Excellent photo

“18.01.91 F-15E 88-1689 coded SJ from 4th TFW, piloted by Major Thomas F. Koritz, WSO Major Donnie R. Holland shot down 16miles SW of Basrah. Both aviators KIA. Combat loss officially confirmed by USAF, reason assumed AAA. Show me one single proof, Sens, that this aircraft was not hit by an Iraqi fighter instead.

20.01.91 F-15E 88-1692 coded SJ from 4th TFW, piloted by Col. David W. Eberly, WSO Major Thomas E. Griffith – shot down near Al Qiam, crew ejected and taken as POW. Combat loss officially confirmed by USAF, reason given SA-2. Show me one single proof, Sens, that this aircraft was not hit by a missile fired by an Iraqi fighter.”

The indications do not support an F-15 being shot down by an Iraqi fighter. If you’re trying to claim it was an Iraqi fighter, the burden of proof and responsibility is on you to support your claims, the burden of proof does not rely on others to disprove you.

Like I said before, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

If I understand correctly AWACS and other radar indicated that there were no hostile or unidentified aircraft in the area. There were documentation of SAMs and AAA in the area, so it is logical to assume that their loss is probably due to SAMs or AAA.

In the case of Scotts F-18 there were SAMs exploding in the area, so they assumed the aircraft was lost to a SAM. Because of the war they had too many other urgent things to do than to review the tapes. After the war they re-examined the AWACS tapes and found that there was an unidentified aircraft close enough to Scotts aircraft it could have shot Scotts aircraft down. Also the behavior of bogey supported an ATA missile launch. Scott asked for permission to fire on the MIG, but the AWACS was unable to reasonably identify it. The ROE prevented Scott from attacking the MIG, the MIG ran, so Scott proceeded with his mission, judging by the radar tapes the MIG doubled back and snuck up behind Scott and shot him down. I think his wingman heard an explosion and saw a flash, but assumed it was just another erroneous SAM and they assumed there wasn’t a MIG in the area. Since it was night and they were under radio silence, they didn’t notice he was missing until much later. If I understand Scott had a firing solution, but was not granted permission to fire, Scott would have likely gotten the kill, but since he didn’t get permission he ended up getting killed.

“I wonder if any of those sources were able to pinpoint the island used in the alleged test?”

Good question. You may be thinking along the same lines as I. I would think if an island disappeared someone would take note of it. If there were such a vanishing island, I would think scuba divers would investigate and find some evidence of a nuclear explosion to substantiate the claims. Since I see no evidence of a disappearing island, or the footprint of an explosion, I find a story hard to believe.

“No, I didn’t say this!”

I didn’t say you did. I was asking if that’s what you meant or if you knew anything about it. That is why I used a question mark. Sorry if I gave you or anyone else the wrong to impression.

“I too saw a documentary about a sub salvage and this was in the South Atlantic, I can’t remember the cargo!”

I have seen several, and really think it’s wonderful that they can shed some new light on history.

I am somewhat aggravated with the documentary that I saw, they were so busy treasure hunting, that I think they were somewhat careless with safety and with respect to history. I thought they were careless of their handling of the canisters. I was particularly aggravated that they did not have the canisters analyzed scientifically to identify what was in the canisters. Was it just mud or sand? Was it mercury or uranium or a combination?

“Do you think they would have wanted to use the V2’s to deliver an atomic weapon?”

Of course. I suspect in theory they certainly would have, however I doubt their first fission bomb would be small enough or light enough to fit and a V2. I really don’t know what their specific intention was for the V2. I heard that they were considering using rockets with dirty bombs to try to fend off an invasion, which makes me speculate that maybe they were considering the V2 in that manner.

“The U-195 carried V2’s and mercury. It is also possible that the U-195 and the U-219 had cargoes of mercury.”

I heard about the V2’s before, but before your post I was unaware of any other U-boats with a cargo of mercury.

Since I heard the story about U-234 I had been suspicious that there might have been more shipments. Some of the documents recovered from Japan suggests there were other shipments of uranium.

