[Goose]

Agree everybody guessing, but FWIW the picture of the Houthi boat is about twice the size (length) of the Ukrainian one. That would allow the Houthi boat to carry a significantly larger warhead.

We're all speculating, but FWLIW the Italian MT boat which Sutton estimates is similar size to the Ukrainian boat carried 700+lbs of explosives, and as I mentioned sunk a cruiser in WW2.

Indeed it did. However, if you examine how the MT boat functioned, it worked on an entirely different principle. It broke apart and dropped it's warhead into the water. After the warhead sank to an appropriate depth, it detonated, creating a "water hammer" as described for the MK-48 torpedo in my previous post. The USV used by the Ukrainians does not do this. It's detonators are in the bow and it explodes on contact with the target. No water hammer, much less damage.

My hunch is that the ship did cause a lot of damage to the Makarov. If damage was insignificant or light Russia would have released pictures by now.

Even it didn't sink it, a USS Cole level of damage will still be significant. The Cole took over a year to repair, and I'm guessing Russia would take longer for something similar. Maybe longer if they mobilized the guys who'd be doing repairs.

I wouldn't be as ready to read anything into lack of pictures of the ship. Where is it right now? I don't know. If it was damaged as bad as the Cole, it wouldn't be moving and if it were not against a pier it wouldn't be floating most probably. Given Russian damage control, it almost certainly would have sunk if it were at sea. The pictures show the USV hitting a moving Frigate. The Cole was hit by a 400 to 700 lb warhead molded into a shaped charge and held statically against the hull by the suicide bombers. It was not an EFP. Again, the USV can't do this. A shaped charge is capable of much, much more destruction than a free air explosion.

This is not to say it is impossible that the USV seriously damaged the frigate. It is however unclear how it could have done so without some kind of "special" explosive, which it doesn't appear it carried. If the frigate was sunk you would think we would have heard that from Ukraine. If she were in the yard or harbor at Sevastopol, it would have been seen by satellites (or just people's cell phones) by now I would think. So, where is she?

UPDATE: https://avia-pro.net/news/fregat-admiral...vastopolya
This is an alleged picture of the frigate. It is impossible to verify the date it was taken, so I don't think this "report" changes anything. I will be impressed if/when we get a verifiable report frome somebody.

[Goose]

Agree everybody guessing, but FWIW the picture of the Houthi boat is about twice the size (length) of the Ukrainian one. That would allow the Houthi boat to carry a significantly larger warhead.

We're all speculating, but FWLIW the Italian MT boat which Sutton estimates is similar size to the Ukrainian boat carried 700+lbs of explosives, and as I mentioned sunk a cruiser in WW2.

Indeed it did. However, if you examine how the MT boat functioned, it worked on an entirely different principle. It broke apart and dropped it's warhead into the water. After the warhead sank to an appropriate depth, it detonated, creating a "water hammer" as described for the MK-48 torpedo in my previous post. The USV used by the Ukrainians does not do this. It's detonators are in the bow and it explodes on contact with the target. No water hammer, much less damage.

My hunch is that the ship did cause a lot of damage to the Makarov. If damage was insignificant or light Russia would have released pictures by now.

Even it didn't sink it, a USS Cole level of damage will still be significant. The Cole took over a year to repair, and I'm guessing Russia would take longer for something similar. Maybe longer if they mobilized the guys who'd be doing repairs.

I wouldn't be as ready to read anything into lack of pictures of the ship. Where is it right now? I don't know. If it was damaged as bad as the Cole, it wouldn't be moving and if it were not against a pier it wouldn't be floating most probably. Given Russian damage control, it almost certainly would have sunk if it were at sea. The pictures show the USV hitting a moving Frigate. The Cole was hit by a 400 to 700 lb warhead molded into a shaped charge and held statically against the hull by the suicide bombers. It was not an EFP. Again, the USV can't do this. A shaped charge is capable of much, much more destruction than a free air explosion.

This is not to say it is impossible that the USV seriously damaged the frigate. It is however unclear how it could have done so without some kind of "special" explosive, which it doesn't appear it carried. If the frigate was sunk you would think we would have heard that from Ukraine. If she were in the yard or harbor at Sevastopol, it would have been seen by satellites (or just people's cell phones) by now I would think. So, where is she?

UPDATE: https://avia-pro.net/news/fregat-admiral...vastopolya
This is an alleged picture of the frigate. It is impossible to verify the date it was taken, so I don't think this "report" changes anything. I will be impressed if/when we get a verifiable report frome somebody.