I was a crewmember of HMCS ALGONQUIN while conducting a heeling trial alongside in Halifax. While I don't know the specfics of what went wrong (not my part ship) the event went horribly awry and the ship started to flood uncontrollably.
> 
> Major factors in saving the ship were the prompt and proper responses of the damage control teams and calling a tug (one of the Glen boats) to push us against the jetty so we couldn't go down.
> 
> After the event, while mustering lockers in 13 mess so that the crew's personal items could be cataloged as damaged, I noticed that items in the tops of lockers on the port side had suffered water damage. I am 6' tall and had to reach up onto these shelves! Lots of water in that space!
> 
> Relevance here? I agree, any sort of hit below the waterline is going to be close to fatal in a hurry if left unchecked. Above the waterline? With HURON stripped of wiring (and it's flamable and poisonous insulation) she will likely take pretty good punishment.
> 
> I believe doctrine calls for xxxxxxx hits in order to consider an opposing modern frigate out of action.



Just what I wanted to know, thank you Roadracer


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Discussing how many harpoon hits a warship should take is an OPSEC issue so I caution you now.....


----------



## aesop081

If its in the CFCD 106, CFCD 120, ATP-1.ATP-28, ATP-31 and the likes.....


STFU


----------



## Roadracer

Gentlemen: 

"As an estimate, two Harpoon hits would be required to disable a destroyer, four for a cruiser and almost eight for a conventional aircraft carrier."

 http://www.pakdef.info/pakmilitary/navy/antiship.html

Also worth a look: 

http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/cms_news/news_e.asp?category=7&id=473


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

You stated in your post it was _doctrine_ not an _estimate_. There is a big difference. Watch what you post irregardless for OPSEC! You have been warned.


----------



## childs56

I have the actual number. 1/2 of a harpoon to take out a destroyer. 

Come on OPSEC.... Read Janes or watch old videos forNavy ships sinking.
 The Cole took a huge explosion and didnt sink, Ships through out time have had tons of damage to them, from water mines, collisions, etc. Some have come to port after having magazines explode, missing huge chunks of the ships and have lived. While other ships have sunk do to minor things and small explosions.


----------



## aesop081

...... for those in doubt of the damage a single ASM can do......do a google search and read up on what destroyed HMS Sheffield in 1982.....thats open source.  The ship now rests at the bottom of the South Atlantic BTW.


----------



## childs56

Very interesting. there has been alot talked about OPSEC on this site.
 Yes I do know about it, I also know that in 1997 when I was learning about how secret TRICAN NUCAS was and how to use it. I was cautioned about discussing it. 
I went to my local library and got a copy of book that described it better then what we were learning. It listed all the country's who use to use it and who was still using it at the time.  
I also read top speeds of different missiles, A/C and ships from old Janes books found in the library. Some of which were very interesting at the time as they had actual speeds and effects of weapons in them not the detained factors. Mind you the publications were 10-15 years old. But at the time they were up to date with the equipment we were using. 

I have seen the older versions of books that you and  Ex-Dragoon see maybe on a daily basis now. Yes that info is OPSEC for the time they are published and in use and not released. 
Real shocking what one can find from open sources that the Department of Defense publishes them selves. 
I had one staff talk to us about the MK48 Torp, one student asked what the top speed was , he said that was classified  but would do 45+ knts open source. I laughed and talked to him privately after wards. He looked shocked and asked me where I got my info from, I told him from Janes public edition along with old US/ British Defence updates all of which are open sources. 

I am willing to bet that anyone who actually has sources for the Current Defence books about operations and such would not come on line and talk about the specific specs on weapons and such. They should have been briefed prior to their gaining their security clearance. If they do then they should be charged for such. 
Whereas you may have opened yourself up to a PERSEC situation now as you have now just told the world that you have access to this information and have studied it alot in the last while. PERSEC/OPSEC. So anyone now wanting this info could in theory kidnap you or a family member and gain that information. 

Most of what I read on here is BS, not harming anyone, we have had theses OPSEC discussions before and that. To bad we really never look at PERSEC. We float OPSEC around like it is a taboo to say anything. 
Remember you as a member of the CF cannot express public views on politics, the military past, present or future. If you do you could be putting yourself at risk from prosecution.
Also if you perceive a violation of such you are responsible to report it to the proper authorities. 

Further to that if  an abuse of position relating to the CF is seen outside of the CF during a leisure function this also must be reported.  

One last thing, everything we write on here is monitored by the people who maintain security with in our country and those who try to destroy it. Keep that in mind. 
Keep our topics to the far side of any thing truly serious. 

Hence my 1/2 missile comment.  

Cheers all


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Considering cdnaviator and myself use nom de guerres and advocate there use we do practice PERSEC, so rather then fight why we come down on people for violating what we see OPSEC and of concern to us because of what our jobs entails, just co-operate. It will make things easier for all of us.


----------



## Sub_Guy

cdnaviator said:
			
		

> ...... for those in doubt of the damage a single ASM can do......do a google search and read up on what destroyed HMS Sheffield in 1982.....thats open source.  The ship now rests at the bottom of the South Atlantic BTW.



Correct me if I am wrong but the Exocet that hit the Sheffield DID NOT EXPLODE the resulting fire is from the friction caused by the missile tearing through the skin of the vessel.  So for those wondering, one ASM can make for a bad day on any of our warships.....


