What would a South Korean torpedo two-thirds of the way through development today have anything to do with a Russian ship sinking off the coast of Spain a year and a half ago?
I’d wager this was Ukraine’s handiwork using conventional or drone weapons.
the article is a year old, so those statements were made at least a year ago, 2) militaries aren’t always super up front about their weapons programs timelines 3) the statement specifically said that even though it was “2/3” of the way through development, it had been tested. How do you know this wasn’t the test?
It could have been Ukraine, but Ukraine does not have super cavitating torpedoes, so if that’s the case the reporting on those and the shape charges must be wrong.
What would a South Korean torpedo two-thirds of the way through development today have anything to do with a Russian ship sinking off the coast of Spain a year and a half ago?
I’d wager this was Ukraine’s handiwork using conventional or drone weapons.
It could have been Ukraine, but Ukraine does not have super cavitating torpedoes, so if that’s the case the reporting on those and the shape charges must be wrong.
What makes you think supercavitating torpedoes are involved at all?
The reactors were bound for North Korean subs. The Spanish claimed evidence of asupercavating torpedo strike.