Patriot missles vs nukes

[Shrykull]

Would a patriot missle or laser work against a nuclear ICBM (and how fast do ICBM's travel?) I'm pretty sure they can both destroy one but isn't there something where a nuclear missle or nuclear submarine will not cause a nuclear explosion if it is destroyed (like in Broken arrow "I'm gonna drop a few grenades in it") that the reaction is triggered in a specific way so you wouldn't have to worry about it releasing a radioactive cloud, etc?

[Mr Bean]

I can answear the second part, A Skin on Skin Contact kill would certanly prevent the Nuke from Going off baring freke chance as Nukes are Delicate things the core must be compressed just so and a 100 pound Warhead going off near it will pretty much ruin any chance for a nice controled dentonate one needs for anything over half a kiloton in power

[Knife]

Would a patriot missle or laser work against a nuclear ICBM (and how fast do ICBM's travel?) I'm pretty sure they can both destroy one but isn't there something where a nuclear missle or nuclear submarine will not cause a nuclear explosion if it is destroyed (like in Broken arrow "I'm gonna drop a few grenades in it") that the reaction is triggered in a specific way so you wouldn't have to worry about it releasing a radioactive cloud, etc?

If a patriot missile could counter a ICBM, I don't think we would still be wasting billions on SDI. The phrase "hitting a bullit with another bullit" seems to come to mind for a patriot to hit a ICBM.

As far as setting it off, a nuke needs a complex set of explosive surrounding it to go off at the exact same time to compress the core to start a chain reaction. If you damage either the detonators, the near perfect set up of the explosives so the core does not compress uniformily or gets squirted out one of the sides, then the nuke won't go off. Also there are numerous electronics that can be damaged in the explosion that could alter the proper functioning of the weapon.

Keeping in mind that it is a nuke, and do you really want to risk setting it off early?

[Darth Wong]

It is extremely doubtful that massive damage to a nuclear weapon would cause it to work properly and prematurely.

However, it would convert it into an impromptu dirty bomb, so you'd want to take it out very far from the target or any populated areas.

[Sea Skimmer]

PAC-3 lacks the performance to handle anything over a MRBM. Modern IRBM's likely could not be hit and ICBM's are impossible, THAAD will make IRBM's a sure thing but will not be effective against ICBM V's . 1950's ICBM's where there sub sonic RV's are another story but none are left now. A laser of sufficient power and with sufficiently precise targeting could destroy an ICBM RV, however current lasers wont cut it, though a planned airborne laser will be able to hit the boosters as they rise.

A hit with anything significant that’s solid will destroy a RV. The Heat shield stops heat and deflects away air, not metle, and nuclear warheads are quite delicate.

As for the danger from the radioactivity. There is no risk of a detonation. The fallout with be minimal with only a couple pounds of U-235 or Plutonium involved. Both emit alpha partials until they detonate in a nuclear blast. These can't penetrate your skin but are a risk if ingested through food.

In the case of a physically kill its going to be in a couple big pieces and some dust. This might cover few squares in very low-level contamination. In the case of a laser hit, it’s the same deal only on a smaller scale, less then one square mile affected.

hat would happen on the ground would be similar to the incident at and over Palomares Spain in 1966. On January 17 a B-52 with four B-28 Thermonuclear bombs collided with its tanker while refueling, resulting in both aircraft exploding.

One bomb landed in the water and was found three months later intact. Recovery was a real pain. Another bomb hit land but was fairly intact, all of the bombs had parachutes which slowed there decent somewhat.

Two others smashed open on impact. The major parts of both where located and recovered with some difficulty. The worst of the alpha particle contaminated soil was dug up and placed in 4,500 normal steel 55 gallon barrels. Really sheets of paper would work for containing alpha partials. These where buried in the United States.

The rest of the affected area had the earth turned over and then heavily irrigated, washing the partials off the surface and underground. It was not thought safe to grow food on these areas for several years but by 1970 elevated alpha levels could barely be detected and today you'd never be able to tell. Alpha partials are only a threat if ingested through food. They can even penetrate your skin.

Random note, here is a picture of the casing of the bomb that landed in the ocean. Along with the casing of the bomb that hit land but did not burst it's on display at the National Atomic Museum.

[Shrykull]

If a patriot missile could counter a ICBM, I don't think we would still be wasting billions on SDI. The phrase "hitting a bullit with another bullit" seems to come to mind for a patriot to hit a ICBM.

See the other post in this forum about a laser hitting an artillery shell
and what's the size difference between a SCUD and an ICBM, I believe there isn't much difference in size. SCUD's were hit in the gulf war, you knew that didn't you?

Keeping in mind that it is a nuke, and do you really want to risk setting it off early?

Um, yes, I do, it's better than the alternative of it hitting it's target and exploding there.