----------



## aesop081

Sub_Guy said:
			
		

> Correct me if I am wrong but the Exocet that hit the Sheffield DID NOT EXPLODE the resulting fire is from the friction caused by the missile tearing through the skin of the vessel.  So for those wondering, one ASM can make for a bad day on any of our warships.....



You are quite correct. The fire devasted the ship.  It sank while being towed


----------



## CrazyCanuck

I thought they scuttled her


----------



## aesop081

Boater said:
			
		

> I thought they scuttled her



Indeed......The burnt-out hulk was taken in tow by the Rothesay class frigate HMS Yarmouth but was scuttled at 53°04'S, 56°56' W on 10 May 1982 because of bad weather turning the ship into a waterlogged hulk.


----------



## childs56

Hopefully one day we can all have a beer and shoot the manure about everything and anything. Then look back on all this stuff and laugh. 

Cheers guys.


----------



## aesop081

CTD said:
			
		

> Hopefully one day we can all have a beer and shoot the manure about everything and anything. Then look back on all this stuff and laugh.
> 
> Cheers guys.



i'm always up for that


----------



## Sub_Guy

Hopefully there will be more to talk about over beers, than the crap that gets thrown around this site!


----------



## NCRCrow

Holy CSI........LOL (PERSEC-OPSEC) 

The EXOCET uses kerosene liquid O2 propellant and hence the fires on Sheffield. 
Ref. A. See Google

I like beer, have a merry christmas


----------



## STONEY

Disagree !!!  EXOCET has a solid propellant engine not liquid.  Missile hit Sheffield on 2 deck 8 ft above waterline destroying ships electric generating systems and fracturing the ships firemain preventing anti-fire mechanisms from operating dooming the ship to be consumed by the raging fire. The crew of the ship and the British Task force believe that the missle warhead did in fact explode.  Others contend that the warhead did not explode but the remaining rocket motor fuel caused the fire.  The Sheff was not scuttled but sank due to bad weather that flooded the ship while it was under tow.  During the Iran/Iraq war over 200 EXOCETS were launched at  various Tankers & Merchant vessels with various amounts of success and a large percentage failed to explode.  US & UK EOD teams recovered several unexploded warheads & even some complete missiles lending creedence to the Sheffield's missile warhead not exploding. 

Cheers


----------



## NCRCrow

sure, i believe u


----------



## childs56

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/exocet.htm


----------



## NCRCrow

I believe u,..have a merry christmas


----------



## CrazyCanuck

After looking at that website I'm wondering why all the nations listed as using this missile (excluding France) are developing countires, this mean it's not as good as western equivalents or is it just cheap?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Easy answer is France sells to anyone.


----------



## Blackadder1916

Huron destined for the deep
Navy plans to tow venerable destroyer out to sea where it will be sunk in a live-fire exercise
http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/capital_van_isl/story.html?id=3ab543d4-8526-4a32-9208-e1489279b27d&k=44301



> Tim Naumetz For CanWest News Service Wednesday, April 04, 2007
> 
> The Federal Environment Department has approved a navy plan to haul retired destroyer HMCS Huron from CFB Esquimalt out to the Pacific Ocean, where U.S. and Canadian ships and jets will use it as target practice until it sinks two kilometres to the ocean floor.
> 
> It's a plan environmentalists and one NDP MP say is fraught with problems.
> 
> "It's treating the ocean like a garbage dump," said Jennifer Lash, the head of the B.C. activist group Living Oceans.
> 
> "No one even knows what kind of marine life there is down there."
> 
> Canadian Forces public relations officers were surprised by a barrage of questions yesterday, following the government's publication last weekend of an Environment Canada permit for the long-planned disposal of the Huron.
> 
> If all goes as expected, the Iroquois-class destroyer, stripped down to 1,118 metric tonnes of raw steel but still longer than a football field, will succumb to a barrage of missiles, machine-guns, naval cannons and torpedoes in a joint U.S.-Canadian exercise off the B.C. coast next month.
> 
> The plan is for the bullet-riddled torn-up hulk of the Huron to sink about 100 kilometres west of Vancouver Island.
> 
> "This, as far as I know, is the first Canadian warship that we've sunk in that manner," said Cmdr. Jeff Agnew, head of navy public relations, who noted the practice has been common with other navies for decades.
> 
> The Huron, commissioned in 1972, served on blockade patrols during the 1991Gulf War, intercepted illegal Chinese immigrants in 1999 and was decommissioned in 2005 to furnish spare parts to the remaining three Iroquois-class destroyers.
> 
> The Environment Department permit appears to set stringent anti-pollution requirements for the event, to the point of listing the ordnance the military will use.
> 
> The attack must take place in weather conditions that allow proper positioning of the Huron, the timing must be outside the opening of any commercial fishery and the navy must ensure "all floatables and all petroleum-based products (fuel oil, hydraulic fluids, lubricants, etc.,) are removed from the vessel prior to disposal."
> 
> The permit says the route from Canadian Forces Base Esquimalt to the target site in a Canadian military firing area must be "direct."
> 
> The method of disposal is listed as: "Firing by naval Sea Sparrow missiles, aircraft machine-guns and naval gunnery (including MK 48 torpedoes)."
> 
> Agnew said the missiles and torpedoes that hit the Huron will contain no radioactive material and the ordnance will leave only "background levels" of lead on the ocean bottom.
> 
> However, Lash, Green party Leader Elizabeth May and NDP environment critic Nathan Cullen all say that sinking a massive steel ship in the ocean sends the wrong signal in this environmentally sensitive era.
> 
> "People don't just drive their car off a cliff into the lake when they're done with it," said Cullen.
> 
> Added May: "It's crazy, we've just had the kerfuffle over U.S. navy live-fire exercises in the Great Lakes."
> 
> May was referring to a U.S. Coast Guard proposal for live-fire exercises on the lakes, which was withdrawn after opposition from groups concerned about the impact on commercial shipping, recreational boating and the environment.



But if it was sunk closer in and created an artificial reef, there would be less objections.


----------



## Donut

blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> But if it was sunk closer in and created an artificial reef, there would be less objections.



The problem with this is that the ships that are sunk for reefs are carefully prepped; massive holes are cut in them first, almost all potential hazards for divers are taken out.  They pretty much eliminate any watertight compartments so they go down, in the right attitude, to the right location.  This eliminates their value as targets, since you could probably sink one of these "prepped" ships with a stiff wind, verus getting to see what happens with multiple missile hits, some naval gunfire, and a MK84 or two.

I think they're intentionally putting her in deep water, deep enough that some fool rec diver isn't going to be tempted to poke around without the right kit and training, get themselves trapped, and have the families sue DND for an "attractive nuisance".

DF


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

Sailed in her on Westploy 97 to the Far East. Great ship, great crew. It's sad to see the old girl go. RIP


----------



## NCS_Eng

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> Sailed in her on Westploy 97 to the Far East. Great ship, great crew. It's sad to see the old girl go. RIP



As a former "280 Lady" myself I take a different view of the great pigs of the sea  . Although I never served on Huron, as she was already referred to as building D281 by the time I hit the fleet. I hope they get good footage of the Mk 48 finishing her off - furthermore interesting choice on using Sea Sparrows in surface mode. Although throwing rocks would probably more effective. I guess the brass wants to use up all their stock of the old missile before ESSM hits the west coast.


----------



## 284_226

NCS_Eng said:
			
		

> I hope they get good footage of the Mk 48 finishing her off - furthermore interesting choice on using Sea Sparrows in surface mode. Although throwing rocks would probably more effective.



They could always leave a bos'n aboard to go outside and slap on a fresh coat of paint after each missile hit  ;D


----------



## Sub_Guy

You will need two people, a combat operator to paint and the Bosn to supervise.  Don't forget the green helmet.


----------



## NCRCrow

Plus 1 LOL


----------



## rmacqueen

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> You will need two people, a combat operator to paint and the Bosn to supervise.  Don't forget the green helmet.


And don't forget the gun tape to patch the holes first


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

back on topic please....


----------



## 284_226

Fair dealings, Copyright Act and all that stuff.

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/Oddities/070514/K051417AU.html

VICTORIA (CP) - A Canadian warship has been sunk by artillery fire.

The Canadian navy spent more than $7 million cleaning up the decommissioned HMCS Huron to ready it for its final voyage and to ensure that nothing toxic was left aboard.

It took two days to tow the engineless, weaponless hulk to a spot about 100 kilometres off the coast of Vancouver Island and then only five hours to send it two kilometres straight down to the bottom of the Pacific Ocean.

Lt.-Cmdr. Mark MacIntyre says the Huron sank just after 1 p.m. local time as part of a joint, international naval exercise.

He says the navy and air force, as well as allies from the United States, got some very realistic training.

Originally plans were to have the warship targeted by naval gunnery, then hit by missiles and at least one submarine-launched torpedo.

But MacIntyre says that proved unnecessary since the ship was sent to the bottom by the barrage of artillery.

_Artillery??   :rofl:_


----------



## geo

Cheeez... those M777s have quite the range, don't they?


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

RIP old girl....memories of some excellent days at sea will never be sunk in my mind.


----------



## 284_226

geo said:
			
		

> Cheeez... those M777s have quite the range, don't they?



I can see it now - Aeroquip strapped to the flight deck, instant "Y" gun.


----------



## Cronicbny

She was indeed sunk yesterday. She was not, however, sunk by ship's guns. She was put down by a laser guided bomb that was dropped from a CF-18. 

It was a great experience to fire on a "live" target for only the second time in my career (the first was a US Knox Class FFG off the coast of Washington). I will post videos and pics once we get then all processed. She really took a hell of a beating from the 9 ships that fired on her, but she remained afloat through all Naval gunfire (5in, 76mm, 57mm, 40mm, 25mm, 20mm and .50 cal) and missiles. Well done HURON.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

How many Harpoons and/or other missiles were launched against her?


----------



## vonGarvin

I heard this on the radio on the weekend.  Apparently one of the captains of one of the ships had mixed emotions about it.  He said though the training would be excellent, it was a bit heartbreaking, as he earned his "ticket" on the ship.  (Bridge watch ticket?  Does that sound right?)

RIP Huron.


----------



## navymich

Captain Sensible said:
			
		

> ...as he earned his "ticket" on the ship.  (Bridge watch ticket?  Does that sound right?)



