Well, if you want to do it undetected, you can spread biowarfare agents in the atmosphere, let them rain down after a few weeks, and since no one knew where the plane was people are none the wiser. There's a difference between all-out warfare and subterfuge.Cybargs wrote:
stfu pace. you dont need a fucking space craft to spread ebola in populated cities.Acerider wrote:
This is just adding to the "conspiracy mumbo-jumbo" but it could also be used to spread biowarfare agents and the like through the atmosphere. It's probably just spying on something, really.
space is no-ones territory. if somebody started deploying these things - "accidents" would inevitably start to happen. there's a lot of space junk in there - you never know when a piece hits your awesome craft.FEOS wrote:
If it has the ability to change orbits and carry a payload--which it appears to be able to do--that is huge. Changing orbits is no small thing, the implications of which, when paired with the payload aspect, are rather large from both a commercial and military perspective.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
damn you're pretty stupid aren't you.Acerider wrote:
Well, if you want to do it undetected, you can spread biowarfare agents in the atmosphere, let them rain down after a few weeks, and since no one knew where the plane was people are none the wiser. There's a difference between all-out warfare and subterfuge.Cybargs wrote:
stfu pace. you dont need a fucking space craft to spread ebola in populated cities.Acerider wrote:
This is just adding to the "conspiracy mumbo-jumbo" but it could also be used to spread biowarfare agents and the like through the atmosphere. It's probably just spying on something, really.
shahter: i'm pretty sure they have radars to detect space junk...
Then why hasn't anyone (other than governments who wouldn't of told us if they had) detected this plane?Cybargs wrote:
damn you're pretty stupid aren't you.Acerider wrote:
Well, if you want to do it undetected, you can spread biowarfare agents in the atmosphere, let them rain down after a few weeks, and since no one knew where the plane was people are none the wiser. There's a difference between all-out warfare and subterfuge.Cybargs wrote:
stfu pace. you dont need a fucking space craft to spread ebola in populated cities.
shahter: i'm pretty sure they have radars to detect space junk...
Aall I'm saying is that this shuttle poses no harm.
ok fm.Acerider wrote:
Aall I'm saying is that this shuttle poses no harm.
HURRR DURRR NORADAcerider wrote:
Then why hasn't anyone (other than governments who wouldn't of told us if they had) detected this plane?Cybargs wrote:
damn you're pretty stupid aren't you.Acerider wrote:
Well, if you want to do it undetected, you can spread biowarfare agents in the atmosphere, let them rain down after a few weeks, and since no one knew where the plane was people are none the wiser. There's a difference between all-out warfare and subterfuge.
shahter: i'm pretty sure they have radars to detect space junk...
I'm pretty damn sure russia/china has similar space radar system.
Also, it's pretty fucking obvious when you're one of two countries that can do this shit.
Also, something called DISPERSAL when it comes to agents, from that high up, you might as well be trying to infect the entire world because of things called WINDS AT HIGH ALTITUDES
Does our government not know what secret means?
It means to not have any knowledge of or pictures of.
Here's a secret number for you, it's 8
It means to not have any knowledge of or pictures of.
Here's a secret number for you, it's 8
Let's just let this argument die, but firstly, you dont need to sed the shuttle to extremely high altitudes, just high enough to effect a large area. This is just conspiracy theory crap, dont take it seriously. Fitting biowares on a shuttle makes sense in conspiracy theory...
So does a giant assasination laser. Realistically? The first time the laser was used it'd be blasted.
So does a giant assasination laser. Realistically? The first time the laser was used it'd be blasted.
Airborne dispersal of bio-agents is just stupid period.Acerider wrote:
Let's just let this argument die, but firstly, you dont need to sed the shuttle to extremely high altitudes, just high enough to effect a large area. This is just conspiracy theory crap, dont take it seriously. Fitting biowares on a shuttle makes sense in conspiracy theory...
So does a giant assasination laser. Realistically? The first time the laser was used it'd be blasted.
An AC-130 with a big-ass laser is MUCH more realistic.
you can inject an ebola virus in a zoo at a populated city. city gets fucked pretty quick.Trotskygrad wrote:
Airborne dispersal of bio-agents is just stupid period.Acerider wrote:
Let's just let this argument die, but firstly, you dont need to sed the shuttle to extremely high altitudes, just high enough to effect a large area. This is just conspiracy theory crap, dont take it seriously. Fitting biowares on a shuttle makes sense in conspiracy theory...
So does a giant assasination laser. Realistically? The first time the laser was used it'd be blasted.
An AC-130 with a big-ass laser is MUCH more realistic.
exactly, ground level introduction means you don't have to have an multibillion dollar plane, which risks getting shot down and is much more imprecise.Cybargs wrote:
you can inject an ebola virus in a zoo at a populated city. city gets fucked pretty quick.Trotskygrad wrote:
Airborne dispersal of bio-agents is just stupid period.Acerider wrote:
Let's just let this argument die, but firstly, you dont need to sed the shuttle to extremely high altitudes, just high enough to effect a large area. This is just conspiracy theory crap, dont take it seriously. Fitting biowares on a shuttle makes sense in conspiracy theory...
So does a giant assasination laser. Realistically? The first time the laser was used it'd be blasted.
