March 26, 201016 yr Breaking news, folks, doesn't look good ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8589507.stm http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/26/south...h-korea/?hpt=T2 http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2...000100315F.HTML
March 26, 201016 yr Author Appears to have been confirmed as the Po Hang class corvette Cheonan (PCC-772), which would look like this:
March 27, 201016 yr Author Yeah, could have been any number of things other than hostile action by the DPRK. And, for that matter, if it was hostile action, could have been any number of causes: torpedo, mine, etc. It doesn't sound like they knew it was coming, whatever it was. From BBC News: The ship's rescued captain has been recounting what happened. "There was the sound of an explosion and the ship keeled to the right. We lost power and telecommunications," South Korea's Yonhap news agency quoted Choi Won-il as saying. "I was trapped in the cabin for five minutes before my colleagues broke the window in and let me out. When I got out, the stern had disappeared."
March 27, 201016 yr Whatever caused it, over 40 people are dead. All those affected are in my thoughts and prayers.
March 27, 201016 yr Looks like it was a mine or torpedo form a sub rather then surface skirmish (excluding an accidental explosion). But whatever caused this, Seoul is downplaying whole incident. They won't go for escalation, not with the instability in the North... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8590515.stm
March 29, 201016 yr Author Latest news at BBC News A theory seems to be forming of Cheonan having struck an old mine from the 1950-53 war.
March 29, 201016 yr A theory of an old mine drifting and impacting this vessel is possible, but is it probable? This theory looks to have a two-fold purpose. First, from the public perception it deescalates tensions with the North and secondly, again from the public perception, it eliminates a crew mishap with the DC, which would cause embarrassment to the crew and to the Navy. My guess is either it was an onboard error or a North Korean SS has one less torpedo in its inventory.
March 29, 201016 yr Author A theory of an old mine drifting and impacting this vessel is possible, but is it probable? This theory looks to have a two-fold purpose. First, from the public perception it deescalates tensions with the North and secondly, again from the public perception, it eliminates a crew mishap with the DC, which would cause embarrassment to the crew and to the Navy. My guess is either it was an onboard error or a North Korean SS has one less torpedo in its inventory. An old mine certainly is the most politically convenient cause if you want to avoid escalating tensions with the DPRK. They could conduct tests to confirm the type and age of the mine, presumably (assuming it was a mine), but the question remains: would they want to? or if they did, would they want to disclose the true results?
April 1, 201015 yr A theory of an old mine drifting and impacting this vessel is possible, but is it probable? This theory looks to have a two-fold purpose. First, from the public perception it deescalates tensions with the North and secondly, again from the public perception, it eliminates a crew mishap with the DC, which would cause embarrassment to the crew and to the Navy. My guess is either it was an onboard error or a North Korean SS has one less torpedo in its inventory. An old mine certainly is the most politically convenient cause if you want to avoid escalating tensions with the DPRK. They could conduct tests to confirm the type and age of the mine, presumably (assuming it was a mine), but the question remains: would they want to? or if they did, would they want to disclose the true results? Old land mines take out individuals (nearly always civilians) all the time, I'd guess the probability is low but a low probability doesn't mean it can't happen. On board accidents happen too, here in Australia we lost some people in an onboard fire a few years ago and (I guess 35 years ago) we lost a destroyer cut in half by our own 'carrier (during night operations). Things can go wrong. The cause needs to be found, in the case of our lost destroyer (HMAS Voyage for those interested) an enquiry led to a change in stnading orders for operation with the Melbourne (the 'carrier in question). I think maintenance protocols may have been changed after the Westralia (I think that was the ship) fire as well. Don Thomas
April 7, 201015 yr Author From Navy Times U.S., S. Korea to jointly probe ship sinking By Hyung-Jin Kim - The Associated Press Posted : Tuesday Apr 6, 2010 14:39:35 EDT SEOUL, South Korea — A top American military officer said Tuesday he was confident that a joint probe by South Korea and the U.S. would solve the mystery of an explosion that sank a South Korean warship 11 days ago. The 1,200-ton Cheonan exploded March 26 and sank a few hours later during a routine patrol near the tense western border with North Korea. Fifty-eight crew members were rescued soon after but dozens of other sailors remain unaccounted for and are thought trapped in the wreckage. No survivors have been found among the 46 sailors initially listed as missing, but divers found the body of one crewman Saturday. No cause has been determined. South Korean officials have said they will look at all possibilities including that the ship might have been struck by a floating mine or a torpedo from North Korea. South Korea's intelligence chief Won Sei-Hoon told lawmakers in a closed-door session Tuesday that it was difficult to conclude whether North Korea was involved in the incident, Chung Chin-sup, a lawmaker in the ruling Grand National Party, said after being briefed by Won. The U.S. has promised to send a team of naval disaster experts to help find the cause. "I'm confident that we will find out" the cause, Gen. Walter Sharp, chief of the 28,500 American troops in South Korea, said at a meeting with U.S. businesses in South Korea, where he gave a speech Tuesday and then took questions. "We want to get to the right answer, the correct answer and we don't want to rush to that conclusion." Sharp refused to speculate on the cause of the blast. "I'm not going to speculate on this because again, the experts haven't started looking at it," he said. The U.S. and South Korea "watch North Korea very closely every single day of the year and we continue to do that right now," he said. "And again, as this has been said, we see no unusual activity at this time." Earlier this week, South Korea started work to salvage the ship after ending its underwater hunt for the missing sailors at the request of their families, who raised concerns about additional casualties among divers. One military diver died during a search while a South Korean fishing boat that participated disappeared. Two aboard that vessel died and seven others were left missing.