[Sea Skimmer]

See the other post in this forum about a laser hitting an artillery shell
and what's the size difference between a SCUD and an ICBM, I believe there isn't much difference in size. SCUD's were hit in the gulf war, you knew that didn't you?

The ability to hit an empty fuel tank coming in at mach 3 doesn’t translate into the ability to hit a small trashcan at mach 15.

However PAC-3 now does have the ability to hit to kill SCUD type warhead RV's, shattering them into ineffective peices. PAC-2 went for the biggest target, the fuel tank and filled it with fragments.

Against an ICBM warhead Patriot has nil cross range capability and to long of an engament time. Basically the warhead has to be coming directly at the patriot launcher, and even then it will explode while the SAM is still in the boost phase

[Vympel]

The Patriot PAC-2 used in the Gulf War had dismal performance. PAC-3 was an upgrade to deal with such ballistic missile threats. The ABM capability of the PAC-3 is also found in the S-300VM.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Plutonium or enriched uranium fallout from a warhead pulverized at suborbital altitude would produce negligible radiation in comparison to current radiation levels. This is why protests about the launch of the Cassini spacecraft were stupid wastes of time.

[Master of Ossus]

The Patriot was not designed to counter ICBM attacks. It is only marginally effective against SCUD missiles, and similar, so I don't think it would be a reasonable defense against a large nuclear attack, even if it was set up to try to defend a specific city or area from an impending nuclear strike. Add to that the radiation that would inevitably be released from the weapon, anyway, and I cannot call the Patriot a reasonable defense.

[The Dark]

The most important thing to remember is that Patriot was not designed as an anti-missile missile. It was a SAM designed to take out aircraft that was hastily modified to fire on missiles. While the current generation of Patriot (PAC-3) has been upgraded to handle tactical ballistic missiles such as the Scud, it is not capable of readily intercepting strategic ballistic missiles. THAAD (which I believe is Theater High-Altitude Aerial Defense, though that sound wrong now that I've written it) is designed to project a small-radius safe zone against missiles to protect vital targets. There is another project being worked on with greater capability, though I don't recall its name.

[Wicked Pilot]

The Patriot missile and the airborne lasers are both tactical weapons. They are inappropiate against strategic missiles.

The Patriot missile is designed to defend only a small area like an airfield. They hit imcoming warheads, destroying them and knocking the debris away from the airfield and into isolated areas outside of it. Against a city, this isn't that effective. Because a city is much larger, debris will still rain down within a populated area. The NBC material may get out and cause havoc.

As to the new airborne laser, it has to be in the same theatre as the missile launch in order to be effective. It is designed to shoot down missiles in the launch phase, sending the weapon back down to earth on top of the enemy. It too is useless against ICBMs, as they are usually stationed deep within enemy terratory.

[Pu-239]

Alpha partials are only a threat if ingested through food. They can even penetrate your skin.

Change can to can't. Also I think they can also be a hazard if particles of radioactive material is inhaled

[Crown]

Israel has developed it's own form of Patriot. The Arrow. Wonder why they would go with and indegeonous design? Reckon it's better?

[The Dark]

Israel has developed it's own form of Patriot. The Arrow. Wonder why they would go with and indegeonous design? Reckon it's better?

Could be cheaper or more available. AFAIK, LockMart's not building any PAC-2s while they're working on developing the PAC-3. Israel can't buy what isn't being built.

[Sea Skimmer]

Israel has developed it's own form of Patriot. The Arrow. Wonder why they would go with and indegeonous design? Reckon it's better?

Arrow is not a patriot variant. It drew on some PAC technology and experience but the missile and is support structure are all new. Arrow was designed from the base up as an ABM weapon, its faster and more importantly has better cross range capability, all PAC versions have only a few miles cross range at best.. Reaction time is also very low. Its better then PAC-3 for TBMD as a result. THAAD however should best it.

[Crown]

Thanks guys, Sea Skimmer any online info about this I could look up?

[Sea Skimmer]

Thanks guys, Sea Skimmer any online info about this I could look up?

This provides some basic information about the program. A search for "Arrow missile" should turn up a few thousand hits.

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/Arrow.html

[Crown]

Thanks Sea Skimmer.

[Johnston]

Well, i dont know.
In TOm clancy's the Bear and the Dragon, Ticonderoga Aegis Class Cruisers are modded with SM2-ER SAMS and are stationed as stopgap defenses against the Chinese ICBMs.
(In this timeline, Sov/US Ballistic weaps are all disarmed, thus, no SDI)
Some great scieitist (cant remember name) is assigned to improve Aegis and help the SM2-ER hit an inbound MIRV.
Well i cant understand half of what is said, but the test comes when China's ICBMs are launched against Washington. about 10 or so SM2's are fired. The last one, a rader homer, impacts with a skin-skin kill.
NOt understand the science behind, but it raises possiblity of adapting current Ticonderoga's for such purposes.
P.S Im only 19 and this is the best i can do.