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 |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
"PENTAGON WORKING TO GIVE F-35 JSF NUCLEAR-STRIKE CAPABILITY"
"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in message ... On May 7, 1:09 pm, "Keith Willshaw" wrote: "Ken S. Tucker" wrote in ... ... As a back-drop, 27 years ago, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exocet#Falklands_Conflict (Seems like yesterday). Delivered by aircraft as a standoff weapon, the target identification was down on board the aircraft. Keith, I was rather hoping the "27 years ago" might be a hint. ... It's a bit difficult to hide a CVN from a satellite. Sure but getting real time location from a satellite is difficult and VERY expensive This works, it's civilian, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RADARSAT-1 Quote the satellite is in exactly the same location and can take the same image (same beam mode and beam position) every 24 days. /Quote Not much good for real time target tracking 1) Any given low earth recon birds will only revisit any given spot at infrequent periods typically measured in daysor at best hours rather than minutes 2) Standard recon satellites use optical or infrared methods which limits their effectiveness in case of clud cover 3) Even if your satellite happens to fly over a CVN you have to have people analysing the data in real time. To get round the problems the Soviets launched a whole series of Radar satellites (RORSAT). These were BIG and typically powered by type BES-5 nuclear reactors. They weighed in at around 4 tons and to get decent coverage of even a fairly small part of the planet they had to launch a whole constellation of them at vast expense. AFAIK there have been no such satelllites in service for more than a decade. Today, using conventional ordinance, an MRBM put in the ballpark of a CVN will terminal guide to a probable direct hit, even choosing where to hit. And just what combination of sensors and steering do you think can do that ? If the CVN+fleet is converted into a floating nuke strike base, it becomes #1 target to MIRV, as in 10 100kt bombs detonated over a fleet. ... First find your fleet then target the missiles and get launch authorisation. Oops the fleet has now moved miles from that location. I deviated the topic to F-35 (nuke able) for the navy is to be absolutely unnecessary and of nil usefulness. (The A-5 Vigilante again). I'll go further, all nuke weapons should be banned by treaty from international waters and air space. Ken There goes the US nuclear deterrent Keith Maybe the nuke subs lurkin' off the US coasts on hair trigger can go home, if it's ok with American citizens. Ken Maybe but the Russian boats wont Keith |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
"PENTAGON WORKING TO GIVE F-35 JSF NUCLEAR-STRIKE CAPABILITY"
On May 8, 12:51 am, frank wrote:
On May 8, 1:38 am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote: On May 7, 1:09 pm, "Keith Willshaw" wrote: "Ken S. Tucker" wrote in ... ... As a back-drop, 27 years ago, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exocet#Falklands_Conflict (Seems like yesterday). Delivered by aircraft as a standoff weapon, the target identification was down on board the aircraft. Keith, I was rather hoping the "27 years ago" might be a hint. ... It's a bit difficult to hide a CVN from a satellite. Sure but getting real time location from a satellite is difficult and VERY expensive This works, it's civilian,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RADARSAT-1 1) Any given low earth recon birds will only revisit any given spot at infrequent periods typically measured in daysor at best hours rather than minutes 2) Standard recon satellites use optical or infrared methods which limits their effectiveness in case of clud cover 3) Even if your satellite happens to fly over a CVN you have to have people analysing the data in real time. To get round the problems the Soviets launched a whole series of Radar satellites (RORSAT). These were BIG and typically powered by type BES-5 nuclear reactors. They weighed in at around 4 tons and to get decent coverage of even a fairly small part of the planet they had to launch a whole constellation of them at vast expense. AFAIK there have been no such satelllites in service for more than a decade. Today, using conventional ordinance, an MRBM put in the ballpark of a CVN will terminal guide to a probable direct hit, even choosing where to hit. If the CVN+fleet is converted into a floating nuke strike base, it becomes #1 target to MIRV, as in 10 100kt bombs detonated over a fleet. ... I deviated the topic to F-35 (nuke able) for the navy is to be absolutely unnecessary and of nil usefulness. (The A-5 Vigilante again). I'll go further, all nuke weapons should be banned by treaty from international waters and air space. Ken There goes the US nuclear deterrent Keith Maybe the nuke subs lurkin' off the US coasts