| Author | Message | | Ilana_Halevy | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 8:46 pm Post subject: |
| Al jeffie, I did not deny napalm bombs. When I said rockets I meant high explosive rocket lke one was used againt Stark. Rocket or bomb it does not matter, result is the same, type of warhead matters.
There were not used high explosive bombs or rockets, that could sink Liberty in minutes. That was my point.
I also deny heat missiles, because such thing did not exist.  | |  | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 9:15 pm Post subject: |
| | All diversions and avoidance of the REAL issues. You are aware of this as anyone. Spare me. | | | | smallaxe | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 9:24 pm Post subject: |
| | Are those qualifications and diversions lies? | | | | Jefferson Davis | | | | Ilana_Halevy | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 10:07 pm Post subject: |
| | Yes real issue is that planes did not carry any serious anti ship weapons. Even conspirattors admit that fact. | | | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 10:18 pm Post subject: |
| No Ilana.
The only REAL issue is the Liberty crew and their survivors finding and honest and truthful accounting of what happened and why on 8 June 1967 when they were attacked. They've waited for 40 years for justice.
Keep diverting and avoiding as all Liberty apologists do. | | | | DanielDives | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 8:20 am Post subject: |
| Q: I also deny heat missiles, because such thing did not exist.
R: Really?
AIM-9 Sidewinder
The AIM-9 Sidewinder is a supersonic, heat-seeking, air-to-air missile carried by fighter aircraft. It has a high-explosive warhead and an active infrared guidance system. The Sidewinder was developed by the US Navy for fleet air defense and was adapted by the U.S. Air Force for fighter aircraft use. Early versions of the missile were extensively used in the Southeast Asian conflict. In September 1958 Chinese Nationalist F-86s fired the first Sidewinder air-to-air missiles to down 11 communist Chinese MiG-17s over the Formosa Straits. Until that time, aircraft defensive means where primarily limited to pilots and tail gunners firing small caliber ammunition in dog-fight situations.
The AIM-9 has a cylindrical body with a roll-stabilizing rear wing/rolleron assembly. Also, it has detachable, double-delta control surfaces behind the nose that improve the missile's maneuverability. Both rollerons and control surfaces are in a cross-like arrangement.
The missile's main components are an infrared homing guidance section, an active optical target detector, a high-explosive warhead, and a rocket motor.
The infrared guidance head enables the missile to home on target aircraft engine exhaust. An infrared unit costs less than other types of guidance systems, and can be used in day/night and electronic countermeasures conditions. The infrared seeker also permits the pilot to launch the missile, then leave the area or take evasive action while the missile guides itself to the target.
Anyway, this is the discussion the Liberty Survivors are having with various experts.
Mike Burke - MSgt (Ret), USAF
I just became aware some believe heat-seeking missiles were used in the attack on Liberty. As a retired Air Force Munitions Specialist, I find that highly questionable. I'll explain why but would like to hear from any other ordnance experts who have good reasons to disagree.
In Peter Hounam's book, Operation Cyanide, he states Israeli fighters "were diving low over the (sic) vessel and firing heat-seeking missiles" presumably to target tuning transformers attached to aerial arrays on the ship. Hounam then quotes Lt Cmdr David Lewis as saying "every tuning section of every HF antenna had a hole in it."
Problem 1: Nobody on Liberty could be expected to recognize the particulars of the weapons streaking towards the ship. Did anyone have the expertise, time, or opportunity to tell if the incoming armament was unguided rockets, heat-seeking missiles, or radar-guided missiles? It wouldn't have been by their tell-tale radio signals: heat-seekers in 1967 didn't have any; they used passive infrared guidance systems. Short of finding an intact dud missile after the attack, it's unlikely anyone on Liberty could know that heat-seekers had been used.
Problem 2: Even the best heat-seeking missiles in 1967 would have been unlikely to focus on a target as small as a tuning transformer. Infrared systems of that era were infamous for their inability to discriminate between heat emitters; they simply went after whatever presented the biggest and hottest target. On Liberty, that would probably have been the engine compartment or smokestack at the start of the attack. Later in the attack, the deck fires would have attracted the missiles.
Problem 3: Missile design and established military doctrine make it unlikely heat-seekers were used against Liberty. The inability to discriminate is just one of many reasons heat-seekers - especially in the 1960s - were almost exclusively limited to air-to-air or ground-to-air engagements. The fact that 'every tuning section...had a hole in it' is certainly evidence of the Israeli's savagery and thoroughness but it's no real argument for heat-seekers. Heck, the whole ship had holes in it, right?
