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.

 

Shooting a UFO, STS mission (video)

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jgruh4e
I myself doubt the secret war theory and not because I don't think the government could have gained such unimaginable weapons.Rather it is against logic.


What type of logic would that be against? Where do you think all the trillions of dollars the Pentagon 'lost' went? I would have no objection to you claiming it was just outright theft by some parties but would it not make more sense to assume that at least some of it went towards deploying and operating the craft/weapons we can UFOs?


If those weapons were reverse engineered, it is to be suspected the aliens would have more and better ones. It will be like the current war between Israel and Lebanon in terms of weaponry... So it just doesn't make sense. If there was war, the aliens would have long won it...


Well then logically one should assume that the war is not between the USA and aliens but between earth factions or states? If one country with all it's 'free' media can 'lose' trillions ( admittedly) in defense spending what can secretive states like China and Russia manage with their total secrecy? Why assume that any earthly faction would be stupid enough to attack 'aliens' of some description at ALL? I mean there is quite a few maniac rulers but i consider few of them so pointedly stupid.



On the other hand, of course, I can not be so confident, as such speculation does not take into consideration what the intentions of the extraterrestrials are... There might even be good and bad aliens using the Earth as a proxy...


Most things ( diplomatic / technological )seem possible once one gives it due consideration.


Anyways!

Stellar




posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 05:57 AM
link   
Someone mentioned Occam's razor in relation to 'ice particle's and space 'debris'?

Well i for one think that taking into account all that we do know Occam's razor suggest space battle's between earthly factions....

These are press 'clippings' i have put together over the last year indicating (IMO) that there is a war being fought with our money/energy but without our knowledge.

( The numbers are just my way of keeping track when researching/debating and is in no way a 'rank' towards relative importance.)

1.

The Soviets are working on technologies or have specific weapons-related programs underway for more advanced antisatellite systems. These include space -based kinetic energy, ground- and space-based laser, particle beam, and radio frequency weapons. The Soviets apparently believe that these techniques offer greater promise for future antisatellite application than continued development of ground-based orbital interceptors equipped with conventional warheads. The Soviets also believe that military applications of directed energy technologies hold promise of overcoming weaknesses in their conventional air and missile defenses.

The USSR's high-energy laser program, which dates from the mid-1960s, is much larger than the US effort. They have built over a half dozen major R&D facilities and test ranges, and they have over 10,000 scientists and engineers associated with laser development. They are developing chemical lasers and have continued to work on other high-energy lasers having potential weapons applications - the gas dynamic laser and the electric discharge laser. They are also pursuing related laser weapon technologies, such as efficient electrical power sources, and are pursuing capabilities to produce high-quality optical components. They have developed a rocket-driven magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) generator which produces 15 megawatts of short-term electric power - a device that has no counterpart in the West. The scope of the USSR's military capabilities would depend on its success in developing advanced weapons, including laser weapons for ballistic missile defense.

The Soviets have now progressed beyond technology research, in some cases to the development of prototype laser weapons. They already have ground-based lasers that could be used to interfere with US satellites. In the late 1980s, they could have prototype space based laser weapons for use against satellites. In addition, ongoing Soviet programs have progressed to the point where they could include construction of ground-based laser antisatellite(ASAT) facilities at operational sites. These could be available by the end of the 1980s and would greatly increase the Soviets' laser ASAT capability beyond that currently at their test site at Sary Shagan. They may deploy operational systems of space-based lasers for antisatellite purposes in the l990s, if their technology developments prove successful, and they can be expected to pursue development of space-based laser systems for ballistic missile defense for possible deployment after the year 2000.

www.fas.org...


2.

One potential method might be a powerfull ground-based laser (why was the infrared sensor on one of our satellites suddenly blinded as it passed over the USSR?) A laser on the Mir space station recently "illuminated" an ICBM during the cruise phase of its flight in space, demonstrating Soviet ability to detect and track a missile, according t o Pentagon sources (Washington Inquirer , July 24, 1987).

The purpose of Mir may indeed include bringing about "peace" -- Soviet style,
implies absence of opposition.

www.oism.org...


3.

ASATs The Soviets may have a new "direct-ascent" antisatellite
capability, according to the Pentagon's annual report
to the Congress. This would be more effective than the "coorbital"
ASAT, which has been operational since 1971. It is
speculated that the new ASAT could carry a nuclear warhead.
Lasers: According to Paul Nitze, the Soviets have over a
half dozen major development facilities, including an ABM test
center at Sary Shagan. US intelligence sources suspect that
Soviet lasers have already damaged some American spy
satellites. In 1984, Richard DeLauer testified that it would
take the US about ten years to reach parity in laser weapons.
Active Measures (Wet)?: Since July 1986, there have
been seven terrorist bombings, three assassinations, five highly
suspicious "suicides," and one disappearance among European
scientists and officials working on SDI-related projects.
(Washington Inquirer, 12/18/87).

www.oism.org...


4.

At the annual meeting of The American Civil Defense Association (TACDA) in Los Angeles, October, 1985, Dr. Teller stated that the U.S.
has made encouraging progress in research on x-ray lasers. But he believes the Soviets are a decade ahead of us in strategic defenses.

www.oism.org...


5.

On Sept. 29 and 30, the Soviets practiced bombing Hawaii.
They also zapped three American airplanes with lasers. The
pilots were not seriously injured, but most of the electronic
surveillance equipment on one plane was knocked out
instantly. For several hours, Mikhail Gorbachev and a number
of other top Soviet officials occupied the deep underground
bunkers near MOSCOW, according to US intelligence sources
(Washington ZTmes, Oct. 13, 1987 Al). But they did not need
such a huge protection factor. The US government responded
with a protest, and with optimism about the upcoming summit.
A few Hawaiian citizens called their Director of Civil Defense
to ask where the shelters were, and had to be informed that
actually there aren't any (personal communication, War Crisis
Workshop, Ark. Department of Emergency Services, Nov. 4).

www.oism.org...


6.

One problem is limitations in
satellite verification capability. Only two advanced
photoreconnaissance satellites (called KH-11) are now in orbit,
possibly about half the bare minimum needed. One is long
past its design life. A replacement was reportedly destroyed in
the Challenger explosion (Washington Inquirer Aug 12,1988).
In an 18-month period, there were five satellite launch failures.
In satellites for surveillance and defense, the USSR is
said to have a tenfold advantage. When trouble flares, the
Soviets frequently launch one or more surveillance satellites
within days, while it takes the US at least six weeks to plan a
new space flight. Development of Soviet antisatellite weapons
continue. Space-based lasers may be deployed in the 199Os,
and ground-based lasers may be capable of blinding US
satellites in low earth orbit even now (Wall St July 12,1988).

www.oism.org...


7.

U.S. Fears Satellites Damaged
Peter G. Neumann
Sun 24 Jan 88 14:10:34-PST

Subtitle -- Soviets used lasers to cripple equipment, sources contend.

Washington, by Richard Sale (UPI, 24 January 1988).

U.S. intelligence agencies are convinced Soviet laser attacks have damaged
supersophisticated U.S. spy satellites deployed to monitor missile and
spacecraft launches, administration sources said. These sources said they
believe the Soviets fired ground-based lasers to cripple optical equipment
attempting to scan launches at Tyuratam, the major Soviet space center, to
obtain a variety of sensitive military information. Administration
intelligence sources said they fear that other vital U.S. reconnaissance
satellites will soon be endangered because six new Soviet laser battle stations
are under construction... "There is no way you can protect the optical sensors
on satellites" from laser attacks, an Air Force official said. ...

Intelligence sources acknowledged that the Pentagon also has trained
ground-based lasers on Soviet spacecraft, sometimes in attempts to disrupt
their sensors. ...

[From the San Francisco Examiner and Chronicle, front page, 24 Jan 88. The
article goes on to consider reports that some spacecraft malfunctions may
have been due to laser "hosing", e.g., a KH-11 or Code 1010 satellite, which
was permanently damaged in 1978. Seems unlikely -- the technology was not
very well advanced then? PGN]

[However, the risks of laser interference or accidental triggering are worth
noting. Adding to the risks of computing in SDI, might such a concerted
attack of simultaneous laser bursts on many satellite sensors be mistakenly
detected as the launch of a nuclear attack!? PGN]


catless.ncl.ac.uk...


8.

Lasers. The PLA’s intense interest in laser weapons exemplifies its quest for next-generation technology that also exploits the weaknesses of potential enemies. Lasers were a key area on investment for the “863-Program.” Pro-RMA officers view lasers as a key weapons technology for the future. The PLA envisions using lasers for anti-air, satellite tracking, anti-satellite, and for radar functions.[xiii] In 1995 the PLA company Norinco marketed its ZM-87 battlefield laser dazzler. The 1998 Pentagon PLA report noted that the PLA might already have a ground-based laser capable of damaging low-orbit reconnaissance satellites. Last year the Select Committee suggested that Russia might be a source of nuclear-pump laser technology for the PRC for use in space.[xiv] Last October the PLA revealed for the first time its Type-98 main battle tank, which has a box on the hull that may be a low-light camera or a laser dazzler. According to the Pentagon’s PLA report released in June, China “reportedly is investigating the feasibility of shipborne laser weapons for air defense.”

www.fas.org...


Continued

[edit on 12-8-2006 by StellarX]



posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 06:04 AM
link   
Hi, Stellar. I think you misunderstood me. I actually said that it was quite possible for our government to have developed some extremely advanced weaponry. You are totally right about the money going to black budgets and stuff. However, I just think that in case of a real war between humans and alies, humanity has no chances. On the other hand, it could be what Ectoterrestrial said:


Originally posted by Ectoterrestrial


As far as the secret war theory, we have to be careful not to assume that our potential 'opponents' are fighting a war back. They might not be. It might not even make sense to them to do so. It might not even be important to them. Think of a beehive keeper. The bees might be fighting a 'secret war' with the beekeeper, but the beekeeper doesn't see it that way. He just extracts the honey he wants and then walks away, laughing about the stings.



Very well said. I think such a scenario is much more likely...

edit: spelling. Stellar, very interesting quotes, I will read them in entirety tomorrow, too sleepy now...

[edit on 12-8-2006 by Jgruh4e]



posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 06:16 AM
link   
9.

To power the laser system the satellite received two turbine generators, and the laser gun itself was placed in the fairing moved to the fuselage. This fairing was located between the trailing edge of the wing and the fin.

Since late 1960s, the Soviet Union was working on development of ground laser systems for anti-satellite defense and pumping from nuclear explosions. Unlike the Roentgen laser of Teller, such lasers were reusable. One of such lasers was probably built near Dushanbe. In different periods Yu. Babaev and Yu. Ablekov supervised the work on such laser, but due to the unilateral moratorium announced by the USSR, and the followed mysterious deaths of both engineers the work on such lasers was suspended in the mid-1980s.

In 1994-1995, The High Temperatures Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences sold the Pamir-3U mobile electric generator to the United States. The Pamir-3U had an output of 15 megawatt, dimensions of 2.5 x 2.65 x 10 meters, and weighed about 20 tons. The generator could be used in Russia (USSR) on the ground or in outer space for power supply to long-range laser and super high frequency weapon systems.

The Soviet Union also worked on designing of an "orbital fortress" based on a space station of the Mir type. Modules of the aiming system served as the side blocks of the station. The side blocks were attached to the basic module. The blocks were to be delivered to the station in cargo compartments of the Buran shuttle orbiter. The station was intended for killing of warheads of ballistic missiles from outer space when the crew was on board.

www.fas.org...


10.

One effect of the panic was the strengthening of U.S. satellites against
radiation that in the end would help shield them from ground-based laser
attacks. According to U.S. intelligence sources, who asked not to be named,
such attacks damaged super-sophisticated American spy satellites deployed to
monitor missile and spacecraft launches at the major Russian space center.

In 1976, a KH-11 or Code 1010 satellite was "painted" by a Soviet laser
and sustained "permanent damage," according to a senior Air Force official.
This source said that such paintings continued into the late 1980s.

Air Force officials told UPI that for years the Soviets had a
"battle-ready" ground-based laser at Saryshagan that they said they believed
had been involved in past blindings of U.S. spacecraft.

But the result of the "hosings" of U.S. equipment was positive. The United
States moved quickly to install laser warning receivers on its newest
generation of low-orbit spacecraft, U.S. intelligence sources said. The
receivers have allowed time for evasive action and have assisted ground
controllers seeking to prove the Soviets had inflicted the damage.

One State Dept. analyst said that the whole Star Wars system of the Reagan
presidency was the result of Soviets "messing around with our satellites."

www.g2mil.com...


11.

Kornilov points out a laser reflector but gives no information on any scientific experiments using it. He also states that personnel on ships, aircraft and the ground were to take part in experiments with Polyus. It appears they were to attempt to target the platform by radar, infra-red and visible light, and when the platform was detected they were to fire at it with lasers. If the laser hit the platform, the mirror would reflect it back to Earth, and thus the platform's stealthiness could be tested without making radio transmissions. Earlier launch pad photos showed that the Polyus was covered by an optically black shroud and it is suspected that this may have been radar absorptive as well.

www.astronautix.com...


12

The Soviet response was immediate. Yuri Andropov ordered additional funding and implementation of Fon-2. At the same time Soviet diplomatic initiatives were undertaken. A proposal was made to the Unite States to ban all space-based weapons. Andropov declared a unilateral moratorium on testing of the improved IS-MU ASAT. As a 'warning shot' the Terra-3 complex was used to track the STS-41-G space shuttle Challenger with a low power laser on 10 October 1984. This caused malfunction of on-board equipment and temporary blinding of the crew, leading to a US diplomatic protest.

www.astronautix.com...


13.

Manned seven crew. Deployed ERBS; performed high resolution Earth imagery. Payloads: Earth Radiation Budget Satellite (ERBS) deployment, Office of Space and Terrestrial Applications (OSTA)-3 experiments, Large Format Camera (LFC). First use of Orbital Refueling System (ORS) with extravehicular activity (EVA) astronauts, IMAX camera. In response to the American Strategic Defence Initiative and continued military use of the shuttle, the Soviet Union fired a 'warning shot' from the Terra-3 laser complex at Sary Shagan. The facility tracked Challenger with a low power laser on 10 October 1984. This caused malfunctions to on-board equipment and discomfort / temporary blinding of the crew, leading to a US diplomatic protest.

www.astronautix.com...


14.

Images of a distant, Buck-Rogersian future. But military lasers date back to the Vietnam War, when they were first used to guide bombs to their targets. Targeting lasers don't pack any punch, but even then the Pentagon was funding research into high-energy lasers that would destroy rather than "designate" targets. Army and Navy lasers began shooting down small missiles and unmanned aircraft in limited late-1970s tests and the programs accelerated in the next decade under Star Wars. But it wasn't until the mid-1990s that laser tracking and control systems became accurate enough for reliable weapons.

Kornilov points out a laser reflector but gives no information on any scientific experiments using it. He also states that personnel on ships, aircraft and the ground were to take part in experiments with Polyus. It appears they were to attempt to target the platform by radar, infra-red and visible light, and when the platform was detected they were to fire at it with lasers. If the laser hit the platform, the mirror would reflect it back to Earth, and thus the platform's stealthiness could be tested without making radio transmissions. Earlier launch pad photos showed that the Polyus was covered by an optically black shroud and it is suspected that this may have been radar absorptive as well.

www.stratmag.com...


15.

China has successfully developed a laser cannon with a range of over 100km and might have already deployed it in Fujian Province facing Taiwan, defense sources said yesterday.

"One version goes that the weapon is still under development. Another is that the weapon has already been deployed across the Taiwan Strait and that there are around 20 units in service," the official said.

Chang Li-teh (???), a senior editor with Defense Technology Monthly magazine, said it is possible that China had successfully developed a laser cannon with Taiwan in its range.

"The US' airborne laser was designed to have a range of between 200 and 300km. If the system could strike that far from an aircraft, it should be able to reach much further launched from land," Chang said.

"Such laser weapons depend on power supply for effectiveness. A land-based laser cannon has a much greater power supply than airborne one," he said.

www.taipeitimes.com...


16.

There have been occasional reports of actual laser weapons, usually in the Hong Kong press.[5] In late 2003 Taiwanese military sources reported that the PLA had deployed a “laser cannon” with a 100km range in the Nanjing Military Region. [6] While this alarming report received no coverage in the U.S., if true it would handily precede U.S. intentions to deploy its first ground-based laser weapons by 2007 or 2008.[7] The U.S. hopes to test an airborne chemical laser in 2004 and is developing a range of military lasers to include air, naval and land-based solid-state lasers. If it indeed exists, the PLA’s laser would be useful for shooting down aircraft, cruise missiles, some PGMs and some ballistic missiles. In addition, Internet sources indicate the PLA Army has a laser-radar (LIDAR) system small enough to place on an armored personnel carrier for chemical detection purposes.

The Pentagon’s Congressionally-mandated annual reports on PLA modernization have been warning about potential breakthroughs in laser weapons since their first issue in late 1998. In its 2002 report the Department of Defense stated, “China reportedly is focusing its laser weapon development on anti-personnel, counter-precision guided munitions air defense, and ASAT roles.”[8] Beginning with its 1998 report the Department of Defense noted the probable PLA use of ground-based lasers to damage satellites. In its 2002 report the U.S. Department of Defense stated this observation as follows:

In 1984 Russia used a laser to track the U.S. space shuttle and caused some malfunctions.[15] In the early 1990s Western observers were surprised to discover the KDKhR-1N laser-based “chemical reconnaissance system.” Russian ships have used lasers to ward off U.S. aircraft, and on occasion have blinded U.S. pilots. Developed in the 1980s it is a laser-radar on a tracked APC chassis configured to detect and classify chemical agents. Russia markets a variety of laser tracking and designating systems. One system marketed at the 2003 Moscow Airshow, the Nudelman Precision Engineering Bureau’s PAPV uses lasers to locate enemy optics, like a sniper scope, and deliver a laser blast that blinds the sniper, or worse.

www.uscc.gov...


Continued



posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 06:20 AM
link   
17.

One approach is "parasite satellites"--orbiting limpet bombs that attach themselves to enemy craft for detonation at a later date. The Chinese say they can do this already, though the claim is hard to verify. A simpler method is to disable your enemy with a high-speed projectile. In other words, shoot at it. This was tried in 1974 when the Soviet Union launched Salyut 3, the first crewed military reconnaissance outpost in orbit. In anticipation of an attack by the US, the Soviets mounted a modified machine gun on the satellite so they could greet any hostile approach with a hail of bullets. The attack never came. Salyut 3 proved to be a white elephant and was quickly decommissioned, although not without a shot being fired. After the two-man crew had left, the ground crew fired a few rounds by remote control. It must have been quite a sight.

Particle-beam weapons inflict damage in a similar way. They emit beams of particles, perhaps hydrogen or deuterium ions, at near-light speed. Details remain sketchy, but the principle is essentially the same as in an ion-propulsion system (New Scientist, 21 November 1998, p 22). A working particle beam is believed to have been on board the mysterious Soviet "battlestar" Polyus-Skif, which was launched in May 1987 but crashed during take-off. Polyus-Skif also carried a prototype laser for destroying satellites. In the US, research on particle-beam weapons continues at the High Energy Research and Technology Facility on Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico.

www.jamesoberg.com...


18.

This passage was published before Edward Gerry announced his invention of the gas-dynamic laser, which opened the door for high-energy laser (HEL) technology. Public disclosures about rapidly advancing HEL technology, which now includes electric discharge lasers and chemical lasers, suggest that the U.S-Soviet competition to weaponize these technologies is well under way.

Following the advent of gas-dynamic laser technology in the late 1960s, various news reports have been published regarding the military potential of high-energy laser weapons. For example, in 1973 an Associated Press story stated that:

The British government is exchanging information with the United States on a laser "death ray" both nations are developing to destroy aircraft and missiles at long range, the Defense Ministry said today. A spokesman said work on a powerful, long-range laser gun has been going on for some time.3

More recently, an article appearing in the New York Times boasted a headline implying that high-energy laser weapons would become part of American and Soviet arsenals in the not-too-distant future.4 What formerly had been considered an exotic weapon possibility has now become a conventional topic of popularized articles appearing in news stories and in science-oriented magazines.

www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil...


19.

In 1983 flight trials of the approximately 60t laser device commenced on an Ilyushin Il-76MD heavylift transport. At the same time research was being carried out on the propagation of laser beams in the atmosphere.

Starting at the end of the 1960s, the Russians also developed ground-based nuclear laser systems for combating spacecraft. Unlike the American x-ray lasers, they could be used several times over. The programme was terminated after the USSR announced a unilateral moratorium on trials of the space defence system and the puzzling deaths of the two project managers in the mid-1980s.

The mobile Pamir-SU electro-generator, with an output of 15MW and a mass of around 20t, could supply power to long-range lasers and ultra-high-frequency weapon systems. It could be used both on the Earth and also in space. In 1994/1995 this equipment was sold to the USA.

www.flug-revue.rotor.com...


20.

LEAD: Soviet Laser Threat Seen The Soviet Union has developed lasers capable of destroying low-orbiting United States satellites, an Air Force general said. Page 62.

query.nytimes.com...


21.