on hair trigger can go home, if it's ok with American citizens. Ken You must have missed Cheney's memo. Its all peace love and tranquility. Ed has long hair, throws rose petals. They all luv us. no more hair triggers. They/us ??? Recently I'm amazed that the value of a house in Kansas drops 30%, and so Chinese workers can't afford to buy Big Macs in Beiging. Now, it takes what minutes to get back to a hair trigger alert, but most people don't understand that. Basing SSBN's in national waters provides recallability, if sent enroute to launch stations, and a moment of sanity pause. Guess the politicians are happy. Slip them another beer. It's been suggested we gather all interested politicians to witness an H-bomb detonation every few years, also we could all do scientific experiments, it would be a "clean bomb". Imagine a bunch of them sitting around in their lawn chairs in the Sahara desert, enjoying a beverage, then BOOM, fun stuff. It would be a real tourist draw too. We could build a pipeline from the Mediterrean to make some beach front property, (some clothing optional for Ed). Do it every 4 years like the Olympics. Frank you have a lot of stimulating ideas. Ken |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
"PENTAGON WORKING TO GIVE F-35 JSF NUCLEAR-STRIKE CAPABILITY"
Frank you have a lot of stimulating ideas. Ken Best one was when Ronnie was president. They decided to dust off the old how to survive a nuclear war bit. drive 40 minutes to bunkers that would have food, water for weeks. Single road to get there. I told them I'd drive home, put the Nikon on a tripod, get a six pack and wait for a good shot of the flash and cloud. They were not amused. I think they wanted volunteers to do a test one weekend. See if everybody could drive out there. Don't remember if they ever did. Knew the engineer who was to look at 'fallout shelters' one was one of those old hangars with glass windows. You know the type. All over the AF bases. They weren't thrilled when he asked when fallout shelters would have glass windows. Not to mention what the probability of glass breaking. At least White Sands took it seriously enough to practice it every year. Printed tons of paper manuals. Went out and played war games. When was done, had annual hunt for 7 - 10 days of deer if you were base personnel. Can't beat that. Pretty much blew off October as far as getting real work done. But for a training and doctrine base, took stuff seriously. Ever if we were an AF unit on it. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
"PENTAGON WORKING TO GIVE F-35 JSF NUCLEAR-STRIKE CAPABILITY"
On May 8, 1:30 am, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote: "Ken S. Tucker" wrote in ... On May 7, 1:09 pm, "Keith Willshaw" wrote: "Ken S. Tucker" wrote in ... ... As a back-drop, 27 years ago, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exocet#Falklands_Conflict (Seems like yesterday). Delivered by aircraft as a standoff weapon, the target identification was down on board the aircraft. Keith, I was rather hoping the "27 years ago" might be a hint. ... It's a bit difficult to hide a CVN from a satellite. Sure but getting real time location from a satellite is difficult and VERY expensive This works, it's civilian, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RADARSAT-1 Quote the satellite is in exactly the same location and can take the same image (same beam mode and beam position) every 24 days. /Quote Not much good for real time target tracking We'd sit out after sunset in the dark, having a few brew around a fire, with the stars above. Every 5 minutes or so a North - South sat would fly over, visible because they're still in the sunlight, practically a traffic jam up there. 1) Any given low earth recon birds will only revisit any given spot at infrequent periods typically measured in daysor at best hours rather than minutes 2) Standard recon satellites use optical or infrared methods which limits their effectiveness in case of clud cover 3) Even if your satellite happens to fly over a CVN you have to have people analysing the data in real time. To get round the problems the Soviets launched a whole series of Radar satellites (RORSAT). These were BIG and typically powered by type BES-5 nuclear reactors. They weighed in at around 4 tons and to get decent coverage of even a fairly small part of the planet they had to launch a whole constellation of them at vast expense. AFAIK there have been no such satelllites in service for more than a decade. Today, using conventional ordinance, an MRBM put in the ballpark of a CVN will terminal guide to a probable direct hit, even choosing where to hit. And just what combination of sensors and steering do you think can do that ? Just simple stuff. What would you use? If the CVN+fleet is converted into a floating nuke strike base, it becomes #1 target to MIRV, as in 10 100kt bombs detonated over a fleet. ... First find your fleet then target the missiles and get launch authorisation. Oops the fleet has now moved miles from that location. Well, it's not going to happen. I deviated the topic to F-35 (nuke able) for the navy is to be absolutely unnecessary and of nil usefulness. (The A-5 Vigilante again). I'll go further, all nuke weapons should be banned by treaty from international waters and air space. Ken There goes the US nuclear deterrent Keith Maybe the nuke subs lurkin' off the US coasts on hair trigger can go home, if it's ok with American citizens. Ken Maybe but the Russian boats wont Keith It's a good treaty to ratchet things down. Everybody want's it, so let's get it done. Ken |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
