Here's another one.
Posted on 11/10/2010 10:59:19 AM PST by Eleutheria5
I guess that means I shouldn't hold my breath waiting for the link?
Here's another one.
Some believe this was an accidental Vandal “aerial target” release at SNI...
MQM-8G
Length 36. 2 feet
Diameter 7.3 feet
Normal Weight 8,225 pounds
MQM-8G Extended Range and MQM-8G Extended Extended Range.
The MQM-8G Extended Range (ER) and MQM-8G Extended Extended Range (EER) Vandal Targets are two of a family of Vandal Targets developed from the obsolete TALOS RIM-8G/J
I-7 fleet missile.
The MQM-8G (ER/EER) Vandal Targets are the only versions of the vehicle still in use. They are remote-controlled, non-recoverable vehicles, launched from a land-based modified TALOS launcher by a solid propellant booster and propelled through flight by a ramjet engine...
per Jane’s”
...Vandal is a supersonic target designed to simulate the mid-course and terminal phases of anti-ship cruise missiles, to support weapons system test and evaluation and fleet training requirements. Sea Snake was an upgraded version of the extended-range MQM-8G Vandal EER which competed unsuccessfully against Orbital’s GQM-163A Coyote as the USN’s next-generation supersonic sea-skimming target (SSST).
However, could have been a Coyote:
The GQM-163A Coyote has entered operational service at the Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWC) in Point Mugu, CA, and is replacing the MQM-8 VANDAL that was based on the liquid-fuel ramjet-powered Talos missile.
Aug 13/10: The first flight test of the Coyote SSST High Diver variant was successful. During the naval test at San Nicolas Island, CA, the Coyote High Diver vehicle was rail-launched from the ground, then boosted by its Variable Flow Ducted Rocket (VFDR) solid rocket motor to ramjet-takeover speed. It ascended to 35,000 feet and Mach 3.3 cruise under ramjet power, and executed the planned 40-degree unpowered dive to its objective point near the ocean’s surface at the end of its 110 mile journey.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/gqm163-ssst-a-tricky-coyote-to-match-wits-with-defenses-03155/
Don’t you just love it when someone posts information they get from another site and then when asked for the link they come up with excuse after excuse and never give you the link? Kinda makes one wonder.
Not even close
[i]Rush just mentioned and he expressed confidence that it was not an aircraft contrail.[/i]
I did not hear him say it in that way. I took it as he was saying it’s typical gov’t response or lack of.
What is irritating is the far too frequent "Says who?" posts on FR. Posters should offer their ideas and move on.
Many of us have sources that we are not to give out on a public forum. Why? Because we want to keep those sources for background and tips on future stories.
Source challenges more often are just a cheap trick to drive opposing opinions away when the challenger has run out of substance.
Don't buy that.
Source challenges more often are just a cheap trick to drive opposing opinions away when the challenger has run out of substance.
No. Source challenges are a way of determining facts. Just because someone says something on FR does not make it true. They either have to be able to make a credible argument or if their argument is they saw it on another site, to give a link to that site.
Never mind that you 'altered' the description of your 'site' from a blog to a sign-in site to an invitation only site.
Give me the dang link to see if you have any credibility!
You’re a troll.
You joined Free Republic to refute every single comment a FReeper makes. I just noticed you today and have looked over comments you’ve made. Who in the hell do you think you are?
Why don’t you just leave now and go back to DU?
How many times are you going to post that same picture?
I’m beginning to wonder if ‘toldyou’ is right, and you are a troll.
Offer some evidence or analysis and we will be happy to tear it apart by logic or opposing facts.
We may even agree with you.
Blog is just a convenient term, mea culpa, didn't think it would tip you over. If you have a commercial, multi-engine pilot's license, post it and I will submit your name to the private forum I referred to. These pilots are professionals and are not going to allow just anyone in, they would all stop debating freely.
Do you have anything material to add to the topic of the mystery missile?
“I’m beginning to wonder if ‘toldyou’ is right, and you are a troll.”
This person goes from thread to thread degrading FReepers.
'gandalftb' - "BTW, several of the posters are military pilots in the area."
'SeeSac' - "Link please. Thanks."
You keep on nagging for a link. Explain if you can, troll, how anyone can provide a link that shows that "several of the posters are military pilots in the area".
Better yet, just stop being a rude little n00b and go away.
For someone so anal about links, here's a link to his posting history!
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:seesac/index?tab=comments;brevity=full;options=no-change
I have a pilot's license but I dang sure ain't going to post my SS number up on a public board.
So it is ok to present non-factual evidence?
“Yes, the n00b is an agitator at best.”
I agree! Sure has his or her panties all in a bunch!
Unfriendly, negative...challenges every FReeper. Perhaps switching to decaf might help?
Is this porported to be a Hi to AZ flight as well?
Do you have clear detailed pics showing the exhaust flame like the original video?
Post them and I will render an opinion. Your pic is of something 75 or more miles distant at an unknown time of year and unknown time of day. Atmospheric conditions change depending on season and time of day.
For some people ‘wild-assed speculation’ is superior to facts or even rational thinking.
These ‘missile’ threads should wake some people up to this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.