Iran Air 655 Incident- ACI last night.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ireland
Age: 51
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LJ,
The Hawk was an attempted replacement for the phoenix and as such an A-A missile not a A-G or anti ship like an Excocet. The radar modes for the AWG-9 would at least have been operating in its natural environment. It would be a big ask of the Iranians to integrate a stand-off A-G weapon into the AWG-9. They had other platforms for this role.
Also the USS Vincennes should have known exactly what the radar return of an F-14 looked like as they would have engaged it many times in the past on excercises.
Which brings us back to the threat analysis. It took many leaps in logic to turn the radar return of an A-320 on a standard rising commercial flight profile into that of an F-14 (a dedicated A-A weapon) flying a ship attack profile (wrong speed/ climbing) with a stand-off weapon (which didn't exist on that platform) to be engaged BVR.
As far as I can see the only evidence they had was an IFF return. The Iranians may have a question to answer here as to how an A-320 could squak a military code.
We know that in the fog of war this happens but this one was avoidable.
The Hawk was an attempted replacement for the phoenix and as such an A-A missile not a A-G or anti ship like an Excocet. The radar modes for the AWG-9 would at least have been operating in its natural environment. It would be a big ask of the Iranians to integrate a stand-off A-G weapon into the AWG-9. They had other platforms for this role.
Also the USS Vincennes should have known exactly what the radar return of an F-14 looked like as they would have engaged it many times in the past on excercises.
Which brings us back to the threat analysis. It took many leaps in logic to turn the radar return of an A-320 on a standard rising commercial flight profile into that of an F-14 (a dedicated A-A weapon) flying a ship attack profile (wrong speed/ climbing) with a stand-off weapon (which didn't exist on that platform) to be engaged BVR.
As far as I can see the only evidence they had was an IFF return. The Iranians may have a question to answer here as to how an A-320 could squak a military code.
We know that in the fog of war this happens but this one was avoidable.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: .
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spudh
I'll repost my previous in case you missed it.
"Where it WAS different was that at the time there was a shooting match going on with a bunch of Iranian speedboats. The Iranian authorities must have known this, yet they allowed a civilian aircraft to overfly a live firing zone. Life is cheap in Iran. it wouldn't surprise me at all if they deliberately risked the loss of the aircraft in an attempt to gain international sympathy.
As I said before on another thread, I'm convinced from what I witnessed of their chemical supply route that they were gassing their own people to gain sympathy, it wouldn't surprise me if a aircraft full of people were equally regarded as disposable, just to gain a political point. "
I may be wrong, I'd like to think I am, but somehow I think I'm close to the truth.
By the way - are you another journalist? It just seems strange timing for your first two posts to be on this thread.
I'll repost my previous in case you missed it.
"Where it WAS different was that at the time there was a shooting match going on with a bunch of Iranian speedboats. The Iranian authorities must have known this, yet they allowed a civilian aircraft to overfly a live firing zone. Life is cheap in Iran. it wouldn't surprise me at all if they deliberately risked the loss of the aircraft in an attempt to gain international sympathy.
As I said before on another thread, I'm convinced from what I witnessed of their chemical supply route that they were gassing their own people to gain sympathy, it wouldn't surprise me if a aircraft full of people were equally regarded as disposable, just to gain a political point. "
I may be wrong, I'd like to think I am, but somehow I think I'm close to the truth.
By the way - are you another journalist? It just seems strange timing for your first two posts to be on this thread.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jakey did what jakey did but it certainly exposed certain issues..
I thought Leon's post had the best answer but hands up all those that researched this subject and hand's up all those that believe the commanding officer of that ship should have been court martialed for his actions immediately PRIOR to this incident? I am in the corner that says 'YES!' He might not have been out of control but he was certainly not behaving in a manner that was a credit to his service.
My thoughts are that Jakey may well have been after a certain response and by crikey he got it.......
Hook, line and sinker.
In life I have a theory that sometimes people keep getting promoted until they reach the limits of their capability... If ever there was a case to justify this theory then research the actions of this captain!! He was promoted one level too far and a lot of people paid for that error!