An AC-130 with a big-ass laser is MUCH more realistic.
Fine, you're right.
ddddddoublepost...
seriously though, most space-based weapons platforms are very impractical, like as impractical as a conventional warhead ICBM
seriously though, most space-based weapons platforms are very impractical, like as impractical as a conventional warhead ICBM
Because of the cost?Trotskygrad wrote:
ddddddoublepost...
seriously though, most space-based weapons platforms are very impractical, like as impractical as a conventional warhead ICBM
Hell no.Acerider wrote:
Because of the cost?Trotskygrad wrote:
ddddddoublepost...
seriously though, most space-based weapons platforms are very impractical, like as impractical as a conventional warhead ICBM
Because there's no way to differetiate between a non-nuclear ICBM an a nuclear ICBM
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/New_Ame … ngers.html
Oh. So if someone fired an unarmed ICBM, everyone would have no idea if it was nuclear armed or not and immediately activate countermeasures?Trotskygrad wrote:
Hell no.Acerider wrote:
Because of the cost?Trotskygrad wrote:
ddddddoublepost...
seriously though, most space-based weapons platforms are very impractical, like as impractical as a conventional warhead ICBM
Because there's no way to differetiate between a non-nuclear ICBM an a nuclear ICBM
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/New_Ame … ngers.html
Except for the fact that every piece of space junk is logged and tracked. And any ASAT activity has enough indicators that if you have the ability to change orbit, you can...thus complicating the ASAT targeting problem. Or you could just de-orbit altogether before the ASAT is ready.Shahter wrote:
space is no-ones territory. if somebody started deploying these things - "accidents" would inevitably start to happen. there's a lot of space junk in there - you never know when a piece hits your awesome craft.FEOS wrote:
If it has the ability to change orbits and carry a payload--which it appears to be able to do--that is huge. Changing orbits is no small thing, the implications of which, when paired with the payload aspect, are rather large from both a commercial and military perspective.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
It's a possibility, that's why you ANNOUNCE nuclear testsAcerider wrote:
Oh. So if someone fired an unarmed ICBM, everyone would have no idea if it was nuclear armed or not and immediately activate countermeasures?Trotskygrad wrote:
Hell no.Acerider wrote:
Because of the cost?
Because there's no way to differetiate between a non-nuclear ICBM an a nuclear ICBM
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/New_Ame … ngers.html
all that is right of course. however, increasing the amounts of space junk beyond anyone's tracking capabilities would be relatively easy.FEOS wrote:
Except for the fact that every piece of space junk is logged and tracked. And any ASAT activity has enough indicators that if you have the ability to change orbit, you can...thus complicating the ASAT targeting problem. Or you could just de-orbit altogether before the ASAT is ready.Shahter wrote:
space is no-ones territory. if somebody started deploying these things - "accidents" would inevitably start to happen. there's a lot of space junk in there - you never know when a piece hits your awesome craft.FEOS wrote:
If it has the ability to change orbits and carry a payload--which it appears to be able to do--that is huge. Changing orbits is no small thing, the implications of which, when paired with the payload aspect, are rather large from both a commercial and military perspective.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
And self-defeating, if you have any desire in using space yourself.Shahter wrote:
all that is right of course. however, increasing the amounts of space junk beyond anyone's tracking capabilities would be relatively easy.FEOS wrote:
Except for the fact that every piece of space junk is logged and tracked. And any ASAT activity has enough indicators that if you have the ability to change orbit, you can...thus complicating the ASAT targeting problem. Or you could just de-orbit altogether before the ASAT is ready.Shahter wrote:
space is no-ones territory. if somebody started deploying these things - "accidents" would inevitably start to happen. there's a lot of space junk in there - you never know when a piece hits your awesome craft.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Most, but not all. Space-based kinetic ablatable rods are an excellent alternative. The primary weakness of on-orbit platforms being the predictability of orbits. However, if you can alter your orbit at will...Trotskygrad wrote:
ddddddoublepost...
seriously though, most space-based weapons platforms are very impractical, like as impractical as a conventional warhead ICBM
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
absolutely. but then again, when someone starts deploying those kinds of spacecraft others might just consider making space impossible to navigate, imo.FEOS wrote:
And self-defeating, if you have any desire in using space yourself.Shahter wrote:
all that is right of course. however, increasing the amounts of space junk beyond anyone's tracking capabilities would be relatively easy.FEOS wrote:
Except for the fact that every piece of space junk is logged and tracked. And any ASAT activity has enough indicators that if you have the ability to change orbit, you can...thus complicating the ASAT targeting problem. Or you could just de-orbit altogether before the ASAT is ready.
Last edited by Shahter (2010-10-13 10:32:21)
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
Depends on what kind of orbit it can switch from and to, even then surely it takes alot of energy to do that. This thing would have to carry loads of fuel. I dunno, doesn't seem like anything special. I don't even know where you got that from that it can switch up its orbit, it's not really practical.
If only the US focused more on Project Constellation and a mission to Mars. Instead they're more focused on trying to use space to fuck people up below.
If only the US focused more on Project Constellation and a mission to Mars. Instead they're more focused on trying to use space to fuck people up below.