South Korean Navy Ship Sinking

Brown Bomber

Anyone able to expand on this?

Probe concludes torpedo sank South Korea ship: report
SEOUL
Thu May 6, 2010 10:19pm EDT
Related News

* Kim committed to denuclearisation: report
Thu, May 6 2010

SEOUL (Reuters) - Investigators probing the deadly sinking of a South Korean navy ship in March near the North have concluded that a torpedo was the source of an explosion that destroyed the vessel, a news report said on Friday.

World

The team of South Korean and foreign investigators found traces of explosives used in torpedoes on several parts of the sunken ship as well as pieces of composite metal used in such weapons, South Korea's Yonhap news agency said quoting a senior government official.

South Korean officials have not officially accused the North but made little secret of their belief Pyongyang deliberately torpedoed the 1,200-tonne corvette Cheonan in March near their disputed border in retaliation of a naval firefight last year.

The metallic debris and chemical residue appear to be consistent with a type of torpedo made in Germany, indicating the North may have been trying to disguise its involvement by avoiding arms made by allies China and Russia, Yonhap quoted the official as saying.

North Korea has denied involvement and accused South Korean President Lee Myung-bak's government of trying to use the incident for political gains ahead of local elections in June.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6460FC20100507

As far as I know North Korea has a UN mandated arms embago on arms imports/exports since their nuclear test last year.

Other than Germany, who else has recieved German torpedoes?

Is it possible to obtain them on the black market via a 3rd party?

Could Germany have done it?

All I know is that Israel, the masters of the false-flag attack have recieved German subs, for free!

TEL AVIV, Israel, April 20 (UPI) -- Israel is building up its navy and it's looking to Germany to provide the warships, most notably two advanced corvettes and two, possibly three, more Dolphin-class attack submarines, that will transform it from a coastal force to a deep-water navy.

Until now, the navy has been largely confined to the Mediterranean countering the naval forces of Syria, Egypt and the Maghreb states further east, with occasional forays into the Red Sea.

The objective of the expansion program clearly seems to be to increase the navy's reach to counter Iran, which Israel views as its primary adversary because of its buildup of ballistic missiles and its alleged drive to develop nuclear weapons.

The main focus of the naval expansion program is negotiations with Germany to buy two MEKO A-100 corvettes from the Blohm+Voss shipyard in Hamburg. Jane's Defense Weekly says the 2,500-ton, 280-foot MEKOs would be adapted to carry Israeli-made systems.

The warships, which carry crews of 94, have a range of 4,635 miles, a top speed of 30 knots and advanced radar-evading capability. They carry one medium-size helicopter and 24 weapons systems -- 16 ship-to-shore and eight anti-ship missile launchers adapted to U.S. weapons as well as air-defense missiles and automatic cannon.

The Israeli navy had shown interest in Lockheed Martin's Littoral Combat Ship to fit its requirement for a new missile ship to be categorized as Saar 5.5. But the U.S. vessel was considered too expensive at $600 million. The MEKO variant sought by Israel costs an estimated $300 million.

Negotiations with the Germans began in October 2007 when Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi visited Berlin.

The Israelis want a discount on the proposed MEKO deal of 20-30 percent, said Jane's.

The Germans are already funding one-third of the total cost, estimated at $1.4 billion, of two 1,900-ton Dolphin submarines, based on Germany's Type 212A boat currently on order.

These were ordered in 2006 and are scheduled for delivery starting in 2012 to the submarine base at Haifa. That will bolster the Israeli navy's sub strength to five.

The subs, the most expensive weapons platforms in Israel's arsenal, have a range of 2,810 miles. However there were reports in October 2009 that their fuel capacity had been increased to keep the vessels at sea for 50 days without refueling.

German opposition parties, including the Social Democrats, have expressed misgivings about exporting weapons to crisis zones. But the 2006 order for two Dolphins was approved while the Democrats were part of a coalition government.

Germany has provided hefty discounts on arms sales to Israel because it is morally committed to the Jewish state's security in reparation for the Holocaust.

Talks are under way on Israel acquiring a sixth Dolphin built by the Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft in Kiel and the Thyssen Nordseewerke in Emden.

The Israeli subs' four 650mm torpedo tubes have been reportedly modified to launch cruise missiles armed with nuclear warheads.

Each Dolphin is believed to carry 10 U.S.-built Harpoon missiles but these have a range of only 135 miles. Still, that gives these boats a limited strategic first- or second-strike capability.

With six Dolphins, the Israelis would be able to maintain at least two or three deployed in the Arabian Sea off Iran's southern coast at any one time or at their Red Sea naval base at Eilat on the Gulf of Aqaba ready for swift deployment against the Islamic Republic.

Israel has threatened to launch pre-emptive strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities if it fails to halt its alleged weapons program.

One Israeli source noted that the navy would like even more Dolphins. "Our ideal number would be nine -- enough to ensure we have the necessary assets at sea to cover all relevant threats and targets," he said.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2010/04/20/Israel-builds-up-deep-sea-navy/UPI-39251271795979/

"Remember the Liberty"

Brown Bomber

Asia Times -


Mission impossible
There are four important points that make it clear that a North Korean submarine did not sink the South Korean corvette.

continued:http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/LE05Dg01.htmll

Blazer

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Asia Times -


Mission impossible
There are four important points that make it clear that a North Korean submarine did not sink the South Korean corvette.

continued:http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/LE05Dg01.htmll

I'm sure he's very trustworthy

Kim Myong Chol is author of a number of books and papers in Korean, Japanese and English on North Korea, including Kim Jong-il's Strategy for Reunification. He has a PhD from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's Academy of Social Sciences and is often called an "unofficial" spokesman of Kim Jong-il and North Korea.

(Copyright 2010 Kim Myong Chol.)

Brown Bomber

Berkut wrote: »

I'm sure he's very trustworthy

Kim Myong Chol is author of a number of books and papers in Korean, Japanese and English on North Korea, including Kim Jong-il's Strategy for Reunification. He has a PhD from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's Academy of Social Sciences and is often called an "unofficial" spokesman of Kim Jong-il and North Korea.

(Copyright 2010 Kim Myong Chol.)

Don't see why any of that should neccessarily mean he is untrustworthy, besides I am more interested in content tbh.

Brown Bomber

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Other than Germany, who else has recieved German torpedoes?

Greece

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Mine Avoidance Sonar
* Submarine Sonar System

Germany

* Sonare
o Sonar System DBQS 40 for Submarine Class 212
o Low Frequency Towed Active Sonarsystem for Frigate Class 123
o Hull Mounted Sonar DSQS 21/23/21mod for Frigates Class 122,123 and 124
* Torpedoes
o DM 2 A3 for Submarine Class 206
o DM 2 A4 for Submarine Class 212
* UUV – Unmanned Underwater Vehicles
o SeaFox for Minehunting Vessel Class 332 and 333 as well Minesweeper Class 343
o Demonstrator SeaOtter Mk 2
* Command and Control Systems
o C² for Minesweeper Class 343
o TAKIS for Minehunting Vessel Class 332
o IMCMS for Minehunting Vessel Class 332
o ISUS 90 for Submarines Class 212 2nd batch
o ANCS for Frigate Class 125
* Link Systems
o ADLiS for Helicopter CH 53
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems
o VTS North Sea

Greece

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Mine Avoidance Sonar
* Submarine Sonar System

Norway

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Submarine Sonar System
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems / VTS 9740

Spain

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems (several)

Turkey

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Submarine Sonar System

India

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Submarine Command & Control System
* Submarine Sonar System
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems / VTS 9730

Indonesia

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* VTS Djarkarta

Israel

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems / VTS 9740

South Korea

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Hull Mounted Sonar System
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems (several)

Argentina

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Hull Mounted Sonar System
* Submarine Sonar System

Chile

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Submarine Sonar System

Colombia

* Hull Mounted Sonar System
* Submarine Sonar System
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems (in operation for the Colombian Coast Guard)
* Heavy Weight Torpedo

Ecuador

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Submarine Sonar System

Peru

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Submarine Sonar System

Venezuela

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System

South Africa

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Vessel Traffic Services Systems

http://www.atlas-elektronik.com/typo3/index.php?id=1891&L=3

Brown Bomber

Berkut wrote: »

I'm sure he's very trustworthy

Kim Myong Chol is author of a number of books and papers in Korean, Japanese and English on North Korea, including Kim Jong-il's Strategy for Reunification. He has a PhD from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's Academy of Social Sciences and is often called an "unofficial" spokesman of Kim Jong-il and North Korea.

