The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - January 9, 2009

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest

Advertisement



New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies

Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Weapons of the World Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: next terrorist weapon
andyf    8/26/2006 8:34:34 AM
rather than liquid bombs or other explosives..
why havent the terrorists worked out that a bit of mustard gas/phosgene/etc released on a plane at altitude would be a hell of a weapon.?
some things would be so easy to make, how about a thermos flask with liquified carbon monoxide in it?
the air on a plane is recirculated- ok , so the terroris dies as well, but they dont care about that
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT
flamingknives       8/26/2006 9:28:11 AM
Because no-one suggested it? Because aircraft also have back-up air?
 
Quote    Reply

Rommel    EMP   8/9/2007 1:18:46 PM
Terroists may try to launch an EMP attack on us next(has the ability to knock out all of the countrys electronics if detonated at high enough altitude.)
 
Quote    Reply

Jeff_F_F    EMP terrorist attacks...   8/10/2007 3:33:27 PM
...will be possible just as soon as the terrorists get a nuke, and a rocket to boost it to high altitude. So lets just say as soon at terrorist organizations get nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles this will be an issue. Not that is isn't something to be concerned about, but it is a low order probability scenario compared to others.
 
The problem with most toxins other than nerve gas is that it takes a fairly large amount to do much damage. You will probably make people sick with something like mustard gas but outside of a fairly small area you won't cause a lot of deaths. Look at how relatively ineffective the sarin attacks on the Tokyo subway were. On avarage only 1-2 deaths were caused per attack. Granted if that had been staged at the midpoint of an intercontinental airline flight it would have been a lot worse because the victims would have been exposed for a longer period of time and treatment would have been delayed. But you still have to get the (liquid) compound on the plane.
 
I'd be more worried about someone putting a small package of commercial or improvised explosive under a tanker truck myself, and blowing it up on a bridge in the middle of rush hour. Or the same on a railcar. There are still some wood rail bridges out there which could be completely taken out by this method. Or a very nasty fire could be started in a tunnel, especially if the bomb was large enough to derail the train.
 
Quote    Reply

andyf       8/20/2007 3:42:03 PM
heres a terror plot for you.
 oil tanker loading its cargo in a mid-east rogue state, oil-proof packages of HE with an internal detonator are posted into the oil tanks
timer/ gps fusing?
should act like a masive FAE if you set it up right
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       8/20/2007 4:03:35 PM

Terroists may try to launch an EMP attack on us next(has the ability to knock out all of the countrys electronics if detonated at high enough altitude.)



Think about why what you are suggesting is IMPOSSIBLE. Here is a hint...if what you suggest was true, a single AWACS would "see" every plane over the USA. Can't make it any easier...
 
 
-DA
 
Quote    Reply

doggtag       8/20/2007 4:25:39 PM

heres a terror plot for you.

 oil tanker loading its cargo in a mid-east rogue state, oil-proof packages of HE with an internal detonator are posted into the oil tanks

timer/ gps fusing?

should act like a masive FAE if you set it up right


Oil supertankers got nothing on LNG tankers.
Some ports almost shut down shipping completely, and provide considerable overwatch, to allow safe passage of an LNG tanker.
The liquified natural gas will reach vapor point, and rapidly spread the resulting fireball, much more quickly than thick crude oil.

 
 
Quote    Reply

andyf       8/20/2007 4:46:22 PM
these tankers? they go to any major ports , or are they restricted on destinations.
 
 
Quote    Reply

the British Lion       8/20/2007 4:52:04 PM
I swear, if a mustard gas bomb goes off in my town 'cause of this damn thread, I'll be coming for you Andyf!
 
B.L.
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       8/28/2007 1:47:42 AM




heres a terror plot for you.



 oil tanker loading its cargo in a mid-east rogue state, oil-proof packages of HE with an internal detonator are posted into the oil tanks



timer/ gps fusing?



should act like a masive FAE if you set it up right




Oil supertankers got nothing on LNG tankers.
Some ports almost shut down shipping completely, and provide considerable overwatch, to allow safe passage of an LNG tanker.

The liquified natural gas will reach vapor point, and rapidly spread the resulting fireball, much more quickly than thick crude oil.
Typical political scare mongering.
LNG is a LOT SAFER than they make out in the fiction books and movies.
 
