gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
Thrust vectoring in a missile is more for maintaining stability and heading integrity during ascent. In this, deflector vanes will do the job just fine. However, gimbaled nozzle, meaning the nozzle itself swivels on a more complex mechanical platform, can actually steers the missile besides providing directional stability. It is not that difficult to visualize. With deflector vanes, the rocket can change attitude only in very rigid and restricted movements: linear in the the x-y axes. For lack of better frames of references: Left or right. Up or down.
But with a swiveling nozzle, the rocket can have a more 'circular' degree of freedom and this enabled another feature that increases accuracy: spinning the rocket body. Again, it is not that difficult to mentally visualize. We already know that spinning a cylinder increases stability, especially in flight, and this increases accuracy.
IEEE Xplore - Aero-elastic stability design of spinning ballistic missile with sliding mode control
Remember, a rocket is a looooong cylindrical body and under constant thrust whose intention may be to reach escape velocity, longitudinal vibration is a huge problem. Spinning the cylinder reduce or even negate this longitudinal vibration, enhances stability over distance, and increases accuracy and precision if the rocket is a missile (weapon). Sharpshooters know this effect on their bullets' flight. Nozzle swiveling is far superior to exhaust stream deflector vanes in working in concert with these factors to secure predicted ground target accuracy and precision.
Twenty yards is good enough, you think? Sorry, but think again. The heart of any nuclear reactor will be behind layers of concrete, people, equipments, rooms, air, whatever.
To do any serious damages to a working nuclear reactor, you MUST hit the dome and penetrate it. Or you must do such damages to the outer structure that it will collapse on itself, thereby creating the same effect as if you hit and penetrated the dome in the first place.
So regarding the illustration above, the best odds for a missile based attack on a highly specified ground target, like a particular building, and if the missile force is equipped with less than desired technology like exhaust stream deflector vanes, then it is best if the missile attack is a massive flight to achieve 'High accuracy, Low precision'. Hopefully, enough of this massive assault force will score a few hits at the vital areas.
Most people in the USAF have never heard of an office inside the USAF Systems Command call 'Foreign Technology Exploitation' branch. The US Army have one. So does the US Navy. Those who study adversary technology are not fools, including Iranian specialists who study Israeli war technology. They know their limits, and they know the Israelis know Iranian limits. If I can tell you all of this based upon publicly available information, what do you think the Israelis know about Iranian capabilities?
You are speaking with a stone too..... 
.
