|
Missile defence shield test fails AGAIN!! (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| tranceinurpants |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
Good god man!
what are you like a member of the Republican youth defense front?
Get a grip!
Honestly, i thought TAs were alot more tolerant then this .
Sad my dear lads really damn sad
swilly |
I hate to be kickin up yesterday's news but...
Tolerant?? the definition from dictionary.com "Inclined to tolerate the beliefs, practices, or traits of others; forbearing"
I hate to kick up old stuff but man tolerance is not the answer man to tolerate is to put up with, you tolerate heat, you tolerate some one's BS they are typing on the TA forum
tolerance is not good, acceptance is key fellas |
|
|
| cap |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cyrus King
So many of you morons live in fear. The US media has perfected their transformation of people like you into paranoid sheep |
Dude, I understand your side of this whole America-Middle East ongoing debate on TA.
But, you're just on the other side of the spectrum, just as extreme as a hypnotized "pro-imperial" American.
In order for any resolve, both parties must come forth and admit "we aren't perfect" "we need each other to prosper in harmony" etc. |
|
|
| cap |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
I have nothing against the west,I do however got major problems with the U.S government.I've been living in the west for more then 15 yrs and Iam enjoying the freedom thank you :) |
ok, good to clarify. I thought it was an anti-west thing. |
|
|
| RobbyG. |
Slightly off topic but relevant...I always wondered if instead of a missile shooting down another missile if "lasers" would be developed instead...Well I ran across this article and it was written in 1986:eyespop:
So who knows what the military is up to for weapons development:nervous: |
|
|
| starsearcher |
| quote: | Originally posted by RobbyG.
Slightly off topic but relevant...I always wondered if instead of a missile shooting down another missile if "lasers" would be developed instead...Well I ran across this article and it was written in 1986:eyespop:
So who knows what the military is up to for weapons development:nervous: |
Hmmm...well I heard many times from various sources that Moscow is protected by a "laser shield" in case of a massive attack nothing can penetrate it...who knows if it's true :toocool:
And Israel developed a laser weapon to shoot down small rockets and mortars that are usually fired at Northern Israeli towns from Lebanon (by terorist groups) and apparently it works (on a small scale obviously) :)...but at the same time they developed a missle called "hez" which means arrow in hebrew that supposed to shoot other missles down and it's fairly successful. |
|
|
| RobbyG. |
| quote: | Originally posted by starsearcher
Hmmm...well I heard many times from various sources that Moscow is protected by a "laser shield" in case of a massive attack nothing can penetrate it...who knows if it's true :toocool:
And Israel developed a laser weapon to shoot down small rockets and mortars that are usually fired at Northern Israeli towns from Lebanon (by terorist groups) and apparently it works (on a small scale obviously) :)...but at the same time they developed a missle called "hez" which means arrow in hebrew that supposed to shoot other missles down and it's fairly successful. |
Scary :nervous: ...I remember I saw a special on TLC on special weapons in the U.S.It was a 747 with a laser that can shoot down incoming missiles from several miles.The machine to produce the laser took up most of the inside of the 747 and fired from underneath the body of the plane... |
|
|
| starsearcher |
| quote: | Originally posted by RobbyG.
Scary :nervous: ...I remember I saw a special on TLC on special weapons in the U.S.It was a 747 with a laser that can shoot down incoming missiles from several miles.The machine to produce the laser took up most of the inside of the 747 and fired from underneath the body of the plane... |
Yeah that 747 does exist and it's their version of laser shooters...
Here's what I've been talking about...he laser weapon against small missiles - THEL:
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weap...stems/THEL.html
and the Arrow system ("Hez"):
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weap...rrow/Arrow.html |
|
|
| VERTiG0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by RobbyG.
Scary :nervous: ...I remember I saw a special on TLC on special weapons in the U.S.It was a 747 with a laser that can shoot down incoming missiles from several miles.The machine to produce the laser took up most of the inside of the 747 and fired from underneath the body of the plane... |
It now does it from the nose of the aircraft.
I love technology so much. Military technology is always the best, of course.
Also the THEL system is so awesome. It is capable of destroying artillery shells in mid flight.
It seems to me as though that Arrow system is just a modernized extension of the Patriot ABMs from the 90s? |
|
|
| starsearcher |
| quote: | US Downs Dummy Ballistic Missile in Successful Test
Thu Feb 24, 7:39 PM ET
Science - Reuters
By Jim Wolf
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A missile fired from a U.S. Navy (news - web sites) ship off Kauai, Hawaii, intercepted and destroyed a mock warhead on Thursday, the fifth success in six such test of the fledgling U.S. anti-missile shield's sea-based leg, the Pentagon (news - web sites) announced.
"We had a successful hit-to-kill intercept," said Richard Lehner, a spokesman for the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency.
The target was tracked from the cruiser Lake Erie using the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Weapon System developed by Lockheed Martin Corp. It was launched from the U.S. Pacific Missile Range Facility at Barking Sands, Kauai.
The ship fired a Standard Missile (SM)-3 at the target outside the earth's atmosphere during the descent phase of flight, Lockheed said. Raytheon Co. is developing the SM-3.
The Defense Department plans to field up to 30 SM-3 missiles on Aegis-equipped ships by 2007 to destroy short- and medium-range ballistic missiles in mid-flight. Other systems are being developed to defend at different stages.
For the ground-based mid-course leg of ballistic missile defense, managed for the Pentagon by Boeing Co., five of eight shoot down tests have been completed successfully.
Interceptor missiles failed to launch from their silos in the last two ground-based tests because of hardware and software glitches.
The Pentagon plans to spend roughly $10 billion a year over the next five years on all aspects of missile defense. The initial "layered" shield is designed to thwart missiles that could be fired from North Korea (news - web sites), possibly tipped with nuclear, chemical or germ warheads.
Last fall, the Japan-based Arleigh Burke-class destroyer Curtis Wilbur became the first component of the anti-missile shield to be put on patrol in the Sea of Japan to guard against North Korean attack.
Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed, the Pentagon's No. 1 supplier, calls Aegis the world's premier naval defense system, capable of defending against air, surface and underwater threats.
Currently deployed on 68 U.S. Navy cruisers and destroyers, the Aegis system is also being supplied to Spain, Japan, South Korea (news - web sites), Norway and Australia. |
Not that I want to start another flamewar or anything but just adding to the discussion. |
|
|
| RobbyG. |
| Woohoo...it worked:toothless |
|
|
| starsearcher |
| quote: | Originally posted by RobbyG.
Woohoo...it worked:toothless |
Well according to this article it worked 5 ouf of 6 times in sea, and 5 our of 8 times on land (mainly cause of software and hardware glitches)...so this whole thread about how it fails again and again seems highly exagerated. I'm not really for or against the program just for the record :p |
|
|
| crazedcanuck |
Even if it didn't work, the financial burden is on the US.
If all Canada has to do is staff NORAD, and fund it's monitoring, like we already do jointly with the US, then why not reap the benefits, including research grants for Canadian companies.
If they are going to pay to develop it and maintain it, then please tell me again why this is such a bad thing?
Please swilly, give a rational argument with factual points with documentation, as opposed to anti-american rhetoric.
Just this once, for the children. |
|
|
|
|