We have right now, I believe, one weapons-grade laser operating in the United States. The Soviets have at least ten we have identified and there may be more. At Los Alamos right now our scientists are working on developing a very compact particle accelerator. This is vital work toward the development of something you have all heard about, a particle beam weapon of some kind. At the heart of that system is a Soviet invention dating back to the 1960s called a radio frequency quadrapole. Years ago, the Soviets mys@eriously decided that there would be no more literature, open or semi-open, on this or any similar development. Such information suddenly disappeared from these vaunted scientific exchanges that we hear are so important. Of course, the Soviets exchange very little information that is vital to them in these so-called exchanges, anyway.

www.heritage.org...


22.

The Soviet Union has had a large, military-sponsored, high-energy laser weapon program since the l960s. One of the primary motivations for this effort is probably the development of ballistic missile defense weapons. Our best evidence in this area concerns a major program to develop the technology necessary for a ground-based laser weapon for terminal ballistic missile defense. Soviet research also has included a project to develop a space-based laser weapon, probably for ASAT applications initially, but we believe that the more difficult BMD mission is also of interest to them. The result of these longstanding and well-funded programs is that the Soviets are now on a par with, or lead, the United States in most of the directed energy weapons technologies.

We believe there is a high probability that a Soviet prototype high-energy laser ASAT weapon will be tested in low orbit by the early 1990s. A space-based laser of the 1-megawatt class could be tested in the late 1980s at the earliest, but prototype testing is more likely to occur in the early 1990s. If testing proves successful, an initial operational low-altitude system consisting of a few satellite weapons, each having an ASAT range in the hundreds of kilometers, could be available by the mid-1990s.

www.fas.org...


23.

The Soviets built high-energy laser devices in the 1980s and generally placed more emphasis on the weapons applications of lasers than did the West. The tactical laser program had progressed to the point that by the mid-1980s, U.S. analysts anticipated that laser weapons would be deployed with future Soviet forces.

www.dia.mil...


24.

Stream, or Potok in Russian, is a new portable laser weapon developed by the St. Petersburg Institute of Special Materials. Unlike all other laser weapons already known to the world, Stream can temporarily stun a human being without causing irreversible blindness or death.
"I guess you could call it a true technological breakthrough," said Arkady Khalyavitsky, one of the three inventors of Stream. "The most important thing is that the laser is non-lethal. To our knowledge, this is the first thing of this kind to be made in Russia or the world."

Weighing just 300 grams and around 15 centimeters long, Stream looks more like a pocket flashlight than a crowd-control weapon. In fact, it looks so ordinary that, at first glance, one would think it was just one of those laser pointers you can easily find down at Sennaya Ploshchad.

But Stream's country of origin should perhaps not come as a surprise. A July 1996 U.S. intelligence report, entitled Worldwide Laser Capabilities - obtained by Human Rights Watch under the Freedom of Information Act - even stated that "Russia leads the world in the development of laser blinding weapons."

With previous laser weapons, it was found that there was no middle ground between causing blindness or death with a laser at full power, and having almost no effect when the laser was weak.

Mikhailin said that one Stream laser could cost from $100 to $1,000 or more, depending on the power required.

www.sptimes.ru...


Continued



posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 06:25 AM
link   
25.

Hydrogen Fluoride Laser. The hydrogen fluoride laser operates much like a rocket engine. In the laser cavity, atomic fluorine reacts with molecular hydrogen to produce excited hydrogen fluorine molecules. The resulting laser produces several simultaneous wavelengths in the range of 2.7 microns and 2.9 microns. The laser beam, at these wavelengths, is mostly absorbed by the earth's atmosphere and can only be used above the earth's atmosphere.47 This laser is the leading contender for the Space-Based Laser (SBL) program.

The Ballistic Missile Defense Organization continues to support the hydrogen fluoride laser for space-based defenses.48 The Alpha program, originally funded by Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in the 1980s, then the Strategic Defense Initiative Office (SDIO), and now BMDO, has successfully demonstrated a megawatt power laser in a low-pressure, simulated space environment.49 The design is compatible with a space environment, is directly scalable to the size required for a space-based laser, and produces the power and beam quality specified in the SDIO plan in 1984.50 This laser has been integrated with optical systems from the Large Advanced Mirror Program, described later, and has been test fired at the TRW San Juan Capistrano test facility in California.

The Mid-Infrared Advanced Chemical Laser (MIRACL), built by TRW Inc., is a deuterium fluoride laser that is capable of power in excess of one megawatt.53 The system was first operational in 1980 and since then has accumulated over 3,600 seconds of lasing time.54 This laser system has been integrated with a system called the SEALITE Beam Director, which is a large pointing telescope for high-energy lasers, and in 1996 successfully shot down a rocket at the U.S. Army's High-Energy Laser Systems Test Facility at the White Sands Missile Range.55

www.au.af.mil...


26.

The U.S. military operational community does not
widely appreciate the progress that has been made
in increasing SSL power levels. As noted earlier,
the three corporations participating in DoD’s Joint
High-Powered Solid-State Laser Program either
have achieved or will shortly achieve 25-kilowatt
power levels with solid-state lasers in a laboratory
environment.3 While this is far from the 100 kW
range that the DoD’s High Energy Laser Joint
Technology Office believes is necessary for a tactical
laser to be effective, this work is viewed by many
in the industry as promising. As technology progresses,
weight might emerge as a problem as it is
estimated that reaching an objective power-to-mass
ratio would result in a laser system weighing
about 11,000 pounds4, much heavier than would
be feasible for some of the uses described above.
However, some in industry argue that technological
advances could reduce the weight of a SSL laser
of optimal power to less than 4,000 pounds.

www.analysiscenter.northropgrumman.com...


