Has THAAD fundamentally changed MAD? Can the USA fire nuclear

>>33268495
THAAD THUNDUHCAWK?

>>33268495
THAAD really only works on short to intermediate range ballistic missiles. It was designed to counter SCUD missiles and not true ICBMs. THAAD is great for its intended niche, bit it is not capable of hitting Reentry Vehicles from ICBMs traveling at Mach 20+ whith decoys in tow.

File: tmp_7320-images.duckduckgo.com(15)1607851606.jpg (21KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 300x225px

Thad is in Asia now?

I hope he notified his parole officer...

no, THAAD doesn't at all change MAD against a country that is capable of just overwhelming them with bombs

It'll work against NK or China because it can be stationed close to the launch sites and take multiple shots

>>33268495

There's never been an anti-missile system that's been proven to work 100%, and even if 1 THAAD missile = 1 dead enemy missile, the enemy has thousands of missiles, and we don't have thousands of THAAD's.

>>33268495
usa has boomers in macau harbor ready to wipe peking off the map you yellow fucking slope

>>33268949
China only has ~200 nuclear warheads, so in this case China is fully contained

>>33268949
China only has a few hundred nuclear ICBM's they would be capable of launching at any one time though. Not to mention there are other American counter-missile missiles in the area like the standard missile series and SM-3 block 2a especially, and patriots.

>>33268495
Nope. It just means less warheads will hit you, which might mean you eventually think that the outcome is worth it. China is grandstanding by pretending this is a threat to China. It's not. There aren't enough deployed tubes for it to ruin China's deterrence policy. They know full well its biggest use is stopping North Korea's handful of missiles, and they don't have a problem with that. They're just raising a major stink in case by doing so they get thrown a bone to quiet them up.

>>33268949
We do. The numbers are classified but the mumber of missiles built is estimated on the thousands. I'm going to assume we have at least hundreds of launchers. What helps is they are in Gaum, South Korea have them and now Japan wants in on that sweet THAAD action.

>>33268949
>There's never been an anti-missile system that's been proven to work 100%

Using closely positioned SLBMs to detonate in atmosphere to destroy their nukes in flight followed up by our land based ICBMs to finish them off will do the trick.

>>33268495
Despite Chinese whining, THAAD is only effective against short ranged missiles in the terminal phase.

THAAD doesn't work reliably. It stops less than 50% of the missiles it's supposed to stop - and that's with missiles who's fly paths are known.

File: arctic_map.gif (147KB, 728x728px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 728x728px

Important to know that the THAAD system set up in South Korea would be useless against any northern China launches, which would send the missile flying over Siberia and lastly over the northern polar cap. It is a common misconception that people think it is wise to just fling rockets over the Pacific - it is not. It will hit the West Coast at the expense of flying over a large water mass to maybe get a shot at impacting a target - whereas with the northern polar cap flight line, the time of travel is cut down drastically and the missiles itself cover less ground.

See:
Red - Optimal
Blue & Pink - What people usually think

>>33269400
>flat earth shills
my dude...

>>33269420
>flat earth
>doesnt understand that going up and across is easier than crossing the entire width of the pacific

a u t i s m
u
t
i
s
m

>>33269420

You nigger, it's called a polar projection.

Speaking of BMD systems, how valid is this roasting of the SM-3?
http://www.g2mil.com/NMD_Fraud.htm

>>33268495
the only possible way to stop a icbm is to destroy it on ascension or while it reached orbit/sub orbit..

once it started the final burn nothing can stop them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLx9rABUWaQ

check this out this is a video from the moment of the vehicle starting to enter into the atmosphere and in 25 sec is already on the target..

THAAD has radars that can monitor more that just flying ICBMs, there is a reason why America did not want the Anti Ballistic Missile system that the Soviets were building in Cuba. Now it's just the other way around, and America is being helped by Fake News CNN to spread their narrative.

>>33269484
are you actually suggesting that an orbital missile will actually use the great cycle to hit a target on the other side of the world ?

and not going into orbit achieve 20-25 mach (which is the norm for them) and essentially start a ballisti trajectory? we are talking about 20 mins trip from russia to new york 30 mins trip from russia to sf and from china to sf is probably under 18 due to the rotation of earth and under 30 for new york..

>>33268495
>enemy has thousands of missiles
Which enemy is this? The zerg?

>>33269561
That's Russian '4202' which is probably powered by Project Avangard. That's different from normal reentry vehicles, so that doesn't count.

>>33269593
normal? thats a typica mirv re entry profile nothing different about it

>>33269484
Not by much. Earth isn't flat.

>>33269608
Its Object 4202 MaRV using Project Avangard non-Bus system release. Different from regular MIRV.

>>33269641
oh ok i didnt knew they actually had a working model already

paint me green and call me a pickle

>>33269641
>Object 4202
>They fly like cruise missile
For why?

>>33269561
No, you're a fucking retard.

The US and Russia at various points have both had terminal ICBM capable ABM systems.

>>33269692
please show me a system that was tested on the final leg of an icbm..

ABL did that and it failed horribly you simply dont understand that the sheer speed of the warheads is enough there is NO missile capable of intercepting ANYTHING once it starts the re entry

russia had an ambitious program with the polyus but it failed

>>33268540
Underrated post

>>33268495
The only way to completely negate a full intercontinental exchange is to have multiple armed spaceships in orbit shooting down the missiles. They may have to use cannons so that they can carry enough ammo to down them all.

THAAD can suffice for dealing with the remaining submarine launched missiles.

File: upandover.jpg (934KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

934KB, 1920x1080px

>>33269616
>>33269580
Different anon here - he's talking about taking the shortest route - he's saying that instead of having missiles fly east across the Pacific (~14,500km from mid-China to mid-US) the missiles would be flying up over Siberia, over the top of Alaska, down through Canada and striking the US (about ~11,500km from mid-China to mid-US).

There's no point in launching over the Pacific unless you're aiming for Hawaii.

Pic attached is Google Earth's representation.

>>33268495

Colossal BS.
Don't overestimate THAAD, while it IS a good ABM system, the fact that it relies solely on kinetic energy to destroy incoming missiles and not explosion makes it just as falible as any defence system.

Besides, saturation can overwhelm THAAD easily, just as any other ABM system.

It's good, but not perfect. In a real battle situation it can and WILL miss sometimes.

Let's hope we won't find out how effective it is.

>>33268960
Except, China will not attack with ICBMs, but with mass cruise missile attack that will overwhelm any ABM Systems, even THAAD.

THAAD can work 100% against North Korea, though I doubt it, but against China....might take some of the edge of an attack, but it will hurt, nonetheless.

THAAD can only intercept missiles when they launch, there is no way hitting a warhead going ten kilometers per second.

It hasnt eliminated MAD in any way

can someone post more cool videos and stuff of MIRVs. theyre cool.

>>33268992
[Citation needed]

China has maybe 30 ICBMs that can hit America.

This is a serious threat to China. China doesn't just flip its shit over fucking nothing.

>>33268495
Is MAD even applicable in a US/China nuclear war? They have fuck all warheads.

>>33269842
[Citation needed]

If this was true, then how is it useful against NK? Their missiles are in the northern part of their country.

>>33269884
You know you are talking about China here, right? The ones that flipped shit over nothing multiple times ovef the past century?

>>33269892
???

Do you even know the geography of Korean peninsula?

>>33269890
In a relative sense, yes. China could kill 30-50 million Americans, and that's something no one is willing to risk politically in the US.

In an absolute sense, no.

China has 200 warheads, and 30 ICBMs capable of hitting the lower 48.
America has 7000 and 400 ICBMs capable of hitting China. Not to mention submarine launched systems.

If THAAD takes out just a few Chinese ICBMs, and US based ABM and EW measures take out a few more because of the improved tracking provided by THAAD's radar, you can argue that China is relatively very weak in a hypothetical nuclear war.

Despite some of you retards claiming THAAD is meaningless to China, China is ruining its friendship with North Korea and South Korea for a reason. That reason is the threat caused by THAAD.

>>33269895
Care to tell me about these "multiple times in the last few centuries"?

>>33269897
Are you fucking retarded?
No missile on the earth can travel from South-Central South Korea to North-Central North Korea in less than 10 seconds.
That's 250 miles at least.

>>33269909
>these systems are capable of taking out ICBMs
Citation needed

>>33269913
>No missile on the earth can travel from South-Central South Korea to North-Central North Korea in less than 10 seconds.

