On Monday, October 3, 2022 at 2:34:32 PM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
> AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> writes:
>
> > On 9/30/2022 8:22 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> >> AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> writes:
> >>
> >>> On 9/29/2022 10:21 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:52:31 -0400, Radey Shouman
> >>>> <sho...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> John B. <sloc...@gmail.com> writes:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:27:10 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 9/29/2022 1:01 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> >>>>>>>> AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> writes:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 9/28/2022 10:50 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 8:42:23 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 9/28/2022 9:25 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:05:57 AM UTC-7,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Andre Jute wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2022/09/27/the-world-wants-no-part-of-woke-but-its-glad-we-do-n2613688
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It wasn't "Americans" who screwed the United States with "woke"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ideology, Mr Hanson. It was the Democrat Party pandering to its
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> insane left wing, and its intimidated so-called "centre" or, even
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> more risibly, "moderates" doing absolutely nothing about it for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> fear of being cancelled.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> There are too many Americans to be lumped together. The good
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> people need to identify the America-haters and put them down with
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> utmost brutality as an existential threat, for reasons Victor
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Davis Hanson has pithily summarised in a very short article..
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andre Jute
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Credit where it is due, and specific blame where compromise is no
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> longer possible.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The Slime Stream Media is crying Climate Change but blaming Putin
> >>>>>>>>>>>> for the destruction of the Russian-European natural gas
> >>>>>>>>>>>> pipeline. Methane is one of the most powerful greenhouse gases and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Biden stated that IF Russia invaded the Ukraine he would blow the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> pipeline up. And you certainly can't blame Russia - a country
> >>>>>>>>>>>> teetering on Bankruptcy for destroying a major source of hard
> >>>>>>>>>>>> income.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> So again the left is exposed for their utter hypocrisy. They
> >>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't care less about climate change - that is for the little
> >>>>>>>>>>>> man that they convinced it was real. Well, Methane (natural gas)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is real and the destruction of that pipeline was a greater blow to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the environment than the 1960's to 980's car culture.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The pipeline attack is like an Agatha Christie piece- way
> >>>>>>>>>>> too many actors with both means and motivation.
> >>>>>>>>>> There were THREE very large underwater explosions. There are not a
> >>>>>>>>>> lot of people that can accomplish that without leaving traces all
> >>>>>>>>>> over the place. Andre points out to what occurs to losers in the
> >>>>>>>>>> Russian political atmosphere. Putin used to be the head of the KGB
> >>>>>>>>>> so he is well aware of what can and might be done. Especially now
> >>>>>>>>>> that his attack on the Ukraine has turned into losing the cream of
> >>>>>>>>>> his military might. Does anyone with a shred of intelligence believe
> >>>>>>>>>> that supplying nothing more than cannon fodder is going to change
> >>>>>>>>>> things?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> No, the only one with a motive and the capability was Biden and he
> >>>>>>>>>> told the entire world in a press conference that he intended to do
> >>>>>>>>>> just that.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> It's not a technically daunting problem. No need for submarines or UDT
> >>>>>>>>> or SBS commandos. As noted in a British paper yesterday the routes are
> >>>>>>>>> well publicized. One need only pass a 'fishing' trawler across the
> >>>>>>>>> path, drop a timed explosive and keep moving. 'Timed explosive' can be
> >>>>>>>>> an hour or a day or a week.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Very near, or inside, the Danish or Swedish economic zones? I'll bet
> >>>>>>>> fishing trawlers are pretty well surveiled. On the other hand I'm not
> >>>>>>>> sure I would bet on dropping an explosive (estimated 500 Kg TNT
> >>>>>>>> equivalent) accurately enough through 90 meters of seawater, that sounds
> >>>>>>>> like a bit of a challenge.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I don't know. My search yesterday was fruitless and I don't
> >>>>>>> know anyone with relevant military experience so you may be
> >>>>>>> right. Or not.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> During WW II the Royal Navy's 450 lb (200 kg) Mark VII depth charge.
> >>>>>> Note, this was the total weight of the device which contained 290 lb
> >>>>>> (130 kg) TNT
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As for effectiveness, the following from the Wikki
> >>>>>> The killing radius of a depth charge depends on the depth of
> >>>>>> detonation, the payload of the depth charge and the size and strength
> >>>>>> of the submarine hull. A depth charge of approximately 220 lb (100 kg)
> >>>>>> of TNT (400 MJ) would normally have a killing radius (resulting in a
> >>>>>> hull breach) of only 9.8–13.1 ft (3–4 m) against a conventional
> >>>>>> 1000-ton submarine, while the disablement radius (where the submarine
> >>>>>> is not sunk but is put out of commission) would be approximately 26–33
> >>>>>> ft (8–10 m). A larger payload increases the radius only slightly
> >>>>>> because the effect of an underwater explosion decreases as the cube of
> >>>>>> the distance to the target.
> >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_charge#Effectiveness
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Those radii seem pretty small to me. I can easily imagine a depth
> >>>>> charge drifting horizontally more than 10 feet, due to current and so
> >>>>> forth. I'll bet the pipeline was quite a bit tougher than a WW II sub,
> >>>>
> >>>> The Royal Navy Type D depth charge was designated the "Mark VII" in
> >>>> 1939.Initial sinking speed was 7 ft/s (2.1 m/s) with a terminal
> >>>> velocity of 9.9 ft/s (3.0 m/s) at a depth of 250 ft (76 m) Cast iron
> >>>> weights of 150 lb (68 kg) were attached to the Mark VII at the end of
> >>>> 1940 to increase sinking velocity to 16.8 ft/s (5.1 m/s) The Mark
> >>>> VII's 290 lb (130 kg) amatol charge was estimated to be capable of
> >>>> splitting a 7/8 in (22 mm) submarine pressure hull at a distance of 20
> >>>> ft (6.1 m).
> >>>>
> >>>> The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> The pipelines aren't moving, the positions are known and so descent
> >>> rate is immaterial. Despite various impedimenta someone did
> >>> successfully breach them.
> >>
> >> The water is always moving. Faster descent means less deflection by
> >> current. Think of windage for bullets in air.
> >>
> >
> > Good point.
> > I assume someone skilled and motivated would allow for that right?
>
> It might be pretty hard. Currents can vary a lot with depth, and with
> time and tide. It's a higher dimensional problem than shooting in air,
> where the wind is generally more or less horizontal. Just holding your
> boat on station to within a few feet is not easy, or even possible with
> normal hardware. You would want some kind of fancy thrusters.
>
> Assuming it really was sabotage my guess would be some kind of
> underwater vehicle, perhaps manned, perhaps not.

I would guess remotely piloted since the variables of current and drift were simply too large. It appears that two charges were laid and were detonated in a manner to cause the most damage. This means setting charges at the junctions of the turns in the pipeline and you cannot find those remotely, with high confidence, you have to be able to directly observe the lines.