>*takes a long drag from a hash pipe*
This is going to sound very stupid but: Why don't poor countries' navies not just make improvised warships instead of shilling loads of bucks to buy from West/East?
Like, I dunno. You can take a tanker and turn it into a helicopter carrier.
Or put deck guns, stingers, and exocets on a tramp steamer.
If third worlders in Ukraine and Syria run around in technicals and improvised armor, why not improvised warships eh?
Picture semi-related.
Other urls found in this thread:
nrac.navy.mil
youtube.com
twitter.com
answer me you heathens.
>slow
>no armor
>no sonar
>huge signature, on radar, VIS and the shit it leaves behind
will probably get shitted on by a Kh-47 before modification is even finished.
Because the infrastructure for creating arms/armor simply doesn't exist for those countries. Imagine trying to get Ethiopia to produce a 75mm deck gun. They'd have to somehow invent all of the tooling, metallurgy, and production lines. It's much easier to simply buy this stuff from the countries who can already produce it.
>If third worlders in Ukraine and Syria run around in technicals and improvised armor, why not improvised warships eh?
Because Ukraine and Syria are both active warzones that have military assets being pumped into them. The improvised arms/armor are more often than not re-purposed enemy resources.
Cargo ships have completely different designs from warships. Hulls on cargo ships are generally optimized for cruising speed, using the least fuel to carry the most amount of cargo as possible. Warship hulls are generally semi-displacement types. They have a smaller Length:beam ratio for increased maneuverability and, although many have sonar domes that also act as bulbous bows to decrease wave resistance, they are meant to be able to operate at a variety of speeds. The engines of conventional warships are also gas turbine or combined diesel and gas, whereas most commercial vessels use diesel only, once again because diesel is optimized for one efficient speed whereas gas turbine has a better range of speeds.
Great, now I gotta go hit my fucking hash pipe
Like user said :
You could however make an argument that a fleet of improvised warships could be assembled as a stop-gap measure.
Or simply as a "suicide fleet" if the other side cannot replace its own navy easily.
If the other side :
- has a small military navy
- is strapped for cash
- doesn't have a domestic naval military industry
then he won't be able to replace his losses easily.
In that situation, losing a few cargo ships in an exchange against the lone escadre of the enemy might be worth it, as it would rob him of his naval capacities for years.
Even if you ended up the winner of such exchange with a single improvised warship left, that would already be infinitely more than your opponent.
But more pragmatically, the missiles, guns and other systems you would have to add to the civilian ships to make them war-worthy would push the price so high it might just be best to buy a dedicated warship.
We do that here in the Philippines actually. Not much for the navy- which does buy actual military craft- but the coast guard does it all the time.
Because of the needs to patrol a wide expanse of coast, the Philippine Coast Guard pretty much buys anything that is fast and can float and sticks guns on them.
Then there's also the Philippine Coast Guard auxiliary, which does that even to traditional Philippine seacraft like bancas (outrigger skiffs).
contd.
Nearby Malaysia actually did buy a conainer/cargo vessel that serves as an auxiliary ship/helicopter carrier.
Except it can only carry 2 birds at a time.
>ukraine
No such thing.
>No such thing.
Insufficient evidence.
Poor quality in massive quantity usually doesn't fare good against up to date quality in modest quantity
*shoots your transports just to be sure*
gee idk
China back in the 70s and early 80s did this when they didn't have much of a navy.
When they nicked the Paracel Islands from Vietnam, part of the craft they sent were barges which had machineguns and howitzers on them/
monkeys cant fly or drive ships....
In all fairness, we haven't really seen any example of modern naval warfare to prove this. Small swarms of missile boats or small diesel-electric subs could very possibly fuck up large naval formations that stray too close to enemy shores. I mean, I could be completely wrong; we'll have to wait until the US vs. Iran or some shit like that goes down.
>Small boat swarms.
Generally, no. Even with suicidal courage small boats need to get too close to make an attack to be effective and would be slaughtered without doing anything to harm their targets. Larger boats able to be equipped with larger weapons and more effective sensors end up too expensive to be built in large numbers. The days of the torpedo boat are over, if they ever truly were.
Because a small, second-hand, gearless feeder in the 500 TEU range still cost like five million USD and cost 100k a year to keep seaworthy before you buy fuel.
Small, poor nations are way better off asking the US if they have any OHP they aren't using or something.
Just buy superior Chinese container weapons. Ranging from containerised land attack cruise missile to containerised anti sub suicide drones. China is the best in efficient and effective weapons.
well they can be converted easily, thats why. you dont actually do it until you need it
>Ethiopia
>landlock country
>Deck Guns
They bought the 737; I wouldn't give them too much credit.
>ethiopia
>landlocked
it's like you're not even redpilled on the final solution to the somali problem
holy fuck all of you are newfags
