/k/ makes a missile defense system

>>34848349
Walk away. Those demands are impossible to meet.

Thousands of low earth orbit platforms.

>>34848349
>arrow 3

already exists

>>34848349
America already developed a decent ABM system called Sentinel and immediately scratched it. I assume simply digging the microfilms out of some dusty cabinet in the Pentagon and replacing all their electronics for modern components would be a good starting point.

Thousands of nuggets pointing at the sky

>>34848398
Cant intercept ballistic missiles.

>>34848349
Instead of actually making it can I just lie to the enemy and my superiors by way of a multi-million dollar media campaign? I figure I spend half of whatever budget I'm given bullshitting the world into thinking I actually made this thing and pocket the other half.

>>34848398
>>34848399
Can't defend against MIRVs

File: 1474376893064.jpg (90KB, 617x627px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 617x627px

>>34848403
>an exoatmospheric anti-ballistic missile,

try again, retard

>>34848404
Shut up Reagan, go back to being dead

>>34848406
Both Sentinel and the Arrow 3 would be able to defend against MIRV given high numbers, as the ICBM does not release reentry vehicles until its apogee.

ORBITAL LASER CANNON

>>34848406
just use a CWIS jeez

>>34848349

Even though OP is a faggot, but any sensible person would just try to figure out how to fill their own pockets with as much money as possible

>>34848349
Three layers.
1st layer will be X-ray laser vehicles mounted on boosters. These boosters will be based on the periphery of the US. When The US detects a launch, the first wave of boosters will be launched, deploy their laser vehicles which will then fire on the approaching missiles.

2nd layer are Hit-to-kill interceptors mounted on converted SLBMs. The Subs carrying these SLBMs will patrol in the oceans. Their KKVs will be smaller than standard KKVs because they will be designed to intercept the targets just after apogee because that's when the targets will be have the lowest speed. This is known as the TOP HAT engagement geometry. Given their small size, each SLBM could carry a dozen or more of these TOP HAT interceptors.

3rd layer is terminal defense. This will be provided by 100mm railgun emplacements near targets and along the coasts (to intercept SLBMs). The railgun projectile is the guided D2 projectile that was being tested in 1992. The D2 hypervelocity projectile is command guided into the intercept basket, where its own terminal guidance takes over. This system would have a high rate of fire and enable each attacking RV to have multiple shots taken.

Tying all this together would be several phased array radars and a battle management computer, similar in concept to the Navys AEGIS system. The Battle Management system would be data linked to all the layers in the defensive system (the lasers, the TOP HAT KKVs, the railgun systems), allowing them to operate semi-autonomously.

>>34848859
>spend trillions of dollars to counter primitive 1960's tech
I hope Raytheon or Lockheed has at least sent Kim Jong a gift basket. They'll make enough money to feed NK for a decade and still have plenty of change left for Christmas bonuses by the time this missile defense hysteria dies down.

>>34848955
Do me a favor. Point out in the OP where he said that the system should be geared towards just NK?

>>34848404
That's just what the Soviets did with regards to their missile count. They fudged the shit out of it.

File: G-020.png (372KB, 500x500px)

372KB, 500x500px

I got it.

Blast it with piss

>>34848968
It looks like OP left out "use common sense" in his post, my apologies.

>>34848996
I think its pretty clear that OP was looking for a hypothetocal discussion on peoples opinion on what it would take to build a missile defense shield that could defeat a strike by any existing threat.

Your request is granted. You are forgiven. Have a good day.

>>34849027
In this hypothetical scenario, you'd have to build this system without China or Russia preemptively annihilating you. Considering that Russia has repeatedly affirmed its intention of doing this, I'd say the only feasible hypothetical missile shield would have to limit its focus to NK.

>>34849071
Lol. You have this confused with a wargame or other opposed contest. This is a thread about what a system capable of stopping a missile strike would look like.
This is not a thread about the political effects of the construction of such a system would entail.
I thought that the focus of the thread would be clear given that the OP stated that money was no issue. If you are trying to make a stand for realistic political fallout in a thread where there is no budget, I think you are focused on the wrong thing.

>>34849071
>hypothetical scenario
This isnt a scenario my dude. Its a question. Do you go into other threads a spew your 'tism all over it if it doesnt take into account all possible effects? When people post about self defense, do you sperg if no one goes into the possible trial?

>>34849128
omg Oppenheimer senpai is back

>>34849128
>>34849147
Ok I get it guys, I guess we might as well just look into building a giant space curtain then since that's just as feasible and more effective than your idea.

>>34849181
>just as feasible and more effective than your idea

There you go, you are getting it.

So explain why your idea is more feasible and effective?

>>34849197
>giant impenetrable space curtain
Not much to say really. It'd be 100% effective and it's also entirely impossible to pay for, so it'd be just as feasible as yours.

>>34849240
>so it'd be just as feasible as yours.
So based on your understanding of science, a giant space curtain is just as possible as the plan I outlined?
Interesting.

>>34849240
So in terms of high grade autism, are you about 4.5 mega Chris-chans?

>>34848859

What success rate would you specify for each layer? Or would you count it as the whole system?

>>34848349
Glass the planet before they glass us!

>>34848859
Would this system be able to protect against modified SLBMs? That is, would it be able to stop a smaller SLBM with less thrust shot from right against the coast right against a major city? I'm not too familiar with the typical SLBM launch profile, but it sounds to me like 30 seconds of warning wouldn't be enough if you don't have radars on every emplacement.

Orbital rod from God system with millimeter accuracy

>>34849280
>What success rate would you specify for each layer? Or would you count it as the whole system?
Hard to say as its mostly notional.

X-ray Laser systems are probably the most effective on a system by system basis, meaning each individual laser has a higher sspk than the other systems.
The TOP HAT interceptors are probably next in terms of individual pk, followed by the D2 projectiles (as long as we are counting per projectile).

In terms of overall effectiveness, the D2 probably has the highest overall pk, with scores of projectiles for each target, followed by X-rays, then TOP HAT.

>>34849295
The railgun systems would have their own engagement radars and they would be the only system that would have a shot at intercepting a depressed trajectory SLBM. It's hard to say what the effectiveness would be. On one hand they wouldn't have much reaction time (10 seconds? This could be extended if you had EW blimps near the coasts pushing the radar horizon out further.) but the thread cloud would be a lot less of an issue, limiting the total number of possible targets for the system to engage.

Here is a paper on the D2 projectile, if anyone wants to read it.

www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA345781

>>34848349
Give nk money to not drop nukes.
You said budget was not an option so give them as much as kju requires

>>34849340
>This could be extended if you had EW blimps near the coasts pushing the radar horizon out further.
Maybe you could bring the SR-71 back to do high altitude loops.

>>34849262
I'm no scientist, but given unlimited money I'd definitely look for something that knocks the interception probability closer to nill than any air to air system would. For every added layer of missile defense there's always a more cost-effective countermeasure that can be strapped on an ICBM.

>>34849420
Yes, but this idea relies on the concept of Defense In Depth. The probability of 5 or more defense systems all failing catastrophically at once is very low.

Enough estes rocket motors to propel a nugget bayonet on a intercept course with the target.

>>34849420
>For every added layer of missile defense there's always a more cost-effective countermeasure that can be strapped on an ICBM.
This system overcomes this in two ways.
1) The X-ray system's engagement can be increased easily. In Project Excalibur, for example, each laser would be able to hit thousands of targets.
2) D2 projectiles are inexpensive (compared to systems like GBI) and can be fired in large numbers from their emplacements, which can be self contained and mobile.

This flips the traditional defense equation on his head, with the cost of intercepting an RV less than the cost of the booster+RV together.

>>34849434
Well we already have at least 3 layers in the Pacific and we're so worried they'll fail that we probably won't even risk attempting to intercept the bottle rockets NK tests on Guam.

>>34849481
Against ICBMs, we have one layer. The GBI.

>>34849481
What? We have THAAD, PAC-3 and SM-3, and all of those are capable against IRBMs. Where did you get the idea that we're afraid that they will fail from?

>>34848859
100mm railguns? We are talking about reentry vehicles that already under immense heat and pressure. I'd think a sufficiently dense 25mm projectile would be enough to fracture the heat shield and destroy the warhead.

>>34849513
The D2 Projectile is larger and uses a sabot. It needs to be bigger to accommodate the seeker and maneuvering system. See here:>>34849355

>>34849501
They're capable of intercepting a missile in a highly controlled test. Nothing I've read has expressed any confidence in our intercepting a hostile missile.

File: missle defence.webm (3MB, 640x266px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x266px

>>34848349
This. /thread

>>34849536
>FTT-18 (Flight Test THAAD 18): The FTT-18 test plan was announced to the public on 8 July 2017.[25] The first test of THAAD against an IRBM,[26] FTT-18 successfully occurred on 11 July 2017; an Alaska-based THAAD interceptor, launched from the Pacific Spaceport Complex – Alaska on Kodiak island, intercepted its target over Alaska airspace. The FTT-18 target simulated an intermediate-range ballistic missile. It was dropped from the cargo hold of a C-17 by parachute. The mock IRBM target was launched near Hawaii and aimed at Alaska.[27][28]

That sounds capable to me. Unless you're suggesting that the mock target was modified to increase radar signature or something.