 

·         LNG a liquid at atmospheric pressure, not a gas like CNG.   It’s not stored at high pressure, so it flows fairly slowly, not screaming out in a jet. Pound to found LNG is probably less dangerous than gasoline.

·         Because the LNG is a cryogenic liquid, those huge tanks are double walled and very tough, with several feet of insulation between to the two walls. The insulation is also a load bearing structure, so it adds to the toughness of the design.

·         Yes, LNG will vaporize as it absorbs heat from it’s surrounding, but that slows and stops as the area around it is cooled. Revaporizing a tanker load of LNG is simple in concept, but a major engineering project in reality. Igniting the vapor will help heat and vaporize the rest, but once vaporized it’s low density causes it to spreads vertically, not horizontally like a liquid. Don’t expect to get a ground hugging fireball.

·         There have been several large accidents involving LNG, but all have been at the liquefaction plants, not on the tankers.

Having said all that, I would want to live next to either an oil of LNG terminal.

If I were a terrorist I would look for an oil tanker with a mixed load of gasoline (for a big fireball), diesel fuel or kerosene (to create a burning oil slick), and a medium grade sour crude (sour = sulfur, to make a stink, and the rest to contaminate the area and make cleanup as time consuming, and visually disgusting as possible) .


 
Quote    Reply

Nasty German Idiot       8/28/2007 9:03:54 AM
The goal of the terrorists is to create fear and terror,  and additionally kill as many as possible.  I think the next action will be some kind of kidnapping, nerve breaking thing with hostages and bombs involved.
The Chechens were quite successful with their attacks against the School in Beslan and the Show in Moscow some years ago, and Al-Quaida has started a massive kidnapping campaign.  Also the standoff in the Red Mosque points in that direction, I think they will try to conduct such a thing sooner or later, in a Western state.  Such desperate acts were conducted often in the past when terrorist organisations got cornered or were loosing ground. 
 
Quote    Reply

Softwar    Power Grid/Sniper Teams   8/28/2007 9:11:53 AM
Combination of non-nuke EMP - localized - using conventional design EMG generators scratch built with plastic explosives targeted at the power grid and two or three teams of snipers in the urban areas.  The black out would cause mass panic and overload the authorities - the sniper teams would shoot innocent victims at random using jury rigged cars and vans so they cannot be spotted.  This could go on for weeks before power is restored.
 
Quote    Reply

FJV       8/28/2007 1:15:50 PM
Propably because the economics of using such weapons are unfavorable when compared to plain old fashioned bombs and bullets.

You can do a chemical attack and need special handling, difficult planning, hard to get equipment, difficult deployment and possible small results (unlike soldiers, civilians are not required to stay in the contaminated area and so limit their exposure). Or you can just spray a machinegun at a crowd and kill an equal number of civilians with much less hassle.

You might even make several conventional attacks for the same hassle of 1 chemical attack.



 
Quote    Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan    the next terrorist attack   8/31/2007 8:06:59 PM
Terrorists employed at food and beverage vendors for major sporting events would be able to inject spores into everything.  The food will be frozen and then cooked, the rapid temperature change would keep the pathogens in spore form until they enter the cozy environment our digestive tract.  Halfway through the last half of said sporting event people are vomiting, keeling over and collapsing en masse in front of every camera in the stadium and tens of millions if not billions of viewers.

 
Quote    Reply

andyf       8/31/2007 10:23:51 PM
if tom clancy uses any of this stuff we'd best get royalties!!!
 
luckily I think our best defence is their stupidity
these folks arent educated or scientifically minded. - if they were they wouldnt be islamic terrorists
 
theres plenty easier stuff  to make than mustard gas...
carbon monoxide?
chlorine?
ammonia
sulphur dioxide?
any of those would cause many deaths and injuries
 
Quote    Reply

andyf       8/31/2007 10:27:43 PM
ok, another plot idea for you.
give a terrorist a rifle and a clip of rounds. his orders are on every odd numbered day to go out to a road bridge  and snipe out the driver of a petrol tanker
 
( he has an opposite number at the other end of the country ith the same orders, but for even days)
when he runs out of ammo, he is to bury the gun in a deserted location and never do anything else illegal
 
what implications would this attack have?
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy