On Sun, 20 Apr 2014 08:13:23 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On another note, isn't it wonderful that I pose these "provocative"
issues here? It gives the boys something to discuss besides Herring's
tiptoeing through the tulips, Tim's Remembrance of Posts Past*, W'hine's
telling us just how big and fancy his boat is, Bert's regurgitation of
his fondness for John Birch Society bull****,
Ingersoll's schizophrenia, CalifBill's own brand of right-wing insanity,
FlaJim's junior high school insults, and so forth and so on.

===

Harry, have I told you recently that you're an asshole?

Have a nice Easter.

On 4/20/2014 3:23 PM, BAR wrote:
In article , says...

On 4/19/14, 10:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
Here's a game for you Harry.

It's a "hi res" Google satellite image of the 61 million square miles
of the Pacific Ocean.

I zoomed in close enough to draw a fairly wide, bright red line that is
605 feet long (all to scale) and saved it on the image. I then zoomed
back out to capture the full Pacific again and took a screen capture of it.

You mission, should you chose to accept it, is to find the red line.
You can save the picture and zoom away. It's there, guarantee it.
I know where it is, so I can zoom in and easily find it.

Can you?

http://i802.photobucket.com/albums/y...ch/Pacific.jpg



I don't know...can I?

The photo is hardly "hi res."

There are aspects to locating this ship you haven't really considered.

It's a large ship, and it is powered by fossil fuel. A lot of fossil
fuel. Refueling these ships at sea is a very risky business, though it
can be done. It is going to have to make port for fuel, for supplies,
and sometimes for maintenance. The number of places you can "park" a
600-foot warship are limited. The ship will be seen arriving and
departing. Ports of call many times are announced. Once its location is
known, it can be tracked by the usual methods, including by submarine
and by aircraft and by satellite. The Navy's PR department says the
powerplant heat bloom is minimized, as is the ship's wake and
disturbance on the ocean surface. Maybe not as well as the Navy would
like, eh? Military PR is the very definition of self-serving.

Now, of course, very few if any of the third world countries we make war
on have the assets to do this. But some of those countries have sponsors
or are client states of major countries that do have modern ships,
planes, submarines, satellites. It doesn't take much effort to
"communicate" the location of an enemy's assets. I'm confident the
Russians would not be displeased if some ******** of a country sucking
on Moscow's teat managed to put a hole through the hull of the Zumwalt.

On another note, isn't it wonderful that I pose these "provocative"
issues here? It gives the boys something to discuss besides Herring's
tiptoeing through the tulips, Tim's Remembrance of Posts Past*, W'hine's
telling us just how big and fancy his boat is, Bert's regurgitation of
his fondness for John Birch Society bull****,
Ingersoll's schizophrenia, CalifBill's own brand of right-wing insanity,
FlaJim's junior high school insults, and so forth and so on.

As always, have nice day!


* Full apologies to Marcel Proust and his À la recherche du temps perdu...

Warships can stay out to sea for years, anything they need can be
delivered by an oiler or a helicopter.


They could but they don't. Crew would go nuts. Even nuke subs limit
their patrols to six months max.

Longest "at sea" period I had was 41 days and that felt like years.
Channel fever gets turned up a few notches.

On 4/20/2014 8:57 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:11:21 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 4/20/2014 3:23 PM, BAR wrote:
In article , says...

Warships can stay out to sea for years, anything they need can be
delivered by an oiler or a helicopter.


They could but they don't. Crew would go nuts. Even nuke subs limit
their patrols to six months max.

Longest "at sea" period I had was 41 days and that felt like years.
Channel fever gets turned up a few notches.


The typical "weather" cruise was 45 days in the middle of the ocean
but I was on a Bravo (North Atlantic) that went 53,(Absecon Nov/Dec
65).
We used to laugh at Navy guys who were in port every week or two and
called us puddle pirates,



My 41 "dayer" was shortly after reporting aboard my first ship. We
headed south, stopped at GTMO, then continued south doing hide and seek
exercises with a nuke sub for a month. When the exercise was over we
were off the coast of Brazil and about 100 miles to the equator. The CO
decided it would be a grand plan to extend the cruise by a couple of
days to cross the equator and convert a bunch of us Pollywogs into
Shellbacks. I still have my card.

Stupid, silly stuff but good memories as I look back upon them now.

On Sat, 19 Apr 2014 23:12:50 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Apr 2014 22:36:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Here's a game for you Harry.

It's a "hi res" Google satellite image of the 61 million square miles
of the Pacific Ocean.

I zoomed in close enough to draw a fairly wide, bright red line that is
605 feet long (all to scale) and saved it on the image. I then zoomed
back out to capture the full Pacific again and took a screen capture of it.

You mission, should you chose to accept it, is to find the red line.
You can save the picture and zoom away. It's there, guarantee it.
I know where it is, so I can zoom in and easily find it.

Can you?

http://i802.photobucket.com/albums/y...ch/Pacific.jpg


I bet the computers at DIA would pluck it out in a second or two. The
reason they didn't see the jet was they did not have the algorithm in
there to look for random debris.

===

And it's entirely possible, even likely, that there was no satellite
in the right position at the right time. Satellites are not all that
useful for real time tracking of fast moving targets.

On 4/19/2014 11:20 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sat, 19 Apr 2014 23:12:50 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Apr 2014 22:36:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Here's a game for you Harry.

It's a "hi res" Google satellite image of the 61 million square miles
of the Pacific Ocean.

I zoomed in close enough to draw a fairly wide, bright red line that is
605 feet long (all to scale) and saved it on the image. I then zoomed
back out to capture the full Pacific again and took a screen capture of it.

You mission, should you chose to accept it, is to find the red line.
You can save the picture and zoom away. It's there, guarantee it.
I know where it is, so I can zoom in and easily find it.

Can you?

http://i802.photobucket.com/albums/y...ch/Pacific.jpg


I bet the computers at DIA would pluck it out in a second or two. The
reason they didn't see the jet was they did not have the algorithm in
there to look for random debris.

===

And it's entirely possible, even likely, that there was no satellite
in the right position at the right time. Satellites are not all that
useful for real time tracking of fast moving targets.


That's the point I am trying to make. "Spy" satellites have optics that
can resolve dimples on a golf ball but you have to know where the golf
ball is to zoom in on it. Land targets are one thing because they don't
move and the GPS coordinates are known. A ship at sea would be very
difficult to find unless you had a good idea where to look and could
limit the search to a highly zoomed area. Oceans are big.

On 4/19/2014 11:20 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sat, 19 Apr 2014 23:12:50 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Apr 2014 22:36:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Here's a game for you Harry.

It's a "hi res" Google satellite image of the 61 million square miles
of the Pacific Ocean.

I zoomed in close enough to draw a fairly wide, bright red line that is
605 feet long (all to scale) and saved it on the image. I then zoomed
back out to capture the full Pacific again and took a screen capture of it.

You mission, should you chose to accept it, is to find the red line.
You can save the picture and zoom away. It's there, guarantee it.
I know where it is, so I can zoom in and easily find it.

Can you?

http://i802.photobucket.com/albums/y...ch/Pacific.jpg


I bet the computers at DIA would pluck it out in a second or two. The
reason they didn't see the jet was they did not have the algorithm in
there to look for random debris.

===

And it's entirely possible, even likely, that there was no satellite
in the right position at the right time. Satellites are not all that
useful for real time tracking of fast moving targets.


And just as possible the plane isn't even in the Southern Hemisphere....
There is not one spec of evidence we have been made aware of that
suggests the plane made it down there. Something is still fishy about
the whole thing.