LA Plane Theory is blown out of the sky - US missed Chinese Missile

reply to post by Use your brain


I used to work in a design office for SSBN's and my understanding is the boat does not need to surface in order to fire a missile. That actually is the point of the ship design.

Why was the missile not land bound ? ... well the exercise was simply a show of capability not intended as an actual attack, therfore the missile was directed elsewhere.

reply to post by williamAmerican


I agree that it was not a MM III. That was just an example, but other IRBM (intermediate range) move even faster these days. Just trying to throw out a comparison for speed/visibility purposes.

Originally posted by Use your brain
Jesus f'n tap-dancing christ. You talk about avoiding a topic of conversation, then you all continue to avoid the fact that a ballistic missile would be moving at least 8x as fast as the object in the pictures/videos. It matters not that you all have found your "smoking gun" when you negligently avoid the fact that no ballistic missile known to man moves as slow as the object of debate.

as this makes the 2nd time u have brought this up
and seem to be too lazy to read back through all the
pages for an explanation so I will reluctantly
oblige.

1) This video of the missile launch was taken
during stage one of a Chinese Ballistic Missile Launch.
In stage 1 while it's trying to gain altitude, it is much
slower than at it's top speed.

2) Distance to filmed missile also plays another part.
there is a reason why on a vehicles right side rear
view mirror, it reads "Objects may be closer than
they appear" meaning the mirror is vexed for wide
angles to eliminate blind spots. Objects that are
farther away from the camera appear slower.

3) Missile Trajectory also plays another role.
The angle at which it is filmed from. If it is going
directly away from you then it will appear to be
going slower than it would if it were darting
across your screen from left to right.

4) The Interceptor Missile may have damaged
the Chinese Missile and it lost one of it's booster
rockets, therefore slowing it down even more.

thanks for participating
you should have read backwards though as I hate
posting things twice
best wishes

reply to post by boondock-saint

The line you have draw as the horizon in the webcam image is the shoreline, not the horizon.


The helicopter is in the air, a higher vantage point than the webcam. You cannot compare the two in that manner, the perspective is different. The cameraman says the contrail extended beyond the horizon.

I usually like your stuff Boondock but this is, frankly, rubbish.

There is no evidence of what you are suggesting. Your diagram is well thought, but it is imaginary. Also, you didn't address the issue of the Chinese missile later on. Where did it go? I certainly didn't see a nuclear explosion anywhere. You say it continued on its course toward its target, but I don't remember seeing a nuke attack on the news.

reply to post by bigyin


I am aware that modern submarines have sub-surface launch capabilities. They do have to be near-surface depth though. They also give away their position to ANY and EVERYONE within hundreds if not thousands of miles. Our Pacific fleet(s) would have pin-pointed this sub in a matter of minutes, if not seconds. Launching a sub-surface missile would be like getting on a west-coast intercom and screaming at the top of your lungs that you are in the water launching possible WMD's within U.S. territory. I don't believe China, Russia, France or any other nuclear sub possessing country is anywhere near that stupid.

time my two cents

Isnt it quite obvious that we were most likely testing our own missile defense system and it actually worked omfg!
why blow up a icbm when you can redirect away from your people?

We might have been doing a exercise with the chinese? you never know however if it was missile we would be at war right now so use your brain and figure it out

reply to post by boondock-saint


Really, how about you read backwards and supply me with evidence of ANY ICBM or IRBM that would travel slow enough in ANY stage to remain observable to the naked eye for 10+ minutes.

Oh, you said something previous, that MUST mean you are right.

reply to post by Use your brain


I love how I said this and poked holes in boondock's story, and yet I don't see him replying to that.

reply to post by boondock-saint

For reference; a Minotaur missile fires its second stage 58 seconds after launch at an altitude of 15 miles (79,200 feet). The second stage burns out 1:57 after launch at an altitude of 55 miles and a distance of 95 miles from launch. At 2:12 the third stage ignites at an altitude of 66 miles. The third stage burns out at 3:27.

The cameraman said he watched this for 10 minutes. Do you think the "Chinese missile" has such a different flight profile?

BTW, where would that "interceptor missile" have come from? A ship which was tracking the sub? I thought the sub was undetected.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


The MSM started screaming "missile" to get everyone's attention, claim they took 10 minutes of footage, but have not released it in its entirety.

People are being sold sensationalism for ratings on this one. IMO. The really sad thing is the media is not being called out on what they did.

