Short answer – yes!.

You’d hope that their inventory management would notice the fact that one of their 209’s came back one eel light….even if the crew, somehow, tried to keep the whole thing under wraps. Not easy to think of reasons why a crew could come back from peacetime patrol with a short count on the torpedoes!. Could try and claim an emergency jettison of a malfunctioning weapon – but within the same timeframe as a torpedoed corvette???.

Assuming an errant SK torp from one of their 209’s – it would seem to have served RoKN needs much better to have just come straight out and declared a training accident that led to an accidental sinking….rather than stoking up the political avalanche that could come from this. Would explain the apparent lack of concern about pushing salvage vessels into ‘potentially dangerous’ waters when they did though. They knew that there were no hostiles around because there wasn’t a hostile there in the first place!.

Well, what if it wasn’t a SUT but a White Shark (which is heavily influenced by SUT, and development of which probably involved AEG/STN Atlas)? IIRC the development of that torp has not been unproblematic nor the result entirely satisfactory (after a lot of money was spent on it). And it has a fire-and-forget mode … exercise gone wrong with this domectic fish might be worthwhile to cover up. Though to me, it sounds as far-fetched as NK employing a German designed fish to shoot an SK surface combattant.

But lets not get carried away by the presence of RDX:

‘‘It is true that RDX, which is used to make torpedoes, has been found, but it is not true that RDX is being used only in western countries,’’ [South Korean Defense Minister] Kim [Tae Young] told reporters.

Although even gov’t officials make claerly incorrect statements (RDX is used also in mines), things still do point in the direction of a torpedo:

According to a government official in Seoul, who spoke to reporters on the condition of anonymity, the joint military and civilian investigation team has found traces of RDX, one of the most powerful military explosives.

RDX is used in torpedoes, not sea mines, the official said. The traces were found in the Cheonan¡’s chimney and the damaged side of the stern.

According to the official, investigators also found three to four pieces of metal near the site of the wreck, and analysis showed the fragments were an alloy of aluminum and magnesium, which is used in torpedo casings.

Investigators are trying to determine whether the alloy was made in Germany, China or Russia.

It’s possible that North Korea may have used a German torpedo to disguise its attack, knowing that South Korea uses German torpedoes, the official said.

To me, that means “yes, most likely a torpedo, but we don’t know the make yet, nor the launching platform”

Probe concludes torpedo sank South Korea ship: report
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.

* How / from whom would NK be able to acquire a German (BRD) torpedo? Considering the countries Germany exported subs and torpedoes to as well as countries with production licences (e.g. Indonesia)

* What (if any) alterations would a Ming/Romea class sub require in order to be able to effectively use a German (wireguided) heavyweight torpedo (DM2 A1-A4, SST4, SUT)

German torpedo info
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTGER_PostWWII.htm
http://www.forecastinternational.com/Archive/ws/ws5154.doc
http://www.nadir.org/nadir/initiativ/ikrg/buch/register/a006.htm
http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=639&Itemid=363

North Korea Sub Suspected In Sinking Of South Korea Warship
SANGWON YOON | 05/10/10 03:20 AM |

SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea’s defense minister confirmed Monday that traces of an explosive chemical substance used to make torpedoes were found in the wreckage of a naval ship that sank near the border with North Korea.

The 1,200-ton Cheonan went down in the Yellow Sea on March 26 after an explosion tore through the frigate. Fifty-eight sailors were rescued, but 46 were killed. Seoul has not directly blamed North Korea for the sinking, and Pyongyang has denied involvement. However, suspicion has focused on the North, given its history of provocations and attacks.

South Korean Defense Minister Kim Tae-young said earlier that an initial investigation indicated that a torpedo was likely to blame for the disaster. On Monday, he confirmed media reports that traces of a high explosive were found on the ship’s wreckage.

“It’s true that RDX, a chemical substance used in making torpedoes, has been detected,” he told reporters. “The possibility of a torpedo (attack) has increased, but it’s too early to say anything.”

The explosive material was detected on the ship’s smokestack and in samples of sand from the site, said joint investigation team spokesman Rear Adm. Moon Byung-ok.

“Mines use RDX as well as torpedoes so we need to investigate further to determine which was responsible,” he said.

RDX, or research department explosive, is a powerful high explosive often mixed with other explosives such as TNT or TORPEX, and has been widely used since World War II by all countries for military and industrial purposes, Kim said.

The multinational investigation team is analyzing aluminum pieces salvaged from the wreckage to determine whether they are a part of the ship or a torpedo, Kim said.

“It is not easy to tie the debris to weapons like torpedoes because information on other countries’ weapons systems is not readily available,” he said.

Reports say investigation results are expected within weeks, but officials have said there is no deadline.

The two Koreas remain locked in a state of war because their three-year conflict ended in a truce, not a peace treaty, in 1953.

North Korean artillery sank a South Korean ship in 1967, killing 39 sailors, and their navies have fought three more bloody skirmishes off the west coast since 1999.

Pyongyang also is suspected in a 1983 bombing in Burma that narrowly missed killing then-South Korean President Chun Doo-hwan but left 21 others dead, as well as for the 1987 bombing of a South Korean airliner that killed 115 people on board.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/10/north-korea-sub-suspected_n_569584.html

The earliest weapons used wet gun-cotton. Just prior to World War I, this was replaced with TNT. Torpex was introduced in the Fall of 1942. In the late 1940s Torpex was replaced by HBX, then H-6 in the 1960s and by PBX in the 1970s.
Approximately 1.9 lbs. (0.9 kg) of wet gun-cotton is equivalent to 1.0 lbs. (0.45 kg) of TNT.

Torpex is a mixture of 37-41% TNT, 41-45% RDX (cyclonite, cyclomethylene trinitramine) and 18% aluminum. HBX and H-6 are also TNT based with additives to increase their explosive power or increase their stability.

Torpex is attractive because of the increased explosive energy and higher detonation velocity of RDX as compared to TNT and the prolongation of the pressure wave by the aluminum. On a weight basis, Torpex is conservatively estimated to be about 50% more effective than TNT as an underwater explosive against ships. However, Torpex is more sensitive than TNT and RDX is expensive and difficult to make safely.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTUS_Notes.htm

More on torpedo and mine explosives, see here (scroll to near page end):
http://www.dutchsubmarines.com/specials/special_torpedoes_mines.htm

RDX forms the base for a number of common military explosives:

Composition A: (wax-coated, granular explosive consisting of RDX and plasticizing wax), composition A5 (mixed with 1.5% stearic acid)
Composition B: castable mixtures of RDX and TNT
Composition C: a plastic demolition explosive consisting of RDX, other explosives, and plasticizers
Composition D
HBX: castable mixtures of RDX, TNT, powdered aluminium, and D-2 wax with calcium chloride
H-6
Semtex: plastic demolition explosives containing RDX and PETN as major energetic components
RDX is also used as a major component of many plastic bonded explosives used in nuclear weapons.

More on RDX: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RDX

Sigh … Topview: consider the hangar dimensions 155×26. The width of the hangar is double the width of the width area taken up by the launchers. The length of the area between hangar front and launcherspace is roughly equal the length of the launcher space itself. IMHO that means there is no way to fully expand the hangar forward because you run out of relocation space quickly. Besides, I suspect that between the two startpositions at the skijump there may be ordnance lifts or something like that (4 small ‘in deck’ items). So, I would venture an educated guess that room for expansion is very limited to say the least.

It doesn’t seem to bother the Kuznetsov, which also has a significantly overhanging skijump.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdPDlbrN21o&NR=1

You are fully entitled to your opinion but I would disagree that a lightweight ASW torpedo would as effective against a skimmer as a heavyweight dual role fish

Clearly. But they might take out a couple of propellors nicely, thus slowing Belgrano down.

Morning Wan- would you like some coffee now that you’ve woken up :dev2:

That would just be great

A ‘flurry’ of Exocets we didnt have embarked on the vessels escorting the carriers…and we would have faced the same back from the cruisers escorting destroyers. 1000lb’ers from the SHAR’s would have been about it and delivering those wouldn’t have been risk free to the precious SHAR force and would have taken away assets needed for air defence.

Perhaps a few ‘surprise’ Sea Eagle missiles for the SHARs? Design of the P3T began in 1976, with full scale development initiated in 1979. Production of the finished production weapon began in 1982.

Shame on me 😎