Odd Structures in Google Maps in Nevada

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
This area is labelled on the US topo maps as "NAS Fallon Target B-20":

upload_2015-1-13_17-26-39.png

This is part of the Fallon Range Training Complex

 

David Fraser

Senior Member
It's a dummy city made from shipping containers, used for target and urban warfare practice, like this one in Arizona:
http://weburbanist.com/2013/02/01/instant-abandonment-faux-desert-city-built-to-be-bombed/

That looks so cool. Makes me wish I was back with mortars or Milan platoons to blow stuff up :)
 

Marine0811

Active Member
The ground looks too clean around these objects to be used for missile testing. There should be impact craters and burn marks on the ground. They are arranged in a complex pattern which doesn't make much sense if they are just going to be destroyed. Surely they could build a much less complex and time consuming area to bomb.
It could be structures used to calibrate satellites and camera equipment.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The ground looks too clean around these objects to be used for missile testing. There should be impact craters and burn marks on the ground. They are arranged in a complex pattern which doesn't make much sense if they are just going to be destroyed. Surely they could build a much less complex and time consuming area to bomb.
It could be structures used to calibrate satellites and camera equipment.
As noted above, there's another in Nevada to looks exactly the same, and is know to be used for urban warfare practice. The impact craters and burn marks are just too small to be seen by satellite.
 

Marine0811

Active Member
As noted above, there's another in Nevada to looks exactly the same, and is know to be used for urban warfare practice. The impact craters and burn marks are just too small to be seen by satellite.
Check out the box to the upper right. Everything is similar and symetrical except for that one and the X.
 

Marine0811

Active Member
I just looked at the link and I don't see how you believe they are the same. They look nothing alike to me. They are arranged completely different and the bombing site has burn marks and visible damage as I noted earlier. The one in Nevada doesn't have the disorganization and damage marks.
 

Marine0811

Active Member
The structures in the OP also seem to have the same brown color on mostly all of them. The known bombing site posted by Mick has different colored units or buildings to go along with the other differences.
 

solrey

Senior Member
I just looked at the link and I don't see how you believe they are the same. They look nothing alike to me. They are arranged completely different and the bombing site has burn marks and visible damage as I noted earlier. The one in Nevada doesn't have the disorganization and damage marks.
It's been identified as the B-20 target range, described as:

Why would you expect burn marks and visible damage at an inert target range?

I do however, see what looks like impact sites in and around the one circular target area closeup with something in the middle of the target zone, like an armored vehicle perhaps?

You act like all bombing/target ranges should be identical or something. They are not.
 

Marine0811

Active Member
It's been identified as the B-20 target range, described as:

Why would you expect burn marks and visible damage at an inert target range?

I do however, see what looks like impact sites in and around the one circular target area closeup with something in the middle of the target zone, like an armored vehicle perhaps?

You act like all bombing/target ranges should be identical or something. They are not.
There is a lot more structures or objects than 22. How do you figure there are 22?
I don't see any damage except for possibly around the X at the top right.
How do you conclude that this site is inactive?
I don't think all should look the same, but should have more similarities than differences.
 

solrey

Senior Member
There is a lot more structures or objects than 22. How do you figure there are 22?
I don't see any damage except for possibly around the X at the top right.
How do you conclude that this site is inactive?
I don't think all should look the same, but should have more similarities than differences.
I didn't figure anything, that's a description of the target range from a previously posted link. It says 22 large metal targets of various geometric designs. I can discern lots of different geometric designs, many repeated in multiple spots. It also says inert impact area, as in no go boom boom. In this context inert does not mean inactive.

How many military target ranges have you been to? Out of the probably dozen or so various kinds of target/bomb/explosive ordnance ranges I experienced as a combat engineer in the US Army Reserves, none of them were the same... not even close.
 

Marine0811

Active Member
I didn't figure anything, that's a description of the target range from a previously posted link. It says 22 large metal targets of various geometric designs. I can discern lots of different geometric designs, many
I didn't figure anything, that's a description of the target range from a previously posted link. It says 22 large metal targets of various geometric designs. I can discern lots of different geometric designs, many repeated in multiple spots. It also says inert impact area, as in no go boom boom. In this context inert does not mean inactive.

How many military target ranges have you been to? Out of the probably dozen or so various kinds of target/bomb/explosive ordnance ranges I experienced as a combat engineer in the US Army Reserves, none of them were the same... not even close.
repeated in multiple spots. It also says inert impact area, as in no go boom boom. In this context inert does not mean inactive.

How many military target ranges have you been to? Out of the probably dozen or so various kinds of target/bomb/explosive ordnance ranges I experienced as a combat engineer in the US Army Reserves, none of them were the same... not even close.
I don't see a logical explanation of how the site is identified when the number of targets is inaccurate, if targets are what they are. How are there only 22?
I am willing to accept this is a target range if you can show images of other target ranges that are similar, I can't find any. These objects are organized in perfect distances and patterns. They look too organized to be destroyed.
 

Village Cat Dad

New Member
Shipping containers are ubiquitous and inexpensive (relatively speaking) to replace. There are piles on the West and East coast that can be had for little. So what if some get destroyed, the military just puts more in their place. Simple.
 

Hevach

Senior Member
Shipping containers are ubiquitous and inexpensive (relatively speaking) to replace. There are piles on the West and East coast that can be had for little. So what if some get destroyed, the military just puts more in their place. Simple.
My county recently cracked down on people putting them on trailer park slabs and converting them into cheap housing, because they were actually dragging down the property value in the kind of neighborhoods where your lawnmower has a fair chance at being worth more than your house.
 

Village Cat Dad

New Member
My county recently cracked down on people putting them on trailer park slabs and converting them into cheap housing, because they were actually dragging down the property value in the kind of neighborhoods where your lawnmower has a fair chance at being worth more than your house.
Yes, agree. For all the higher-end houses built using shipping containers as basic frameworks (google shipping container houses), I'm sure there are a lot more that are just put in place rather than a traditional modular home.
 

PCB

Member
The ground looks too clean around these objects to be used for missile testing. There should be impact craters and burn marks on the ground. They are arranged in a complex pattern which doesn't make much sense if they are just going to be destroyed. Surely they could build a much less complex and time consuming area to bomb.
It could be structures used to calibrate satellites and camera equipment.
.
I think the problem understanding some of this is that it's not clear what an "urban warfare training area" is for.
.
Missiles and bombs don't normally have anything to do with those. They are not "target areas" like that.
(Except perhaps for some small neutered or simulated ordinance from ground support choppers or similar.)
.
These areas are to train foot soldiers how to operate in and move through urban areas.
By using a variety of layouts throughout their town they can create different tactical problems and vary the missions in the training plan so they aren't doing the same scenarios over and over.
.
The containers simulate buildings and are far less expensive than actually building a bunch of buildings.
Additionally they are easy to move around should they want to create a specific combat situation/scenario.
.
Some other areas pointed out may in fact be target areas for missiles/bombs..
It's still desirable in those to be able to change things around so it's not the same every time.
.
.
.
(Related)
There are some more advanced training areas that use actual buildings and are populated with real live people as 'props' so the speak. (Actors might be a better word.) The actors simulate a civilian population in the town. They go so far as to choose actors who are (as much as possible) physically and culturally correct. For example, if the scenario is for an Iraqi town they will use 'props' that at least look Iraqi, speak the correct language(s), dress them in the correct cloths and have them do things (activities) that would be typical in an Iraqi town. - The actors are not usually military personnel BTW. I only know about this because a former (I moved) neighbor/friend of mine did this. He's an Iraqi national that has been a US citizen since the 1970's or early 80's. It's not a full time gig. Usually twice a year for 2 or 3 weeks max.
.
 
Last edited:

TEEJ

Senior Member
Every single target and building can be found in the following Fallon range users manual.

Fallon Range Training Complex (FRTC) Users Manual

https://uchisworld.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/knfl-nas-fallon-range-users-manual.pdf

See Annex B B-13, B-14, B-15, B-16

Bldg-01 to Bldg-212 are listed by coordinates in the manual.



 

mik

Member
It would be sensible to use an arrangement of shipping containers as a range target, though, as in today's battlefield environments it is absolutely vital for pilots to be able to accurately discern between a specific target building in a suburban sprawl. Likewise it is also as important to train the FACs (forward air controllers) to describe and mark these specific targets for close air support ordnance delivery.

While munitions such as JDAMS are pre programmed to guide themselves to a set of GPS coordinates, laser guided munitions still require visual confirmation of the target from the pilot through the illuminator package

Here is a picture of the Lockheed Martin developed inert laser guided training unit:
[Broken External Image]:http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/lockheed/us/products/enhanced-Laser-guided-training-round/_jcr_content/product_image.img.jpg/1401292004474.jpg

I also include a picture of an inert training bomb type BDU-33 used in conjunction of a launcher unit for practicing deployment of dumb bombs. A smoke charge inside provides aerial indication for the impact site.
 

Attachments

Top