It's a Hit!!

[palehorse]

:thumbsup: to the Navy! Congrats on a job well done!

 

[Mxylplyx]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Duddy
You watching Russia and China? You paying attention?

I think China already did this before the US, though the US did in 1989 from a plane at 80,000 feet take out one of its own satellites.

WTF? Are you a tard or something? The US started knocking out satellites with ground-based missles (like China recently did) starting back in the late 1950s or so.

And I bet China would have had a lot less success had Clinton not given them secret guidance technology in exchange for campaign contributions. An act of treason if you ask me.

You are full of shit. The first artificial satellite (Sputnik), wasnt even launched until 1957. The first satellite intercept by a guided missile was Sept. 13, 1985.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Duddy
You watching Russia and China? You paying attention?

I think China already did this before the US, though the US did in 1989 from a plane at 80,000 feet take out one of its own satellites.

It's impressive something at mach 25-30 can be hit, I suppose, but on the other hand with all the money thrown at this I'm surprised it's not easier. This was clearly a weapons test or effort to prevent recapture of the satellite parts, though. Certainly a big difference between an easily tracked satellite and a fresh icbm. As john said, no country has a very good defense system at all.

Actually, this was HARDER than a ballistic missile because the satellite was much cooler than an ICBM would be having travelled through the atmosphere and burning fuel along the way (or upon reentry).

"Surprised it's not easier"?!? WTF do you want? Launching an interceptor from a moving platform (something the Chinese did NOT do) through the atmosphere 130 miles into space and striking a fairly cool target moving at 17,000 mph (according to MSNBC). The intercept took 24 minutes from launch to impact, and the radar system had to account for delays in tracking to guidance at those distances (yes, I realize there's terminal homing). It's often described as hitting a bullet with a bullet, but the reality is that the velocities exceed those of bullets.

I hate to break it to people around here, but guided missiles don't work like they do in Command & Conquer.

This was an amazing feat of engineering and should be a proud day for any American. Too bad there are few proud Americans anymore.

As for "no country has a very good defense system", perhaps some people around here would do well to actually read the news. The Missile Defense Agency conducted NINE successful hit to kill tests of missile defense systems in 2007, including a successful realistic test of an operationally configured ground-based interceptor against a ballistic missile target. There are a total of 45 (well, now 44 I suppose) ballistic missile interceptors deployed at Ft. Greeley, Vandenberg AFB, and on board Navy vessels. This satellite intercept once again proves that the system works, and the system is operationally deployed.

Let's hope we never have to use it, but that's part of the purpose. What's not in dispute, except by ostriches, is that it DOES work. Given the age of the Russian system deployed around Moscow plus their long standing budget issues, I would be highly surprised if their ABM radars work at all, let alone the possibility of actually launching a missile against a target.

Good going, USS Lake Erie!

well said.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Duddy
You watching Russia and China? You paying attention?

I think China already did this before the US, though the US did in 1989 from a plane at 80,000 feet take out one of its own satellites.

WTF? Are you a tard or something? The US started knocking out satellites with ground-based missles (like China recently did) starting back in the late 1950s or so.

And I bet China would have had a lot less success had Clinton not given them secret guidance technology in exchange for campaign contributions. An act of treason if you ask me.

hahahah dude you need to open a history book.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Mxylplyx
Text

Looks like they nailed the sucker.

With it locked on the fucking signal it'd be a wonder if it missed, kinda like how the missile defense system only works if they put homing devices on their missiles, then 3/10 will still hit, no wonder you want several instances, you'll nee a few more, like 100 000 trillion dollars more to make it effective if you take the numbers to get to this poinst, it was dead in it's crib but i'be got goo news for you, there is not a country in this world with a functional missile defense system, the Russan system, it deploys only on a direct target, it cannat trace and intercept, so it works like the US system does but at a thrillionth of the deveopmpt cost.

the satellite hasnt been turned on for years, it had little to no heat sig for the missile to lock onto. that was the big question when they launched the missile.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Duddy
You watching Russia and China? You paying attention?

I think China already did this before the US, though the US did in 1989 from a plane at 80,000 feet take out one of its own satellites.

It's impressive something at mach 25-30 can be hit, I suppose, but on the other hand with all the money thrown at this I'm surprised it's not easier. This was clearly a weapons test or effort to prevent recapture of the satellite parts, though. Certainly a big difference between an easily tracked satellite and a fresh icbm. As john said, no country has a very good defense system at all.

Actually, this was HARDER than a ballistic missile because the satellite was much cooler than an ICBM would be having travelled through the atmosphere and burning fuel along the way (or upon reentry).

"Surprised it's not easier"?!? WTF do you want? Launching an interceptor from a moving platform (something the Chinese did NOT do) through the atmosphere 130 miles into space and striking a fairly cool target moving at 17,000 mph (according to MSNBC). The intercept took 24 minutes from launch to impact, and the radar system had to account for delays in tracking to guidance at those distances (yes, I realize there's terminal homing). It's often described as hitting a bullet with a bullet, but the reality is that the velocities exceed those of bullets.

I hate to break it to people around here, but guided missiles don't work like they do in Command & Conquer.

This was an amazing feat of engineering and should be a proud day for any American. Too bad there are few proud Americans anymore.

As for "no country has a very good defense system", perhaps some people around here would do well to actually read the news. The Missile Defense Agency conducted NINE successful hit to kill tests of missile defense systems in 2007, including a successful realistic test of an operationally configured ground-based interceptor against a ballistic missile target. There are a total of 45 (well, now 44 I suppose) ballistic missile interceptors deployed at Ft. Greeley, Vandenberg AFB, and on board Navy vessels. This satellite intercept once again proves that the system works, and the system is operationally deployed.

Let's hope we never have to use it, but that's part of the purpose. What's not in dispute, except by ostriches, is that it DOES work. Given the age of the Russian system deployed around Moscow plus their long standing budget issues, I would be highly surprised if their ABM radars work at all, let alone the possibility of actually launching a missile against a target.

Good going, USS Lake Erie!

There is already another thread in which I discussed this. Our system is crap. Totally worthless crap.

It has a flawed emphasis on the mid course phase for intercept. Our system has never been successfully tested against anything remotely approaching the actual conditions that our interceptors would face in a real ballistic missile attack, and even if they were successful at hitting the missile in such a scenario the system would still be incredibly easily overwhelmed by basic, practical considerations.

That all being said, shooting it down was still an impressive technical achievement. Lets just not make it more then it is.

 

[blackangst1]

Our military FUCKING KICKS ASS.

WTG Navy!

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Our military FUCKING KICKS ASS.

WTG Navy!

:thumbsup: