It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

No wonder the folks in L.A were freaking out - check out this amazing pic!!

page: 5
58
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Pre warming of tests is good for the enemy to spy on, analyze weaknesses; better just let fly, and not in their direction… unless you're a dick about it.

Edit: Now tell me Russia and China aren't considered enemies by the United States.
edit on 10-11-2015 by intrptr because: Edit:




posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

You haven't bothered to read any agreement have you. There's no need for either side to spy on them. They release the telemetry frequency for each test flight. They LET them watch the flight. Whether it's Russian or American.

Even if they didn't, when exactly is the test launching when the warning period is over 5 days? And exactly which way would you suggest they launch that isn't going towards Russia or China? They can be hit from almost any direction.


You're not stopping an inbound ICBM with any anti missile system out there. Too many variables, too difficult an intercept.
edit on 11/10/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/10/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

No pre waring of launches is a good way to measure response times and counter measures to track and communicate with higher ups, too.

If a warning is given, then the response isn't there to see, because they have been informed of the (test) launch ahead of time.

Edit: This cat and mouse game is played on every level between potential enemies

For instance, a Chinese Song class Diesel submarine surfacing within torpedo range of an American Carrier group. Easy to tell that tale, its not as critical to the whole world as missing an inbound sub launched ICBM.

Wakey, wakey… just 'testing'.




edit on 10-11-2015 by intrptr because: Edit:



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 05:15 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

It's also a stunningly stupid way to get to test your response time when they fire everything they have back at you.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: intrptr

It's also a stunningly stupid way to get to test your response time when they fire everything they have back at you.

Or lull your enemy to sleep…



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: six67seven
a reply to: Sublimecraft

So thats not how it looked in real-time provided its a timelapse photo. Look at the car lights on the road...

As Abe stated: they were 'trying out new techniques on their cameras.'


surprisingly that is pretty much what it looked like in real time aswell. im in northern california and just happened to be in the right place at the right time and the entire plume from its exhaust hung there and glowed for maybe a min. the only thing that was different is that the middle plume was the only part that appeared blue to the naked eye and the larger plume that surrounds it appeared to be whitish green.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Yes, let's screw around with nuclear weapons. What could POSSIBLY go wrong.

And comparing a sub stalking surface ships to a no notice launch of nuclear capable missiles is ridiculous. With anything else there's time to evaluate and react. With nuclear missiles there isn't.
edit on 11/10/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: intrptr

Yes, let's screw around with nuclear weapons. What could POSSIBLY go wrong.


on the flip side, yes, lets not test our nuclear weapons and just wait and see what happens when we really need to push the button. i keep hearing people talk about the deadly side of nuclear weapons yet know one brings up that sometimes u need to test them so u can identify a potential problem and avoid having a nuclear catastrophe. a radioactive environment is a very harsh place for electronics and many other components that make up a missile. alot of tests are done simply to make sure that everything performs as expected and if it doesnt its a good thing to find out when the weapon is not armed. missile tests arent anything new. all parties have the data and know when a missile is being tested, whatever they glean from the test they could have allready read from a book anyhow. what they see during a test isnt really whats important.
edit on 10-11-2015 by TheScale because: grammatical



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: TheScale

Exactly. Add in that the Kentucky just came out of RCOH and you have the perfect opportunity to kill two birds with one stone. Prove her launch system works after overhaul, and test the missiles at the same time.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Finally -- Lockheed-Martin press release
www.lockheedmartin.com...



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 06:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

I very much doubt that.

The US announcing anything it does ahead of time, thats a lark.

You could convince me though, gotta link?

Oh, and its okay to land in my message box…


LOL! You really do live in a fantasy world. Yes the Russians and US respectively provide a launch window notification for their ICBM/SLBM test launches. That also includes telemetry data exchange and frequency monitoring. Why is this so hard for you to comprehend? No side wants an ICBM/SLBM test launch to be misconstrued as a rogue or surprise attack. The advanced notification procedure has been in force since 31st May 1988. The launch notification and telemetry data exchange is also highlighted in the New START treaty between the US and Russia.


