Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Bob Ireland
Would the type of launch platform you suggest be able to launch a missile with, say, 500 mile range?

No, a standard shipping container would be large enough for a surface to air missile. Anything with that much range would be a surface to surface missile and not suitable for taking out AF1.

I was thinking along the lines of a RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM). It is an IR homing missile with a ~6 mile range. (click for larger image)

This is a fire and forget missile that doesn't require any additional radar or command guidance.

If you are going to do something like this, KISS. Using a submarine to shoot down AF1 is a huge expense for a single shot at a plane that may not come within range. It also represents a much larger risk of being discovered and backtracked.

WWG1WGA

Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)

LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)

928 posted on 10/10/2020 10:13:40 AM PDT by LonePalm (Commander and Chef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 746 | View Replies ]


To: LonePalm
***I was thinking along the lines of a RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM). It is an IR homing missile with a ~6 mile range. (click for larger image)***

I only posed that question because, as I understand it, AF1 had rerouted northwards towards Alaska; presuming that was a missile fired from the environs of Whidbey Island, Puget Sound, on June 10, 2018, either they would have fired a long range missile or they fired at a decoy with a short range missile.

It was Q that posted the picture of the mystery sub, although I don't remember that he ever claimed that it shot the June 10 missile.

To set up a launch platform, other than a shipping container, on Whidbey Island - at least sparsely populated - seems unlikely, which adds credence to a surface ship or a submarine. Even a surface ship would attract some attention, unlike a submarine that could remain submerged until long after dark.

While I admit no expertise in this area, I cannot see Puget Sound as an ideal launching site nor the channels on either side of Whidbey Island as a place I would want to get trapped with hostility in a submarine. As you say, It also represents a much larger risk of being discovered and backtracked.

Still, there seems little doubt that what rose into the sky that night from Puget Sound was a missile.

1,134 posted on 10/10/2020 7:35:19 PM PDT by Bob Ireland (The Democrap Party is the enemy of freedom.They use all the seductions and deceits of the Bolshevics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 928 | View Replies ]

To: LonePalm

That does not appear to be the same missile as pictured in the weather cam video.
1,141 posted on 10/10/2020 7:42:29 PM PDT by Bob Ireland (The Democrap Party is the enemy of freedom.They use all the seductions and deceits of the Bolshevics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 928 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson