Strategic Weapons Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
A Little Instead of Enough
   Next Article → INDIA-PAKISTAN: Religious Schools Targeted

June 26, 2007: In the latest ballistic-missile defense test, the American destroyer, the USS Decatur,  successfully shot down an incoming ballistic missile with an SM-3 missile - the ninth hit-to-kill intercept. This is just the latest success in a number of tests that will enable the United States to blunt almost any nuclear power's arsenal of ICBMs and SLBMs. But can this American ballistic missile defense system do this  when there are so few interceptors? The Chinese ICBM and SLBM forces are both very small (24 DF-5 ICBMs and 24 JL-1 SLBMs total), but there are more of them than there are interceptors deployed. China's future plans for their SLBM force will center around two Jin-class SSBNs (the Type 094), each with 16 JL-2 SLBMs. China hopes to get as many as 60 ICBMs by 2010, possibly increasing the disparity, especially if Congress cuts the National Missile Defense system.

The answer is because even an incomplete system will add uncertainty to the results of any attack. Particularly with regards to the ICBMs, perhaps the most secure portion of China's arsenal. The SLBMs are carried on submarines - which might not be as secure as it sounds. The United States Navy spent four-plus decades learning how to track SSBNs. That experience will come into play in any conflict with China. Chinese SSBNs will, in all probability, have an exciting and very short wartime career.

But 60 ICBMs is a lot. By firing them all off, China could theoretically overwhelm the present missile defense systems and some would get through. America would be hurt by whatever missiles reach their targets. But which missiles would do that? That is the question nobody could answer unless the missiles try to break through the NMD system for real.

That uncertainty alone can deter an attack. The Chinese would have no idea whether the missiles that got through would hit the most important targets (like American naval bases in San Diego and Pearl Harbor, or Andersen Air Force Base in Guam). At least 55 SM-3s are planned for deployment by the end of 2009. American allies like Australia and Japan are also going to field this missile. In essence, the ballistic missiles of China and North Korea are more impotent than they would like them to be.

That said, the missile defense system does not have smooth sailing. Its biggest threat may not be Russian efforts to counter it, but Congress, which is run by Democrats who have long opposed a national missile defense system. - Harold C. Hutchison (haroldc.hutchison@gmail.com)

Next Article → INDIA-PAKISTAN: Religious Schools Targeted
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT
sclayton    Not hard to overwhelm nothing   6/27/2007 11:20:17 AM

"But 60 ICBMs is a lot. By firing them all off, China could theoretically overwhelm the present
missile defense systems and some would get through. America would be hurt by whatever missiles
reach their targets.

"could theoretically overwhelm?"  Firing 24 ICBMS against our present zero interceptors means 
"would certainly overwhelm."   By the time we have our 55, they will be close to having their 60.

60 ICBMs may be a credible deterrent for some time. When 60 isn't enough,  China
has  the economic power to build sufficient additional ICBMs to keep us guessing: 
How many of their missiles will get through?  If scores of missiles are flying, what
percentage of our NMD interceptors really will get hits? A 60% hit rate would seem
pretty good.   Will US planners really risk that the USA will only be hurt by 25, or 
10 or even 5 strategic nuclear weapons? China's growing economic  power will allow
them to keep this numbers game up as long as we can.  

The NMD is more impotent than we would like it to be.



 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    Think this through   6/27/2007 11:35:27 AM


"But 60 ICBMs is a lot. By firing them all off,
China could theoretically overwhelm the present
missile defense systems and
some would get through. America would be hurt by whatever missiles
reach their
targets.

"could theoretically overwhelm?"  Firing 24 ICBMS against our present zero interceptors means 
"would certainly overwhelm."   By the time we have our 55, they will be close to having their 60.

60 ICBMs may be a credible deterrent for some time. When 60 isn't enough,  China
has  the economic power to build sufficient additional ICBMs to keep us guessing: 
How many of their missiles will get through?  If scores of missiles are flying, what
percentage of our NMD interceptors really will get hits? A 60% hit rate would seem
pretty good.   Will US planners really risk that the USA will only be hurt by 25, or 
10 or even 5 strategic nuclear weapons? China's growing economic  power will allow
them to keep this numbers game up as long as we can.  

The NMD is more impotent than we would like it to be.




We are getting better at defending while China striving to catch up to our 1970's capability. We are ahead of the power curve here and China's only hope is if the liberals in congress decide to stop funding the research and deployment.
 
Once again the threat is not China it is our own "people's party". Not a suprise since the Clinton's gave the Chicoms the ability to shoot ICBM's to begin with. An unprecedented act of treachery.

Check Six
 
Rocky
 
Quote    Reply

EricTheRed       6/27/2007 9:52:16 PM
Its still MAD all over again. On our part, even one hostile warhead landing would screw up our economy.  But we would still obliterate China. (Unless our future democratic president apologizes for antagonizing the chinese enough to launch!!) But our thousands of warheads vs their non-existant missile defense? I don't think the chinese are that stupid. But if they are, NMD at least gives us SOME chance, as opposed to none.
                                                                                        ETR

 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    The purpose of NMD.   6/27/2007 11:18:46 PM
is to give our revenge strike the ability to get out of its silos. Even as few as 24 interceptors buys us enough time for our command and control to get 100-300 MINUTEMEN off.in a PLANNED counterattack instead of a panic launch on warning. If we get CONUS KEI we also effectively remove the EMP option from the PRC's gameplan. They can't put a warhead in close enough to pulse our landbased missile fields or our national infrasstructure if we catch the inbounds over the Arctic. we have to trust our assassin subs to take care of the PRC SSBN threat. 
 
Check this thread where I explain this.
 
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

EricTheRed       6/28/2007 12:00:36 AM
Herald- Link didn't work... ETR
 
Quote    Reply

EricTheRed       6/28/2007 12:02:35 AM
Herald- PS -Aren't our land based icbms hardened (as well as commo) to prevent an emp attack or at least make retaliation possible? Or am I misinformed?   ETR
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    ETR reply.   6/28/2007 12:53:57 AM
Link works for me.
 
ICBM sites are hardened as best as can be, but Faradaying isn't 100% certain even if you test for it. There might be a ground path or charge coupling event you overlooked in your testing and shielding. Post attack communications can still be vulnerable.  Better to prevent the pulse than to actually test your measures in combat. For example if the PRCs still hear us on the air after their Pearl Harbor EMP bomb fails and see our radars go to full power, they may hold off on their follow up attack and open negotiations immediately to prevent escalation. 
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    ETR reply.   6/28/2007 12:57:28 AM
Check the StrategyPage  forum topic "Could Russia Roll into Eastern Europe" thread. There you will find the explanations I use and the assumptions I try to debunk as to efficacies and purposes of the BMD question.
 
Herald.
 
Quote    Reply

EricTheRed       6/28/2007 12:59:08 AM
Herald. Thanks for the info... I still can't get the link to work I get a 404 file not found- any chance you can type it out?   Thanks....     ETR
 
Quote    Reply

EricTheRed       6/28/2007 2:21:54 AM
Herald- thanks, I found it. Wow, the rest of the world really believes we have the death star in orbit blackmailing them to fund our global conquest. Not buyin' it. Anyway, in re the purpose of nmd defense post- I always thought (perhaps it was a soviet era thought) that we didn't really think any (or at least not many) of our land based missiles or bombers would survive a first strike. This being because of the reluctance of a politician to push the button due to a false alarm (which I seem to recall has happened). So they'd wait until they were sure ie bombs start landing. Thus the sub launched missiles, which even in the current scenario are pretty sure to survive.
    So wouldn't nmd give us a way to fairly good way to defend without actually just launching a massive strike? From the other thread, it doesn't seem anybody else would even know where there own missiles were, let alone an abm of ours. Why do we need the minutemen to survive if the subs are there?
    The sea based nmd system (lacking a space based one) seems to make more sense to me as the long-term reliability of any host nation could be in doubt, but I digress. My point is just that I think that at least nmd will give us the option to save some targets, while at the same time giving the chinese something else to think about should they try anything stupid.        ETR
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT