It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Phage
We have never been informed (and probably never will be) of the precise failure mode of the missile. I don't think there is any reason to believe that the test was not a failure since a failure can be defined as the payload not reaching its target. But the successful launch the following day of the Topol-M displayed a similar effect so it could very well be that the spiral was not a direct result of the failure. It should be pointed out that James Oberg has been skeptical of the spiral being caused by the failure of the Bulava since very early on. At one point I, half in jest, suggested that the spiral was indeed evidence of electronic counter measures.
A very detailed and thorough analysis to show that the Bulava was the source of the spiral.
No. It wasn't a missile
Originally posted by undo
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
ewww, i feel all negative and crap now. you're dripping in some heavy duty anger or something. whew. you okay?
Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
reply to post by tauristercus
As it is, I have no opinion on what started this spiral, and in the end...I don't care. Whether it was a failed missile or a paranormal monster that is forming on the equivalent scale of Godzilla, ITS OVER. Thanks for all of your work, but, this is a dead horse that has been beaten to the point of it becoming a husk.
Originally posted by tauristercus
I'm quite certain that at no time did I mention any other nations involvement beyond that of Russia's ... so by definition ... NO conspiracy and by extension ... NO conspiracy theory.
I ended my analysis with a speculation that perhaps to mask or divert attention away from the testing of some possible new technology, that the Russian military/government/whatever may have resorted to downplaying or misreporting the actual degree of success they may have been achieving. Would this behaviour be unique and a 1st timer in the annals of military hardware development ? I think not !
I also conjectured that I personally thought it exceedingly strange and unusual that Russia, with 50 odd years in very successful missile and launch vehicle technology but now all of a sudden can't seem to get x amount of missiles to successfully launch if their lives depended on it ... especially considering that these NEW missiles are based to a large extent on their tried and tested Topol M predecessor which constitutes the backbone of the Russian missile fleet ?
So are we to assume that the Russians have somehow progressed backwards in launch technology and forgotten much of what they had learned during the Cold War ... or perhaps under reporting their real successes ?
Originally posted by Helmkat
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
Honestly I am really suprised EM.
For someone who just spent a long time telling people over and over to review the data to talk intelligently on the Haiti Haarp situation, you are not practicing as you preach here.
The OP put a lot of time and effort into this, perhaps you should "respond to the data" presented?