27.

Threatening U.S. Satellites. The Soviets could also use as ASAT systems their Galosh Anti-Ballistic Missile and other modified ballistic missiles besides the SS-9. These missiles could carry conventional or nuclear warheads. Moscow is also developing ground-based lasers, such as the massive Soviet laser facility under construction at Dushanbe, and space-based ASAT systems, including lasers. All of these systems could threaten U.S. satellites.

These ASAT systems are part of the massive Soviet Red Shield strategic defense program which, as Mikhail Gorbachev has admitted, is being energetically pursued. This Red Shield program is significantly larger than the congressionally constrained U.S. SDI program and includes deployed systems such as ASATs, while SDI remains a research program.

The failure of the anti-satellite (ASAT) negotiations dur ing the Carter Administration is in large part attributable to a fundamental discrepancy: the USSR possessed a demonstrable if limited capacity to intercept and destroy some low-orbit US satellites, while the United States did not possess a capacity to do the same to corresponding Soviet systems. US officials were largely uninterested in an accord that would preserve the Soviet advantage: Soviet officials were 20 uninterested in an accord that would eliminate their advantage.

Such an accord would also fail to prevent Soviet development of improved versions of this system and of new types of ASAT systems,.such as lasers, because Moscow could evade any limits on their development. The idea of an ASAT ban thus is not only a nonsense, but a dangerous nonsense.

www.heritage.org...


28.

Laser weapons may also be tested in the near term. The United States is moving ahead with the air force's Airborne Laser, and may accelerate elements of the Space-Based Laser, depending on the former's success. In the past, U.S., and possibly Soviet, lasers have "illuminated" satellites in orbit and experiments have been conducted on the vulnerability of satellites to laser attack. But these tests have been few and far between. Now India is moving ahead with a laser program and may decide to test against space-based assets sometime in the next decade. Again, there are no current rules--but possible damage to other countries' spacecraft would not be a trivial international problem.

www.thebulletin.org...


29.

There are a variety of friendly and hostile lasers currently developed by military forces in the form of laser range finders and designators. Some of the Soviet lasers may have power levels unwarranted by range finder or designator applications, but it is not known whether these are intended as anti-personnel weapons. Laser radiation has been experienced by U.S. flight crews flying reconnaissance missions. While there are several different damage mechanisms (discussed in this report), present lasers can cause eye damage at ranges up to a few miles. However, they can cause a "dazzle" effect at greater ranges (particularly at night) when illumination of a cockpit and the scattering of light results in the inability of the crew perform its mission and can result in the loss of the aircraft. The panel concluded that the laser threat is growing and whether intentionally used as anti-personnel weapons or causing damage only accidentally, lasers must be considered a growing anti-personnel threat against which protection should be provided.The naval aviators most exposed to this threat are the air-to-surface attack aircraft and the
Marine aircraft and helicopter crews supporting ground combat.

www.onr.navy.mil...


30.

Lt. Cmdr. Daly, who has since retired, was injured while photographing the Russian merchant ship Kapitan Mann, which was gathering intelligence on a U.S. nuclear submarine in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, northwest of Washington state's Puget Sound, on April 4, 1997.

After several passes aboard a Canadian military helicopter, the intelligence officer and the pilot, Canadian Capt. Pat Barnes, suffered injuries to their eyes that doctors found were consistent with laser illumination. The Russian military has used lasers to thwart surveillance in the past.

A Purple Heart is awarded to U.S. servicemen wounded by enemy combatants. It is also given posthumously to the next of kin of a servicemen killed in action or from wounds received in action

www.washtimes.com...


31.

Tremendous Resources. Considerable funding has been allotted to these efforts. According to former Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Robert Gates the Soviet laser program is estimated to cost about $1 billion per year The Soviets also have invested tremendous resources in developing an extensive space launch capability, centered on very large booster rockets and reusable spacecraft, which could lift strategic defense systems into space.

www.heritage.org...


32.

According to the Hong Kong media, in June 2000 the Chinese military was developing sophisticated laser artillery (also known as "death ray" artillery). It was listed in China's "1998 National Security System Project," adopted by Jiang Zemin in 1999.

The PLA successfully tested laser artillery – for the second time – in intercepting low-flying missiles in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau in early June 2000. This laser weapon could significantly upgrade the anti-aircraft and anti-missile capability of, particularly, the PLA navy. Reportedly, new tests of "laser artillery" took place in 2001.

It should be emphasized that China received from Russia much of its laser technology, both for civilian and military use, from 1992 to 1998. And in June 1999, in Moscow, Col.-Gen. Zhang Wannian concluded agreements on joint laser-weapons development.

www.newsmax.com...


There might be one or two copies of the same information, from two sources, but that is so for a reason. If i used the same source page twice somewhere please point this out to me as the list is getting a bit unwieldy..

Stellar

[edit on 12-8-2006 by StellarX]



posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 10:14 AM
link   
stellar, i think you made your point with one post.



posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 11:08 AM
link   
I'm sorry but what on earth are you talking about?
People who believe in UFO's are scientifically illiterate?
I mean I would respond more but that...nevermind



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied

Originally posted by xEphon
I'm sorry but what on earth are you talking about?
People who believe in UFO's are scientifically illiterate?