BWK, bridge watchkeeper, is what they are, and yes, it is a "ticket" that they earn to be qualified to stand the watches.

It is things like this that make me miss sailing, and being involved in evolutions like this.  Cronicbny, I'm looking forward to seeing the pictures and videos that you have.  That would have been amazing to have been there, what an opportunity!


----------



## geo

JDnav said:
			
		

> hha... Wouldnt it serve better purpose if it was salvaged for steel and parts rather than sunk for practice


ships used to be towed out to India - to be stripped down by the wreckers... (remember the Bonny?)
now, those same doo-gooders feel that the labourers who toiled at wrecking the ships were being exposed to all sorts of nasty things as they did their work ... and so we don't send our ships over there anymore.


----------



## NCS_Eng

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> How many Harpoons and/or other missiles were launched against her?



AFAIK, There were no Harpoons fired upon the Huron. The plan was to engage it with Sea Sparrow Missiles operating in surface mode, but I don't know how many firing serials there was before it sank. Apparently (unsurprisingly) the damage done to the ship by these SA Missiles was negligible.

Its too bad they didn't get to unleash the Mk48... that would have been some good footage


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

From briefs we have had in the last couple of days the Sea Sparrows used were not even warshot, just telemetric warheads to collect data.


----------



## NCS_Eng

Cronicbny said:
			
		

> She was indeed sunk yesterday. She was not, however, sunk by ship's guns. She was put down by a laser guided bomb that was dropped from a CF-18.
> 
> It was a great experience to fire on a "live" target for only the second time in my career (the first was a US Knox Class FFG off the coast of Washington). I will post videos and pics once we get then all processed. She really took a hell of a beating from the 9 ships that fired on her, but she remained afloat through all Naval gunfire (5in, 76mm, 57mm, 40mm, 25mm, 20mm and .50 cal) and missiles. Well done HURON.



Any luck getting a hold of these videos / pictures? Everything I've read/seen in the media and people I've talked to onboard the REGINA state that the Huron was sunk by a second volley of shots from Algonquin's 76mm and that bombs were NOT dropped on the Huron.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO




----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

I have pics but can't figure out how to post em...oh well


----------



## Ljealexander

Photos of the sinking of the Huron can be found at combat camera's website. This link may help:

http://www.combatcamera.forces.gc.ca/netpub/server.np?quickfind&site=combatcamera&catalog=photos&template=results_e.np&sorton=IPTC%20-%20DateCreated&ascending=0


----------



## NCS_Eng

I've seen a few pictures and video from various sources (the periscope one, a few from A-Channel Victoria) but I'm specifically referring to anything from the CF-18's that would lend credence to Cronicbny's assertion that laser guided bombs sank the Huron.

Also mostly because I'd really like to see any video of the strafing run.


----------



## navymich

Ljealexander said:
			
		

> Photos of the sinking of the Huron can be found at combat camera's website. This link may help:
> 
> http://www.combatcamera.forces.gc.ca/netpub/server.np?quickfind&site=combatcamera&catalog=photos&template=results_e.np&sorton=IPTC%20-%20DateCreated&ascending=0



That brought up a ton of pics for me, but typing in keyword "Huron" I got these.

Here is one of the pics from the above link:








> The former HMCS Huron was used as a target by Canadian and American warships during Exercise TRIDENT FURY 2007 due to the increase in operational tempo of the Navy and it was determined that Huron's hulk would provide realistic and invaluable operational training for our sailors.
> 
> HMCS Ottawa is participating in Exercise TRIDENT FURY 07, which is an annual, joint, coalition exercise hosted by Joint Task Force Pacific (JTFP) and executed jointly by Canadian Fleet Pacific and 1 Canadian Air Division. The exercise will involve over 2,000 personnel from naval, air and land forces from Canada and the United States and will provide the participants with many training opportunities.


----------



## Gunner_Pyza

NCS_Eng said:
			
		

> Any luck getting a hold of these videos / pictures? Everything I've read/seen in the media and people I've talked to onboard the REGINA state that the Huron was sunk by a second volley of shots from Algonquin's 76mm and that bombs were NOT dropped on the Huron.



You're correct, her sister ship sank the Huron.  I have a bunch of pictures on a CD which I still haven't looked at yet.  To sum it all up, after a numerous amount of volleys from the Canadian and American ships that took part in the exercise, that included the 76mm, 57mm, and 50 cal and CIWS; Algonquin was allowed a 2nd volley.  Immediatly after the Huron started listing to it's side and then sank pretty quickly.  Took about 10 minutes for the ship to sink and the Still was piped on all circuits on the ship when it was definite that she was going down.  If the ship didn't sink on our 2nd volley then there would have been air strikes and if the ship withstood the aircraft, USS Topeka was schedualed to fire a torpedo at her.


----------



## Cronicbny

I base my assertion that it was a bomb that finally put her down on the statements made to me by CFMWC staff.... if they were incorrect then I stand corrected. 

Besides, in the DIMS from that evening credit was, in fact, given to NAN, SAS and ALE for starting her going down. I'm happy to take those comments (from the commander directly) to the bank too.


----------



## 284_226

Cronicbny said:
			
		

> Besides, in the DIMS from that evening credit was, in fact, given to NAN, SAS and ALE for starting her going down.



