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.

 

Long Range Missle was aimed at Hawaii

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Breaking news, Analysis of trajectory of long range missle fired on the 4th show the missle was aimed at a Hawiian island. Is this still juist a simple test now?




posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:50 PM
link   
how cant you know your gona be asked for a source? you cant just write something down like that. would be interesting to say the least if its true.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Japanese government was the source, was just on Fox news



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:56 PM
link   
cant find the story...can you post link please ?

Also, the direction of the missles heading, you could have drawn a straight
line, and the first land mass you saw, you could then assume it was aimed for.
Do they have anything to back up claims ?



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by acura_el2000
how cant you know your gona be asked for a source? you cant just write something down like that. would be interesting to say the least if its true.


Reuters
Jesh...relax he was just gunning to be the first.

Jury still out though. I have heard from some mil pilots I chat with that the rumor in the mil is that China and Russia are pushing NK to test, in the hopes of gaining data on US BMD system. No source on that one, but it would be a smart move.

BTW Acura_el2000 & PittsburghMike Welcome to ATS Guys!

[edit on 6-7-2006 by Imperium Americana]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:58 PM
link   
They just broke in on Fox news, they said setails are coming shortly, Japanese and US officials both came up with the analysis. no link..just what I heard on tv about 15 minutes ago



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Imperium, that would explain China and Russia's unwillingness to bear down on NK for the tests. Let the little dog do the big dogs dirty work.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by PittsburghMike
Breaking news, Analysis of trajectory of long range missle fired on the 4th show the missle was aimed at a Hawiian island. Is this still juist a simple test now?


Definately need to back that one up bud, because why would all the other missles not hit anything either? If NK was serious about hitting something, they would have. Yes, it's still just a test. And even if they did have it aimed at Hawaii, there was a dummy warhead on it, or at least that is what I've read.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Mike,
Check your U2u..

Here is a source
asia.news.yahoo.com...



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:05 PM
link   
JPost.com » International » Article


Jul. 7, 2006 4:04
Report: N. Korea's missile was aimed near Hawaii
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
TOKYO


North Korea targeted waters near Hawaii when it fired a long-range missile this week, a Japanese newspaper reported Friday.

The long-range Taepodong-2 was part of a barrage of seven missiles test-fired by North Korea on Wednesday. They all fell harmlessly into the Sea of Japan, but South Korean officials said the long-range missile had malfunctioned, suggesting it was intended for a more remote target.

Japan's conservative mainstream daily Sankei said that Japanese and US defense officials have concluded that the Taepodong-2 had been targeted US state of Hawaii in the Pacific Ocean, after analyzing data collected from their intelligence equipment.

The newspaper quoted unidentified Japanese and US government officials.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:11 PM
link   
I don't understand how "waters NEAR Hawaii" translates in your mind to "aimed AT Hawaii." So now I suppose I should post another thread called "Missiles aimed at Japan? They were 600 km near Japan. In other words, missed it by a long shot. YES. A test.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:11 PM
link   
NEAR not AT.


North Korea targeted waters near Hawaii when it fired a long-range missile this week, a Japanese newspaper reported Friday.

The long-range Taepodong-2 was part of a barrage of seven missiles test-fired by North Korea on Wednesday. They all fell harmlessly into the Sea of Japan, but South Korean officials said the long-range missile had malfunctioned, suggesting it was intended for a more remote target.

Source.



data from U.S. and Japanese Aegis radar-equipped destroyers and surveillance aircraft on the missile's angle of take-off and altitude indicated that it was heading for waters near Hawaii, the Sankei Shimbun reported, citing multiple sources in the United States and Japan.

North Korea may have targeted Hawaii to show the United States that it was capable of landing a missile there, or because it is home to the headquarters of the U.S. Pacific fleet, the paper said.

An alternative explanation might be that a missile could accidentally hit land if fired towards Alaska, the report said.

Source.


The above explanation [in bold] works for me. A missile, armed or not, crashing down on land will cause unwanted damage, better to let it land in the ocean, don't you think? Of course, carry on jumping up and down over a perceived threat, no matter how laughable.

