# Truth is Stranger than Fiction



## Glider (Sep 13, 2007)

We have all come across things which are so crazy they couldn't be made up and are true.
I thought it might be a good idea to have somewhere to put these strange examples.

To kick it off, I attach the following and in case anyone is wondering, the chickens were part of the final design. 

I give you the Blue Peacock

Blue Peacock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 13, 2007)

Christ it is a wonder we survived the cold war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## ccheese (Sep 13, 2007)

This is, indeed, stranger than fiction. Wonder if MI-6 knows about this ?

Charles


----------



## Gnomey (Sep 13, 2007)

Haha, there was also the pigeon guided bomb (or was it missile).


----------



## timshatz (Sep 13, 2007)

Man, the crap a couple scientist can think up. Amazing.


----------



## Glider (Sep 13, 2007)

The strange thing is that although the project was cancelled at least one of these things were built. My son saw it today and had to tip me off as it was such an amazing development, he did describe it as being huge.


----------



## Graeme (Sep 13, 2007)

timshatz said:


> Man, the crap a couple scientist can think up. Amazing.



Speaking of crap, this is from 'What a Way To Go' by Bowler and Green.
I have doubts. Did early post war airliners really dump crap?


----------



## Konigstiger205 (Sep 13, 2007)

Yeah well I have lots of ideas but nobody pays me for them...I think those boys just had too much free time on their hands...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 15, 2007)

Graeme said:


> Speaking of crap, this is from 'What a Way To Go' by Bowler and Green.
> I have doubts. Did early post war airliners really dump crap?




This has happened numerous times. There have been cases where it has fallen through roofs of houses and so forth.


----------



## Konigstiger205 (Sep 15, 2007)

Thats an "original" way to die...


----------



## Aggie08 (Sep 16, 2007)

"Impaled by frozen spear of ****..." 

Yeah, I'd agree with you Konigstiger.


----------



## Graeme (Sep 16, 2007)

The Mutter Museum. I liked the 'Woman who turned to Soap' and 'The Big Colon'. 

Mutter Museum, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


----------



## Konigstiger205 (Sep 17, 2007)

Graeme said:


> The Mutter Museum. I liked the 'Woman who turned to Soap' and 'The Big Colon'.
> 
> Mutter Museum, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania



Interesting stuff Graeme....I liked also those things.


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 17, 2007)

Graeme said:


> Speaking of crap, this is from 'What a Way To Go' by Bowler and Green.
> I have doubts. Did early post war airliners really dump crap?



I can't vouch for the glory days of flying (1930-1950). But I suspect the answer would be yes they did dump waste overboard. Since the early regulations for aircraft operations were heavily steeped in railroad regulations, I suspect that dumping of waste was a common occurrence. For all of you who have hunted for interesting objects on rail tracks, think about that. To this day, rail operators dump their waste while underway... but only in discrete locations.

Modern aircraft lavatories have waste tanks that are pumped while at the gate. However, the plumbing between the aircraft skin and the tank valve are known to contain waste that freezes and falls away at altitude. The latter is what Adler is referring to.

An example of a WWII sort, is that the B-17 had a "piss tube" located fore of the ventral turret. I have read of the ball turret gunner complaining that his shipmates would relieve themselves at altitude and the "piss tube" would spray urine all over the plexiglass, freezing instantly.

That's my toilet knowledge for the day.


----------



## Graeme (Sep 18, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> To this day, rail operators dump their waste while underway... but only in discrete locations.



No denying that fact. I remember in the 70s, that looking down toilets on Interstate trains in Australia, you could *see* the railway sleepers. Signs were posted asking passengers to "refrain from using the toilet while the train is stationary".

Interesting post Matt!


----------



## Graeme (Sep 18, 2007)

From ‘Old Wives Tales-Fact or Fiction?’ by Thomas J. Craughwell. (The discussion surrounds the ‘myth’ that, a severed head stays alive for several minutes after it’s separated from the body).

Mechanical head-chopping devices have been around at least since 1307, when a beheading machine was set up near the town of Meron, Ireland, to execute a scalawag named Mucod Ballagh. But the Cuisinart of head removers was the guillotine, named after Doctor Antoine Louis Guillotine, who designed the sleek, efficient gadget that decapitated King Louis XVI, Queen Marie Antoinette, and thousands of less distinguished victims during the French Revolution’s reign of terror.