(Copyright 2010 Kim Myong Chol.)

Perhaps you could explain to me the refutations and the use of the German torpedo which according to Reuters

(by using the German torpedo)

"the North may have been trying to disguise its involvement by avoiding arms made by allies China and Russia, Yonhap quoted the official as saying."

They would go to so much trouble to "disguise its involvement" and then go on to write in North Korean on the torpedo. It is illogical.

But, at a press conference in Seoul, military and civilian investigators presented a selection of items recovered from the scene of the sunken vessel.
They included the remains of the torpedo with North Korean writing on it.

http://www.euronews.net/2010/05/20/seoul-says-north-korea-torpedoed-ship/

Blazer

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Don't see why any of that should neccessarily mean he is untrustworthy, besides I am more interested in content tbh.

but you're basing your opinion on a guy that's a mouthpiece for Kim...
You're prepared to ignore the official findings from an independent inquiry but you accept it from him?

Brown Bomber

This is a bit strange. The German military supplier ATLAS ELEKTRONIK
http://www.atlas-elektronik.com/typo...hp?id=1891&L=3 (above) has blocked out from their site what they have supplied to Pakistan. Check for yourself, they are the only state when clicked that nothing happens.

This clearly shows that Pakistan use the ATLAS ELECTRONIK torpedoes

Anti-surface vessel and anti-submarine torpedo.





Description The SUT (Surface and Underwater Target) torpedo is the latest and most versatile member of the Seal, Seeschlange and SST 4 family of torpedoes. It is a dual-purpose wire-guided torpedo for engaging both surface and submarine targets. The SUT can be launched from submarines and surface vessels, from fixed locations or mobile shore stations. Its electrical propulsion permits variable speed in accordance with tactical requirements, silent running and wakelessness. The wire guidance gives immunity to interference with a two-way datalink between vessel and torpedo. The acoustic homing head has long acquisition ranges and a wide search sector for active and passive operation. After termination of guidance wire, SUT continues operation as a highly intelligent homing torpedo, with internal guidance programmes for target search, target loss and so on. The large payload with combined fuze systems ensures the optimum effect of explosive power. The SUT operates at great depths as well as in very shallow waters. Consort operation permits exploitation of the full over-the-horizon range of the SUT. The body is made of plastic or aluminium. SUT at present exists in three different versions with slight differences in the internal guidance programs and the extent of data transferred via the guidance wire. The latest version is SUT Mod 2 with its special feature of additional data from the homing head being signalled back to the vessel including an `Audio Channel'.
Operational status
In service and in production for several navies (NATO - Greece; South America - Chile, Colombia, Ecuador; Asia - India, Indonesia, South Korea, Pakistan, Taiwan). In the early 1980s Indonesia signed a contract for indigenous manufacture of the SUT within a long-term programme still running.
SPECIFICATIONS :
Length: 6,150 mm (6,620 mm with guidance wire casket)
Diameter: 533 mm
Weight: 1,420 kg (without casket)
Warhead: 260 kg
Speed: selectable, max 35 kt
Range: 28 km at 23 kt or 12 km at 35 kt
Fuze: magnetic proximity and impact

COMPANY NAME : STN ATLAS Elektronik GmbH

http://www.pakdef.info/pakmilitary/navy/torpedo.html

Pure speculation on my part but this incident could lead to (nuclear) World War.

1. South Korea/US/India/EU/Israel? false-flag on South Korean naval vessel blamed on North Korea
2. South Korea attacks North Korea, or provokes North Korea into attacking them.
3. China intervenes and becomes occupied in the region.
4. Pakistan fingered for supplying the German torpedo to North Korea on the black market.
5. US pre-emptive strike on Pakistan's nuclear facilities as they are now a "clear and present danger"
6. Possible nuclear attack/narrowly averted attack by North Korea or Pakistan. - US nuclear retalliation?
7. India attacks Pakistan
8. Justification for Iran attack
9. Israel may have made a pre-emptive attack on Iran by this stage.
10. Triggering Hizbullah to attack Israel
11. Israel attacks Lebanon
12. Israel attacks Palestine (Hamas) for supporting Iran and Lebanon for supporting Hezbollah.
13. Shia's go nuts worldwide attacking western forces, especially in Iraq

When all is said and done China would be isolated, "The realm" Israel would be secure and they would have their lebensraum, Jerusalem could be ethnically cleansed of Palestinians. Potential threats to US security would be neutralised, the bankers and the arms manufactures would make billions and the US would have control of Iran's oil. The whole ME would be under US/Israel sphere of influence. The puppet oil producing nations would be compliant. The world would be rid of two "rogue" nuclear states, Pakistan would probably be broken up, as with Iran. Russia would be the big question mark for me.

This is not a prediction Just a result of my overactive imagination:)

robtri

here's an unusal thought... maybe it was just the North Koreans, been feckers as per usual....

so how does Mossad fit in here

Brown Bomber

robtri wrote: »

here's an unusal thought... maybe it was just the North Koreans, been feckers as per usual....

so how does Mossad fit in here

Read this and educate yourself a little, and I don¨t mean that in a patronising way, honest.

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]About the Author: Victor Ostrovsky was raised in Israel, but was born in Canada. At eighteen he became the youngest officer in the Israeli military, eventually rising to the rank of lieutenant commander in charge of naval weapons testing. He was a Mossad case officer from 1984-1986 [/FONT]

http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/libya.html

I would like to backtrack a little on the OP, that was based on my very limited knowledge of German torpedoes. All I knew at the time was Germany had supplied Israel with submarines. There is no reason to believe it was an Isreali operation any more than anyone else other than their proven history of false-flag attacks, as above.

studiorat

I think you are underestimating China's position in this, they certainly wouldn't be isolated. If they support NK they take the risk of loosing respect in the international community. If they don't they face the prospect of Kim Jong-il falling from power (very likely)and a flood of refugees across their border, not to menthon the possibility a Korean Unification. South Korea have about $200bn a year trade with China compaired to North Korea's $3bn, I guess they'll do the math on that one too.

Meanwhile in Germany they have a new minister of defence, the old Minister of Defense along with the Deputy Defense Minister Peter Wichert and the Military Chief of Staff General Wolfgang Schneiderhan all resigned last week becuse they were caught lying about how many civilians were killed in a drone attack in Afghanistan.

Of course South Korea use German Torpedoes, involving Israel at this stage looks like you've been reading a few sites with a single agenda.

Brown Bomber

studiorat wrote: »

I think you are underestimating China's position in this, they certainly wouldn't be isolated. If they support NK they take the risk of loosing respect in the international community. If they don't they face the prospect of Kim Jong-il falling from power (very likely)and a flood of refugees across their border, not to menthon the possibility a Korean Unification. South Korea have about $200bn a year trade with China compaired to North Korea's $3bn, I guess they'll do the math on that one too.

