This is a hardened aircraft shelter

[Onyx]

Too many alternate facts!

 

[Lewdog]

It doesn't matter if they detected them. The U.S. told Russia beforehand what they were doing, do you NOT think Russia didn't tell Syria what was going on? The cruise missiles have anti-jamming equipment on them and Syria couldn't do shit about it.

My god you are a moron...

The anti-jamming equipment is designed to prevent the missile from losing its route and being taken off course by the enemy. Not to jam communications in an airbase several hundred miles away. Russia informed the Syrians, and they moved their aircraft. I'd bet the money in my wallet.

No dumbass...as in anti-jamming equipment that keeps Syria from jamming the guidance systems and causing the cruise missiles to veer off target.

You should just stop, you are the lone person on this entire forum in this thread making idiotic statements that many people that know better are telling you is wrong, but you continue to defend it.

 

[Onyx]

No dumbass...as in anti-jamming equipment that keeps Syria from jamming the guidance systems and causing the cruise missiles to veer off target.

That's literally what I just said... You implied that the anti-jamming techonology would of blocked the Russians from informing the Syrians, or at least that's how I read your post.

You should just stop, you are the lone person on this entire forum in this thread making idiotic statements that many people that know better are telling you is wrong, but you continue to defend it.

I guarantee you I am the only one here educated in this field, so it doesn't really matter if a bunch of suburban dipshits on a messageboard attack me with alternate facts.

The pentagon claimed that there were 2 air squadrons in their early satellite imagery. If we find out that no more than two aircraft were destroyed (and I predict zero), then you'll eat crow tomorrow. Or forward me money via paypal. That's all I have to say about that!

 

[westwall]

Who cares? They flew to the target and blew it to hell.

That's yet to be proven. I bet my wallet no aircraft were destroyed.

Empty cardboard held together with a rubber band is no bet dude. Just sayin.....

 

[Lewdog]

No dumbass...as in anti-jamming equipment that keeps Syria from jamming the guidance systems and causing the cruise missiles to veer off target.

That's literally what I just said... You implied that the anti-jamming techonology would of blocked the Russians from informing the Syrians, or at least that's how I read your post.

You should just stop, you are the lone person on this entire forum in this thread making idiotic statements that many people that know better are telling you is wrong, but you continue to defend it.

I guarantee you I am the only one here educated in this field, so it doesn't really matter if a bunch of suburban dipshits on a messageboard attack me with alternate facts.

The pentagon claimed that there were 2 air squadrons in their early satellite imagery. If we find out that no more than two aircraft were destroyed (and I predict zero), then you'll eat crow tomorrow. Or forward me money via paypal. That's all I have to say about that!

No, that's NOT what I said. You said that if the launches were very close to Syira it would have triggered their attention, and I flat out said the U.S. TOLD RUSSIA it was going to happen beforehand, and asked if you seriously thought Russia didn't tell Syria is was coming...effectively making your argument moot.

You guarantee you are the only one educated in this field?

 

[westwall]

Tomahawks have a 99% reliability rating .. Best in the world for that kind of weapon..

At what range were the tests? Over 500km?

The 99% refers to them launching. Once they are in the air you program them to hit where you want. They can hit a window from 1000 km away. That's what makes them "precision". You really don't know anything do you?

 

[Onyx]

 

[Lewdog]

Tomahawks have a 99% reliability rating .. Best in the world for that kind of weapon..

At what range were the tests? Over 500km?

The 99% refers to them launching. Once they are in the air you program them to hit where you want. They can hit a window from 1000 km away. That's what makes them "precision". You really don't know anything do you?

As I told him in another thread, in the Gulf War in the 90's, cruise missiles could literally be fired from hundreds of miles away and make 90 degree corners on city streets to hit their target...and he thinks 20+ years later they are going to be ineffective.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Tomahawks have a 99% reliability rating .. Best in the world for that kind of weapon..

At what range were the tests? Over 500km?

The 99% refers to them launching. Once they are in the air you program them to hit where you want. They can hit a window from 1000 km away. That's what makes them "precision". You really don't know anything do you?

I really don't know why I try with some of these people.. The solid rockets used to fire this weapon off almost never fail. As long as the jet motor functions the missile is almost perfect in its targeting. And the internal systems can hit an area just 3 meter's in diameter, in any position.. wall ceiling.. etc..

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You should just stop, you are the lone person on this entire forum in this thread making idiotic statements that many people that know better are telling you is wrong, but you continue to defend it.

It doesn't even take any great expertise. Several of the key facts are easily enough learned through simple Google searches. In fact, I'd say that the genuine facts are probably much easier to find than the ignorant nonsense that Onyx is spewing.

 

[OKTexas]

Tomahawks have a 99% reliability rating .. Best in the world for that kind of weapon..

At what range were the tests? Over 500km?

The 99% refers to them launching. Once they are in the air you program them to hit where you want. They can hit a window from 1000 km away. That's what makes them "precision". You really don't know anything do you?

Actually the target package is loaded before launch.

 

[Lewdog]

Tomahawks have a 99% reliability rating .. Best in the world for that kind of weapon..

At what range were the tests? Over 500km?

The 99% refers to them launching. Once they are in the air you program them to hit where you want. They can hit a window from 1000 km away. That's what makes them "precision". You really don't know anything do you?

Actually the target package is loaded before launch.

Yes, but they have updated the software on them in the last couple years that it can be changed while in flight.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Tomahawks have a 99% reliability rating .. Best in the world for that kind of weapon..

At what range were the tests? Over 500km?

The 99% refers to them launching. Once they are in the air you program them to hit where you want. They can hit a window from 1000 km away. That's what makes them "precision". You really don't know anything do you?

Actually the target package is loaded before launch.

Yes, but they have updated the software on them in the last couple years that it can be changed while in flight.

Yes they are burst transmission capable including self destruct commands.

 

[EverCurious]

Effective range of the Tomahawk is 1600 miles I thought ~shrug~ We pay folks to know this shit.

 

[Lewdog]

The one thing I do have a question about is... if chemical weapons were one of the targets of this attack, could the secondary missiles after the primary explosions work to blow up and burn up the exploded chemical ammunitions? Is that maybe why they launched so many within such a small window of time?

 

[g5000]

 

[g5000]

 

[EverCurious]

There's one "flavor" of tomahawk's that can drop like multiple bombs, kind of like carpet bombing...

 

[Billy_Bob]

The one thing I do have a question about is... if chemical weapons were one of the targets of this attack, could the secondary missiles after the primary explosions work to blow up and burn up the exploded chemical ammunitions? Is that maybe why they launched so many within such a small window of time?

Sarin agent is non-persistent, so it will evaporate quickly and burn off. A barrage of heat/fire/concussion explosions would lessen the spread of the chemical by burning it.

 

[Lewdog]

The one thing I do have a question about is... if chemical weapons were one of the targets of this attack, could the secondary missiles after the primary explosions work to blow up and burn up the exploded chemical ammunitions? Is that maybe why they launched so many within such a small window of time?

Sarin agent is non-persistent, so it will evaporate quickly and burn off. A barrage of heat/fire/concussion explosions would lessen the spread of the chemical by burning it.

I was just thinking that might be a reason for why the missile launch happened like it did.