China tests MIRV technology

[RblDiver]

Great, just bloody great. http://freebeacon.com/national-security/china-tests-icbm-with-multiple-warheads/

(I was surprised to learn our Minuteman missiles no longer are MIRV-capable)

[RMAC757]

Great, just bloody great. http://freebeacon.com/national-security/china-tests-icbm-with-multiple-warheads/

(I was surprised to learn our Minuteman missiles no longer are MIRV-capable)

I think it's because our subs are so capable. They are the tip of our nuclear triad.

[Aloha_Shooter]

MIRV capability was negotiated away because the liberals diplomats felt their friends the Soviets couldn't do it as well as us it was a destabilizing technology.

[HoneyBadger]

I think it's because our subs are so capable. They are the tip of our nuclear triad.
Yes

MIRV capability was negotiated away because the liberals diplomats felt their friends the Soviets couldn't do it as well as us it was a destabilizing technology.
and Yes.


Honestly, I'm not too concerned. The US and soviets have been doing that for 30+ years. It gives China a nuclear bargaining chip, but it's not significantly better than what they previously had. I'm also not too concerned because of the direction defense technology is going: we are focusing a lot of resources on "shooting down" ICBMs before they would lose their payload faring and separate the multiple re-entry vehicles - which easily counters MIRV capabilities.

[SRG720]

Yes, that's right.. Shooting down ICBMs before the MIRVs separate. Curious I am, how close would these shoot down capabilities have to be to accomplish this? Say the black sea, Romania, Poland for example????

[Circuits]

I was surprised to learn our Minuteman missiles no longer are MIRV-capable)
They're still "capable" - just not loaded as such thanks to START II (technically, the Russian Duma never ratified it, so we don't really have to abide by it....).

SLBM is the pointy tip of the US nuclear triad. We still -sorta- have land ICBMS and aerial bombs, I guess. And them cruise missile things.

[HoneyBadger]

Yes, that's right.. Shooting down ICBMs before the MIRVs separate. Curious I am, how close would these shoot down capabilities have to be to accomplish this? Say the black sea, Romania, Poland for example????
Black sea, Romania, and Poland would do little to defend the Continental United States against a Chinese ICBM. The ICBM would travel over the Arctic and approach the US from the North, as this is the shortest distance from China to the US, especially since their targets are probably centralized on the East Coast (DC area).

That being said, there are several different means of missile defense in all three phases of flight (launch, midcourse, and re-entry). There aren't a lot of unclassified details (for good reason) but wikipedia is full of interesting programs and technologies.
Here's a good starting point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-Based_Midcourse_Defense

Also, it's worth noting that China has been working on MIRV tech since 1983 and has demonstrated MIRV tech as early as 2008, so this isn't really a first:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-31



They're still "capable" - just not loaded as such thanks to START II (technically, the Russian Duma never ratified it, so we don't really have to abide by it....).

SLBM is the pointy tip of the US nuclear triad. We still -sorta- have land ICBMS and aerial bombs, I guess. And them cruise missile things.
There is no "sorta" about it: We have 450 Minuteman-IIIs in tubes spread across Wyoming, North Dakota, and Montana, and our B-52s are just as capable as they've ever been. We also have B1s and B2s that can carry nukes, as well as an assortment of nuclear-armed cruise missiles and other air launched nuclear armnament that can be carried by planes as small as an F-16. We have lots of nuclear options. SLBMs, ICBMs and B-52s are just a few pieces of the puzzle. :)

An awesome side-note: Our Trident 2 SLBMs can carry up to 14 warheads (475kt each!), but currently, I believe they only carry 8 to comply with a treaty that was never ratified. [Shake]

[SRG720]

So why is the US placing ABM systems in e Europe?

Why on earth would China attack the us being completely outgunned? That makes no sense.

As far as the trident 2 goes.. I think ploughshares has a report on them currently outfitted with 4-5 warhead combos. As far as 14 warheads.. I think you mean the smaller, lighter 100kt w76 and not the bigger w88

[HoneyBadger]

So why is the US placing ABM systems in Europe? Those are posturing to protect "the west" (Europe) against SRBMs and MRBMs from Russia. Mostly just poking Putin in the eye.

Why on earth would China attack the us being completely outgunned? That makes no sense. They wouldn't. Another reason why I'm not worried about them testing MIRV tech.

As far as the trident 2 goes.. I think ploughshares has a report on them currently outfitted with 4-5 warhead combos. As far as 14 warheads.. I think you mean the smaller, lighter 100kt w76 and not the bigger w88. I took that info about the Trident 2 straight from Wikipedia. Wikipedia has been wrong before, but generally it's pretty accurate. [Dunno]

[SRG720]

OK because I'm just assuming a smaller yield 100 kt warhead aka w76 would be smaller and much lighter than a warhead like the w88 at 475kt. Also, I think the payload of the missile to the range of the missile is also an important factor. Ie the heavier the payload the lesser the maximum range.

[TFOGGER]

In Other News, China has posted the following High Resolution video of the test:


http://youtu.be/uJijGLGHRTE

[HoneyBadger]

OK because I'm just assuming a smaller yield 100 kt warhead aka w76 would be smaller and much lighter than a warhead like the w88 at 475kt. Also, I think the payload of the missile to the range of the missile is also an important factor. Ie the heavier the payload the lesser the maximum range.
Absolutely true. See below for the "official" numbers.

From Wikipedia:


Purpose: Seaborne Nuclear Deterrence[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II#cite_note-Parsch-1)
Unit Cost: US$ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_dollar) 37.3 million
Range: With full load 7,840 kilometres (4,230 nmi);
with reduced load approx. 7,000 mi (11,300 km) (exact is classified)[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II#cite_note-DEPARTMENT_OF_DEFENSE_APPROPRIATIONS_ACT_1995-6)
Maximum speed: Approximately 18,030 mph (29,020 km/h) (Mach 24)[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II#cite_note-Parsch-1)(terminal phase)
Guidance system: Inertial (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_navigation_system), with Star-sighting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_navigation).
CEP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_error_probable): Requirement: 90–120 metres (300–390 ft).[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II#cite_note-UGM-133-4) (Information from flight tests is classified.)
Warhead (in USA usage only): The Mark 5 MIRV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIRV) can carry up to 14 W88 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W88) (475 kt) warheads, while the Mark 4 MIRV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIRV) can also carry 14 W76 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W76) (100 kt) warheads.[17] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II#cite_note-designation-systems.net-17)[18] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II#cite_note-futura-dtp.dk-18) START I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/START_I) reduced this to eight. New START (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_START) provides for further reductions in deployed launch vehicles, limiting the number of Submarine-launched ballistic missiles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine-launched_ballistic_missile) (SLBM) to 288, and the number of deployed SLBM warheads to a total of 1,152. In 2014, another START Treaty will reduce the number of deployed SLBMs to 240.[19] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II#cite_note-19)



We currently have 14 Subs that carry Trident IIs... and they could be hiding in anyone's backyard. That is the just pure terrifying awesomeness. [Muaha]

[SRG720]

How much does a w88 warhead weigh? Esp considering the total throw weight of the missile

[HoneyBadger]

How much does a w88 warhead weigh? Esp considering the total throw weight of the missile
If you click on "W88" above (it's linked) it I'll take you to the page on Wikipedia. You can probably find the weight there.

[Aloha_Shooter]

OK because I'm just assuming a smaller yield 100 kt warhead aka w76 would be smaller and much lighter than a warhead like the w88 at 475kt. Also, I think the payload of the missile to the range of the missile is also an important factor. Ie the heavier the payload the lesser the maximum range.

Yep, it's all in the Ideal Rocket Equation:

http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/Images/rktpow.gif

Since you're holding the rocket type itself constant, the actual total thrust is constant. The final vertical velocity will therefore be roughly proportional with the mass differential between warheads so the rocket's range will also be affected by the increase or reduction in payload mass. The exact effect on the max range will also be affected by any additional engineering done to accommodate the change in warheads that increases or decreases the total mass of the payload complex.

[HoneyBadger]

I still have bad dreams about the IRE... Lol way too much time working that out by hand in school. [panic]

[Aloha_Shooter]

They let you use your hands?

[Joe_K]

How much does a w88 warhead weigh? Esp considering the total throw weight of the missile

Not enough.

[Gman]

Why on earth would China attack the us being completely outgunned? That makes no sense.
Which is what the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) strategy is all about.

[fly boy]

CAUTION TO ALL WHO ARE POSTING!!!!!


if you collect enough random ass information and pool it into 1 place, it potentially can become CLASSIFIED.

[Irving]

IBTC?

[HoneyBadger]

CAUTION TO ALL WHO ARE POSTING!!!!!


if you collect enough random ass information and pool it into 1 place, it potentially can become CLASSIFIED.
Everything I posted was from Wikipedia. I have no idea if any of that is classified. How would any of us here know? If you see something classified, PM TheGinsue and he'll clean it up.

[fly boy]

Everything I posted was from Wikipedia. I have no idea if any of that is classified. How would any of us here know? If you see something classified, PM TheGinsue and he'll clean it up.

That's the problem, unless you know what to look for, it's all jibberish. There are TONS of things online that as a separate entity, they are unclass, but when mixed with other particular information in the same venue, all becomes classified. Some nub at safety did that, and 1500 computers had to be wiped clean all because he sent out a safety poster before a 3-day weekend.

[HoneyBadger]

That's the problem, unless you know what to look for, it's all jibberish. There are TONS of things online that as a separate entity, they are unclass, but when mixed with other particular information in the same venue, all becomes classified. Some nub at safety did that, and 1500 computers had to be wiped clean all because he sent out a safety poster before a 3-day weekend.
So Wikipedia servers should be wiped?

[wyome]

So Wikipedia servers should be wiped?

It's for the children

[KevDen2005]

I do think it's funny when one agency will classify something and another agency will classify something completely different from the same information.