HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
It's been known for some time that Napa Valley wines rank very highly in the World. They compete very well with the French wines. Austrailian wines have also exploded on the scene in the last few years (no pun intended).
[/OT]
Ozoned
Diamond Member
- Mar 22, 2004
- 5,578
- 0
- 0
Scud busters
Jul. 26, 2004 23:49 | Updated Jul. 27, 2004 0:57
Arrow Scud buster to be tested in US
By ARIEH O'SULLIVAN
The Arrow-2 anti-ballistic missile has been deployed on the Pacific coast in California and will shortly be tested for the first time against an incoming Scud missile, defense and industry sources said Monday.
The milestone test will be the first time the Arrow-2, designed and manufactured by Israel Aircraft Industries, will go up against the Scud. Until now, it has had 11 test launches, but they were against missiles dropped from aircraft that simulated Scud surface-to-surface rockets.
The Arrow battery in the United States missile testing ground was provided by the Israel Air Force. Top defense and industry officials will be on hand for the launch.
Defense sources dismissed comments on Channel 1 which said the "test was a message to Syria and Iran" who were developing missile-borne threats against Israel.
"These tests are planned many years in advance. There is no connection between them and current developments," said an official in the defense establishment.
The Air Force declared the Arrow-2 operational in the spring of 2000, nearly a decade after 39 Iraqi Scud missiles hit Israel during the first Gulf War. The intention to test the Arrow-2 against a real Scud has been in the works for over three years. It has involved visits to the US and its territories to look for a suitable test site.
A joint committee from the Defense Ministry, IAF, and Israel Aircraft Industries has scouted out missile testing ranges for the test, including the White Sands base in New Mexico, Kwajalein in the Pacific Marshall Islands, and the Pacific missile testing range near Hawaii. A base along the Pacific coast in California was eventually chosen.
According to the IAF, the Arrow is to be test-launched twice a year.
The last test was in December. The Arrow-2 was launched at the Palmahim Air Force Base south of Tel Aviv, where all of the test launches have been conducted until now.
For safety reasons, a test against a real Scud could not be done in Israel since the Scud missile would be launched from hundreds of kilometers away.
The test will allow technicians to examine the system and its capabilities in true and all-encompassing
ways.
According a report published by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Arrow-2 ? which can travel nine times the speed of sound and intercept hostile warheads as far as 48 km. from their target ? can intercept any missile, including Scuds, that may be fired at Israel.
The US has paid for about 65 percent of the $1 billion spent so far on the project.
Ozoned
Diamond Member
- Mar 22, 2004
- 5,578
- 0
- 0
No, they are not. ICBM's are designed to achieve their high speed by relying on gravity after re-entering the earths atmosphere. The goal of the arrow II program is to exploit anymissile at its weak point. Fortunately, the ICBM is extremely vulnerable from the time it lifts off and up to the point where it has fallen 10km after re-entering the earths atmosphere.
If you are interested in defense against ICBM's
Current thinking on anti-missile defense system's is that they should be designed to protect a country from a rouge or accidental attack.
Coupled with a bit of current computer tracking technology it would not be unrealistic to expect a 100% kill against any type of attack, provided that no arrow II counter-measures have been incorporated into the attacking vehicles.
Originally posted by: Bumrush99
I wonder how long it will take for the UN to censure Israel for selling these missle busters to the US
about as long as it will take israel to tell the UN to go stuff themselves...again
CaptnKirk
Lifer
- Jul 25, 2002
- 10,053
- 0
- 71
The boost phase of an ICBM places the deployment platform at an altitude of over 500 miles
above the earth. Deployment uses gravity and spin rotation during alignment to drop the
warhead into a CEP of usually less than the length of a football field on the intended target.
From initial launch to wepon detonation, any point on the earth, approximately 6,000 miles
from launch can be hit within a time span of 25 minutes maximum.
Our deployment calls for the simultanious launch from 2 different facillities (redundancy)
with one effecting a ground burst as the target, and the other warhead set as an aerial
burst. This acheives 2 objectives: #1) multiple devices in case one is intercepted or fails,
and #2) 'Pancake' - the aerial busrt is timed to go off at the same time as the ground blast,
and directly above the ground blast - this overhead aerial spherical shock wave flattens the
hemispherical shock wave from the ground blast, and pushes it back down onto the target.
the ground blast is amplified by a magnitude of 100X for the effect of damaged caused.
The aerial burst by itself would nominally destroy all structures within a 10 mile radius.
Now how would the Arrow stop the ICBM launch that was up to 6,000 miles away, and
which of the 2 incoming warheads do you choose to stop that is coming in at nearly 17,000
MPH from an altitude of over 500 miles. You sure can't wait for it to be inside of a 10 mile
proximity for intercept, and you can't go out to it's deployment buss where it's vulnerable.
Brilliant Pebbles was one approach, but I think that was dismissed as not deployable.
I liked the KEWE concept.
above the earth. Deployment uses gravity and spin rotation during alignment to drop the
warhead into a CEP of usually less than the length of a football field on the intended target.
From initial launch to wepon detonation, any point on the earth, approximately 6,000 miles
from launch can be hit within a time span of 25 minutes maximum.
Our deployment calls for the simultanious launch from 2 different facillities (redundancy)
with one effecting a ground burst as the target, and the other warhead set as an aerial
burst. This acheives 2 objectives: #1) multiple devices in case one is intercepted or fails,
and #2) 'Pancake' - the aerial busrt is timed to go off at the same time as the ground blast,
and directly above the ground blast - this overhead aerial spherical shock wave flattens the
hemispherical shock wave from the ground blast, and pushes it back down onto the target.
the ground blast is amplified by a magnitude of 100X for the effect of damaged caused.
The aerial burst by itself would nominally destroy all structures within a 10 mile radius.
Now how would the Arrow stop the ICBM launch that was up to 6,000 miles away, and
which of the 2 incoming warheads do you choose to stop that is coming in at nearly 17,000
MPH from an altitude of over 500 miles. You sure can't wait for it to be inside of a 10 mile
proximity for intercept, and you can't go out to it's deployment buss where it's vulnerable.
Brilliant Pebbles was one approach, but I think that was dismissed as not deployable.
I liked the KEWE concept.
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: tallest1
Whew! I was worried Iraq would launch missles at us within 45 minutes too
Good news
They could have launched missiles at us within 30 minutes. They just would have fallen about 9,000 miles short. You see, it's nuance and if you don't get it then I guess you just aren't as intelligent as those of us who grasp the nuance.
K1052
Elite Member
- Aug 21, 2003
- 53,123
- 47,300
- 136
The damage to the target of course depends on the yield of the warheads and the composition of the target. IIRC, a number of the less powerful W-62 (165kt) warheads are still loaded on MMIIs since START II stalled out. They were to be replaced with the new W-87 (300kt) warheads from the MX program that were to be scrapped under the same treaty.
CaptnKirk
Lifer
- Jul 25, 2002
- 10,053
- 0
- 71
CaptnKirk
Lifer
- Jul 25, 2002
- 10,053
- 0
- 71
CaptnKirk
Lifer
- Jul 25, 2002
- 10,053
- 0
- 71
CEP = Circle of Error Probability
Way down under 'General'
RV CEP (circle error probability) is <400 feet
Consider if you will, hitting a target and being closer than 400 feet at 6,000 miles.
Way down under 'General'
RV CEP (circle error probability) is <400 feet
Consider if you will, hitting a target and being closer than 400 feet at 6,000 miles.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter