Path: utzoo!utgpu!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: R2RS1%AKRONVM@vm1.cc.UAKRON.EDU (Suku) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Missile pods on Soviet warships Message-ID: <1991Jun20.020943.1923@cbnews.cb.att.com> Date: 20 Jun 91 02:09:43 GMT Sender: military@cbnews.cb.att.com (william.a.thacker) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 25 Approved: military@att.att.com From: Suku Missile pods on Soviet warships =============================== Sometime back I was looking at photographs of Guided missile ships of Soviet make and saw that most of them have their SSM pods mounted externally on either side of the superstructure. Doesnt that make them very vulnerable. A hit from an incoming shell or missile would wipe out their missile capability easily, not to mention the damage caused by exploding warheads and propellant. Does it not make sense to have vertical launched missile magazines situated inside the ship hulls giving a little more protection and survivability ? Have there been any Soviet made ships involved in combat which took such hits that made them inoperable/sunk ? I understand that the latest Soviet makes have vertical launch capability. BTW I have also seen some US ships upgraded with Harpoon canisters similarly mounted externally. Any ideas/thoughts ? ************************************************************************* * R SUKUMAR.....................(R2RS1@VM1.CC.UAKRON.EDU) * * THE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON - DEPT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING * * AKRON OH 44325 * * (216)434-6335 - (R) My thoughts are my own * * (216)972-6002 - (O) So are my opinions * *************************************************************************