Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 74 guests

Stupid Apollo Tricks

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Stupid Apollo Tricks
Post by Loren Pechtel   » Mon Aug 22, 2016 10:32 pm

Loren Pechtel
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:24 pm

Annachie wrote:Little bit roughish but.

Rather than putting a normal head on a missile, place a PDLC.

Then optimize the control missile for targeting on comming enemy missiles.

With a little care, the flight of missiles can interfly multiple incomming waves on enemy missiles, thinning each wave at least a little by shooting them with the PDLC.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk


Nah--mount the PD cluster on a recon drone! That way you get it back.
Top
Re: Stupid Apollo Tricks
Post by Loren Pechtel   » Mon Aug 22, 2016 10:46 pm

Loren Pechtel
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:24 pm

kzt wrote:No, we and the Soviets had perfectly effective ABMs in the 60s. The Russians still do. They deployed theirs to protect Moscow, we decided to protect the middle of North Dakota. It's that the US government decided that we couldn't use nukes that makes this hard.


Fire a nuclear-tipped ABM and you kill the inbound.

And you do a very good job of jamming your own defenses, you have little chance of hitting the next missile.
Top
Re: Stupid Apollo Tricks
Post by kzt   » Mon Aug 22, 2016 11:25 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11360
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Loren Pechtel wrote:Fire a nuclear-tipped ABM and you kill the inbound.

And you do a very good job of jamming your own defenses, you have little chance of hitting the next missile.

You seem think that the people developing and deploying these systems are not perfectly aware of what the effects are. Given that the USSR internally estimated it should be able to defeat 8-12 ICBMs (technically "complex ballistic targets" - which may well be a single warhead+decoys) or up to 40 IRBMs I suspect that they understood how nukes worked. Though they deactivated the exo-atmospheric portion of the system almost 10 years ago without replacement, so who knows.
Top
Re: Stupid Apollo Tricks
Post by drinksmuchcoffee   » Tue Aug 23, 2016 12:03 am

drinksmuchcoffee
Lieutenant Commander

Posts: 108
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 11:51 am

kit wrote:...
You seem think that the people developing and deploying these systems are not perfectly aware of what the effects are. Given that the USSR internally estimated it should be able to defeat 8-12 ICBMs (technically "complex ballistic targets" - which may well be a single warhead+decoys) or up to 40 IRBMs I suspect that they understood how nukes worked. Though they deactivated the exo-atmospheric portion of the system almost 10 years ago without replacement, so who knows.


You may well be right.

Although there is an unhappy history of the widespread deployment of defective weapons. A good example is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_14_torpedo. Given that from a practical standpoint it is going to be extremely difficult to do an all-up test of such an ABM system I personally wouldn't have a bet-your-capital-city level of confidence that the overall system was going to work -- or even work well enough to matter.

Interestingly, the Russians next-generation ABM system is going to be non-nuclear.

The current Russian A-135 system uses the 53T6 missile that pulls 210Gs! And can maneuver at over 90Gs. Damn.
Top
Re: Stupid Apollo Tricks
Post by Loren Pechtel   » Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:14 pm

Loren Pechtel
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:24 pm

kzt wrote:
Loren Pechtel wrote:Fire a nuclear-tipped ABM and you kill the inbound.

And you do a very good job of jamming your own defenses, you have little chance of hitting the next missile.

You seem think that the people developing and deploying these systems are not perfectly aware of what the effects are. Given that the USSR internally estimated it should be able to defeat 8-12 ICBMs (technically "complex ballistic targets" - which may well be a single warhead+decoys) or up to 40 IRBMs I suspect that they understood how nukes worked. Though they deactivated the exo-atmospheric portion of the system almost 10 years ago without replacement, so who knows.


And just how much did they know about the effects of high altitude nukes when they built the system??
Top
Re: Stupid Apollo Tricks
Post by kzt   » Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:13 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11360
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Loren Pechtel wrote:And just how much did they know about the effects of high altitude nukes when they built the system??

ABM 3 was a 1995 system Iirc.
Top

Return to Honorverse