Section IV - Notifications Concerning Launches of ICBMs or SLBMs and the Exchange of Telemetric Data Section IV consists of six paragraphs. One paragraph covers launches of ICBMs and SLBMs while the remaining five paragraphs cover the exchange of telemetric information conducted in accordance with Part Seven of the Protocol and the Annex on Telemetric Information to the Protocol. Paragraph 1 provides for the advance notification of any launch of an ICBM or
SLBM in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on Notifications of Launches of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles and Submarine-Launched Ballistic
Missiles of May 31, 1988 (the Ballistic Missile Launch Notification Agreement). Data regarding telemetry broadcast frequencies and modulation types must be provided for those launches for which telemetric information may be provided to
the other Party in accordance with Part Two of the Annex on Telemetric Information. While launches of ICBMs or SLBMs that are not subject to the Treaty, such as of Trident I SLBMs, are not subject to this provision, they remain subject to notification pursuant to the Ballistic Missile Launch Notification Agreement itself. The Parties have agreed in Part Eight of the Protocol to provisionally apply this paragraph from the date of signature of the Treaty. Telemetric broadcast information will not be included in notifications provided prior to entry into force of the Treaty because, in accordance with the Annex on Telemetric Information, telemetric information will only be exchanged for launches conducted after entry into force of the Treaty.


www.state.gov...


For missile-generated flight test data, known as telemetry, START I called for telemetry to be openly shared, with limited exceptions, to monitor missile development. New START does not limit new types of ballistic missiles, and thus the old START formula for extensive telemetry sharing was no longer necessary. New START requires the broadcast of telemetry and exchange of recordings and other information on up to five missile tests per side per year to promote openness and transparency.


www.armscontrol.org...

In addition the danger areas and the time window data was available to the public from 2nd November on for example the US Notices to Mariners. These are routinely monitored by intelligence and defence agencies with an interest. The activation alone of those danger areas is evidence enough that a long range ballistic missile(s) test was being planned for. It appears that defence journalists missed it?


363/15(18,21,81).
EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC.
CALIFORNIA.
HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS 071600Z TO 080300Z AND
091600Z TO 100300Z NOV IN AREAS:
A. BOUND BY
32-09N 119-30W, 32-36N 119-30W,
32-27N 117-34W, 32-00N 117-34W.
B. BETWEEN 32-18N 32-36N AND 122-30W 120-48W.
C. BETWEEN 32-12N 32-54N AND 131-00W 127-12W.
D. BOUND BY
29-42N 159-12W, 30-42N 159-24W,
31-54N 152-00W, 30-54N 151-42W.
E. BOUND BY
12-30N 151-00E, 13-30N 150-00E,
17-15N 157-30E, 16-15N 158-30E.
2. CANCEL THIS MSG 100400Z NOV 15.


msi.nga.mil...

msi.nga.mil...

Jim Oberg plotted them out at the following link.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


edit on 10/11/2015 by tommyjo because: Additional info added



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Thats so cool...nothing exciting ever happens over London. Oh wait, we had some fog the other day. And the country ground to a stand still, as usual.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Slightly off topic, but we were making an overnight passage in the Southern Marshall Islands the night of the 9-10 Nov local time and the Captain observed a very suspicious vessel. It displayed a very bright yellowish light, had no radar return on 2 different sets, and when our vessel approached, took off at 40 knots plus. This happened 2 times then it dissappeared over the horizon at 40 knots. Perhaps an Aegis class cruiser or similar assessing the missile test, or a foreign power with a similar vessel. We have seen a few Aegis cruisers or similar out here and they have little or no radar return. Chinese perhaps?



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 01:32 AM
link   
hey guys.. they already admitted they didnt notify the public bc they wanted to test the publics reaction time.. they wanted to test our reaction.. as in would people run away or panic.. why do u think they wanted a test done like this? it wasnt for mechanical purpises and they admited it. were abiut to kick someones ass and we just tested the reaction time for it



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 01:33 AM
link   
a reply to: tonycodes



they already admitted they didnt notify the public bc they wanted to test the publics reaction time

They did? Where?



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 02:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Bluesma

It's not the first time a rocket has caused a stir internationally. It happens very often.


It doesn't happen so often as that. The last time it reached the rural areas (people that mostly do not know how to use a computer) was the russian Bulava tests over Norway.

It seems the only way to really get the information spread as far as possible is to have a lot of people think it is a UFO or a portal into other dimensions or something, and let that spread for a while, before you reveal what it really was.
The crazy stuff acts like a trojan horse. That event eventually lead to people having a slight change it attitude about russia.

If the US government watches this phenomena, and learns from it, especially at a time in which-


The Pentagon recently embarked on a $355-billion program for modernizing each aging leg of the U.S. nuclear triad over the next decade.

The submarine missile test came late Saturday after Defense Secretary Ashton Carter addressed a defense forum at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley about the U.S. “adapting our operational posture and contingency plans” to deter Russia’s “aggression.”

(from the other link, LA TIMES)

I honestly have a hard time imagining that people that high up in responsibility wouldn't notice that and use it.

But whatever, if you guys disagree, fine. I remain skeptical.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 02:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma




It seems the only way to really get the information spread as far as possible is to have a lot of people think it is a UFO or a portal into other dimensions or something, and let that spread for a while, before you reveal what it really was.
You mean like social media? Sorry, I don't buy it. Tell me, do you think our own Skeptic Overlord was used, or did he just fall for the idiotic noise?
www.abovetopsecret.com...


The crazy stuff acts like a trojan horse. That event eventually lead to people having a slight change it attitude about russia.
How so? And you'll find that those who went for the "crazy stuff" still are doing so.



If the US government watches this phenomena, and learns from it, especially at a time in which-
How long do you think it takes to overhaul an Ohio class submarine? You think this is something recent? You think it has something to do with what Carter said? You think it was triggered by what happened in Ukraine?



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 02:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

Florida? They have been using southern California for a long time. It is a designated testing area.
www.navair.navy.mil...


Yes, they are also tested off the Florida coast, in the Air Force's Eastern Range.

www.lockheedmartin.com...
edit on 11-11-2015 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 02:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma
Trident launches?
Assuming you're right, how does that support your position that this is something new?

They could test off the coast of Oregon, Washington, or even Alaska. Instead they're now testing tridents off the coast of California and Florida.

edit on 11/11/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 03:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
You mean like social media? Sorry, I don't buy it. Tell me, do you think our own Skeptic Overlord was used, or did he just fall for the idiotic noise?


I don't know anything about the topic you linked to, I do not want to make any judgement upon anyone.

The crazy stuff acts like a trojan horse. That event eventually lead to people having a slight change it attitude about russia.

How so? And you'll find that those who went for the "crazy stuff" still are doing so.


It seems to me you might be referring to the kinds of persons who frequent conspiracy and New Age sites?
I was speaking about the larger masses of "normal" people. (LOL! Yes, I am laughing at myself here)
I mean the kind of people ho do not spend time thinking about conspiracy theories, nor spirituality, nor aliens or UFOs, and for goodness sakes not time or dimension portals!
I mean the majority- the people who work their job all day, hear what the evening news said, saw the spectacular headlines that came in their email box, and scrolled past them on their Facebook.
The repeated exclamations about "Massive UFO sighting in California!!!" with a very impressive photo.

Just like with the Norway missile testing, they saw the photo, it was really mindblowing, they saw the headlines, and then, well they usually had to get to work or taking the kids to school or something. Then they talked with coworkers or acquaintances, "hey, did you see that crazy thing in the sky? Totally mysterious... I saw some claim it was a UFO or something..."


It takes a very long time for the truth to trickle down to those people, and by the time it does, a new round of talking about it occurs- "you remember that crazy light thing? Turns out it was a missile!"

"Really?? What kind of missile looks like that? Nah, I don't believe you..." and they go off into discussing the details of the kind of missile, and each ends up researching it on their end, late at night, and now have earned a greater sense of the military might and current activity of that country.


This is what I observe. That same event, if it didn't start off with the sensationalist headlines, would have not gone so far.
Missile testing, shmissile testing, who really cares?


How long do you think it takes to overhaul an Ohio class submarine? You think this is something recent? You think it has something to do with what Carter said? You think it was triggered by what happened in Ukraine?


I do not know how long it takes to overhaul an Ohio class submarine. I fail to see the relevance to what I said?

I do not think missile testing is something recent, though I do think that access to increased to information around the world, especially alternative and citizen journalism, took off around the year 2000 and is quickly evolving and growing in influence. I think that in observing the events that happen and the way it influences spread of information through this type of media, we are learning how to manipulate it more efficiently.

I don't have any idea which thing Carter said you refer to.
What event in Ukraine do you refer to and how do you see it as relevant?
edit on 11-11-2015 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join