http://www.space.com/news/rumsfeld_space_020204.html
What is thunder rod? Hurled from space? Is this a space sick astronaut weapon?
I think it's the title of the new Austin Powers movie spoof of James Bond's Thunderball.
Anybody know what this is?
http://www.space.com/news/rumsfeld_space_020204.html
What is thunder rod? Hurled from space? Is this a space sick astronaut weapon?
I think it's the title of the new Austin Powers movie spoof of James Bond's Thunderball.
Anybody know what this is?
That article does say that it is non-nuclear.
But, if "New earth-penetrating and thermobaric weapons could make obsolete the deep underground facilities," what would we do with Cheyenne Mountain?
60's-retro-theme hotel/restaurant/nightclub?On 2002-02-05 09:10, GrapesOfWrath wrote:
But, if "New earth-penetrating and thermobaric weapons could make obsolete the deep underground facilities," what would we do with Cheyenne Mountain?
we could use the concertina wire for coatrecks
There's a lot more active discussion going on about this over at the SDMB.
The idea's been around awhile, so I'd hardly say it's new like the article suggests... Essentially it's a large metal rod or pipe (maybe 1 to 2 meters long and a few cms thick with apparently no, or very few, motorized parts to keep it on target) that is "shot" from an orbiting platform - actually its more or less released with a little push. The rod then plunges through the atmosphere, building up speed and strikes a ground based target with a HUGE amount of kinetic energy, on par with small nuclear weapons. It's basically a man-made meteor. The military loves this weapon because its cheap and easy to build, and no more expensive to deploy than a nuclear missile (actually you could mount several rods onto one platform and thus make it far cheaper than nukes.) I think the only thing holding up deployment is accuracy, especially if the target was to move after firing.On 2002-02-05 08:29, John Kierein wrote:
http://www.space.com/news/rumsfeld_space_020204.html
What is thunder rod?
Are you saying we have these things already manufactured and ready to launch, but we're waiting for the enemy to stop moving?On 2002-02-05 10:58, Mnemonia wrote:
I think the only thing holding up deployment is accuracy, especially if the target was to move after firing.
I'm reminded of Bill Mauldin's WWII cartoon of a GI in a foxhole with a Panzer literally right on top of him. The GI's on the radio back to the Artillery: "I've got a target for you, but you're going to have to be patient!"On 2002-02-05 11:05, GrapesOfWrath wrote:
Are you saying we have these things already manufactured and ready to launch, but we're waiting for the enemy to stop moving?
The (calling fire on my position!) Curtmudgeon