Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 68,059
Oh good, we're back to non-existent submarines again. And we're getting more of Vixen's poor history knowledge thrown in.
1. No submarine captain is going to willingly ram a surface vessel, it's not just stupid it's insane.
2. Why task any vessel to shadow a ferry sailing from a known point of departure to a known point of arrival? Last time I checked the KGB/FSB has agents all over Europe, and would have simply had a guy waiting for the Estonia when it arrived. He would have likely photographed the drivers of the mystery trucks, and followed them to their destination. Hell, they might have had a guy on the Estonia following the stolen items (maybe it was a KGB sting operation). Hardware is not as important as fleshing out a smuggling network who is stealing your state secrets to sell to the west.
3. There was no torpedo. We know this because there was no fire. Torpedo technology has evolved since WWII, which is what the average person thinks of when this subject comes up. The warheads and they way they're designed to explode are more destructive today:
[qimg]https://media.giphy.com/media/gjbIGLLbwULle/giphy.gif[/qimg]
4. KAL-007 has nothing to do with this conversation. It was an airplane, not a ship. It was within Soviet air-space, not international air-space. The Soviets thought it was a US spyplane (RC-135). The irony is today the US will shoot down an unresponsive passenger jet in broad daylight over its air-space.
Just stop.
I linked to that video earlier in the thread when torpedoes were mentioned, and again today. It's an ex Australian navy Leander class being hit by a Mk 48 torpedo, standard US design used for decades.
How that could be mistaken for a small charge on the bow visor or inside the hull is anybody's guess.