"PENTAGON WORKING TO GIVE F-35 JSF NUCLEAR-STRIKE CAPABILITY"
On May 9, 10:14 pm, frank wrote:
Frank you have a lot of stimulating ideas. Ken Best one was when Ronnie was president. They decided to dust off the old how to survive a nuclear war bit. drive 40 minutes to bunkers that would have food, water for weeks. Single road to get there. I told them I'd drive home, put the Nikon on a tripod, get a six pack and wait for a good shot of the flash and cloud. They were not amused. I think they wanted volunteers to do a test one weekend. See if everybody could drive out there. Don't remember if they ever did. Knew the engineer who was to look at 'fallout shelters' one was one of those old hangars with glass windows. You know the type. All over the AF bases. They weren't thrilled when he asked when fallout shelters would have glass windows. Not to mention what the probability of glass breaking. About that same time I considered taking a position designing buildings to be resistant to "severe overpressures", like 100kt 1 mile away, that I regard as very important research since it can translate into civil building codes to improve structural survivability during hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes, the nuke scenario being a good excuse to pay for the research. At least White Sands took it seriously enough to practice it every year. Printed tons of paper manuals. Went out and played war games. When was done, had annual hunt for 7 - 10 days of deer if you were base personnel. Can't beat that. Pretty much blew off October as far as getting real work done. But for a training and doctrine base, took stuff seriously. Ever if we were an AF unit on it. Do you think the Atomic Age has arrived? Ken |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
"PENTAGON WORKING TO GIVE F-35 JSF NUCLEAR-STRIKE CAPABILITY"
"frank" wrote in message
... Frank you have a lot of stimulating ideas. Ken Best one was when Ronnie was president. They decided to dust off the old how to survive a nuclear war bit. drive 40 minutes to bunkers that would have food, water for weeks. Single road to get there. I told them I'd drive home, put the Nikon on a tripod, get a six pack and wait for a good shot of the flash and cloud. They were not amused. I think they wanted volunteers to do a test one weekend. See if everybody could drive out there. Don't remember if they ever did. Knew the engineer who was to look at 'fallout shelters' one was one of those old hangars with glass windows. You know the type. All over the AF bases. They weren't thrilled when he asked when fallout shelters would have glass windows. Not to mention what the probability of glass breaking. At least White Sands took it seriously enough to practice it every year. Printed tons of paper manuals. Went out and played war games. When was done, had annual hunt for 7 - 10 days of deer if you were base personnel. Can't beat that. Pretty much blew off October as far as getting real work done. But for a training and doctrine base, took stuff seriously. Ever if we were an AF unit on it. I was at CFB Chatham as the Ops O of an air defence battery back in Reagan's second term. My CO sent me on a pleasant waste of time in the form of a recce to find a hide for the battery off the base in case a nuclear exchange threatened. The aim was to shield the battery's men and equipment from a nuclear attack on the airfield -- it had a 12,000' runway and much of what you might need in a dispersal or diversion field for large aircraft -- so to be available for deployment post-strike. I did a dead ground trace for a likely maximum burst height and looked among the "shadows" for some place to hide upwards of 200 troops and 70 vehicles. I ran the results by the base ops staff; they were somewhat horrified. In order for the battery to deploy with its essential kit, it would have taken about four hours to get it on the road: two hours to recall personnel and then two hours to draw weapons, stores, consumables and to issue orders. To get to the hide we had to move the battery north across the Miramichi on a two lane bridge to the Tabusintac River, some 40 Km north as the crow flies, 50 km by road. IIRC, it was Indian land, and I am not sure how they would have viewed us landing on their doorstep unannounced, I obviously could not consult them about the plan. Here's the op area: http://preview.tinyurl.com/ovcyyr. While the plan showed initiative on the part of my CO, I really think I was on a fool's errand. Fortunately, the battery changed command and the successor CO concentrated on getting the battery ready for where it was likely to deploy for operations (Germany or Norway). We never exercised the plan. -- Andrew Chaplin SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO (If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.) |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
