Zephyr Net


Return to the Fighters Anthology Resource Center

Go to the VNFAWING.com Forums
It is currently Mon Dec 30, 2024 14:29 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 00:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 16:44 pm
Posts: 809
Location: Any cheap strip joint close by
If the North Korean's launch a long range missile that flys within range do you believe we (USA) should attempt an intercept ?

How do you think they would do it, if attempted ?

Will Reagan ever be acknowledged to be the genius he was ? (personal opinion)

_________________
Image

"cool beanz"
D. "FETCH" Jordan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 01:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 00:26 am
Posts: 1409
Location: Mid-Coast USA
WTF?
Within range of what?
And if the intercept fails ( as it most likely would )what signal would THAT send?

_________________
Fighting for justice with brains of steel

Let your anger be like the monkey which hides inside the piniata.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 01:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2003 19:00 pm
Posts: 763
No. It's very unlikely the missile will be fired within range of the only system capable of shooting it down (NMD, unless the ABL is secretly ready).

A successful intercept would be a huge political win for the US....

But a miss would be a huge political loss and a blow to a system that already has a shaky track record. The NMD system's problems have been pathetic glitches and quality control issues that needlessly play into the hands of its critics. Instead of a debate on the strategic and political issues of NMD vs./and/or MAD, or the physics/logistical/financial issues of building a usable system, the critics can focus on failures and glitches that simply should not exist in a system as high profile or expensive.

An investigation of the system was recently done by either the GAO or an independent DOD investigation board, and the recommendation was that all 12 deployed interceptors be returned to the factory (Boeing?) for remanufacture. The missiles contained quality control problems and inferior parts that simply were not capable of reliable space flight. The next test will be using one of these suspect missiles, future tests may or may not use new build missiles, because I'm not sure remanufacture is currently going to happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 10:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 16:44 pm
Posts: 809
Location: Any cheap strip joint close by
I have to say YES big time.

having in the past worked in the aerospace community, at times with the types that think this stuff up and spend an entire carrier pitching their seeming impossible until it's done ideals, I know these guys and they are as pumped up as the guys that made the first Moon shot.

If they score a hit it will be a shot heard and felt around the World, it would in an instant change strategic thinking everywhere. Would guarantee large influxes of money for their programs, that have been hanging by a thread almost since inception.

We put guys on the Moon, they can do this, I got the popcorn out and am praying that the North Koreans do launch and give these guys the chance to kick the long one for the home team.

If they don't take the shot opponents will say all the money spent up till now has been wasted. I'd bet every asset we got is rapidly moving to theater .... they have to take they're best shot there is to much riding on it not to.


As to how, that 747 thing with a laser is probably not up to speed as a weapon or system yet, it will have to be some sort of missile based intercept vehicle. Basic problems two fold.
1) got to hit it going up or coming down, can't hit it while ballistic.
2) all the range and tract anticipation that entails.

So logic would dictate you anticipate both, but the best chance would be going up for a couple reasons. You know about where it is, and common sense says catching a snake in the yard beats catching him in the house, earlier is better. To catch it down range ... heck it could be going most anywhere since it's just a range test, and they probably don't really know exactly where it's going. That would be very lucky or some of the best intel ever.

Question ?
Can we get a suitable launch platform say within 150 miles of the dang thing ? I really don't know.

_________________
Image

"cool beanz"
D. "FETCH" Jordan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 14:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 00:26 am
Posts: 1409
Location: Mid-Coast USA
The ship based system is the ONLY system that has scored a creditable success in this arena, the land based shots have always had a smell of being rigged tests.

Quote:
If they score a hit it will be a shot heard and felt around the World, it would in an instant change strategic thinking everywhere.


Why? It wouldent be any different than the first downing of a stealth plane or sinking of a submarine. They would just build more ICBMs to overwhelm our system. Other than ego there is absolutely positively ZERO reasons to take a pot-shot at a missle test.

Quote:
As to how, that 747 thing with a laser is probably not up to speed as a weapon or system yet, it will have to be some sort of missile based intercept vehicle. Basic problems two fold.
1) got to hit it going up or coming down, can't hit it while ballistic.
2) all the range and tract anticipation that entails.

ICBMs are ballistic as soon as they leave the launch complex, it's what they DO lol. The exo-atmospheric part of the course is actually the easiest time to hit it because they are easy to see and have run out of propellant for doing any manuevering/course adjustment. All sorts of things happen during re-entry that complicate an intercept at that point including ionization of the surrounding air due to superheating, causing tracking problems. Thundering down through the various layers of the atmosphere causes course changes too, that's why the AF has entire squadrons of weather watchers in the ballistic missle program.
30 seconds or less after launch Rivit Ball and Cobra Ball aircraft and Cobra Dane radar will know everything about the missle including the landing spot within a few miles. Boost phase is the easiest shot IF you already have an asset there, which is why enemies will simply have launch complexes farther inland if we deploy ABL.

_________________
Fighting for justice with brains of steel

Let your anger be like the monkey which hides inside the piniata.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 17:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 16:44 pm
Posts: 809
Location: Any cheap strip joint close by
Quote:
Why? It wouldent be any different than the first downing of a stealth plane or sinking of a submarine.


Beceause if prooved and developed into a real life practicule solution to ICBM's some countries might op to develope an defencive system vs the offset of one offencive platform with another offencive platform I.E. so called arms races that has been the pattern in recent decades.

_________________
Image

"cool beanz"
D. "FETCH" Jordan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Intercept Missile
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 20:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 21:33 pm
Posts: 416
Location: Oklahoma, USA
I think we should intercept the NK missile to show them we can. This would take alot of wind out of thier sails :) Also we need to show them we intend to protect our country and allies. The Navy has had good luck with thier SM2's and 3's in taking out missiles.

Best Regards,
Pappy

_________________
Tally Ho Pappy's In!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 21:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 00:26 am
Posts: 1409
Location: Mid-Coast USA
FETCH wrote:
Quote:
Why? It wouldent be any different than the first downing of a stealth plane or sinking of a submarine.


Beceause if prooved and developed into a real life practicule solution to ICBM's some countries might op to develope an defencive system vs the offset of one offencive platform with another offencive platform I.E. so called arms races that has been the pattern in recent decades.


We have anti-aircraft missles and guns, didnt stop anyone from making more airplanes to saturate them, changing tactics to avoid them or developing stealth to render them less effective. Defensive systems tend to encourage MORE offence, not less. When you have a weapon that can just go in and easily destroy your enemy, you dont need a bunch of them.

_________________
Fighting for justice with brains of steel

Let your anger be like the monkey which hides inside the piniata.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group