Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

On the eve of war

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

On the eve of war

Old 15th Jun 2019, 18:37
  #1061 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 2,132
Originally Posted by Stan Woolley View Post
A recent Facebook post:

“The Editor
Readers’ Letters
Saturday, 15 June 2019

Dear Sir

Tanker sabotage

I freely admit that my knowledge of naval sabotage has been gleaned from the cinema but there is much that defies reason in the alleged Iranian attempt to sink tankers in the Gulf of Oman. Let’s ignore why Iran would possibly want to do it and concentrate on how it was done. Given the heightened tension in the area and reputed recent attacks on shipping I find it impossible to believe that ships do not have 24/7 onboard surveillance during transit in the Strait of Hormuz; why then since everyone seems to have a mobile phone with a camera is there no pictorial record of the crime being committed? If the mines were placed high on the hull one imagines that the perpetrators operated from a sizeable vessel which would be obvious on radar as would its approach to the tanker.
Why is the film of a mine being supposedly removed by the perpetrators taken from another vessel and not the ship under attack? Why was this intruder vessel not shadowed to its home port and the origin of the attackers positively identified. Why would anyone who had clandestinely placed explosive charges then decide to remove one and risk being identified? Why given the fact that limpet mines can function under water and damage created there potentially more destructive would saboteurs place them high above the waterline? Why incapacitate rather than destroy the target? None of it makes sense unless the agents wanted the devices to be seen. I keep asking myself is this happening in the Gulf of Oman or the Gulf of Tonkin?”

Why is the film of a mine being supposedly removed by the perpetrators taken from another vessel and not the ship under attack?

The footage was apparently from an aerial asset. At the reported time of the footage the crew had abandoned ship quite a few hours earlier.

See timeline

https://news.usni.org/2019/06/13/u-s...rts-of-attacks

Why was this intruder vessel not shadowed to its home port and the origin of the attackers positively identified.

The US reported that a surface to air missile was launched. All aerial assets would likely have been withdrawn. To remain at distance and observe it would probably have taken the likes of a U-2S with it's slant sensors. Perhaps a U-2 was not on station?
TEEEJ is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2019, 19:28
  #1062 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 72
Posts: 677
Some news reports are saying the video footage was taken by USS Bainbridge, while some say it was taken in the dark. That is a bit odd as "the dark" was over and done with at the time of the attacks.
Contrary to reports of mines being used, the owners of Kokuka Courageous are quoting the crew as saying they were hit by something from the air. The quote from the F.T. in USNI news reports 2 "shells" hitting the tanker on the port side, rear of the ship followed 3 hours later by another that struck port midships. Why then do the US Navy's pictures show alleged limpet mines on the starboard side of the ship?
KelvinD is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2019, 20:28
  #1063 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,570
Kelvin, I haven't been following it that closely but one of the ships was shown in daylight, starboard side on fire airships and starboard superstructure blackened. Timelines are what I don't know.

TEEEJ will have a timeline.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2019, 22:55
  #1064 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 72
Posts: 677
PN: Yes, I too saw that and I assume it was the Norwegian ship that was burning. The ship with the alleged mines is shown in a very clear close up photo in the USNI link provided by TEEEJ. Come to think of it, that photo is in itself odd. It is, as I say, a remarkably clear photo, taken very close off the starboard quarter of the Kokuka Courageous. From the elevation, it appears to have been taken perhaps from a ship's boat, not the destroyer itself. Yet, the alleged mine is a black triangle more or less midships on the starboard side. The ship is 170m long so the photographer was perhaps 100m away from the black triangle. I would have thought the Bainbridge, or their boat, could have gone right alongside the tanker and examined a suspicious object in close up detail. Imagine how that may have looked if they obtained a full frame, umpteen megapixel photo of the object with all the markings one could expect from a munition.
Not to worry though. I am sure we will find out exactly what happened and who was responsible in the fullness of time. About a week after the UK government presents us with the "incontrovertible" evidence of the Russians guilt in the Salisbury poisonings!
KelvinD is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 01:21
  #1065 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: in the shadows
Age: 44
Posts: 35
Why doesn't anyone think of terrorists? Terrorist groups like the IS are the only ones that would certainly profit from another war in the Middle East, like they have profited from the wars in Iraq and Syria. Destabilisation of states, chaos, military fighting against other military instead of terrorists etc. have always helped terrorists to gain control over territorities and people, gain supporters, arms etc. IS is on retreat, a war could change that.

And I guess they'd certainly be able to commit such an attack.

To me this seems much more plausible than a state-supported attack, because no state would gain much from a war against Iran, Iran itself the least.
anotheruser is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 02:52
  #1066 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 789
" I would have thought the Bainbridge, or their boat, could have gone right alongside the tanker and examined a suspicious object in close up detail."

You first, KelvinD.

We will just wait over here with our fingers in our ears. You know, just in case.
currawong is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 06:02
  #1067 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 413
Looks like the US government is having a hard time getting support for its position except for the usual lapdogs (Saudi, Israel, UK conservatives). The UK opposition, Germans, French, the EU, Chinese and the Japanese themselves are all sceptical of the US government’s claims. Even a lot of mainstream media networks in the US are publishing stories critical of the US’s claims and broadcasting the tanker company CEO’s version of events.

Is it because the media in the US is mostly anti-Trump? I’m not sure, but at least now they’re doing a slightly better job of standing up to the obvious deceptions and hunger for conflict from the US Administration.
dr dre is online now  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 08:19
  #1068 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 369
FWIW, the imagery looks very like that from a reconnaissance and surveillance system. I've been out of the loop on this stuff for many years now, but the system we had on the Lynx 30 years ago could read a car number plate from about a mile away. It seems quite possible that whatever was recording video of the boat alongside the tanker may have been an aerial asset a mile or so away. Didn't the US say they had aerial assets in the area, that they withdrew because of a possible SAM threat?
VP959 is online now  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 14:00
  #1069 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 64
Posts: 59
License plate from a mile away.
Full face image from a satellite if you're looking up at the time.
Facial recognition technology advancing. (China big on this for some communist reasons)
Yet most CCTV monitoring images that are released are, at best, kind of poor.
Those limpet/tanker shots were poor.

Think things are being manipulated for the public?
meadowrun is online now  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 15:25
  #1070 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by meadowrun View Post
License plate from a mile away.
Full face image from a satellite if you're looking up at the time.
Facial recognition technology advancing. (China big on this for some communist reasons)
Yet most CCTV monitoring images that are released are, at best, kind of poor.
Those limpet/tanker shots were poor.

Think things are being manipulated for the public?
I've long suspected that military video is degraded before being released to the media. I think that this may be, in part, to restrict people from knowing how good (or bad) some of this reconnaissance technology is. I was shown some footage taken from the system installed in a Lynx in NI in 1988 of two soldiers being beaten and killed. It was bloody grim, and of surprisingly high quality, significantly better than the quality of the video of the tanker that's been released. I can't believe that this technology hasn't been significantly improved in the last thirty years or so.
VP959 is online now  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 15:42
  #1071 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Eastern Cape, South Africa
Posts: 50
I am sure that the general public would be shocked at the clarity of modern imagery from Military recon!

So why show utterly crap videos that could mean anything?

unless you are hiding something?
ATSA1 is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 15:52
  #1072 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,570
VP, I am with you on a stand off platform. Even commercial systems have remarkable long range capability. Quite some years ago I saw a bit on TV with the reporter speaking directly to camera. Then the camera panned out until you could not see the reporter. My camcorder 20 years ago had x700 zoom.

Drones standing off can appear stationary. What I thought interesting was the apparent lens changes, almost like TV and film turret lens, perhaps changing optics is still necessary - wide angle to locate, telephoto to track.

If it was a drone then I am surprised it didn't follow the vessel.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 18:34
  #1073 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 2,132
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
Come to think of it, that photo is in itself odd. It is, as I say, a remarkably clear photo, taken very close off the starboard quarter of the Kokuka Courageous. From the elevation, it appears to have been taken perhaps from a ship's boat, not the destroyer itself. Yet, the alleged mine is a black triangle more or less midships on the starboard side. The ship is 170m long so the photographer was perhaps 100m away from the black triangle. I would have thought the Bainbridge, or their boat, could have gone right alongside the tanker and examined a suspicious object in close up detail. Imagine how that may have looked if they obtained a full frame, umpteen megapixel photo of the object with all the markings one could expect from a munition.
Perhaps the photo was taken either by the rescued crew of the M/T Kokuka Courageous or the crew of the Dutch tug Coastal Ace? Pic then turned over to the US Navy? The rescued crew was then transferred from the tug Coastal Ace to the USS Bainbridge.

At 11:05 a.m. local time USS Bainbridge approaches the Dutch tug Coastal Ace, which had rescued the crew of twenty-one sailors from the M/T Kokuka Courageous who had abandoned their ship after discovering a probable unexploded limpet mine on their hull following an initial explosion.
https://news.usni.org/2019/06/13/u-s...rts-of-attacks
TEEEJ is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 19:21
  #1074 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 2,132
Originally Posted by Small cog View Post
Looks like some of the boat crew were wearing a life jacket. Who would have thought that the Revolutionary Guard were so H&S conscious?
Nothing remarkable about life jackets.


TEEEJ is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2019, 03:18
  #1075 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 789
Safe bet there is better imagery available that is yet to be released.

Oh look. Here is some now, in full colour too...

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-...?section=world
currawong is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2019, 03:52
  #1076 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 602
Long-distance shot, it does seem. This may have been taken by the very drone that allegedly had a missile fired at it.

And possibly it did follow them, but would they necessarily want to release that segment?
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2019, 04:03
  #1077 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 413
Originally Posted by currawong View Post
Safe bet there is better imagery available that is yet to be released.

Oh look. Here is some now, in full colour too...

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-...?section=world
Still proves nothing. The crew of the vessel who witnessed the incident are saying the US government’s version of events is false:

This reminds me of Iraq in 2003, when any shred of evidence that Iraq has WMDs was widely promoted but even more compelling evidence to the contrary was dismissed, ignored or its proponents suffered character assassinations.

If there are still people here who are too blind to see neocons like Pompeo and Bolton are desperate to change regimes in Iran and are willing to use any excuse to go to war to do it then I don’t think there’s anything that would convince them.


dr dre is online now  
Old 18th Jun 2019, 07:00
  #1078 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 54
Posts: 905
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
If there are still people here who are too blind to see neocons like Pompeo and Bolton are desperate to change regimes in Iran and are willing to use any excuse to go to war to do it then I don’t think there’s anything that would convince them.
The same is true in reverse, of course. There are those who are such fully paid up subscribers to deep state conspiracy theories that they simply won't even consider the possibility that Iran may be guilty as charged.
Andy_S is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2019, 09:22
  #1079 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 674
Originally Posted by Andy_S View Post
The same is true in reverse, of course. There are those who are such fully paid up subscribers to deep state conspiracy theories that they simply won't even consider the possibility that Iran may be guilty as charged.
Yes, but where is your evidence that these people (mad conspiracy theorists)aren’t often (always?) right?

Would you trust Pompeo or Bolton? I sure as hell wouldn’t!

Stan Woolley is online now  
Old 18th Jun 2019, 10:02
  #1080 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 602
Why is Iran like a leopard?

Ain't never gonna change its spots.

Why can't we have leopards in this earthly 'zoo' of ours too?
jolihokistix is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.