Path: utzoo!attcan!telly!lethe!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: swilliam@dtoa1.dt.navy.mil (Williams)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Anti-Balistic Missiles Now
Message-ID: <1990Dec15.011936.13077@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 15 Dec 90 01:19:36 GMT
References: <1990Dec7.011307.474@cbnews.att.com> <1990Dec13.032943.18680@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: David Taylor Research Center, Bethesda, MD
Lines: 15
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: swilliam@dtoa1.dt.navy.mil (Williams)

>Have there been any known cases where a ship was saved by CIWS? We 
>know that the USS Stark did not have CIWS.

Correction: the USS Stark did have a CIWS when it was hit by an Exocet
missile.  The problem was that the CIWS was shut off out of fear that
it might fire upon another ship that might come too near.  Thus, a real
opportunity to test the CIWS under real battle condition was lost. 

As far as I could remember, the Stark never had a chance to react to 
the missile even though a crewman on deck saw it coming just a few seconds 
before the impact.