World Affairs Board - View Single Post - TOPOL-M invincible?

urmomma158 · 06-06-2006, 11:59 AM

Quote:

The program, overseen by the Missile Defense Agency and the Army Space and Missile Defense Technical Center, is portrayed as a cost-effective way to take multiple shots at a single incoming missile equipped with multiple decoys or warheads. One interceptor equipped with a bevy of MKVs could do the job of several interceptors each equipped with one regular-sized kill vehicle. Graham said the program's goal is for the MKVs used on one interceptor to cost as much as, or less than, one GMD EKV.

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/sea...2Fkil01094.xml

I'd like to see the Topol M dodge a bunch of small soda can size interceptors.MIRVS'made ICBMs difficult to stop and it's agreat idea for missile defense too.

Quote:

HUNTSVILLE, Ala. - U.S. missile defense developers have discovered that the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, designed to destroy short- and medium-range ballistic missiles in their final stages of flight, will also be capable of shooting down longer-range targets.

At the seventh annual space and missile defense conference here, Army Col. Charles Driessnack, THAAD's program manager, said in a speech late Aug. 18 and at a press briefing Aug. 19 that recent tests of the system's Raytheon-built radar have shown that THAAD will have a "residual" capability against intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

"We weren't planning to have the ICBM capability," but the radar is "outperforming what we thought it was supposed to do," Driessnack said.

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/sea...2Ftha08204.xml

THAAD can intercept ICBM's. if you read the article there's a hint in there suggesting future variants will have longer ranges.

Quote:

To penetrate a layered (exoatmospheric and terminal) defense, ABRES focused on a maneuvering reentry vehicle. This vehicle would be coupled with an early-reentry decoy, which would remain viable down to the altitude at which the reentry vehicle could maneuver. Researchers determined that the extremely high lateral g forces that the maneuvering reentry vehicle could pull would be more than sufficient to evade the terminal interceptors.
Minuteman III launch

The Minuteman II had a much longer range than its predecessor and was the first U.S. ICBM to use decoys in its warhead section. (U.S. Air Force)

The first maneuvering vehicles tested were large flap-based units, three of which were successfully flight-tested over the Pacific in the late 1960s. Vehicles that used reaction jets to maneuver were also considered, but design studies and wind tunnel data indicated that the simpler flap arrangement could perform all the maneuvers required. Three full-scale flap-based vehicles were flown over the Pacific Ocean in 1973–1974, followed by three successful preprototype flight tests of the Advanced Maneuvering Reentry Vehicle in 1981. The vehicle was declared operational for the Minuteman III or the MX.

The success of the Advanced Maneuvering Reentry Vehicle was made possible in part by its innovative guidance system, a small nuclear-hardened inertial platform that could achieve the same accuracy as a ballistic reentry vehicle even after experiencing high-level accelerations. Eight years had gone into the development of this guidance platform, and its introduction was highly significant. Whereas guidance systems for ballistic missiles can weigh well over 100 kilograms and only have to withstand acceleration up to 10 g's, the guidance system for the Advanced Maneuvering Reentry Vehicle could weigh no more than 13–18 kilograms and had to retain accuracy after experiencing g forces more than an order of magnitude higher. The early design employed small gyros and accelerometers in a small, hardened, gimbaled platform, which was immersed in a liquid to relieve the g force loads; however, this arrangement generated thermodynamic and chemical interactions among the electronics, instruments, and liquid. These problems were eventually resolved, and the small hardened inertial platform achieved its performance goals, providing a model for future development.

http://www.aero.org/publications/cro...er2003/02.html

US MARV tested in the 80's.^^^^^The TopolM is nowhere near revolutionary. Besides they don't have too many TopolM 's.