[edit on 6/7/06 by Implosion]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Just one question, since when have any countries launched 7-10 missiles at once just to test if they were working?

If this was some sort of test, it was to test the defense system and reaction of the U.S. and Japan, nothing more, nothing less imo.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:20 PM
link   
Wow.. they're good to get a precise trajectory from 42 seconds of flight time...seing the dang missile was designed to burn for another 2-3 stages. It's not like projecting Scuds who have a known burn time and single stage. Scuds destination are practically known at launch. A multiple stage missile that has never been tested? No data on the fuel used or the burn time? Why not just get it over and say it was heading for California... why limit yourself with a tiny target in the middle of the ocean.

My analysis says it was heading for the Pacific Ocean with a 95 percent proability of hitting water. How far in the ocean is anyones guess, even to DPRK.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Yeah,

Could be a drama test. It's definitely working if that was the purpose..

Could be a shell game. " hey! which one has the nuke?"

I haven't tested many missles myself...But for testing purposes, would it not be best to
fire off one, then spend time digesting the data...then later, fire off another with your refined data, etc. etc...

a "flock o'rockets" seems wasteful, as a test of the hardware..

And remember...
CLose only counts in Horseshoes, Hand Grenades....and nukes...



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
Just one question, since when have any countries launched 7-10 missiles at once just to test if they were working?

If this was some sort of test, it was to test the defense system and reaction of the U.S. and Japan, nothing more, nothing less imo.


Very interesting...



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:29 PM
link   
It's possible they may have intended it to land in waters relatively near Hawaii as an ill-conceived "show of strength". It's extremely unlikely it was actually aimed at a Hawaiian island as the original poster suggests.

One single missile landing on a Hawaiian island isn't going to do anything to the US, on the other hand it's going to guarantee an extremely violent US retaliation. If, by some miracle, they managed to hit Pearl Harbor or Honolulu with a nuke, North Korea would cease to exist as a country within about 30 minutes. Not a very clever plan.

This story is interesting because earlier I read a story saying that the failure of the missile so early in the flight made it impossible to determine its intended trajectory.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
Just one question, since when have any countries launched 7-10 missiles at once just to test if they were working?

If this was some sort of test, it was to test the defense system and reaction of the U.S. and Japan, nothing more, nothing less imo.


It would explain the logic. Fire at Alaska and you are heading straight into the teeth of the BMD. Assuming they had the range, firing at the US mainland would make the US goes crazy. But Hawaii...even close and you show range. Miss and you can easily be in international waters. Plus it keeps the US BMD X-band & UEWR at full blast for the entire time.

The other side of the coin is that Japan is simply pushing this in reaction to the shots. They could be freaked out and are spinning the story to force the US to provide more concession in the BMD agreement.

Either way I do not buy the whole ~48hrs to detirmine the track. SMDC would know the ~track and range with in minutes.

[edit on 6-7-2006 by Imperium Americana]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacedoubt
.............
I haven't tested many missles myself...But for testing purposes, would it not be best to
fire off one, then spend time digesting the data...then later, fire off another with your refined data, etc. etc...

a "flock o'rockets" seems wasteful, as a test of the hardware..
.............


Exactly Spacedoubt, and there appear to be reports that they are preparing to make more tests. I will see what i can find.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:34 PM
link   

SEOUL, South Korea - North Korea angrily mocked international criticism of its multiple missile tests, threatening on Thursday to fire off more rockets. In the face of nearly unanimous world condemnation of the seven missile tests on Wednesday, Pyongyang's foreign minister released a blustery statement declaring that it had the right to develop and test its weapons — and vowing unspecified retaliation against anyone who tries to stop it.

"Our military will continue with missile launch drills in the future as part of efforts to strengthen self-defense deterrent," said the statement, carried in state-run media.

"If anyone intends to dispute or add pressure about this, we will have to take stronger physical actions in other forms."

The statement did not specify what actions North Korea would take.


Link

For some reason they have become more defiant than ever before.

[edit on 6-7-2006 by Muaddib]

Mod Edit: Trimmed down huuuuuuge link


[edit on 7/6/06 by FredT]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join