Although the guillotine is almost universally regarded with horror these days, Dr Guillotine intended it as a swift, tidy, and humane form of execution. He and the leaders of the Revolution were determined to have a mode of capital punishment in keeping with the principles of the Age of Enlightenment. Compared to the unspeakable agonies of being burned at the stake, or having one’s bones smashed while being bound to a wheel, the guillotine was a genuinely merciful step forward. Dr Guillotine himself described his device as “philanthropic.”

Soon after the Guillotine was in regular operation, executioners and others on the scaffold began to notice that the severed heads often seemed to still be “alive.” The eyes opened or twitched. The lips trembled, or the mouth opened as if the victim were trying to speak.

The most famous case is that of Charlotte Corday, the young woman who stabbed to death the French revolutionary Murat while he soaked in his bath . After she was guillotined, the executioner lifted her head out of the basket and displayed it to the crowd as he slapped its face. Corday’s cheeks reddened and her face took on an angry expression. The old wives said that the guillotine worked so swiftly that for several minutes after the head was separated from the body it remained alive and conscious. The idea was terribly unsettling, to say the least.

This notion hung on so long that in 1905 a French physician named Beaurieux decided to settle the matter by studying the head of a criminal named Languille who scheduled to be guillotined at 5:30 am 28 June 1905.

After the blade of the guillotine fell, Dr Beaurieux observed, _“The eyelids and lips of the guillotined man worked in irregularly rhythmic contractions for about five or six seconds.”_ Beaurieux waited a few seconds more until he saw the muscles of the face relax and the eyelids half close.
Then he says. _“I called in a strong, sharp voice, 'Languille!' I saw the eyelids slowly lift up, without any spasmodic contractions-I insist advisedly on this peculiarity-but with an even movement, quite distinct and normal, such as happens in everyday life, with people awakened or torn from their thoughts…Languille’s eyes very definitely fixed themselves on mine and the pupils focussed themselves. I was not , then, dealing with the sort of vague dull look without any expression, that can be observed any day in dying people to whom one speaks: I was dealing with undeniably living eyes which were looking at me.”_

After several seconds, the eyelids closed again. Once again the doctor called out the “dead” mans name. _“Once more, without any spasm, slowly, the eyelids lifted and undeniably living eyes fixed themselves on mine with perhaps even more penetration than the first time.”_ The eyelids closed again, and when Beaurieux called Languille’s name for the third time there was no reaction. He lifted the lids with his fingers and recognised that the eyes had taken on _“the glazed look which they have in death”.
_
According to Dr Beaurieux, the whole scene took about 25 to 30 seconds.

Languille may have remained conscious for a few seconds after being beheaded. However, his remaining conscious for 25 to 30 seconds seems unlikely. When the head is severed from, the body, both parts quickly lose enormous amounts of blood. Blood loss leads-in rapid succession-to a massive drop in blood pressure, oxygen deprivation (cerebral hypoxia) unconsciousness, and brain death.


----------



## Konigstiger205 (Sep 18, 2007)

That's creepy....


----------



## DOUGRD (Sep 19, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> Modern aircraft lavatories have waste tanks that are pumped while at the gate. However, the plumbing between the aircraft skin and the tank valve are known to contain waste that freezes and falls away at altitude.



You're pretty close there Matt. All the modern airliners (The ones I'm familiar with anyway) have a Dump valve in each lav tank. When the rampers go to empty the shitters they attach the Lav Truck hose to the aircraft, open the Aircraft Dump Valve ,usually a flapper or butterfly valve, and then pull the "T" handle that actuates the lav dump valve and the waste transfers from the lav tank thru the dump tube, thru the butterfly valve and out into the Lav truck. Then the lav tank is refilled with 5 gals of "Blue Juice" By the way folks, this "Blue Juice" is NOT a disinfectant and it does get recirculated in the tank. So anyway, what happens sometimes is that after the lavs are serviced the Aircraft Dump Valve doesn't close completely and that leaking "Blue Juice" is what forms the "Blue Ice" that usually causes such mysterious events. One such event I heard of while I worked for Northwest Airlines was back on the old B727. The lav dump valve leaked and the resulting "blue Ice" bomb broke loose and was ingested by #1 Eng. The vibration was so intense that the engine broke loose from its mounts and departed the aircraft.


----------



## jkworld (Sep 28, 2007)

I am an imbecile


----------



## jkworld (Sep 28, 2007)

I pee my pants


----------



## jkworld (Sep 28, 2007)

I was dropped on my head as a young child


----------



## Bernhart (Sep 28, 2007)

?


----------



## comiso90 (Sep 28, 2007)

jkworld said:


> i till you where i live 27 mt ninderry ct and F**K YOU BICTHES AND SUCK MY FAT COC NOW BUTF*****G COC HEAD



Hillary, is that you?


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 29, 2007)

Where's a mod when you need 'em. What a noob. Say hello to your mommy for me.


----------



## mkloby (Sep 29, 2007)

Hehe


----------



## Downwind.Maddl-Land (Oct 1, 2007)

to the tune of the Eton Boating Song (?):

"Gentlemen will please refrain
from urinating while the train
is standing in the station, if you please,

Railway workers underneath
are getting it in the eyes and teeth......"

and so on....!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 1, 2007)

Banned

Damn I have not been online for a few days.


----------



## Bernhart (Oct 1, 2007)

If your gonna rant at least spell the words right.


----------



## ccheese (Oct 1, 2007)

Bernhart said:


> If your gonna rant at least spell the words right.



The _*idiot*_ probably doesn't know how....

Charles


----------



## Aggie08 (Oct 2, 2007)

Haha, I didn't see the original dialogue, just what FlyboyJ replaced it with. It's funnier that way, instead of seeming painfully idiotic he just seems confused and doesn't care who knows it.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 2, 2007)

He was obviously a young kid, living at home. I remember when I had my first beer too. Full of piss and bravado, hiding behind Windows firewall makes men out of mental midgets.


----------



## Graeme (Oct 10, 2007)

Somewhere around 1992 Citroen produced a TV commercial that involved a Citroen BX 19 GTI car seen flying on the back of an airliner (707). I don't know the 'storyline' of the commercial, but the article that I got these photos from spent nine pages discussing the intricacies and the difficulties involved including how to remove Hylocks from the fuselage paneling. The problem was that the 707 was leased and had to be returned in 'pristine' condition. 










From Air Enthusiast Forty Two.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 17, 2007)

Brilliant!!


----------



## Glider (Jun 8, 2008)

Whoever thought this would be viable was way off track. Imagine the call, is it a first strike, or the mail man, do I retaliate, don't I.

In 1959 USS Barbero a Submarine with a Regulas nuclear Missile system assisted the United States Postal Service (USPS) in its search for faster, more efficient forms of mail transportation. The USPS tried their first and only delivery of "Missile Mail", though the idea of delivering mail by rocket was not new. Shortly before noon on 8 June 1959, Barbero fired a Regulus cruise missile at the Naval Auxiliary Air Station, Mayport, Florida. Twenty-two minutes later the missile struck its target; its nuclear warhead had been replaced by two official USPS mail containers.

The USPS had officially established a branch post office on Barbero and delivered some 3000 pieces of mail to it before Barbero left Norfolk, Virginia. The mail consisted entirely of commemorative postal covers addressed to President of the United States Dwight Eisenhower, other government officials, the Postmasters General of all members of the Universal Postal Union, and so on. They contained letters from United States Postmaster General Arthur E. Summerfield. Their postage (four cents domestic, eight cents international) had been cancelled "USS Barbero Jun 8 9.30am 1959" before the boat put to sea. In Mayport, the Regulus was opened and the mail forwarded to the Jacksonville, Florida, Post Office for further sorting and routing.

Upon witnessing the missile's landing, Summerfield stated, "This peacetime employment of a guided missile for the important and practical purpose of carrying mail, is the first known official use of missiles by any Post Office Department of any nation." Summerfield proclaimed the event to be "of historic significance to the peoples of the entire world," and predicted that "before man reaches the moon, mail will be delivered within hours from New York to California, to Britain, to India or Australia by guided missiles. We stand on the threshold of rocket mail."

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## PDKL45 (Aug 22, 2008)

Hey all, 

My first post here. I just heard a podcast dealing with this incident and had to include it in this thread. I'll try to find a link to the podcast to post here.

From what I understand, an SAC wing was deploying to Europe. In the scramble to get the wing airborne in the allotted time to go into the running for a distinguished unit citation,I believe the ground handling crew "forgot" to insert a crucial safety pin properly.

