[PHOTOS] Dammages on the Israelian Hanit ship 09/14/2006

[UglyMowgli]

more photos here : http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...458845,00.html

[The Avon Lady]

Background reading: Full details of the Hezbullah INS Hanit kill.

EDIT: The word "complacency", used in the article, is the key.

[TLAM Strike]

I see we have still to learn the lessons of the HMS Sheffield and USS Stark.

I just heard about this a week ago. Strange it wasn't all over the headlines when it happened.

[fatty]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

I just heard about this a week ago. Strange it wasn't all over the headlines when it happened.

It wasn't?

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by fatty

It wasn't?

Not here, then again I don't have cable. :hmm:

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by fatty

It wasn't?

It was all over the international media at the time.

[geetrue]

It's been a long time since I was a radarman, finished my nine years as a sonarman on submarines, but as a young 18 year old right out of boot camp I reported aboard the USS Helena CA72 as a radarman recruit.

We are talking over forty years ago for personal experience, but the words active and pasive for a detection unit were used in AL's aritcle she linked us to.
http://www.strategypage.com/military.../36-22440.aspx

These words are easy enough to undestand, right? On active a signal is active, looking, sending. seeking and on passive it is in the duh mode, listening, comprehending, but not ready to react yet.

What I am trying to say is, could the enemy in this case have any knowledge that the system in question was turned off or is that too far fetched?

It was a human error that should not be repeated ...

Seems a young officer had just switched off the active defensive shield to a passive mode.

Despite initial suspicions that a radar malfunction contributed to the July 14 attack, experts here said the glitch in the Elta Pulse Doppler surveillance system affected only detection range, not accuracy.

As for other onboard systems, investigators confirmed that locally produced electro-optical surveillance sensors, communications and combat management systems were in prime condition and fully operational, but that the integrated naval electronic warfare suite designed to track incoming missiles was in standby mode.

investigators faulted the actions of an electronic warfare systems officer, who switched active defensive systems into standby mode without informing the ship’s commander. According to Navy sources here, the young officer incorrectly assessed the significance of a malfunctioning electronic warfare detector tube, and kept the passive defense system on standby when it technically was capable of operating in high-alert mode.
While investigators reported that the ship’s integrated radar did not detect the incoming missile, Navy officials insist this was due to human rather than technological error.