Meanwhile in Germany they have a new minister of defence, the old Minister of Defense along with the Deputy Defense Minister Peter Wichert and the Military Chief of Staff General Wolfgang Schneiderhan all resigned last week becuse they were caught lying about how many civilians were killed in a drone attack in Afghanistan.

Of course South Korea use German Torpedoes, involving Israel at this stage looks like you've been reading a few sites with a single agenda.

What a shame...

I actually found your post quite interesting until the pointless sly dig at the end:rolleyes:

bonkey

Brown Bomber wrote: »

As far as I know North Korea has a UN mandated arms embago on arms imports/exports since their nuclear test last year.

Indeed. Given that torpedoes have a shelf-life of less then 12 months, this embargo would absolutely make it impossible for North Korea to be (legally) in possession of this technology.

Brown Bomber

bonkey wrote: »

Indeed. Given that torpedoes have a shelf-life of less then 12 months, this embargo would absolutely make it impossible for North Korea to be (legally) in possession of this technology.

That is interesting and something I was not aware of, tbh it was nice to not get debunked by you for once. Spent the whole time reading your post waiting for the sting in the tail :pac::pac:

Lab_Mouse

bonkey wrote: »

Indeed. Given that torpedoes have a shelf-life of less then 12 months,

thats interesting.Is it because the explosives in them degenerate or is it a man made trip switch that gives them such a short life span?

Lab_Mouse

Brown Bomber wrote: »

it was nice to not get debunked by you for once.

in fairness he is one of the most articulate posters here and puts his points across fairly and in such a way that doesnt ruffle many peoples feathers no matter which side of the fence you sit on

studiorat

Brown Bomber wrote: »

What a shame...

I actually found your post quite interesting until the pointless sly dig at the end:rolleyes:

The truth is often uncomfortable. Nowhere did anyone mention Israel without the site also carrying more anti Israeli posts, everything from the Oil slick in the Gulf to god knows what.. except for some spanner who thought Germany was on "the rise" again.

I've been following the actual story for a while now, I even half wrote a post about it. I think that the absence on any comment on actual relations between Israel and DPRK in the OP is telling. It has all the marks of jumping on the bandwagon of abovetopsecret etc. Hence my comment on a single agenda. You even ended the OP with "remember the liberty" before expanding on anything more. To me it looked like you saw an opportunity to stick it to Israel and went for it. Researching to make the story fit instead of looking for other possibilities.

Since tensions are pretty high between Israel and DPRK already, with both accusing each other of various things including DPRK smuggling arms to Syria and DPRK not recognising the state of Israel. It would seem a bit careless of Israel to leave themselves so open to being put in the spotlight for this. Especially since half the internet seems to be doing it already.

bonkey

Brown Bomber wrote: »

That is interesting and something I was not aware of, tbh it was nice to not get debunked by you for once. Spent the whole time reading your post waiting for the sting in the tail :pac::pac:

Lets try this for a sting in the tail...

That you were not aware of its existence would mean that when you raised the point of the year-old embargo, you must have been of the opinion that it had absolutely no relevance to the capability of North Korea to have German-made weapons technology.

To add to the sting...there is no such shelf-life. I made it up. It was a failed attempt to be sarcastic. Not only that, but I even added in the rider that even were it true, my argument would only mean it were not legally possible for NK to have such tech.

It is, of course, inconceivable* for them to ilegally have such tech.

*That's more sarcasm, in case anyone misses it.

Brown Bomber

Lab_Mouse wrote: »

in fairness he is one of the most articulate posters here and puts his points across fairly and in such a way that doesnt ruffle many peoples feathers no matter which side of the fence you sit on

Feathers getting ruffled here.:mad: :pac::pac:

Brown Bomber

At least my instincts were correct.;)

bonkey wrote: »

Lets try this for a sting in the tail...

That you were not aware of its existence would mean that when you raised the point of the year-old embargo, you must have been of the opinion that it had absolutely no relevance to the capability of North Korea to have German-made weapons technology.

I wouldn't agree with that. I was coming from a position of general ignorance on the subject but was keen to find out more, for others more in the know to fill in the blanks. That is why question mark smiley in the title for the first time ever.

bonkey wrote: »

To add to the sting...there is no such shelf-life. I made it up. It was a failed attempt to be sarcastic. Not only that, but I even added in the rider that even were it true, my argument would only mean it were not legally possible for NK to have such tech.

To be fair, I hadn't ruled that out. Which is why I had asked if it were possible to obtain such weaponry on the black market.

Brown Bomber

studiorat wrote: »

The truth is often uncomfortable. Nowhere did anyone mention Israel without the site also carrying more anti Israeli posts, everything from the Oil slick in the Gulf to god knows what.. except for some spanner who thought Germany was on "the rise" again.

I've been following the actual story for a while now, I even half wrote a post about it. I think that the absence on any comment on actual relations between Israel and DPRK in the OP is telling. It has all the marks of jumping on the bandwagon of abovetopsecret etc. Hence my comment on a single agenda. You even ended the OP with "remember the liberty" before expanding on anything more. To me it looked like you saw an opportunity to stick it to Israel and went for it. Researching to make the story fit instead of looking for other possibilities.

Since tensions are pretty high between Israel and DPRK already, with both accusing each other of various things including DPRK smuggling arms to Syria and DPRK not recognising the state of Israel. It would seem a bit careless of Israel to leave themselves so open to being put in the spotlight for this. Especially since half the internet seems to be doing it already.

Your conveniently ignoring my post in post 3 which l listed about 20 countries other than Isreal which had recieved German torpedoes, I was not aware of that in the OP. I subsequently posted this

I would like to backtrack a little on the OP, that was based on my very limited knowledge of German torpedoes. All I knew at the time was Germany had supplied Israel with submarines. There is no reason to believe it was an Isreali operation any more than anyone else other than their proven history of false-flag attacks, as above.

Now it seems to me you are the only one jumping on bandwagons.

studiorat

Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions. I must have missed that.
When did this torpedo become German anyway? It was DPRK's last week.

ballsymchugh

studiorat wrote: »

Since tensions are pretty high between Israel and DPRK already, with both accusing each other of various things including DPRK smuggling arms to Syria and DPRK not recognising the state of Israel. It would seem a bit careless of Israel to leave themselves so open to being put in the spotlight for this. Especially since half the internet seems to be doing it already.

funny you should say that, i was in north korea a couple of years ago, and our government appointed guide's husband was on, eh, official business in syria.
not bad for a country where it's about who your grandparents are before you're even considered for a house in pyongyang.

bonkey

Brown Bomber wrote:

I was coming from a position of general ignorance on the subject but was keen to find out more, for others more in the know to fill in the blanks.

Your general ignorance, however, didn't prevent you from mentioning Israel, nor implying a connection by virtue of their possession of German tech (which you obviously researched or copy/pasted from someone who had researched) and your belief that they're " masters of the false-flag attack".

In post 8, you then went on to highlight a scenario which has Israel and the US as the big winners.

When someone comments on this, and says that they disagree with your analysis, you fall back on the notion that between post 1 and post 8 you mentioned some other nations in passing as other recipients of German tech.

So lets call a spade a spade here.

Are you suggesting that you suspect Israeli involvement (as posts 1 and 8 would strongly suggest), or was it just a coincidence that they were central to those two posts and what you're really saying is that you haven't a clue about who might be involved in what.

If its the former, then I'd suggest you don't accuse people of jumping on bandwagons for spotting that you're hinting at such an involvement.

If its the latter, then I'd hope that we can all agree to pick some other random country who might have been involved simply because they possess german tech. How about South Africa, for example?

Brown Bomber

studiorat wrote: »

Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions. I must have missed that.

Appreciate that and for what its worth I understand to an extent where you are coming from, though I disagree.

studiorat wrote: »

When did this torpedo become German anyway? It was DPRK's last week.

There seems to be very little reporting of it. The Reuters article in the OP seems to be the best source.

This is the same investigative committee I believe
Cheonan probe finds RDX, alloy used in torpedoes
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2920174

And this is a decent analysis for my money.
http://beforeitsnews.com/news/48/745/The_Sinking_of_the_Cheonan:_We_Are_Being_Lied_To.html

Brown Bomber

bonkey wrote: »

Your general ignorance, however, didn't prevent you from mentioning Israel,

I would say that it was my general ignorance, to which I have admitted was the reason I mentioned Isreal. I accept I added 1+1 and got three. I accepted this myself before any issue was made of it, as I learned a little as I went and corrected myself.

I would like to backtrack a little on the OP, that was based on my very limited knowledge of German torpedoes. All I knew at the time was Germany had supplied Israel with submarines. There is no reason to believe it was an Isreali operation any more than anyone else other than their proven history of false-flag attacks, as above.

bonkey wrote: »

nor implying a connection by virtue of their possession of German tech (which you obviously researched or copy/pasted from someone who had researched)

Here I would like to point out that you are wrong.

I hadn't researched it especially for the post, I remembered it from last year and to be honest I find your insinuation that I have plagiarised and your assumption that I would be unaware of a world news story from last year insulting.

bonkey wrote: »

and your belief that they're " masters of the false-flag attack".

Israeli false-flag attacks are something that I would not consider myself in general ignorance of and I would consider them the "masters of the false-flag" for want of a better term.

bonkey wrote: »

In post 8, you then went on to highlight a scenario which has Israel and the US as the big winners.

My "analysis" as you put it was self-decribed as "pure speculation" and "Just a result of my overactive imagination" i.e. not to be taken seriously.

bonkey wrote: »

When someone comments on this, and says that they disagree with your analysis, you fall back on the notion that between post 1 and post 8 you mentioned some other nations in passing as other recipients of German tech.

Some other nations in passiing???

this was the post

Greece

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Mine Avoidance Sonar
* Submarine Sonar System

Germany

* Sonare
o Sonar System DBQS 40 for Submarine Class 212
o Low Frequency Towed Active Sonarsystem for Frigate Class 123
o Hull Mounted Sonar DSQS 21/23/21mod for Frigates Class 122,123 and 124
* Torpedoes
o DM 2 A3 for Submarine Class 206
o DM 2 A4 for Submarine Class 212
* UUV – Unmanned Underwater Vehicles
o SeaFox for Minehunting Vessel Class 332 and 333 as well Minesweeper Class 343
o Demonstrator SeaOtter Mk 2
* Command and Control Systems
o C² for Minesweeper Class 343
o TAKIS for Minehunting Vessel Class 332
o IMCMS for Minehunting Vessel Class 332
o ISUS 90 for Submarines Class 212 2nd batch
o ANCS for Frigate Class 125
* Link Systems
o ADLiS for Helicopter CH 53
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems
o VTS North Sea

Greece

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Mine Avoidance Sonar
* Submarine Sonar System

Norway

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Submarine Sonar System
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems / VTS 9740

Spain

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems (several)

Turkey

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Submarine Sonar System

India

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Submarine Command & Control System
* Submarine Sonar System
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems / VTS 9730

Indonesia

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* VTS Djarkarta

Israel

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems / VTS 9740

South Korea

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Hull Mounted Sonar System
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems (several)

Argentina

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Hull Mounted Sonar System
* Submarine Sonar System

Chile

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Submarine Sonar System

Colombia

* Hull Mounted Sonar System
* Submarine Sonar System
* Vessel Traffic Service Systems (in operation for the Colombian Coast Guard)
* Heavy Weight Torpedo

Ecuador

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Submarine Sonar System

Peru

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Submarine Sonar System

Venezuela

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System

South Africa

* Heavy Weight Torpedo
* Integrated Submarine Combat System
* Vessel Traffic Services Systems

http://www.atlas-elektronik.com/typo...hp?id=1891&L=3

I have no idea how you can refer to that post as such.

I should point out here that I was answering my own question with this response from the OP.

Other than Germany, who else has recieved German torpedoes?

Which supports my claim that I knew very little, and was open to suggestion.

Also noteworthy here is that I looked for the info myself in an attempt to debunk my own OP in a one sense or to be further informed in another.

It was after this and of my own accord that I posted my correction

I would like to backtrack a little on the OP, that was based on my very limited knowledge of German torpedoes. All I knew at the time was Germany had supplied Israel with submarines. There is no reason to believe it was an Isreali operation any more than anyone else other than their proven history of false-flag attacks, as above.

bonkey wrote: »

So lets call a spade a spade here.

Are you suggesting that you suspect Israeli involvement (as posts 1 and 8 would strongly suggest), or was it just a coincidence that they were central to those two posts and what you're really saying is that you haven't a clue about who might be involved in what.

If its the former, then I'd suggest you don't accuse people of jumping on bandwagons for spotting that you're hinting at such an involvement.

If its the latter, then I'd hope that we can all agree to pick some other random country who might have been involved simply because they possess german tech. How about South Africa, for example?

I initially suggested possible Israeli involvement, but intended to make absolutely clear that I wasn't sure for two reasons.

1. My limited knowledge (which last time I checked wasn't against any rules) basically amounted to A german made torpedo having being discovered as what sank the S.Korena vessel. This set off a red flag for me. As I've tried to make clear, all I happened to know about anything connected to German subs/torpedoes was that Israel had been provided them for free by Germany.

So I shared this information I had, which may have led to other findings by somebody else, who knows? Can't see the issue you have with this.

Post 8 really has no relevance as explained above.

2. I would admit to having a suspcion of Israels international activities based on their highly active intelligence services, their basic disregard for international law and their history of false-flag attacks.

I would like to highlight it is a suspicion, no more no less. In the same way if twenty quid went missing from my wallet I would suspect out of my 10 roommates it was the cleptomaniac with multiple theft convictions, though I wouldn't act on it.

Difference here is that this is a conspiracy theory forum, and it shouldn't be an issue whatsoever to suspect a group of involvement in a conspiracy. we are not accusing each other personally of any involvement, so in theory we should be emotionally detached from any accusations

robtri

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Difference here is that this is a conspiracy theory forum, and it shouldn't be an issue whatsoever to suspect a group of involvement in a conspiracy. we are not accusing each other personally of any involvement, so in theory we should be emotionally detached from any accusations

It shouldnt be an issue... but every thread you open up is a dig at isreal... even this thread, where there is no connection between isreal and the sinking... you have to make one up....
Thats the piece here that people have an issue with.... and get pissed off about....

For gods sake look at your Sig.........
I wonder how long a sig like lets kick a paddy lady in theback and laugh about it would last...

Brown Bomber

robtri wrote: »

It should be an issue...

Why?

robtri wrote: »

but very thread you open up is a dig at isreal

False. Even if it were true what would be the issue? Are certain groups/associations/individuals/states off limits in your view?

I wholeheartedly agree that anything racist, anti-semtitic, or bigoted should be off limits.

But your falling for the classic deception that criticism of Israel is anti-semitic. You should try to become aware of this and free yourself from it.