"PENTAGON WORKING TO GIVE F-35 JSF NUCLEAR-STRIKE CAPABILITY"
"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in message ... On May 8, 1:30 am, "Keith Willshaw" wrote: "Ken S. Tucker" wrote in ... On May 7, 1:09 pm, "Keith Willshaw" wrote: "Ken S. Tucker" wrote in ... ... As a back-drop, 27 years ago, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exocet#Falklands_Conflict (Seems like yesterday). Delivered by aircraft as a standoff weapon, the target identification was down on board the aircraft. Keith, I was rather hoping the "27 years ago" might be a hint. ... It's a bit difficult to hide a CVN from a satellite. Sure but getting real time location from a satellite is difficult and VERY expensive This works, it's civilian, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RADARSAT-1 Quote the satellite is in exactly the same location and can take the same image (same beam mode and beam position) every 24 days. /Quote Not much good for real time target tracking We'd sit out after sunset in the dark, having a few brew around a fire, with the stars above. Every 5 minutes or so a North - South sat would fly over, visible because they're still in the sunlight, practically a traffic jam up there. The number of Soviet Optical satellites in orbit at any one time was rarely more than one. The active life of a satellite was 30 days snip Today, using conventional ordinance, an MRBM put in the ballpark of a CVN will terminal guide to a probable direct hit, even choosing where to hit. And just what combination of sensors and steering do you think can do that ? Just simple stuff. What would you use? Its not simple stuff, a MRBM is doing anything up to 4,000 m/sec on rentry. The plasma around the reentry vehicle is going to make most sensors useless while also making radical manoeveurs next to impossible. Note that while Pershing II used a synthetic aperture radar system for terminal guidance this was an ancillary to the INS and compared radar maps of the terrain with the on board maps. Its inclusion was simply to reduce the CEP from the 400m of the Pershing I to 30m. This system did not have the capability to search for, locate and guide the warhead to a moving target that may be 30 miles from the aim point. Keith |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
"PENTAGON WORKING TO GIVE F-35 JSF NUCLEAR-STRIKE CAPABILITY"
On May 10, 2:02*am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
On May 9, 10:14 pm, frank wrote: Frank you have a lot of stimulating ideas. Ken Best one was when Ronnie was president. They decided to dust off the old how to survive a nuclear war bit. drive 40 minutes to bunkers that would have food, water for weeks. Single road to get there. I told them I'd drive home, put the Nikon on a tripod, get a six pack and wait for a good shot of the flash and cloud. They were not amused. I think they wanted *volunteers to do a test one weekend. See if everybody could drive out there. Don't remember if they ever did. Knew the engineer who was to look at 'fallout shelters' one was one of those old hangars with glass windows. You know the type. All over the AF bases. They weren't thrilled when he asked when fallout shelters would have glass windows. Not to mention what the probability of glass breaking. About that same time I considered taking a position designing buildings to be resistant to *"severe overpressures", like 100kt 1 mile away, that I regard as very important research since it can translate into civil building codes to improve structural survivability during hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes, the nuke scenario being a good excuse to pay for the research. At least White Sands took it seriously enough to practice it every year. Printed tons of paper manuals. Went out and played war games. When was done, had annual hunt for 7 - 10 days of deer if you were base personnel. Can't beat that. Pretty much blew off *October as far as getting real work done. But for a training and doctrine base, took stuff seriously. Ever if we were an AF unit on it. Do you think the Atomic Age has arrived? Ken No, but at least they had their head in right spot. Could be anything, nuclear, terrorism, weather related. Major traffic incident. Anything. Don't train or talk to people, real mess when something happens and you find out can't communicate, talk to