I think on some of the cargo manifests and other paperwork the mercury was listed however often the uranium was omitted. Like many, I suspect part of the reason it was not listed as uranium on some of the manifests was for secrecy. This would reduce the risk of dockworkers, file clerks, accounting, ect… being leaks.

So like many people I am suspicious of any German or Japanese mercury cargo, considering that uranium seem to be shipped under the apparent guise of mercury. I don’t doubt that they carried mercury, I just suspicious there was uranium oxide mixed in with the mercury.

It could be all the other shipments of mercury are regular mercury, however I would think you would understand my suspicion and curiosity.

I have seen other claims that other U-boats carried uranium to Japan. However the only one that I would consider reasonably confirmed is U-234. The rest of the claims I’ve seen are either on unsubstantiated or have weak evidence, in my opinion.

“If it was OK for them to build a nuclear power industry when the Shah was in power then why can’t they have one now?”

The Shah seemed to have honored this agreement (to the best of my recollection) at least in the beginning. The hostage crisis, damaged Iran’s credibility and honor seriously. Who would be crazy enough to want to let a country whose political organizations, religion, people often chant death to America, death to Israel, ect… Saying there intentions is to wipe Israel off the map (or the destruction of Israel) is not what you want to hear from a country with intentions for nuclear power. A country that has a history of cheating on its agreement not to pursue nuclear arms, is not a country that should have nuclear arms, or a nuclear reactor.

I realize some day probably all nations including Iran will have nuclear power, but hopefully it will be of a more peaceful nature.

Eventually I would like to see nuclear power generation in all countries. However I would prefer to keep the nuclear weapon club small and exclusive.

”Talks and aide stopped.”

The talks and aid stopped because North Korea was cheating. Why should we keep on talking to them and giving them aid if they’re not going to honor their agreement?

U-859 Was carrying uranium oxide also? This is news to me. Thanks.
I’m sorry I don’t know the answer to your questions Newforest. Newforest your post is very intriguing to me.

I saw a documentary where a commercial outfit was trying to do a submarine salvage with a minisub. They were hunting for German gold. There were containers that they said were filled with mud or sand that they were handling very carelessly. I think there was rubber and tin (in raw form). They were unclear what the substance was in the containers so they just called it mud or sand. I was wondering at the time that I saw this documentary if it was uranium oxide or if the substance was tin. I don’t know if it was the documentary I have posted below or not.

U-864: Hitler’s Last Secret
*TV-G
January 18 at 10:00 PM ET/PT
Deep in the icy waters off of Norway lies one of the last great secrets of the Second World War—the German submarine U-864. Sixty years after it was lost, the remotely controlled underwater vehicles of a Norwegian salvage team inspected the submarine’s wreck, discovering 80 tons of deadly mercury. Now that the wreck has been disturbed, the team races to lift the toxic cargo off the seabed and ensure that Hitler’s deadly last secret is made safe once and for all.

It sounds like U-864 was carrying uranium oxide also.

So would that make three or more submarines loaded with uranium bound or sunk on the way to Japan? Very interesting.

I was under the impression that despite enrichment a delivery system was also an issue to the Japanese for a fission bomb. From what I understand their alternative method was to use balloon bombs, rockets, and a submarine launched bomber that was originally intended to bomb the Panamá Canal to deliver uranium to the mainland. I think they also had planned on trying to use some of the uranium as a scorched earth policy as on some other outlying Islands to try to ball down the potential invasion.

re

I think the smarter thing to do would be to go to the job fair. (If you think there is likely to be interesting/good jobs in your field). Either decision you make you will have regrets and there will be benefits. Like others have said, if they really are friends, they will understand if you go to the job fair. If they don’t understand, then they are really not friends, they just want someone to party with if they don’t understand. Maybe your friends could reschedule or maybe you could get together with your friends on a later date.

The short-term gratification would be to go on a trip with your friends. If you miss out on a career opportunity, your career might end up being flipping burgers. You probably won’t be able to afford to visit your friends very often if your career is something like flipping burgers, and you will not be able to afford to do as fun things with your friends, if your career is flipping burgers.

