Well yeah. And NMD has a longer reach than THAAD *and* Spartan.
How do you know what the engagement footprint is for THAAD in terms of
ICBM's? It apparently is NOT the advertised "more than 200 km" range/150 km
altitude advertised for it in the role of theater TBM killer.
Where did I say it was? Also I did mention NEW BOOSTER.
Spartan had a
reported max range of some 740 km!
Great. NMD is several THOUSAND *miles*.
THAAD comes in at about *on-third* the
size of Spartan (6.2 meter length bversus some 16 meters, diameter of 0.34
meters versus over one meter for Spartan. If you think THAAD is gonna
outreach Spartan, think again.
Where did I say that? I've said "terminal" and Sprint all along.
I've never once mentioned Spartan. You did. I don't think THAAD
would have any trouble at all reaching Sprint's 25 mile range.
Trying to defend a large urban area (like you
find on the Left Coast) against ICBM attack with THAAD would require
sprinkling launch sites around like the old Nike Ajax did...and that
ain't
gonna happen.
Well not quite. Those were dedicated missile bases,
And if you are going to try and protect the urban areas on the Left Coast
with THAAD, don't you think you'd *need* dedicated basing?
Nope. Do you even know what a dedicated missile site is? Do a Google
on "Nike Hercules" and you'll get back two million hits with lots on
info. A dedicated missile site is NOT and Airforce or Army base with
a few missile launchers living there.
The crews would
get kind of tired of eating at the Golden Arches every meal (thought they
might like the TDY pay....).
Why would they have to? Is there something inherently impossible
about stationing a couple THAAD launchers on an air base?
each with a dozen
or two launchers for LARGE missiles with quite a bit shorter range.
Those "LARGE" missiles were not much bigger than THAAD
10,000 pounds and 41 feet (Hercules) vs 2000 pounds and 20 feet for
THAAD. You're right, they're damn near identical. How many Nike
Hercules you think they could squeeze onto a THAAD launcher? Ten?
Five? One?
; about the same
diameter, and a 10 meter length versus a six-plus meter length. Max range
was about 50 km--and since we don't know *what* the max range is for THAAD
in an anti-ICBM role (but we do know it would probably be quite a bit less
than 200 km), your hypothesis seems to be a bit lacking.
It seems your reading comprehension is nonexistant. Why don't you go
back and reread everything I've written and then come back for
discussion. I don't know what the hell you're on but you apparently
misread something and ran with it. Off the deep end.
Quite different than say, three or four radars total and a launcher or
two per location operating out of military bases up and down the
coast.
OK, take a gander at the distribution of coastal military bases, and tell me
if they have a seperation of between one and one hundred fifty hundred
klicks, which is about as good as you can expect to get with THAAD against
an ICBM target.
Hey I didn't write the article. In fact if you had any reading skills
at all you'd see I was wondering about it myself.
Once you have done that, I think you will see where your
holes are, and they will be large ones. That is a LONG coast line along the
Pacific, with a lot of population centers distributed along it.
They said that with the different booster THAAD could cover an
entire coast with one battery. Last I heard a THAAD battery was
suppose to be something like ONE radar and 32 missiles or so.
That will be one hell of a booster, and it will no longer be a THAAD.
A Titan IV isn't a Titan I but it's still a Titan. An SM-3 isn't an
SM-1 MR but it's still a Standard. An AIM-9X isn't an AIM-9B but it's
still a Sidewinder. Need I go on?
Not to
mention that the radar would likely not be powerful enough to handle
coverage of the entire coast...
Drop a 1200 mile diameter circle on the Pacific coast and that's your
coverage. And again *I'm* not the one claiming ONE battery could do
it. AW&ST is. I'd mention them needing three or four radars to do
it.
|