April 15, 201015 yr Author From CNN South Korea raises sunken naval ship By the CNN Wire Staff April 15, 2010 1:32 p.m. EDT Seoul, South Korea (CNN) -- South Korea raised a naval ship from the floor of the Yellow Sea that sank under mysterious circumstances last month, Korea's Yonhap news agency reported Thursday. The bodies of at least 25 of the 45 missing sailors believed to be in the hull of the navy corvette Cheonan were found in the hours after it was raised, Yonhap reported. Officials hope the wreckage will provide clues to what caused the ship to break in two after an explosion near the maritime border with North Korea on March 26. The recovery operation was carried live by South Korean television. A crane lifted the ship from the water and place it on a barge, where officials began their search for the missing sailors. The ship will be taken to a naval base for investigation. Soon after the ship sank, 58 men were rescued. But a weeklong search for dozens of missing sailors was called off on April 3 after family members asked the navy to focus on raising the ship. Naval experts quoted in Korean media had surmised that men trapped underwater could only remain alive for 60 to 70 hours, but many hoped some sailors would still be alive. One of the navy's most experienced divers died while attempting to enter the wreck in the hours after the ship sank. Navy Chief Master Sgt. Han Joo-ho, 53, fell unconscious after reportedly exceeding recommended times and depths under water. Two other divers were hospitalized on the same day. It is unclear whether intense public pressure contributed to the divers taking excessive risks. Family members of the missing have consistently criticized the navy for what they consider an inadequate response to the disaster. The media are rife with speculation over what caused the explosion. One theory is the ship struck a mine left from the Korean War in the 1950s. But South Korea has backed away from casting blame on North Korea. [CV32: The damage appears to be much further forward than I would have expected, given what we knew up to now (which, admittedly, wasn't much).]
April 16, 201015 yr From CNN South Korea raises sunken naval ship By the CNN Wire Staff April 15, 2010 1:32 p.m. EDT.... One of the navy's most experienced divers died while attempting to enter the wreck in the hours after the ship sank. Navy Chief Master Sgt. Han Joo-ho, 53, fell unconscious after reportedly exceeding recommended times and depths under water. Two other divers were hospitalized on the same day. It is unclear whether intense public pressure contributed to the divers taking excessive risks. Family members of the missing have consistently criticized the navy for what they consider an inadequate response to the disaster. The media are rife with speculation over what caused the explosion. One theory is the ship struck a mine left from the Korean War in the 1950s. But South Korea has backed away from casting blame on North Korea. [CV32: The damage appears to be much further forward than I would have expected, given what we knew up to now (which, admittedly, wasn't much).] Comparing to the photo in post #2 I'd think about midships, perhaps an engine room? I assume they're diesel, no big smoke stack, still little clue. I'm sorry for the dead diver, I think most navy divers in that situation would be stretching the rules as much as possible with no need of pressure from others - one life risk to maybe save forty, easy decision for the right kind of guy.
April 16, 201015 yr Does anyone know anything about the crane being used? It must be ENORMOUS! What do they use it for when it's not lifting wrecks?
Create an account or sign in to comment