URGENT: Japanese tanker explodes near Strait of Hormuz

Originally posted by Britguy
reply to post by mydarkpassenger

 

I was about to post about the possibility of them having pumped out the tanks too before the photo was taken.

I still think it's a possible sub collision.

I don't know. It looks like more than half of that dent is above the waterline - meaning a sub would need to be running at the surface and any sub running on the surface should be visible to the tanker's radar.

Plus it would be really take some genius sailors too miss seeing something as big and well lit as a supertanker while running surfaced.

reply to post by Manouche


from the link
"“That’s been the question of the day,” he said. “Do we know what caused this? And the answer is no.”

if they are looking at it and they can't tell that is very odd
we are back to Godzilla farts?
nooooooooo....

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger

Originally posted by Britguy
reply to post by mydarkpassenger

 

I was about to post about the possibility of them having pumped out the tanks too before the photo was taken.

I still think it's a possible sub collision.

I don't know. It looks like more than half of that dent is above the waterline - meaning a sub would need to be running at the surface and any sub running on the surface should be visible to the tanker's radar.

Plus it would be really take some genius sailors too miss seeing something as big and well lit as a supertanker while running surfaced.

Having served on a US submarine and seeing it in dry dock, I can say that even when fully surfaced, 2/3 or more of the sub is still under water... The subs also have radar and have no desire to hit a surface ship (or be detected) - we like to keep the water out of the people spaces...

The US Navy is very cautious, it's the local authorities telling fantasies. Maybe they fear confidence goes down and trade slows so they come up with senseless causes. But they don't know better.

Originally posted by CommandoJoe

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger

Originally posted by Britguy
reply to post by mydarkpassenger

 

I was about to post about the possibility of them having pumped out the tanks too before the photo was taken.

I still think it's a possible sub collision.

I don't know. It looks like more than half of that dent is above the waterline - meaning a sub would need to be running at the surface and any sub running on the surface should be visible to the tanker's radar.

Plus it would be really take some genius sailors too miss seeing something as big and well lit as a supertanker while running surfaced.

Having served on a US submarine and seeing it in dry dock, I can say that even when fully surfaced, 2/3 or more of the sub is still under water... The subs also have radar and have no desire to hit a surface ship (or be detected) - we like to keep the water out of the people spaces...

Me too and there you go, even better. I just don't believe it was any kind of collision.

And I don't believe it started inside the ship because the first thing afaik is that a flash was seen by the watch, followed by an explosion.

I'm thinking that it's some sort of very near-miss explosion. As for whodunnit?

Beats me: the list of possible perps is just too long.

Why? Maybe hold the tanker hostage for ransom? Destabilize the area even further, and maybe point the finger at some one else? Hell, it COULD be Iran even, some twisty double logic - blow the tanker up, and point the finger at the US, all the while oil prices sky-rocket again. Or maybe a corporation for the same result - a huge price increases in oil - and just watch the oil market go!

[edit on 29-7-2010 by mydarkpassenger]

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by mydarkpassenger

 

the draft is aprox 28 meters or 78 feet so I don't think it was pumped out.
that looks like the water line I think...the caption says
"as it arrived" and it looks to be under way...entering port
here she is under way loaded I think

www.google.com...

www.google.com...

as you can see in the pic of her entering harbour the bildge pump is just above the water line they don't submerge past the bilge pump

It is looking more and more like an old mine did this.

en.wikipedia.org...

"On 18 April 1988, the U.S. Navy waged a one-day battle against Iranian forces in and around the strait. The battle, dubbed Operation Praying Mantis by the U.S. side, was launched in retaliation for the 14 April mining of the USS Samuel B. Roberts (FFG-58). U.S. forces sank one frigate, one gunboat, and as many as six armed speedboats in the engagement and seriously damaged a second frigate."

I think this time the mine was an accident, and left over from previous
actions is my guess.

They still find unexploded ordnance from WW2 in Europe.

Originally posted by 12voltz
According to this report Mitsui o.s.k says ship may have been attacked from outside force ,whatever that means
www.automatedtrader.net...

As in a Sith, duh. Could also mean Satan. May the (good) force, be with, YOU, or something.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by MermaidWatcher]

So this tanker "exploded"? I havent seen anything about that. Everything ive seen in the news said the ship made it on its way under its own power and suffered very little damage (relatively) but nothing about it "exploding". Sounds like ATS hype/overexaggeration to me.

Originally posted by princeofpeace
So this tanker "exploded"? I havent seen anything about that. Everything ive seen in the news said the ship made it on its way under its own power and suffered very little damage (relatively) but nothing about it "exploding". Sounds like ATS hype/overexaggeration to me.

The OP was directly quoting The Kyodo News, if you click the link you see so.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by freetree64]

Heres a drawing of a tanker.

