tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post5119207123878081905..comments2019-06-28T06:52:47.421-04:00Comments on Tempered Insanity: Russia vs. America, Take 2Sean O'Connorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12262754627111404755noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-5046818453332282412007-07-31T09:18:00.000-04:002007-07-31T09:18:00.000-04:00Sean>It's not physically possible for GMD to do th...Sean>It's not physically possible for GMD to do that<BR/><BR/>Wrong for SS-19 launched from the Koselsk or Tatishchevo bases. <BR/><BR/>Sean O'Connor>Towards what? America? Such a weapon wouldn't fly straight over Europe towards Washington D.C. Ergo, the interceptor would be forced into a tail-chase engagement, something it is not designed for and incapable of performing due to the speeds and distances involved. <BR/><BR/><BR/>OK. Lets talk about it.<BR/>Look here: http://programtree.com/pro.gif<BR/>You can see traejectory to<BR/>1 - Miami<BR/>2 - Minneapolis<BR/>3 - Seattle<BR/><BR/>All boot phases for Koselsk inside GBI range.<BR/>Case: GBI version is OBV. Launch is 45 sec later SS19. Last point of boot phase for SS19 is main engine shutoff.(Verniers continue to burn for 19 seconds after mainstage shutoff.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-24727706391483852622007-07-31T09:01:00.000-04:002007-07-31T09:01:00.000-04:00Sean O'Connor>Towards what? America? Such a weapon...Sean O'Connor><BR/>Towards what? America? Such a weapon wouldn't fly straight over Europe towards Washington D.C. Ergo, the interceptor would be forced into a tail-chase engagement, something it is not designed for and incapable of performing due to the speeds and distances involved.<BR/><BR/>OK. Lets talk about it.<BR/>Look here: http://programtree.com/pro.gif<BR/>You can see trajectory <BR/>1 to Miami <BR/>2 to Minneapolis<BR/>3 to Seattle<BR/><BR/>All boot phases for Koselsk inside GBI range. <BR/>Case: GBI version is OBV. <BR/>Launch GBI is 45 sec later SS19. Last point of boot phase for SS19 is main engine shutoff. (Verniers continue to burn for 19 seconds after mainstage shutoff.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-86373754585523549952007-07-03T17:47:00.000-04:002007-07-03T17:47:00.000-04:00Launch detection systems can already monitor Russi...Launch detection systems can already monitor Russian ICBM fields with accuracy so I don't see why that might be an issue. Plus, the array would be oriented towards Iran, not Russia!<BR/><BR/>They have nothing to worry about the interceptors being placed there, as I explained already they are not capable of tail-chase intercepts or Russian ICBMs heading towards the USA.Sean O'Connorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12262754627111404755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-77311076163608913282007-06-30T02:11:00.000-04:002007-06-30T02:11:00.000-04:00Is not the main issue initially that the proposed ...Is not the main issue initially that the proposed Czech radar would be able to surveil all or western Russia with great accuracy? Is this not why they (Russians) are suggesting the azer radar that points the other way?<BR/><BR/>I'm sure at some point they will be worried about the interceptors, particularily when we get to ver 2 and higher and when we decide to go from 10 to 100. Once there the urge to upgrade will be difficult to thwart.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-47964321717848340102007-06-10T16:03:00.000-04:002007-06-10T16:03:00.000-04:00Towards what? America? Such a weapon wouldn't fl...Towards what? America? Such a weapon wouldn't fly straight over Europe towards Washington D.C. Ergo, the interceptor would be forced into a tail-chase engagement, something it is not designed for and incapable of performing due to the speeds and distances involved.Sean O'Connorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12262754627111404755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-30119391212982156732007-06-09T16:43:00.000-04:002007-06-09T16:43:00.000-04:00Sean>It's not physically possible for GMD to do th...Sean>It's not physically possible for GMD to do that<BR/><BR/>Wrong for SS-19 launched from the Koselsk or Tatishchevo bases.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-44917011347878370692007-06-04T07:47:00.000-04:002007-06-04T07:47:00.000-04:00it's all just a theory, you have got lot of imagin...it's all just a theory, you have got lot of imagination please take into consideration that fact .. that Iran DOESNT HAVE ICBM system.. and such missiles ur talking about here they don't exist and there's no any treat from that side. So the reason of locating usa missilesin East Europe stays unclear..