A much smaller, much less capable US frigate which was on station with that vessel and a ship which had far less electronic wizardry had already recognised that aircraft for what it was, they had already established it was a civilian airliner that was on a published and authorised route, at the scheduled time and also one which the US Navy were fully aware of!!
All this information and more was taken into account after the event and whilst I accept all the medals awarded to that crew were awarded for their 'professionalism' during that cruise or commission, but surely can we not accept it was in bad taste to give those medals?
Of course it was bad form to drag this up but are we perhaps also guilty of fetching up events that are best left buried and if so why such abuse to this troll?
Having a cavalier attitude and not being punished will usually end in tears, is it not best to remove the cavalier BEFORE they kill someone? It might not be nice, it might not be pleasant but how many senior officers are aware of the cavalier attitudes of officers that go on to either kill themselves or sadly innocent members of the public?
Is it in bad taste to offer examples?
Think display flying of a B52
Think about the severing of ski lift cables
Think about a modern nuclear powered submarine surfacing directly underneath a research vessel
Puma crash Catterick
I listened to a tape of an Apache aircraft crew struggling to identify two armoured vehicles and just before this aircraft launched its deadly weapons the operator can quite clearly be heard saying, "God I hope they are not friendlies!" This person was NEVER convinced the target was hostile.. Never ever convinced and yet they still fired their weapons!
And yes the armoured vehicles were 'friendlies' and there were sadly many casualties!
Is this the standards of training\command that we want, or can we try harder? Should we monitor the performance of those we place in a position of trust and..... take affirmative action if or when the very rare character sneaks through the much respected promotion procedures?
We tend to highlight American incidents and is it because of their psyche or.... Is it down to the numbers involved? If a mistake in selection is made once every thousand, then may I suggest it is probable that the US will possibly have more flawed characters than any nation with a smaller military service?
Of course, a thousand times of course there will always be that awful fog of war, and yes there will always be what is known as 'blue on blue' but let's not kid a kidder.. This event we are discussing did not do the US Navy any favours, and embarrassment or not that officer should have been held accountable for his actions and not just put out to graze.
I do not agree with how jakey went about this, but likewise I do not agree with trying to defend the indefensible.
I was not there but the sad reality is that the Vincennes should also not have been there!!
Was the career of the commanding officer of the frigate also effected?
I thought Leon's post had the best answer but hands up all those that researched this subject and hand's up all those that believe the commanding officer of that ship should have been court martialed for his actions immediately PRIOR to this incident? I am in the corner that says 'YES!' He might not have been out of control but he was certainly not behaving in a manner that was a credit to his service.
My thoughts are that Jakey may well have been after a certain response and by crikey he got it.......
Hook, line and sinker.
In life I have a theory that sometimes people keep getting promoted until they reach the limits of their capability... If ever there was a case to justify this theory then research the actions of this captain!! He was promoted one level too far and a lot of people paid for that error!
A much smaller, much less capable US frigate which was on station with that vessel and a ship which had far less electronic wizardry had already recognised that aircraft for what it was, they had already established it was a civilian airliner that was on a published and authorised route, at the scheduled time and also one which the US Navy were fully aware of!!
All this information and more was taken into account after the event and whilst I accept all the medals awarded to that crew were awarded for their 'professionalism' during that cruise or commission, but surely can we not accept it was in bad taste to give those medals?
Of course it was bad form to drag this up but are we perhaps also guilty of fetching up events that are best left buried and if so why such abuse to this troll?
Having a cavalier attitude and not being punished will usually end in tears, is it not best to remove the cavalier BEFORE they kill someone? It might not be nice, it might not be pleasant but how many senior officers are aware of the cavalier attitudes of officers that go on to either kill themselves or sadly innocent members of the public?
Is it in bad taste to offer examples?
Think display flying of a B52
Think about the severing of ski lift cables
Think about a modern nuclear powered submarine surfacing directly underneath a research vessel
Puma crash Catterick
I listened to a tape of an Apache aircraft crew struggling to identify two armoured vehicles and just before this aircraft launched its deadly weapons the operator can quite clearly be heard saying, "God I hope they are not friendlies!" This person was NEVER convinced the target was hostile.. Never ever convinced and yet they still fired their weapons!
And yes the armoured vehicles were 'friendlies' and there were sadly many casualties!