ALE ?  I'm guessing that's a typoed ALG...


----------



## Cronicbny

Nope... ALE = USCGC Alert


----------



## Jaydub

I hear that they removed all the hatches before sinking her.  For the sake of realism, I think it would have been better to leave them in or at least have some sort of a substitution.  In a real-world situation, the ship would have been in DC condition Zulu.  All the hatches would have been closed for obvious reasons.

It could have kept the ship afloat longer to facilitate more live fire training.  Also, with these classes of ships still in service, it would give us a better idea of what these ships could withstand while closed up in Zulu.


----------



## TN2IC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMTf1FWPq4A


Is this her being fired at?

Regards,
TN2IC


----------



## Cronicbny

TN2IC,

Thats the USCGC Alert firing 25mm and 50cal at her indeed.... we (NAN) were in front of her in the gunnery line and SAS in front of us.


----------



## Navy_Blue

I was looking at the combat camera footage and noticed that Algonquin had fired a volley and missed with plumes visible forward of Huron.  Was Algonquin not in line of sight?  Should it not be expected that a modern naval gun be able to hit what it is pointed at on the first shot when in range?  We're talking the broad side of a barn here in calm sea.  



> Plumes of water spurt into the air as 76mm rounds from HMCS Algonquins Oto Melara gun fall short of their target



We did a sink ex in the gulf and put up vertical sections on the targets so the gun could see the targets we wanted it to hit.  I always figured it was a small target (Old fishing boat) so that's why it took so many rounds.  Now seeing pics of the Huron and the 76mm missing on its first few shots I'm beginning to wonder.

Is this normal?  Should a modern (Cold War) gun system miss a big target like that in calm seas?  

 :warstory:


----------



## Cronicbny

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IimkffYBAc

Good video of her actually sinking.


----------



## TN2IC

Huron... 280 Class?


----------



## aesop081

TN2IC said:
			
		

> Huron... 280 Class?



Yes


----------



## TN2IC

Ah good. I am catching on this Navy stuff now. Arg... 

But yeah... it is a sad day to see her go now. Great video post. I wonder when the other 280s will be put to rest? I know we have two...I think on this side.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

TN2IC said:
			
		

> Ah good. I am catching on this Navy stuff now. Arg...
> 
> But yeah... it is a sad day to see her go now. Great video post. I wonder when the other 280s will be put to rest? I know we have two...I think on this side.



We are  now down to 3, 2 east and 1 west. Supposedly the 280s are to remain in service until 2015.


----------



## NavyShooter

Nice video....I'm taking the course (maintainer) on the system that was shot with right now.

Damn.

NS


----------



## Gunner_Pyza

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Nice video....I'm taking the course (maintainer) on the system that was shot with right now.
> 
> Damn.
> 
> NS




it's an awesome system!


----------



## NASAAN101

What did you guys thing of the sinking.. when i was watching i was trying hard not to giggle, but there were a few cute lines, that had me giggling.. and i wish i could remember the one.. dose any remember, this one guys first Name, his last name is Taylor, i can't remember his first name.. he was on her sister Algonquin.. the deck gun Algonguin had was part of Huron main armament, meaning she was sank by one of her own guns,, can you guys a chep shot, big time..
NIKKI


----------



## Ljealexander

Microsoft Virtual Earth  has an interesting view of what I presume to be the HMCS Huron in Esquimalt prior to its sinking. 

http://dev.live.com/virtualearth/sdk/  

Unfortunately I don't know how to post a screen print.  It was on the west side of the Harbour just NW of the Fisguard light house. Use the Birdseye view.

Enjoy.

LA


----------



## George Wallace

You can post the Location........Latitude and Longtitude from Google Earth and others can then locate it.


----------



## NASAAN101

Guys,
How deep is she..


----------



## aesop081

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> How deep is she.. [/color] [/color]



Bit of a personal question isn't it ?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> Guys,
> How deep is she..



According to this site HMCS Huron is at 2,468 m 
http://www.bookrags.com/wiki/HMCS_Huron_(DDH_281)


----------



## FSTO

Ljealexander said:
			
		

> Microsoft Virtual Earth  has an interesting view of what I presume to be the HMCS Huron in Esquimalt prior to its sinking.
> 
> http://dev.live.com/virtualearth/sdk/
> 
> Unfortunately I don't know how to post a screen print.  It was on the west side of the Harbour just NW of the Fisguard light house. Use the Birdseye view.
> 
> Enjoy.
> 
> LA
> 
> Not her, that is ANNAPOLIS who will be sunk as a dive reef up near Squamish in the near future. I think Huron was located at C1 (Horseshoe like jetty, she is on the west face). By the look of the construction around FMF this was taken when the majority of the fleet was away during OP APOLLO.


----------



## Sub Standard

> Not her, that is ANNAPOLIS who will be sunk as a dive reef up near Squamish in the near future. I think Huron was located at C1 (Horseshoe like jetty, she is on the west face). By the look of the construction around FMF this was taken when the majority of the fleet was away during OP APOLLO.



The birds eye views and the aerial views are from different times but both shots are are of the Annapolis.  The aerial views is deffinitly older than the birds eye as the naval graving dock is empty in the aerial and Victoria is in the dock in the birds eye under all the white covering.  which means it is from the last couple of years.


