Posted on 04/22/2012 8:50:03 AM PDT by lbryce
They had some Shuttle tracking cameras at the Cape, but NASA gave them to the muslims on an outreach grant.
"We deliver your nuke in 60 minutes or it's free."
Our ICBM fleet has a maximum range of about 6,500 miles.
The only thing we considered that could reach around the world was the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System, FOBS, and that was stopped for both political and technological reasons.
The only ICBM that was remotely capable of FOBS, if it was heavily modified, was the old Titan II ICBM but the accuracy would have been so bad it would render the threat potential worthless.
"Fiscally, I can't really see the need for this, we already have such a system to deliver a bomb to anyplace on Earth within 30 minutes that has been available since the late 1950's, the ICBM. We even have SLBM's approaching what ICBM's can do, basically, this is a money waster. I'm for funding the military and making sure they have the tools we need but we need to make sure they have the stuff they need currently, which in realty, we are cutting where we should not right now."
Where to begin to answer your sincere but incorrect post:
1) Using a Minuteman to deliver a 500-lb bomb is like using a grenade launcher to kill a flea. Too much.
2) Cost -- Minuteman missiles are very expensive. DARPA is looking for an inexpensive way to deliver something awfully quickly.
3) Minuteman missiles technically do not cover the globe. They only cover the northern hemisphere, and primarily the former Soviet Union. If we wanted to drop a 500-lb bomb on a raghead in Somalia, don't think we could do it with a Minuteman.
4) Detectability and MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) -- there is no way we could convince the Russians that a Minuteman launch would not be a threat to them. They have satellites that will detect a Minuteman launch within seconds, like us, and their presumption was, and still is, that such a launch is potentially a mortal threat to their nation. A small launch vehicle from a non-Minuteman site, too small to carry a nuke, would remove this element of concern. Can't have the Russians going to their equivalent of Defcon 1 just because we decided to take out a bad guy.
5) The DARPA hypersonic craft is an essential complement to our wired military and instant global military awareness. But suppose we see the next Bin Laden leaving a tent, or hear his voice, in a country that is 3,000 miles from the nearest US base. It would take us 5-15 hours, while hurrying, to get a plane or cruise missile airborne. Cost a lot, too. With a launch capability like the DARPA craft, no problem. What use is it to see Bin Laden the moment he sticks his head outside the tent (via satellite), but have no ability to kill him for 8 hours?
With the DARPA device he's dead within 30 minutes NO MATTER WHERE THE BLOODY H-LL HE IS. In reality, this device would save us a boatload of money because we would kill bad guys sooner.
6) Accuracy -- I expect that the DARPA hypersonic delivery vehicle would have accuracy like today's guided ordnance. Couldn't get that out of a Minuteman. We can drop a smart bomb down a chimney but the Minuteman's accuracy is not nearly as good (it's classified).
Sorry for the long answer but I want to assure you that this device is sorely needed and will have an absolutely fantastic deterrent effect, if the bad guys know that there is nowhere on earth where they are safe.
OK, yuns convinced me. I guess if we had to, we could load this missile up on a B-52 and launch it to wherever it needs to go. Hopefully, we can get it to work plus I hope it avoids Bammy’s cuts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.