So two questions
- Has the US got the capability to shoot down a ICBM similar to the ones N Korea fired over Japan 8 times?
- How certain could they be of downing a missile?
Here's some facts from the Operational Test and Evaluation Office of the Secretary of Defence.
LINK HERE (as of March 2018)
83 of 102 hit-to-kill intercept attempts have been successful across all programs since the integrated system began development in 2001 ..... 19% fail rate.
53 of 68 hit-to-kill intercept attempts have been achieved for THAAD, Aegis BMD, and GMD test programs since 2001 .... 22% fail rate
Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD): 10 successful intercepts in 18 attempts since 1999 ....44% Fail rate
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defence: 37 successful intercepts in 46 attempts against ballistic missile targets: 19% fail rate
Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD): 15 successful intercepts in 15 attempts ... 0% fail rate
From another source .....
"This was the first time THAAD had ever intercepted a target representing an IRBM (intermediate-range ballistic missile) and was the system’s 14 successful intercept since a revised testing regimen began in 2005."We can conclude from that there have only been 2 launches against IRBMs. That's not a great deal of testing although 15 out of 15 is a pretty amazing result considering what its doing.
Executive Summary LINK HEREThe Ground-based Midcourse Defence (GMD) element demonstrated the capability to defend the U.S. Homeland from a small number of intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) or intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) threats with simple countermeasures when the Homeland Defence Ballistic Missile Defence System (BMDS) employs its full sensors/command and control architecture. This assessment is upgraded from FY16.
The Regional/Theater BMDS demonstrated a limited capability to defend the U.S. Pacific Command (USPACOM), U.S. European Command (USEUCOM), and U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM) areas of responsibility for small numbers of medium-range ballistic missile and IRBM threats (1,000 to 4,000 km), and a fair capability for short-range ballistic missile threats (less than 1,000 km range). This assessment is unchanged from FY16.
Conclusion LINK HERE
The deployment of one or two THAAD batteries in South Korea would substantially enhance its capacity to defend against a North Korean missile attack. To be sure, there is no perfect defence against ballistic missile attacks, but the probability of greatly reducing the damage resulting from missiles with conventional warheads increases when THAAD is incorporated into the defence architecture. When viewed through the lens of providing maximum protection from a North Korean missile threat, accepting the American offer to provide THAAD to the Republic of Korea is a prudent and defensible policy decision for Seoul. However, the added defensive capability will have to be weighed against other considerations. Chinese objections to the deployment of THAAD (an assessment of whether those objections are rebased on a realistic assessment of the system is beyond the scope of this article) are clear. The economics of missile defence must also be considered. It is considerably more expensive to deploy and operate THAAD to South Korea, than it will be for North Korea to grow the size of its arsenal or to quickly invest in additional missiles, missile launchers and trained crews in order to overwhelm the defences. Last, as this analysis shows, any system designed to destroy incoming missiles will have leakage. If those missiles are armed with nuclear weapons, that leakage could have catastrophic results.
Officials in Seoul will have some difficult decisions ahead of them, but the analyses here should partially refute arguments that say THAAD will not significantly benefit South Korea when countering the short-range, Hwasong missile threat from North Korea in the immediate future.
In answer to question one above:
Yes ...Looking at the facts the US can shoot down a ICBM similar to the ones N Korea fired over Japan.
In answer to question two above:
THAAD was the only system with 15/15 and only two of those was against ICBMs. Other documents allude to its effectiveness being less than 100%. The report certainly seems to bear out the 100% success rate. But THAAD has its limitations and is part of the overall system, which is why the overall a 20% fail rate prevails and that's a big window. The real answer is the jury is out and additionally no one has tested effectiveness against a nuclear missile, so no one knows exactly what would happen.
I have another question... why did Trump not attempt to shoot down the Missiles, fired by N Korea?
After all in his tweets Trump has called Kim Jong-un "Little Rocket Man" he also claimed "Ive got a bigger nuclear button than you and it works" Trump must have been salivating at the thought of being able to claim he'd shot one of "Rocket Mans" missiles down. So why didn't he?
It could be for many reasons so lets explore a few...
- They knew they would land in the sea so didn't bother wasting a missile shooting it down.....Hmm the US has never been worried about wasting missiles and the kudos from shooting one of "Rocket Mans" missiles down would be worth billions in Trumps eyes.
- They knew it wasn't armed..... Hmmm the only system that has this capability as far as I understand it is THAAD and how accurate that is hasn't been disclosed as far as I can see.
- They didn't want to provoke him by shooting a missile down....Hmmm. North Korea firing a missile over another country is about as provocative as it gets without getting real.
Soap Box Conclusion
Trump has been trying to get South Korea to pay for the THAAD missile defences. That bill wouldn't be small and if THAAD wasn't as 100% effective as some suggest, it would increase South Korea's and others reluctance to buy it.
In my humble opinion looking at all the facts and figures. I propose that they haven't attempted to shoot a North Korea missile down because a fail would cause a massive loss of face and a few countries that are looking to buy it would be asking some very serious questions.
Lets face it we all know Trump would love to be able to say "Rocket man I shot your missile down" but with a 20% overall fail rate he cant afford to risk a miss, unless its for real.
LINKS
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2017/pdf/bmds/2017bmds.pdf
https://www.mda.mil/
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2017/pdf/other/2017lfte.pdf
https://www.mda.mil/global/documents/pdf/testrecord.pdf
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2016/pdf/bmds/2016bmds.pdf
https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/can-we-stop-a-nuke-16988105/?page=1
https://www.scienceabc.com/eyeopeners/would-a-nuclear-missile-cause-a-nuclear-explosion-if-its-shot-in-mid-air.html
http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/the-scary-reason-why-nobody-has-attempted-to-shootdown-one-of-north-koreas-missiles/news-story/66b2a67ef21952e3d4af0381d74de0e0
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/30/15713966/ballistic-missile-attack-department-of-defense-pentagon-north-korea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_High_Altitude_Area_Defense
http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2018/04/13/2018041301408.html
http://www.dw.com/en/the-limits-of-missile-defense-systems/a-38602048
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-usa-defenses-excl/exclusive-u-s-plans-to-test-thaad-missile-defenses-as-north-korea-tensions-mount-idUSKBN19S2XQ
https://thediplomat.com/2016/02/what-is-thaad-what-does-it-do-and-why-is-china-mad-about-it/
https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-05-03/how-good-new-missile-defense-system-us-just-deployed-south-korea
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/09/19/can-us-military-shoot-down-north-korean-missile.html
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/07/11/us-successfully-tests-thaad-missile-system-amid-north-korean-tensions.html
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/08/what-would-happen-if-north-korea-fires-missile-at-us.html
No comments:
Post a Comment