----------



## NASAAN101

the deck gun Algonguin had was part of Huron main armament, meaning she was sank by one of her own guns,, can you guys a cheap shot, big time.. It's so not fair that her sister got to take a few punches at her..
NIKKI


----------



## Ljealexander

http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php?action=gallery&g2_itemId=39765&g2_imageViewsIndex=1

Hopefully this is a sucessful attempt to post the screen print from my computer. Sorry, I'm not terribly up to date on Google Earth/ MS Virtual Earth.

LA


----------



## Sub Standard

> Hopefully this is a sucessful attempt to post the screen print from my computer. Sorry, I'm not terribly up to date on Google Earth/ MS Virtual Earth.



That is the Huron alright.


----------



## NASAAN101

Ya i thing it is her.. But the deck gun Algonguin had was part of Huron main armament, meaning she was sank by one of her own guns,, can you guys a cheap shot, big time.. It was so not fair that her twin sister got to take a few shots at her..


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Its pretty common for the Navy to switch out gear with other ships so its not a big thing....


----------



## drunknsubmrnr

Algonquin was the first to go through TRUMP. It's not surprising she traded in her SRGM for one that was a lot less worn, even if it was Huron's.


----------



## NASAAN101

Guys it was still a chaep shot ok.  yoounger Sister Vs. her older Sister, not even fair.. Even if it was just an Exercise, It was still a cheap shot, like it or not.. .  Not trying to get any one made at me ok That's Just the way i see it ok.
NIKKI


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> Guys it was still a chaep shot ok.  yoounger Sister Vs. her older Sister, not even fair.. Even if it was just an Exercise, It was still a cheap shot, like it or not.. .  Not trying to get any one made at me ok That's Just the way i see it ok.
> NIKKI


Ummmm okayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy..................


----------



## NASAAN101

Guys, Look my feeling is that they sould have left her sister out of this.. that my olny point ok..
NIKKI


----------



## geo

Ok Nikki..... we've figured that out from your series of posts......


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Nikki..the crew of the Algonquin gained valuable training from the exercise in sinking the Huron. while it was sad to see her go down. The valuable training and data collected will help save lives and enable us to build better ships.


----------



## NASAAN101

Guys, i'm not sayind it didnt. All i'm saying is how can two ships that are sisters got at it with eachother, that's all i'm saying ok..
NIKKI


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> Guys, i'm not sayind it didnt. All i'm saying is how can two ships that are sisters got at it with eachother, that's all i'm saying ok..
> NIKKI



Thats easy..the government declared Huron surplus and no longer needed and it was sunk. One of the ships involved was of the same class, believe me I don't think Hron and Algonquin minded. This kind of thing happens with navies.

Its done, its over with and it will happen again. get over it.


----------



## NASAAN101

Ex-Dragoon ,
i'm not saying i'm mad i thing it was, king of neat, but the only thing that made feel bad was her beening sunk in the first place, what were her chance of becoming a muscue ship?, eighter there or here in the US?
NIKKI


----------



## drunknsubmrnr

It would be pretty hard to make her a museum ship when there are still 3 other TRUMPs in commission. Her systems were required for spares, and it would be a pretty boring tour without them.


----------



## NASAAN101

Guys,
Where is Algonquin now, is she still in the picafic, or were is she..
NIKKI


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

She is with MARPAC...Iroquois in with MARLANT.


----------



## Privateer

Anyone know which 280 is the next to go, and when?


----------



## geo

I would imagine that a warship (and it's former crew) would greatly prefer seeing her go down in a blaze of glory... even if it was a gunnery practice... VS the alternative - being towed away and chopped up into little pieces - returning to us as little Mazdas & Subarus.

The Huron didn't necessarily go down in a fight - just the next best thing to one.


----------



## NASAAN101

Guys, 
i wasn't trying to get any one mad at me with the way i feel about Huron, she should been a museum ship. What was canada thinging as far as far as acutlly doing doing it, or were at going to sink her in the first place. she was tge second oldest ship in the class and Algonguin was the baby in the class, right?
Nikki


----------



## aesop081

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> Guys,
> i wasn't trying to get any one mad at me with the way i feel about Huron, she should been a museum ship. What was canada thinging as far as far as acutlly doing doing it, or were at going to sink her in the first place. she was tge second oldest ship in the class and Algonguin was the baby in the class, right?
> Nikki



Been drinking again eh ?


----------



## NASAAN101

NO.. Guys, 
i wasn't trying to get any one mad at me with the way feel about Huron, she should been a museum ship. What was canada thinging as far as far as acutlly doing doing it, or were they going to sink her in the first place. she was the second oldest ship in the class and Algonguin was the baby in the class, right?
Nikki


----------



## aesop081

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> NO.. Guys,
> i wasn't trying to get any one mad at me with the way feel about Huron, she should been a museum ship. What was canada thinging as far as far as acutlly doing doing it, or were they going to sink her in the first place. she was the second oldest ship in the class and Algonguin was the baby in the class, right?
> Nikki



I was only commenting on your language. You might want to read your posts a few time before posting. You might get a better reception if you ....oh , i dont know.......start making sense ?


