Build your own Cruise Missile

[Tovarish 0]

Check out this webpage

Not surprizingly, his government is not very happy with him, as you'll read, but he hasn't broken any laws and intends this as a wakeup call.

*edit* though I can't say I like the idea of him providing "full working plans"

[Necromancer- 0]

The problem is that all items (except for the explosives) are completely legal to obtain...

But I find that such a DIY cruise missile is less effective than a DIY car-bomb..

[EiZei 0]

So how is this any worse than a small truck full of fertilizer bombs?

[DBR_ONIX 0]

It's not, but "Cruise missile" or "small truck full of fertilizer bombs" - which sounds scarier

Which will the goverment prefer people NOT to have (By people, I mean "evil terrorists who want to blow you up")

- Ben

[Supah 0]

seems to me what he is building is just a V-1 with more advanced guidance mechanisme

[Necromancer- 0]

Thing is...

HOW are you going to make this effective???

Assuming that terrorists are unable to use high-grade explosives (high-grade as in at least 4 times more explosive than an average Palestinian suicide-bomber).

I think you at least need several DIY cruise missiles to create a vast amount of damage to a scale of the FBI HQ Oklahoma bombing.

Besides.. it's easier to protect a city against relatively slow DIY cruise missiles than car bombs..

How??? Simple.. just place enough AA(flak)guns in and around the city.. scanning the sky for unknown objects.

I also believe that cruise missiles have a gigantic heat signature to IR-sensors.. I do not believe you can obtain technology that easy to reduce heat-emission.

[Harnu 0]

How??? Simple.. just place enough AA(flak)guns in and around the city.. scanning the sky for unknown objects.

Sounds more like a plan to reduce bird droppings on our windsheilds.

Going to place AA guns in and around cities, on rooftops perhaps, or maybe they'd look nice on top of the hill in the park? I don't think an Anti-Aircraft grid in major cities sounds like a good solution to DIY Cruise Missiles.

I don't think a cruise missile in a convential form would make a very good terrorist weapon anyway. Not enough bang for the buck if they're being home made. The best they could do is some kind of chemical agent on a busy highway/sporting event or firing these at gas stations near heavily populated areas.

[EiZei 0]

I don't think a cruise missile in a convential form would make a very good terrorist weapon anyway. Not enough bang for the buck if they're being home made. The best they could do is some kind of chemical agent on a busy highway/sporting event or firing these at gas stations near heavily populated areas.

And yet they could just get a canister full of that stuff and do a chemical weapon equivalent of a drive-by.

I think most terrorist groups have more willing boneheads to martyr themselves than people who are qualified to make even halfway decent cruise missiles.

[Supah 0]

They could use it like the V-1 was used at times, as a leaflet bomber. Just spray major cities with propaganda,or even worse, counterfeit money or something like that. Also imagine what would happen if you sprayed american black-ghetto's with bad drugs. Plenty of junkies around in those empovrished area's. That would cause a lot of trouble for law enforcement and medical personel. Also, once you scale it up to have a large enough warhead, the V-1 had 850 kg's of explosives, they could become a real threat when used against certain events like the superbowl etc. Placing a AAA grid around most cities, like someone mentioned earlier, is a bit daft. You'd have to station massive amounts of AAA around every city and military installation. The US army is allready short of personel and thats only going to get worse as recruitment continues to fail. Where do you think their going to get all those AAA gunners? Not to mention all those AA guns. You could use stingers but their effectiveness against such a small IR target flying at relatively high speed at low altitude is highly doubtfull. All in all there is no realistic defense against this sort of terrorist attack.

[EiZei 0]

Plenty of junkies around in those empovrished area's. That would cause a lot of trouble for law enforcement and medical personel.

It probably would be quieter when all the stoners would be spending their time doing the free drugs instead of stealing stuff in order to get it.

And still, why use cruise missiles for spreading stuff that can be done using more conventional/cheaper/reliable means?

Quote[/b] ]

The US army is allready short of personel and thats only going to get worse as recruitment continues to fail. Where do you think their going to get all those AAA gunners? Not to mention all those AA guns. You could use stingers but their effectiveness against such a small IR target flying at relatively high speed at low altitude is highly doubtfull. All in all there is no realistic defense against this sort of terrorist attack.

Even that would be overkill considering the low velocity and high target profile.

Since when there was an effective defence against any kind of terrorist attack?

[Supah 0]

Plenty of junkies around in those empovrished area's. That would cause a lot of trouble for law enforcement and medical personel.

It probably would be quieter when all the stoners would be spending their time doing the free drugs instead of stealing stuff in order to get it.

Not if you mix in some interesting chemicals making it like PCP or speed causing hyperactivity and agression New Orleans has shown the world a significant portion of US citizens is easy to incite to rebellion given the right push in the back. We all saw how the King Tapes lead to the LA riots. These people are very susciptible to propaganda.

Heh EiZei. Ever hear of "What comes up must come down"? Ever see tapes of these things firing? You see massive amounts of splashes in the water behind the target. Those are thousands of 30/20 MM Pre Fragmented shells that didnt hit. Do you really want to spray a inhabited area with high speed shells, killing thousands, just to destroy an object that might kill hundreds?

[EiZei 0]

Plenty of junkies around in those empovrished area's. That would cause a lot of trouble for law enforcement and medical personel.

It probably would be quieter when all the stoners would be spending their time doing the free drugs instead of stealing stuff in order to get it.

Not if you mix in some interesting chemicals making it like PCP or speed causing hyperactivity and agression New Orleans has shown the world a significant portion of US citizens is easy to incite to rebellion given the right push in the back. We all saw how the King Tapes lead to the LA riots. These people are very susciptible to propaganda.

I think most of the people would stay away from it after seeing what happens to the first users.

[Supah 0]

Plenty of junkies around in those empovrished area's. That would cause a lot of trouble for law enforcement and medical personel.

It probably would be quieter when all the stoners would be spending their time doing the free drugs instead of stealing stuff in order to get it.

Not if you mix in some interesting chemicals making it like PCP or speed causing hyperactivity and agression New Orleans has shown the world a significant portion of US citizens is easy to incite to rebellion given the right push in the back. We all saw how the King Tapes lead to the LA riots. These people are very susciptible to propaganda.

I think most of the people would stay away from it after seeing what happens to the first users.

The same way people stay away from drugs now seeing what happens to junkies? No junkie will say no to free drugs no matter what it does to him.

[EiZei 0]

Plenty of junkies around in those empovrished area's. That would cause a lot of trouble for law enforcement and medical personel.

It probably would be quieter when all the stoners would be spending their time doing the free drugs instead of stealing stuff in order to get it.

Not if you mix in some interesting chemicals making it like PCP or speed causing hyperactivity and agression New Orleans has shown the world a significant portion of US citizens is easy to incite to rebellion given the right push in the back. We all saw how the King Tapes lead to the LA riots. These people are very susciptible to propaganda.

I think most of the people would stay away from it after seeing what happens to the first users.

The same way people stay away from drugs now seeing what happens to junkies? No junkie will say no to free drugs no matter what it does to him.

Seeing what regular drugs do? No.

Seeing what some PCP spiked stuff does? Yes.

Bet they could achieve much worse effects running around with a syringe full of funny stuff and injecting it into random supermarket foodstuffs. No need for cruise missiles.

[Necromancer- 0]

Placing a AAA grid around most cities, like someone mentioned earlier, is a bit daft. You'd have to station massive amounts of AAA around every city and military installation. The US army is allready short of personel and thats only going to get worse as recruitment continues to fail. Where do you think their going to get all those AAA gunners? Not to mention all those AA guns. You could use stingers but their effectiveness against such a small IR target flying at relatively high speed at low altitude is highly doubtfull. All in all there is no realistic defense against this sort of terrorist attack.

Plenty of recruits willing to serve their country... in their own country!

Besides.. aren't there many left overs from WW2?

Compared to a new aircraft carrier or a development for a new conventional über-bomb... AA batteries are relatively cheap.

If I'm wrong, i'll find another way to be "right".

[Tovarish 0]

AA guns, massive amounts of them, to guard against a possibility of a fast, extreemely small, very low flying target....hmmmm...the guns themselves would probably do more damage to the city than the missiles.

*edit*

not to mention the cost of the guns and the men required to man them.

*edit again*

How many AA guns do you figure were around London in WWII? How effective were they against V-1 attacks? Then keep in mind that with the tech available today, the DIY missiles this guy talks about could fly NOE much better than the gyro-guided V-1.

*edit yet again*

Realization hits that supah has already said pretty much everything I have and better, and you feel his arguments lack style...well, I've put in my 2 cents reinforcing his 2 cents, but I won't bang my head against brick walls.

[EiZei 0]

How many AA guns do you figure were around London in WWII? How effective were they against V-1 attacks? Then keep in mind that with the tech available today, the DIY missiles this guy talks about could fly NOE much better than the gyro-guided V-1.

Wouldnt be so sure, this DIY missile is supposed to have range of 100km while the V-1 had a range of 200-400km.

Also the V-1 was capable of carrying >500kg warhead while this thing manages 10-15kg.

[Tovarish 0]

Wouldnt be so sure, this DIY missile is supposed to have range of 100km while the V-1 had a range of 200-400km.

Also the V-1 was capable of carrying >500kg warhead while this thing manages 10-15kg.

...and this thing just happens to be a "proof of concept"

[EiZei 0]

Wouldnt be so sure, this DIY missile is supposed to have range of 100km while the V-1 had a range of 200-400km.

Also the V-1 was capable of carrying >500kg warhead while this thing manages 10-15kg.

...and this thing just happens to be a "proof of concept"

.. which was'nt even finished.

EDIT: Just read more of the diary. Apparently it uses GPS for navigation. Not excatly a wise idea to use your enemy's navigational systems.

[Tovarish 0]

EDIT: Just read more of the diary. Apparently it uses GPS for navigation. Not excatly a wise idea to use your enemy's navigational systems.

Perhaps, but if you shut down civilian GPS, "the terrorists win"

[EiZei 0]

EDIT: Just read more of the diary. Apparently it uses GPS for navigation. Not excatly a wise idea to use your enemy's navigational systems.

Perhaps, but if you shut down civilian GPS, "the terrorists win"

I think we can live few hours without GPS..

If some mullahs at afghanistan could jam GPS guided military grade smart bombs I think the US goverment can pretty much arserape any civilian ones.

[I)eath_By_8s 0]

mmmmm a cruse missle is a nice touch to already wide selection of things that go boom. but for the bad guy its just anothere thing they could try to strap on to some 1 and send them to die i would use it though definitly....

[Necromancer- 0]

EDIT: Just read more of the diary. Apparently it uses GPS for navigation. Not excatly a wise idea to use your enemy's navigational systems.

Perhaps, but if you shut down civilian GPS, "the terrorists win"

Come to think of it...

You CAN influence the GPS satellites that way that you can guide the GPS guided cruise missile elsewhere..

however.. this will disrupt any other GPS device in the area.

Quote[/b] ]and you feel his arguments lack style...

Actually I don't... however, I removed that remark to prevent off-topic replies.

[Tovarish 0]

I think we can live few hours without GPS..

If some mullahs at afghanistan could jam GPS guided military grade smart bombs I think the US goverment can pretty much arserape any civilian ones.

I'm in no way questioning the ability of the U.S. to jam GPS or in fact shut it down completely - after all, it is their system, and yes, we could live without for a couple of hours no doubt, but who has a crystal ball to know when to shut it down? let's face it, by the time one of these things, if launched, was detected, it would likely be near its target, and even if it missed it would have accomplished the objective of terrorizing and quite possibly causing some damage.

And then we have to consider how long it would take to shut down GPS after detection, or the cost of covering potential targets with jammers, and in a few years, there'll be Galileo to worry about as well, which is supposed to be more accurate than GPS - even the U.S. military's version. Imagine a missile using both systems as guidance - one as backup in case the other fails/becomes erratic.

Anyways, I think the missile man's point should be taken. While it may seem far fetched, this sort of attack is very possible. Yes, Car bombs may be as effective and simpler 90% of the time, but every now and then there may be a tempting terrorist target that would not be acessible to a car bomb. And after all, who'da thunk that a few Mujahedin would have taken piloting lessons to fly into the WTC, when they could have just tried a car bomb again?

[Student Pilot 0]

The civilian GPS satellites have a built-in error.  This reduces the accuracy of the GPS Satellites greatly.  Guiding a cruise missile by civilian GPS would be little more accurate than the V1's method of gyroscopes, and the V1 wasn't that accurate.  It could hit cities and that's about it.  Further more, you guys talk about a high-speed object.  A fast speed would require a pretty hefty flight computer.  Not many people are smart enough to write a program for something travelling as fast as a cruise missile.  I would be surprised if this went as fast as a Scud, which is relatively slow.  And Scuds were easy targets for the patriot missile system.  I don't think the terrorists will bother with cruise missiles.  A truck bomb can do so much more damage at a much more specific spot than one of these.

-Student Pilot

EDIT:

Quote[/b] ]And after all, who'da thunk that a few Mujahedin would have taken piloting lessons to fly into the WTC, when they could have just tried a car bomb again?

From personel experience I can say that flying a plane is very easy. Making a jump from a cessna to a boeing isn't hard until you try to land These people didn't have to obey the FARs, didn't have to communicate, didn't have to land, all they had to do was point the plane in the direction of the towers. It doesn't take a pro with 5000 hours under his belt to do this.