Russian NAVY detected foreign subs near Kamchatka

Let me get this straight, comrade Mikey - I made a mistake, admitted it
immediately, and, in your rather dim eyes, you see this as "destroying" my
"professional reputation"?

Well, I could take a page from your playbook and deny my error in the face of
overwhelming evidence (MOON HOAX) or slightly backpedal without ever admitting
I made a mistake, but to tell you the truth, I wouldn't want to do anything in
your manner. I prefer to admit my mistakes when they happen.

you who has a
stainless credibility of high flying US NAVY aviation expert.

Thanks, comrade Mikey! Here I thought I was just a face in the crowd of people
who think of you as a nationalist ex-patriot.


Although
the question remains do all US NAVY aviation experts still believe that
Tu-160s and russian NAVY Tu-22M3s are the same planes? Just curiosity.

Ask them, comrade - since I have been out of the Navy for years, it seems
ridiculous of you, as usual, to think I am speaking on their behalf. I don't
represent the US Navy; I represent the people who think you are a fool.




Look at the dates. your "days" are from the same department of "small
mistakes". It seems Gordon you do have propesities to distort
unpleasant
reality according to your current needs. Yeah Gordon small useful lie?

Funny, that - I made a mistake and didn't try to cover it. In the last couple
years of watching you here in RAM, I don't recall ever seeing you do the same.


As for Tu-22M3 vs. Tu-160 well some "small mistakes" can destroy
professional reputation forever.

I didn't confuse these two numerical designations, I confused their quite
similar NATO reporting names, ONCE, in a posting, and admitting to my mistake.
Since you seem in a position of being able to claim you've never made a similar
mistake, I'd love to see you say that in print.

in my personal view this
"small mistake" does speak for the real professional level of
its maker.

Your "personal view" is mighty narrow anyway and is of no concern. Or are you
pretending that before this error of mine, you considered me an expert...?
You're just being churlish, as I'd expect of you.


I do not know how about others but sorry Gordon after that
"accident" I cannot take you seriousely anymore, at least not in the
field of military aviation.

Please, Mikey, don't feel sorry - I think I can live with it.

Gordon

Russia would be better off if it sold its Tu-160s to the Confederate Air
Force
and used the money to buy medicines:

They can have my Confederate Air Force patch when they pry it from my old,
wrinkled uniform shirt.

v/r
Gordon

I'm told that the Russians had a huge Joke with an american nuclear
sub after exercises in Australias North recently.

cite? I'd love to hear how this occurred, name of subs involved, etc. - what
did the fCommie sub do, broach alongside the US boat? Swift. Sounds like the
"two Sov... errr Russian bombers "surprised" the Connie, making terrified
sailors run in all directions" bull**** story from last year.

G

ost (Chris Mark) wrote in message ...
Russia would be better off if it sold its Tu-160s to the Confederate Air
Force and used the money to buy medicines:

Actually, Russians were better off when they were building the Tu-160s.

Higher death rates since then have accounted for about 6 million of 'em.

Stuart Wilkes

nt (Gordon) wrote in message ...

Let me get this straight, comrade Mikey - I made a mistake, admitted it
immediately, and, in your rather dim eyes, you see this as "destroying" my
"professional reputation"?

It depends on type of mistake certanly. The fact is that aviation
experts
cannot confuse T-160 and Tu22. This just cannot happend with aviation
experts. And the fact that you indeed admitted it does not change the
fact
that your are not an aviation expert.


Well, I could take a page from your playbook and deny my error in the face of
overwhelming evidence (MOON HOAX) or slightly backpedal without ever admitting
I made a mistake, but to tell you the truth, I wouldn't want to do anything in
your manner. I prefer to admit my mistakes when they happen.

Of course. What you could do else? Insisting that Tu-160 and Backfires
are the same? That would be funny indeed.


you who has a
stainless credibility of high flying US NAVY aviation expert.

