Posted on 07/11/2017 7:49:59 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The U.S. on Tuesday test-fired its THAAD anti-ballistic missile system from Alaska that successfully intercepted a target missile launched from an Air Force Cargo plane north of Hawaii.
The drill was previously scheduled in June and comes a week after North Korea successfully test-launched an intermediate-range ballistic missile capable of hitting Alaska.
THAAD is used to intercept short- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. It does not target intercontinental ballistic missiles. The U.S. has a perfect record on launches, hitting 14 out of 14 targets.
"I couldn't be more proud of the government and contractor team who executed this flight test today," said Missile Defense Agency Director Lt. Gen. Sam Greaves. "This test further demonstrates the capabilities of the THAAD weapon system and its ability to intercept and destroy ballistic missile threats. THAAD continues to protect our citizens, deployed forces and allies from a real and growing threat."
Fox News was told it will be a few hours before imagery and video are released.
Soldiers from the 11th Air Defense Artillery Brigade on Kodiak conducted launches using the same procedures they would use in an actual combat scenario, the statement read. Soldiers operating the equipment were not aware of the actual target launch time.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
It does not target intercontinental ballistic missiles.
And BTW, I thought leftists said nobody can shoot down missiles, ever.
They said “like hitting a bullet with a bullet”. And they have a bunch of “””””scientists””””” backing them up.
What about that?
That does not sound good.
from Wikipedia:
There are only three systems in the world that can intercept ICBMs. Besides them, many smaller systems exist (tactical ABMs), that generally cannot intercept intercontinental strategic missiles, even if within range—an incoming ICBM simply moves too fast for these systems.
The Russian A-35 anti-ballistic missile system, used for the defense of Moscow, whose development started in 1971. The currently active system is called A-135. The system uses Gorgon and Gazelle missiles with nuclear warheads to intercept incoming ICBMs.
The U.S. Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD; previously known as National Missile Defense – NMD) system has reached initial operational capability. Instead of using an explosive charge, it launches a kinetic projectile. The George W. Bush administration accelerated development and deployment of a system proposed in 1998 by the Clinton administration. The system is a dual purpose test and interception facility in Alaska, and in 2006 was operational with a few interceptor missiles. The Alaska site provides more protection against the nuclear threat from North Korean missiles or launches from Russia or China, but is likely less effective against missiles launched from the Middle East. President Bush referenced the September 11 attacks in 2001 and the proliferation of ballistic missiles as reasons for missile defense. The current GMD system has the more limited goal of shielding against a limited attack by a rogue state such as North Korea.
Israel’s Arrow 3 system entered operational service in 2017. It is designed for exo-atmosphere interception of ballistic missiles during the spaceflight portion of their trajectory, including those of ICBMs.[1] It may also act as an anti-satellite weapon.
an incoming ICBM simply moves too fast for these systems
I’m not arguing with you, I’m just trying to understand why it’s impossible to use a proven technology against NORK targets.
Even if we could detect the launch, I imagine that there would be very little time after detection to shoot down an ICBM: a minute or even seconds before the missile left the atmosphere. Very difficult to target and eliminate.
The Israeli system -- the most advanced in the world -- targets the ICBM when it is in space near its apogee, before it turns downward and picks up speed -- at its most vulnerable point.
Thanks. I appreciate your explanation.
The same people who worship global warming are the same ones who said star wars project wouldn’t work. Technology catches up... I bet we could mount spaced based lasers to intercept missiles instead within a decade if needed.
Reagan launched the program and was laughed at. I don’t know how much Bush 41 did... I suspect not much.
Clinton surely killed any research, or restricted it greatly.
Bush 43 picked his nose while working hard to increase the Mexican invasion of America.
Obama surely killed or throttled down every military program he was aware of (when he wasn’t golfing).
That leaves Trump to pick up where Reagan left off. And I agree with you, lasers in space is the way to go.
Our GDM “ground based missile defense system” successfully intercepted an ICBM when it was tested back in May from Vandenberg Air force Base.
I’d vote for the Israeli system
Our GDM “ground based missile defense system” successfully intercepted an ICBM when it was tested back in May from Vandenberg Air force Base.
What people fail to realize is that this is not a bullet hitting a bullet, it is much more super complicated.
Here are some issues:
1. An ICBM is launched. At what exact point can it be determined where it will impact?
2. An ICBM is launched, where is point a US based radar will acquire that launch?
3. When can an interceptor be fired to effectively negate that ICBM launch?
4. Can an existing Patriot missile intercept an ICBM?
and there are more questions.
MORE THINGS TO CONSIDER:
North Korea has 10,000 to 12,000 artillery pieces and 2,300 MLRS pieces over 107mm. The majority of tube artillery are 122-, 130-, 152- and 170-millimeter units, and on the rocket side the majority are 240-millimeter units. (per google search)
Some experts estimate they could fire 500,000 rounds in the first hour. The tube artillery would need rocket assist to hit Seoul proper but the outskirts are certainly within range. Those same experts predict a high dud rate for the artillery so perhaps a lower amount would actually do damage. On top of that they have significant stores of chemical and bio weapons which can be delivered with the artillery.
The THAAD is designed to be used against missiles and not the above artillery. SK and the US have significant forces in place to take out the artillery but that would take time.
THAAD is built by Lockheed Martin. Just sayin, for those that want to rag on the “military industrial complex”. Your welcome, BTW.
Yes, and even if it was 100% they would still deny the systems effectiveness.
Yes, and even if it was 100% they would still deny the systems effectiveness.
I remember 1982. I remember them scoffing at it saying “shooting a bullet with a bullet”.
And I said even back then, “bullet with a bullet”... sounds like an engineering problem to me. Isn’t that what we do best in the US, solve engineering problems?
Do we have anything that does?
See post # 10
At launch, the warhead is under guidance control and is not “ballistic”
Interceptors like the THAAD Kill Vehicle use the fact that once in ballistic (or free fall) flight the warhead’s path can be calculated accurately and an interception planned. This is why we don’t use a ballistic missile interceptor during the launch phase. More likely an anti missile laser would be used at this time. (Requires a plane carrying a laser to be in the immediate area.)
If the warhead reaches too high a velocity on re-entry then the interceptor has to be very reactive. We do not know the ultimate capabilities of the THAAD because they are classified. But THAAD was designed when a treaty forced it to not be effective against long range ICBMs. This treaty is not in effect anymore.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.