How you came to that conclusion I have no clue.

What I'm talking about is scientifically illiterate people will look at these videos and automatically assume it must be a UFO just because someone else says it is and they don’t have any tools to prove otherwise other than their own opinion.

Scientifically educated people will look at these videos and use logic and physics to try and rule out all other known (and unknown) possibilities before coming to a conclusion… and often the only conclusion that can made is that it’s inconclusive as to what it may be without more data.

(I realize the term "illiterate" may sound offensive but it wasn't meant that way.)


if you watch nasa videos you can come to the conclusion that the object in the videos is a ufo quite conclusively. the next logical assesment is that it is alien spacecraft. that conclusion is what most people will reach, however i admit there is no proof to this. but, being that you can observe the object it is easy to rule out any object incapable of making a 90° turn in mid space. that rules out debris and craft made with known technologies of man.



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 11:32 PM
link   
While engaging in a search for links for a discussion on exactly this subject over at Strieber's home page, found this fresh thread and would be delighted to join in if acceptable. (www.jamesoberg.com)

Debating this particular case can be constructive because the context of the original apparition can be so well defined and constrained, so we can have a good shot at determining whether this case really is only 'space junk' (and hence, all the UFO argumentation based on it are based on junk) and the promoters of the case in the media are incompetent, or the stimulus of the case is outside 'ordinary events' and requires a non-prosaic basis. I favor the former of the two alternatives, and there could well be additional alternatives. I think Kasher's 'proofs' are inane and useful only to winnow out people who understand math, from those who are hornswoggled by it -- but I expect to have to prove that interpretation.

Here's a list of links with background data and back-forth argumentation:

Kasher original paper (named misspelled ‘Rasher’) www.nicap.org...

Whitley’s journal:
www.unknowncountry.com...
www.unknowncountry.com...

Pro-Kasher links:
ttp://www.nicap.org/sts_48dir.htm
www.abovetopsecret.com... (links to video)

Mike Bara (1997) critiques my original pro-prosaic essay:
www.lunaranomalies.com...
and also www.ufoevidence.org...
My reply:
www.jamesoberg.com...

Oberg/Ecker debate on Larry King (1992):
www.ufoseek.org...

Some of my own argumentation:
My 1992 ‘short explanation’ www.debunker.com...
(but I no longer believe “If one plotted all the departure lines
of the pushed debris and the expelled ice, they would converge
at the jet's location” because the ‘shoving’ plume seems to have
taken a bounce off the aft wing inboard elevon, not gone directly
to impact the nearby debris.”)
www.virtuallystrange.net...
www.rense.com...



Prosaic arguments:
www.lysator.liu.se... (scroll down)

Actual STS-48 telemetry showing why jet fired and
at that moment why the stars don’t seem to shift:
www.igs.net... or
www.igs.net...

My general comments on NASA TV, what you see is what there is…
www.space.com...
and www.space.com...



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 01:11 AM
link   
Just so you know, if the object in question were an ice crystal near the shuttles thruster nozzle, the discharge of said thruster would disturb the motion of the aforementioned particle, causing the particle itself to move off, not simply moving the shuttle. And if the thruster were located to the bottom-left of the frame, it may have GREATLY accelerated another particle across the shot when it lit off, generating the blurry, faster moving object.

Or we could be at war with aliens.

I know which answer I like better.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied



OBERG: I'll tell you, if we saw some real spacecraft - if I saw some real spacecraft - and I know many people in the space program - saw something out there that could be really proof of something revolutionary, there's no power on earth that would be able to stop people from coming out and being on your show.


No power on earth? Funny considering the scale of the secrets governments all around the world have kept from the the public in the past. It's claims like these that destroys a persons credibility whatever their expertise and knowledge. It just makes it so very clear that their batting for the other side.

Stellar



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Stellar, can you provide me an example of somebody who was prosecuted or punished for speaking out about 'UFO secrets'? Sure, there are lots of legends, but when OMNI magazine sponsored 'Project Open Book' back in the early 1990's, and I was part of the team, we spent a lot of time and money tracking down claims, and came up with zilch.

And Stellar, we are also noticing that you are dodging the central theme of this thread, the allegations that the STS-48 video shows something unexplainable in everyday terms. Do you concede that point, or do you wish to contest it, or are you going to argue that the lack of credible evidence is PROOF of the vastness of the conspiracy?

Also -- don't throw around ad hominem phrases such as 'batting for the other side'. It may make you feel warm and fuzzy, but it just makes your mental processes look fuzzy.



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   
One compelling reason to believe it and the other dots are small nearby objects can be found in viewing the longer version of the video sequence.

The ground lights go by with the horizon in the distance. Sunrise occurs -- a small smudge of light on the shuttle begins to glow, and a host of moving dots appear all at the same moment that orbital calculations show the Sun pops above the horizon.

Some of them drift out of the field of view, but one of them is still in sight a minute later when the 'flicker' occurs (precisely at the time an attitude adjustment thruster fires) -- and it (along with some other dots) changes course during and ONLY during the 1-second thruster firing.

The implication of this sequence is that stuff is nearby the shuttle (so close that sunrise occurred simo for all objects), then got pushed by the thruster plume.

The implication is so strong that most UFO websites do NOT show the entire sequence.



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 02:38 PM
link   
I saw a video the other day on YouTube called "UFO EXPLODING" Could it have any connection to the ongoing "War in Space".

