MarmiteLover123 [comrade/them, comrade/them]

I looove Marmite!

Upvote ≠ Endorsement

  • 0 Posts
  • 357 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: September 19th, 2022

help-circle



  • Also any military expansion will most definitely be buying more US or Israeli military equipment under the instruction of the US. Does Europe have a domestic equivalent to the F-35 fighter jet, and the THAAD, AEGIS Ashore, Arrow, Patriot PAC 3 air defence systems? The answer is no, which is why Germany just bought Arrow 3 air defence (midcourse ballistic missile interception) batteries from Israel last year. Europe has managed to deliver just one SAMP/T air defence battery to Ukraine in the entire war, so domestic production is just not there. The 80 or so cold war era F-16AM block 15s Ukraine are getting from Europe can only be delivered because of a US support package, and US replacements (F-35s) being sent over to the European countries giving up these F-16s. See Macron saying Europe gave Ukraine all it could give. Also, Europe is definitely not buying the Chinese equivalents to those systems, that would not be allowed. These are all critical capabilities in a hypothetical NATO-Russia war.






  • In a Chinese military context, China needs to make ships for power projection, which is why they’ve heavily invested in shipbuilding and building new aircraft carriers. Even outside of an explicitly military context, these weapons have very useful area denial capabilities against cargo ships in say a Naval blockade (as shown by Yemen). They also offer the capability to penetrate highly defended enemy airspace to carry out strikes. The main problem with ballistic missiles in a conventional context is cost and accuracy, but those problems are being minimised with modern technology. The United States and China (and Russia to an extent) have far more sophisticated guidance technology than say Iran, whose solution to the accuracy issue experienced during previous operations, is to put electro optics (likely an infrared camera) on their missiles.




  • In another comment in the new proposed US military budget, US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth has released a memorandum. What’s very interesting is that this is the literal first bullet point in the memo:

    To accelerate delivery of war winning capabilities, the Secretary of the Army is directed to:

    • Field long-range missiles capable of striking moving land and maritime targets by 2027.

    As I’ve commented previously when first viewing the GOP military budget proposal the US Army wants the latest ballistic missile technology, including the area denial capabilities of anti ship variants, for themselves after witnessing it’s proliferation and the Navy being on the targeted end of this technology.

    What’s also interesting is that the latest fear mongering report from the US DoDs Defense Intelligence Agency, classes Maneuverable Re-entry Vehicle (MaRV) equipped ballistic missiles, and unibody ballistic missiles that can perform similar maneuvers to MaRV equipped missiles (like Iskander-1000) as hypersonic weapons, under the subcategory “aeroballistic missiles”.

    With this in mind, it’s clear that the US military fears a “missile gap” and wants to build their own ballistic missiles, and is making it one of their highest priority topics to address, literally the first bullet point in Hegseth’s memorandum. Pershing-III is coming soon I guess, by 2027 according to whiskeyleaks Hegseth

    As for why the focus globally is on these aeroballistic missiles, my comment on the previous military budget proposal offers some explanation.








  • Yeah you’d have to perform a very low altitude glide (in the context of ballistic missiles) to get the camera a good enough image, so glide distance will be in the tens of kilometres due to aerodynamic drag. Tens of kilometres of glide distance should be enough to get a cloud free image eventually in most conditions, with the exception of say cirrostratus clouds. I decided to look through the book “Lighting Bolts - First MaRV”, and this is what it said about the heat shield and terminal guidance/glide phase on the Pershing-II :

    The Goodyear Aerospace Company (RADar Area Guidance or RADAG) system was selected for terminal navigation. It scanned the target area with J-band (i.e.: 10 GHz to 20 GHz) frequency radar, compared the image with a pre-stored radar map, updated the inertial position and permitted the MARV to steer to the target.

    Estimates suggest the heat shield was 1/8 inch-thick aluminum covered by 3/8 inch-thick carbon-phenolic composite and weighed approximately 650 pounds/295 kilograms. The drag coefficient was about (CD-0.2), base area of (A=4.91 square feet), and weight of (W-1,400 pounds), to give a ballistic coefficient of (W/CDA=1,425 pounds per square foot). This was sufficiently high to assure a Mach 8 velocity, ballistic reentry trajectory, but without overly stressing the nose tip or heatshield. The vehicle retained sufficient energy below 50,000 feet/15,240 meter altitude to perform a 25-g pullout maneuver and 30-mile/48 kilometer range extension (during which RADAG performed its map-matching accuracy update), or it could perform a high-g evasion maneuver.

    So with the electro optically guided Iranian ballistic missiles, we’re likely looking at something very similar, but with electro optics instead of radar. A low altitude glide, the electro optical sensor performs it’s scan during this time, comparing it to a stored image, provides an accuracy update and steers the missile towards the target. Iran also uses this system for anti ship ballistic missiles.