Skip to comments.
Video: A C-5 Galaxy Air Launches an ICBM.
Defense Tech ^
| 3/1/2012
| Defense tech
Posted on 02/24/2012 5:14:32 PM PST by U-238
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-68 next last
To: patton
There was also a scheme at the same time called the “Ground Proximity Extraction System” which involved using grappling hooks tossed out the back of the aircraft to engage arresting cables on the ground to pull the cargo out of the aircraft.
That one didn’t go very far either; I believe it also cost several aircraft in the development process.
41
posted on
02/24/2012 6:58:53 PM PST
by
DuncanWaring
(The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
To: BwanaNdege
42
posted on
02/24/2012 7:05:24 PM PST
by
GeronL
(The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
To: JRandomFreeper
Thank goodness I still have the Military Channel though
43
posted on
02/24/2012 7:09:01 PM PST
by
GeronL
(The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
To: U-238; patton
Thanks very much for the links. WOW!
44
posted on
02/24/2012 7:11:19 PM PST
by
PGalt
To: GeronL
I haven't had a TV for 10 years or so.
Truth be told, I'm listening to BBC World News on 9.460Mhz on the shortwave in the background.
I'd trust Radio Moscow before I trust ABCCBSNBCCNNetc...
/johnny
To: Stonewall Jackson; PLMerite
If you have not yet read the book Flight of the Old Dog by Dale Brown I strongly urge you to do so.
Imagine a 767 equipped as a flying battleship.
I think you would enjoy it quite a bit.
Cheers,
knewshound
46
posted on
02/24/2012 7:17:11 PM PST
by
knews_hound
(Credo Quia Absurdium--take nothing seriously unless it is absurd. E. Clampus Vitus)
To: JRandomFreeper; BwanaNdege; Squawk 8888
Thanks for those links...dangerous; interesting; conscientious objectors (back in the day even they did something productive).
47
posted on
02/24/2012 7:22:42 PM PST
by
PGalt
To: Lx
If the Minuteman was capable from flying from Vandenberg to the USSR, the C5 could only add to the range and it was mobile! The big benefit was that it was mobile. Silo-based missiles were vulnerable to a surprise first strike. Bombers could be kept aloft, invulnerable to a first strike, but bombers would then have to be able to penetrate enemy air defenses.
A C-5 would have the benefit of a bomber (could be launched on first indication that a strike was imminent, and be called back if it was a false alarm) along with the advantages of an ICBM (hard for an enemy to stop once launched)
48
posted on
02/24/2012 7:29:36 PM PST
by
PapaBear3625
(In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. - George Orwell)
To: Stonewall Jackson
but the 747's could hold 72 missiles on internal rotary launchers. With the ready availability of parts and trained crews (both air and ground), I've often wondered why the Air Force never went with this plan. If you were an airline executive, or Boeing, would YOU want the Soviets to always be unsure as to whether any given 747 flying near the USSR was really a strategic launch platform?
49
posted on
02/24/2012 7:33:48 PM PST
by
PapaBear3625
(In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. - George Orwell)
To: JRandomFreeper
BBC is pretty dang biased too aren’t they?
50
posted on
02/24/2012 7:37:16 PM PST
by
GeronL
(The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
To: GeronL
To be truthful, I'm mainly listening to the static to see how the MUF is going. BBC is the alleged signal, background from the universe is the alleged noise.
But sometimes I do actually listen to their stories. I take them with a large grain of sodium chloride.
But it's amazing what you can train old, poor-hearing ears to do on S/N ratio on monitoring the F layer. ;)
/johnny
To: HiTech RedNeck
Of course it didn’t have a warhead, but it obviously had rocket fuel, ergo pucker factor high.
52
posted on
02/24/2012 7:44:38 PM PST
by
HMS Surprise
(Chris Christie can still go to hell.)
To: U-238
Russia and China does not need to do this...
Instead they BUY and OWN democrats.. and some RINOs...
53
posted on
02/24/2012 7:58:07 PM PST
by
hosepipe
(This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole...)
To: PGalt; All
Anything for my FRiends at Free Republic.
54
posted on
02/24/2012 8:03:41 PM PST
by
U-238
To: JRandomFreeper
do you ever listen to the crazy conspiracy nut kind of shortwave channels or the World Harvest Church?
Just wondering.
55
posted on
02/24/2012 8:15:39 PM PST
by
GeronL
(The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
To: GeronL
No. Just WWV (Colorado, US) and BBC. And mainly for the ratio between the static and signal. I don't know why I'd want to listen to pure static. ;)
/johnny
To: PLMerite
How's this for an attack platform ?
57
posted on
02/24/2012 8:39:48 PM PST
by
PLMerite
(Shut the Beyotch Down! Burn, baby, burn!)
To: PLMerite
Totally fictional, of course.
58
posted on
02/24/2012 8:41:24 PM PST
by
PLMerite
(Shut the Beyotch Down! Burn, baby, burn!)
To: JRandomFreeper
I have always wondered how far some radio station signals will go. I know there are sites that show it, I just can’t seem to remember how to find them. lol.
Even with Google I am often lost.
59
posted on
02/24/2012 9:09:31 PM PST
by
GeronL
(The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
To: PLMerite
Hmm...replace the cruises with Hellfires, Tomahawks or Harpoons, and I think you’re on to something!!!
60
posted on
02/24/2012 9:19:31 PM PST
by
M1903A1
("We shed all that is good and virtuous for that which is shoddy and sleazy... and call it progress")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-68 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson