Excuse me?
My understanding is that a ballistic missile's path is determined strictly by ballistics - weight, firing time, firing angle, engine power, etc.
A guided missile's path can be adjusted by sensors, on the missile or on the ground. It is thus not a ballistic missile.
Am I wrong?
You're correct. That's why we have ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.
That is the distinction. You are correct, the "opposite" of ballistic missile is guided missile.
More importantly, a ballistic missle's course includes fre-fall - ballistics. A guided missle's path involves none.
A ballistic missile refers to the fact that the trajectory is largely defined by ballistic mechanics. Steerable re-entry vehicles like the MX are still referred to as ballistic missiles, since the amount that they can be steered is fairly small. The gross profile of the flight is determined by the angle, strength and duration of boost.
The other type would be cruise missiles, which fly in air and are completely controllable.
Have another glass of scotch and contemplate the 'cruise missile,' Mr. Hitchens.
Excuse me?
My understanding is that a ballistic missile's path is determined strictly by ballistics - weight, firing time, firing angle, engine power, etc.
I think he might be referring to RANGE. While there ARE some truly longrange cruise missiles, so far as we know only ballistic missiles fall into the INTERCONTINENTAL range category.
This is a bit of a quibble, but I think that's what he meant.
Not wrong but not entirely right. ICBM's are 'guided' during the initial booster launch but are ballistic from then on.
Any object that is designed to move ordnance from one spot to another without a plane is "ballistic". I don't hink it matters if it's "guided".