Thanks, comrade Mikey! Here I thought I was just a face in the crowd of people
who think of you as a nationalist ex-patriot.

Wrongly thought. In fact I am internationalist and patriot, Russia
patriot of course.
Not a US patriot. That's the only reason for you pathological hate
against me.



Although
the question remains do all US NAVY aviation experts still believe that
Tu-160s and russian NAVY Tu-22M3s are the same planes? Just curiosity.

Ask them, comrade - since I have been out of the Navy for years, it seems
ridiculous of you, as usual, to think I am speaking on their behalf. I don't
represent the US Navy; I represent the people who think you are a fool.

Are you an impostor in addition? Why would not you speak for yourself
only?
But you want bring others who gave you no rights for "speaking on
their behalf".
Why is that? Just make your empty words looking a bit more heavier.
That's why. A small useful lie, Gordon, again.



Look at the dates. your "days" are from the same department of "small
mistakes". It seems Gordon you do have propesities to distort
unpleasant
reality according to your current needs. Yeah Gordon small useful lie?

Funny, that - I made a mistake and didn't try to cover it.

I never said you tried to cover it. It was simply impossible.
Otherwise
I think you almost certainly would try.

In the last couple
years of watching you here in RAM, I don't recall ever seeing you do the same.

Perhaps s bad vision.



As for Tu-22M3 vs. Tu-160 well some "small mistakes" can destroy
professional reputation forever.

I didn't confuse these two numerical designations, I confused their quite
similar NATO reporting names,

Are "Blackjack" and "Backfire" names so really similar for you?

ONCE, in a posting, and admitting to my mistake.
Since you seem in a position of being able to claim you've never made a similar
mistake, I'd love to see you say that in print.

Although I am not an aviation expert I indeed never confused Tu-160
and Tu22Ms.


in my personal view this
"small mistake" does speak for the real professional level of
its maker.

Your "personal view" is mighty narrow anyway and is of no concern.

Lie again Gordon, You are very concern about my "personal view".
Otherwise you would not respond in the way you did. Your reputation
is in danger. That's why you so concern. Note every time you try
to fix it you go in even more traubles. So recommend you: shut up.
Maybe it will be forgotten ... or maybe not.

Michael

Mike says:

Let me get this straight, comrade Mikey - I made a mistake, admitted it
immediately, and, in your rather dim eyes, you see this as "destroying" my
"professional reputation"?

It depends on type of mistake certanly. The fact is that aviation
experts
cannot confuse T-160 and Tu22. This just cannot happend with aviation
experts. And the fact that you indeed admitted it does not change the
fact
that your are not an aviation expert.

Clutch the pearls, I've been discovered!!! Horrors.

Michael, I don't sign my posts with "Gordon, aviation expert" - I don't claim
it. Trying to put words in my mouth doesn't help your claim, Moonboy.

Well, I could take a page from your playbook and deny my error in the face
of
overwhelming evidence (MOON HOAX) or slightly backpedal without ever
admitting
I made a mistake, but to tell you the truth, I wouldn't want to do anything
in
your manner. I prefer to admit my mistakes when they happen.

Of course. What you could do else?

Lie. Like you. Like Mladen. Like Venik. Thats what separates you and them,
from me.

Insisting that Tu-160 and Backfires
are the same? That would be funny indeed.

Talking about something I didn't do..?

you who has a
stainless credibility of high flying US NAVY aviation expert.

Thanks, comrade Mikey! Here I thought I was just a face in the crowd of
people
who think of you as a nationalist ex-patriot.

Wrongly thought. In fact I am internationalist and patriot, Russia
patriot of course.

An external patriot then? I wonder how such a "patriot" helps his country from
a distance. In your case, it does make sense -- "Comrade Michael, you serve us
best by leaving."

Not a US patriot. That's the only reason for you pathological hate
against me.


No, no - just a few annoying traits of yours. Like other nationalistic
chest-beaters, when you spend 100% of your efforts driving down the country you
oppose, it makes you look shrill.


Although
the question remains do all US NAVY aviation experts still believe that
Tu-160s and russian NAVY Tu-22M3s are the same planes? Just curiosity.

Ask them, comrade - since I have been out of the Navy for years, it seems
ridiculous of you, as usual, to think I am speaking on their behalf. I
don't
represent the US Navy; I represent the people who think you are a fool.

Are you an impostor in addition?

LOL No, Mikey, I really DO represent the people who think you are a fool.

Why would not you speak for yourself
only?

Who else would I speak for, Comrade? My kids, perhaps. That's about it.

But you want bring others who gave you no rights for "speaking on
their behalf".

Well, its supposed to be a big secret, but I'm sure we can trust you. You
see, Michael, there are about 50 of us that meet twice a month in Francoise'
cellar where we plot ways of making you look dense. By popular vote among the
Moonboy Fanclub, I am their spokesman.

Why is that? Just make your empty words looking a bit more heavier.
That's why. A small useful lie, Gordon, again.

If you can't tell sarcasm, there isn't anything I can do to help you. "I
represent the people who think you are an idiot" is not a lie.



Look at the dates. your "days" are from the same department of "small
mistakes". It seems Gordon you do have propesities to distort
unpleasant
reality according to your current needs. Yeah Gordon small useful lie?

Funny, that - I made a mistake and didn't try to cover it.

I never said you tried to cover it. It was simply impossible.
Otherwise
I think you almost certainly would try.

You _think_?

In the last couple
years of watching you here in RAM, I don't recall ever seeing you do the
same.

Perhaps s bad vision.

Riiiiiiiiiight, Moonboy.



As for Tu-22M3 vs. Tu-160 well some "small mistakes" can destroy
professional reputation forever.

Thankfully, I am not a professional in aviation at this point in my life. Just
a person who made a small mistake and admitted to it. Sorry, Moonboy, but if I
had a professional reputation to damage, I think claiming Apollo was a hoax
would be the proper way to "destroy" it.

I didn't confuse these two numerical designations, I confused their quite
similar NATO reporting names,

Are "Blackjack" and "Backfire" names so really similar for you?

Simple mistake, comrade. Like when you call yourself a patriot, when you live
and work in a different country, contributing nothing to your country.

ONCE, in a posting, and admitting to my mistake.
Since you seem in a position of being able to claim you've never made a
similar
mistake, I'd love to see you say that in print.

Although I am not an aviation expert I indeed never confused Tu-160
and Tu22Ms.

I did. Once.

in my personal view this
"small mistake" does speak for the real professional level of
its maker.

Wow, that stings.

Your "personal view" is mighty narrow anyway and is of no concern.

Lie again Gordon, You are very concern about my "personal view".

LOL No, I am very concerned about my kids. Little else.

Otherwise you would not respond in the way you did. Your reputation
is in danger.

Well... so far, you seem the only person to have taken notice that 1) I HAD a
reputation or 2) that I am in danger of destroying it.

That's why you so concern. Note every time you try
to fix it you go in even more traubles. So recommend you: shut up.

Michael, I have thought over your suggestion and have decided that it is more
enjoyable to get into trauble.

Maybe it will be forgotten ... or maybe not.

Michael

Spoken by Moonboy, that's not much of a threat.

Gordon

nt (Gordon) wrote in message ...
Mike says:



you who has a
stainless credibility of high flying US NAVY aviation expert.

Thanks, comrade Mikey! Here I thought I was just a face in the crowd of
people
who think of you as a nationalist ex-patriot.

Wrongly thought. In fact I am internationalist and patriot, Russia
patriot of course.

An external patriot then?

internal, Gordon internal since 2000.

I wonder how such a "patriot" helps his country from
a distance. In your case, it does make sense -- "Comrade Michael, you serve us
best by leaving."

Don't you think Gordon it is a bit stuipid to cry "get out" then nobody around?


Not a US patriot. That's the only reason for you pathological hate
against me.


No, no - just a few annoying traits of yours. Like other nationalistic
chest-beaters, when you spend 100% of your efforts driving down the country you
oppose, it makes you look shrill.

I remember one time you said I am brilliant... I know it was
yet an other "small mistake" but still very sincerely. However
you did not apologize for that one till now.



Although
the question remains do all US NAVY aviation experts still believe that
Tu-160s and russian NAVY Tu-22M3s are the same planes? Just curiosity.

Ask them, comrade - since I have been out of the Navy for years, it seems
ridiculous of you, as usual, to think I am speaking on their behalf. I
don't
represent the US Navy; I represent the people who think you are a fool.

Are you an impostor in addition?

LOL No, Mikey, I really DO represent the people who think you are a fool.

Gordon, you DO represent fools in this NG who totaly incapable to keep
their own views without hate the opposite ones of others.


Why would not you speak for yourself
only?

Who else would I speak for, Comrade? My kids, perhaps. That's about it.

What?


But you want bring others who gave you no rights for "speaking on
their behalf".

Well, its supposed to be a big secret, but I'm sure we can trust you. You
see, Michael, there are about 50 of us that meet twice a month in Francoise'
cellar where we plot ways of making you look dense. By popular vote among the
Moonboy Fanclub, I am their spokesman.

Is it a kind of humor attempt? Increadible even that this kind
style still can survive somewhere in a dark corner.


Why is that? Just make your empty words looking a bit more heavier.
That's why. A small useful lie, Gordon, again.

If you can't tell sarcasm, there isn't anything I can do to help you. "I
represent the people who think you are an idiot" is not a lie.

Well You believe I am idiot I believe you are idiot. Since in this game
there will be always draw game, how about switching on something else,
for instance similarities in NATO names for Tu-160 and Tu-22M. Ready?




Look at the dates. your "days" are from the same department of "small
mistakes". It seems Gordon you do have propesities to distort
unpleasant
reality according to your current needs. Yeah Gordon small useful lie?

Funny, that - I made a mistake and didn't try to cover it.

I never said you tried to cover it. It was simply impossible.
Otherwise
I think you almost certainly would try.

You _think_?

You knows it better than I do.


In the last couple
years of watching you here in RAM, I don't recall ever seeing you do the
same.

Perhaps s bad vision.

Riiiiiiiiiight, Moonboy.



As for Tu-22M3 vs. Tu-160 well some "small mistakes" can destroy
professional reputation forever.

Thankfully, I am not a professional in aviation at this point in my life. Just
a person who made a small mistake and admitted to it. Sorry, Moonboy, but if I
had a professional reputation to damage, I think claiming Apollo was a hoax
would be the proper way to "destroy" it.

Well claiming only would mean that. But collecting scientific
papers, looking into details, learning space physics and based
on it drawing your own conclusions on that purely scientific
matters would mean totaly different. For intance you could try
to estimate radiation dozage based on published data for crossing
van-allen belts and compate it with an official NASA data. Although...
you are not only aviation expert also you are not a researcher...
One day you said you are news (TV I guess) eater, or something like
that. Than my appology your life horizonts are indeed too narrow
to think about such things like could manned moon landing be for real
or not.



I didn't confuse these two numerical designations, I confused their quite
similar NATO reporting names,

Are "Blackjack" and "Backfire" names so really similar for you?

Simple mistake, comrade. Like when you call yourself a patriot, when you live
and work in a different country, contributing nothing to your country.

And where this false conclusions were derived from. Morerover unlike
your contributions my dear, my contributions is very easy to find out.
Go to a library and ask for "Petukhov M" in a pubmed search engine.


ONCE, in a posting, and admitting to my mistake.
Since you seem in a position of being able to claim you've never made a
similar
mistake, I'd love to see you say that in print.

Although I am not an aviation expert I indeed never confused Tu-160
and Tu22Ms.

I did. Once.

And rightly! But russians say "there is no bad without good"
next time you will think twice before open your mouth.


in my personal view this
"small mistake" does speak for the real professional level of
its maker.

Wow, that stings.

Your "personal view" is mighty narrow anyway and is of no concern.

Lie again Gordon, You are very concern about my "personal view".

LOL No, I am very concerned about my kids. Little else.

What's wrong with your kids, Gordon? Perhaps wrong country?


Otherwise you would not respond in the way you did. Your reputation
is in danger.

Well... so far, you seem the only person to have taken notice that 1) I HAD a
reputation or 2) that I am in danger of destroying it.

What? The only one? yeah Gordon I did not know that. Terrible. I can imagine...


That's why you so concern. Note every time you try
to fix it you go in even more traubles. So recommend you: shut up.

Michael, I have thought over your suggestion and have decided that it is more
enjoyable to get into trauble.

what you mean under "I have thought"? Planning another trap, Gordon
for such a good innocent guy like I am is not what I would recomended
you. Think more about your poor life, its sense which was totally lost
and so on.

Michael

Why the emphasis on "NAVY"? Is that something unusual for the Russian
Navy to do?

In article ,
(Michael Petukhov) wrote:

commander-in-chief of Russian NAVY admiral Kuroedov told
press that forces of russian pacific ocean fleet have
detected in Saturday and also today foreign submarines
in the area near Kamchatka where large scale manoeuvres of our
fleet are carried out. "We are fully in control of this
situation and prepared to interact with our foreign
"observers" in this way as well. Perhaps those subs
came instead of observers who were invited but did not
came from some countries", he said //Interfax

Yesterday there were news reports that two Tu-160s arrived
to Vladivostok to carry out missions in "long distant ocean
zone". Tu-160s never operated in Pacific Ocean area.


Probably could make this statement 360 days out of the year and it
would be true, no need to actually 'detect' them, they are there.

1) the detected sub is dead sub in a war conditions.

You've obviously never done ASW. Detecting the sub is only part of the
battle; you still have to localize it, develop an attack plot, and then
launch the attack. Of course, the sub will probably know it has been
detected and wont wait around to become a victim during all this.


How many subs have you ever tracked, Mikhai?



Tu-160 searching for US subs.... Well sounds like a joke
of the week. We have other means to search for your subs like
Tu-142, Il-38, Ka-27 etc.



You have a lot of aviation means to _search" for our subs...but this
doesn't mean your aviation assets can actually find them. I've seen the
ASW avionics in the Ka-25 and 27....what a joke. I doubt the Il-38 is
any better.

Remind me sometime to tell you about the time the aircraft carrier I was
on (USS Kitty Hawk) ran over one of you Victor class subs in the Sea of
Japan (1984) and spun it 360 degrees leaving one of its props stuck on
the side of our ship. I'm sure some people on that sub must have been
majorly messed up. Funny story...eh?


--Mike

Michael Wise wrote:

:In article ,
: (Michael Petukhov) wrote:
:
: 1) the detected sub is dead sub in a war conditions.
:
:You've obviously never done ASW. Detecting the sub is only part of the
:battle; you still have to localize it, develop an attack plot, and then
:launch the attack. Of course, the sub will probably know it has been
:detected and wont wait around to become a victim during all this.

I suspect that by 'detected', he means the first two of Sagire.
Classis, Destructum have occurred.

:Remind me sometime to tell you about the time the aircraft carrier I was
n (USS Kitty Hawk) ran over one of you Victor class subs in the Sea of
:Japan (1984) and spun it 360 degrees leaving one of its props stuck on
:the side of our ship. I'm sure some people on that sub must have been
:majorly messed up. Funny story...eh?

We used to scare them by transmitting VDS-VDS-VDS on the hull mount
when they'd move in close behind us. Tended to flush them right back
out of there again. We did this even if the ship didn't HAVE a VDS.

--
"Rule Number One for Slayers - Don't die."
-- Buffy, the Vampire Slayer