Posted on 04/24/2006 9:45:15 AM PDT by jveritas
This document CMPC-2004-004404 contains memos dated from 1999 and 2000 about Saddam regime procurements of 81 mm in Diameter, 900 mm in Lenght HIGH STRENGTH AND HIGH QUALITY ALUMINUM TUBES. As many of you know the issue of 81 mm High Strength, High Quality Aluminum Tubes were subject for an intensive debate since 2002 because this type of tubes can be used in GAS CENTRIFUGES FOR URANIUM ENRICHMENT. Although the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) said in its final report in 2004 the following about the procurement of these tubes “ Baghdad’s interest in high-strength, high-specification aluminum tubes—dual-use items controlled under Annex 3 of the Ongoing Monitoring and Verification Plan as possible centrifuge rotors—is best explained by its efforts to produce 81-mm rockets”. However the ISG could not prove definitively that these very special tubes were not used as part of Saddam Regime attempt to build its Nuclear Programs and Projects (see link to ISG report http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/chap4.html#sect6). In fact the ISG in its report says also the following “ The limited information found by ISG that ties Iraqi nuclear entities to the tubes also appears related to the 81-mm rocket program and the ISG report also says ” Purported high-level interest in aluminum tubes by Saddam and Iraq’s Deputy Prime Minister—a potential indicator of a program of national importance, such as a centrifuge program.. A 6 March 2003 letter from the Iraqi National Monitoring Directorate (NMD) to the IAEA’s Iraq Nuclear Verification Office (INVO) notes that the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC) conducted material composition testing on a sample aluminum tube in early 2001 and In another translated memo “http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1620262/posts ” that talks about a secret project by the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission to re-instate the “Nuclear Reactor Simulators” using equipments from the “Old TAMUZ (OZIRAQ) Nuclear Reactor”. All this is a clear indication of Saddam intent to restart the Nuclear Programs.
I will translate the first two pages of this 11 pages document. The first two pages are the Quotation Bid regarding these Special Aluminum Tubes by a company called AL Bashair addressed to Al Rasheed General Company which is a division of the Iraqi Military Manufacturing Commission. Page 3 of the document has the Technical Specification written in English of these Aluminum tubes, Diameter, Length, Specification, Chemical Composition, Price, Manufacturing origin etc,,
Beginning of the Partial Translation of document CMPC-2004-004404
In the Name of God the Most Merciful The Most Compassionate
Al-Bashair Trading Co. LTD
Date: 2/11/1999
To: Al Rasheed General Company
Subject: Proposal
Following up to our two letters numbered T 2484 and T 2504 on 30/10 and 1/11/1999 consecutively and attached with it proposals numner/3 related to your invitation numbered (75/3/13) included is our forth proposal related to it:
Please study with the other proposals sent to by our letter above and inform us..
With Regards
Signature…
Mounir Mamdooh Awed
Acting Director
4/11/1999
Best Salute
Indicating to your overture addressed to us regarding the bid numbered (725/99) we are pleased to offer our proposal included and are shown its details of the Technical Specifications, Prices, and the required quantity by you.
Knowing that the cost of a single tube delivered to your respected company warehouses is estimated (105 dollar) one hundred and five American Dollars,
Please take in consideration the following issues:
1. The Manufacturing Origin of the tubes German/European.
2. The equipping will be achieved within a period of 8 months from the date to deposit the amount in our interest and in the order of partial shipments divided during the equipping period above, where the first shipment begins within four months from the period of equipping indicated above.
3. The quantity of tubes required for equipping is 50,000 Tubes.
We hope that our proposal will receive your approval… with the continuous corporation with you to serve the general interest… with regards
Attachments. Schedule of Technical Specifications with prices.
TUBE ALUMUNIUM ALLOY
1. SPECIFICATION: AL-ZN-MG-CU 215/ NO. 7075
2. DIMENSION OF TUBE:
Outside Diameter = 81.0 mm
Inside Diameter = 74.4 mm
Thickness = 3.3 mm
Length = 900 mm.
3. CHEMICAL COMPOSITION
NB ALL TUBES ARE SUBJECTED TO CHEMICAL COATNG IONADIZATION PROCESS TO PREVENT AND SUSTAIN SCRATCHES AND CORROSIONS.
4. PRICE: FOR EACH TUBE = USD 105
5. MANUFACTURING OF ORIGIN: GERMANY OR E.E.C
How does that compare with the Libya tubes, are they then same size excluding the mount at the bottom?
a standard 2x4 is actually 1.5 inches by 3.5 inches(I checked)
16 times 3.5 equals 56 inches.
However if the crates were built in Libya with local supplies I don't have a clue what size the "2x4" is
Thanks Ernest, but I am already on eyespysomethings ping list so you can take me off your list so I don't get duplicates.
"OK, someone who has familiarity with armaments please comment on this: the aluminum tubes had an outer diameter of 81 mm, not an inner diameter of 81 mm. When armaments are being discussed in terms of their dimension (for example 105 mm tank ammunition or 122 mm artillery rocket launcher), wouldn't the meaningful dimension of the tube/barrel from which that round was launched be the inner diameter, and not the outer diameter? So, if the Iraqi intent was to use the tubes for such purposes, why isn't it described as a "74 mm rocket program"? Was the 81-mm program designation invented by the ISG, or was it used by the Iraqis?"
I don't know about the inside diameter vs the outside diameter as far as armaments standards. I am wondering about rockets vs missiles. I used to work at an airplane factory that also built drone missiles. These missiles used about the same thickness of sheet metal that we used for small airplanes. We used 1/16th inch thickness for the outer skins of most planes. If my calculations are correct, and I believe they are, this material is about double that. It is over 1/8th inch thick. Would rockets require that additional thickness?
I have used metal a little less thick than that when building much larger jets for Boeing (737 next generation).
The 9/11 Report left many things open. No report has been conclusive. These documents continue to back up the Bush Admin, and the intelligence agencies of the member Nations of the UN Security Council that agreed.
"What if the 81mm also refers to the inner diameter of the tube that is used to launch the rocket?"
Good question, but the document indicates that the 81mm is outside diameter with an inside diameter of 74mm with a thickness of 3.3 milimeters or a little over 1/8th inch. I haven't converted the inside and outside diameters to inches yet. Let me know if you want me to.
I still think they are similiar in size and the ratio of length to width for whatever that is worth.
Perhaps there are some other specifications that may also point out additional similiarities like the copper or brass mounting flange on the bottom end of the Libya tubes. They appear to be bolted on in the picture and the tube appears to be capped on the top, with some sort of spring or wire connecting the two maybe a heating element.
I hate that pic. Dang you to heck.
"It is my understanding (but I can not quote a source off the top of my head) that no other components were found by the ISG to have been part of a procurement designed to produce either 81mm rockets, or tubes to launch rockets, and that therefore it is nothing more than idle speculation to claim that the tubes were intended for use in rocket or artillery launch applications..."
In case anyone is wondering, I have some approximations on converting mm to inches.
They are:
81mm = 3 3/16 inch
3.3mm = Just under 1/8th inch
74 mm = 2 7/8 inch
900mm = 35 inches
This is a very rough estimation, but should still be a little useful.
Hammering it away, bit by bit?
"NB ALL TUBES ARE SUBJECTED TO CHEMICAL COATNG IONADIZATION PROCESS TO PREVENT AND SUSTAIN SCRATCHES AND CORROSIONS.
Why would you worry about these details if the aluminum was to be used for rockets?"
I can answer that one. If scratches or, even small dents occur, the fuel efficiency is greatly reduced. In other words, the rocket will not fly near as far on the same amount of fuel as a rocket that has zero scratches, dents, dings, or corrosion (corrosion brings about the same result as scratches, dings and dents).
redneck version: a stack of Billy beer cans glued end to end.
Don't worry, the media will see that it doesn't!
Bookmark
Doesn't it suppose that the rocket would be launched from inside the tube?
If the solid rocket fuel is installed in the tube, it would be better if the fuel was bonded to the inner walls instead of being able to slide in and out because the inside was slick and free of any scratches.
I just was struck by a thought, are these Anodized or Ionized aluminum tubes?
This document doesn't say whether that is , outside or inside , or perhaps even both sides....
The key word might be IONIZATION
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.