Originally posted by OrphenFire
Also, you didn't address the issue of the Chinese missile later on. Where did it go? I certainly didn't see a nuclear explosion anywhere. You say it continued on its course toward its target, but I don't remember seeing a nuke attack on the news.

when you stand in a field and fire a rifle straight up
into the air .... where does the bullet land???
I have no idea where the missile went after the
end of this video. However, if
it impacted US territory I'm very sure
somebody somewhere would have
reported it to the news and we would
have seen and heard about it.
Not all Ballistic Missiles carry a Nuclear
Payload. Some are conventional and
some are dummy warheads.

reply to post by boondock-saint


again dude, address the issue of SPEED or I'm not going to even bother discussing this with you.

At least four people have asked you to identify ANY IRBM or ICBM that can remain visible for that long in ANY stage of deployment. Stop ducking questions and if you don't have an answer, at least admit that much.

The US has no missile defense systems for civilian targets. Obama, in his great wisdom says we don't need it. Better just to let the commies kill us, since we probably deserve it in his mind.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by boondock-saint

 

For reference; a Minotaur missile fires its second stage 58 seconds after launch at an altitude of 15 miles. The second stage burns out 1:57 after launch at an altitude of 55 miles and a distance of 95 miles from launch. At 2:12 the third stage ignites at an altitude of 66 miles. The third stage burns out at 3:27.

The cameraman said he watched this for 10 minutes. Do you think the "Chinese missile" has such a different flight profile?

well since a Dong Feng 21 and/or 31 is one of the best kept secrets
of Red China. How am I suppose to compare flight profiles?
And also, The Minotaur is a 3 stage missile while the DF21
is a 2-stage missile so that's like comparing oranges to
apples. You can't really compare the 2.

Well, since we won't let this one die, I might as well chime in with my own thoughts.

I'm not sure that contrail is from a conventional aircraft, for 8 reasons:

1) I heard the guy who filmed it interviewed on KFI 640 the day after he filmed it and he said it spiraled in the air just like how a football spirals when it's thrown

2) The vantage point of the helicopter was from the air. More of the contrail was seen, and goes for a very, very long distance down past the horizon. This means that the conventional jet-engine contrail was rather long and well shaped for how long it'd been up there.

3) The contrail would have to be ENORMOUSLY wide at its base if it's that far away; the oldest part of the contrail APPEARS that it would be absolutely massive, if you could somehow see it by standing right under the oldest parts. Things are supposed to get smaller the further away they are. This contrail clearly is larger the further away it is. It should have whisped away to become that large, but instead, it's nice and well-defined, which leads me to...

4) The integrity of the contrail is odd. It looks too dense, and what I mean by that, is the oldest part of the contrail looks as if it SHOULD be light and whispy, like cotton candy.

5) One can clearly see only one contrail coming from the object.

6) It is clear that the object emits a bright flash during flight. This could be sunlight reflecting off of a cylindrical fuselage, or, simply a rocket engine firing. It is impossible to be certain what the bright flash was.

7) The contrail is jagged enough to have been whipped around by wind shear, yet it's still quite well defined. That would have to have been a very bumpy flight, with that crook that's nearest the object. If it's windy enough to crook the contrail like that, then it's windy enough to hork the oldest parts of it.

8) Since when do contrails make it to Russian and BBC news?

This is enough evidence to cast enough doubt on the jetliner OS for me personally.

In my opinion, it is, in order of most likely to least likely:

Experimental aircraft
Rocket (not missile)
Passenger jet

This, of course, is my opinion.

Bah, who cares?

Originally posted by Orphanfire-
Also, you didn't address the issue of the Chinese missile later on. Where did it go? I certainly didn't see a nuclear explosion anywhere. You say it continued on its course toward its target, but I don't remember seeing a nuke attack on the news.

You know that they can take the warhead out of the missle right?

Originally posted by SevenThunders
The US has no missile defense systems for civilian targets. Obama, in his great wisdom says we don't need it. Better just to let the commies kill us, since we probably deserve it in his mind.

That is because an enemy would not target civilian targets. they would be trying to take out our command and our network.

I found a China Rocket on U tube

www.youtube.com...

"Two days after a mysterious vapor trail appeared at sundown off the Los Angeles coast -- triggering fears of an enemy missile attack -- a stunning replay occurred in the sky over Far Rockaway in Queens, the New York Post reported Thursday.
www.bluecollarphilosophy.com...


PS
I heard about the Chinese sub mentioned on talk radio and missed the date...a similar sub incident also happened in 2006 as well as as in 2007.
ooops