
Deadly New Russian Weapon Hides In Shipping Container - urlwolf
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2010/04/26/world/international-us-russia-weapon.html?_r=3
======
gaika
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqwMzQiXlK0> \- original presentation of the
concept.

~~~
patio11
Two funny little notes from the movie:

1) I thought "Hmm, the soundtrack here sounds like it could be from a generic
Jerry Bruckheimer movie", and then it went to songs that were unambiguously
pirated from identifiable Jerry Bruckheimer movies. (I own the Pirates of the
Carribean soundtrack. Sue me.) Man, you can't even get the multi-billion
dollar weapons conglomerates to respect licensing anymore...

2) Amusingly, the good guys were red and the bad guys were blue. (This is the
color convention in Russia and China. Historically, it is the opposite in the
US.)

------
shaddi
I am confused why people are taking this seriously. This is just an idea that
happens to have a nice CGI movie behind it. I could think of lots of
hypothetical weapons systems too if I didn't have to actually build them, nor
was I constrained by any practical limitations.

~~~
vl
This article is clearly just paranoia, this time over poorly rendered youtube
video, of all things.

It doesn't really matter if cruise missile is in container or not. If it's for
sale, bad or good guys would be happy to buy it without container and use it
anyway.

As you can see from this very video, these missiles require satellite guidance
system. Surely small counties don't have access to those and large countries
have capabilities to suppress them as needed.

------
mark_l_watson
Actually, our carriers have not been very safe since Russia started selling
the SSN-22 Sunburn several years ago. The defense industry lobbyists do a
really good job of marketing weapon systems that are not so relevant today.
Too bad for the USA tax payer.

------
Semiapies
_"Nobody's ever done that before."_

Have they in fact _done_ it? There's been a lot of saber-rattling from Russia
while Putin's been in power that stinks of "please still consider us a
military powerhouse". Bombers flying while they don't have the funds to keep
their stockpile in working order, etc.

Let's see something more than CGI.

------
mixmax
This system in the hands of rogue states must be a nightmare for the US.
Especially if the claim that it can bring down a carrier craft is true.

~~~
rsl7
Whose satellites are they using?

~~~
bd
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLONASS> ?

It wouldn't be much of cold war if _both_ sides didn't have missile navigation
systems.

Also China seems to be building their own:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compass_navigation_system>

~~~
gloob
As a matter of curiosity, for what definition of "rogue state" are Russia and
China rogue states? I figured the poster was thinking more about, e.g. North
Korea.

~~~
kjhgfghjklkjh
Anybody that doesn't buy weapons built in california?

------
blahedo
Ok, can we _please_ start talking seriously about real container inspection
programs at our shipping ports now?

~~~
DenisM
Containers get inspected at the ports, missiles are likely being launched
before containers reach the port. Unless you are imagining a sinister plot to
sneak a cruise missile inland I don't see how this would help.

~~~
kjhgfghjklkjh
Big ships are vunerable, the Brits proved that to the Italians at Toranto,
then the Japanese copied them at Pearl Harbor.

So the only way you let your expensive $Bn carrier fleet near a tiny little
3rd world enemy is once you have comprehensively bombed the *&%$ out of their
defenses.

With this you could have finished bombing all their airfields, sunk their
fleet and blown up all their tanks - then just as the USS Obama arrives off
shore a 40' container in a parking lot opens it's doors and sinks it.

Unless you are going to destroy every container, and every building that could
hold a container in a country before approaching it you have a problem.

~~~
raganwald
> Big ships are vunerable, the Brits proved that to the Italians at Toranto

If I have my facts correct, the Japanese also reminded the Limeys of it when
the sunk the Prince of Wales and the Repulse after Sir Tom Phillips overruled
suggestions that the fleet not move out of Singapore without air cover.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_Prince_of_Wales_and_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_Prince_of_Wales_and_Repulse)

(While Wikipedia says nothing other than reporting that he was killed, I read
elsewhere that Sir Phillips declined to join the sailors abandoning ship.)

