|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Fate of Italian Polaris Missiles
Pat Flannery wrote:
IIRC, in the case of the Thor IRBMs deployed in Britain, it was literally a "Dual Key" set-up; they couldn't be launched unless a authorized US military officer entered a part of the launch sequence unknown to the British. A US officer was stationed at the Thor bases in case the need arose. The difference between the Thors and the UK's Polaris, Trident, WE.177 (etc.) warheads is that the Thors remained US property. (AIUI). Thus the US wouldn't let the UK launch them without their agreement; equally the US couldn't launch them without the UK's agreement. It would have been more difficult with a SLBM; you would have had to It would have been politically impossible. A nuclear deterrent is of no value if it is not under sovereign control. This is what the Nassau Agreement was all about. "Currently, British Trident commanders are able to launch their missiles without authorisation, whereas their American colleagues cannot." Oh, that makes me feel comfortable...just like the bicycle locks used to arm British nuclear weapons: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...ht/7097101.stm Do you trust your armed forces, or not? |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Fate of Italian Polaris Missiles
Pat Flannery ha scritto:
It would have been more difficult with a SLBM; you would have had to carry a US officer on each sub (one sees the concept of a wild flip-side of Dr. Strangelove here, where a lone US officer is trying to talk the insane commander of a British sub out of nuking Paris because they have insulted British beer as the first step in replacing it with cheap wine.) My congrats for the quotation of a real movie (_dr. Strangelove_) instead of the easy parallel with a questionable flick (_crimison tide_), notwhistanding the apparent analogy of the situation with the latter title... BZ ! Best regards from Italy, Dott. Piergiorgio. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Fate of Italian Polaris Missiles
Pat Flannery ha scritto:
Not if the things are in the Adriatic between Italy and Yugoslavia; take a peek at a map. Fire it from just about any other point and it will pass over either Italy itself or a neutral nation on the way to Yugoslavia. Whereas a sub could hide for the amount of time it would take to get the gyros aligned for launch, a surface ship would feel mighty vulnrable. in an Italy vs. Yugoslavia scenario, the Tyrrhenian Sea is rather safe from the Italian perspective, because yugoslavian ships/boat must pass two rather difficult choke points, the boats against top-notch ASW capabilities. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Fate of Italian Polaris Missiles
Dennis ha scritto:
dott.Piergiorgio wrote: eh.... that was once a nuclear race between us and *switzerland* was really a surprise to me, when I read for the first time this very webpage a pair of years ago, i was so --- O_O , WTF??? Details? This sounds interesting!!! pls read the link provided by the OP, that on astronautix.com or something like.... Best regards from Italy, Dott. Piergiorgio. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Fate of Italian Polaris Missiles
Derek Lyons wrote: There's more to it than just range and bearing to target Pat - you also need to be able to erect and align your guidance systems before launching. Among other things you need very exact information about your heading in order to do this, which turns out not to be very simple. I think the heading of any land-based silo missile will be pretty much due eastwards as the Earth rotates. Unlike on a sub, where you are going to have to fire while on the move at a particular bearing from one latitude and longitude to strike a stationary target at another latitude and longitude, in this case both launcher and target are going to be fixed in relation to each other. In the case of a road mobile system, by going to a pre-surveyed launch site, you can then enter its position into the guidance system, and already have the necessary guidance system input data ready to go for several alternate targets that can be reached from that position. The truck could be parked aimed in approximately the right direction for the chosen target, and the launch tube itself rotated a bit after erection till it reaches the exact desired azimuth alignment. Years back, you said it took around 1/2 hour to get a SLBM ready to go from the "make ready to launch" command coming in, and in this case I assume you would get the gyros spun up and aligned in time of crisis, and then update their settings as things progressed. Although I can't picture Italy and Switzerland getting into a nuclear war, and think the Soviet Union would have pulled the plug on Tito if he had ever tried to deploy Yugoslav-controlled nuclear weapons that they had no control over. If somehow Tito had done that, and attacked Italy, he would be in a position where he would be at war with NATO without the Soviet Union to back him up, as he was a iffy Warsaw Pact member at best. If Italy had gone nuclear, I'm willing to bet that Libya wouldn't have been shooting Scud missiles at the island of Lampedusa like happened back in 1986. ;-) Pat |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Fate of Italian Polaris Missiles
Fevric J. Glandules wrote: Oh, that makes me feel comfortable...just like the bicycle locks used to arm British nuclear weapons: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...ht/7097101.stm Do you trust your armed forces, or not? I wouldn't fully trust the Buddha with a atomic bomb. :-D Pat |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Fate of Italian Polaris Missiles
dott.Piergiorgio wrote: in an Italy vs. Yugoslavia scenario, the Tyrrhenian Sea is rather safe from the Italian perspective, because yugoslavian ships/boat must pass two rather difficult choke points, the boats against top-notch ASW capabilities. Wouldn't that bring the spent first stages down on Italian soil though? It is a mighty defensible position though, as you point out. Pat |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Fate of Italian Polaris Missiles
"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
... Pat Flannery wrote: Which brings up a interesting point...would there have been any reason to put the missiles at sea? Because it is fair to middlin' hard to find things at sea, even in the Mediterranean lake. This came up at work a few months ago while discussing Somali pirates. People were convinced it was trivial to find their ships. (That's "targets" for you submariners out there. :-) -- Greg Moore Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Fate of Italian Polaris Missiles
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 07:27:53 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote: I think the heading of any land-based silo missile will be pretty much due eastwards as the Earth rotates. ....Did this apply to ICBMs targeted between the US and the Soviets? IIRC the majority of those flight paths went north over the Arctic because the distance saved was greater than any benefits of launching with the Earth's rotation could have applied. OM -- ]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Fate of Italian Polaris Missiles
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 07:27:53 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote: If Italy had gone nuclear, I'm willing to bet that Libya wouldn't have been shooting Scud missiles at the island of Lampedusa like happened back in 1986. ;-) ....To this day, the best weapon the Italians have against terrorist scumbags like Quaddafi is, of course, the Mafia. The Red Guard terrorist group that killed Aldo Moro was virtually annihilated within a year because the efforts by Italian police to capture the Red Guards had put such a damper on organized crime that the Dons put huge bounties out on Red Guard terrorists. Gotta love it! OM -- ]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Missiles Of October | Astro | Astronomy Misc | 7 | January 11th 08 03:21 AM |
Missiles Of October | Astro | Amateur Astronomy | 7 | January 11th 08 03:21 AM |
New weapon to destroy missiles | Rémy MERCIER | Technology | 0 | August 4th 05 03:31 PM |
ABM missiles nuclear armed? | Joseph S. Powell, III | Space Station | 4 | December 12th 04 05:50 PM |
ABM missiles nuclear armed? | sh'maal | Space Shuttle | 3 | December 12th 04 01:49 AM |