Skip to main content

View Diary: Nukes - Part 1 (119 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Virtually all missiles use inertial guidance (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mr Robert

    Of one type or another, typically a combination of gyros and accelerometers (e.g., mechanical gyros, ball gyros, ring laser gyros, MEMS gyros/accelerometers, etc.).

    I think the question you are asking should be what other systems are used in addition, and how good they are.

    Well, here is something else to thing on; 2 countries have the demonstrated capability to destroy satellites by missile, the US and China, and that changes the equation in both offensive and defensive strategy.

    It also suggests you and/or wikipedia under-estimate the sophistication of Chinese guidance technology given the relatively poor accuracy of inertial systems alone.

    What about my Daughter's future?

    by koNko on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 08:55:48 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Chinese nuclear doctrine (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mr Robert

      is not "counter force".

      They're not trying to target US missile silos. Accuracy isn't really a big deal if you're not trying to hit relatively small, hardened targets. In this case, close counts.

      The Chinese maintain the minimum level of force to deter us from using our nukes. They don't really want to pay for any more than that.

      As such, the accuracy of Chinese ICBMs is acceptable for what they're hoping to accomplish with them.

      If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low... oh you oughta see it sometime. It's a sight. A big plane like a '52... varrrooom! Its jet exhaust... frying chickens in the barnyard!

      by Major Kong on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 11:16:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  However (0+ / 0-)

        If you are targeting satellites with ground based missiles, you need something a bit more accurate than an inertial system.

        I agree that Chinese military doctrine (and weapons development) is basically defensive and intended "denny access", but what seems to concern US Military planners about that is the increasing sophistication of Chinese technology, particularly as it applies to littoral defenses that would repel traditional naval forces (e.g., cheap missiles or torpedos verses battle ships).

        All the more reason for the US and China to pursue dialogue and exchanges to avoid conflicts although, of late, this has not gone very smoothly.

        What about my Daughter's future?

        by koNko on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 11:53:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site