Missile Base for Sale
mobile.missilebaseforsale.com
mobile.missilebaseforsale.com
Terms: Cash or $500,000 down and owner carry remainder
They'll carry the remaining $50k after your $500k down payment. Sounds like they're okay with $500k flat to me.
Edit: I'm not seeing an address for the site. I need to know what school district it is in, and how close to downtown and other activity centers. Maybe that helps explain the $50k wiggle room?
It is a missile silo. They didn't put those things close to city hall. According to GoogleMaps it appears to be about a kilometre from Nekoma, a town of 50 that may or may not have a school. The next town is Langdon, ~2000 people 30km away. Your choice of schools and/or coffee shops might be limited.
Lol. The nearest Tesla supercharger is in 85km away ... in Canada. The nearest US charger is in Fargo, 200km away. Nearest starbucks is 100km. But given that the roads all go north-south or east-west, I would add about 50% to those numbers for driving distance. If there is a nowhere, this is the middle.
Sprint was meant for raw speed. It famously accelerated at like 100g. The shortest intercept is one that is launched perpendicular to the incoming warhead. The interceptor goes out vertical as the enemy warhead is coming in more horizontal on its way to the city 400km down the road from the interceptor base.
They initially had conventional warheads as I recall and they were primarily intended as bomber defense. They'd explode a warhead above a flight of bombers so they'd be hit by a massive shock wave.
The listings was very clear:about whats around them "Langdon, 9 miles [about 15km] Amenities: grocery store, gas stations, school district, ... "
"School district" is also very different than "school". Being in a district means that you are in a district that has school not that that school is anywhere nearby. It may be a long bus ride every day. Being in a district only means you will not have to home school your kids. And Langdon has one highschool. Choices are therefore very limited.
This is not for the occasional Frappuccino but as a simple indicator how popular a particular neighborhood is. It also tells some, but not much, about the demography too.
Starbucks is also one of the cheapest places you can get coffee/sweet drinks in my city so it’s nice to have some around ^^
Most coffee shops around me are fancy third wave shops, making Starbucks a cheap choice. I’m sure I can find a cheaper places couple neighborhoods away but streets are not flat, traffic is always terrible and dangerous for pedestrians.
I checked out of curiosity and we have more than 200 branches within 50 miles of me.
Population density in my state: 6.35/km2
50 miles/100km is nothing in many parts of north america. I have in all honesty driven that far just to pick up groceries.
103rd Ave NE & 99th St
Some of that information is on the site.
Langdon, 9 miles Amenities: grocery store, gas stations, school district, multiple banks, shopping, drug store, building supplies, hardware store, hotels, movie theater
Winkler, Manitoba, 45 min Amenities: chain restaraunts and stores including Wal-Mart
Winnipeg, Manitoba, 1.5 hours Amenities: large metro city with many cultural attractions
Grand Forks, ND, 2 hours Amenities: large metro city with many cultural attractions
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALbqZ9rQQ_E around 6:14.
For those that need a little teaser to be incentivized to click on the YouTube link, here's the title of the video 'Super Pointy Sprint Missile - 0 to Mach 10 in 15 Seconds - 100Gs & 6000°F'
If you have any interest in aerospace at all and have never heard of the Sprint, take a gander, it's a spectacular edge case in engineering.
After that has a good mixture of technical and political limitations.
The US has some working missile defenses. Vandenberg is the main US launch site for them. They might be able to stop an attack from North Korea, or at least thin it out a bit. They only have 30 interceptors or so, which is nowhere near enough to do much against a superpower attack. That missile defense operation is run by the Army, not the USAF or Space Force.
Some US Navy ships have anti-ICBM capability, but that's only useful if a ship happens to be in the right position at the right time.
Interesting anecdote on this topic: One of these shipborne anti-ICBM systems is called the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. By all accounts it seems successful enough of a system, but as Animats mentions above there is the problem that it is only useful if the ships are in the right place. And if you never move your ships, why would you want to pay all the extra costs associated with their maintenance? So people come up with the concept of installing the same system on shore based installations. They called it the Aegis Ashore system. If you squint at it it kinda looks like as if the rough outline of a ship's superstructure is sunk into the concrete: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Ballistic_Missile_Defens...
So now we have Aegis, and Aegis Ashore. Here comes the twist. Japan wanted to install the Aegis Ashore system, but for various reasons they couldn't find the right place on land to put it. So they come up with the idea of installing it on barges. And if they do we will have Aegis Ashore-Afloat. :) (Though I'm reading just now that it seems they have canceled these plans. Pity.)
A lot of the interest in surface ships shooting down ballistic missiles is because China and Russia have been developing hyper-sonic anti-ship missiles.
Allegedly the Navy has an actual usable point defense laser... but I strongly suspect all these high tech capital defenses are just the usual Navy boondoggles to enrich contractors and will be worthless against swarm drone attacks.