Who are you quoting here? Certainly not me

>>33269917
http://thediplomat.com/2016/02/what-is-thaad-what-does-it-do-and-why-is-china-mad-about-it/
>China’s right to believe that THAAD surveillance data could be transferred to other BMD assets protecting [the continental United States (CONUS)]. Indeed, one of THAAD’s missions would be to strengthen U.S. defenses against the possibility of North Korean ballistic missile attack on CONUS. So it has to be able to transfer data to CONUS-based radars and interceptors. But the United States already has a THAAD battery deployed on Guam, two AN/TPY-2 radars deployed in Japan (at Shariki and Kyogamisaki), space-based assets, plus a range of ship-borne radars and larger land-based radars in other parts of the Pacific theatre. Would a THAAD deployment in South Korea change much? The short answer is that it could improve early tracking of some Chinese missiles, depending on thei

>>33269919
Look>>33269842

I misquoted the anon, but he is completely wrong.

>>33268565
You are wrong about it being designed to go after SCUDs. Obviously its Secret so I can't get into it but A-E are not the main concern of THAAD.

really quick here, missile intercept is not 100%, and doesn't need to be. there is a miss rate. the advantage in missile defense, is that it leads to the opponent devoting more warheads/target, meaning fewer overall targets. it's not a complete null effect, which is what a lot of you are trying to say..

>>33269939
No no no anon China is retarded and illogical and ruins its relationships with other nations for no inherent reason

Surely THAAD doesn't negatively effect China at all!

Look, this anon claims that here>>33269895

File: burgertime.jpg (193KB, 700x1025px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 700x1025px

>>33269892
Not him, but adding my $0.02

Think with NK is they mostly rely on their short-mid range theatre missiles to deliver anything down south as their long range gear is pretty wobbly.
Most of that is SCUD's and variants of them- the old SCUD can hit about mach-5 or so on its downward trajectory if my memory serves me right and most of their extended range stuff has a range of about 350-1000km or so- given that THAAD can hit about mach-8 or 9 (not 100% sure on its specs, bit after my time) they should be able to clean up those types of launches and attacks relatively easily as they're nowhere near the speed of a full ICBM coming in from orbit

>There are people in this thread who think that China is fucking over NK due to THAAD

Get the fuck out. Norks have fucked the Chinese over for decades and killed bunch of pro china officials.

>>33268729
I don't think you understand how THAAD works at all. *Hint* look up where these engagements take place i.e where the interceptor meets the TBM

>>33268980
Take a look at the capabilities of THAAD and Patriot and whether or not ICBMs can be engaged by either of those AD systems.

>>33269048
can't get into exact missile counts but the THAAD manual is open source, go look at it. Take a gander at how many THAAD BNs there are and then look at how many launchers are MTOE'd to each BN. Can't get into %'s of successful engagements as that is secret.

>>33269654
Look at the altitudes at which most cruise missiles fly, that's literally as much as I can say.

>>33269800
This guy has the right idea.

>>33269936
Don't believe everything you read in the media anon. All I can say.

>>33269696
Gazelle (USSR), Spartan (US), Sprint (US).

Each was (or is in the case of Gazelle) fitted with a nuclear warhead. While none were ever tested with nuclear weapons it's piss easy to tell if the interceptor got close enough to the attacking test missile to score a kill.

I stand by what I said, you're a fucking retard.

>>33269842
THAAD is a terminal ABM system. It is NOT a boost phase system.

>>33269952
But Korea and the US already have thousands of Patriot missiles, indigenous ABM's, and Israel missiles....

Why do they need a missile that can threaten China now?

Why did THAAD only start after the crazy conservative witch lady became the president of Korea?

Was there no threat before that?

>>33269953
China just stopped all coal shipments from North Korea. You are an idiot if you don't think THAAD increases the pressure on China to tame/punish NK.

NK has been fucking over China going back to 2011.

>>33269956
There's no evidence that THAAD can't engage terminal ICBMs.

>d-don't believe military experts working at the Naval War College!
>no believe me and CNN!

>>33269956
Oh, hey Oppenheimer.

Quick question, why did you leave your defence gig for a gig with a national security NGO?

>>33269979
There is no such thing as a missile system that can engage every type of threat.

*Hint* think about the speeds, altitudes and capabilties of the radar systems that are used by the specific AD system, and finally the capabilities of the type of interceptor that each AD system actually fires.

