Hmm the plot thickens... I has my doubts all along.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/23/world/la-fg-korea-torpedo-20100724
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/23/world/la-fg-korea-torpedo-20100724
More doubts about N Koreas guilt in ship sinking....
- Thread starter nottyboi
- Start date
Let us consider who the OP is and be glad he's spread his gospel sermons beyond the Middle East theatre.
Wow you guys are just war mongers aren't you!! Amazing!! At least if you had the balls to go and fight all these wars you support I could respect you.Let us consider who the OP is and be glad he's spread his gospel sermons beyond the Middle East theatre.
I'm not quite sure how you get my being a war monger out of my post . but I don't get how you glean what you do out of most members post. It must be in invisible ink. You obviously don't know your critics very well. You just lash at anyone that opposes you. You've been around since 2008, but I'm guessing you don't retain much of what you read. Unless of course, you don't read much of what is posted by others. That might explain a lot. I'm nowhere near a war monger, yet no one can call me a pacifist either and my past posts have constantly reflected that.Wow you guys are just war mongers aren't you!! Amazing!! At least if you had the balls to go and fight all these wars you support I could respect you.
interesting article, personally I don't think it is anywhere near correct but that's just my opinion . The existance of a torpedo motor section is ..... pretty much conclusive to my mind. The other problem with the grounding is from the pictures I haver seen there was not a lot of bow damage, the point where you would expect grounding damage to occur . The use of the grounding in a political campaign comes from the pot calling the kettle black school of conspiracies.
So how do you know that? Are you presonally a torpedo expert? Even so, how do you know where that specific torpedo was found. I always have said it is far too intact to have been a live torpedo with a 500lb warhead. No I'm not an expert either, but I doubt 500lb of explosives would leave that much debris:The fucking torpedo is North Korean. It was either fired by North Korea or its ally China. There's nothing more China would like to see then the US spend even more $$ on another conflict. This article is nonsense.
Another intersting opinion:
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2010/06/north-korean-torpedo-fake.html
You are just another bleating sheep. BaaaaaaI'm not quite sure how you get my being a war monger out of my post . but I don't get how you glean what you do out of most members post. It must be in invisible ink. You obviously don't know your critics very well. You just lash at anyone that opposes you. You've been around since 2008, but I'm guessing you don't retain much of what you read. Unless of course, you don't read much of what is posted by others. That might explain a lot. I'm nowhere near a war monger, yet no one can call me a pacifist either and my past posts have constantly reflected that.
I do like mutton, does that help. If that you're rebuttal., I think we're done here.You are just another bleating sheep. Baaaaaa
Ok so first you say that you are not an expert and then you go on to say that there should have been more debris? So which is it are you an expert in underwater demolition specifically the physics of high speed underwater cavitation explosions or are you just shooting off your mouth because it suits your purpose again.So how do you know that? Are you presonally a torpedo expert? Even so, how do you know where that specific torpedo was found. I always have said it is far too intact to have been a live torpedo with a 500lb warhead. No I'm not an expert either, but I doubt 500lb of explosives would leave that much debris:
Another intersting opinion:
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2010/06/north-korean-torpedo-fake.html
FYI that particular type of detonation is not designed to destroy the ship it is designed to creat a cavity of gas under the keel of the ship , the ship drops into the cavity and the keel breaks, it is not a contact detonation so there is no " big boom " followed by debris scattered all over the neigborhood. The ship breaks and sinks.
I understand how a torpedo works, I am not talking about ship debris, I am questioning why there is so much debris left over from the torpedo after it was right at the epicenter of a explosion of 500 lbs of military grade explosives. Have you seen what is left of a missile or artillary shell?Ok so first you say that you are not an expert and then you go on to say that there should have been more debris? So which is it are you an expert in underwater demolition specifically the physics of high speed underwater cavitation explosions or are you just shooting off your mouth because it suits your purpose again.
FYI that particular type of detonation is not designed to destroy the ship it is designed to creat a cavity of gas under the keel of the ship , the ship drops into the cavity and the keel breaks, it is not a contact detonation so there is no " big boom " followed by debris scattered all over the neigborhood. The ship breaks and sinks.
