Could it be done ?
could a ship like Missouri be taken over completely ? the crew numbers were massive
someones in my fruit cellar someone with a fresh soul
Most definitely.
Time is money
MovieChat Forums > Under Siege (1992) Discussion > Could it be done ?
Anyone who gives you a short answer with no facts to back it up is not giving you a legit answer.
My background is nearly 20 years in the Navy to present. In the Fleet and out of the Fleet. So lets break it down.
In the movie, the premise is that Missouri is returning to the mainland with a skeleton crew to decommission. Since we can't really know what they mean by skeleton in terms of numbers we can only assume or guess. IRL Mo had room for about 1800 crew in its final configuration. IRL she decommissioned with a little over 1200 crew. So lets assume they had 1200 crew based on real life, since you are asking could it be done in real life.
The terrorists, bad guys, whatever you want to call them came aboard in a HH-46. An H-46 can carry 24 passengers. Since the stripper/playmate took up one spot, lets assume 23 bad guys got on board with this 46. Even if all 23 of these dudes were bad assed High Speed SOF Operators, there is no way 23 guys are going to take on a crew of 1200. This crew is military not civilian, most of them have at least some weapons experience. And there are many, many small arms aboard. The Marine Detachment aside, Missouri had 8 Security Alert Teams (2 for each inport duty section). 240 men trained at least to some degree in protecting the ship. My no shVt assessment, you would need at least several hundred men to have any chance as assaulting Mo. Problem is Mo is labor intensive to operate and it can't just be operated by unskilled labor. You would need to keep many of the crew alive and in working order just to keep the Boilers running. Which if you are trying to take the ship, it would be inherently difficult to subdue rather than kill/incapacitate. Ultimately the Mo Crew has the advantage and its unlikely even several hundred assaulters could take her.
Based on numbers alone, it would be easy to say that taking a ship could be as easy as outnumbering the crew. Its not that easy though. Navy ships are inherently secure structures. With compartmentation and secured/securable doors in nearly every space, limited entry points and no ability to breach, its a logistical nightmare.
The most possible scenario IMO for taking Mo or any warship for that matter....is inport. Let me take it a step further and say not just inport but, in a stand down configuration, like for example during the holidays. This is a time when the ship will be at its lowest manning.
You're taking a dump and they call GQ do you pinch it off or finish your business?
[deleted]
The OP is asking about Real Life, could it be done. We are not talking about the movie. This isn't a prison ship, the sailors aren't locked down or subdued.
No go away troll before I step on you!
You're taking a dump and they call GQ do you pinch it off or finish your business?
[deleted]
What is stupid is that they sent in a SEAL "Strike Team" as they call it in the movie in a Boeing UH-46 Sea Knight however in the movie dialogue they say it will be a CH-53E from the Nimitz. It would have Apache gunship support to take out the Mo's Radar however their Hellfire missiles and 2.75" rockets only have a maximum range of 10km. These would easily get shot out of the sky by one of the 4 × 20 mm Phalanx CIWS. Also all the TPTB in that Situation Room would know that the Mo would have MANPADS on board and that the helo would be shot down easily.
As the Mo didn't have any anti-aircraft missiles I assume having MANPADS aboard would have be beneficial or policy. Is it SOP to have MANPADS in the armory of all US surface warships in case the power goes down and ESS Missiles or the Phalanx CIWS goes offline?
Putting on my Armchair General uniform but wouldn't an underwater SEAL insertion using a SEAL Delivery Vehicle being inserted into the water several kilometres away then climbing up the welded stairs like Seagal does in the movie? Then have an F/A-18 fly around out of CIWS range to distract the "bad guys".
If you are not willing to give up everything, you have already lost
[deleted]
You're wrong of course. You know you're not even a good poser. You're not a good troll. You're just a loser. There aren't many guys in 'The Teams' that watch English soap operas so you might want to use another sock puppet to post on those boards. Just saying....
You're taking a dump and they call GQ do you pinch it off or finish your business?
[deleted]
Im not bent out of shape. You internet appraisal skills are lacking. I am just pointing out the obvious. When you say something stupid, expect to get called on it.
You're taking a dump and they call GQ do you pinch it off or finish your business?
[deleted]
Since you were in the Teams then why are you asking this question? Seems kind of strange for a former SEAL not knowing anything about SEAL Delivery Vehicles!
If you are not willing to give up everything, you have already lost
What ISN'T wrong with using SDVs for the insertion?....that is the real question.
It's been duly noted by myself that SDVs are inappropriate for assaulting a warship underway. The reasons being:
-SDVs are slow. The MK8 can do about 5 knots in open ocean. This creates problems when the target ship can go 30+ knots.
-SDV deployment options are very limited. They can be deployed by Dry Dock Shelter (DDS) from fitted subs or they can be deployed by H-53/H-47 helos. The latter of option which has never been used operationally to date. There are a limited amount of subs fitted full-time with DDS. They try to have one per for specific regional commands (PACOM/SOUTCOM/CENTCOM/EUCOM).
-SDV payload is also very limited. They can deploy 6 when used at long range, more for short distances. The passengers are very limited to what they can carry as well. Payload and Passenger load-out are more suited to Combat Swimmer missions not ship assaults.
