Re: ICBM warheads
From: George (Geodanah_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 11/23/04
- Next message: Derek Lyons: "Re: Did Ancient Roman Soldiers Shave?"
- Previous message: Eric Moore: "Re: Can Remote Controlled Guns be used as a Defence Against Car Bombers?"
- In reply to: john-locke: "Re: ICBM warheads"
- Next in thread: john-locke: "Re: ICBM warheads"
- Reply: john-locke: "Re: ICBM warheads"
- Reply: Paul F Austin: "Re: ICBM warheads"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
To: sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org Date: 22 Nov 2004 22:10:31 -0800
"john-locke" <john-locke@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:<5iRnd.478$%92.427@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net>...
> "Ian Stirling" <root@mauve.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:419df3f7$0$557$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net...
> > Dirk Bruere at Neopax <dirk@neopax.com> wrote:
> > > How are the warheads of ICBMs triggered for an air burst?
> > > Presumably they are coming in at several thousand mph and are plasma
> sheathed so
> > > radar won't work.
> >
> > Inertial navigation.
> > Basically just measuring the accellerations that the warhead undergoes,
> and
> > working out the position from these accellerations.
> > Because of the short time that the warhead is in the atmosphere,
> > (10-20 seconds?) this bit of guidance does not need to be very accurate.
> > I suspect even a $2 car airbag type sensor (50G +-0.5G) might do, with a
> > LEP of around 1Km.
> > That's probably a bit much, but you're only looking at maybe an order and
> > a half of magnitude better than that, nothing challenging compared to the
> > navigational accuracy needed for the bus.
>
> This is all very well, however, with fail-safe measures such a presidential
> counter command facilities, I would have given some thought that this
> detonation or device burst would have been implimented via satellite relay
> through GPS sats to the missile warhead on-board computer to greet it, then
> give it correct orders. I would have thought that sats would have more
> input, than in previous (Cold War era) times.
>
> John Locke.
Satellites are too vulnerable, especially in a nuclear war. A high
powered laser, Soviet ASAT satellites, high altitude nuclear bursts,
there are a lot of ways to kill them, so you don't want to depend on
them for your doomsday weapon like an ICBM.
- Next message: Derek Lyons: "Re: Did Ancient Roman Soldiers Shave?"
- Previous message: Eric Moore: "Re: Can Remote Controlled Guns be used as a Defence Against Car Bombers?"
- In reply to: john-locke: "Re: ICBM warheads"
- Next in thread: john-locke: "Re: ICBM warheads"
- Reply: john-locke: "Re: ICBM warheads"
- Reply: Paul F Austin: "Re: ICBM warheads"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|