Hindenburg flies again: D.C. to Be Protected from Cruise Missiles by $2.7 Billion Blimps
32 replies, posted
[QUOTE]If America is attacked, we might be saved by blimps. No, not state-of-the-art jet fighters that can fly well beyond the speed of sound. But blimps: lumbering, relatively jovial blimps—the manatees of aviation. Within a year, a pair of souped-up $2.7 billion blimps (price includes R&D) will be floated 10,000 feet above the District of Columbia and act as a 340-mile-wide eye in the sky, detecting incoming missiles and the like. [/QUOTE]
SOURCE:
[url]http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/07/dc-be-protected-cruise-missiles-27-billion-blimps/67652/[/url]
[url]http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/don-t-be-alarmed-by-the-drone-blimps-hovering-over-d-c-they-re-here-to-stop-cruise-missiles-20130726[/url]
[url]http://rt.com/usa/army-raytheon-jlens-blimps-594/[/url]
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/25/dc-blimps_n_3651676.html[/url]
[editline]27th July 2013[/editline]
[img]http://rt.com/files/news/1f/e2/20/00/army-raytheon-jlens-blimps-.si.jpg[/img]
Photo for you if you're curious how it looks.
They should have giant monitors on each side that loop a bunch of inspirational messages about how strong our country is, spoken by our great leader Obama.
Who would have the capability of launching a missile at DC and who would actually want to?
Why don't just use radar stations? Why do they have to float in midair?
I feel like this is asking for some sort of trouble and that there's a better solution.
[QUOTE=TorashVD;41607870]Why don't just use radar stations? Why do they have to float in midair?[/QUOTE]
Forgive me if I'm wrong, I'm not really sure how much radar stations cost and etc.
I believe one of the sources mention this is a cheaper alternative to radar stations and etc..
hypothetically, could big blimps like that be used to kind of... block missile attacks?
like, they figure out a missiles trajectory somehow and move the blimp into it's path.
I did not realize we were still under a constant missile threat like we were decades ago. I mean sure, it's great to be safe, but 2.7 billion dollar blimps?
2.7bn on what looks like a paintless, inflated Goodyear balloon blimp?
[QUOTE=Mellowbloom;41607937]hypothetically, could big blimps like that be used to kind of... block missile attacks?
like, they figure out a missiles trajectory somehow and move the blimp into it's path.[/QUOTE]
Blimps are far too slow and pondering to even attempt to meatshield DC from a missile.
[QUOTE=TorashVD;41607870]Why don't just use radar stations? Why do they have to float in midair?[/QUOTE]
Better range and harder to take out.
Either they know that [i]someone[/i] is holding a real threat to attack them or there is no real limit to how paranoid they have become.
[QUOTE=Nazi666;41607932]Forgive me if I'm wrong, I'm not really sure how much radar stations cost and etc.
I believe one of the sources mention this is a cheaper alternative to radar stations and etc..[/QUOTE]
But they have to use radar too I think. You can't calculate the trajectory of a missile precisely just by optics, and if you want to intercept those missiles you have to be precise.
[QUOTE=Mellowbloom;41607937]hypothetically, could big blimps like that be used to kind of... block missile attacks?
like, they figure out a missiles trajectory somehow and move the blimp into it's path.[/QUOTE]
Calculating is easy, you only need the velocity and distance vectors and the flight path angel. You could intercept them with the blimps but even if they would "stop" the missiles they will still explode way to near to Washington.
Hindenburg wasn't a blimp, it was a zeppelin rigid airship
I want Obama to come out and say, "Nothing to worry about its just a new weather balloon."
:v:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but unmanned blimps were used in WWII as static defenses against air raids, because propelled bombers and fighters had to evade the wires connecting the blimps to the ground.
I mean, fuck, what's a blimp going to do against a missile? The thing will go through the blimp!
Besides, isn't America protected by, like, four static super-radars or something?
[QUOTE=T553412;41608303]Correct me if I'm wrong, but unmanned blimps were used in WWII as static defenses against air raids, because propelled bombers and fighters had to evade the wires connecting the blimps to the ground.
I mean, fuck, what's a blimp going to do against a missile? The thing will go through the blimp!
Besides, isn't America protected by, like, four static super-radars or something?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, they were used to defend against dive bombers and torpedo bombers. The wires on them couldn't persay cut off a wing, but if it got into something like the propeller your plane would start spinning out of control.
Also the whole, "protect against missiles" is pretty horse-shit. They are more-or-less drones to keep surveillance at a high height. They presently use them in similar fashion at the Arizona-Mexican border.
[QUOTE=Doctor Death921;41607981]I did not realize we were still under a constant missile threat like we were decades ago. I mean sure, it's great to be safe, but 2.7 billion dollar blimps?[/QUOTE]
Incredible waste of money to defend against a Cold War threat that isn't valid anymore, not to mention the psychology of parking permanent eyes in the sky over civilian cities.
[QUOTE=Alec W;41607863]They should have giant monitors on each side that loop a bunch of inspirational messages about how strong our country is, spoken by our great leader Obama.[/QUOTE]
I just thought of that scene from Scarface.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PGRlWWRKSo[/media]
[i]"The world is yours, America! - Hugs & Kisses, OBAMA"[/i]
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;41608367]Incredible waste of money to defend against a Cold War threat that isn't valid anymore, not to mention the psychology of parking permanent eyes in the sky over civilian cities.[/QUOTE]
They [I]could[/I] be useful to monitor maritime drug routes, but that's it.
Shoot blimp down, make it fall on the president
OR
SHOOT ALL THE BLIMPS!
-snip
Read it wrong, the blimp isn't used as a physical barrier but for detecting cruise missiles from an altitude.
You know, reading the title I honestly thought this would be like some kind of rapid-deployment system comprising of many blimps that rise up into the air and form a 'shield' of sorts over a sensitive location, using guidance jamming or something to confuse incoming missiles and hopefully cause them to veer into one of the protective blimps to avoid ground damage. Like a fancy electronic countermeasure system combined with a physical barrier against missile impacts.
Go imagination go!
how effective were barrage balloons in WWII?
that blimp has a scrotum
[QUOTE=TheLolrus;41608782]that blimp has a scrotum[/QUOTE]
that sack has a sack
These blimps house "over the horizon radar" inside a bulge that is on the bottom side.
I believe they were originally developed to detect NK missile launches. They're blimps so they can be launched/towed by ships operating in the Pacific.
These can only be placed in areas that are in restricted air space, can't they? 10,000 feet is the altitude that airliners can exceed the 250knt speed limit and turn off their landing lights. It's a high altitude in the way, whereas an altitude of say 400ft is far less so. The island the WTCs were on, Above the Pentagon and White House are restricted air space, but other than those and a few other places... this seems like just a waste of fucking money. We have radar stations, we have Aegis ships, we have NORAD and more radar stations, we have satellites... Why do we need 100 year old technology with 10 year old cameras and some sort of radar on them sitting stationary over the mainland USA at the cost of nearly 3 billion dollars
Down a quarter of our fighter jets to save money (Which are now flying again, as of a few days ago) But instead of saving the money, you're just throwing it at something as silly as this
They wont be obliviously visible... They fly at 10,000 feet, and at 200 feet long that's like looking at a 747 at cruising altitude.
It would appear that 90% of the people in this thread either don't understand how radar based point defense works or didn't bother reading the 4 sentence snippet.
Who the hell would shoot cruise missiles at D.C? From where?
Are they sure it's not meant to be against ICBMs?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.