03-21-2003, 04:17 AM
I prefer 101 proof Wild Turkey bourbon whiskey. :)
As to the proof of 'breach,' it is already available to anyone who looks with due care on the past 12 years, and the evidence reported today that it was actually Scuds, which were supposed to be turned over, versus Frogs and other shorter range tactical ballistic missiles. The very fact of non cooperation was breach, for what it is worth. The last 12 years has been rife with that.
Scuds proven? Maybe. The methods used to detect and track Scud launches, which grew from ICBM detect and track methods, are pretty reliable. It may take a day or so for the analysts to look hard at the date, cull the false alarms from the valid info, some from sattelites, and trace the tracks back to their launching point. That sort of data would show if the missiles launched were beyond the shorter range missiles, and thus have to be Scud or other longer range missiles that were to be turned over ages ago . . .
On the other hand, if 'Scuds' were fired from within the range of the shorter range missiles, then some better analysis would be needed to compare speeds and other such telemtery to try and discriminate between missile types. It is doable, though I would venture to say not with 100% fidelity on every single launch, as the quality of each set of data might vary with sattelite timing and other such normal 'friction.'
In short, the news guys may have been a bit premature, as might the public affairs types feeding them, in announcing that it was actually Scuds that launched today and were felled by the Patriot missiles.
For Pete, just in the old FYI mode:
Patriot Pac II and Pac III were expressly developed with TBM defense in mind. The Army was not all that happy with how the Scuds actually performed, versus some of the stuff we may have been fed, nor were the various allies who were buying them. Pac II and Pac III competed with and displaced THAAD, (as well as the Navy SM-2 Block IVA and subsequent missiles) which was a noble attempt to build a TBM class weapon from the ground up that ran into both technical and budgetary problems. Last I heard, THAAD was dying a painful death on the cutting room floor of the BMDO: Balistic Missile Defense Office. I might be a bit out of date on that one, though.
Pac III was to have taken the old blast frag warhead and replaced it with a Hit To Kill / kinetic-kill style warhead. It was to harness the better processing power becoming available to achieve that tougher Pk spec. Perhaps this effort over the past decade or so has paid off.
As to the proof of 'breach,' it is already available to anyone who looks with due care on the past 12 years, and the evidence reported today that it was actually Scuds, which were supposed to be turned over, versus Frogs and other shorter range tactical ballistic missiles. The very fact of non cooperation was breach, for what it is worth. The last 12 years has been rife with that.
Scuds proven? Maybe. The methods used to detect and track Scud launches, which grew from ICBM detect and track methods, are pretty reliable. It may take a day or so for the analysts to look hard at the date, cull the false alarms from the valid info, some from sattelites, and trace the tracks back to their launching point. That sort of data would show if the missiles launched were beyond the shorter range missiles, and thus have to be Scud or other longer range missiles that were to be turned over ages ago . . .
On the other hand, if 'Scuds' were fired from within the range of the shorter range missiles, then some better analysis would be needed to compare speeds and other such telemtery to try and discriminate between missile types. It is doable, though I would venture to say not with 100% fidelity on every single launch, as the quality of each set of data might vary with sattelite timing and other such normal 'friction.'
In short, the news guys may have been a bit premature, as might the public affairs types feeding them, in announcing that it was actually Scuds that launched today and were felled by the Patriot missiles.
For Pete, just in the old FYI mode:
Patriot Pac II and Pac III were expressly developed with TBM defense in mind. The Army was not all that happy with how the Scuds actually performed, versus some of the stuff we may have been fed, nor were the various allies who were buying them. Pac II and Pac III competed with and displaced THAAD, (as well as the Navy SM-2 Block IVA and subsequent missiles) which was a noble attempt to build a TBM class weapon from the ground up that ran into both technical and budgetary problems. Last I heard, THAAD was dying a painful death on the cutting room floor of the BMDO: Balistic Missile Defense Office. I might be a bit out of date on that one, though.
Pac III was to have taken the old blast frag warhead and replaced it with a Hit To Kill / kinetic-kill style warhead. It was to harness the better processing power becoming available to achieve that tougher Pk spec. Perhaps this effort over the past decade or so has paid off.
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete