US THAAD could take down Chinese missiles from SK

[Destro]

Your response is emotional, believe it or not the US has the ability to quickly and effectively neutralize the threat of missiles. And I don't mean destroy the missiles, I mean render the whole system ineffective for as long as it is necessary.

Believe it or not, so do we!

We have our own methods to dismantle the US war machine just like we did in Korea. You can bet your military generals multiple mistresses that we can counter and retaliate in no uncertain terms and impose MAXIMUM possible punishment on American forces.

Can the US withstand an all out military assault from land, air, sea, subsea, space, cyber and electronic? Neeeeeeah

 

[Alpha1]

MIRVs are usually for different targets, not the same target.

This maybe slightly offtopic but I have read that as 5 , 5MT bombs are more effective than a Single 50 MT bomb,
So won't MIRVs at a single target (not at the same point) be more effective than a Single bomb with double the yeild?

 

[Dillinger]

This maybe slightly offtopic but I have read that as 5 , 5MT bombs are more effective than a Single 50 MT bomb,
So won't MIRVs at a single target (not at the same point) be more effective than a Single bomb with double the yeild?

There are no 5 MT warheads for MIRVs, 300-400KT at the most. No one uses MT warheads anymore if their delivery platforms have achieved sub 100 meter accuracy. Even the Russians, who were the most obsessed about tonnage, use a singular 800KT warhead on their primary land mobile platform.

 

[Alpha1]

There are no 5 MT warheads for MIRVs, 300-400KT at the most. No one uses MT warheads anymore if their delivery platforms have achieved sub 100 meter accuracy. Even the Russians, who were the most obsessed about tonnage, use a singular 800KT warhead on their primary land mobile platform.

I know there is no such thing as a 5MT MIRVed warheads. I was just giving an example of how MIRVs at half the total yeild of a singular warhead are more effective than it .
As for Multi mega tonners, what about the Russian R-36 ?

 

[Dillinger]

I know there is no such thing as a 5MT MIRVed warheads. I was just giving an example of how MIRVs at half the total yeild of a singular warhead are more effective than it .
As for Multi mega tonners, what about the Russian R-36 ?

The Russians are done with that phase. They are more interested in getting the Bulava system up to speed. No one with a developed delivery platform will be looking at MT level tonnage, why should they? On topic- the THAAD is a beast, its KKV is a wonder and the AN/TPY-2 is imminently efficient as a precision X-band sensor. Wouldn't be surprised if it did achieve a high interception rate, the missile seems to have adequate lateral acceleration too, at least when it pulls that corkscrew maneuver to bleed off excess fuel, dunno how much of that it retains throughout its flight envelope. At the end of the day its a very advanced hit-to-kill system and well worth the price. Qatar and UAE are looking at it too. Hell even I'd have the AN/TPY-2 for our own KKV/PDV and PD-1/2.

 

[gambit]

This maybe slightly offtopic but I have read that as 5 , 5MT bombs are more effective than a Single 50 MT bomb,
So won't MIRVs at a single target (not at the same point) be more effective than a Single bomb with double the yeild?

Never mind the tonnage for now. What you are asking about is the tactical utility of delivering multiple small hits to a target in order to sort of increasing the blast radius. It is a valid tactic.

In order for a MIRV vehicle to deliver such a pattern, the individual attackers should approach the target from different approach angles and perhaps different intervals. The delivery vehicle would have to disperse the units at different altitudes and timing. Keep in mind that once the units are in descent, there is no stopping them. The defender would have to track and calculate all attackers' probable ground impact points.

It still fall back upon this...

If five attackers are dispensed to the same ground point but from different approaches, the only way to overwhelm the defender requires the quality of the warheads to be 'High accuracy, High precision'. Anything less and the defender will be able to figure out which of the five will do the most damage and will focus defense on that particular attacker.

 

[Hafizzz]

There are no 5 MT warheads for MIRVs, 300-400KT at the most. No one uses MT warheads anymore if their delivery platforms have achieved sub 100 meter accuracy. Even the Russians, who were the most obsessed about tonnage, use a singular 800KT warhead on their primary land mobile platform.