* March 11, 1958 – Florence, South Carolina, USA – Non-nuclear detonation of a nuclear bomb

* A B-47 bomber flying from Savannah, Georgia accidentally released a nuclear bomb after the bomb lock failed. The chemical explosives detonated on impact in the suburban neighborhood of Florence, South Carolina. Radioactive substances were flung across the area. Several minor injuries resulted and the house on which the bomb fell was destroyed. No radiation sickness occurred.

The strangest story, (as I recall from the podcast I heard), was the protracted legal battle the unfortunate inhabitants of the destroyed house waged with the newly formed USAF.

List of military nuclear accidents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There's some hair-raising stuff there. 

I also seem to remember a cold-war era tactical nuclear weapon (from a book I have in storage many tens of thousands of kilometers away) that may have been shoulder (or vehicle?) launched. The operators had to dig a reasonably deep trench as they were inevitably within the blast radius. I think it was a envisaged as a stay behind, last-resort kinda thing to blunt the tip of an advancing Warsaw Pact armored division.

The US nuclear arsenal of the 1970s was truly stranger than fiction...


----------



## machine shop tom (Aug 22, 2008)

Here's something ya don't hear about every day:

snopes.com: Beaver Dam Letter

tom


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 22, 2008)

machine shop tom said:


> Here's something ya don't hear about every day:
> 
> snopes.com: Beaver Dam Letter
> 
> tom



Not sure where you are coming from Tom. Sarcasm I suspect.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 22, 2008)

PDKL45 said:


> Hey all,
> 
> My first post here. I just heard a podcast dealing with this incident and had to include it in this thread. I'll try to find a link to the podcast to post here.
> 
> ...




That's some new ones that I hadn't heard before and suspect is likely BS. There were certainly instances of nuclear weapons being dropped or involved in crash incidents, but they are far and few between. Besides, the radioactivity in such incidents are easily traceable.



PDKL45 said:


> I also seem to remember a cold-war era tactical nuclear weapon (from a book I have in storage many tens of thousands of kilometers away) that may have been shoulder (or vehicle?) launched. The operators had to dig a reasonably deep trench as they were inevitably within the blast radius. I think it was a envisaged as a stay behind, last-resort kinda thing to blunt the tip of an advancing Warsaw Pact armored division.
> 
> The US nuclear arsenal of the 1970s was truly stranger than fiction...



Now this one is a little closer to reality. In the 50s, the British had entertained buried thermo-nuclear weapons located in European middle-ground (Germany, France, etc) that could be detonated to halt a Soviet advance. There is a thread here somewhere with the technical quotes, but I can't remember where.


----------



## machine shop tom (Aug 23, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Not sure where you are coming from Tom. Sarcasm I suspect.



Sarcasm? Heck no. I just figured that it was stranger than fiction.

Sorry.

tom


----------



## JugBR (Aug 24, 2008)

Graeme said:


> Somewhere around 1992 Citroen produced a TV commercial that involved a Citroen BX 19 GTI *car seen flying on the back of an airliner* (707). I don't know the 'storyline' of the commercial, but the article that I got these photos from spent nine pages discussing the intricacies and the difficulties involved including how to remove Hylocks from the fuselage paneling. The problem was that the 707 was leased and *had to be returned in 'pristine' condition. *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 26, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Not sure where you are coming from Tom. Sarcasm I suspect.



Sorry Tom. I misread your post.


----------



## Airframes (Aug 26, 2008)

Re the 'lost' nuclear weapon podcast.
A few years ago, an aquintance of mine (no names, you understand!) who deals in ex-military equipment, was inspecting a shipment of containers, one of which was supposed to have held radio equipment.Upon opening said container, he discovered three nuclear weapons, I believe of the air droppable kind! Having informed his contacts at the British Ministry of Defence disposal site, he was told that he must be mistaken, such a thing was impossible! Finding the manufacturers lable, he contacted them to tell them of his find with the same result. He eventually loaded one of the weapons' transit cases, with the 'bomb' inside, onto his trailer and took it to the manufacturer's premises to prove his story. He was eventually arrested and held for three days! Needless to say he eventually got some good deals on kit for keeping quiet! I am assured this story is true!!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 26, 2008)

Sorry, I find it rather hard to believe myself...


----------



## syscom3 (Aug 26, 2008)

I dont believe it.

"I am assured the story is true"...... dead give away!


