If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Sincerely, I don't even know what "PLAD" means...?
-- ************************************************** *********************** Tom Cooper Freelance aviation journalist Author: - Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875 - Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6550 - Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585 - African MiGs http://www.acig.org/afmig/ - Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988 http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php ************************************************** *********************** |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Woody,
You're expecting a comprehensive report with historical accuracy. What you're reading though is an intelligence report where SPEAR is reporting only on the verifiable incidents a short time later without the benefit of your historical sources. Make sense? Explained that way, it does. The document isn't inaccurate. It's probably just incomplete. That doesn't make sence (either they're reporting, or not reporting at all), but, well, OK... If nothing else it's good to have another opinion - that's why I asked. Re. "conspiracy": I wouldn't say there is a consipiracy. I'd only say that I simply can't understand why should State Dept. keep USN documents back. Can you say what could be a reason? I could, but then I'd have to kill you. Well, that's also an answer. Yep; the USN witnessed the fight. Unclear is only if they actually saw it or tracked it on their radars. AFAIK, they did not notice ejection. Two days later the pilot was found deeper inside the Hormuz Straits by other group of USN vessels. I can nearly guarantee that nobody "eye-witnessed" it. The altitude and ranges that these things occur at--especially in the daytime--make them difficult to keep track of visually. Fair enough: USN warships usually held a position away from the Iraqi-declared "War Zone" along the Iranian coast. SNIP From what I've learned so far on this and the previous two days there was a small SAG centered around USS Guam (LPH-9) in the area between Khark Island and Bahrain. What I'm sure of is that crews of these ships have withnessed the Iraqi three-wave strike against Khark, flown in the early morning, morning and afternoon of 18 March 1988, then after the success of the first Iraqi strike specific skipper of one of USN warships declared the Iraqi attack for, "deplorable by nature", and subsequently the whole SAG turned around. When the next Iraqi wave (flown around 09:00hr AM local time) appeared the IRIAF interceptors were airborne and the USN warships recorded - I don't know yet by which means (if I would know this I would not need any documents from ONI) - firings of five AIM-54s. You're assuming. Based on the SPEAR message, SOME Navy/intel platform detected those firings. We don't know how or from what. That's right - even if I wouldn't say that there is a question "from what" (there is only one platform capable of firing AIM-54s). BTW, it's funny the USN credits IRIAF F-14s with a kill against a Mirage on this day, while the IRIAF isn't crediting itself with anything similar. Also funny is that about "deplorable by nature" - which wasn't an assumption, but something I've got from somebody who was on the bridge of one of the ships in question. Now, one of logical questions here is why would a USN skipper declare an Iraqi attack for "deplorable by nature", but I guess if you'd answer that one you'd have to kill me too... ? ;-) (I know, I know, this is thinn....but, I need some ideas at least so to see where could I continue to dig). "John Keeney" wrote in message ... "Tom Cooper" wrote in message ... For example, the only day in "early Feb 88" on which F-14s engaged Mirage F.1s in two different engagements over the Persian Gulf was 9th of February. That, however, is not a date I'd describe as "early February". Why not? If you break the month evenly in to"early", "mid" and "late" (that is, "thirds") the 9th falls in to the first third of the month or the "early" part. I wouldn't do that: that's why I asked if people who work or used to work with USN would. Different people think different way. Also, if you can see the situation from my perspective: air combats on 2nd and 5th February weren't that much different regarding odds or outcome (the first was fought between 14 Iraqis and a single F-14; the other between six Mirages and a single F-14). So, from my standpoint, such a statement can easily cause a confusion. -- ************************************************** *********************** Tom Cooper Freelance aviation journalist Author: - Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875 - Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6550 - Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585 - African MiGs http://www.acig.org/afmig/ - Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988 http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php ************************************************** *********************** |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Tom,
I quit. I've wasted enough time on this pointless business which is getting me, nor you, anywhere. I still believe what I know, but I will not pursue it any more. This is not a productive nor happy use of time. Good luck, ND |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Not that I expected anything else.
And, don't complain about what is or what is not a "productive use of time": you started wasting your own time by lying and guessing about my work, my co-workers and me - nobody was forcing you to do that. -- ************************************************** *********************** Tom Cooper Freelance aviation journalist Author: - Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875 - Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6550 - Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585 - African MiGs http://www.acig.org/afmig/ - Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988 http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php ************************************************** *********************** |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
On 11/12/04 13:51, in article , "Tom
Cooper" wrote: Woody, You're expecting a comprehensive report with historical accuracy. What you're reading though is an intelligence report where SPEAR is reporting only on the verifiable incidents a short time later without the benefit of your historical sources. Make sense? Explained that way, it does. The document isn't inaccurate. It's probably just incomplete. That doesn't make sence (either they're reporting, or not reporting at all), but, well, OK... If nothing else it's good to have another opinion - that's why I asked. I wrote my comment a bit unclearly. My point is (in context) that it's incomplete from a historical perspective. Re. "conspiracy": I wouldn't say there is a consipiracy. I'd only say that I simply can't understand why should State Dept. keep USN documents back. Can you say what could be a reason? I could, but then I'd have to kill you. Well, that's also an answer. My attempt at humor. Hard to grasp sometimes without the benefit of personal interaction. It's all about security. --Woody |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Woody,
I've got your points already, don't worry. ;-)) Anyway, in conclusion, it can be said that at least some within the USN should have got and seen these documents. It remains unclear, however, why specific people haven't ever got them nor heard about them. This especially when it comes to people who were in - I'd say - decisive positions for the stance of the whole USN in regards to the F-14. That's at least something to think about. Perhaps some day somebody would care enough to find out why (I do not think this is our job: Farzad and me have already enough to do with Iranians and Iraqis). -- ************************************************** *********************** Tom Cooper Freelance aviation journalist Author: - Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875 - Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6550 - Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585 - African MiGs http://www.acig.org/afmig/ - Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988 http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php ************************************************** *********************** |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Mr Cooper- Anyway, in conclusion, it can be said that at least some within
the USN should have got and seen these documents. BRBR Okay, my last input about this. Just got the Fall 2004 issue of 'Hook mag. Little story about the F-14 since it's about outta here. Page 32, "The IRIAF Tomcats participated in the Ian-Iraq war and scored an undertermined number of kills while suffering some losses." Story contributors were the likes of Capt Monroe Smith, RADM Jay Yakeley, CDR Tom Twomey, CDR Dave Baranek, and some others. These F-14 guys, particularly Capt Smith, are no slouches when it comes to F-14 history and knowledge but...... P. C. Chisholm CDR, USN(ret.) Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|