Nope.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...-294-megatons-thermonuclear-deterrence-2.html

However, we should note there is a report that China has 120 to 150 DF-5s that can be MIRVed with six one-megaton warheads (see citations in the second post below). This means that China may have 900 DF-5B one-megaton warheads in total.

 

[Dillinger]

Nope.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...-294-megatons-thermonuclear-deterrence-2.html

However, we should note there is a report that China has 120 to 150 DF-5s that can be MIRVed with six one-megaton warheads (see citations in the second post below). This means that China may have 900 DF-5B one-megaton warheads in total.

Yawn worthy- wonder whether the author can even spell out what a prolate primary is, something which China cannot yet get to and India and Pakistan can't even dream about leave alone attempt. Chock full of discrepancies. And not to mention a subject on which me and @Hyperion have already rectified malformed notions for interested parties over in our thread.

 

[xunzi]

Your response is emotional, believe it or not the US has the ability to quickly and effectively neutralize the threat of missiles. And I don't mean destroy the missiles, I mean render the whole system ineffective for as long as it is necessary.

Bullshit, you think we are a lame sitting duck waiting for the US to render our whole system ineffective just so you can run all over our defense? Fact is we have studied the US's missile defense technology for decades and research on its weakness and deploy countermeasure. One of the weakness of your missile system is its reliance on satellite to track and guide. Two, we have developed multiple dummy warheads to trick your missile defense system. Three back in the 2011, we ship counterfeit missile chips to your army to disrupt its electronic component. And lastly, our hacking army will try to disrupt the flow of your missile communication. Let be honest here, if we and you ever engage in a war, it would be all-out war and nothing is off the table, including exchanging nuke.

 

[j20blackdragon]

With the help of the AN/TPY-2 X-band radar, the THAAD is able to detect and intercept ballistic missiles launched more than 1,000km away.

Hit that radar with the LD-10 anti-radiation missile.

Problem solved.

 

[HongWu]

Let them bet their whole population on their boasting!

 

[nalan]

The terminal-based THAAD would find it difficult to intercept warheads with terminal-maneuver capabilities (MaRV) though.

it is not difficult,it is impossiple.

 

[nalan]

US THAAD could take down Chinese missiles from SK

The launch of a THAAD missile.


Intercepting potential Chinese missile attacks over the East China Sea is one of the capabilities the US would gain if it successfully deploys its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense System to South Korea, according to the party mouthpiece Global Times.

The defense system, also known as THAAD, is an air missile designed by Lockheed Martin as part of the US Theater Missile Defense system in the Asia-Pacific Region. With the help of the AN/TPY-2 X-band radar, the THAAD is able to detect and intercept ballistic missiles launched more than 1,000km away. Its range would extend over the East China Sea and could be used to intercept missiles from China.

Last year, the United States tried to convince South Korea to join the Theater Missile Defense system through allowing the deployment of the X-band radar to the island of Baengnyeongdo, which sits on the border between the North and South Korea.

The idea was turned down by South Korea's defense minister Kim Kwan-jin over concerns that the deployment would irritate Beijing and lead it to believe that the country was trying to contain China in an alliance with Japan and the US, according to the Seoul Shinmun.

The range of the air defense system fars exceeds North Korean territory, leading professor Kim Hung-gyu from Seoul's Sungshin Womens University to believe the US is trying to provoke South Korea into conflict with Beijing. This would make South Korea a pawn in a US-Japan crusade against China, according to Kim.

it must be a joke

 

[Superboy]

THAAD has an operational range of 200 km, same as HQ-9. Methinks it would have trouble taking down Chinese cruise missiles like the CJ-10, which have a very long range and are very fast.

Terminal High Altitude Area Defense - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

CJ-10 (missile) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Sashan]

Nope. Taiwan would just cause trouble between US and China. US Taiwan relationship consist of economic relationships, but not much political relationship.

As per your view, U.S need to abandon Taiwan Relations Act because Taiwan would just cause trouble and next what? Abandon U.S-Japan security treaty as Japan would cause trouble due to the island dispute between Japan-China and why stop there as well - abandon other allies like Philippines, South Korea as they would cause trouble as well and go into isolation. Bravo....