Generally a career is more important. I would rather take the time to find a job that I will like a little better (or hate the least), and a job that is more likely to be more ethically, financially and intellectually rewarding. A job can be very important to you financially and mentally. It really creates vacuum to have to take a job that you dislike just to survive. I would rather take the time to find a job that I will enjoy (or hate less) and a job that is more financially and intellectually rewarding.

In the future do you think you would have more fun with your friends at a YMCA or on a snow ski trip?

Even if you don’t find a job at the job fair, it can help you to learn what type of employers are out there and how to job hunt. Even if you don’t find a job at the job fair, what you learn there can likely benefit your career.

My father told me “a person that enjoys his job is a rich man”. He meant this on two levels. The first level is that you spend most of your life working, and that if you enjoy your work that will be a reward and itself. The second level is that people that enjoy their job tend to do a better job and tend to get better paid.

I see a lot of people out there thinking short-term and they try for the jobs that pay the most, you regardless of other factors. As result they often choose jobs they hate, and less rewarding intellectually, and sometimes immoral. Thusly they often perform poorly on the job, thusly there is little chance of advancement. Thusly many people that go for the short term financial rewards, often end up with less money in the long run. It is best not to walk down the immoral road because it can bother your conscience, and it could lead to a career in prison… if you get my drift.

I suspect your heart is telling you to spend the week on a holiday with your friends, but your mind should be telling you to better your career.

The better your career and the more honest and happy you are on the job, the more likely you are to have friends. People with a lot of money, often have no problem finding people that will act like friends. Real good friends will continue to like you even if you don’t have money or if you can’t get-together and party with them, if they’re real friends they will miss you if you can’t visit them but they will understand.

“MLD… Except the F 22 none of the current USAF fighters has such system. There are some USAF CSAR….”

I disagree.

You seem to think that missile launch detectors are only IR sensors, and you seem to be fixating and stereotyping a particular package and a particular part of the package. I would consider radar, passive radar (and radar detectors), IR sensors, and UV sensors, optics (visual; like a target camera), laser detectors, ect… all are MLDs. I would also classify scanners as part of some MLDs packages; scanners look for things like guidance telemetry, jammers, radar (frequency, intensity, and pattern can all indicate a launch). In a roundabout way, I would consider some IFF systems part of the MLDs suite.

MLDs are not limited to the primary aircraft; things like wingman, GCI, JSTARs, AWACKs, satellites, can all be networked can all be used to enhance detection and situational awareness.

MLDs are not limited just to launch detectors, they also can help with situational awareness and help evaluate and classify and prioritize possible threats. They can often be used to recognize a potential threat or pre-launch behavior, which can give you advanced warning in some cases.

That is part of the beauty of modern technology, the more that time goes on the more that we are able to network the sensors in different ways to enhance detectability and situational awareness. The sensors are improving, but to me it is more dramatic how the information from the sensors is shared and processed. Identification, clarification and classification have all dramatically improved.

There has been much effort to improve these systems, particularly since Vietnam. All the aircraft that were lost by the US and Vietnam was a reality check. Unfortunately we often drift back into complacency, often it takes another slap in the face to wake us back up. Due to limited funds, and complacency, in some ways, some of our allies and enemies have better equipment than we do. Sometimes some of the weapons we sell to our allies is more advanced than what we can afford to commonly field ourselves.

My opinion

The F-22 definitely needs data links, but the datalinks needs to be multimode, and proper tactics used. For security reasons I do not want to speculate or talk in more debth.

Data links are good, but if the F-22 is trying to be stealthy and it is using a data link in active mode, it is somewhat counterproductive. The data links, like radar should be made so they have full capability in the active mode and partial capability in a passive mode.

Not only should it have the capability but pilots actually have to know how to use, and to employ them properly. It’s like the F-117 that was shot down, it was shot down largely if not entirely because it was used in a way that did not exploit its stealth. It was complacency.

The police are investigating, but have found nothing to go on:D

Brovo

He is in a of **** now, because of his theft.