How nice...You're familiar with a boat designed in 1963 but not with the Seawolf class. You're admitting prima facie that you're not familiar with a boat designed 25 years later, and you want me to make up for your ignorance? And now, instead of 30 kts, it's 30+? Now surfaced subs travel at one-half their submerged speed, huh? So the published speed of the surfaced Trepang (15 kts) is 50% of it's published submerged speed (25 kts)? What laughing academy did you say you matriculated from???
Y'know...I think I'll just let the shrill invectiveness of your and the alleged F-16 jock who believes the CIA "noseless zoom climb cartoon" speak to the reader as to the lengths a disinformationist is prepaired to go. By the way, what's your position on the CIA "cartoon"? Answer carefully, for you can't afford to make another faux paux where credibility is concerned
Whether you or Rokke accept anything is inconsequential...The information is out there and the reader can make up his mind. It seems you both have trouble with that concept. :^)
It would have been a lot easier if you just admitted that you don't have any evidence of a U.S. or allied sub capable of doing either 30 knots or 30+ knots surfaced. Or any evidence that the P-3 was towing a target. Or any evidence of a test of a submarine launched surface-to-air missile system. But instead you have to throw out cracks about laughing academy and accusing me of 'shrill invectives' and question my credibility while clinging to you unsupportable theory. So be it. Like the short, bald, fat man with the bad skin and cheap toupee who thinks he looks like Tom Cruise you refuse to listen to those he try to tell you that you're making a fool out of yourself. Go ahead. I won't try to stop you any more.