http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=37.62818 ... &t=h&hl=en
Some one please tell me what that is?
Its like some UFO nuts went into the desert to make a landing pad for aliens or a bullseye for sky divers from the moon
WTF is this?
- DatDude
- Errant Scholar
- Posts: 216
- Joined: August 24th, 2007, 12:21 am
- Contact:
- Weirdonian
- Team Captain
- Posts: 62
- Joined: August 19th, 2007, 7:17 pm
- Location: Hubbardston, MA, USA
- Contact:
Re: WTF is this?
Wow, neat find!
Zooming in a little more, the whole area around it is titled "Nellis Air Force Range", so I'm guessing this is some kind of bombing target. Zooming in more, there appear to be some craters here and there as well as some small structure at the very center.
A quick check on Google Earth didn't turn up much more information, mostly just a bunch of "What's this?" posts. It isn't too far from Groom Lake/Area 51, though. A quick google search didn't turn up much either.
Zooming in a little more, the whole area around it is titled "Nellis Air Force Range", so I'm guessing this is some kind of bombing target. Zooming in more, there appear to be some craters here and there as well as some small structure at the very center.
A quick check on Google Earth didn't turn up much more information, mostly just a bunch of "What's this?" posts. It isn't too far from Groom Lake/Area 51, though. A quick google search didn't turn up much either.
- zanntos
- Errant Scholar
- Posts: 208
- Joined: October 4th, 2007, 3:29 pm
- Location: Nowhere-ville Southern Maryland
- Contact:
Re: WTF is this?
Yeah, the Airport itself is to the NE, probably a targeting range for various Aircraft ordinance like Weirdonian said, the triangle and circles looked like a fairly classic ordinance targeting range if you are a military channel junky like me.
- Boss Out of Town
- Team Captain
- Posts: 1051
- Joined: August 20th, 2007, 8:49 pm
- Location: Near where the Children of the Corn go to school
Re: WTF is this?
One of the geography wikis has several of these things noted on the satellite images of Utah and Nevada. The air forces apparently have their own ideas of what a nifty bullseye should look like from forty-thousand feet.
In another original thought, Washington Monthly had a fascinating article on disbanding the USAF and distributing its functions among the Navy and Army branches. Very sensible notion, as aside from the Stragetic Air Command, all of the air force's function involve supporting the other services. Problem is, for all of its history and back to the days of Billy Mitchell, the air force hierarchy has been infested with strategic bombing types and fighter jocks. The kind of people who, quite literally, think the air force can win wars all by itself. As a result, tactical air, intelligence, and logistics support get done as kind of a side line. Note that the three specialties I mentioned are key factors in waging modern dispersed warfare. You really can't bomb an insurgent movement into submission. You can only recruit for them by blasting the civilians they hide behind and ruining the country you're trying to save.
But, strategic bombing does allow you to draw really cool giant ground targets.
In another original thought, Washington Monthly had a fascinating article on disbanding the USAF and distributing its functions among the Navy and Army branches. Very sensible notion, as aside from the Stragetic Air Command, all of the air force's function involve supporting the other services. Problem is, for all of its history and back to the days of Billy Mitchell, the air force hierarchy has been infested with strategic bombing types and fighter jocks. The kind of people who, quite literally, think the air force can win wars all by itself. As a result, tactical air, intelligence, and logistics support get done as kind of a side line. Note that the three specialties I mentioned are key factors in waging modern dispersed warfare. You really can't bomb an insurgent movement into submission. You can only recruit for them by blasting the civilians they hide behind and ruining the country you're trying to save.
But, strategic bombing does allow you to draw really cool giant ground targets.
- Graybeard
- The Heretical Admin
- Posts: 7184
- Joined: August 20th, 2007, 8:26 am
- Location: Nuevo Mexico y Colorado, Estados Unidos
Re: WTF is this?
One thing about that original image is that Nellis is one of the places used for various military competitions, including delivering bombs and other ordnance. Crews from different services and outfits compete to see who can drop a load closest to a specified target, and get bragging rights if they beat the other services/squadrons. That grid might be used in one of those competitions.Boss Out of Town wrote:One of the geography wikis has several of these things noted on the satellite images of Utah and Nevada. The air forces apparently have their own ideas of what a nifty bullseye should look like from forty-thousand feet.
Historically, your analysis is correct, but in the age of PGMs (precision-guided munitions, or "smart bombs"), I think a case can be made that attack from the air can win certain types of conflicts, or at least bring them to a close, without messy stuff like tanks and artillery, let along your own troops on the ground killing and being killed. Not every conflict is won/resolved by invading the other guy; sometimes just wiping out his capacity to wage war suffices.Boss Out of Town wrote:In another original thought, Washington Monthly had a fascinating article on disbanding the USAF and distributing its functions among the Navy and Army branches. Very sensible notion, as aside from the Stragetic Air Command, all of the air force's function involve supporting the other services. Problem is, for all of its history and back to the days of Billy Mitchell, the air force hierarchy has been infested with strategic bombing types and fighter jocks. The kind of people who, quite literally, think the air force can win wars all by itself. As a result, tactical air, intelligence, and logistics support get done as kind of a side line. Note that the three specialties I mentioned are key factors in waging modern dispersed warfare. You really can't bomb an insurgent movement into submission. You can only recruit for them by blasting the civilians they hide behind and ruining the country you're trying to save.
Also historically, attempts to subordinate air power to armies and navies haven't worked well, because of the egos involved. Get somebody smart enough at the top of the military food chain, and the coordinating of roles will get done in a way that works, regardless of whether the air force is separate. Get an idiot on top, and the structure doesn't matter either, but for the opposite reasons...
Because old is wise, does good, and above all, kicks ass.