Is this the standards of training\command that we want, or can we try harder? Should we monitor the performance of those we place in a position of trust and..... take affirmative action if or when the very rare character sneaks through the much respected promotion procedures?
We tend to highlight American incidents and is it because of their psyche or.... Is it down to the numbers involved? If a mistake in selection is made once every thousand, then may I suggest it is probable that the US will possibly have more flawed characters than any nation with a smaller military service?
Of course, a thousand times of course there will always be that awful fog of war, and yes there will always be what is known as 'blue on blue' but let's not kid a kidder.. This event we are discussing did not do the US Navy any favours, and embarrassment or not that officer should have been held accountable for his actions and not just put out to graze.
I do not agree with how jakey went about this, but likewise I do not agree with trying to defend the indefensible.
I was not there but the sad reality is that the Vincennes should also not have been there!!
Was the career of the commanding officer of the frigate also effected?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: home: United Kingdom
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
glojo,
How dare you!
You are adding debate to pages and pages of vitriol - form both sides. Stop it, immediately! If you want reasoned debate, best you go elsewhere.
Duncs
PS. Your post was better than I could have stated!
How dare you!
You are adding debate to pages and pages of vitriol - form both sides. Stop it, immediately! If you want reasoned debate, best you go elsewhere.
Duncs
PS. Your post was better than I could have stated!
Last edited by Duncan D'Sorderlee; 18th Jul 2012 at 10:22.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ireland
Age: 51
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By the way - are you another journalist? It just seems strange timing for your first two posts to be on this thread.
Whats with the paranoia here? I'm a member for over 15 months, I only post where I feel I can contribute. You're such a welcoming bunch I didn't dip my toe in before. In 10 pages of slagging each other, no one mentioned the point I was making which I believe is a salient one. I have particular interest in the F-14, I thought I could add to the discussion.
I agree that the Iranians did contribute to the tragedy, the fact that the A300 squaked the same code as an F-14 on a flight path through hostilities would appear to me more than coincidental.
It might help if Spudh actually knew what type of aircraft was shot down...
And the prize for pedantry goes to Avionker Come on, like its relevant that I typed 2 instead of 0. Thank you for the correction.
Whats with the paranoia here? I'm a member for over 15 months, I only post where I feel I can contribute. You're such a welcoming bunch I didn't dip my toe in before. In 10 pages of slagging each other, no one mentioned the point I was making which I believe is a salient one. I have particular interest in the F-14, I thought I could add to the discussion.
I agree that the Iranians did contribute to the tragedy, the fact that the A300 squaked the same code as an F-14 on a flight path through hostilities would appear to me more than coincidental.
It might help if Spudh actually knew what type of aircraft was shot down...
And the prize for pedantry goes to Avionker
Come on, like its relevant that I typed 2 instead of 0. Thank you for the correction.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: .
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Whats with the paranoia here? I'm a member for over 15 months, I only post where I feel I can contribute."
No paranoia. Just surprised at the coincidence that someone should suddenly choose this thread to make a first post after such a time
As to the Hawk, the Iranians are adept at adapting technology to uses other than it was originally intended. I suggest you do a quick read up of their known aircraft mod capabilities, and their missile capabilities
And by the way, you didn't answer my question.
Are you a journalist?
No paranoia. Just surprised at the coincidence that someone should suddenly choose this thread to make a first post after such a time
As to the Hawk, the Iranians are adept at adapting technology to uses other than it was originally intended. I suggest you do a quick read up of their known aircraft mod capabilities, and their missile capabilities
And by the way, you didn't answer my question.
Are you a journalist?
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ireland
Age: 51
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And by the way, you didn't answer my question.
Are you a journalist?
No, just a mil-av junkie with the F-14 as my pet subject for the last 30 odd years. Engineer by profession.
Just surprised at the coincidence that someone should suddenly choose this thread to make a first post after such a time
I'm not trolling, threads relative to the F-14 rarely occur these day so I didn't feel I had anything to add before. Everyone has to have a first post, I wouldn't have bothered but I thought it was relevant to the few coherent arguments being put forward.