This is all moot. Chinese new super missile use very fast fuel that makes speed very fast when going to space. Then uses new Chinese space program technology that uses non bus system where every reentry vehicle has its own engine to propel it and make calculations to hit its target. And then the MaRV itself uses Chinese technology that can jam any anti missile defense. And has super glider technology that can evade hit to kill projectiles.

>>34849549
Half of our interception tests since the 90's have been failures. Maybe THAAD is capable of changing this success rate but I wouldn't place too much faith in a single test.

File: JUST GIVE UP THE AGE OF THE MISSILE DEFENSE IS OVER BUY CHINESE PRODUCTS.png (118KB, 1691x746px)

118KB, 1691x746px

>>34849617

File: sparrow1.jpg (218KB, 690x1014px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 690x1014px

>>34849614
Thank you for your glorious service to the Motherland. You will be awarded the Great Cross of the Order of the Jade Sparrow.

File: Untitled.jpg (65KB, 1493x982px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 1493x982px

foolproof

>>34848349
Satellite based lazors

>>34848859
>X-ray laser vehicles
Oppenheimer I know you're pretty well respected but you do know how those things work, right? X-ray lasers never made it off the drawing board because they need to be pumped with a god damn megaton nuke.

>>34849704
Working on it™

>>34849704
I know.
Whats the problem?

>>34849733
Not him, but frying everyone's satellites and EMPing yourself.

>>34849774
Just use X-37 to replace the missing satellites

>>34849733
I guess if you're willing to work with the cost, complexity, and blowing hydrogen bombs in low orbit there's nothing objectively wrong with it. But those are all good reasons to not do it.

File: This nigga just said what?.jpg (26KB, 429x410px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 429x410px

>>34849733
>X-ray lasers never made it off the drawing board because they need to be pumped with a god damn megaton nuke.
>I know.
>Whats the problem?

>>34848859
>rocket boosted lasers
Unless you know about tech the rest of us don't those would have to be nuclear-pumped, and I think you know how expensive that would be.

>using SSBNs for ABM duty
Now you're not only burning money, you're actively reducing the nation's nuclear capabilities.

>100mm railguns literally everywhere
Again, costs. You'd need easily a 100 emplacements to cover just the coastline, along with all the inland sites to protect potential targets.

10/10 for ingenuity, 1/10 for being a literally multi-trillion dollar program.

File: 5000 hours.png (18KB, 652x886px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 652x886px

>>34849307
That's useless for missile interception. For space based options, two real life options are a satellite that blows itself up, and a satellite that shoots lasers.

The rods from god concept is also useless. The satellites would need to have highly elliptical orbits, so they can spend most of their time over the USSR. This also makes them very easy to see and shoot down. There's no reason for a satellite to spend 90% of its orbit over your country like that unless it's a spy sat or a RFG sat.

>>34849704
To be clear, I am using 'vehicles' in the sense of a platform carrying the explosive, lasing material, target tracking systems, data links, etc.

>>34849774
The burst altitude of the Laser weapon, as well as its likely deployment over oceans or polar regions, there is not likely to be much vulnerable equipment in the line of sight of the explosion.


>>34849786
>cost, complexity,
Cost isn't an issue. And detonating a nuclear weapon in space is not overly complex. The rest of it would be, but then again, cost is no object.

>>34849817
>those would have to be nuclear-pumped,
Correct.

>and I think you know how expensive that would be.
Cost is not a factor.


>Now you're not only burning money,
Cost is not a factor.

>you're actively reducing the nation's nuclear capabilities.
If the system works you wont need that many, and if it really bothers you, we can build more SSBNs, because cost is not a factor.


>Again, costs.
Are not a factor.


Please read the OP. Specifically the part where he says "Assume budget is not an object "

Thanks.

>>34849817
>Cost

>Must have a 100% success rate
>budget is not an object

It's like you think this is supposed to be realistic

I'm personally all for filling low earth orbit with so many kill vehicles that astronauts could just jump from one to another for fun

>>34849458
Project Excaliber was eventually concluded to be unable to produce either the claimed laser power or the accuracy necessary to be viable.

>>34849852
Excalibur is an example of the type of weapon. The X-ray laser in the system is one of a novel design using our unlimited budget.
None of the issues were found to be insurmountable in Excalibur, just beyond the abilities of the technology at the time and more importantly the budget.

Which, again, we don't have one in this thread.

