China and Russia Get A THAAD Ache

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Strategic Nuclear Weapons Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: China and Russia Get A THAAD Ache
SYSOP 4/29/2015 6:36:15 AM

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2

IndividualAnon 4/29/2015 8:26:15 AM

Could the radar receivers continue to function after an overhead nuclear explosion?

Quote Reply

m-1 Welcome in Asia. 4/29/2015 8:37:07 AM

That is great news.

If it can stop for once and for all the nuclear blackmail and rogue attitude of nations, such as Russia and reduce the risk of nuclear armagedon, that is awesome.

At the same time, it may allow offensive operations from the USA, as there is no mutual assured destruction.

Quote Reply

JFKY Individual 4/29/2015 8:46:18 AM

1. You question is essentially unanswerable...EMP/TREE would depend on altitude of burst, yield of burst, & the degree of hardening present in the THAAD radar.

2. Even if the radar continues to function, the question would be what would the effects of the burst be upon radar propagation?

Quote Reply

Tamerlane Star Wars Redux 4/29/2015 9:57:02 AM

Well, there's always that EMP-buster called the "Faraday Shield." Such hardening may not work all the time, but it works well enough. I worked on the old ERINT Program back in the Bronze Age when the libs said Star Wars was a waste of money. Apparently, China and the Mini-Me Soviets do not share their opinion: "The dart that is on target raises the loudest screams." N. Bonaparte.

Quote Reply

Tamerlane Star Wars Redux 4/29/2015 10:07:34 AM

PS: All this missile defense caterwauling is for political purposes. If someone is trying to kick you in the balls, bite your nose, crush your zyphioid, stamp on your foot and gouge your eye at the same time...you better be flailing two nunchucks like "Bruce Lee on Benzedrine." In a real exchange between two real players, the delivery systems will be everything from old pickup trucks and garbage scows to maneuverable MIRVS. The best defense is still MAD.

Quote Reply

HR temer 4/29/2015 10:41:58 AM

Sometimes the deployment of weapons like these is a political move... it forces the opponent to spend resources on something else that is more expensive. Plus read carefully... they are being black mailed and this will bring a degree of insecurity to the blackmailer.

Quote Reply

keffler25 4/29/2015 12:22:04 PM

1. The question is unanswerable because in order to know if the EMP would have any effects the radar electronics, TR characteristics (ground path through antenna) would have to coincide closely with the designed main wavelength of the pulse from the EMP weapon used. Since the numerics are state secrets, well, you can see the problem?

2. If the radar functionally survives the pulse for whatever reason, the answer is no effect at all aside from any damage incurred by blast and the usual transient weather effects which always plague radar.

1. You question is essentially unanswerable...EMP/TREE would depend on altitude of burst, yield of burst, & the degree of hardening present in the THAAD radar.

2. Even if the radar continues to function, the question would be what would the effects of the burst be upon radar propagation?

Quote Reply

Nate Dog Tamerlane 4/30/2015 1:20:08 AM

The best defence THUS far has been MAD. Just because something has worked till now doesn't mean it'll always work, your philosophy professor will sight the chicken and the farmer as example, throughout the chickens life the farmer feeds it, tends to it, ministers to it when its sick, raises its offspring when they are born, right until the day when he chops its head off and feeds it to his children.

I can see a couple of 21st century problems with MAD, for one, its not so assured, if missile defence works as well as its advertised, and far more dangerous, if the imbeciles in NORAD actually believe the brochure as to how well the missile defence will work....

The other issue is the eventual proliferation of nuclear weapons into the hands of morons whom actually truly believe that things get better once they die, then MAD goes right out the window as a deterrent and becomes a goal.

Quote Reply

jessmo_24 4/30/2015 3:30:26 AM

Can someone explain this weapon? I have never heard of it. Is it emp or what?

A Florida lawmaker's bid to push the Air Force to develop new electronic weapons failed on Tuesday when the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said the effort was technically flawed.

Rep. Richard Nugent, R-Florida, said the Air Force "has been dragging its feet" on preparing the weapon for deployment and instead redirecting $10 million the service received in 2015.

"The Air Force has really been skating around this congressional intent a lot lately, and almost everyone has experienced frustration [with their] tactics," Nugent said, citing the service's determination to retire the A-10 Thunderbolt over the will of Congress.

Nugent hoped to remedy that by including an amendment in the 2016 National Defense Authorization Act ordering the Air Force to direct $10 million to the Counter-electronics High-powered Microwave Missile Project.

The missile is considered non-lethal because it is designed to knock out electronics systems but not directly harm people or destroy structures.

The Air Force started developing the $40 million program in 2009. Service officials completed what was called a successful test in 2012 when the missile was flown on the wing of a B-52. The program is led by Boeing.

The amendment failed to get a vote, however, after HASC Chairman Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, opposed it on technicalities, "not because I disagree with anything that [Nugent] said about the program itself," Thornberry told the hearing.

Nugent first pitched using the CHAMP system on a cruise missile in June 2014, arguing the Air Force could have it ready for combat within 18 months.

He said the Air Force appears to be holding off developing the system for use until they can put it onto a reusable vehicle.

"The problem is, they can have the best of intentions in wanting something reusable, but they have nothing in design now and no idea of what it would be," he told Military.com. "By the time they do the development and testing, and then get to procurement, it'll be way down the road."

Combatant commanders have asked for this capability, he said.

"And we're saying use it, on short term put them on cruise missiles that we have that are sitting there in warehouses because we've removed the nuclear devices off them" he said.

Nugent told the committee the Air Force can place the system onto cruise missiles while developing a reusable vehicle.

Quote Reply

TonyAAA 5/3/2015 5:12:39 PM

^ Sounds like they want funding for an explosively pumped flux compression generator.

Basically a one time use device that makes a single huge EMP pulse but the key thing is it does this without needing a nuke, just normal explosives and electronics.

Quote Reply

1 2