Is criticism of extra-judicial killings anti-semitic?
Is criticism of an illicit nuclear facility anti-semitic?
Is criticism of committing war crimes against children anti-semitic?
Is criticism of dressing up as arabs and bombing innocent people anti-semitic?
This list goes on and on.

robtri wrote: »

... even this thread, where there is no connection between isreal and the sinking... you have to make one up....

I didn't make up the connection. Germany HAS given Israel German made subs.

robtri wrote: »

Thats the piece here that people have an issue with.... and get pissed off about....

Suppose I consider myself pro-alien and I'm sick to death of all these alien thread cropping up involving aliens with CT's and I make a complaint - that is how silly your complaint sounds to me, no offence.

robtri wrote: »

For gods sake look at your Sig.........
I wonder how long a sig like lets kick a paddy lady in theback and laugh about it would last...

It is called satire.

robtri

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Why?

Sorry that should have been shoulnt.. edited there..

Brown Bomber wrote: »

False. Even if it were true what would be the issue? Are certain groups/associations/individuals/states off limits in your view?

Its not false... its true... virtually every thread you start is a platform to beat isreal up...

Is there an issue... no.... but people get tired hearing the same ole drum been beaten..... especially when there is nothing to link them to this...

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I wholeheartedly agree that anything racist, anti-semtitic, or bigoted should be off limits.

never said it should be off limits...

Brown Bomber wrote: »

But your falling for the classic deception that criticism of Israel is anti-semitic. You should try to become aware of this and free yourself from it.

Is criticism of extra-judicial killings anti-semitic?
Is criticism of an illicit nuclear facility anti-semitic?
Is criticism of committing war crimes against children anti-semitic?
Is criticism of dressing up as arabs and bombing innocent people anti-semitic?
This list goes on and on.

See you have to get the digs in...
I have all ready told you my opinions of Isreal in previous thread.. yet you didnt listen, you hear what you want to hear....

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I didn't make up the connection. Germany HAS given Israel German made subs.

yes you did make it up.... you implied isreal did this... based ona connection that they use german subs...... like how the hell does using a german sub make them responsible....
how many other nations use german subs??? are they all guilty for this reason....

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Suppose I consider myself pro-alien and I'm sick to death of all these alien thread cropping up involving aliens with CT's and I make a complaint - that is how silly your complaint sounds to me, no offence.

see again, jumping to conclusions and making assumptions that I am pro Isreal.....
how wrong you are, like a lot of other stuff, but you are happy to spout it cause u believe it to be true....

this quote sums it all up... u jump to conclusions put 2 and 2 together and come up with 7and a half...

Brown Bomber wrote: »

It is called satire.

yes of course it is...... you keep beliving that...
its perfectly fine....


And just to keep this on topic... have we any proof isreal where involved... or a set of events which could link them to this...

Brown Bomber

robtri wrote: »

Sorry that should have been shoulnt.. edited there..

No worries, it changed the whole preceeding post though and by extension my response.

To make clear I respect your opinion and your right to an opinion about me or anything else. Most of all I respect you for speaking out against what you a see as bigotry. I get the impression you see me as some kind of White Nationalist, stormfront type when I despise this and all forms of racism just as much as you. Believe me, they'd have a bigger problem with me than you. I am an immigrant myself and am married to a black woman, well mixed race, the ultimate sin. I'd be a race traitor to them.

bonkey

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I initially suggested possible Israeli involvement, but intended to make absolutely clear that I wasn't sure for two reasons.

This underlines exactly the point I'm trying to make.

You have an event where you know that you don't have an awful lot of details. You admit to not having a lot of details...but wonder if Israel could be behind it anyway.

You then go on to amass information....and come back to offer a scenario that has Israel behind it. When questioned on it, you then say that there's pretty-much no reason to suspect Israel...except that if it wasn't NK, then your prime suspect would be Israel because it would be a false-flag attack.

So you've taken an event and said "I wonder if there's anything fishy here....and if there is, the prime suspect would be Israel until there's evidence to suggest otherwise".....and then get shirty because people are suggesting that you've got some beef against Israel.

1. My limited knowledge (which last time I checked wasn't against any rules) basically amounted to A german made torpedo having being discovered as what sank the S.Korena vessel. This set off a red flag for me. As I've tried to make clear, all I happened to know about anything connected to German subs/torpedoes was that Israel had been provided them for free by Germany.

What was the red flag? That it was German, or that Israel are in possession of them?

So I shared this information I had, which may have led to other findings by somebody else, who knows? Can't see the issue you have with this.

I had no issue until you started acting that it was unreasonable for someone to point out that whilst you were claiming you had no idea who might be behind it, you were also clearly putting one nation front and center as the potential bad guy for a conspiracy theory.

If nothing else, your post reads like "I'm looking for evidence to suggest that Israel were behind this" and not "I'm wondering if there's a Conspiracy afoot here, and I'm looking for evidence others might think is reasonable". You seem to be insisting that you're doing the latter..all the while having concentrated on one nation as your suspect.

2. I would admit to having a suspcion of Israels international activities based on their highly active intelligence services, their basic disregard for international law and their history of false-flag attacks.

I would like to highlight it is a suspicion, no more no less. In the same way if twenty quid went missing from my wallet I would suspect out of my 10 roommates it was the cleptomaniac with multiple theft convictions, though I wouldn't act on it.

If I suspected one of my 10 roommates, I wouldn't pointing out that of the 10, I thought one was the most likely to have done it and would like to know if anyone had any information to share. To do so would look like I was persuing an agenda. Clearly, you see things differently on that score.

Difference here is that this is a conspiracy theory forum, and it shouldn't be an issue whatsoever to suspect a group of involvement in a conspiracy.

It also shouldn't be an issue for people to comment on how the same group is time and time again being suspected of involvement, even when - as in this case - there is little to no evidence to support it and its even being outed as wild speculation.

You're perfectly entitled to start as many threads as you like, linking anything and everything as tenuously as you like to whomever you like.....but that doesn't mean that others are somehow not entitled to remark on this.

Brown Bomber

robtri wrote: »

And just to keep this on topic... have we any proof isreal where involved... or a set of events which could link them to this...

Israel's foreign minister on Wednesday declared North Korea, Syria and Iran the new "axis of evil," claiming that North Korean weapons seized in Bangkok in December were bound for Middle Eastern militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah.


Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said during a visit to Japan that the three countries are cooperating and pose the biggest threat to world security because they are building and spreading weapons of mass destruction.


Lieberman, who heads an ultranationalist party that is a junior partner in Israel's coaltion government, also claimed that "missile programs" in Iran and Syria were receiving crucial assistance from the North Korean side. He gave no evidence.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wirestory?id=10621598&page=2

North Korea on Saturday angrily denied previous Israeli allegations that Pyongyang is spreading weapons of mass destruction, denouncing Lieberman as an "ultra-rightist" and "an imbecile in diplomacy" and vowing not to tolerate Israel's alleged slander.



The North's Foreign Ministry said Saturday the country has nothing to do with the spread of WMDs. It also said it would never pardon Israel for daring to slander the dignified (North) by concocting "sheer lies."
The comments, published by the North's official Korean Central News Agency, were the first official response to Lieberman's comment this past week.



Lieberman on Tuesday urged the international community to do everything in its power to prevent Iran and North Korea from fulfilling their nuclear ambitions.



Speaking a day after North Korea conducted a nuclear weapons test, Lieberman told Army Radio: "To our regret we see a mad arms race in the country. Everything must be done in order thwart their attempts to reach a nuclear capability.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/lieberman-north-korea-calling-me-an-imbecile-is-a-compliment-1.290491

Have to say though the main motive I am seeing now is the US bases in Japan, that will now be staying.

The heightened tension seems to have helped push Japan to agree to most elements of a plan to relocate U.S. forces on Okinawa, specifically the Marines' Futenma Air Base, Japanese officials and media reports said. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama was scheduled to visit Okinawa this weekend to explain his decision, Japanese officials said. Japan's "language has changed since Cheonan," a senior U.S. official said. "There was a realization that this still is a very dangerous world."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/21/AR2010052101077.html?waporef=obinsite

Brown Bomber

I would appreciate it if you made clear that are are posting as a regular user or mod/Admin of this forum.

bonkey wrote: »

This underlines exactly the point I'm trying to make.

You have an event where you know that you don't have an awful lot of details. You admit to not having a lot of details...but wonder if Israel could be behind it anyway.

That is true. But please notice this I wondered in that very same OP if OTHERS could be behind it also.

This is what I mentioned of Israel.
SUSPECT 1[[/QUOTE]All I know is that Israel, the masters of the false-flag attack have recieved German subs, for free!
[/QUOTE]
Which is a fact and which I previously stated was my sum knowledge of who legally had access to German torpedoes.

Other than Germany, which is why I asked again in the very same post.
SUSPECT 2

Could Germany have done it?

A third question which gave
MULTIPLE SUSPECTS: EVERY STATE THAT LEGALLY IMPORTS GERMAN TORPEDOES

Other than Germany, who else has recieved German torpedoes?

bonkey wrote: »

You then go on to amass information....and come back to offer a scenario that has Israel behind it. When questioned on it, you then say that there's pretty-much no reason to suspect Israel...except that if it wasn't NK, then your prime suspect would be Israel because it would be a false-flag attack.

From my fourth question, again from the OP I establish
FURTHER MULTIPLE SUSPECTS: POTENTIALLY EVERY OTHER NATION ON EARTH WITH A MILITARY BUDGET

I

Is it possible to obtain them on the black market via a 3rd party?

bonkey wrote: »

So you've taken an event and said "I wonder if there's anything fishy here....and if there is, the prime suspect would be Israel until there's evidence to suggest otherwise".....and then get shirty because people are suggesting that you've got some beef against Israel.

Not true.

I suggested in the OP based on the revelation that a German torpedo hit the South Korean ship that Israel would have the capability to carry off such an attack, perhaps amongst many others but maybe we could get to the bottom of it together.
.

bonkey wrote: »

What was the red flag? That it was German, or that Israel are in possession of them?

German torpedo used in the attack

bonkey wrote: »

I had no issue until you started acting that it was unreasonable for someone to point out that whilst you were claiming you had no idea who might be behind it, you were also clearly putting one nation front and center as the potential bad guy for a conspiracy theory.

I disagree I put one nation out in front, and my posts confirm it.

These are all potential suspects based on further reading which I posted based on them having German Torpedoes.

Greece

Germany

Greece

Norway

Spain

Turkey

India

Indonesia

Israel

South Korea

Argentina

Chile

Colombia

Ecuador

Peru

Venezuela

South Africa

to be continued.

studiorat

Ya missed a bit.

Impoverished North Korea is believed to earn hundreds of millions of dollars every year by selling missiles, missile parts and other weapons to countries such as Iran, Syria and Myanmar.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1988744,00.html#ixzz0oy1krFgD

Brown Bomber

bonkey wrote: »

I had no issue until you started acting that it was unreasonable for someone to point out that whilst you were claiming you had no idea who might be behind it, you were also clearly putting one nation front and center as the potential bad guy for a conspiracy theory.

Likewise I have no issue with someone pointing out (that I) "claiming you had no idea who might be behind it, you were also clearly putting one nation front and center as the potential bad guy for a conspiracy theory." Even though it is demonstrably false.

What I do take umbrage with however is comments like this

studiorat wrote: »

involving Israel at this stage looks like you've been reading a few sites with a single agenda.

Clearly implying that I visit and am influenced extremist websites which is a falsehood.

That is a personal attack.

And I didn't respond to this by "getting shirty" this was my full response.

"
I actually found your post quite interesting until the pointless sly dig at the end"

bonkey wrote: »

If nothing else, your post reads like "I'm looking for evidence to suggest that Israel were behind this" and not "I'm wondering if there's a Conspiracy afoot here, and I'm looking for evidence others might think is reasonable". You seem to be insisting that you're doing the latter..all the while having concentrated on one nation as your suspect.

I believe I have demonstrated otherwise.

My thoughts can be summarised by this single statement which I posted:

South Korea/US/India/EU/Israel? false-flag on South Korean naval vessel blamed on North Korea

So not concentrating on "one nation" as you say but there is a list of five, 32 in fact if you include all the EU states. The question mark implied that I really didn't know who if any of those mentioned had carried out a false-flag attack

bonkey wrote: »

If I suspected one of my 10 roommates, I wouldn't pointing out that of the 10, I thought one was the most likely to have done it and would like to know if anyone had any information to share. To do so would look like I was persuing an agenda. Clearly, you see things differently on that score.

Actually we don't.

I said I would suspect one of the roommates - as you have. I said I wouldn't act on the suspicion as you have.

bonkey wrote: »

It also shouldn't be an issue for people to comment on how the same group is time and time again being suspected of involvement, even when - as in this case - there is little to no evidence to support it and its even being outed as wild speculation.

It isn't an issue for me as long as it is backed up, so I can defend myself and not general smears like it always is.

bonkey wrote: »

You're perfectly entitled to start as many threads as you like, linking anything and everything as tenuously as you like to whomever you like.....but that doesn't mean that others are somehow not entitled to remark on this.

How would that be in line with keeping on topic in any given thread?

studiorat

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Clearly implying that I visit and am influenced extremist websites which is a falsehood.

That is a personal attack.

And I didn't respond to this by "getting shirty" this was my full response.

"
I actually found your post quite interesting until the pointless sly dig at the end"

It meant that you culled your information from Anti-Israeli websites. You called them extremist, not me. I would suggest you were influenced by them though. I checked the sources you cited and some more and came back with the observation that most of the places which agreed with your argument also carried other Anti-Israeli stories.

The purpose of which was to point out to you that your sources were biased. If you want to change the subject by crying personal attack that's your choice. It doesn't change the fact that you reported prejudice information. And I mean that in the Pre-Judged sense in case you think it's another attack.

Brown Bomber

studiorat wrote: »

It meant that you culled your information from Anti-Israeli websites. You called them extremist, not me. I would suggest you were influenced by them though. I checked the sources you cited and some more and came back with the observation that most of the places which agreed with your argument also carried other Anti-Israeli stories.

The purpose of which was to point out to you that your sources were biased. If you want to change the subject by crying personal attack that's your choice. It doesn't change the fact that you reported prejudice information. And I mean that in the Pre-Judged sense in case you think it's another attack.

What are you talking about? I linked to Reuters and UPI in the OP.

Brown Bomber

studiorat wrote: »

Ya missed a bit.



Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1988744,00.html#ixzz0oy1krFgD

All the more reason to carry out a false-flag to instigate a war then surely.

studiorat

studiorat wrote: »

I checked the sources you cited and some more and came back with the observation that most of the places which agreed with your argument also carried other Anti-Israeli stories.

Read it again. Linking to them doesn't come into it, the same arguments you are presenting are also presented in other fora etc. If I found them, YOU certainly did...



It also means there's more suspicion on Israel, maybe then they are less likely to carry out a FF op. It goes both ways when the argument is so tenous I suppose.

Brown Bomber

studiorat wrote: »

Read it again. Linking to them doesn't come into it, the same arguments

Clearly, because that would actually carry some sembelance of an argument.

Your basing your false assumptions on me based on websites that YOU have visited, NOT ME.

