Norway Spiral thread series MAY have predicted new Russian technology claiming missiles invulnerable

page: 1
25
<<   2 >>

log in

join
+4 more 
posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 10:35 PM
link   
Just after the Norway Spiral gained international notoriety, I created a very detailed 3-part thread series, namely:
Norway Spiral : Case reopened - the anatomy of an event
Norway Spiral : Case reopened - the analysis of an event (Part 2)
Norway Spiral : Case Closed
in which I attempted to show that the "common belief" promulgated by the media and the Russian military itself, that the Norway Spiral phenomena was caused by nothing more mysterious than a fuel leak in the 3rd stage of the Bulava missile, was in fact erroneous, misleading and in my opinion, an ingenious attempt by the Russian military to deflect attention and close scrutiny of what may have in fact been a very succesful test of a new highly advanced offense/defense or propulsion system.

The overall belief was that the Russian military was struggling to gain any kind of reliability with the Bulava missile system tests due to the extremely high number of apparently "failed" test launches prior to, and including the test that resulted in the Norway Spiral phenomena. In fact, the entire Bulava missile system was under a very grey cloud and there was even talk that the Bulava system may never make it into final, battle ready, production and go online.

In fact, since the Norway Spiral incident of 2 years ago, there has been virtually zero additional media news on the status of the Bulava missile system ... was it still under development ? ... was it still scheduled to go into production ? ... would the project be terminated due to the high "failure" rate ?

However, we now have reports that the Bulava missile system apparently is now functioning as designed and has been approved for deployment in either late 2011 or early 2012.



"The Bulava has taken off. That’s good news. We understand that in this case we can put the missile into serial production," Serdyukov said at a meeting with Russian defense observers.

On Tuesday, the 15th test launch of the Bulava missile was successfully conducted by the Defense Ministry.

"We’ve achieved results; we now can put the Bulava on the Yury Dolgoruky," he added.

The Russian Defense Ministry said earlier that if the 15th test of Bulava was successful, the missile might be put into service later in 2011 or in early 2012.

Source: Russia to start Bulava production


So, are we to believe that with such a high rate of "test failures" occuring as late as December 2009, that somehow in the 2 years since the Norway Spiral incident, that all the ongoing problems with the Bulava missile series have all been sorted out and the system is now fully functional and ready for deployment ?

In my mind, this lends further credence to the point that I was making in my Norway Spiral thread series that the so-called "failures" were nothing more than an effective smoke screen hiding the fact that the Russian military was not so much testing a new missile series but rather using an already reliable launch system based on the existing and proven Tupolov missile system, to conduct tests on a highly advanced and very top secret offensive/defensive technology. A vastly new and superior technology that possibly had the potential to nullify American and NATO missile systems and defenses, rendering them basically innefective and thereby shifting the balance of global military power well and truly back into the Russian sphere.

Naturally, when I created the Norway Spiral thread series, I could only base my final conclusion that the Bulava missile series of tests were in fact a cover up based on available media based evidence. However, the "evidence" clearly pointed to the fact that the Russians were testing some new and exotic form of missile based technology and from the incredible photo's that made headline news around the world, this technology was something that the world had never seen before, or even suspected that it existed and quite possibly was based and developed on some kind of "scientific breakthrough".

So here we are 2 short years later and not only do we learn that the Russian military has not only sorted out all the so-called "technical problems" that were plaguing the Bulava missile system and are now so confident that they've announced it's imminent deployment, but we are being told by a proud and confident Russian military that the West's missile defense shields are now effectively nullified and no longer a treat to Russian missiles.



MOSCOW: Nearly all of the silo-based and mobile missile systems belonging to the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces (RVSN) are equipped with warheads capable of overpowering missile defense shields, RVSN Commander Lt. Gen. Sergei Karakayev said.

Source: Source


Additional information, courtesy of the Russian military, is that their missile systems now carry advanced means to overpower missile defense shield.



"New missile systems of RVSN will be equipped with highly effective maneuverable and guided warheads and more advanced means able to overpower missile defense shields. All this allows us to confidently forecast the Russian strategic nuclear forces' ability to maintain the country's security no matter what scenario the international situation follows," Karakayev said.

Source: Source


All of the above, in my opinion, confirms and validates the point I was making in my Norway Spiral threads, namely that the Russian military was using the Bulava's to conduct testing on incredibly advanced technology and doing it in plain site of the world but getting away with it by encouraging the belief that they were having significant technical issues with the Bulava's and that the missile system was an inferior one compared to what the Americans and NATO possessed ... and therefore nothing for the West to be concerned over.


Well surprise, surprise ... looks like the Russian military may just have pulled a fast one on the rest of the world !

edit on 16/12/11 by tauristercus because: (no reason given)


 
Mod Edit: External Source Tags Instructions – Please Review This Link.
edit on 25/12/2011 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 10:40 PM
link   
S+F just for the work you did on all these!!
Its late, but im going to finish reading this, then go back and look at the older threads.
Thanks for bringing this up again because this event has always been stuck in the back of my head and will be until we figure out what exactly caused it.



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Fantastic thread!

S&F

It's easy to tell you've done your homework....keep up the great work!

It's ATS members like you that keep us informed of things that go on in the world.
edit on 16-12-2011 by isyeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 10:53 PM
link   
So, you're saying instead of a missile accidentally spiraling out of control due to error, that one purposely maneuvered in a spiral pattern to demonstrate that it could?

I guess we'll never knew until it's too late...



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Russian missile technology is certainly the best. There topol-m missiles are excellent penetrators in time of nuclear war. Not only that, they have multiple missiles that render Aegis missle defense which protects carriers obsolete. If syria did get a hold of russian technolgy, launching 20-30 simultaneous missiles at a US carrier is a sure way to sink it.



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 





In fact, since the Norway Spiral incident of 2 years ago, there has been virtually zero additional media news on the status of the Bulava missile system

Wrong. I've been following Russian news every week and there's been dozens of articles on the bulava in the last two years.

But anyway, great work on these threads.
edit on 16-12-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Somehow it double posted...
edit on 16-12-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 

Great thread on this. I just got done spending some time reading about these and their new mobile land based missile and it's all fascinating, but I have to agree with you. They are nothing terribly new in producing something like the Spiral, which was so far outside anything we've seen before. The missiles don't even seem to be 100% certain as outside the pre-existing START treaty limitations. They likely are, but no one knows for sure. Doesn't sound like their Torpedo for entirely new and different tech tho, to be sure.

I've wondered since I first saw it and how symmetrical it was, if it wasn't a propulsion system and perhaps one that wasn't intended to be engaged inside the atmosphere at all. The world's most visible case of 'Whats this button do?' or the largest Oops one can imagine...either way. Your material and what I looked up after reading the OP just seems to deepen the mystery all around....but does seem to make the official version sound pretty silly.



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


According to Russian Space Web there have been 5 successful launches of Bulava since the Norway incident...


Two previous launches of the Bulava missile also failed, bringing the total of failed flights to six. (see above) The latest flight apparently followed an aborted launch attempt in November, when the Dmitry Donskoy submarine reportedly sailed to the launch area, but did not conduct the actual launch scheduled for Nov 24, 2009, the RIA Novosti news agency reported. The test was originally scheduled to take place in October 2009.

Despite the scandalous atmosphere around the project, the high rate of failures in Bulava tests might be explained by the complex nature of the new weapon, especially of its highly maneuverable third stage, rather than by a fundamental flaw in the design of the missile. The history of rocket development knows many examples of difficult birth of new systems, which would later reach a high degree of reliability and performance. In August of 2009, shortly after the previous failed launch, Russian officials disclosed that a fourth submarine for the Bulava-type missiles would be constructed.

2010 Oct. 7: The long-anticipated 13th launch of the Bulava missile was successful, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced. The rocket was launched from the Dmitry Donskoy submarine stationed in the White Sea in the direction of the Kura impact range on the Kamchatka Peninsula. According to the Ministry of Defense spokesman, all warheads reached Kura. Two more test launches were promised during 2010, including one from the Dmitry Donskoy and one from the operational version of the submarine - the Yuri Dolgoruky.

2010 Oct. 29: The 14th test launch of Russia's Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missile was a complete success, official media reported Friday. It was the second successful flight in a row of the previously troubled vehicle. The missile lifted off on Oct. 29, 2010, at 05:10 Moscow Time from the Dmitry Donskoy submarine submerged in the White Sea. Several minutes later, the multiple warheads from the missile successfully hit their targets at the Kura impact range in the Kamchatka Peninsula, a Russian Ministry of Defense spokesman said. Another test launch of the Bulava missile was scheduled for December of this year, Russian media reported.

2011 June 28: The Yuri Dolgoruky submarine submerged in the White Sea launched the Bulava missile. According to the official Russian sources, this was the first firing of the missile from an operational vessel and all warheads successfully reached their targets at the Kura impact range on the Kamchatka Peninsula. On August 1, 2011, Russian officials promised to conduct four test firings of the Bulava missile before the end of 2011, including a possible salvo launch of two or more vehicles.

2011 Aug. 27: At 07:20 Moscow Time, the Bulava missile lifted off from the Yuri Dolgoruky submarine stationed in the submerged position in the White Sea and 33 minutes later its warheads successfully impacted in the Pacific Ocean, some 9,300 kilometers from the launch site, demonstrating maximum range of the new weapon, representatives of the Russian Navy announced. It was the 16th flight of the missile.

2011 Oct. 28: (08:20 Moscow Time?) The Yuri Dolgoruky submarine stationed in the submerged position in the White Sea launched Bulava missile toward the Kura impact range in Kamchatka Peninsula. The missile's warheads reportedly reached their targets.



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


I have read your excellent threads on the Norway Spiral. One thought that came to my mind was
the idea of hundreds or thousands of these spirals spraying out particulate matter that could alter the
flight path,interfere with a guidance system or even cause detonation. On certain types of missles using
jet propulsion, the air intake could be fouled up, which could also result in malfunction. At the time however,
the main explanation (besides the UFO angle) was that it was an errant missle error.
Great Thread
S&F



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 



tauristercus - thank you for your diligence as well as fortitude...you set a high standard amongst the membership here.





With that said - I don't know what the Norway Spiral truly is, but it sure as hell isn't a missile, Bulava or not...the only evidence I have to back that up is common sense, but I understand that isn't always the recognized norm around here, so hey.





posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:09 AM
link   
S&F for both excellent research, with a few apparent exceptions and the fact that we live in the same city.
I knew that those spirals were not just fuel leaking or something else as mundane as that (wow calling that mundane says alot about out modern world)

Similar spirals have been reported in several different countries and they can't all be the same thing surely (they aren't and don't call me shirly)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by daynight42
So, you're saying instead of a missile accidentally spiraling out of control due to error, that one purposely maneuvered in a spiral pattern to demonstrate that it could?

I guess we'll never knew until it's too late...


Nope ... what I have always maintained is that the Bulava missile test on Dec 9 2009 (Norway Spiral date) was in fact a SUCCESSFUL launch ... contrary to what the media and the Russians wanted us to believe. The test on that day I propose was a test of some new scientific breakthrough that was either offensive or defensive in nature. The Russians didn't want to admit publicly to be in the possession of some highly advanced technology and so were more than prepared to "admit to" or "encourage" the world wide belief that their prized Bulava missile system may have been a load of crap to divert attention away from the new technology.

And here we are just 2 years down the track and what do we find ?
1. The Bulava missile system now seems to be completely reliable and able to be deployed as the new replacement missile system for the Russian navy, and
2. The Russian military claims it now has complete immunity from any Western missile defense shield.


Ask yourself, where did this unprecedented new defense technology that the Russians are claiming, come from ... and when was it tested ? Certainly didn't happen overnight.

I don't know about you but putting 2 and 2 together is giving me a definite 4 ... and I'm seeing the Norway Spiral test as possibly a test of highly advanced shielding technology.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:36 AM
link   
Please.

You were not the only one to speculate about countermeasures.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

And the idea that the spiral was related to countermeasures is still nothing but speculation.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
And the idea that the spiral was related to countermeasures is still nothing but speculation.


Speculation that is based on observation and deduction resulting in a viable hypothesis based on at least circumstantial evidence and NOT just because I have a personal agenda that I'm trying to shove down everyone's throat.

Also bear in mind that not ONE solid and undeniable piece of evidence has surfaced in the last 2 years that categorically and undeniably PROVES the Spiral event was nothing more than leaking fuel ... if YOU have such evidence that debunks conclusively my Spiral thread, then please feel free to produce it here for us to examine.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 

There is nothing to debunk. Your spiral thread "proved" that the spiral was produced by the launch of a missile. Something that most critical thinkers realized from the first reports. Whether or not the spiral had anything to do with countermeasures was, and is, nothing but speculation (spirals are not that unusual) but it was known that the primary purpose of the new missile was to defeat antimissile measures.