I have the highest respect for Lt Cmdr Lewis and only question his expertise regarding missile systems; Dave, if you read this, would you please let me know whether Hounam quoted you correctly in his book? I'm still reading the rest of Operation Cyanide based on the high esteem Liberty's crew have given it. I sincerely hope Hounam's assumptions about heat-seekers are no reflection on his credibility.
http://www.usslibertyinquiry.com/forums/showthread.php?t=635
As has been explained to you before, ergardless what the crew thought they were [exactly] you say, "I did not deny napalm bombs. Rocket or bomb it does not matter, result is the same...."
Napalm is an anti-personnel weapon, this, plus the strafing, rockets and torpedo [the USS Liberty would have been sunk if one or two of the others had hit the vessel] killed 34 innocent men and wounded over 170 more... that does matter, at least to the survivors it does.
As with Cowboy, if your case is a slam-dunk case, why not have your day in court? What are you afraid of? | | | | funglefoot | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 9:27 am Post subject: |
| | Ill Anna wrote: | | I also deny heat missiles, because such thing did not exist. |
You persist in telling porkies. Look  and learn 
Flight test and service introduction
Prototype Sidewinder-1 Missile on A-1 Skyraider during flight testingA prototype Sidewinder, the XAAM-N-7 (later AIM-9A), was first fired successfully in September 1953. The initial production version, designated AAM-N-7 (later AIM-9B), entered operational use in 1956, and has been improved upon steadily since.
Combat introduction
The first combat use of the Sidewinder was on September 24, 1958 with the air force of the Republic of China on Taiwan. During that period of time, ROC F-86 Sabres were routinely engaged in air battles with the People's Republic of China over the Taiwan Strait. The PRC MiG-17s had higher altitude ceiling performance and in similar fashion to Korean War encounters between the F-86 and earlier MiG-15, the PRC formations cruised above the ROC Sabres immune to their .50 cal weaponry and only choosing battle when conditions favored them. In a highly secret effort, United States provided a few dozen Sidewinders to ROC forces and a team to modify their Sabres to carry the Sidewinder. In the first encounter on 24 Sept 1958, the Sidewinders were used to ambush the MiG-17s as they flew past the Sabres seemingly invulnerable to attack. The MiGs broke formation and descended to the altitude of the Sabres in swirling dogfights. Air combat had entered a new era.
Compromised technology
The Taiwan Strait battles inadvertently produced a new derivative of Sidewinder: shortly after that conflict the Soviet Union began the manufacture of the K-13/R-3S missile (NATO reporting name AA-2 'Atoll'), a reverse-engineered copy of the Sidewinder. It was made possible after a Taiwanese AIM-9B hit a Chinese MiG-17 without exploding; amazingly, the missile struck the MiG-17 and became lodged within the airframe, and the pilot was able to return to base with the missile. According to Ron Westrum in his book "Sidewinder", the Soviets obtained the plans for Sidewinder from a Swedish Colonel and rushed their version into service by 1961 copying it so closely that even the parts numbers are duplicated. Years later, Soviet engineers would admit that the captured Sidewinder served as a "university course" in missile design and substantially improved Soviet and allied air-to-air capabilities. The K-13 and its derivatives remained in production for nearly 30 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-9M_Sidewinder
But this is just another diversion from the main issue which is the Liberty.
Ill Anna cannot resist the temptation to lie even in her diversions. | | | | Ilana_Halevy | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 9:50 am Post subject: |
| | Quote: | Q: I also deny heat missiles, because such thing did not exist.
R: Really?
AIM-9 Sidewinder |
You are a degenerate. I expected that you may come with something like this , thats why I wrote on 26 April:
| Quote: | | There were no heat missiles in 1967 (no includng Sidewinder which is air to air and cant be used against ship). |
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/uss-liberty/2007/04/26/the-uss-liberty-and-the-onus-of-proof-page-38.php
Sidewinder is guided only at jet flame (thats why you cant fire it at plane in front, you must go to rear). It cant be guided at ship at all. Heat missiles that are sensitive enough to guide at ground targets appeared much much later. So dont argue with engineer, ya arabfirster ignorant. | | | | funglefoot | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 10:57 am Post subject: |
| Anti-ship missile
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Most anti-ship missiles are of the sea-skimming, subsonic or supersonic, type and use a combination of inertial guidance and radar homing. The typical acronym for the phrase is ASM, but AShM can also be used to avoid confusion with air-to-surface missiles.
History
Anti-ship missiles were among the first instances of short range guided missiles during the Second World War. The German Luftwaffe used them to some effect against Allied shipping and sank or damaged some large warships successfully before the Allies devised countermeasures (principally radio jamming).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-ship_missile#History | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