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-91962200114344399402007-05-10T14:20:00.000-04:002007-05-10T14:20:00.000-04:00Here is a map with countries containing US militar...Here is a map with countries containing US military bases<BR/>http://www.globalpolicy.org/images/maps/empire/usbases200103.jpg<BR/>Since 1991, Russia has bombed attacked no country, has bombed no country, has threatened no country.<BR/>I'll let you count the number of countries the US has attacked, invaded, bombed and threatened since 1991. Russia is not the country threatening world peace or wanting to restart the Cold War. The Washington based Defence Industry lobbyist on the other hand.....Gilleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07150310899503100085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-83624911368383153002007-05-06T21:12:00.000-04:002007-05-06T21:12:00.000-04:00Very interesting Blog and I agree with most of you...Very interesting Blog and I agree with most of your arguments.<BR/>One comment about the Russian viewpoint though: look at a globe and plot US and NATO military installations around Russia. They surround Russia, including several in ex Soviet Republics. Because of them, Russia has every reason to be on the edge. Every time the Soviet Union had an opportunity, real or perceived, to have any military installations near the US, the US reacted aggressively and shed blood over it: Cuba, Nicaragua, Grenada, and El Salvador. In light of this, do you really think Russia over reacting over the Slovak and Polish installations?Gilleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07150310899503100085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-82201394638601050822007-04-20T16:35:00.000-04:002007-04-20T16:35:00.000-04:00Sounds like Croatia is doing pretty well. I alway...Sounds like Croatia is doing pretty well. I always wanted to travel to Eastern Europe personally, I just haven't yet found the time.<BR/><BR/>On to your questions:<BR/><BR/>1. First off, it's "48N6DM", which is a further extended-range 300km variant of the 48N6 family (48N6 reaches out to 150km, 48N6D 200km). The big 400km missile is most likely just "40N6", although I have seen 40N6V and 40N6M before. As to whether or not either one could engage a THAAD or GMD missile: maybe the first, definitely not the second. GMD moves too fast and would take an actual ABM to intercept. THAAD, being a terminal weapon, may not move quite as fast during some flight regimes.<BR/><BR/>2. That would be what is referred to as the S-500 system. The S-500 is the projected S-300/S-400 follow-on using completely new components. Right now the S-400 uses modified S-300PM-1/2 components and incorporates the 40N6 missile into the mix. S-400 may actually have been designated the S-300PM-3 at one point due to the commonality. Also, there is the S-1000, the projected S-300V replacement. Both of these are still on the drawing board though.<BR/><BR/>3. All you really need to do to make an ICBM is come up with an SLV. That gives you the thrust needed to get intercontinental range, then all you do is modify the software to use a ballistic flightpath to a target instead of into orbit. Iran could go the North Korean route and develop a multi-stage system based on the SCUD or something similar and fly a prototype relatively soon. They are already talking about developing Shahab-4 as a satellite launch vehicle. If they get it to work, they'll be able to build an ICBM with relative ease. Now, the difficult part of developing an ICBM is developing MIRV capability and obtaining accuracy lower than 750-1000 meters CEP. You don't have to do that though. You can always use a big enough warhead in the megaton range and forget about accuracy altogether.Sean O'Connorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12262754627111404755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-51523821734183857162007-04-20T14:31:00.000-04:002007-04-20T14:31:00.000-04:00Well now that war and corrupt privatization ( whit...Well now that war and corrupt privatization ( whitch caused even more economic damage to Croatia than war) are long over Croatia is gaining its momentum in economy recovery and life standard is improving, in shortly. Thanks for asking.<BR/><BR/>Still I have few questions in response.<BR/><BR/>1.Can S-400 system with its 40N6Dm rocket be used to take down GBI/SM-3 or THAAD rockets thus protecting its balistic missile.