Just saw on TV. in a word, AWESOME that they may have used some tech that we really don't know about!
Printable View
Just saw on TV. in a word, AWESOME that they may have used some tech that we really don't know about!
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/0...k-hawk-050411/
Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet
It might have looked like this:
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/da...x3-660x410.jpg
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011...y-copter/all/1
So while the mission was an overall success, and they tried to blow up the helo, is the fact that the tail remained intact a partial failure in that aspect of the mission?
yes no one's saying how that aspect was a failure. Just thought I was the only one.
I don't see that aspect as a failure...it's just not a big deal. Protecting the chopper's secrecy wasn't really part of the mission. It broke, they blew up what they could and even with remaining parts people STILL don't know exactly what it was.
It is probably the ONLY failure in the entire mission. They should have erased any and every trace of evidence before they left....or dropped a few 1,000 pounders after dust off.