For those interested in a little more detail, this is a link to what I believe is the recent article discussing the deterioration of the Minuteman III:
As the title implies, the focus of the piece is how utterly lame the replacement program is. It cannot even get off the drawing boards:
he LGM-35A Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) currently under development for the United States Air Force is facing growing prospects of deep cuts and possible cancellation due to tremendous cost overruns very early in development,
I find it utterly shocking that the MIC--addicted to spending money--would actually say out loud that they may not want to spend some money.
Do you think rockets ready to launch on a moments notice can sit in silos for 50 years without maintenance? They go into orbit. Just like those that put satellites in orbit. With similar sized payloads. It takes days of planning to just put up one payload. Yet we can sends thousands of them on a moments notice with the turn of a key? Even as a child in the 70's, this never made sense to me.
We can do this, several thousand times, in a ten minute window, with no crew, or pre-flight buildup.
Provide data on stockpiles and resources required to maintain them.
On a dead internet? Where search engines obscure results? Even less likely then launching a Minuteman III.
It takes hundreds of people, days of coordination and millions of dollars of resources to prep and launch a single rocket. One does not need details to understand that you can not mothball a rocket for 50 years and launch it in under ten minutes by turning a pair of keys.
You can't even park a car for more than a month without worrying about start up issues. This is a rocket, meant for intercontinental space flight, with nuclear ordinance.
The shelf life of a "missile system", and not just the individual missiles is 8 to 22 years. Reminder; this is not a missile. It is a rocket being called a missile for some reason.
This isn't an "Argument Forum". I can't even believe I have to explain this too you.
Now, which do I need to do? Prove that they don't exist somehow? Or Provide maintenance procedures, cost analysis, and estimated man hours required for rockets that I do not believe exist? You tell me, how to prove something doesn't exist, and we'll take it from there. Because, I can prove that something exists, but I can not prove that it doesn't.
For those interested in a little more detail, this is a link to what I believe is the recent article discussing the deterioration of the Minuteman III:
Likelihood Grows of America Abandoning Nuclear Triad: Would ICBM Funds Be Better Used Elsewhere? (Military Watch Magazine 12/16/2023)
As the title implies, the focus of the piece is how utterly lame the replacement program is. It cannot even get off the drawing boards:
I find it utterly shocking that the MIC--addicted to spending money--would actually say out loud that they may not want to spend some money.
Do you think rockets ready to launch on a moments notice can sit in silos for 50 years without maintenance? They go into orbit. Just like those that put satellites in orbit. With similar sized payloads. It takes days of planning to just put up one payload. Yet we can sends thousands of them on a moments notice with the turn of a key? Even as a child in the 70's, this never made sense to me.
We can do this, several thousand times, in a ten minute window, with no crew, or pre-flight buildup.
Does that sound even remotely believable?
Earlier Thread
Dud? Or no nuclear core in most of these ordinance?
A show of strength, doesn't have to be real.
Explain why it's not possible.
Provide data on stockpiles and resources required to maintain them.
On a dead internet? Where search engines obscure results? Even less likely then launching a Minuteman III.
It takes hundreds of people, days of coordination and millions of dollars of resources to prep and launch a single rocket. One does not need details to understand that you can not mothball a rocket for 50 years and launch it in under ten minutes by turning a pair of keys.
There are less than ten videos of this thing actually being fired on youtube.
You want proof? How have they been performing maintenance on these things for 50 years without knowing how to perform maintenance on them?
You can't even park a car for more than a month without worrying about start up issues. This is a rocket, meant for intercontinental space flight, with nuclear ordinance.
The shelf life of a "missile system", and not just the individual missiles is 8 to 22 years. Reminder; this is not a missile. It is a rocket being called a missile for some reason.
Oh, look. You have no data and no actual knowledge of topic.
What a fucking surprise.
Oh, look you have no data either. You've been searching this whole time?
What a fucking surprise.
What I have stated however are obvious self evident truths.
Oh, I mean; you need to go on an endless fetch quest to prove your worth to me. Or I will dismiss you outright without cause.
what would i need data for? I'm not the one making up claims out of thin air.
your whole argument is "i know nothing about this therefore it's not real"
Because My claim is that they don't exist. I can not prove that something does not exists with data. But you can prove that they do.
By claiming that they don't exist, you are dismissing every piece of information that they do exist.
Please provide all the data you have reviewed and your reasoning for dismissing it.
You have conceded the argument. Your position on this matter is dismissed.
This isn't an "Argument Forum". I can't even believe I have to explain this too you.
Now, which do I need to do? Prove that they don't exist somehow? Or Provide maintenance procedures, cost analysis, and estimated man hours required for rockets that I do not believe exist? You tell me, how to prove something doesn't exist, and we'll take it from there. Because, I can prove that something exists, but I can not prove that it doesn't.
Fuck off. You failed. You don’t even comprehend how reality itself works. You cannot hold these discussions.
I think they shut these down as part of the treaty with Gorbachev. We switched to missiles on subs and 24/7 aircraft
I question if nukes actually exist.
Try again.