Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!cbnews!sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM
From: sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: article submission
Summary: command & control center
Message-ID: <6148@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 2 May 89 03:29:41 GMT
References: <5977@cbnews.ATT.COM> <6034@cbnews.ATT.COM> <6072@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: Interface Systems @ AT&T Bell Labs
Lines: 27
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink)

In article <6072@cbnews.ATT.COM>, bucsb!brianb@bu-cs.bu.edu (Brian Bresnahan) writes:
 
: In article <6034@cbnews.ATT.COM> sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink) writes:
: >No sea-skimming missile hits below the waterline, so it is unlikely to sink
: >a ship that way. They *do* home in towards the central command & control
: >centers as stated by a previous poster.
: >
: Right they hit the belt of a ship, and it puts a hole in side of the
: ship.  As I said above, its intent is to cause structural damage.
: All the data I have seen on the Harpoon and Exocet, tells me
: that they aare designed to hit the broadside of the ship, they do
: not home in. Every photograph I have seen of a ship or target hit by
: a seaskimmer was hit in the hull area, not in the upper part of the
: ship.

Right! I think you will find that the combat command and control center of 
a modern ship *is* below main deck level; it is usually burried right in the 
middle of the hull, giving it as much protection as possible.
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Captain, I see no reason to stand here  |  Stuart Warmink, Whippany, NJ, USA
 and be insulted" - Spock                | sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (att!cbnewsl!sw)
-------------------------> My opinions are just that <------------------------