----------



## NASAAN101

Guys
Sorry. Algonquin is the Baby in the class right? Shawn Taylor who was on Algonquin was also on Huron to right, I love what he said about her.. And yes she did go down in the blaze of glory. Ok about this whole thing the only Misslie used was a surface to air not the surface to surface Missile right?
Nikki


----------



## hugh19

The 280's are ships, they are INANIMATE objects. I think you have watched to many kids shows.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

NASAAN101...So why do you feel this strong about the Huron? What connection do you have with this ship? Maybe if you enlighten us we will be better able to understand where you are coming from.
I will break a few things down for you:
What the Huron sinking accomplished:
1) It enabled our Navy and other Navies to predict how a ship would react with battle damage. This will save lives.
2) Seeing how long Huron stayed afloat with all that ordnance being shot into it gave our sailors confidence in our ships so we now know how much damage a 280 can absorb.
3) We don't get to shoot at actual ships a lot so this gave our crews confidence that our weapons can do as advertised.
4) Huron becomes a reef for marine life.



> i wasn't trying to get any one mad at me with the way i feel about Huron, she should been a museum ship.


Why?Is there a group of people out there looking to buy an old 280 and turn it into a museum? Huron was laid up for several years before it was sunk? Was there any interest expresed then anout turning it into a museum? Had people wanted to I am sure they could have saved the ship if they were organized.


> What was canada thinging as far as far as acutlly doing doing it, or were at going to sink her in the first place. she was tge second oldest ship in the class and Algonguin was the baby in the class, right?


Huh?You will have to explain the first part of your statment.  As for being the second oldest what does that have to do with anything? She was in the apparent worse condition then the other 3 280s.


----------



## NASAAN101

Ex-Dragoon ,
you guys are going to think i'm Nuts, But i've always loved ships always, from Titanic to right down to the Bismarck.. that just the way i am.. I know it seams dumb, and i wish i could explain why, i just can't.. I thing one of the mean reasons is i had a consin who was in the US navy..  Also how far off the coast is she, i heard 92-miles, is that right? And how deep is she? 
Nikki..


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Nothing wrong with loving ships but be careful how you come across when you post.Right now your posts are not coming across to favourably.  As for her location check out the site I provided earlier.


----------



## NASAAN101

Sorry,
I wasn't trying to come across as a Butt head.. 
NIKKI


----------



## NASAAN101

Guys,
Any way, i had a friend ask me this Are Alqonquin and Huron, true twin sisters or no? Is Huron wreck a Dive site or Not yet? 
NIKKI


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Algonquin, Iroquois, Athabaskan and Huron all belong to the same class. There are some differences but you will find that in any warship of the same class.

Ummm you know from a previous post that Huron rests at 2,468_ meters _ right?


----------



## Eye In The Sky

I watched the SINKEX today on The History Channel.  It was interesting to see.


----------



## TheHead

It was a yawner for me.....  had some cool moments here and there but I wasn't to impressed.  I was hoping that the American sub would get a shot at it with it's torpedo I never knew the exact science of how they worked till I saw that show and it's pretty amazing.


----------



## NASAAN101

OMG, 
This is going good, But as far as the Sub that was there her name was Topeka, I liked watching it and for a while i had it taped. Also is it out to own on DVD or not just yet? As Were can i fine any photos of Huron and her sisters together? how many mile is 2,468 meters? I"m just asking ok.. One thing i should have said very early on RIP Huron..
NIKKI


----------



## Sub_Guy

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> OMG,
> As Were can i fine any photos of Huron and her sisters together? how many mile is 2,468 meters?
> NIKKI



Work the Google...  

It is too bad that submarine didn't get to shoot the torpedo, seeing a MK48 rip through a 280 would have been something to see.  Sinking it they way they did was pretty boring to watch.


----------



## PMedMoe

2468 meters = 1.534 miles.

convert-me.com


----------



## Eye In The Sky

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> 2468 meters = 1.534 miles.
> 
> convert-me.com



Oh, so I'd only need a snorkel then.  :blotto:


----------



## dbouls

I enjoyed the docu, but the thing that peeved me was that the documentary crew faked a camera on the ship. They had shots of Regina shooting at Huron then they cut to a "camera" on the ship where they would show fake computer generated bullets hitting it and the weirdest lighting.


----------



## Neill McKay

dbouls said:
			
		

> I enjoyed the docu, but the thing that peeved me was that the documentary crew faked a camera on the ship. They had shots of Regina shooting at Huron then they cut to a "camera" on the ship where they would show fake computer generated bullets hitting it and the weirdest lighting.



I admit I wasn't looking at it with a very critical eye, but what makes you say it was faked?

(My only gripe about that show is the awful writing.  When I went to school you didn't dare refer to a CPO1 as a "senior officer"!)


----------



## NASAAN101

Guys,
The senior officer for Alqonquin, was Shawn Taylor.. I loved what he said about Huron.. is he still withAlgonquin or not any more? Also when the ships are in port is the pubic able to see them up close or no?
NIKKI


----------



## Neill McKay

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> Also when the ships are in port is the pubic able to see them up close or no?



All Canadian navy ships are based at either Halifax (Nova Scotia) or Esquimalt (British Columbia).  Neither location would allow members of the public to walk right up to a ship, but in both places at least some of the ships are visible from a distance.  Individual ships do open themselves up to visitors from time to time, especially when visiting other ports.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> Guys,
> The senior officer for Alqonquin, was Shawn Taylor.. I loved what he said about Huron.. is he still withAlgonquin or not any more? Also when the ships are in port is the pubic able to see them up close or no?
> NIKKI



We can't reveal the locations of our members for PERSEC reasons.