I can't see this being a mine or the tanker running into something. The damage is at the back of the ship. Were they going in reverse? If not its hard to hit something with your rear bumper driving forwards. Did a sub hit it or a mine the dents are above the water line. The red paint on the ship never completely goes under the water even when full. The damage is mostly above the red and above the waterline.

Heres a picture of the damaged crew area.



Picture came from here.
english.aljazeera.net...

The crew area is above the engine area. Heres a picture of an engine for one of these monsters.




That picture came from here.

www.subsim.com...

Isay it was a bad vent valve. The cargo pump room is right under the life boat in this picture. If something happened when venting theres a good chance the life boat could be damaged.

Originally posted by Ex_MislTech

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by mydarkpassenger

 

the draft is aprox 28 meters or 78 feet so I don't think it was pumped out.
that looks like the water line I think...the caption says
"as it arrived" and it looks to be under way...entering port
here she is under way loaded I think

www.google.com...

www.google.com...

as you can see in the pic of her entering harbour the bildge pump is just above the water line they don't submerge past the bilge pump

It is looking more and more like an old mine did this.

en.wikipedia.org...

"On 18 April 1988, the U.S. Navy waged a one-day battle against Iranian forces in and around the strait. The battle, dubbed Operation Praying Mantis by the U.S. side, was launched in retaliation for the 14 April mining of the USS Samuel B. Roberts (FFG-58). U.S. forces sank one frigate, one gunboat, and as many as six armed speedboats in the engagement and seriously damaged a second frigate."

I think this time the mine was an accident, and left over from previous
actions is my guess.

They still find unexploded ordnance from WW2 in Europe.

Yes, I agree.

Whatever 'blew up' did not blow up while in contact with the hull...but short distance away...a few meters to 10 meters...

The strike was near the aft end of the tanker,

The bow pressure wave could possibly have dislodged an old mine...there are vortexes much like you see from aircraft, but slower, and under the water.

However...

a) when was the last time 'old ordinance' caused damage to a ship in the gulf?
b) seems damned convenient that the mine came to the surface on the Iranian side
of the ship, or am I confused?
c) and just happened to occur during the height of tensions and force buildup in the same area.
d) This smells like choreographed false flag performance art and who has prior "convictions" for such? (USA in the gulf of Tonkin, 911, Shanksville, Pentagon and the recent N Korean "incident")


if it was merely an old iranian 'mine', then only a few meters closer and we would never know much other than an oil tanker exploded in the gulf after being 'hit' on the aft starboard side...and after CNN got done with it we would have the US Neo-con's wet-dream - Armageddon...


[edit on 29-7-2010 by seataka]

reply to post by JBA2848


after that vid of the tank implodung and reading the link I put up where they discuss the video...Im still thinking implosion or possibly a mine
but the sonar would register an explosion and Im pretty sure these craft have black boxes that would have charted / recorded an explosion.
if a mine was close enough to do air damage there would have been damage bellow the waterline too

my 500 dollar side scan fish finder/ depth sounder charts and with gps too..and I can see fish 100 feet off

did anyone look at the pdf I posted earlier which showed pix of explosion damage? the damage was much more tearing then what we see

edit to add
here is the latest news no definite answers and that is strange
just vague disagreement....

www.bbc.co.uk...



[edit on 29-7-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 29-7-2010 by Danbones]

Could this tanker incident be a false flag for:

www.haaretz.com...

I understand that as thats how it was first reported but that has since changed. The title should be changed otherwise folks who dont read the OP are going to log on and just start talking about thow the US caused a ship to "explode".

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger

Originally posted by princeofpeace
So this tanker "exploded"? I havent seen anything about that. Everything ive seen in the news said the ship made it on its way under its own power and suffered very little damage (relatively) but nothing about it "exploding". Sounds like ATS hype/overexaggeration to me.

The OP was directly quoting The Kyodo News, if you click the link you see so.

Israel helping an ARAB Sheikdom? Ummmm....okay.

Originally posted by quest4info
Could this tanker incident be a false flag for:

www.haaretz.com...

reply to post by princeofpeace


I know its a stretch, but nice strategic location to have friends for all the Iran posturing.

Oh i agree! I just didnt think (according to everyone on here) that Israelis and Arabs couldnt be "friends".

[edit on 29-7-2010 by princeofpeace]

Probably an old mine. Thats why no one knows exactly what happened and if it was an old mine, the detonation was probably weakend which is why there wasnt much damage.

hi to all ...could it have been a seal diver plant so sort of percussion bomb on the side of the tanker and swim away .
Next thing you know set of a flash responc for the seal pick up and then pop.just my opinion but i am sure som xseal can mabe answer

[edit on 30-7-2010 by the2ofusr1]