North Korea is expected to launch an ICBM at full range on Saturday

a reply to: gortex

Don might not need to the japs and S koreans are pretty fed up with kimmy shooting # over their countries.

originally posted by: ThePeaceMaker
Hmmm and they moved forward the launch of the X-37B by SpaceX..

Quoting myself .. on second thoughts they launched early because of the hurricane coming as to avoid damage. Still I like the idea of it being launched as it's secret mission might something to do with taking out enemy satellites and missiles, come on this is a 'conspiracy site'

a reply to: eriktheawful

Just because someone has enough rocket power to put something into orbit is absolutely NO measure of how accurate they can be when coming back down.

I wasn't talking abut accuracy, I was addressing the threat of "Max Range" in the OP, whatever that is supposed to mean. If they can reach orbit then they can reach sub orbit, too.

Double Anyway, lil Koreans aren't the ones threatening the world, US is.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I thought we should shoot them down too, but that can be a double-edged sword. Our success rate isn't that reliable with our interceptors. If we try to shoot it down and fail, that will be a huge propaganda win for NK and may even embolden the wacko more if he thinks his missiles are so good we can't intercept them. Remember, we're not dealing with a rational actor. Not sure I'd risk trying to shoot down his little test rockets.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I thought we should shoot them down too, but that can be a double-edged sword. Our success rate isn't that reliable with our interceptors. If we try to shoot it down and fail, that will be a huge propaganda win for NK and may even embolden the wacko more if he thinks his missiles are so good we can't intercept them. Remember, we're not dealing with a rational actor. Not sure I'd risk trying to shoot down his little test rockets.

You are assuming that the military would let anyone know they tried if it fails.(hint they wont)

a reply to: yuppa

NK's rocket tests are monitored by more than just America's military. Everyone watching would see us try to intercept it and fail, we wouldn't be able to hide it. Besides, we announced a failure of an intercept test recently, which looked bad on us in the midst of this # with NK. It would have been prudent to hide it then too, but they didn't.

a reply to: face23785

Line it up so that any US interceptor misses land in downtown Pyongyang... "oopsie, maybe you should have waited until we had all the wrinkles ironed out, Kimmy ol' boy."

Here's a solution to the world's Kim Jong problem...

An unlikely mutual friend is offering to help President Donald Trump make peace with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un.

Dennis Rodman is offering to help the U.S. "straighten things out" with North Korea after the two countries have escalated tensions with threats of a potential nuclear war.

Kim is "just like everybody else," Rodman said. The basketball Hall of Famer, also known as "The Worm," told host Piers Morgan that his trips to Pyongyang included "cool things" like karaoke, skiing, horseback riding and laughing.

Source: www.syracuse.com...

a reply to: Justso

The U.S. may or may not have the ability to shoot down every one of them. Missile defense is...difficult to say the least.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

That would help. My other idea was why only assign one interceptor? If the success rate is say 60%, launch 5 of em. That could significantly increase the odds of one of them hitting it, depending on the exact reason why they're missing. That's above my pay grade.

a reply to: face23785

They usually launch in pairs in a real world situation. They launch single missiles in tests because of cost and other reasons. If it was a real missile they'd fire two interceptors at each inbound missile.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Would that improve the success odds or is the failure of such a nature that the number launched wouldn't matter?

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Zaphod58

Would that improve the success odds or is the failure of such a nature that the number launched wouldn't matter?

each one has a 50 50 chance. so odds are its getting hit.

I have a feeling we will see it shot down
if they do a long range test.

a reply to: yuppa

Not necessarily. It depends on why exactly they're missing. For example, if there's just a certain trajectory the system doesn't handle well for whatever reason, and the system has a 10% success rate on that trajectory, but a 90% success rate on other trajectories, that will bring the average up obviously. So on paper, yeah it looks like if you launch 2 missiles it would double your chances, but that might not actually be the case. It would take some understanding of the nuances of the system, which is what I'm asking if anyone here knows.

a reply to: face23785

It improves the odds, but it's primarily so that if one missile fails, they aren't having to fire another that has to cover the same ground, while the missile gets closer.

a reply to: face23785

Several failures have been hardware related, at least one was the guidance radar. There's no one specific cause.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Anywhere I can read up on it? You know the usual news articles don't have any useful information in them.

Heres the thing, im not worried about NK starting WWIII on purpose, Im worried about them starting it on accident. They lob a missile to test and find they cant control where it lands....

What are VEGAS odds we shoot it down?