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.

 

ask capability of US and Iran missile

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 06:25 AM
link   
If Iran launch LRBM in next stage of maneuver, could US navy has capability to intercept it? Iran has anounced that they are going to launch Long-Range Ballistic Missile in next stage of maneuver.




posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 07:04 AM
link   
It's been anounced that US destroyers have a modified AA battery capable of targeting incoming missiles.



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Depends where they fired it at - they would presumably fire it into the Arabian Sea/Indian Ocean in which case no, the USN would probably not be in a position to intercept it. They haven't yet managed to even shoot down a North Korean launch and they had plenty of warning and a pretty good idea of the launch site, direction of flight etc.

- let's get something straight. Like the North Korean missile tests, the US has no real NEED to interecpt these missiles, only the motives of showing off, supression (rightly or wrongly, that's beside the point) and woeing alies in the region to buy their military kool aid some more.

Next time America test fires a BM of any kind should Iran try to shoot it down? - would it be a legitimate international act????



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 06:47 PM
link   
I'm not saying the US should intercept a missile, only they have the capability, which they do.

There are many countries with this capability, but it is considered aggression unless action is recognized by both parties. Of course, firing a missile after some of the comments that have been made isn't exactly good diplomatic standing.



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by bothered
I'm not saying the US should intercept a missile, only they have the capability, which they do.

There are many countries with this capability, but it is considered aggression unless action is recognized by both parties. Of course, firing a missile after some of the comments that have been made isn't exactly good diplomatic standing.

The true current extent of the US's ABM capability has been talked about. The window of opportunity for the Standard SM-3 missile against a medium range ballistic missile is very small - if the Iranian missile was launched from mid or Northern Iran it would be too high for an SM-3 intercept way before it even crossed into the Arabian Sea. Saying that the USN has the capability to shoot down an Iranian missile test launch is a bit like saying that Wales have a chance of winning the next World Cup ..... on paper maybe....


[edit on 21-8-2006 by planeman]



posted on Aug, 22 2006 @ 11:33 PM
link   
Missiles aren't leading edge interception devices, anymore.

Currently in development - and most likely deployed in classified locations - are laser weapons on air, land, and sea assets.

Such systems have been capable of destroying artilery shells, tanks, missiles, radars, (presumably humans will be a viable target), planes, etc.

Although as far as missiles go - I would give a correctly placed battery a decent chance of intercepting an LRBM. This depends on many factors, including the missile being used to target the LRBM.

Although the Aegis cruiser can reportedly narrow its radar emissions into a narrow enough beam to act as a microwave and destroy large missiles.

So... lasers, missiles, and concentrated radar beams are at our disposal. I would say that, if we wanted to, we could destroy a missile with 100% certainty.



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
Missiles aren't leading edge interception devices, anymore.

Currently in development - and most likely deployed in classified locations - are laser weapons on air, land, and sea assets.

Such systems have been capable of destroying artilery shells, tanks, missiles, radars, (presumably humans will be a viable target), planes, etc.

Although as far as missiles go - I would give a correctly placed battery a decent chance of intercepting an LRBM. This depends on many factors, including the missile being used to target the LRBM.

Although the Aegis cruiser can reportedly narrow its radar emissions into a narrow enough beam to act as a microwave and destroy large missiles.

So... lasers, missiles, and concentrated radar beams are at our disposal. I would say that, if we wanted to, we could destroy a missile with 100% certainty.
I'm wary of suppositions that are based on the concept that the US military must be years further ahead than even they say they are.

It does not make sense that if they already had the capability to shoot down missiles that they haven't let the world know about it. Instead they are publically developing several costly missile defense programmes (PAC-3, SM-2, THAAD, ABL, Ground Based Interceptor, GBL etc). And marketing some of these products to alies.

If the Aegis system can use its radar to shoot down missiles why invest in the Standard SM-3??? And why did they let the SCUDs rain down on Israel and Saudi Arabia during GW1 whilst the Aegis warships just watched???? And why does Japan seem interested in Buying into THAAD if its Aegis warships can do the job?



[edit on 23-8-2006 by planeman]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join