![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Derek Lyons wrote:
(George William Herbert) wrote: Even without good landlines, the word getting out to the missile sites doesn't have to be any more sophisticated than an emergency action message. A single code word, which shifts over time, may be enough. Yes, you are correct, many of these things are *conceptually* simple. But moving from concept to execution, even without the overkill practiced by the West, contains many hidden and non-obvious snags. For a 'simple EAM' to work, you need a system manned 24/7. If you don't want to do that, you need a reliable way of 'pre-alerting' your forces to stand-to. You need to securely create, distribute, and store the code words. (And an alternate supply of the same in case of compromise.) You need to procure, supply (spares), train, test, and maintain the individual components as well as the whole system. (And complicating the whole affair in many third tier nations are political issues.) It is doable, probably even on the cheap, but if you want a useful system you cannot skimp on the details. It's made a lot simpler by the operational environment; an ICBM strike really could come out of the blue, but a divisional strength US Army invasion is not going to suprise anyone. The 24/7 requirement only applies to known crisies. That said, you have to have the capability to operate on that basis, with those fundamental system capabilities and reasonable reliability. It doesn't need to be 100%, if you have tens of thousands of cruise missiles... some firing late is not going to be the sort of disaster that ICBM partial failures to launch on warning or partial failures to launch in a pre-emptive first strike would be. Doing it on the cheap is probably doable. Doing it on the stupid would leave it vulnerable to US breaking the command and control system down. -george william herbert |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Australia F111 to be scrapped!! | John Cook | Military Aviation | 35 | November 10th 03 11:46 PM |