----------



## NASAAN101

Ex-Dragoon,
Sorry. were can i fine some photo of colored Algonquin. she and her sister Huron are two of 9-ship candad has that i like.. i know that sound dump, but it true.. Now here is a little on why i like ships so much. One Sthey are leek, fast and almost Nothing can get near them. two there Huge and lastly there nice to look at ,even if they are warships.. what dose PERSEC mean?
NIKKI


----------



## Sub_Guy

Google images for "HMCS Algonquin".  You will find all kinds of pictures!


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> Ex-Dragoon,
> Sorry. were can i fine some photo of colored Algonquin. she and her sister Huron are two of 9-ship candad has that i like.. i know that sound dump, but it true.. Now here is a little on why i like ships so much. One Sthey are leek, fast and almost Nothing can get near them. two there Huge and lastly there nice to look at ,even if they are warships.. what dose PERSEC mean?
> NIKKI



Ummm...what did you say?

PERSEC...is personnel security meaning revealing personal information about yourself or others is a no-no.


----------



## NASAAN101

Ex-Dragoon,
Sorry, should not have asked.. Any way Halifa Nova Scotia was a port used since WW12 right.. The only reason i know hat is i'm bigg in to learning about it.. That also were some of Basttleships Bismarck Survivors came to wait out the rest of the war..
NIKKI


----------



## George Wallace

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> Ex-Dragoon,
> Sorry, should not have asked.. Any way Halifa Nova Scotia was a port used since WW12 right.. The only reason i know hat is i'm bigg in to learning about it.. That also were some of Basttleships Bismarck Survivors came to wait out the rest of the war..
> NIKKI



I know I have been tired lately, but I am positive I have not slept through ten World Wars in the past few years.  I am sure someone or something would have woken me up.      ;D


----------



## Eye In The Sky

*laughing*


----------



## NASAAN101

Guys
Sorry, I meant since WW 2.
NIKKI


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Halifax has been used as a naval port since 1759....so it was used by the Royal Navy before being taken over for the Canadian Navy (RCN et al)


----------



## NASAAN101

I thing it was one of i think four ports used in WW2, i could be wrong on that.. Any way i'm sorry i asked ok.. he is one guys i would like to meet.. that all.. Any way, Dumb question, i don't know how much of WW2 you guys know about but here:  I've had this question on my mind for a very long time, and i've looked on the Internet for the Answer, but try as i may i haven't. so here! 
Scharnhorst flashed a signal to Rawalpindi to "Heave to!" followed up with a warning shot across her bow! what dose that actually Mean? Do you guys and the US navy still do this to this day or not any more..
NIKKI


----------



## Sailorwest

I do that frequently but it is usually after a mess dinner and several glasses of port.


----------



## NASAAN101

OMG! Why do i get the feeling this is going to be a long thread.. Any way, Dumb question, i don't know how much of WW2 you guys know about but here:  I've had this question on my mind for a very long time, and i've looked on the Internet for the Answer, but try as i may i haven't. so here! Scharnhorst flashed a signal to Rawalpindi to "Heave to!" followed up with a warning shot across her bow! what dose that actually Mean? Do you guys and the US navy still do this to this day or not any more..
Nikki


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Nasaan101 why do you ask the same question twice.

Using the amazing tool of Google: Heave to>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaving_to   as much as I am loathe to use Wkipedia they are correct.


----------



## NASAAN101

Sorry it's a habit.. but any way there was other part to the question: Do you guys and the US navy still fire warning shots to this day or not any more..

NIKKI


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

NASAAN101 said:
			
		

> Sorry it's a habit.. but any way there was other part to the question: Do you guys and the US navy still fire warning shots to this day or not any more..
> 
> NIKKI



I cannot and will not answer for the US Navy and as for Canada firing Warning Shots, that depends on the situation and ROE (Rules of Engagement) we are operating under.


----------



## NASAAN101

OK.. thanks.. i had a friend ask me and i did know ok..
NIKKI


----------



## hugh19

I have to ask, and if I missed it I am sorry. Nikki is english your first  or second language?


----------



## PMedMoe

The people who are having issues with Nikki's posts may want to have a look at her profile.


----------



## hugh19

I did look at her profile. I assume Va means Virginia. She is 25, and has ADD.  Which I would not take as an excuse not to know the difference between thing and think. Though if english was her second language I would take that as a good reason.


----------



## gwp

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> We can't reveal the locations of our members for PERSEC reasons.



Click on meet the crew. 

http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/Algonquin/home/index_e.asp


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

gwp said:
			
		

> Click on meet the crew.
> 
> http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/Algonquin/home/index_e.asp



And how up to date is the Meet the Crew Section?


----------



## NASAAN101

Guys, 
Algonquin was in the first gulf war, right? How long was she out there before Huron got out there so, she could come home?? And have they ever work together as a team?
Nikki


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

This is now way off topic...if anyone else have anything with regards to the Huron being sunk IM a Staff member and we will see about opening it up again. Until then. LOCKED!

Milnet.ca Staff


----------

