Navy intercepts 2 ballistic missiles in test

nhboy

Ubi bene ibi patria
"HONOLULU — The Navy on Tuesday night destroyed two ballistic missile targets simultaneously in space 100 miles above the Pacific Ocean in a test.

Engineers say it’s the first time the U.S. missile defense system has shot down two ballistic missiles at once outside the earth’s atmosphere.

The test demonstrates the system can shoot down targets in operationally realistic conditions, officials said."

Navy intercepts 2 ballistic missiles in test - Navy News, opinions, editorials, news from Iraq, photos, reports - Navy Times
 

Richard Cranium

New Member
Actually, no....

The countries we need to worry about carry MIRV's (Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicles). They separate from the missle early in flight.
 

Nicole_in_somd

How you like me now?
Actually, no....

The countries we need to worry about carry MIRV's (Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicles). They separate from the missle early in flight.

Crap. How many are you talking about? What are the chances of one of those countries actually firing them off at us?
 

ylexot

Super Genius
Actually, no....

The countries we need to worry about carry MIRV's (Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicles). They separate from the missle early in flight.

They don't separate early in flight. They separate just before re-entry (which is late in flight). Thus the "re-entry" in the acronym. According to the article, they "shot down two ballistic missiles at once outside the earth’s atmosphere." The implication being that they were shot down before a MIRV would separate into multiple warheads.
 

Richard Cranium

New Member
Some countries carry single-warhead missiles. This was probably the exercise, for a North Korean attack.

However, China, Russia, and Israel all carry MIRV's.
 

Richard Cranium

New Member
We pose way more of a threat to ourselves than any other country poses to US.:smack:

You're right...however, if we allow a certain aggressor in the Middle East to reap what they sow and cut off our political ties with the aggressor, we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now.

I don't care if you all blast me. I am against the existance of Israel....that does not mean that I have a hatred for Jews. The land does not belong to them.
 

Candleguy

ON FIRE
You're right...however, if we allow a certain aggressor in the Middle East to reap what they sow and cut off our political ties with the aggressor, we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now.

I don't care if you all blast me. I am against the existance of Israel....that does not mean that I have a hatred for Jews. The land does not belong to them.

and it alll starts again:whistle:
 

Richard Cranium

New Member
Actually Russia and China would not launch a first strike. They know using them would begin WWIII and their own annihilation if they did so.

If it comes down to it, nobody will care who struck first, will they?

Our MAO and LAO priorities are so ####ed up right now it's ridiculous.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Yeah...

Actually, no....

The countries we need to worry about carry MIRV's (Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicles). They separate from the missle early in flight.

...and the sooner we develop the ability to knock down missiles over the enemy's turf before they separate, the better. Along the way we would seemingly develop the ability to hit any number of targets anyway and either detonate them in space or over the ocean or over their turf.

Point being we make the expense of missiles not worth it.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Ok...

You're right...however, if we allow a certain aggressor in the Middle East to reap what they sow and cut off our political ties with the aggressor, we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now.

I don't care if you all blast me. I am against the existance of Israel....that does not mean that I have a hatred for Jews. The land does not belong to them.

...who does it 'belong' to?
 
Top