Re: RAN OPV and Frigate shortlist news
Posted: 05 Oct 2017 08:22
more waste.. ICBM defensive systems don't work. They have the effectiveness of hitting a bullet with a bullet.
More hyperbole from Turn bull - ICBM defensive capable ships is simply code uttered to brace Australian's for the cost shock of another procurement cluster****. It won't happen.
from ABC news / The Conversation on their effectiveness:
None of these systems is 100 per cent effective, and most have an iffy record in testing.
Aegis has succeeded in 35 out of 42 tests, while GMD has had only ten successes in 18 tests. However, THAAD has been successful in 18 out of 18 tests. Tests are conducted in favourable conditions — and it is reasonable to expect the success rates to be lower in actual combat use.
The true difficulty lies with intercontinental ballistic missiles. An intercontinental ballistic missile can attain altitudes well in excess of low earth orbit. Those fired on a typical long-range trajectory can exceed 1,200 kilometres in altitude. The high-trajectory, short-range test shot North Korea conducted this week attained an altitude of 2,700 kilometres.
By way of comparison, the International Space Station orbits at an altitude of around 400 kilometres.
However, the altitude intercontinental ballistic missiles attain is only part of the problem.
The other major challenge facing ballistic missile defence is the truly enormous speeds that missiles attain during the terminal phase. They often hit or exceed 20 times the speed of sound.
A common comparison used is that ballistic missile defence is akin to shooting a bullet in flight with another bullet. The reality is even more extreme.
For example, a .300 Winchester Magnum (a high-velocity hunting and sniper round) can achieve a velocity of 2,950 feet per second as it leaves the barrel.
This equates to 3,237 kilometres per hour, or 2.62 times the speed of sound.
An intercontinental ballistic missile can achieve speeds almost eight times faster than this. As a result, it is almost impossible to reliably defend against such missiles.
So why bother with it?
More hyperbole from Turn bull - ICBM defensive capable ships is simply code uttered to brace Australian's for the cost shock of another procurement cluster****. It won't happen.
from ABC news / The Conversation on their effectiveness:
None of these systems is 100 per cent effective, and most have an iffy record in testing.
Aegis has succeeded in 35 out of 42 tests, while GMD has had only ten successes in 18 tests. However, THAAD has been successful in 18 out of 18 tests. Tests are conducted in favourable conditions — and it is reasonable to expect the success rates to be lower in actual combat use.
The true difficulty lies with intercontinental ballistic missiles. An intercontinental ballistic missile can attain altitudes well in excess of low earth orbit. Those fired on a typical long-range trajectory can exceed 1,200 kilometres in altitude. The high-trajectory, short-range test shot North Korea conducted this week attained an altitude of 2,700 kilometres.
By way of comparison, the International Space Station orbits at an altitude of around 400 kilometres.
However, the altitude intercontinental ballistic missiles attain is only part of the problem.
The other major challenge facing ballistic missile defence is the truly enormous speeds that missiles attain during the terminal phase. They often hit or exceed 20 times the speed of sound.
A common comparison used is that ballistic missile defence is akin to shooting a bullet in flight with another bullet. The reality is even more extreme.
For example, a .300 Winchester Magnum (a high-velocity hunting and sniper round) can achieve a velocity of 2,950 feet per second as it leaves the barrel.
This equates to 3,237 kilometres per hour, or 2.62 times the speed of sound.
An intercontinental ballistic missile can achieve speeds almost eight times faster than this. As a result, it is almost impossible to reliably defend against such missiles.
So why bother with it?