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.
Its going to be pretty hard to hit a ship moving at 30-40 knots and taking evasive manuvers at the same time with consistency.
Also its only a matter of time before the Aegis system will be operation with ship board missiles that can intercept an inbound target.
Originally posted by iskander
It’s a MIRV…
We’re talking 4 to 5 kilometers per second.
Please feel free to calculate the needed response time and required speed for a kinetic kill just on a single such target, and we’re talking MIRVs here.
The Sea- based Midcourse Defense (SMD) element of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) will provide the capability for US Navy Surface Combatants to intercept and destroy Medium Range to Inter- Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) in the midcourse ascent phase of the exoatmospheric battlespace while forward deployed or on Fleet Missile Defense Patrol in defense of the nation, deployed U. S.
www.globalsecurity.org...
Originally posted by FredT
Its going to be pretty hard to hit a ship moving at 30-40 knots and taking evasive manuvers at the same time with consistency.
Also its only a matter of time before the Aegis system will be operation with ship board missiles that can intercept an inbound target.
China is correct is trying to develop systems that go after space based assets as well as CBG's but im confident that a counter will be developed. In fact it may be the justification that ABM proponents will need to get more funding and speed up research.
Yes, I saw that already but thanks for the update eh?
Plenty of time as the DSP et al. would detect a ballistic missile launch. Also you are making an assumption that the warhead would MIRV before the exoatmosphere interception would take place. Or for that matter in the accent phase
Please take the time to aquaint yourself with the Multiple Kill Vehicle as well
While you keep going on about MIRV's and yes I do understand what they are it is one thing to alter a flight path as a countermeasure or to adjust a target, but we are talking about fixed ground targets using nuclear weapons where a CEP of 1000 meters is not a huge issue.
But you are talking about hitting a moving target with a non nuclear or kintetic energy warhead. You have to be spot on. We are not talking about strapping a JDAM or paveway kit on the sucker eh?
Как отмечают специалисты, современные корабельные средства ПВО не способны поражать головные части баллистических ракет, падающие на цель вертикально со скоростью несколько километров в секунду.
Kindly explain how you could have a Radar IR system that would function at mach 11 or better yet how you could intergrate those in the nose of the reentry vehicle.
Interesting link, Iskander.
For those of us who don't speak Russian (well, I know a couple good Russian curse words anyway) here is a slightly goofy Google translation of it:
I heard that the Russian fleet would rely on target saturation when engaging a carrier group.
True or false?
Originally posted by iskander
противокорабельные баллистические ракеты – means anti-ship ballistic missiles, not “anti-ballistic missiles”.
Originally posted by FredT
Plenty of time as the DSP et al. would detect a ballistic missile launch.
SMD will provide the capability for US Navy Surface Combatants to intercept and destroy Medium Range to Inter- Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) in the midcourse ascent phase of the exoatmospheric battlespace
This kind of weapon will always be more difficult and expensive to defend against than it will to be to produce and deploy. The US's (considerable, but shrinking) technological advantages will most likely not be a sufficient force multiplier to make up for the basic dynamics of the systems involved.