I suggest you do a quick read up of their known aircraft mod capabilities, and their missile capabilities
I'm pretty well versed on Iranian capabilities, Like I said I'm an F-14 nut so as the only operator of the F-14 outside of US I've read just about every published literature on Iranian employment of the Tomcat. In 1988 the Iranian F-14's were absorbed in air defence and too valuable a radar asset to be employed against ships.
A well briefed captain of a US cruiser taking his ship into potential hostilities should have known which Iranian aircraft presented a real threat to his ship. If it was an F-4 or F-5 he might have had something to worry about but not an F-14.
Are you a journalist?
No, just a mil-av junkie with the F-14 as my pet subject for the last 30 odd years. Engineer by profession.
Just surprised at the coincidence that someone should suddenly choose this thread to make a first post after such a time
I'm not trolling, threads relative to the F-14 rarely occur these day so I didn't feel I had anything to add before. Everyone has to have a first post, I wouldn't have bothered but I thought it was relevant to the few coherent arguments being put forward.
I suggest you do a quick read up of their known aircraft mod capabilities, and their missile capabilities
I'm pretty well versed on Iranian capabilities, Like I said I'm an F-14 nut so as the only operator of the F-14 outside of US I've read just about every published literature on Iranian employment of the Tomcat. In 1988 the Iranian F-14's were absorbed in air defence and too valuable a radar asset to be employed against ships.
A well briefed captain of a US cruiser taking his ship into potential hostilities should have known which Iranian aircraft presented a real threat to his ship. If it was an F-4 or F-5 he might have had something to worry about but not an F-14.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spudh
I would suggest a little research before getting the digits to type words that might not factually be correct:
Just one of many errors by the Vincennes on that day was the reporting of the IFF signal.
The 'gate' was still over the area of Bandar Abbas Airport, the equipment was still searching the airport and picked up the IFF from a military aircraft that had NOT taken off. Flight 655 was airborne and on its correct flight path.
Should personnel get medals for this sort of 'professionalism?' is a question the US military must have asked and decided it was of a standard that they found worthy of recognition
All I ask is that we do not put ANY blame on the crew of that civilian airliner, they were on a regular milk run that ALL US warships were aware of, the USS Sides had positively identified it as a civilian commercial flight, the USS Forrestal an aircraft carrier some hundreds of miles away 'suspected' it to be a commercial flight AND had also informed two patrolling F-14 aircraft that had been scrambled to assist the Vincennes. The only ship that got things wrong was the one fitted with the most modern, most sophisticated equipment in the World!! It got it wrong and we are all aware of the consequences. by all means shoot the messenger but shoot them with facts and not tissues of wannabe imagination.
I would suggest a little research before getting the digits to type words that might not factually be correct:
Just one of many errors by the Vincennes on that day was the reporting of the IFF signal.
While the radar operator was examining the oncoming contact (Flight 655) with his trackball cursor, the IFF displayed its reading from the last “tracking gate” location. This “gate” is essentially a box that the
ship’s radar monitors for various signals (such as IFF); if it isn’t explicitly moved, it stays in place. Thus, while the civilian Airbus plane was correctly emitting an IFF Mode III signal, the radar picked up the IFF Mode II signals from F-14’s still at the Bandar Abbas Airport.
ship’s radar monitors for various signals (such as IFF); if it isn’t explicitly moved, it stays in place. Thus, while the civilian Airbus plane was correctly emitting an IFF Mode III signal, the radar picked up the IFF Mode II signals from F-14’s still at the Bandar Abbas Airport.
Should personnel get medals for this sort of 'professionalism?' is a question the US military must have asked and decided it was of a standard that they found worthy of recognition
All I ask is that we do not put ANY blame on the crew of that civilian airliner, they were on a regular milk run that ALL US warships were aware of, the USS Sides had positively identified it as a civilian commercial flight, the USS Forrestal an aircraft carrier some hundreds of miles away 'suspected' it to be a commercial flight AND had also informed two patrolling F-14 aircraft that had been scrambled to assist the Vincennes. The only ship that got things wrong was the one fitted with the most modern, most sophisticated equipment in the World!! It got it wrong and we are all aware of the consequences. by all means shoot the messenger but shoot them with facts and not tissues of wannabe imagination.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ireland
Age: 51
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spudh
I would suggest a little research before getting the digits to type words that might not factually be correct:
Just one of many errors by the Vincennes on that day was the reporting of the IFF signal.
Glojo,
I was refering to the video in the OP's first thread. This was portrayed as a factual presentation. I jumped the gun assuming that the Airbus gave a code II squak. Consider my digits corrected.
Thank you for the information on how the mistake was made in the Vincennes.
I'm not trying to apportion any blame to the airliner itself, my original post was based on it being identified as an F-14 through its IFF (I was mistaken in by interpretation that the Iranian authorities had done this purposely), my argument was that even then it did not warrant a missile shot.
However, I still don't think Iranian authorities should have sent an airliner through a hot spot. Its normal to make course corrections for weather, why not divert around a warzone. Small consideration, but if its course was not a perceived threat to the Vincennes then nothing would have happened.
I would suggest a little research before getting the digits to type words that might not factually be correct:
Just one of many errors by the Vincennes on that day was the reporting of the IFF signal.
Glojo,
I was refering to the video in the OP's first thread. This was portrayed as a factual presentation. I jumped the gun assuming that the Airbus gave a code II squak. Consider my digits corrected.
Thank you for the information on how the mistake was made in the Vincennes.
I'm not trying to apportion any blame to the airliner itself, my original post was based on it being identified as an F-14 through its IFF (I was mistaken in by interpretation that the Iranian authorities had done this purposely), my argument was that even then it did not warrant a missile shot.
However, I still don't think Iranian authorities should have sent an airliner through a hot spot. Its normal to make course corrections for weather, why not divert around a warzone. Small consideration, but if its course was not a perceived threat to the Vincennes then nothing would have happened.
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Iranian authorities must have known this, yet they allowed a civilian aircraft to overfly a live firing zone.
In fact, at that time civil airliners were often aggressively addressed by US naval forces on 121.5 but not all civil airliners have the triple VHF installation needed to monitor guard while working the ATC frequencies during aproach in such a busy ATC environmment. The third VHF is not required for "full airways fit" under Part K. Even with three VHFs, many aircraft are using the third for its intended purpose of downloading ACARS data to the destination station. The civil ATC frequencies are openly published and available on all airways charts. Why did the military choose not to use them, but try to use 121.5 instead? Anybody here know?
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
George Bush quotes
I often wonder whether Lockerbie would still have happened if the US hadn't been this arrogant.
I often wonder whether Lockerbie would still have happened if the US hadn't been this arrogant.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: oxford
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: in the bath
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jakey said
"Morning boys..
I floated this on 4 or 5 forums yesterday- most agreed, save for this one. I wanted to prove that there is a totally different perspective and slightly warped perspective about this in military circles.
I was right."
Google only brings up two hits for threads with the same wording
A music forum Iran Air 655 Incident- Utter disgrace..
A rugby forum Planet Rugby Forum • View topic - Iran Air 655 Incident- Utter disgrace.
Neither are normally recognised as sources of reliable military information. Neither hobby is renowned for producing members with intelligence in the upper quartiles....
And I'm not convinced by the comment "most agreed". I really don't think you can draw that conclusion from what are in the main uninformed random comments.
Anyway, he said four or five forums, only two show on Google. so either the threads on the others got pulled, or they didn't happen, or Google regards them as so insignificant they don't index them
Hardly stunning journalistic research
"Morning boys..
I floated this on 4 or 5 forums yesterday- most agreed, save for this one. I wanted to prove that there is a totally different perspective and slightly warped perspective about this in military circles.
I was right."
Google only brings up two hits for threads with the same wording
A music forum Iran Air 655 Incident- Utter disgrace..
A rugby forum Planet Rugby Forum • View topic - Iran Air 655 Incident- Utter disgrace.
Neither are normally recognised as sources of reliable military information. Neither hobby is renowned for producing members with intelligence in the upper quartiles....
And I'm not convinced by the comment "most agreed". I really don't think you can draw that conclusion from what are in the main uninformed random comments.
Anyway, he said four or five forums, only two show on Google. so either the threads on the others got pulled, or they didn't happen, or Google regards them as so insignificant they don't index them
Hardly stunning journalistic research
Last edited by randyrippley; 18th Jul 2012 at 13:29.
Minding our own business on an established civilian airway in Saudi Arabia, during the trail of an RAF Tornado back to the UK, I was rather surprised to be'aggressively challenged' by some Spam in a boat somewhere on the Red Sea on 243.0:
"Unidentified aircraft at (our position), this is Red Crown on Guard. Identify yourself!"
"Say please!"
"Err, unidentified postion at (our position), please identify yourself"
"Ascot **** in company with Ascot *****, Halaifa 1014, FL220 estimating Wejh at 1037. As per Flight Plan!"
"Uhh, ahh, roger, you're cleared to proceed"
"Absolutely right. Goodbye"
Quite what the heck some Spam thought he was doing querying legitimately flight planned traffic in the airspace of a sovereign nation, I cannot imagine. Now wonder they're pretty unpopular in many parts of the world.
As for the Vincennes, the report makes appalling reading. A gung ho 'shoot 'em up' captain with overly aggressive attitudes and a crew who made ridiculous mistakes. A full and frank apology should have been made immediately the president discovered what his idiots had done.
"Unidentified aircraft at (our position), this is Red Crown on Guard. Identify yourself!"
"Say please!"
"Err, unidentified postion at (our position), please identify yourself"
"Ascot **** in company with Ascot *****, Halaifa 1014, FL220 estimating Wejh at 1037. As per Flight Plan!"
"Uhh, ahh, roger, you're cleared to proceed"
"Absolutely right. Goodbye"
Quite what the heck some Spam thought he was doing querying legitimately flight planned traffic in the airspace of a sovereign nation, I cannot imagine. Now wonder they're pretty unpopular in many parts of the world.
As for the Vincennes, the report makes appalling reading. A gung ho 'shoot 'em up' captain with overly aggressive attitudes and a crew who made ridiculous mistakes. A full and frank apology should have been made immediately the president discovered what his idiots had done.
Spud
I was trying to spell out that the Iranians are very clever at adapting all sorts of stuff. The AWG-9 is capable of seeing ships and locking onto them - in fact RIOs would use the blue-water capability to find their flat-tops all the time. I also fired a Skyflash at a target floating in Cardigan Bay ably supported by AI-24 FOXHUNTER; so if the Iranian Tomcat/Hawk combination is able to do the same then that 54kg warhead in the missile would do considerable damage.
Hopefully, I've made myself a little clearer?
Jakey
I wonder if this is you?
Saboteur: Jake Hanrahan | Sabotage Times
Jake Hanrahan - United Kingdom | LinkedIn
Jake Hanrahan (OiJake) on Twitter
It would seem to fit your profile and personality type. The only other freelance journo I could find was this chap...
Jake May - United Kingdom | LinkedIn
Again, possible profile fit, especially given the Music Forum.
LJ
I was trying to spell out that the Iranians are very clever at adapting all sorts of stuff. The AWG-9 is capable of seeing ships and locking onto them - in fact RIOs would use the blue-water capability to find their flat-tops all the time. I also fired a Skyflash at a target floating in Cardigan Bay ably supported by AI-24 FOXHUNTER; so if the Iranian Tomcat/Hawk combination is able to do the same then that 54kg warhead in the missile would do considerable damage.
Hopefully, I've made myself a little clearer?
Jakey
I wonder if this is you?
Saboteur: Jake Hanrahan | Sabotage Times
Jake Hanrahan - United Kingdom | LinkedIn
Jake Hanrahan (OiJake) on Twitter
It would seem to fit your profile and personality type. The only other freelance journo I could find was this chap...
Jake May - United Kingdom | LinkedIn
Again, possible profile fit, especially given the Music Forum.
LJ
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle - your story reminds of this one US Navy vs Canada This is the transcript of the ACTUAL radio conversation of a U
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
randy
"Anyway, he said four or five forums, only two show on Google. so either the threads on the others got pulled, or they didn't happen, or Google regards them as so insignificant they don't index them"
Or the forums don't allow bots (which is understandable) so they never show up on Google or any other search engine.
"Anyway, he said four or five forums, only two show on Google. so either the threads on the others got pulled, or they didn't happen, or Google regards them as so insignificant they don't index them"
Or the forums don't allow bots (which is understandable) so they never show up on Google or any other search engine.