Yes. It mentions nothing about ground targets. Assuming this isn't propaganda from the west, and it probably isn't, they are talking about weapons that target other satellites and possible catching intercontinental missiles at their apex (near space).
Much ado about nothing. All he has is a sensor "track" from overhead. No three-dimensional anything, despite his claims. He cannot possibly know if it is going upward north or upward south or even a hump or a valley inbetween, since he is making the a priori assumption that it is what he wants to think it is, and he has no independent source of altitude information. It is strictly 2-D.
In fact there is better evidence, from the appearance of the "track" and its seeming duplication in another image that it is a sensor glitch. The "track" is highly pixelated, but it is clear that the sensor resolution is much higher than the pixelation, which means that this is an image processing fault of some kind. It might even be a spark flashing across the sensor chip, or the effect of a cosmic ray passing through the chip. (In passing, he shows global imagery where in the time passage, whole blocks of image become blank, yet he doesn't bat an eyelash at that.)
The proximity to air bases? A coincidence. Life is filled with them. But the first case (Tyndall AFB) was simply bogus, since the implied association with a fire was far, far from Tyndall (like in another town). The gulf coast has a plenitude of military installations, due to water proximity and favorable flying weather. In my location (Puget Sound), we have an Army base, an Air Force base, and 3 Navy bases, not to mention 3 major ports and 3 major airfields. Nobody thinks anything about it. In the city of Seattle alone there are an Army and a Navy base that have been deactivated in my lifetime.
I could hardly stand the breathlessness of his delivery, real-time amazement, and lightning-fast conclusion-drawing, when the most likely explanation (a cosmic ray track) slipped right through his fingers.
Yes, it was less than a sentence, making an obligatory allegation that the Chinese and Russians are working on DEW antisatellite systems. An allegation is less than a "confirmation" by a long shot.
But going after ICBMs at apogee is fruitless. The booster burns out in 200-300 seconds from launch, which is maybe 100-200 km altitude (or less, my memory is dim). The post-boost vehicle is separated at the conclusion of the boost, which is well before apogee.
Has anyone seen this before?
https://www.dutchsinse.com/9-16-2020-dept-of-defense-secretary-mark-esper-confirms-directed-energy-weapons-dew-in-space/
Apparently not
Yes. It mentions nothing about ground targets. Assuming this isn't propaganda from the west, and it probably isn't, they are talking about weapons that target other satellites and possible catching intercontinental missiles at their apex (near space).
https://www.dutchsinse.com/10-09-2020-directed-energy-weapon-dew-caught-beaming-at-tyndall-air-force-base-florida-space-wing-creating-hot-spot-in-a-field-at-the-base/
Much ado about nothing. All he has is a sensor "track" from overhead. No three-dimensional anything, despite his claims. He cannot possibly know if it is going upward north or upward south or even a hump or a valley inbetween, since he is making the a priori assumption that it is what he wants to think it is, and he has no independent source of altitude information. It is strictly 2-D.
In fact there is better evidence, from the appearance of the "track" and its seeming duplication in another image that it is a sensor glitch. The "track" is highly pixelated, but it is clear that the sensor resolution is much higher than the pixelation, which means that this is an image processing fault of some kind. It might even be a spark flashing across the sensor chip, or the effect of a cosmic ray passing through the chip. (In passing, he shows global imagery where in the time passage, whole blocks of image become blank, yet he doesn't bat an eyelash at that.)
The proximity to air bases? A coincidence. Life is filled with them. But the first case (Tyndall AFB) was simply bogus, since the implied association with a fire was far, far from Tyndall (like in another town). The gulf coast has a plenitude of military installations, due to water proximity and favorable flying weather. In my location (Puget Sound), we have an Army base, an Air Force base, and 3 Navy bases, not to mention 3 major ports and 3 major airfields. Nobody thinks anything about it. In the city of Seattle alone there are an Army and a Navy base that have been deactivated in my lifetime.
I could hardly stand the breathlessness of his delivery, real-time amazement, and lightning-fast conclusion-drawing, when the most likely explanation (a cosmic ray track) slipped right through his fingers.
Yes, it was less than a sentence, making an obligatory allegation that the Chinese and Russians are working on DEW antisatellite systems. An allegation is less than a "confirmation" by a long shot.
But going after ICBMs at apogee is fruitless. The booster burns out in 200-300 seconds from launch, which is maybe 100-200 km altitude (or less, my memory is dim). The post-boost vehicle is separated at the conclusion of the boost, which is well before apogee.