Will CHAAD save Guam from Nork missiles?

>>35029258
>the virgin ICBM
>the chad CHAAD

>>35029280

someone needs to make this

Does this THAAD shit even work? The only evidence is from the guys that sell this so I can't really trust the sources

>>35029403

If it didn't work, China wouldn't be so butthurt over it's deployment in Korea

>>35029439

China would bitch even if the US deployed a field kitchen to Korea at this point.

>>35029403
It's done well in testing against SRBM and MRBM test targets. It probably can't do much against ICBMs

>>35029258
from what we seen nork missiles need to be saved from themselves much before hitting guam

>>35029451

GMD is the only thing that's really been tested against ICBMs and even then it's probably 50% effective. Who knows when you throw countermeasures/decoys/chaff into the mix.

>>35029509
Norks don't have any of that.

>>35030114

I didn't say they did. I don't think anyone is actually worried about Norks nuking anyone but themselves. The autistic shit flinging is just more of the same, but sooner or later they need to be smacked.

>>35029258
>north korea will nuke Guam

Oh fuck it's last week again! Where's that lottery ticket.

On a serious note, you are foolish for thinking this will ever happen. Deadline passed yet again and nothing happened. Or is daddy Kim extending again. I swear, you fucks act like north Korea is your dad coming to pick you up on his weekend
>no no he's coming
>he's Gunna invade San Fran, I know it
>he's not staying at home drinking, he's just thinking up battleplans

File: IMG_0666.jpg (95KB, 479x455px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 479x455px

>>35029258
>CHAAD

>>35029509
>even then it's probably 50% effective.

Where are you getting this stuff anyway, I see you spout it in every single thread.

>>35030307

>http://breakingdefense.com/2017/05/missile-defense-hits-icbm-target-success-rate-now-50/

Google is hard for brainlets, I guess.

Is Aegis any good?

>>35030114
Probably, but we're not sure. They could possibly load a first-gen cheapo decoy along with their nuke onto the Hwasong 14 and still hit LA. There's also reason to believe the Hwasong 12 and 14 (the Guam and Denver range missiles, respectively) have a post-boost vehicle (an important step in decoy development).

>>35029451
>It probably can't do much against ICBMs
It's about as good as it gets for terminal defense.
>>35029509
GMD is midcourse. Totally different class of interceptor. Both could be used against ICBMs, but at different points in the trajectory. Layered defense, my dude.

File: chaad.png (151KB, 1158x624px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1158x624px

Well /k/?

>>35031303
It has a larger engagement window and better chance for success than THAAD.

>>35031573
A Mach 8 missile doesn't have much chance of hitting a Mach 20 reentry vehicle

>>35031672
Thanks, this made my day

File: nork defense.png (295KB, 1158x624px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1158x624px

>>35031574

>>35030301
topkek

File: CHAAD defeated.png (174KB, 1158x624px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1158x624px

>>35031574
They'll never catch me!