posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 10:09 AM
reply to post by lostbook
The mentioning of a Star Wars type of weapon is more apt than most people will realized. The image of an idealized space weapons platform someone
posted herein is more likely the intended station for such a weapon. But of course, they can't tell us that. But it you think about it and have
kept up with some of the earlier, professional discussions of this weapon, it all fits together. Fired from space, there is no limit to range. The
"range" is gravity assisted, downward. At the speed quoted, the projectile will be nothing less than a man-made asteroid vaporizing a great deal of
its target. While at close range, it could be a dumb projectile, but it won't be. The 25k per projectile won't merely be a highly machined inert
piece of tungsten or depleted uranium. It will be internally guided just like a cruise missile, but it won't need--necessarily--an exploding
warhead. The speed and inertia of the projectile will be sufficient for most targets.
Imagine a single or two dozen of these projectiles raining down on a flattop. At such speeds there is nothing on the drawing tables that could
counter one, let alone several. Such potent weapons from space is why there was and is a Star Wars program and why Gary McKinnon was probably correct
in what he reported, and why big, slow and ungainly ships in naval warfare are mere relics of the past, setting ducks if they remain around until the
next world war starts.
Rail gun development has been around for a couple of decades. Some of the initial work--once it started being talked about--was at the University of
Texas at Austin. Surprisingly to me, the lead on the project was none other than Harold Puthoff the principle developer of the CIA's remote viewing
program back in the 1970s. As i recall, he supposedly was in Austin doing work (physical or theoretical, we don't know) on "Zero Point" energy.
Later, it was revealed that he was working on the rail gun. My details on this come from the memory of articles printed in the Austin-American
at the time which I assume was mid-1980s.
The rail gun, as a main weapon, has several inherent advantages over the supposed dream weapon of futuristic warfare, the laser. On the face of it,
it seems like a step backward, but it ain't. Lasers as weapons that can instantly kill a hardened target are still finicky dreams. The rail gun is
simple in concept and very direct.