h a l f b a k e r yOn the one hand, true. On the other hand, bollocks.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
This ship would consist of a huge metal shell that looks just
like an aircraft carrier. It would also have a battery with
which to put out electronic noise to seem more like a real
carrier. Speakers in the bottom give it the same acoustic signature.
Inland decoy aircraft carrier
http://www.chinasma...building-wuhan.html
[mouseposture, Jul 17 2010]
Enterprise
http://0.tqn.com/d/.../loch_ness_1_lg.jpg
successfully disguised as Loch Ness Monster [xenzag, Jul 18 2010]
Winston Churchill's Toyshop
http://www.amazon.c...8433&pf_rd_i=468294
SOE's "Q Section". [8th of 7, Jul 18 2010]
The Secret War
http://www.amazon.c...d=1279476961&sr=1-2
The story of the "Wheezers and Dodgers" [8th of 7, Jul 18 2010]
[link]
|
| |
This sounds like a brilliant idea. |
|
| |
As I understand it, decoy ducks have been used for
centuries; this should work every bit as well. [+] |
|
| |
Aircraft carriers are usually surrounded by planes and other
ships, so the decoy might not be effective without lots of
other decoys; also, their construction, launching, port calls
etc. are typically rather public. Wouldn't this
idea work rather better with submarines? |
|
| |
Well, stealth is not the goal here, is it? |
|
| |
[Grogster] Well, if you postulate a carrier-group's worth of
decoy planes and ships, fake launching, port calls etc.,
then,
yes, I agree
with you. |
|
| |
But a carrier's got a large crew. You're going to need fake
sailors to line up on the deck when the ship sails into port,
plus fake wives and children to wave to them, fake
prostitutes reporting to (real) enemy intelligence agents
about the sailors' pillow talk ... and so on. |
|
| |
Submarines have smaller crews, often travel alone, make
fewer calls at foreign ports (I think), and are normally
secretive in
their comings & goings, so I think the decoy idea works
better for them -- 'cause you only need the decoy, not so
much of the extra stuff. |
|
| |
I was thinking along the lines of a participant in a carrier
group in times of war. |
|
| |
If you start with a carrier group, and then add
several inflatable carrier decoys it could work well
enough to spread out attacks. |
|
| |
Use an inflatable/water filled design with a
mylar/metalized shell to produce the radar
return. Add the noise generation and radio
decoys as in the original idea. A relatively small
motor and steering system should be enough to
keep up with the carrier group, and the entire
thing should pack down small enough for a supply
tender to carry several when not under threat. |
|
| |
A scheme somewhat similar to this was tried during WWI, at the behest of none other than Winston Churchill (Then First Lord of the Admiralty). |
|
| |
Passenger liners had their upperworks removed, and replaced by a facsimilie of a battleship, often constructed in wood and canvas. |
|
| |
The idea was to decoy German subamrines into attacking a "flotilla" which would be of no strategic value but would be heavily defended. |
|
| |
The scheme caused a fair amount of puzzlement and nervousness in the High Seas Fleet as the purpose of the dummy fleet was not understood. This may in itself have been a positive result. But taking into account the cost and complexity of the operation, it did not produce any worthwhile return. |
|
| |
Could a real aircraft character not be repainted to look like (for example) the Loch Ness Monster? See pic in link of result of the USS Enterprise carrier following camouflage repainting, and some modifications. |
|
| |
//See pic in link of result of the USS Enterprise carrier
following camouflage repainting, and some modifications.// |
|
| |
Dear god! The warp drives must be getting soaked! |
|
| |
[8th of 7] You know, when I read this, my first thought was:
"I bet the British did this already. It's characteristicly
half-baked and too-clever-by-half, the sort of thing Winston
Churchill would propose." But I got the dates wrong: I
thought it'd be WWII. |
|
| |
The Enemy would catch on to this right away and ignore it. |
|
| |
At which point a fleet of real destroyer ships would emerge from a secret hatch in the fake carrier's hull. |
|
| |
[mp], read "Winston Churchill's Toyshop" and "The Secret War". The things that were actually tried were so outlandish as to make them incredible in a fictional context, from the notorious "exploding rats" to exploding bicycle pumps, aerial mines suspended from balloons and air-drop equipment that used retro rockets instead of parachutes .... |
|
| |
The US may have cornered the market in high tech and big-budget conspiracy theories, but if you want the real deal off-the-wall "weid shit", the British specialise in breeding a totally unique type of very clever eccentric loony for just this job. |
|
| |
[8] "The Yanks have more tanks, but the Brits have
more brains: we can win this war with carboard & string." |
|
| |
//read "Winston Churchill's Toyshop"//
Is that the one with the anecdote about buying up a small town's stocks of aniseed balls and condoms?
I read that as a teenager - a very good read. |
|
| |
No, you're thinking of "Clement Atlee's Sweetshop", but the confusion is entirely understandable. |
|
| |