You have a secret clearance?

>>33269979
>There's no evidence I can't shoot down ICBMs with my dick
>B-b-believe me!

>>33269979
Also, there are alot of "military experts" that talk about shit they have no understanding about. But you are right, im just some random anon that has tactical and operational experience on both systems.

Actually I promise you, look at the open source stuff regarding THAAD capabilties. Obviously I'm not about to divulge top secret information so you will have to settle with the open source stuff.

>>33269986
You made the claim that THAAD can't touch ICBMs. That's unsubstantiated.

The difference between a terminal phase MRBM and ICBM is nominal at most.

>>33269990
>strawmanning this hard

I quoted a fucking credible source from a credible website on foreign policy. If you are claiming some anon without sources is more credible, believe whatever you want.

>>33269979
>Why do they need a missile that can threaten China now?

It can't, doesn't have the range. I'm not an expert on THAAD, but I'm familiar with the radar systems it uses as they sort of fell off the back of the SDI program.
THAAD itself poses no threat to China.
Its radar system though, does see quite well and would pick up anything launched in China quite easily. Bit like how SDI made the Soviet's go fucking apeshit on their military spending, the US is poking the chinks with the same stick to see how they cope and if anything is to go by, they're not taking the poking very well. But they where starting to expand and start messing around in the Sth China sea, annoying everyone there and this is just a little nudge from the US to let them know they don't have a completely open world to go play in.

>>33270005
Like I dunno what you want me to do.

Since whether THAAD can engage ICBMs is literally top secret neither I nor the "military experts" can divulge its TS capabilities. Its non-TS capabilities are literally open source anon.

>>33270001
Yeah and there are anons like you who claim they know everything without posting one fucking source backing them.

If you know of so many sources, post at least one.

As far as I can tell, this Military analyst>>33269936
is saying something that the US/Korea/China all acknowledge as the crux of the matter.
The USA is promising *wink* that they'll only use it on NK.
https://www.google.es/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/02/02/politics/us-defense-secretary-mattis-south-korea-trip/index.html
>(CNN) New US Defense Secretary James Mattis on Thursday defended the planned deployment of a missile defense system in South Korea, saying only North Korea had anything to fear from it.

>>33269979
Oh yes the coal shipments

Its not a big thing as China has rolled back the reliance on goal for years now. Its not surprising that theyre using it to pressure NK.

Burden of proof is on you to prove that China is pressuring China due to THAAD given China has been doing this long before talk about THAAD in korea popped up

>>33270017
I'm not affirming that it can or cannot. Please read my next post, we are firing back and forth at each other too fast lol.

>>33270015

I strongly recommend that you go and look up the open source documents pertaining to the THAAD interceptor and capabilities.

>>33270015
You are the one who claimed it can touch ICBMs first.

Now you're saying you can't back that claim.

Fuck.

>>33270013
And when China places their THAAD radar in Cuba, will the US government and media treat it the same way as it does now?

A lot of anons ITT (not you), are claiming the THAAD system is no threat to China and that China is just freaking out for no reason.

That's 100% plain bullshit. Thank you for acknowledging that.

>>33270005
>http://thediplomat.com/2016/02/what-is-thaad-what-does-it-do-and-why-is-china-mad-about-it/

Your source links to a LM page that doesn't say anything about ICBM capabilities.

THAAD has never been tested against an ICBM. The worst it's faced is a MRBM. There is a big different between the two in that MRBMs are travelling 2 to 3 times slower than an ICBM. This massively reduces the detect, decide, react, engagement window.

>>33268495

It all depends on what type of classified stuff we have. For example, the Pentagon built anti-satellite missiles fired from a F-15s:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASM-135_ASAT

Likewise, the US Navy's new laser exists courtesy of SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative) which was an anti-ballistic missile program. If the navy can scale it up 100x (plausible, if the ships have a large enough power source such as a nuclear reactor) then it becomes an anti-ballistic missile weapon.

It's mostly a problem of face. MAD has been the standard since ballistic missiles became a thing in the early 60s, nobody in the government wants to go back to the brinksmanship which preceded it. So, we will continue to see research into this area but no major money allocated to it until a major crisis happens forcing the gov't to do so.

>>33270031
Nah man, its TS. I literally can't say whether it can or cannot. All I am saying is that you shouldn't listen to these media reprots. That is literally the biggest hint I can give you.

I can back the claim since I was a Patriot operator have my THAAD identifier but I don't want to go to jail Mr FBI for disclosing TS information.

>>33270017
He's not an analyst, he's a journalist.

>>33270031
Also, I'm on staff duty right now so I'll be back in a couple hours after I get done with my checks to see if you are satisfied yet.

>>33270024
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-09/china-s-turn-to-deal-with-north-korea
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-03-08/china-proposes-north-korea-u-s-compromise-to-defuse-tensions
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2017-03-08/china-aims-to-diffuse-tensions-over-north-korea

You are asking me to find sources for something I didn't claim. Nonetheless I am posting sources linking THAAD to pressure by China on NK.

Hitting your opponent's missiles while in flight seems fundamentally risky. Why not just hit them before they can launch?

>>33270033
I never claimed that THAAD can intercept ICBMs.

Some anon here claimed it CANNOT intercept ICBMs, which is what started this whole argument.

>>33270046
Okay. I'm not sure where to go from here.

THAAD affects China's nuclear capability negatively, hence China's negative reaction.

>>33270047
[Citation needed]

>>33270064
Because that requires advance knowledge and information. Not to mention a mach 20 missile.

>>33270075
>Because that requires advance knowledge and information

It's a missile silo, it's hardly going to look like a Tim Hortons.

>>33270080
I'm not arguing with you.

The THAAD is terminal phase only, for logical reasons.

File: thad.jpg (102KB, 540x720px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 540x720px

>>33268495
Thad and his pocket pussy will destroy chyna

THAAD takes down NUCLEAR MISSLES
while YOU sit at home and PLINK WITH 22

File: b5d5d6e2cf5ce3a5757166104eca49e9.jpg (33KB, 564x423px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 564x423px

>>33268495
No, because MAD was always a combined arms matchup. ICBMs, MRBMs, long-range bombers, medium range bombers with SRBMs, and second-strike modes like pic related.

One system does not nulify all modes and angles of attack.

>>33270097
If we nuked them first it would. You just have to hit everything in one go. Those sneaky commies would never expect it.

>>33270031
>China is just freaking out for no reason.
Wouldn't say they're freaking out, they've had a good, easy run pushing around SEA nations, building missile platforms, airfields and stuff down there and squeezing some other little yellow balls.
Now, the US has just started squeezing China's little yellow balls and they're not at all happy about it- mostly because there's just fucking nothing they can do about it, so they're just going to yell and carry on for a while. They'll get over it in a few months, hold a grudge and be difficult, but I doubt there's any real deterioration to worry about.

>Has THAAD fundamentally changed MAD?

How much do you want to rely on them, especially since they've yet to try and shoot down an actual enemy missile? A single warhead getting past can easily be the greatest disaster the country has ever faced.

>>33270104
Except that's exactly what MAD puts an end to by having so many nukes, so well spread out, that you can't take out enough in your first strike that what remains and does get launched (minus malfunctions, shot down, etc) doesn't end your nation.

>>33269944
China can AFFORD to bitch without "ruining" relationships. That's called "diplomacy". Autsperger much?

>>33269953
>Norks have fucked the Chinese over for decades and killed bunch of pro china officials.

Citation needed. China has immense leverage over NK.

>>33269979
>thousands of Patriot missiles

Not thousands in the region and not all loaded in batteries where they'd be useful. By the time you reload the first strike would be over.

>>33269973
did you even read about what you post?

in what universe any of this were able to intercept ANYTHING on the last leg?

especially sprint that had a limitation of only 5 mach...

>>33270160
These are all terminal ICBM-rated ABM systems. Unlike everything else in this thread these actually are able to defeat ICBMs. I have no clue how you can even dispute this.

>>33269777
i know pretty well what he meant thats why i mentioned the great cycle

there is not enough time for this since from mach 20 to zero in g*t = 20*340, thus t = 680 seconds

also check this out..
https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk3/1984/8410/8410.PDF

this is a very old book talking about that..

>>33270186
spartan last time i checked was a missile created to intercept a missile while in ORBIT

sprint was a victim of its own design with no real data no even a test fire against a decoy

gazelle given that it is a russian up they will probably fire it up and hit the sun instead of the missile

>>33269578
Nah, america is being helped by the childbthreatening to nuke SK and the US every other week.

>>33270013
>and if anything is to go by,

go by look more like? Has anyone even?

>>33270203
I stand by what I said: you're retarded.

You could literally spend 30 seconds and discover you're wrong but instead you're on 4chan shitposting.

>>33269884
Artifical island build in disputed waters, sempai.

>>33270063
¨That has been a thing long before THAAD though

You know stuff about correlation and causation?

>>33270218
yeah instead of giving any actual data about their perfomance you just listed 3 systems 2 of them dont even exist anymore and for the russian one we dont even have enough data..

but ok despite that i asked to provide any REAL weapon that has actually stopped an icbm on its final leg and on that matter you clearly havent provided NOTHING

>>33270047
>He's not an analyst, he's a journalist.

The quote is attributed to Rod Lyon. He is most certainly an analyst

>>33270188
No idea what the great cycle is; tried Googling it and all I got was either spiritual mumbo jumbo or Milankovitch cycles, which have nothing to do with this.

Not enough time for what? It's as simple as launching North-North-East instead of East.

>>33270231
Yawn.

I provided the names of three systems publicly known to defeat ICBMs. It's now your job to disprove it. It's not my job to tell you every little detail you stupid fucking aspie.

>>33270075
Back from staff duty checks!

We know well in advance of any type of missile launch. Can't explain how since its TS but we can tell when the enemy is fueling its missiles whether it is liquid or solid fuel.

Im not even going to talk about engaging ICBMs anymore after the conversation with my chief I just had.

File: 9k81m s-300vm.jpg (182KB, 1415x898px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1415x898px

>>33268495
THAAD is effectively an S-300V analogue. Neither have anything to do with mad and are aimed at intercepting theatre ballistic missiles. THAAD seem to have a more strategic defence role to cover HQs and industry, while S-300V is a more in-field system to cover ground forces.

>>33269979
>There's no evidence that THAAD can't engage terminal ICBMs
There is no evidence is can.

>>33269938
From http://www.military-today.com/missiles/thaad.htm

The THAAD (or Theatre High Altitude Area Defense) missile system is intended to intercept short- and medium range ballistic missiles, such as the Scud.

That is what it was initially designed for, with limited ICBM capabiiity

>>33270840
>With no ICBM capability
Ftfy.

>>33268495
Only the United States and Russia have nuclear arsenals large enough to invoke MAD.

>>33271078
MAD is a doctrine that functions within two or more parties. It works for Russia and the US. It doesn't work between these two and the others. It does work between Pakis, Indians, Chinese, British or whoever the fuck has about equal nuclear arsenals.

>>33269578
The Soviets were never building an ABM system in Cuba. Just good old nuclear tipped ballistic missiles.

File: V1000_intercept_R12.jpg (66KB, 294x300px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 294x300px

>>33269578
>Anti Ballistic Missile system that the Soviets were building in Cuba
Kek. Why, I didn't know we managed to sneak some V-1000 there among those R-12 and R-14.

>>33269400
>Ukraine is Norway
Is this a side effect of this type of map or is something wrong with it

>>33271302
Well it also says "Greenland" under the island, not on it, so I think it's so to say by design.

>>33268495
THAAD should be renamed CHAD

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-11 at 10.01.17 AM.png (190KB, 536x305px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 536x305px

>>33269400
...............

>>33269420
>>33269616

>flat earth

Does Google Earth also shill for flat earth?

Are you this fucking retarded?

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-11 at 10.04.11 AM.png (133KB, 467x230px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 467x230px

>>33269580
>>33270188
Yes missiles follow great circles you fucking dumbass.

File: bretty good.gif (29KB, 482x800px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 482x800px

>>33271369
CHAD THAADERCOCK
Catapult Hardware Active Deployment Terminal High Altitude Area Defence Extended Range Command Operational Chain Key

Where is OPpenhiemer when you need him?
Realistically in a full scale nuclear exchange, 1k warheads? , how many decoy missles would be fired, if decoy missiles are a thing?

>>33268565
I build them...Yes, they are designed for ICBM. Designed to hit a ICBM before it MIRVS...or have the capability to intercept shorter range missiles in the endo-atmospheric region

>>33269048
I am not going to say how many we have made...but I will promise you, it is well under what you are picturing. THAAD just went into full production last year.