The system has been under development for some time and, as pointed out here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
continued to undergo development after the incident. It sounds like R&D to me.
edit on 12/17/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 01:07 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 




Nope ... what I have always maintained is that the Bulava missile test on Dec 9 2009 (Norway Spiral date) was in fact a SUCCESSFUL launch


By all accounts it was a successful launch, until the third separation stage.

So, if this was a successful launch and the spiral effect we saw was intentional, can you explain why was it carried out so soon after launch?

Every other Bulava missile was launched from the White Sea and flown to impact at the Kura test range in the Kamchatka Peninsula (except those that failed).

Why didn't they carry out this at Kura? Where there is a much, much less chance of witnesses seeing it?

I'm sorry but it seems you're making the evidence at hand fit a chosen belief.



And here we are just 2 years down the track and what do we find ?


We find a further 5 launches, all of which were successful and all were sent to Kura for impact.

So we have a few options here...

The first is that the December 9 launch did in fact fail and the story that was released was true.

Second, the December 9 launch was a complete success and they deliberately set off the 'spiral' early, but all other preceding and subsequent tests they set off the spiral at Kura.

Thirdly, the December 9 launch malfunctioned and the 'spiral' was set off too early.

ETA:

Fourth option could be that the December 9 launch was the only one to have the 'spiral' as part of it's mission, in which case what was the point of the subsequent 5 tests?

And what was the point of the 'spiral' test?














edit on 17/12/11 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by tauristercus
 


By all accounts it was a successful launch, until the third separation stage.

By "who's" account ?
As far as I'm aware, the Norway Bulava missile was NEVER examined by any other foreign government or agency and any "wreckage" (if it existed) was never located for examination. So the ONLY "official account" we have is from the Russian military itself.



So, if this was a successful launch and the spiral effect we saw was intentional, can you explain why was it carried out so soon after launch?

Every other Bulava missile was launched from the White Sea and flown to impact at the Kura test range in the Kamchatka Peninsula (except those that failed).

Why didn't they carry out this at Kura? Where there is a much, much less chance of witnesses seeing it?

No ... I have no explanation to account for a possible unscheduled and early test.



I'm sorry but it seems you're making the evidence at hand fit a chosen belief.

Wrong ... my "belief" as you call it ONLY came into existence AFTER I examined the available evidence. I did NOT decide that the Bulava test was a success and then try to find evidence to support it.
Examining the available evidence and trying to hypothesize different alternative scenarios that could account for a massive spiral caused purely by a fuel leak failed to provide a single instant in which the flight mode of the Bulava and the leaking fuel could produce a spiral effect that was visible to all witnesses essentially in a "full on" rather than "side on" view.

As far as I'm aware, there has not been a single hypothesis produced that accounts for this "full on" rather than "side on" view anomaly attributed to the spiral. In fact, I went to great lengths in part 1 of the Norway Spiral to clearly show how it was impossible for leaking fuel to produce such a massive and perfect spiral.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by tauristercus
 

There is nothing to debunk. Your spiral thread "proved" that the spiral was produced by the launch of a missile.


For once we agree ... yes, my thread attempted to "prove" that the spiral was produced by the launch of the Bulava missile.

But what it did NOT "prove" was that the spiral was the result of a malfunctioning 3rd stage coupled with a fuel leak.
In fact, the complete opposite was shown ... namely that the Bulava travelling right to left across the observers view could NOT have possibly have created a spiral effect that the observers viewed as being "full on" ... the physics simply prohibit it.

Look, if you're SO adamant in your belief that the 3rd stage malfunctioned with a fuel leak, then I would be extremely grateful if you could take the time to show from a physics point of view EXACTLY how a "full on" spiral effect could be produced by a missile crossing the observers view from right to left.
I have gone to the time and effort to show that it couldn't so I certainly would appreciate rather than just throwing words on a page and relying on repetitively saying "it isn't so", that you actually produce some definitive analysis of your own to back up YOUR "belief".

Show us how the spiral effect was the result of the 3rd stage in right to left trajectory coupled with fuel leakage.

I took the time, trouble and effort to produce a detailed 3 part analysis of the Spiral event to substantiate my hypothesis and claims ... what have you produced as an equally detailed counter argument to refute my findings ... besides a handful of words without substance put into a post ?



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 02:03 AM
link   
if you sprayed a liquid metal from the missle as it spiraled is there any way that the liquid metal mist could react in the upperatmosphere to prevent interception? Thats all i can think of.
edit on 17-12-2011 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
25
<<   2 >>

log in

join