From: Adam <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near
the bridge">

Phil Payne wrote:
>>I still stand by the all purpose ro-ro container vessel. Nice fast
>>single purpose ships are just to keep the senior service happy as
>>frankly they ain't going to outrun anything nowadays.
>
>
> Seen this?
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/27/airborne_laser_test/
>
>
Oh & meanwhile:

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/articles/20060327.aspx

&

http://www.janes.com/aerospace/military/news/idr/idr060321_1_n.shtml

Offer a second way in for cheap.

In fact they could be used to target this 747 as well as providing weapons delivery.

Go in low, high & from space. Layered attack which would mean the
defence capaility/cost will become prohibitive. The USSR was dragged down
by the increasing cost of continental defence & the same applies to any
large country.

i.e. if offensive costs are say 5 billion but the defense cost 500 billion
then the long term advantage is with the offensive systems.

Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5