<BR/><BR/>2. I have read that Russia is planing to introduce by 2015-2017 year anti-air system of fifth generation whitch will be integrated in whole network protecting all Russia making it some kind of Russia NMD. Now this thing seems to me little overstreched - do you have any information about what that system might be. Something like THAAD or GBI or some combination?<BR/><BR/>3. You have not said a word about Irans capability to produce ICBM because as I read tehnology level to construct ICBM in opose to SRBM and IRBM is significantly higher whitch would in that case mean that Iran would need atleas decade or two to produce some threat to Eu.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-32357703445095787142007-04-19T17:09:00.000-04:002007-04-19T17:09:00.000-04:00Hi Viktor, how are things in Croatia? Glad you li...Hi Viktor, how are things in Croatia? Glad you liked the blog.<BR/><BR/>On to your inquiries:<BR/><BR/>1. The interceptors in Poland won't be able to chase down an ICBM from Russia. That being said, the missiles in Alaska should be able to intercept Russian ICBMs coming over the pole. Makes you wonder what Russia's real motivation is here, since they don't seem bothered by the Alaskan site that IS a threat, but are bothered by the Polish site that ISN'T a threat. Perhaps more significantly, the Alaskan site, with 100 missiles, would be able to effectively neutralize the current Chinese ICBM force. That's an aspect that you don't hear a lot about!<BR/><BR/>2. No. The GMD interceptors need to set up a track, and then attempt a head-on kill shot. That won't work in this case as they'll first have to chase down Russian ICBMs. At those kinds of speeds, that just isn't possible with the GMD weapon.<BR/><BR/>3. Russia's strategic nuclear arsenal isn't under serious threat by any European-based weapon system. Moreover, they could easily apply depressed trajectories to their SLBM force and make them pretty much unstoppable.<BR/><BR/>4. The US didn't contact the EU because, frankly, they didn't have to. This is a discussion between the USA and Poland (as well as the Czech Republic and the UK regarding radar systems). As such, there is no reason to get the EU involved in my opinion. Poland doesn't have to ask the EU for permission, do they?<BR/><BR/>5. Here's some good links about THAAD:<BR/><BR/>http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/thaad.htm<BR/><BR/>http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/thaad.html<BR/><BR/>http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/html/thaad1.html<BR/><BR/>6. Nothing I can give away, sorry!<BR/><BR/>Cheers!Sean O'Connorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12262754627111404755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500700533018811918.post-78608906198971043252007-04-19T11:55:00.000-04:002007-04-19T11:55:00.000-04:00Hello Sean. Im Viktor from Croatia. I accidently b...Hello Sean. Im Viktor from Croatia. I accidently bumpt on you blog and I must admit it excellent and covers my field of interest. Im future mehanical engineer with interest in military stuff. <BR/>I read and downloaded what have you wrote about ABM in Poland and all that fuse about it and have few questions.<BR/><BR/>1. Can GBI interceptors in Alaska join the chase after Russian ICBM lounched over Canada togeather with interceptors from Poland?<BR/><BR/>2. Can interceptors from Poland shoot down Russian ICBM in boost phase since they are only 500km away from ICBM lounchers?<BR/><BR/>3. I think Russians are more afraid of what might future GBI lounch sites in Poland turn on because USA is pouring on bilions to make system work and with future increase in interceptor speed and ( dont remember where I read about multiple kill vehicle on a single interceptor) MIRV killer anounced to be developt by 2014 year things could turn out to be bad for the Russians do you agree?<BR/><BR/>4. One thing you did not mention in your article and I think its worth mentioning.<BR/>USA is not about to consult EU about its plans concerning EU protection, its little odd to me. It makes impresion that US is in some hurry. Since Iran still has no balistic missile capable of atacking targets in EU why does USA disscus those issues with EU. Im interested about your opinion, Russian claim Iran is at least 10-20 years from constructing B.M. capable of reaching EU because tehnology level requarible is MUTCH higher than those needed to developt SRBM and some IRBM?<BR/><BR/>5.Im interested about THAAD system since I could not find any information about its missiles. <BR/><BR/>6. Do you know missile specs of GBI targets??<BR/><BR/>ThanksAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com