----------



## Airframes (Aug 26, 2008)

Re my last on the nuclear weapons found in a container.
The guy involved normally deals in 'heavy' kit, such as tanks and aircraft. Some of this kit has been exported to various parts of the world, including the U.S.
When I was last at his site (somewhere in England!) he showed me the container in question. It still had 3 sets of suspension slings in place, which were designed to hold the weapons containers. This guy is a genuine fella, a sort of upper-class type, if you know what I mean?
I have no reason to disbelieve his story, as he once fired an anti-tank missile across his estate, and used to see how fast he could go down the runway, without lifting off, in the surplus Phantom he bought from the R.A.F. disposal sale when both FG1/FGR2's and F4J(UK) types were withdrawn from service.
I leave it to you all to decide; true or not (and I'm sure it is!), it's a good story!


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 26, 2008)

Me thinks Gumby is spanking the pony


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 27, 2008)

Airframes said:


> Re my last on the nuclear weapons found in a container.
> The guy involved normally deals in 'heavy' kit, such as tanks and aircraft. Some of this kit has been exported to various parts of the world, including the U.S.
> When I was last at his site (somewhere in England!) he showed me the container in question. It still had 3 sets of suspension slings in place, which were designed to hold the weapons containers. This guy is a genuine fella, a sort of upper-class type, if you know what I mean?
> I have no reason to disbelieve his story, as he once fired an anti-tank missile across his estate, and used to see how fast he could go down the runway, without lifting off, in the surplus Phantom he bought from the R.A.F. disposal sale when both FG1/FGR2's and F4J(UK) types were withdrawn from service.
> I leave it to you all to decide; true or not (and I'm sure it is!), it's a good story!


----------



## Burmese Bandit (Dec 7, 2008)

Airframes said:


> Re my last on the nuclear weapons found in a container.
> The guy involved normally deals in 'heavy' kit, such as tanks and aircraft. Some of this kit has been exported to various parts of the world, including the U.S.
> When I was last at his site (somewhere in England!) he showed me the container in question. It still had 3 sets of suspension slings in place, which were designed to hold the weapons containers. This guy is a genuine fella, a sort of upper-class type, if you know what I mean?
> I have no reason to disbelieve his story, as he once fired an anti-tank missile across his estate, and used to see how fast he could go down the runway, without lifting off, in the surplus Phantom he bought from the R.A.F. disposal sale when both FG1/FGR2's and F4J(UK) types were withdrawn from service.
> I leave it to you all to decide; true or not (and I'm sure it is!), it's a good story!




I not only disbelieve the story - I dont frigging WANT to believe the story!!!


----------



## Glider (Jun 27, 2012)

Elite agents sent to protect French president François Hollande at the Rio Earth summit forgot to pack their guns, it emerged today.

In scenes reminiscent of the bumbling Inspector Clouseau of the Pink Panther films, highly trained members of the GSPR (Security Group of the Presidency of the Republic) thought they had placed their weapons in secure suitcases. They hadn’t.

So unless they managed to borrow weapons from the Brazilians — the country has a serious gun crime issue — the agents wearing sunglasses and earpieces around Mr Hollande would have had fake guns in their shoulder holsters. 

An officer told the French investigative weekly Le Canard Enchaîné: “As far as anyone can remember, this was the first time this has happened.”

The agent responsible for the fiasco was sacked.


----------



## Njaco (Jun 27, 2012)

> The agent responsible for the fiasco was sacked.



Because they didn't have the guns to shoot him!


----------



## Glider (Feb 8, 2013)

Russia has purchased a French built Assult Amphibious Landing ship. The first has been delivered and Russia have just identified a small but very significant problem. Russia doesn't have the correct fuel and cannot use it. Apparently Russain diesel fuel is different to that used in the rest of the world and will cause damage to the ships engines.
Russia can of course modify the fuel so it works but that means they have all the problems of producing, storing and supplying fuel for a couple of ships.

This news was announced by the Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin on Tuesday so we can take it that its right.


----------



## Matt308 (Feb 8, 2013)

I couldn't find my emoticon snort for 'blowing snot out of my nose'.


----------



## Airframes (Feb 9, 2013)

"Ah, Merdeski!"


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 9, 2013)

That is too funny!


----------



## R Pope (Feb 10, 2013)

I read a tale of how a USN pilot got the job of flying an AD and testing the "over-the-shoulder" bomb lobbing technique developed by the USAF for the B-47. He roared over the target at max speed, pulled up into a loop, and released the "bomb" when going straight up. Completing his "Immelman" and speeding back the way he came, he glanced in his mirror and was somewhat distressed to see the pickle falling straight down not far from his tailfeathers! The "Spad" was a tad bit slow for playing with nukes, apparently....


----------



## tyrodtom (Feb 10, 2013)

R Pope said:


> I read a tale of how a USN pilot got the job of flying an AD and testing the "over-the-shoulder" bomb lobbing technique developed by the USAF for the B-47. He roared over the target at max speed, pulled up into a loop, and released the "bomb" when going straight up. Completing his "Immelman" and speeding back the way he came, he glanced in his mirror and was somewhat distressed to see the pickle falling straight down not far from his tailfeathers! The "Spad" was a tad bit slow for playing with nukes, apparently....


 
If he released the bomb when going straight up, then it was his fault, not the aircraft.
In the over-the-shoulder technique it was released when past vertical, if it was a bomb toss, it was released before vertical. If it was released while going straight up, the bomb too would go straight up till gravity stopped it, while it's moving slow, any wind would have a great influence on where the bomb went.
But the Navy ADs were taught the nuke delivery methods too, during the early days of the cold war. I would think they'd have a computer release the bomb like all the other aircraft though, not just depend on the pilot's instinct for bomb release.


----------



## R Pope (Feb 10, 2013)

I believe his point was, at the "tremendous speed" the Spad was capable of, he would have still been inside the fireball when the bomb went off. Or...shortly there after.......


----------



## tyrodtom (Feb 10, 2013)

The idea for releasing the bomb after you was past vertical was to shot the bomb high in the air AND in the direction you were origionally headed, while you completed a loop and went the opposite direction the bomb was going. If you released it at vertical you'd just get the height, and hang time, but no additional distance.
But for a AD, depending on the nuke's size, it probably was a one way mission.
A lot of men, of that era, had their doubts that there'd be anything to come home to anyway.


----------



## Gixxerman (Feb 11, 2013)

tyrodtom said:


> But for a AD, depending on the nuke's size, it probably was a one way mission.
> A lot of men, of that era, had their doubts that there'd be anything to come home to anyway.



My dad (Vulcan crew in the 50's 60's and Canberras before it) used to say they expected to fly to range or to fly beyond return range then head south hopefully to bale out over somewhere completely undeveloped but reasonably friendly, find a comfortable woman and spend the rest of whatever life there was to be had farming hunting eaking out an existance.

Mind you in those days the notion of nuclear winter hadn't arisen yet, but they fully expected 'the developed world' to be utterly gone (including all the developed neutral countries.....the reasoning being why would the superpowers go down so totally catastrophically allow Brazil - or whoever - to rise be the next?......perhaps this explains some of the huge degree of 'overkill' both superpowers maintained at the time?).

A grim world view if ever there was.


----------



## R Pope (Feb 11, 2013)

Makes you wonder what kind of crazies were running the world at the time, doesn't it? 'Course, maybe now they are just better at hiding what they are up to!
Just reading about the "chicken bombs" the Brits and Yanks buried all over Europe so they could blow up advancing Commies by remote control. The chickens were to keep the mechanisms from freezing up in the winter for a few weeks until the bad guys got close enough to the nukes. Really!


----------



## Glider (Feb 13, 2013)

What a great bit of kit BBC News - Black Hornet spycam is a 'lifesaver' for British troops.


----------



## Glider (Oct 29, 2018)

The Spanish Navy designed a new submarine the S80 class. The original design was for a 71 meter 2,200 ton submarine but they discovered that it was so overweight there was a realistic chance that if it submerged it wouldn't be able to surface. The solution was to lengthen the boat, giving it more boyancy resulting in a 81 meter boat that weighs 3,000 tons and works perfectly.

Unfortunately it is now too long to fit in the docks, which are being lengthened to take it. 

Spain's Defence Minister Margarita Robles, speaking on Spanish radio, admitted that "there have been deficiencies in the project"

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Zipper730 (Nov 23, 2018)

Matt308 said:


> Christ it is a wonder we survived the cold war.


I know, really!? It's amazing how many times we came close to bombing ourselves back to the stone-age due to mistakes, malfunctions, and dangerous personalities with their hands on the button to launch more firepower than had apparently been expended in every single war up to that point (and now)


----------