hospitals, find barricades, whatever. County I used to live in had bus run into a semi, mass casualty. Luckily they had planned for that, all agencies worked together. Sort of woke up the, nothing ever happens here crowd. Like most places we sort of talk about stuff, when we actually sat down and looked as all the classified we had to destruct, was a whole different game rather than saying we'd do it. Luckily we had a lot of diesel for the generators and would use that but Pueblo and the recent China Navy aircraft capture shows how some stuff is just hard to get rid of. Best I guess would be data wipes then just turn the cooling off so circuits overhead and fry. Or engineer that in. Add in something corrosive and ability to dump parts out of an aircraft or ship into the briny deep easily. |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
"PENTAGON WORKING TO GIVE F-35 JSF NUCLEAR-STRIKE CAPABILITY"
On May 10, 4:13 am, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote: "Ken S. Tucker" wrote in ... On May 8, 1:30 am, "Keith Willshaw" wrote: "Ken S. Tucker" wrote in ... On May 7, 1:09 pm, "Keith Willshaw" wrote: "Ken S. Tucker" wrote in ... ... As a back-drop, 27 years ago, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exocet#Falklands_Conflict (Seems like yesterday). Delivered by aircraft as a standoff weapon, the target identification was down on board the aircraft. Keith, I was rather hoping the "27 years ago" might be a hint. ... It's a bit difficult to hide a CVN from a satellite. Sure but getting real time location from a satellite is difficult and VERY expensive This works, it's civilian, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RADARSAT-1 Quote the satellite is in exactly the same location and can take the same image (same beam mode and beam position) every 24 days. /Quote Not much good for real time target tracking We'd sit out after sunset in the dark, having a few brew around a fire, with the stars above. Every 5 minutes or so a North - South sat would fly over, visible because they're still in the sunlight, practically a traffic jam up there. The number of Soviet Optical satellites in orbit at any one time was rarely more than one. The active life of a satellite was 30 days Yes, we are sure the Kremlin keeps Keith up to date :-), what is your ref? Today, using conventional ordinance, an MRBM put in the ballpark of a CVN will terminal guide to a probable direct hit, even choosing where to hit. And just what combination of sensors and steering do you think can do that ? Just simple stuff. What would you use? Its not simple stuff, a MRBM is doing anything up to 4,000 m/sec on rentry. The plasma around the reentry vehicle is going to make most sensors useless while also making radical manoeveurs next to impossible. It's a sub-orbital ballistic missile that breaks to subsonic at high altitude, then it has a lot of time (by electronic standards) to search, select, aim and fire. Note that while Pershing II used a synthetic aperture radar system for terminal guidance this was an ancillary to the INS and compared radar maps of the terrain with the on board maps. Its inclusion was simply to reduce the CEP from the 400m of the Pershing I to 30m. This system did not have the capability to search for, locate and guide the warhead to a moving target that may be 30 miles from the aim point. Keith Things haved changed. A missile can shoot down a satellite going 15,000 mph, yet you Keith steadfastly hold to the idea that hitting a huge CVN doing 30 mph is very difficult. Electronics has revolutized warfare as much as atomic energy has. I've been in and out the business since 68, and the pace is astounding, Star Trek type communicators are now used by 12 yo girls for "sexting". Keith, a young fella like yourself has probably never seen a Telex machine. Classified military electronics is likely 10-15 years ahead of what is publically known. Ken |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
"PENTAGON WORKING TO GIVE F-35 JSF NUCLEAR-STRIKE CAPABILITY"
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
snip Things haved changed. A missile can shoot down a satellite going 15,000 mph, yet you Keith steadfastly hold to the idea that hitting a huge CVN doing 30 mph is very difficult. An orbit is predictable. A seagoing vessel's course isn't. A satellite can't change course 90º, a CVN can. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Pentagon Wants Kill Switch for Planes" | Jim Logajan | Piloting | 24 | June 16th 08 03:27 PM |
Spinner strobing as a "Bird Strike Countermeasure" | Jim Logajan | Piloting | 259 | December 13th 07 05:43 AM |
Spinner strobing as a "Bird Strike Countermeasure" | Jim Logajan | Home Built | 212 | December 13th 07 01:35 AM |
"British trace missile in copter strike to Iran" | Mike[_7_] | Naval Aviation | 8 | March 10th 07 08:20 PM |
"Pentagon Command Shuffle Rekindles Equity Debate" | Mike | Naval Aviation | 1 | January 26th 07 03:04 PM |