Higher powered chemical lasers have been built, but were too bulky, fragile, and difficult to operate. The high point of this was MIRACL, a big fixed-installation megawatt chemical laser.[1] Israel tried a US-made chemical laser about a decade ago, and it worked against small rockets and artillery shells, but it took several semitrailers of support equipment. A newer one built in Israel is less bulky and solid state, and will probably go into service.
These are all systems with ranges of tens of kilometers at maximum. ICBMs remain out of reach for now.
The USAF is already testing lasers against drone swarms.[2] That's not as hard. 30KW can take out a drone, and the laser can be re-positioned fast. Truck-mounted versions of that will probably surround US air bases in hostile territory within a very few years.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIRACL
[2] https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a29727696...
Is it true that the basic cruise supersonic missle that hugs the surface and then plops up and drops from above is basically undefendable by surface ships? It's guidance that is 1970s tech at best.
Other Navy guys said their ships would start going into evasive maneuvers and no missle at hypersonic speeds could hit them. With JDAM tech that seems pretty specious.
[1] http://rsl3.com
So living far from silos (and their command centers), and far from the large cities that the sponge protects, is a better survival strategy. :)
I mean when you buy a house with a pool are you expecting any of the pool hardware to be removed? No.
It's so inconsiderate. How am I supposed to establish my own sovereignty over my neighbors without missile tech? Do you know how much of a hassle it is to source ballistics?
You think to yourself, "Wow! What a steal on a bunker!" And then you realize the price drop is because they've moved out all of the military hardware. What shysters.
First, my HOA says I can't land my Apache right next to my bunker, and that it needs to be in its own field. Then, they say I can only transport warheads in the evening.
It's a national tragedy and it needs to stop.
It's a Hellfire modified to deploy effectively big swords as it closes in, so it only shreds people within 4ft or so of the target.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/secret-u-s-missile-aims-to-kill...
Looks like it’s only 1/10 of the price to buy one of those instead!
Most of the nuclear powers are in the northern hemisphere, so you want to be southern.
Obviously you want to be somewhere that's not going to be a target, and as a small island nation without nukes (and in fact one that forbids nuclear-powered vehicles from entering its airspace: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_nuclear-free_zon...), NZ is very unlikely to be targeted by any nuclear combatants.
It's just big enough that it's got some chance of sustaining basic industry in event of the major powers collapsing back into the stone age.
Despite that, as a remote island, no one's likely to invade it for its resources or infrastructure after a nuclear war. It's just too hard to get there without modern navies and air forces.
So, all that to say I think the OP is (sarcastically?) suggesting that someone rich has acquired a place in NZ and is looking to dump this bunker they no longer have a use for.
Though Russia seems like a country that would say "sure" then add it to the list if it wasn't already just as a joke.
Though China might just nuke the site just to be sure.
Look it up. The US/Soviet missile pissing contest completely dwarfs every other nation, even after various disarmament treaties. Russia still has the most.
I believe Elon tried to purchase a rocket from Russia many years ago and even travelled there to meet with people who claimed to be able to broker a sale.
Apparently personal bunkers weren't popular even during the Cold War.
https://vc.ru/story/139377-mesto-gde-mozhno-spryatatsya-skol...
It may be that people just didn't have the money for this kind of stuff and oligarchs would rather build castles that no one knows about than buy old bunkers (which would be in way worse shape in ex USSR I imagine).
Now if we start talking about remote bunkers far away from cities - you start also asking the question of why you would need a bunker! If you build an off grid house in Whistler BC you are highly unlikely to be targeted by a nuke, or be in the fallout zone of any nukes. Rural east coast and southeastern US are also great options. You can even set up a plan for a permanent farming installation in the event of a disaster.
You'll still just be a resource cache for whatever roaming bands of anarchic clans that develop amidst the fallout. And subsistence farming is a complete fantasy; you'll starve very quickly. The only survival scenario that is realistic in an apocalyptic world is one built around trade, alliances, and firepower. Feudalism, essentially. Anyone who thinks they'll be able to go their own way and remain hidden will be the first ones killed off.
Which sounds good until you need a dentist or doctor and you discover you forgot to bring a surgery and/or hospital.
Or a vet. Or spare parts. Or tools/medications you don't already have.
Or any essential consumable that has a shelf life of (if you're lucky...) less than fifty years.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/for-40-years-this-rus...
E.g. live far away from miltary installations, keep a reasonable distance from metros, and avoid any place between the Appalachian mountains and the Sierra Nevada mountains (due to fallout).
Or at least it used to be, EMP proofing takes maintenance.
That kind of system risks blinding and discombobulating itself as soon as it takes its first shot.
Does this mean that cell phones won't work? (Aside from being underground.)
??????
Circa has a site for quirky conversion listings
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/577912501276278784/f8oM...
I think it's supposed to be a sheaf of grain. Same idea!
Russian ICBM sites are all in the middle of nowhere, and are tiny fortresses