Message posted by The Major on July 08, 2006 at 14:31:12 PST:
I thought we had made some important breakthroughs with amplification that made the airborne and battlefield laser "on the horizon" weapon systems. I guess it turned out to be a bust, or has been woefully underfunded. The Major
As far as the HOE, twenty-plus years is an eternity, technology-wise. For example, what laptop computer were you using in 1985? We are in the process of deploying very sophisticated radar systems that improve our ability to determine ICBM trajectory and ferret-out decoys... and that is just the description of its' capabilities for public consumption. They are installing one in Alaska now (it was parked in Pearl Harbor for months waiting for summer to come to the North Pacific). ICBMs can be destroyed at any phase of its' trajectory, but are most vulnerable during the short "boost phase," especially one launched from a peninsula where a sea or air-based ABM system could intercept it much earlier on in it's flight. There is not much time to nail it, so satellite intel heads-up and a quickly mobilized weapon system is a must. How about a mobile/seaborne/airborne "rail gun?" The technology has been around for at least 20 years, with power, accuracy and durability the limiting facors. To shoot-down an ICBM you only need a single hole in the propellant tank or shell. One Mach 6-8 shard of metal would fill the bill.
In any case, as much as we try to scrutinize the vaporous things in the black project world, there will always be the bottom of the iceberg, hidden by even more layers of secrecy and obfuscation. In the end, what is viable and what isn't can only be reliably answered by declassification. Unless, of course, sensitive information is being casually toted around on a zip drive or laptop by a gubmint bureaucrat.
I still think Kimmie's biggest mistake was using duct tape to hold the missile together instead of spandex, which has successfully restrained impossible amounts of fat for decades!
In Reply to: Re: UNDER ATTACK! HELP! posted by Mark Lincoln on July 08, 2006 at 8:44:41 PST:
Replies: