Talk:Gulf of Oman tanker attacks

From A Closer Look On Syria
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Some prior developments

May 19. A week after the Fujairah attacks the Express reports: Now two SBS teams have joined UK registered oil tankers transiting in the Persian Gulf south through the Strait of Hormuz, where they will be tasked with monitoring Iranian activity around the island of Qesham - home to Iranian naval gunboats. Both teams will collate information as the ships move south through the Strait of Hormuz and into the Gulf of Oman, where it is understood they will be airlifted off by Royal Navy Merlin helicopters operating out of Oman.

Likelihood of scenarios

Taking Gwynne Dyer as right in saying:

It's almost impossible to place a limpet mine once a ship is underway. Other boats cannot come close enough without being spotted, and swimmers (including scuba divers) cannot keep up.

And noting the lenghth of time between the ships leaving port and the explosions - once in daylight any above waterline objects of that size should have been noticed by the crew - that would seem to preclude limpet mines having been attached whilst the tankers were in port.

It seems hard to believe that any mines could have been attached (and fixed with nails not just magnets) in the night before the hours of the attack, whilst the ships were underway.

The suggestion (here) that their may have been air to surface fire from a MQ-9 drone would seem to fit better with the timeline of events and with reports of the crew of Kokuka Courgaeous about seeing 'flying objects'.

The "likely limpet mine" shown on the photos from USS Bainbridge and the Iranians removing something from side of K/C a few hours after the Bainbridge had picked up the crew would still remain to be explained though, in the latter scenario. --Diagonal (talk) 14:19, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

A scenario where the alleged remnants of a limpit mine were placed on the hull of the Kokuka Courageous after the Iranian boat had left the scene is lent some credence by the time difference in the stills (see main page) There is no apparent sign of the 'remnants' in the earlier still. Admittedly the quality of the image is not that reliable --Diagonal (talk) 15:55, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

It may be doable, but without well-prepared tools it is quite noisy. E.g. dark inflatable boat with strong motor (not uncommon) catches up with a ship at night. Holes are drilled, some filler inserted (maybe plastic or whatever), and screws go into that. But usual electric drill on metal is probably too noisy. Hand drill, maybe, a bit slow and a bit harder but doable; there is still some typical sound, but it may be below engine and waves noise. Any sort of pneumatic/pyro action is even noisier, unless they designed a silencer, and all this would be extra-special. Melting metal instead of drilling will produce illumination or sparks, suppressing those is again something extra-special. Advantage of actually doing it in this kind of way is that something did stop those ships, and those ships would be inspected for damage by various non-cooperating parties, owners, insurers, and who knows who else. Any other damage will be noted, and eventually leaked to press. So, either staged or real, it probably comes to the same method of doing it, and with similar goal (false flag or deniability of blame) --Resup (talk) 23:22, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

The holes may actually be HILTI nails. But I still find it difficult to believe they were made while the ship was under way. One thing seems clear: whoever planted the mine did not intend the holes to be seen. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 18:02, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Nail tools are quite noisy, like an airgun shot maybe, entering nail +some gas release. Here is a video giving some idea; another video, gun with silencer fastens to metal. I think drilling will be quieter. Of course one can attach it either way, if non-detection is not at issue (another thing, attaching something quite soft to thick metal is a bit tricky, nail can sink too deep into softer stuff or tear a hole in it) --Resup (talk) 01:04, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Looking at better resolution photo, what's funny is that the through-hole is square, and head-hole is quite large, comparable to 1/2 inch (12.7 mm). That may indicate a nail (one can drill, fill, insert too, but nailing is a more straightforward explanation). I gather standard western powder-gun nails will have head of 8 or 9 mm (essentially barrel diameter), and a round shank of 3.7 mm. I have not seen square-shank Western powder gun nails or rivets. But funnily I see an Iranian (?. WTH is "NK Iran Selling "?) square shank version on Alibaba. --Resup (talk) 02:15, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Some prior use of question marks