| Subject: Re: Is new Groom hangar the home of ISIS? |
| From: "miso@sushi.com" <miso@sushi.com> |
| Date: 17/03/2009, 04:41 |
| Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.area51 |
On Mar 16, 6:57 am, dpbet...@comcast.net wrote:
On Mar 15, 6:46 pm, "m...@sushi.com" <m...@sushi.com> wrote:
The new tower would make a nice tether.
Given the range of these blimps, I think the government would need a
few of them to be useful.
There is or should be a side story to this press release.
Specifically, what is the scope of the radar holes in existing land
based surveillance. There is a well known though I don't believe
documented unmonitored airspace in Washington state used for drug
smuggling. Even the route along route 95 in Nevada has holes in the
radar.
Yes, that sturdy tower would be a good tether. It's far more sturdy
that needed for antennas.
There also are holes in radar coverage in south Texas, another
favorite of drug smugglers.
Miso, are you back on DLR? (A new name there makes me wonder.)
I'm banned from DLR, so to quote Bob Dylan, "It ain't me, babe!"
I've been reading "Red Eagles." Highly recommended. Anyway, the book
has some quotes from TTR personnel about drug runners flying over
their airspace. Better yet is a story about some dentist and his
girlfriend landing at the KTNX, thinking they landed at KTPH. They
had a F5 fly CAP during the MIG testing.
If you look at the claimed Pavepaws coverage, you can see a gap:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAVE_PAWS
Hams in the vicinity of Pavepaws have had their 440 repeater power
significant;y restricted, so maybe the coverage isn't as bad as the
map indicated.
Regarding the FAA, I don't believe it is rocket science to find the
holes. If you request flight following, the FAA will tell the pilot
when radar is lost or made.