And what happens when you have to hit 3 targets? A single ICBM will be able to carry a single conventional warhead.

what about you use them for bunker busting? thats a very large bunker buster travelling how fast? Oh man that would be rough to be on the recieving end of that big bag boy!

Well if you're a defense contractor looking for the most expensive possible method to deliver some a couple tons of HE within 90 meters of a given target (that's Trident's CEP), I guess this is it. Beyond that I'm not sure it's such a great idea...

Now if it had terminal radar guidance like the Pershing II, I can see it being of some use. But still absurdly expensive.

[edit on 5/29/06 by xmotex]

Originally posted by xmotex
Well if you're a defense contractor looking for the most expensive possible method to deliver some a couple tons of HE within 90 meters of a given target (that's Trident's CEP), I guess this is it.
[edit on 5/29/06 by xmotex]

Good Point, I didn't even think of that! Ballistic Missiles are by definition not very accurate. They have a Circular Error Probability because of how they are design. ICBM's by definition do not have terminal guidance, that what makes them ballistic.

The principle of a ballisic missile is simular to lobbing a rock at some one. During the "boost" phase, the missile uses a partial guidance to set a trajectory. When they enter midcourse, the engine and guidance system shut down as the missile enters a ballistic flight path. The warhead(s) are then deployed. These warheads then free fall to the target, simlar to how a World War 2 bomb was dropped. More often then not, the warhead doesn't actually hit the target, but lands nearby.

Remember that the Reason ICBM's are so powerful as a deturrent is because they usually have Nuclear Warheads. If you miss by 6 yards with a large Nuclear warhead, it makes no difference, the target is still in the blast zone. If you miss by 6 yards with a 2'000 Lbs. bomb, you get a loud bang and a target with no damage. With a conventional warhead, an ICBM is of almost no real strategic use.

Historical Note: The first Ballistic Missile, the German V-2 was built as a terror weapon. It was used more or less to wage psychological warfare against England. Even the Nazis admitted the weapon was of very little strategic vaule because it lacked the accurcy to hit a spacific Target. Ballistic Missiles were dropped after the war until large, high yeild Nuclear warheads came about, making the ballisitc missile strategically useful as a weapon.

Tim

Ghost it can have terminal guidance and it can maneuver in the terminal phase while still being considered a ballistic missile. The Pershing II was considered a ballistic missile and so is the Topol-M which maneuvers in the terminal phase. Besides, I’m not really concerned with how you choose to classify it, as long as it performs as promised everything else comes second.

EDIT: Double Post

[edit on 1-6-2006 by WestPoint23]

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Ghost it can have terminal guidance and it can maneuver in the terminal phase while still being considered a ballistic missile.

So, what makes it a Ballistic Missile? I was going by the dictonary befinition, which would suggest that it's unguided.

Tim