|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Neat Spartan ABM photo
I know a lot of the people around here are big sci-fi movie fans, so
thought you might appreciate this shot of a underground test of a Spartan ABM 5-megaton nuclear warhead as it's lowered into the test hole: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/sy...1-cannikin.jpg Yes, we've seen this before, haven't we? Last time it was down in Tanganyika as part of Operation Inner Space, and things didn't go at all as expected: http://www.wtf-film.com/ARTICLES/AUG...CK_WORLD.shtml Rocket pointing at sky - good. Rocket pointing at Earth's core - bad. Pat |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Neat Spartan ABM photo
In sci.space.history Pat Flannery wrote:
I know a lot of the people around here are big sci-fi movie fans, so thought you might appreciate this shot of a underground test of a Spartan ABM 5-megaton nuclear warhead as it's lowered into the test hole: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/sy...1-cannikin.jpg Didn't have much budget for rust mitigation did they rick jones -- oxymoron n, Hummer H2 with California Save Our Coasts and Oceans plates these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Neat Spartan ABM photo
On Dec 9, 2:16*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
I know a lot of the people around here are big sci-fi movie fans, so thought you might appreciate this shot of a underground test of a Spartan ABM 5-megaton nuclear warhead as it's lowered into the test hole:http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/sy...1-cannikin.jpg Yes, we've seen this before, haven't we? Last time it was down in Tanganyika as part of Operation Inner Space, and things didn't go at all as expected:http://www.wtf-film.com/ARTICLES/AUG...CK_WORLD.shtml Rocket pointing at sky - good. Rocket pointing at Earth's core - bad. Pat I have seen films of the Spartan test flights when I was in the Air Force. That missile was no slowpoke, it blasted out of the silo at very high velocity. Thus the sleek conical airframe. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Neat Spartan ABM photo
Rick Jones wrote: Didn't have much budget for rust mitigation did they It would be fascinating to know how big of a underground cavity a 5 megaton detonation excavated. Probably made a pretty nifty little earthquake when it went off also. It's interesting that they detonated it with the whole upper stage and nosecone still attached - they must have thought that that could somehow modify the yield or in which directions the radiation was emitted from it. Pat |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Neat Spartan ABM photo
M wrote: I have seen films of the Spartan test flights when I was in the Air Force. That missile was no slowpoke, it blasted out of the silo at very high velocity. Thus the sleek conical airframe. Although Spartan went uphill fast, I think that you are referring to the smaller Sprint ABM which came out of the silo like it was being shot out of a cannon. Spartan was designed to destroy the warheads outside of the atmosphere; Sprint was to intercept any that got past Spartan while the warheads were inside the atmosphere. Pat |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Neat Spartan ABM photo
On Dec 9, 12:16 pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
Rocket pointing at sky - good. Rocket pointing at Earth's core - bad. I remember there were protests about this Amchitka thing back when I was a lad. It was going to set off earthquakes or something? Or it was going to prove to our nice democratic friends in Russia that we were out to get them? And now Russia's democracy - which it achieved after Communism collapsed - has itself collapsed and it's engaged in attacks on a democracy under a deceptive pretext for some sort of tit-for-tat for America's defense of the Kosovars. Presumably, its next step will be to limit America's ability to respond to terrorism. This is very sad. John Savard |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Neat Spartan ABM photo
On Dec 10, 1:17*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
M wrote: I have seen films of the Spartan test flights when I was in the Air Force. That missile was no slowpoke, it blasted out of the silo at very high velocity. Thus the sleek conical airframe. Although Spartan went uphill fast, I think that you are referring to the smaller Sprint ABM which came out of the silo like it was being shot out of a cannon. Spartan was designed to destroy the warheads outside of the atmosphere; Sprint was to intercept any that got past Spartan while the warheads were inside the atmosphere. Pat You are correct. The Sprint was a very fast last ditch interceptor, shaped like a cone. It flew very fast. Too bad it was all dismantled in 1977. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Neat Spartan ABM photo
Quadibloc wrote: I remember there were protests about this Amchitka thing back when I was a lad. It was going to set off earthquakes or something? Or it was going to prove to our nice democratic friends in Russia that we were out to get them? I've been reading up on the test...the island it was done on is volcanic and seismically unstable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amchitka ....which sounds even more like "Crack In The World". :-D The test did indeed cause some pretty good shaking, as can be seen in this video of the ground heaving it caused: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp6aZIhHiRE pat |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Neat Spartan ABM photo
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Neat Spartan ABM photo
Pat Flannery wrote:
: :MIRVed missiles made the ABM inviable from a economic point of view, as :every time the US or the Soviets added a MIRVed ICBM or SLBM to their :arsenal, their opponent would have to add at least one new ABM for each :warhead the missile was carrying (in fact, with the Safeguard system, :you would probably want to add one Spartan and one Sprint for each new :warhead if you wanted to be fairly certain of intercepting it before :detonation.) :So one new Soviet SS-9 "Scarp" Mod 4 with three warheads meant the US :would have to build three Spartans and three Sprints minimum to defend :itself against the incoming warheads of the single missile...and those :six ABMs would cost a lot more than a single Scarp. : Cite for relative costs, including economy adjustments? I agree with your basic premise, but I don't think mere triplet warheads are the real breakover point. : :But only a few months after Safeguard went fully operational, we shut it :down as a budget move. : More like 24 hours and it wasn't really a 'budget move'. It was pretty much all political. : the Soviets kept theirs operational for some time). : Where "some time" extends from initial deployment to now, since it's still active, having undergone several upgrades in the meantime. : :The MIRV problem still exists today; if you can't intercept the :warheads while they are still attached to the warhead bus, or almost :immediately after they detach from it, they are going to be too :separated for even the MKV to be able to get all of them with its :multiple interceptor vehicles by the time they are drawing near to their :target. :So MKV will be usable against a single warhead and decoys, but far less :effective against a MIRVed warhead unless you can sea or space base it :to get the missile right after it completes its powered ascent. :The nice thing about MAD was that is was pretty cheap when it came right :down to it. : You're making the mistake of thinking that US ABM efforts are aimed at 'mature' nuclear powers. They aren't. They're aimed at loonies like North Korea, which can only put up a handful of missiles in the worst case. Other than that, you might want to look at where MKV is intended to engage inbounds and consider just what the launch vehicle is. Hint: It's intended to be both land- and sea-based and intended to attack at trajectory peak. How effective it would be after debuss rather depends on its crossrange capability. : :Minuteman III missiles only cost $7 million each, so a lot of them could :be fielded - enough to swamp any ABM system, since each carried three :warheads. We topped out with 1,000 Minuteman II's and III's emplaced, :with the majority being the MIRVed Minuteman III's. : You're ignoring the cost of the warheads, the basing, etc. -- "Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute." -- Charles Pinckney |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Neat Io photo | Pat Flannery | Policy | 0 | March 2nd 07 03:10 PM |
Neat Io photo | Pat Flannery | History | 0 | March 2nd 07 03:10 PM |
Neat Zond photo | Pat Flannery | History | 2 | February 24th 05 12:11 AM |
A rather neat photo | Andrew Gray | History | 11 | October 4th 04 08:42 PM |
A REALLY NEAT CLOSE-UP OF COMET NEAT FROM KITT PEAK OBSERVATORY (STScI-NN040617) | INBOX ASTRONOMY: NEWS ALERT | Amateur Astronomy | 30 | June 19th 04 07:41 AM |