Whatever websites you visit is not my concern and doesn't relate to me and for you to base an assumption of me on this is totally unjustified.

It is a statement borne from your imagination. You should accept this.

studiorat wrote: »

you are presenting are also presented in other fora etc. If I found them, YOU certainly did...

Your just slinging mud at this stage.

For starters I didn't go looking, and would actually never look based on the impression you give.

Can't you see the irony is you making baseless accusations against me and while accusing me of making baseless accusations?

Run_to_da_hills

Probably not much extra than is currently discussed on this thread.

Articlle: The big lie, what really happened:

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/warwithkorea.php

namloc1980

This is an interesting case fair enough. Being a sceptic the official story is a bit fishy to say the least. Initially the South Koreans ruled out any North Korean involvement in the sinking of the RKOS Cheonan. On the 6th May a report issued indicating that the metallic/explosive residue from a type of German Torpedo had been found on the sunken hull of the ship. Then on the 20th a further report issued blaming the North for attacking the ship with a previously unheard of NK made torpedo and crucially making no mention of the residue found in the previous report. Note that the South Korean Navy has 12 active German made submarines and also uses German made torpedoes.

Now throughout all this the North has strongly denied any involvement in the sinking. Typically the North acknowledges publicly any clashes with the South with anti-American rhetoric etc. but not so this time. That in itself proves nothing but is interesting to note.

I see a few possible scenarios (Israeli involvement not being one of them!):

- NK did indeed sink the ship using a homemade torpedo or a German made torpedo that they procured illegally.
- The annual Foal Eagle joint military exercises with the US were taking place around the time of the sinking. Maybe a South Korean sub accidentally sunk the Cheonan in a friendly fire incident using a German made torpedo? And given the loss of life and the likely public backlash, instead of acknowledging the incident, the blame was placed at NK's door.
- The South Koreans deliberately sunk the Cheonan to spark a war with NK in the hope that they could finally get rid of the NK regime with US help.

Brown Bomber

The "virtually undetectable" German 212 Submarine from Doscovery's future weapons.

namloc1980

Brown Bomber wrote: »

The "virtually undetectable" German 212 Submarine from Doscovery's future weapons.

Only the German and Italian Navies have Type 212 subs

Brown Bomber

namloc1980 wrote: »

Only the German and Italian Navies have Type 212 subs

Not True. I've just looked into it and Israel's specially built Dolphin Class Submarines are 212's

Israel gets two more German submarines

(AFP) – Sep 29, 2009

JERUSALEM — Israel has taken delivery of two German submarines ordered four years ago, a military spokesman said on Tuesday.

"We have received two Dolphin-class submarines built in Germany," he said, on condition of anonymity.

The submarines, called U212s, can launch cruise missiles carrying nuclear warheads, although when it confirmed the sale in 2006 the German government said the two vessels were not equipped to carry nuclear weapons.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j33iXawr-RpZpCmlIkVylnRAoUyg

Besides, Germany has exported 214's, which are upgrades on the 212's to a number of countries.


Type 212/214 submarines

One of the most advanced submarines in the world is the German Type 212 class. Equipped with a fuel cell propulsion system, the Type 212 submarines are the first of only two fuel cell propulsion system equipped submarines, the other being the Russian Lada class submarine.

The Type 212A is probably the quietest submarine in the world. Engineers have managed to reduce the Type 212A’s signature by using the latest technology available. Their aim was to reduce the waterborne noise, magnetism, radar, infrared and pressure signature to as low as possible. The diesel generator plant is mounted on a swinging deck platform with double elastic mounts for noise and vibration isolation

Four of the Type 212A submarines were built at the shipyards of HDW and Thyssen Nordseewerke GmbH (TNSW) of Emden for the German Navy. The four submarines are U31, U32, U33 and the U34. Two more Type 212A submarines have been built by Fincantieri for the Italian Navy: Salvatore Todaro and Scire.

Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft GmbH or HDW, the people who created this masterpiece of technology have taken the Type 212A a step further. The Type 214 submarine is af urther improvement of the Type 212A, with an incresed diving depth of more than 400 meters due to use of new pressure hull materials.

Performance of the AIP system has been increased with two Siemens PEM fuel cells which produce 120kW per module and will give the submarine an underwater endurance of two weeks. A hull shape which has been further optimised for hydrodynamic and stealth characteristics and a low-noise propeller combine to decrease the submarine’s acoustic signature.

http://www.military-heat.com/63/type-212214-submarines/

212 from Wiki

It features diesel propulsion and an additional air-independent propulsion (AIP) system using Siemens proton exchange membrane (PEM) hydrogen fuel cells. The submarine can operate at high speed on diesel power or switch to the AIP system for silent slow cruising, staying submerged for up to three weeks without surfacing and with no exhaust heat. The system is also said to be vibration-free, extremely quiet and virtually undetectable.

Type 212 is the first of the only two fuel cell propulsion system equipped submarines ready for series production by 2007, the other being the Project 677 Lada class submarine designed by Russian Rubin Design Bureau.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_212_submarine

As you said the Italian Navy was involved in the manufacture of Type 212's, but was apparently unable to export any.

The IN (Italian Navy) has received two of the Type 212A vessels, and is due to receive two more between 2015-2016.

Having recorded a profit in 2009,,Fincantieri appears to be financially stable, particularly in its naval vessel markets. The CFO heralded the company's stability as a great accomplishment as the 2007-08 financial crisis had hit other shipbuilders particularly hard.[16] Fincantieri signed 16 new contracts in 2008 for the construction of 28 new naval vessels, amounting to approximately €12 billion in all.[16]

In addition, Fincantieri's mega-yacht and cruise ship sales have been on the rise, marked by a 2010 contract with Carnival Corp for two 3,700 passenger cruise ships that will cost €558 million a piece.[17] Finally, due to earlier criticisms for a lack of indigenous innovation, the company has spearheaded further investment on R&D, totaling €53 million in 2007
http://www.nti.org/db/submarines/italy/export.html

Leaving Germany as the only exporter of Type 212's and and 214's

Submarine Proliferation

Germany Export Behavior

Capabilities | Import | Export

Within the past five decades, 36 submarines were produced for the German Navy, while 102 completed vessels or material components were delivered to other navies.

ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems

ThyssenKrupp offers three types of submarines for export:

* Type 209: diesel-electric patrol submarines, produced since 1974 in various versions;
* Type 212A: hybrid diesel-electric/AIP submarines, with an AIP system based on fuel cell technology;
* Type 214: hybrid diesel-electric/AIP, long-range submarines incorporating successful design features from Type 209 and 212A boats as well as the Dolphin-class, which are diesel-electric boats tailored to Israel's demands.

The most recent contract concluded by ThyssenKrupp is for the construction and sale of two Dolphins to Israel.

A History of German Submarine Exports
http://www.nti.org/db/submarines/germany/export.html

Shows us

Germany, Greece, South Korea, Italy, Israel are the only states with either 212's or 214's active.

However, Greece needs to be removed from this list and both Russia and Portugal need to be added because they have equivalent technologies.


GREECE
Seems that Greece's 214's never became active and they are trying to sell them now.

Greece in Default on U-214 Submarine Order

On Monday Sept 21/09, ThyssenKrupp Marine informed the Greek Minister of Defence that it was canceling “The Archimedes Project” contract for 4 U-214 diesel-electric submarines with Air-Independent Propulsion technology, because the government’s payments had remained underwater for too long.
Amur class submarine

Greece currently fields 8 boats: 4 Glavkos class U-209/1100 boats commissioned between 1971-1979 (S110-S113), and 4 Poseidon class U-209/1200 boats (S114, S117, S118, S119) commissioned from 1979-1980.

Once the Papanikolis’ sea trials began in 2006, however, the Hellenic Navy found a host of issues with the new submarine. Poor performance from the AIP system that supplements its diesel engines for long underwater operations, problems with the ISUS combat system, poor surface seakeeping in high seas, and hydraulic system issues were among the major flaws reported. The Navy refused acceptance, leaving HDW to fix the boat.

HDW set to work on Papanikolis, but the submarine has been docked in Kiel since 2006 waiting for Greek acceptance. HDW says acceptance is now justified, as the defects have been fixed, but the Greek government refuses to accept the boat. It has raised other issues, such as the ad-hoc nature of several required modifications to avoid disassembling the boat, the number of sea trials that have consumed some of the onboard equipment’s operational life – and one rather more traditional reservation, which is not expressed but plays a role. Sailors are famously superstitious, and Papanikolis’ tribulations have given it a reputation as an unlucky boat.

Meanwhile, the other 3 submarines are reportedly complete now, or very close to it. Pipinos was launched in April 2007, Matrozos followed in 2008, and Katsonis was launched at the end of 2008. Not one of them has been accepted for service. Sources currently report payments to TKMS of almost EUR 2 billion, but accumulated payment arrears of EUR 524 million ($770 million): EUR 300 million claimed by Hellenic Shipyards SA, and EUR 224 million owed to HDW.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Greece-in-Default-on-U-214-Submarine-Order-05801/

Portugal

List of ships of the Portuguese Navy
U209/1400 class submarines (but equal to a class U214 with AIP): 2 vessels (HDW shipyards), 2009 and 2010, to replace all of the Albacora class submarine vessels used by the Portuguese Navy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_of_the_Portuguese_Navy

The Portuguese U209 is in fact a 214. It has to bw called a 209 for legal reasons-
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.areamilitar.net%2FANALISE%2Fanalise.aspx%3FNrMateria%3D15&sl=pt&tl=en

Russia

Has one similar submarine submarine in the Lada Class, and has plans to export an inferior model, but has yet to do so yet.

The Amur class submarine, designated as the project 950 Амур, (named for the Amur River), is one of the latest Russian submarines which are advertised as the export version of the Lada class, a highly improved version of the Kilo-class submarine with much better quieting, new combat systems, and an option for air-independent propulsion.



The new vessel is the 4th generation submarine with the capability of striking salvo missile blows at different targets. The sonar signature level of the submarines of this class is several times lower in comparison with “Kilo” class submarines. These submarines are equipped with radio-electronic weapons of the newer generation created on the basis of the latest achievements in the field of radio-electronics. These submarines can outfitted with AIP fuel cells, considerably improving submerged endurance and range. AIP capability can be added as hull extension plug either during new build construction or as a refit existing ships.

It is expected that these vessels can operate in all areas of the World Ocean except the areas with solid ice cover, in all weather conditions, in shallow and deep water areas.[1]

[edit] Current operators

No ships of this class built yet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amur_class_submarine

Sankt Peterburg began initial sea trials on 29 November 2005. On 22 April 2010 it was reported that the submarine had finished all testing and would join the Russian navy later in the year

The Lada-class diesel submarine launched in October 2004 is among the best in its class featuring virtual silence, powerful missiles and torpedoes, and sophisticated sonar equipment. The Admiralty Shipyard is building another three Lada-class submarines, and plans to launch between four and six of them by 2015.

Completed: 1
Active: 1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lada_class_submarine

NORTH KOREAN IMPORTS
Country Class Shipyard Year of Order Number ordered As Boats As Material Kits Comments
North Korea Project 613/ Whiskey SSK unknown (Russia) 1960 4 4 - Ex-Soviet Navy
http://www.nti.org/db/submarines/russia/export.html

Brown Bomber

****, sorry that is so much and hard to read. It is in sections though

robtri

a lot of reading.. there about subs... very interesting...

but did i miss something here... where has it been confirmed a specific sub and torpedo where used......

cause lets face it all we are short of here is a serial number from the torpedo...

Brown Bomber

robtri wrote: »

a lot of reading.. there about subs... very interesting...

Thanks

robtri wrote: »

but did i miss something here... where has it been confirmed a specific sub and torpedo where used......

It hasn't been confirmed anywhere.

I've looked into the North Korea's navy and their submarines are obsolete Soviet/Chinese relics from the 50's and 60's or homegrown unsophisticated models.

I don't see how any of these could could completely outfox the combined detection of US and SOuth Korean forces to arrive undetected, sink the corvette undetected, and leave without leaving a trace.

I haven't seen in confirmed that they are capable of firing a German torpedo.

The list I gave you.

• Portugal
• Italy
• Russia
• Germany
• Isreal
• South Korea

Possess the best in class in stealth submarines and therefore the most able to carry out the attack undetected in the manner that it came about.

And also, cross-referencing from that list earlier with the German torpedoes they all possess German Torpedoes too.

robtri wrote: »

cause lets face it all we are short of here is a serial number from the torpedo...

From memory again they did find a torpedo segment with a partial serial number on it, North Korean based on one they found in the 90's'. Sounds like hikacker passports in the 911 rubble to me though.

This is from the initial report. This is all the evidence they have against the North. Hardly conlusive is it?

As for conclusive evidence that can corroborate the use of a torpedo, we have
collected propulsion parts, including propulsion motor with propellers and a steering
section from the site of the sinking.
The evidence matched in size and shape with the specifications on the
drawing presented in introductory materials provided to foreign
countries by North Korea for export purposes. The marking in Hangul, which
reads "1번(or No. 1 in English)", found inside the end of the propulsion section, is
consistent with the marking of a previously obtained North Korean torpedo. The
above evidence allowed the JIG to confirm that the recovered parts were made in
North Korea.

If you want to read the whole report it is here, it is quite short
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/20_05_10jigreport.pdf

namloc1980

Thanks for the info but the Israeli Dolphin-class are a bespoke design that are similar to but are not 212's, produced especially for Israel. They are a separate class of boat. The only navies that have 212's are the German and Italian navies. The 214 is an export-only refinement and improvement on the 212 which is indeed used by South Korean, Portugal and Greece. So strictly speaking I was correct but point taken that other navies have advanced German U-boats similar to the 212.

Brown Bomber

namloc1980 wrote: »

Thanks for the info but the Israeli Dolphin-class are a bespoke design that are similar to but are not 212's, produced especially for Israel. They are a separate class of boat. The only navies that have 212's are the German and Italian navies. The 214 is an export-only refinement and improvement on the 212 which is indeed used by South Korean, Portugal and Greece. So strictly speaking I was correct but point taken that other navies have advanced German U-boats similar to the 212.

You seem to know what you are talking about. Do you think it is feasible that a North Korean sub could beat South Korean and US radar systems?

namloc1980

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You seem to know what you are talking about. Do you think it is feasible that a North Korean sub could beat South Korean and US radar systems?

Well the US and Korea were conducting the Foal Eagle military exercises around the time of the sinking. Now we don't know what vessels were taking part but there would have been at least one and probably more AEGIS enabled vessels in the area. AEGIS is a multi purpose advanced weapons and sensor system capable of tracking and targeting aerial, surface and submarine threats and is the most advanced system of it's kind. Could the North have penetrated this and sunk the Cheonan....possibly? What I question is how the NK sub got away after launching it's torpedo? Even if it managed to covertly get it's way inside SK defenses the second it fired a torpedo it would have stood out like a sore thumb to US/SK defenses?

Also the recovered torpedo that the South showed off is clearly not the same as the alleged schematic of the NK homemade torpedo.