Lets see 20 years in the military , as a tank commander, second specialty training as an explosive ordance demolition instructor, yep I would say I have seen what is left of shells and missiles. Artillery shells are specifically designed to fragment , that is what causes the injuries, ground to ground and air to ground missiles depending on the design do actually leave a large amount of debris scattered about . A torpedo is basically a delivery system for the warhead. That warhead is designed to explode in a specific manour, in this case it is designed to cavitate. The motor and housing would in all probability de destroyed. In this case destroyed means shattered the pieces would be damaged and scattered. In this specific case the torpedo detonated in shallow water so the pieces would be relativly close to the detonation site. The fact that it is an underwater detonation would also act to limti the spread of the bits and pieces. So in short the detonation does not " destry" the pieces as in vapourized not there any more. It shatters the torpedo housing and the remains sink to the bottom. Highly machined parts are more likely to survive intact because they are made out of higher quality materials ie., very hard stainless steel.
Oooops Fumble!!!!!Lets see 20 years in the military , as a tank commander, second specialty training as an explosive ordance demolition instructor, yep I would say I have seen what is left of shells and missiles. Artillery shells are specifically designed to fragment , that is what causes the injuries, ground to ground and air to ground missiles depending on the design do actually leave a large amount of debris scattered about . A torpedo is basically a delivery system for the warhead. That warhead is designed to explode in a specific manour, in this case it is designed to cavitate. The motor and housing would in all probability de destroyed. In this case destroyed means shattered the pieces would be damaged and scattered. In this specific case the torpedo detonated in shallow water so the pieces would be relativly close to the detonation site. The fact that it is an underwater detonation would also act to limti the spread of the bits and pieces. So in short the detonation does not " destry" the pieces as in vapourized not there any more. It shatters the torpedo housing and the remains sink to the bottom. Highly machined parts are more likely to survive intact because they are made out of higher quality materials ie., very hard stainless steel.
I hate instructors they know so much and so many people have to learn so much from them and really learn it because it can save lives. Geeeesh!
Last edited:
not going to say i was waiting for the opportunity but when it shows up .........Oooops Fumble!!!!!
I hate instructors they know so much and so many people have to learn so much and really learn it because it can save lives. Geeeesh!
so you have no navy experience or specific experience with torpedos and you are speculating as well. Many experts with SPECIFIC experience seem to place doubts on your opinion.Lets see 20 years in the military , as a tank commander, second specialty training as an explosive ordance demolition instructor, yep I would say I have seen what is left of shells and missiles. Artillery shells are specifically designed to fragment , that is what causes the injuries, ground to ground and air to ground missiles depending on the design do actually leave a large amount of debris scattered about . A torpedo is basically a delivery system for the warhead. That warhead is designed to explode in a specific manour, in this case it is designed to cavitate. The motor and housing would in all probability de destroyed. In this case destroyed means shattered the pieces would be damaged and scattered. In this specific case the torpedo detonated in shallow water so the pieces would be relativly close to the detonation site. The fact that it is an underwater detonation would also act to limti the spread of the bits and pieces. So in short the detonation does not " destry" the pieces as in vapourized not there any more. It shatters the torpedo housing and the remains sink to the bottom. Highly machined parts are more likely to survive intact because they are made out of higher quality materials ie., very hard stainless steel.
In that case I will just rely on my PHD in high temperature physics.so you have no navy experience or specific experience with torpedos and you are speculating as well. Many experts with SPECIFIC experience seem to place doubts on your opinion.
You really need to get a life that involves something beyond inventing conspiracy theories that are nonsensical, if you go up the stairs pst your mother in the kitchen and out the door you might just see the outdoors , there is a sun there and everything
Well I have. And guess what? landscaper makes more sense to me than you.so you have no navy experience.
So... you know how a torpedo works.... what is your experience with them? read an article that quotes some "experts"?
People believe what they want to believe and no presentation of the facts can change otherwise. Argument is really futile... except for entertainment.. which is what this forum is mostly to me.In that case I will just rely on my PHD in high temperature physics.
You really need to get a life that involves something beyond inventing conspiracy theories that are nonsensical, if you go up the stairs pst your mother in the kitchen and out the door you might just see the outdoors , there is a sun there and everything
normally i would agree with you regarding the entertainment value , however the I do follow a simple plan , ignorance is not a serious problem, it is correctable with a little time and effort, the ignorance of ignorance is inexcusable. At some point there must be either an effort to improve the general level of intelligence or an off switch.People believe what they want to believe and no presentation of the facts can change otherwise. Argument is really futile... except for entertainment.. which is what this forum is mostly to me.