Here's the link: www.youtube.com...



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimO
Stellar, can you provide me an example of somebody who was prosecuted or punished for speaking out about 'UFO secrets'?


I'm sure i could dig up something had i any interest in defending a claim i never made.


Sure, there are lots of legends, but when OMNI magazine sponsored 'Project Open Book' back in the early 1990's, and I was part of the team, we spent a lot of time and money tracking down claims, and came up with zilch.


Like appointing Kissinger to the 9-11 commission if you ask me. If they can ban DDT and keep cold fusion from the market they can do ANYTHING.



And Stellar, we are also noticing that you are dodging the central theme of this thread, the allegations that the STS-48 video shows something unexplainable in everyday terms.


I lack the time to research your explanation of the issue but considering all the other things i know i see no need to engage you on a topic you clearly had lots of practice with. I find STS-80 rather more interesting but there is no arguing with someone who sees ice particles in front of every curtain IMO.


Do you concede that point, or do you wish to contest it, or are you going to argue that the lack of credible evidence is PROOF of the vastness of the conspiracy?


Oh i have pretty of evidence to prove the immense scale of dozens of conspiracies far larger than this. What i do find interesting is how little people will use towards defending their own views ( scientist and otherwise seemingly intelligent folk )and how much they expect when others contest it. Ice particle's it will have to be for now thought.


Also -- don't throw around ad hominem phrases such as 'batting for the other side'.


Well your on the side that generally defends the truth, right? Why feel insulted when i am , according to you, the ignorant paranoid one? Don't rise if standing hurts so much.


It may make you feel warm and fuzzy, but it just makes your mental processes look fuzzy.


Nothing about your denial of government complicity in numerous conspiracies makes me feel 'warm and fuzzy' and actually leaves me quite cold. You will have ample time to discover just how my mind works if you continue to assume to be the only well informed party here.

On a less hostile note i would be interested to know what you make of the source material i provided earlier. If you can point out unreliable statements/facts it would obviously make my life easier as you are surely better informed than most people i am likely to meet.

I just respond in the same general tone so considering your superior age and experience the ball is very much in your court as to how this will play out.

Stellar



posted on Aug, 26 2006 @ 10:16 AM
link   
quote: Originally posted by JimO
Stellar, can you provide me an example of somebody who was prosecuted or punished for speaking out about 'UFO secrets'?

"I'm sure i could dig up something had i any interest in defending a claim i never made. "

When somebody posted an old quote of mine saying that nobody would be able to prevent me or any other space worker from going public with news of a clear ET encounter, you poohpoohed it with reference to vast secret forces that prevent such disclosure.

That's the way I interpreted your response. If you meant something else, and have actual evidence to support it, please clarify.



posted on Aug, 26 2006 @ 10:20 AM
link   
quote: Sure, there are lots of legends, but when OMNI magazine sponsored 'Project Open Book' back in the early 1990's, and I was part of the team, we spent a lot of time and money tracking down claims, and came up with zilch.

"Like appointing Kissinger to the 9-11 commission if you ask me. If they can ban DDT and keep cold fusion from the market they can do ANYTHING. "

You don't have any confidence in the intentions and capabilities of OMNI magazine to presenting accurate information on the UFO controversy? Well, it's easy enough to prove -- just cite my an example or two of provable witness persecution that you seem so sure the magazine's team (of whioch I was part, but not the leader) missed?


Banning DDT may be stupid, but last I looked it had been done openly through congressional action. No secret cabal was involved, AFAIK -- but enlighten us if that view is wrong.

Keeping cold fusion from the market is an interesting claim -- how is it kept from the Brazilian market, or the North Korean market, or the Russian market, then? What power extends to each and every corner of each and every nation of the planet, in your worldview?



posted on Aug, 26 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   
quote: And Stellar, we are also noticing that you are dodging the central theme of this thread, the allegations that the STS-48 video shows something unexplainable in everyday terms.

"I lack the time to research your explanation of the issue but considering all the other things i know i see no need to engage you on a topic you clearly had lots of practice with. I find STS-80 rather more interesting but there is no arguing with someone who sees ice particles in front of every curtain IMO. "

You seem to have had plenty of time to research space lasers when the avalanche of internet extracts could be made to seem to support an extraordinary stimulus for the video. It's too bad you now say you are 'too busy' to read evidence for a contrary view. Is it a general rule for you, that you want to avoid reading reports on such stories, any stories, by people who have delved into them in details? Again, an interesting approach toward understanding a mysterious phenomenon.

Why would you be interested in STS-80, if -- and fair warning here -- I'm 'practiced' with that one too. Do you want to tell me there is no prosaic explanation, or -- when I present some detailed studies -- will you run away from that one too and find yet another temporary favorite?

The STS-48 and STS-80 'UFO videos' do have many similarities, the most telling of which -- and I'm betting you never knew this -- is that they both occurred in the brief interval after orbital sunrise when the shuttle and nearby objects were bathed in sunlight while the Earth beneath the camera view was still in darkness. That, in my view, is not a coincidence, it is a clue towards the prosaic nature of the images.



posted on Aug, 26 2006 @ 10:27 AM
link   
quote: Also -- don't throw around ad hominem phrases such as 'batting for the other side'.


"Well your on the side that generally defends the truth, right? Why feel insulted when i am , according to you, the ignorant paranoid one? Don't rise if standing hurts so much. "


I missed that post -- when did I say that about you?




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join