>>34848859
Since cost is not an option, why not converted airliners to supplement the SSBNs? Create one or more dummy corporations that for one reason or another fly cargo to different places. But instead of cargo, they have either air launched ABMs or systems like the YAL-1 to try and hit the weapons in boost phase?

>>34849869
That still ignores the biggest problem with detonating nukes in space, the ionized particle blanket it creates that has severely reduces the ability to target any other RVs.

>>34849924
If there is a technical issue that grounds the fleet for inspection you would lose coverage. A crash or mishap would be a worry as well.

Your idea does bring up the possibility of long endurance, high altitude UAVs with sensors and possible weapons (depending on the weight) that would be deployed to fill in gaps or during a crisis. That would be interesting.

>>34849953
Destroying a nuke does not necessarily detonate it.

>>34849954
Don't lie, it's just because you have a sub boner.

>>34849953
The distances from the laser deployment area to the battle management sensors should mitigate this, as well as the fact that the other engagements would happen on the other side of region of interference. PESA radars have increased resistance to this effect as well.
I do not think the effect will be as pronounced as you think.


>>34849977
Maybe...

>>34849962
He's talking about the X-ray lasers.

>>34849962
The nuclear explosion would be coming from megaton weapon powering the lasers

>>34849992
*AESA. Sorry.

>>34849992
>Maybe...
What, are ballistic missiles not good enough?

>>34849954
I'm imagining hundreds of stealth drones, each one with a single Sprint onboard.

>>34849996
I see. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

>>34848349
>Dust off old PROJECT THOR plans.
>Update with modern materials and tech
>Institute project
>Preemptive strike every known and suspected nuke silo, nuke-platform vehicle and nuke production facility when complete

>>34849458
Yo Opp, why HTK for your TOPHAT interceptor?
HTK is freaking hard to do, why not 0.3-0.5kt enhanced prompt radiation weps?
Or similar, but in a Casaba configuration to negate the terminal guidance problems?
I am assuming political costs of development are not a factor.

File: SOLG.jpg (1MB, 1800x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1800x2000px

SOLG or Strategic Orbital Linear Gun

>Giant fucking rail gun in space designed with the purpose of firing on missile silos
>In space so good luck infiltrating it (unless you're belkan)
>You're now able to do a preemptive strike on every enemy missile silo

>>34849501
IRBM =/= ICBM, quite a different ball game.

>>34850075
He was talking about the Guam test specifically.

File: DeathStarUSA.jpg (736KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

736KB, 1024x1024px

>>34848349
>Over 9000 Hours In Ms Paint

Now give me billions DARPA

File: 1502338543393.gif (901KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

901KB, 500x281px

>>34849733

>>34850073
>Railgun fires
>Immediately knocks self out of current orbit
>Fires again
>Starts tumbling
>Fires third time
>Shot goes off target and hits command center in Belka
>SOLG's altered orbit grazes atmosphere and it falls apart

Ace Combat is fun, but strapping a rail gun on the SOLG was pretty stupid. And that final mission where a space station survives reentry and comes in on the slowest ballistic arc imaginable was almost as bad as the Arkbird.

>>34850098
>Russia sees America just finished Death Star
>Putin calls up old KGB pals
>Send team to Chechnya
>Give local kababs money and support
>Infiltrate SpaceX launch because "Muh Diversity"
>Hijack Dragon and fly to space
>Aloha Snackbar into exposed exhaust vent
>Next morning Putin opens paper to see US invaded Chechnya

>>34848349
>quick response air bases all over the ocean
>fire off a one man jet with no capabilities other than catching a missile
>kamikaze for the greater good of America

File: Hercs.jpg (226KB, 1151x864px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 1151x864px

each potential target has a super hercules interceptor missile that contains multiple nuclear warheads
when an launch is detected the missiles fly up into space and detonate in a radial pattern
harmlessly destroying the incoming warheads

>>34848395
This

>>34850009
>ywn see a swarm of Sprints on the horizon
Life truly is suffering

>>34848349
Easy. Pre-emptively nuke everyone whios not America. Best Defense is a great Offense.

>>34848349
A bunch of /k/ommandos firing nuggets in the general direction of the missile until it falls apart.

>>34850225
Have fun stopping the second launch when you can't see it through the ionized particles

>>34848859

Would it be acceptable to swap SSBNs for the San Antonio class BMD concept, or are they too vulnerable?

>>34848349
Build our own Stone Hedge rail gun batteries.
One in every state, each with multiple radars and a super computer for very precise targeting calculations.

>>34848996
He said cost is no object, so if anything, he was expressly forbidding the use of common sense.