It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Do not attempt to suggest unproven and newer designs which do even not offer some of the Tomahawks capabilities
Originally posted by OzWeatherman
reply to post by and01
I wouldnt say bye bye Darwin. The airport up here is a joint military/ commercial airport so there is always air support here and Tindal airbase is 300km south of here so if we are attacked there is always a large military presence. Plus the whole of Darwin is full of army and navy personel. Probably the best guarded city in Australia at the moment
Finally I do not believe that the Indons would be able to single-handedly block the straits off w/o Singapore and Malaysian consent. They would need Indian and USN approval for the same too. So its pretty far fetched.
Originally posted by and01
Actually it would be very easy to block the Straits of Mallacca. A couple of Yakhonts fired across the bows of a couple of oil tankers, and all sea going traffic in the Straits stop. What wth massive insurance premiums and risk aversion, it only takes a minimal amount of shipping harassment to cause the complete cessation of shipping traffic in the Straits of Malacca.
Even the slightest whiff of geopolitical instability in the Straits would cause insurance premiums to go through the roof. Also, geographically at points the Straits are only 25km wide, so on a military level it could even be blocked using basic artillery and land based missile systems being fired from either side to stop all shipping traffic. Even a terrorist group could achieve this.
Originally posted by and01
reply to post by and01
A missing piece of the puzzle is the Chinese naval base being built on the Burmese coast, purely to extend China's sphere of influence into the Indian Ocean and Straits of Malkacca area.
Originally posted by WestPoint23
Originally posted by manson_322
Are you aware that we are not? Our efforts have gone into making the Tomahawk less observable while adding valuable upgrades to it's guidance and control suite, as well as newer warheads. The US is not convinced that hypersonic cruise missiles are necessary apart form the faster reaction time they offer. We are confident enough in the capability and past performance of the Tomahawk (unproved claims not withstanding) to continue developing it. This is why we are developing the similar JASSM, JASSM-ER and JASSM-XR. The RATTLRS so far has not been ordered, and it would not replace either missile only serve in a complimentary role.
Late last week, they handed out contracts to 10 firms to start designing a hypersonic missile that can outrun the now-retired Concorde, and can hit a terrorist nest in Europe from the East Coast.
www.wired.com...
The military wants Falcon operational by 2010, and is taking a two-step approach to reaching the deadline. The first is to design a cruise missile that can travel at hypersonic velocity, and deliver a 1,000-pound, bunker-busting bomb.
www.wired.com...
But this is only the beginning of the Falcon project. In the long-term, Darpa and the Air Force aim to send the hypersonic CAV cruise missiles not by rocket, but by an ultra-fast drone aircraft. This unmanned plane, dubbed the Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle, would take off and land from a military airport, travel more than 10,000 miles in less than two hours, and deliver 12,000 pounds worth of CAVs or sensors. The Pentagon wants the drone carrier in service by 2025
The craft is the same size and shape as a Joint Air-to- Surface Standoff Missile, so it can be attached to a B-52 or fighter jet. It runs on standard JP-7 jet fuel, not on rocket fuel, so it fits in neatly with the military's existing logistical chain. The X-51 is made from a fairly standard nickel alloy, not from exotic materials. And the advanced engine technology is very real. In 2004, NASA broke speed records while testing its X-43A, a precursor to the X-51 (see "Breakthrough Awards 2005," Nov. 2005). In a final test flight, the 12-ft.-long aircraft hit 7000 mph — nearly Mach 10. In other words, the X-51 is not just some lab experiment; it's being designed from the start to deploy. "I've got tremendous confidence in it working," the Air Force's Mark J. Lewis says.
www.popularmechanics.com...
Once across the border, the cruise missile is supposed to be able to penetrate Soviet air defenses effectively because it flies very low, hugging the terrain and staying out of sight of Soviet radars. However, it is vulnerable to an attack from above by the new Soviet
Foxhound fighter, with its lookdown, shootdown radar. The current version of the cruise missile is also as slow as a commercial air liner, and can be shot down by the Soviet SA-10, a relatively new surface-to-air missile.
Improved cruise missiles – supersonic, and with a “stealth” design making them nearly invisible to Soviet radar – are under development, but will not be available in large numbers before the end of the decade.
Until then, the air-launched cruise missile is not
likely to make a major contribution to the viability of the US strategic triad.
www.marshall.org...
Originally posted by Daedalus3
Originally posted by and01
reply to post by and01
A missing piece of the puzzle is the Chinese naval base being built on the Burmese coast, purely to extend China's sphere of influence into the Indian Ocean and Straits of Malkacca area.
And which puzzle is that?
Could you elaborate on that?
Thanks
Originally posted by Daedalus3
albeit slower and cautious pace.
My definition of 'blocking the straits' is to provide such a threat to shipping in the area that even the regional naval powers wouldn't be able to guarantee safety for the same.
Originally posted by and01
My belief is that use of any kind of major weapons systems on any of the worlds important narrow waterway would result in cessation of all large scale commercial shipping traffic. Of course small scale traffic may still occur, but large freighters are not going to navigate these waterways. Even the threat of disruption will affect sea going traffic in major waterways.
[edit on 9-10-2007 by and01]
And the Regan era paper, interesting but the fact remains the US has no long range hypersonic cruise missile in the inventory
This will likely change but again, not for your stated reason, they will be complimentary systems used in a variety of roles. Speed offers time benefits but it does not increase survivability. A stealthy, low flying cruise missile is just as good, if not better, then an IR beacon, high flying supersonic cruise missile
And the Regan era paper, interesting but the fact remains the US has no long range hypersonic cruise missile in the inventory
This will likely change but again, not for your stated reason, they will be complimentary systems used in a variety of roles. Speed offers time benefits but it does not increase survivability. A stealthy, low flying cruise missile is just as good, if not better, then an IR beacon, high flying supersonic cruise missile
Originally posted by manson_322
because of the collapse of USSR
Originally posted by manson_322
...with great investment being made in counter stealth…
Originally posted by manson_322
…are capable of detecting stealth…
Originally posted by manson_322
…subsonic Steath is becoming increasingly vulnerable thus being slowly replaced by supersonic stealth…
Originally posted by manson_322
...examples are F-22 and the supersonic tomahawk...
Originally posted by manson_322
survivablity matters on speed as proven by Sr-71 , or mig-25 as speed enables them to outrun SAMs
Even though the S-300 and S-400 (including all variants) have been developed and deployed since then. That was the main threat the US was supposedly (not) developing cruise missiles to counter...
The advantages that VLO systems offer cannot yet be totally or effectively countered with any great sustained measure of success.
Virtually every military radar system is capable of detecting and tracking stealth systems, that is not the same as effectively neutralizing the threat presented by stealth system however
The DoD has not yet ordered the systems and there is no proof that it is not more "survivable" than the current tomahawk nor that it is being designed to counter "Russian SAM's". A point, which I must say you have yet to prove.
A point, which I must say you have yet to prove.
there is no proof that it is not more "survivable" than the current tomahawk
if they tried to fly towards a highly defend target (not unlike what the Tomahawk does).
if they tried to fly towards a highly defend target (not unlike what the Tomahawk does). There is a reason why the Blackbird never overflew the USSR, or ventured deep into highly defended Soviet sites.
There is a reason why the Blackbird never overflew the USSR, or ventured deep into highly defended Soviet sites.
Although infrared weapon technology is not widely discussed in the West, the Soviet infrared beam weapon is nothing new and was already used during a Soviet dispute with China in 1969 to destroy "a wall" at the Ussuri River, which separates Manchuria from Russia's Far East, according to the physicist.
----
There are indications, according to the physicist, that such a weapon was used when the KAL plane was shot down over Kamchatka (Soviet Union) in September 1983. In the early 90s, this technology returned to scientific discussions in the West and the technology itself appears to have been transferred from the Soviet Union.
www.serendipity.li...
A former East German physicist who studied Soviet infrared technology and plasmoids during the 60s and 70s, and who was directly involved in a demonstration of a Soviet laser beam weapon in 1991 for the U.S. Air Force in Weimar (DDR)
www.serendipity.li...
In 1991, before the Soviet military withdrew from East Germany, the GRU demonstrated for the U.S. Air Force Electronic Security Command (AFESC) the capabilities of its infrared beam weapon by reducing a ceramic plate into dust from a distance of one mile. This display of Soviet weapon technology was meant to impress upon the U.S. Air Force "how a stealth bomber could be turned into dust in the same way," the physicist said
www.serendipity.li...