www.ditl.org

Teaos wrote:And that cant be changed fairly quickly?

Only by building a new radar facing in the proper direction. These aren't like the search radars on a ship, aircraft or AA emplacement. These are large fixed emitters, the size of a large building. I can't find any pics but if your familiar with the old Nike Hercules radars, they are along those lines.

So they'd be blind to missiles launched from Russia?

Rochey wrote:So they'd be blind to missiles launched from Russia?

They'd probably pick them up on satellite but the missiles in Europe won't be able to launch against them without the radar pointing at them. The system is designed to defend against a "rogune nations" small scale attack. Iran, North Korea etc. Even if it was pointed at Russia, they could easily overwhelm it.

The Russians are pissed because they know the system can be easily scaled up by adding more intercepters as long as the radar is facing the right way. In theory the whole system could shut down their entire deterrent, in theory. But they'd have alot of advance notice on that. Besides they have their own ABM system around Moscow and have had it for around thirty years, that they just upgraded to hit-to-kill warheads. It's extensive enough that it would take the UK's entire SLBM force to get through. They can easily upgrade it enough to match what they think the US is upto, that costs money though. Money their busy sinking into new ICBMs.

Is there any defence againt nukes launched from subs?

Teaos wrote:Is there any defence againt nukes launched from subs?

Yeah, sink the sub before launch or shoot them down with an ABM. You just get a shorter window to intercept depending how close the SSBN is to your country.

Of course the Rogue nations in question don't have long range nuclear subs.

And if they had one or two we'd probably just send one of ours to ride their butt. If they buy a diesel sub we can track that pretty easy, or at least pick it up.

Though they always could just drive one of the missile launchers onto a cargo ship. Not sure how well we track those.


Oh and do you have any links that talk about how the radar can't see Russian missiles?

Well there's the usual shite on Wikipedia.

FAS.org

Notably the X-band guidance radar is at least mobile in a sense while the actual search radar is a large fixed installation.

Your mobile launcher idea has merit, though these things are very large and get one shot. With older models having a CEP measured in KM's, perhaps not so much an issue with a nuclear warhead (which is limited in yield thanks to the size of the rocket) but given the abilities of an enemy that would choose this route (the usual trifecta of losers: NK, Iran, Pakistan) I have little confidence that the warhead will go off, let alone reach it's launch point.

Hm. While the radar is certainly a fixed installation. It appears that there is a radar array on each of the three larger faces. Giving it a 360 degree view.

sunnyside wrote:Hm. While the radar is certainly a fixed installation. It appears that there is a radar array on each of the three larger faces. Giving it a 360 degree view.

Which ones that?

Edit: All the pics I see show one radar array on a single side of the structure. The X-Band guidance radar is certainly not limited though.

Cpl Kendall wrote:

sunnyside wrote:Hm. While the radar is certainly a fixed installation. It appears that there is a radar array on each of the three larger faces. Giving it a 360 degree view.

Which ones that?

Edit: All the pics I see show one radar array on a single side of the structure. The X-Band guidance radar is certainly not limited though.

From the FAS link you provided (thanks) the picture they have of the fixed installation is.

http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/61531a.pdf

Which clearly shows two faces with radar. I can't find it now but I'd run across a pic from above which shows that the other face looks about the same and likely also has a phased array radar present.

Searching for "early warning radar" instead of "upgraded early warning radar" finds.



Which does only face one direction. So maybe it's that the new models do the 360 thing (or 240 if they only have two faces) and the old ones are maybe 120 degree deals.

sunnyside wrote:

Red X of death.

me,myself and I wrote:

sunnyside wrote:

Red X of death.

Check the above post again.

So then it depends what radar instalation they stick there (duh). Doesn't change Russia's ability to swamp the system or their massive double standard.

Cpl Kendall wrote:So then it depends what radar instalation they stick there (duh). Doesn't change Russia's ability to swamp the system or their massive double standard.

Actually it's been fairly quite but Russia has made some mewlings like their nuclear deterent isn't what it once was and they worry the shield might actually be able to make a difference. Of course the other half of the time they claim their stuff will totally beat it without a sweat.

I wonder if there is any truth to the former though. While each nation only has a couple missiles, there are multiple nations with them, and it starts adding up to a lot of missiles.


Poking around
http://www.afa.org/magazine/feb1997/0297russi.asp
is rather interesting.

Russia's still got a lot of warheads (no suprise there) and I honestly doubt that they'd have let them degrade to the point of uselessness given their overall paranoia. I'm sure that if the Yanks start ramping up deployment of ABM's that the Russians will either follow the lead and bulk up their ICBM's or ABM. They don't have much choice.