http://mobile.reuters.com/article/i dUSKCN12A082?il=0 Appa

>>31622313
>shooting AShMs at a Burke

Good luck.

>>31622313
most likely one of their glorified barrel bombs

>>31622313
Oh wait, they were those Chinese AShMs that hit the UAE supply ships.

And they both missed.

Welp, good luck fighting the US navy in the SCS China.

File: 1467423802287.jpg (1MB, 2887x1844px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2887x1844px

>>31622350
That's what I'm assuming

I don't think anyone's stupid enough on a government level would just blindly fire on a US Destroyer with absolutely no coordination

>>31622350
actual antiship missiles apparently, keep in mind the same people recent hit and almost sank a Saudi Arabian vessel. http://www.defconwarningsystem.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6805&p=62562#p62562

>>31622444
That was a UAE ship, and the fireball burned the bridge but the ship was structurally intact.

It should have hit midship, maximizing overall damage.

>>31622313
I highly doubt you can fire two antiship missiles or any type of missiles without knowing whats out there. Most missile systems wont allow ballistic firing of missiles without a proper radar lock.

Deal is: houthis saw a ship on their radar. Fired two and both fall short. Rumormill is abuzz that the EW system fried the suckers.

I doubt it is the same missile, last time was a C-802 which is Chinese made and known to be un jammable and has a 1:1 Fire/kill ratio. It's probably some second rate Russian Oniks or Granit, which although not as good as Chinese missiles, can be bought by Iranian dollars.

>>31622753
>unjammable
>1:1

kek

>>31622753
A C-802 can't compare in any way to a Granit or Oniks. Jamming would have been much less effective against those two due to HOJ.

>>31622802
>home on jam

SRBOC?

>>31622802
HOJ for an AShM has yet to actually work in a real world scenario though.