icbm targeting systems

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : icbm targeting systems
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile lord666Project Donor

Send message
Joined: 20 Apr 16
Posts: 29
Credit: 174,560
RAC: 387
Message 1837435 - Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 3:26:19 UTC

is it possible to just install giant signal jammers in every major city that would render them invisible to icbms?
ID: 1837435 · Report as offensive
Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 2848
Credit: 1,215,445
RAC: 145
United States
Message 1837443 - Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 5:08:48 UTC

That probably wouldn't help since by the time a warhead is that close it's trajectory is on a ballistic path. Plus I'm sure they use gps nowadays and a nuclear device doesn't need pin point accuracy.
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.
ID: 1837443 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary CharpentierCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 21125
Credit: 30,663,325
RAC: 23,919
United States
Message 1837449 - Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 6:06:46 UTC - in response to Message 1837435.  

is it possible to just install giant signal jammers in every major city that would render them invisible to icbms?

ICBM's don't look they want to be stealth. Their targets are lat/lon and loaded before flight. They use INS because they assume GPS is jammed.
ID: 1837449 · Report as offensive
Profile lord666Project Donor

Send message
Joined: 20 Apr 16
Posts: 29
Credit: 174,560
RAC: 387
Message 1837456 - Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 7:13:35 UTC - in response to Message 1837449.  

without gps calibration, ins seems grossly inaccurate for large distances. add an abm equipped with some kind of magnetic pulse jammer and old fashioned flak we will probably be safe from mirvs.
ID: 1837456 · Report as offensive
rob smithProject Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 15213
Credit: 252,650,478
RAC: 325,703
United Kingdom
Message 1837458 - Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 7:31:48 UTC
Last modified: 23 Dec 2016, 7:32:07 UTC

GPS doesn't work very well at high velocities and high altitudes that ICBM reach during their flight.
Also, as has already been stated a nuclear bomb does not have to "hit" its target - think of the destruction of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, those were small bombs, and they raised areas of tens of square miles. A near miss of even a few miles off-centre by a typical ICBM warhead would render most major cities into nuclear deserts :-(
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
ID: 1837458 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary CharpentierCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 21125
Credit: 30,663,325
RAC: 23,919
United States
Message 1837517 - Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 14:31:52 UTC - in response to Message 1837456.  

without gps calibration, ins seems grossly inaccurate for large distances. add an abm equipped with some kind of magnetic pulse jammer and old fashioned flak we will probably be safe from mirvs.

INS works fine for getting to Pluto and GPS doesn't work there.
ID: 1837517 · Report as offensive
Profile lord666Project Donor

Send message
Joined: 20 Apr 16
Posts: 29
Credit: 174,560
RAC: 387
Message 1837557 - Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 19:06:09 UTC - in response to Message 1837517.  

not true, but that's classified
ID: 1837557 · Report as offensive
Nick: ID 666
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 11224
Credit: 31,495,177
RAC: 3,301
United Kingdom
Message 1837562 - Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 19:30:07 UTC

Kearhoff INS systems accuracy was better than 1 part in 10,000 back in the late 1980's. One has to assume better accuracy now.
Name change to reflect my BOINC ID number
ID: 1837562 · Report as offensive
AJ4WC
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 May 99
Posts: 10
Credit: 1,180,553
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1840373 - Posted: 6 Jan 2017, 15:34:59 UTC

I worked at Titan II ICBM sites in Kansas in the 1980s. Titan II's were pre-GPS, 1960s technology, and were able to find their target on the other side of the Earth, presumably.
ID: 1840373 · Report as offensive
JWNoctis
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 6 Nov 07
Posts: 20
Credit: 326,866
RAC: 0
China
Message 1840381 - Posted: 6 Jan 2017, 16:38:20 UTC

Since inertial accuracy is largely related to time - With range being only a function of time and speed, they'd probably stay pretty accurate over the flight time of the typical ICBM.
ID: 1840381 · Report as offensive
John McCallum
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 04
Posts: 850
Credit: 452,605
RAC: 112
United Kingdom
Message 1841871 - Posted: 13 Jan 2017, 13:41:54 UTC - in response to Message 1837458.  

GPS doesn't work very well at high velocities and high altitudes that ICBM reach during their flight.
Also, as has already been stated a nuclear bomb does not have to "hit" its target - think of the destruction of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, those were small bombs, and they raised areas of tens of square miles. A near miss of even a few miles off-centre by a typical ICBM warhead would render most major cities into nuclear deserts :-(

.....and most ICBM's are multi headed beasts.
Old enough to know better(but)still young enough not to care
ID: 1841871 · Report as offensive

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : icbm targeting systems


 
©2017 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.