SDVs are better suited to assaulting stationary targets not moving ships. Most often SDVs are reserved for hydrographic survey or other forms of intelligence gathering. Taking pictures, cutting harbor nets, planting mines and so on.
Does that answer your question wannabe?
You're taking a dump and they call GQ do you pinch it off or finish your business?
-SDVs are slow. The MK8 can do about 5 knots in open ocean. This creates problems when the target ship can go 30+ knots.
Was the ship underway when the teams were being inserted? I thought they were tied along with the sub, so...
I guess a few things go against it though:
1 - they wouldn't know what the ship was doing/going to do;
2 - it was remarkably calm for the middle of the ocean (not saying it doesn't get that calm, but it's not something you would assume is going to happen, so the plan relied an awful lot on calm oceans... then again, it was the Pacific )
SpiltPersonality share
In my experience the Pacific in that area is usually calm if there is no storm. But calm would still be slightly rolling.
I believe the H-46 was shot down by the MANPAD on the Sub while the Sub was underway. That was the point the helo didn't know it was there.
Even if Missouri was dead in the water though, the helo would need to drop the SDVs far enough away that Missouri could not spot or hear the helos. It would need to be at least over the horizon. 12 miles is a long way for the SDV to go. It would take them over 2 hours. This is why SDVs have typically only been operationally launched from submarines from about 2 miles out. SEALs in a SDV for 2 hours or even an hour are not going to be as combat effective as they should be when they get on target.
You're taking a dump and they call GQ do you pinch it off or finish your business?
In my experience the Pacific in that area is usually calm if there is no storm. But calm would still be slightly rolling.
Yeah, I wasn't saying it can't be that calm... I mean, it is called the "Pacific" (peaceful) ocean for a reason. Hell, even a harbour can be more choppy that the waters around big mo in that movie.
I just love how nearly all seas in movies are as smooth as a baby's bum, unless the story calls for storms, in which case you absolutely positively must have someone throwing up into the storm as opposed to away from the storm.
SpiltPersonality share
Being that Nimitz didn't carry either helo at the time both are inaccurate. I would rather go in a 46. Heat signature is low for IR Missiles with a simple set of dissipators. Its far more maneuverable and stable at low level.
The initial blocks of Apache had issues operating over water. The engines were overly sensitive to ingesting salty air. The fire control had problems over water and from what I gather it still does. Oddly enough using TOW, it would be hard to detect and counter them. It would also be hard to counter laser guided Hellfires.
I asked a guy who I know that was on Iowa in the late 80s, an OS, as far as he knows Iowa never had Stingers. FYI the Stinger shot that hit the 46 came from the sub. CIWS is more effective than MANPADs. With MANPADs needing solely visual cues and CIWS being fully automated. The only ships I am aware of that currently have MANPADs are Mine Countermeasures types (MCM/MHC) and PCs. Each had ready service lockers with Stingers. Though most MHCs use their Stinger RSLs to stow their Quarterdeck Awnings.
Putting on my Armchair General uniform but wouldn't an underwater SEAL insertion using a SEAL Delivery Vehicle being inserted into the water several kilometres away then climbing up the welded stairs like Seagal does in the movie? Then have an F/A-18 fly around out of CIWS range to distract the "bad guys".
Very armchair. Ive already talked about assault types here, uncluding SDV options. Think about it! Do you know how fast an SDV is? In good conditions it can go 5 knots. It will not be able to catch up to a warship underway unless its dead in the water. Than you have think about how you deploy the SDV. Do we have time to get a SSN in place with a Drydock Shelter? SDVs carry 6 pax you would need 3 to carry 1 Platoon. Can the SEALs swim in? Even if the sub locked them out in very close proximity to the ship it would be difficult for them to get aboard a moving ship. CRRCs? Mo can go faster than a Zodiac, which will get maybe 12 knots in open ocean with a significant sea state.
You're taking a dump and they call GQ do you pinch it off or finish your business? share
I seriously doubted a help with 20-25 men, even assuming those men were all military trained, and the ship operating with a skeleton crew as aforementioned, but I sure learned a lot from your response, nice to see some people actually have sense and don't lie to make friends
shareJust curious, I'm not very knowledgeable on Navy transports or the SOP for SeAL insertion regarding retaking a huge vessel like the Missouri, but, when the "Strike Team" was headed towards the ship, we have to assume the Missouri was somewhere between Hawaii and San Francisco, a distance of 3,000+ miles, so my question is, exactly how far can a HH-46 or whatever helo the strike team was flying in, it had to be at least a 1000 miles, and I'm not aware of any helos with a range of that much?
share[deleted]
Totally agree sir. No flipping way a small group takes over a ship, of any kind (military). It makes for great theatre (well, that's debatable) but is far- fetched to the extreme. Just like Under Seige 2.
sharei have no military knowledge or experience at all, but the whole premise is absolutely ludicrous on one level - yet entirely entertaining on another.
i knew it was implausible, but it's such a great action film. like "Die Hard", so large a structure could not realistically be taken, nor would anyone want to take it (9/11 notwithstanding).
[deleted]