Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Normal
That's entirely wrong. The existence of new hangars was used as evidence of RQ-180 existence. Quellish was arguing that the hangar in question is not related to RQ-180. That's not a strawman argument, its rebutting part of the "evidence".I'm interested in what you think caused this mention of RQ-180 to slip out. If it's secret, that'd be a bad mistake.I have no idea if it exists or not, and nothing on the line, but the evidence presented is weak. If RQ-180 exists, the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) don't know about it in June 2020, because they were grilling the Air Force over its plan to retire MQ-4 Block 20 and 30 without a replacement capability. If RQ-180 was in or near service, they wouldn't be as concerned surely. So if RQ-180 exists, they hadn't informed HASC yet.
That's entirely wrong. The existence of new hangars was used as evidence of RQ-180 existence. Quellish was arguing that the hangar in question is not related to RQ-180. That's not a strawman argument, its rebutting part of the "evidence".
I'm interested in what you think caused this mention of RQ-180 to slip out. If it's secret, that'd be a bad mistake.
I have no idea if it exists or not, and nothing on the line, but the evidence presented is weak. If RQ-180 exists, the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) don't know about it in June 2020, because they were grilling the Air Force over its plan to retire MQ-4 Block 20 and 30 without a replacement capability. If RQ-180 was in or near service, they wouldn't be as concerned surely. So if RQ-180 exists, they hadn't informed HASC yet.
