Can America's Missile Defense Intercept a Nuclear ICBM?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 кві 2024
- PDS Debt is offering a free debt analysis. It only takes thirty seconds. Get yours at PDSDebt.com/task23
What if an intercontinental ballistic nuclear missile was launched at the continental United States homeland? Would the US defense system be about to shoot it down? How much warning would we have to choose how to respond?
The US homeland ballistic missile defense architecture centers on the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system, or GMD for short. It is designed to protect all 50 states from a limited long-range ballistic missile attack. Remember when I was talking about how, broadly speaking, these defense systems work by tracking, then destroying before impact? Well, broadly speaking, the GMD works like that: after detecting a missile launch, GMD’s sensors feed the data into a central control system, which then launches one or more interceptor missiles, which in turn, fly into the path of the incoming missile, release a kill vehicle and destroy the attacker’s missile on impact. But as I said, this is broadly speaking, very broadly. In truth, the GMD is a global system with 11 elements that span 15 time zones, and each element has to be precisely coordinated. And if something fails, everything can go wrong. Mock up of missile defense annual performance review 'Shows great potential, but tends to space out at critical moments.”
According to Annie Jacobsen’s book Nuclear War a scenario in which she interviewed the actual military and civilian experts who built these weapons; and developed all the response plans; she outlined how modern day satellite missile tracking can detect a ICBM launch in just seconds. Technology for detecting threats has vastly improved. But that doesn’t necessarily mean the technology has solved the age old problem of hitting a bullet with another bullet so to speak. Detecting and tracking is very different from shooting down. A new developments in submarine and air launched missiles means instead of 30 minute window it could be as little as 15 minutes to reach their targets. But first,
Let’s talk about the elements that make the GMD what it is, starting with how it tracks missiles, and then we’ll dive into how it destroys them. The GMD tracking depends on seven types of sensors: land, sea, and space.
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @taskandpurpose
Task & Purpose is a military news and culture oriented channel. We want to foster discussion about the defense industry.
Email capelluto@taskandpurpose.com for inquires.
#TECHNOLOGY #WAR #usa
PDS Debt is offering a free debt analysis. It only takes thirty seconds. Get yours at PDSDebt.com/task23
Russia still lives from the legacy of the Soviet Union, in tanks and research and development. They don't have ABM either and their population is much more concentrated and with less population and cities to hit.
@@MisterNi As if he makes video's with you as his sole audience in mind 🤣 only garbage here is you bud.
There's some heavy censorship going on in your comment section, FYI.
1:46 incorrect. they can be not purely defensive. they can have other targets. example, russia using anti ballistic missiles against land targets in ukraine. 5:05 doesn't answer the question. you don't need thousands of nukes to have nuclear deterrence. you only need if you are the agressor and need to feed the military lobby and promote imperialism. no one dares to attack france or india or pakistan. neither has thousands.
6:34 misleading. USA had A LOT more nukes in the 50's through 70s. and and in 1980 USSR had 30k and USA 23K. more than enough to obliterate planet earth.
7:30 patriot was never developed as an anti ballistic missile defense system. it was purely designed as a anti-aircraft system. It was only in 1988 that it was modified to have limited capability against tactical ballistic missiles. and even today it can't target ICBM's.
the shift in focus from star wars wasn't to patriot systems at all. that's completely wrong.
7:50 when bushed pulled out of ABM he prompted russia and other countries like china to start developing advanced ICBM's to overcome future USA ABM systems to keep mutual assured destruction. can't believe you didn't talked about MAD. that's why nowadays you have insane state of art ICBM's with counter countermeasures capable of defeating ABM defenses while USA is still in the ancient era using minuteman ICBM's from the 60s. genius move.
13:55 can't believe you didn't mention the major gap in the north. modern russian ICBM's are designed to go through there instead of having the shortest route. not even mentioning SLBM's.
14:35 large number of warheads since one missile can carry several. what counts is the number of warheads. 100x12 is much higher than 1x400.
15:04 false and misinformation. it wasn't by far the largest ballistic missile attack. in fact very few ballistic missiles were used. they aren't even ICBM's. and there was given a prior warning. all very well documented. the biggest ballistic missile attacks were made by USA against targets in the middle east and afghanistan and by russia in ukraine. it has no comparison whatsoever to this ridiculous tiny media stunt shitty almost mock inconsequent attack from iran.
16:50 missile test failures are normal. they are tested to make sure the final version works correctly.
nice quoting laura grego she's very right.
Hey, can you point me to the explanation of your "Gumby with a mini gun" shirt I saw you wearing?
If you live in a city that was targeted by an ICBM with a nuke and that payload was destroyed by one of these systems... you would consider it money well spent.
Even if you live in an associated economy in a completely different country, it would be money well spent.
But the radiation will kill everything and contaminate that area of the planet and the wind will reach lots of more places, i think a better strategy is to poison the air so the poisoned air will go in the desired direction to the enemies
Grr, no. Military spending bad. We should spend that on welfare where it is needed more (I haven’t had a job in ten years) (this is sarcasm)
In my family I had a second cousin who was the family superstar. He was in college at age 16 and in 9 years had amassed three PhDs. Two were in physics, particle and high energy and an obscure form of chemistry plus 6 master's degrees.
He came to visit when I was in middle school. He was working at that time for a major defense contractor and I managed to coax a little bit of general info from him.
The first and most important thing is, we are several generations ahead of the highest technology that we are allowed to know about.
When I tried to get any specifics, he didn't give me any bullshit, he said I wouldn't understand, but there are only about a dozen people in the world who could really understand what he was doing.
I also know from an unrelated source, Russian, that in the early summer of 1989, the Soviets were told when and where to look and what to look for. They were allowed to observe the test of something that basically gutted them. Shortly thereafter, the USSR started putting up their going out of business clearance sale signs.
@@Meyer-gp7nq Ok, lets spend it all on welfare, BUT... you get an extra big welfare check, IF you take a bath & spend your spare time helping assemble some things which go boom. 😉
Being an American is constantly finding out that your country has some crazy technology with stations in multiple other countries and has spent billions of dollars on it and you never even knew about it.
It is the root of the power of the US and also the reason why Russia decided it can only win by using hybrid warfare with a heavy focus on informational warfare and unfortunately it seems to be working
@Youbetternowatchthis nah, the entire point of informational warfare is making the other sode think you're doing well. Russia is doing worse than the entire west predicted, even the most pessimistic guesses were putting ukraine at losing within 2 or 3 weeks. The single thing russia is doing is spamming comments sections to convince the lowest common denominator in the west that theyre actually winning this 2 day war!
The Israeli systems are designed not to stop all the Iranian missiles though. They are designed to quickly analyze to see if where the trajectory is going to land is a threat, and only then intercept.
Israel intercepted most of the potentially dangerous missiles for them, which was the goal.
@@adrianbundy3249 Davids Sling, THAAD, patriot Missiles, one or maybe 2 more I'm forgetting Yada yada, all of them together plus American and UK Jets didn't stop a volley of 300 (what happens when Iran launches a 500 or 1,000 projectile volley?) . It was a general success, 5 missiles got through. They will get smoked if Iran decides to actually launch a large volley
You didn't think they was using all that cash to fix our rotten infrastructure didja? Yea me neither.
I don't get the critics that say these missile defense systems are flawed because they can be overwhelmed. Isn't 10% getting through much better than 100% getting through?
It's a BS argument on its face. All defenses can be overwhelmed by some tactic, depending on the defense.
It’s more like 98% instead of 100% but yes
100 percent vs 9 in 300 attempts
10% nukes
@@omoymunroe6315 even still, could be millions of lives
You were fairly correct on most of the GMD facts. The 40 interceptors are in Alaska and four are in California. The success rate is now about 50%. That always happens due to many failures at first and fewer as a system matures. You didn't address, at all, that U.S. missile defense is a three tiered system. GMD is the mid-course phase with an assist from the Aegis BMD system. Mid-tier is handled by Aegis and THAAD, and Patriot is the lower tier system.
Israel has the Iron Dome, David's Sling and Arrow 2 systems. They were made in conjunction with the Missile Defense Agency using U.S. tech and joint contractors. I like the fact that you noted the new NGI contract win by LM. These are all very complex systems. State of the art. If we will ever achieve anywhere near complete success, it will be an iterative process. Meaning, you start with little or no capability and advance to an end state that works. Kyiv has also seen success with Patriot shooting down Kinzhals and Iskanders.
What happens if an EMP is used to sabotage these radars all at once? Are there systems to counter an emp attack? The Chinese probably know when and where to strike these systems now.
@@JinKazama92 They are nuclear/emp hardened. Too expensive not too. More likely to get struck by a nuclear blast first.
@@JinKazama92shielding from Emp is possible if that is the goal and military assets have that goal
50 percent? Weren’t they 10/10 abiut 7 years ago?
@@villarreal6 No, the proposed reason for cancellation was much lower. Any U.S. DoD component would love 70%.
So long as nukes are pointed at us we should never take our defenses as acceptable, keep improving cause one failure can literally mean millions dead.
There's no defense in the world that is going to be able to stop a full scale nuclear strike. We're talking about 400 missiles coming in all at once. Each one carrying up to 10 warheads that's not even including the submarines.
You are very right and correct.
Many people here were just making comments without knowing what they were talking about @@killman369547
@@killman369547
Then somebody has to invent something that is capable to
making icbms obsolete should be the top priority
@@killman369547 I don't blame the government for dreaming big when the alternative is a dead country.
@@killman369547there's no defense YET
(FIXED IT FOR YOU)
As a former Soldier of the 23rd Gebirgsjägerbrigade (231st Battalion) of the Bundeswehr i prefer this Channel over most others because it focuses on pretty much all the Conflicts going on in the World. Even the ones most of us Westerners don't even hear much about.
Also of course as a German and therefor European i also appreciate the continueous Coverage of Ukraine which for a lot of us Europeans is especially important because it is so close.
For example. if i'd take my Car and drive to Ukraine right now, it would be about 16 hours, which for Americans i believe is like a casual Drive to another US State.
So having a lot of Coverage on Ukraine by an American UA-camr despite what US Media focuses on at the Moment is really appreciated!
Keep up the great work!
Prost & Cheers from Berchtesgaden in the Bavarian Alps
I completely concur with you
Salut. 🍻
Yeah the internet has its moments for sure! 🇺🇸 🇩🇪
You don't need to go to Ukraine. You will be one of the priority targets. Your family loves you. Russia is not going to attack Germany, we have resolved all the issues long ago.. no need to stir up the past . So don 't strain yourself. Well, of course, only if your not the smartest authorities don't do stu рid things.
It's a lot closer actually. From the eastern Netherlands to Lviv we took 16 hours. And let me tell you the convoy was going a lot slower than what I would've wanted to drive.
Germany - Ukrainian border is 12-14 hours.
In the 80’s I was stationed on Shemya. I got a tour of the Cobra Dane radar. It was pretty cool. I went on in my military career to work with other highly classified systems. What I learned was, the general public doesn’t find out what we really have until about 20 years after we put it into service, in most cases.
My Dad retired from General Dynamics and can confirm the 20 year premise. There might be unknown laser tech that can neutralize an ICBM. Pew Pew Pew...🖖
small correction; Alaska has 40 GBI, Vandenberg is 4. I worked on the Fort Greely Missile field for 12 years.
Thank you for your service
You’re right ! I don’t know how I mixed that up damn , I’ll issue a correction tomorrow thank you for catching that
@taskandpurpose GMD was a fun program to work on. We designed and built all of the HVAC/Humidity systems and controls for the Silos and the Silo interface vaults. I spent a lot of time at Greely, and enjoyed it all…even the -40F days. Was getting ready to build 2 missile fields in Poland and Czechoslovakia when Obama was sworn in and shuttered the program a month later.
Was going to comment the same. You can see and count the silo hatches of the GMD field on Google Earth. Ironically located near Christmas Alaska.
@@Taskandpurpose Is Vanderberg near Vandenberg?
bros really put a whole ass radar station on a boat and said "i got an idea! lets PUSH IT to north korea! we can track the launch that way, yea?"
On a oil rig 😂
Yeah, like that's not gonna be gone in the first 10 minutes.
Along with all the satellites.
And the nearest bases.
And fleets.
@@mambapopenhoffer8706 The chinese spambot discovered grammar
@@mambapopenhoffer8706 - It will be. But the signals will have already been sent out. :)
@@carloshenriquezimmer7543 Joseph Stalin profile pic and account made 2 years ago, pretty sure it's a russian bot, lol 😂
Outstanding historical brief on the complicated and difficult task of missile defense.
I grew up in the 1950s-60s within just a few miles of four active Nike, later Hercules, missile bases located high up in the Angeles National Forest north of Los Angeles.
Even visited a silo on a school field trip. Will never forget the empty coffee cans under the missiles catching drips of unknown liquids. (These missiles were stowed horizontally in their silos and erected to near vertical just prior to launch).
My recollection is the Nike/Hercules systems where primarily designed to splash enemy bombers. A kill on a missile would be an unlikely plus.
Kinda' reminds me of the first gen Patriot system. Only designed and intended to defeat manned enemy aircraft- yet Patriot managed to ding a number of Scud missiles in Gulf War I.
We've had 44 years of Missile Command to prepare us.
One reason that each side had so many warheads during the Cold War was that each silo/base had to be targeted with at least one warhead. So it isn't as simple as saying "you only need 5000 warheads to destroy the world several times over". That would be the case if they were airburst fairly evenly over as many population centers as possible. But most nukes targeted other nukes, which means silos, airbases, and naval bases - the first two of which were often in remote areas.
Valid AF. People forget you need launchers to match the arsenal stockpile . Iran might have 3,000 miles but only 100-200 launchers
that doesn't make any sense since there's SLBM's and transporter erector launchers. silo based ICBM's are very few and only used by nations that failed to upgrade their systems and still use ICBM's from the 60s like the mintueman.
@@Taskandpurpose Alternatively, you might have millions, billions, heck, even infinity bullets, but that doesn't matter if you only have one gun to load and shoot with.
Bases and nuclear silos were primary targets and cities were secondary targets and would only be targeted if the other side already launched their missiles first.
@@randybobandy9828 not true. that's not how it works.
I remember when Ronald Reagan started America's Star Wars anti-missile missile defense system.
At the time, i thought how stupid. No way to hit a missile with a missile.
They go faster than bullets.
Absurd idea.
Boy, was I wrong.
We can do it.
It is done.
Amazing.
Reagan then went on to say he made it up, he had the former USSR trying to catch up to a technology that did not exist, it did not exist then and it does not exist now. This helped with the break up of the USSR but it is also why the Russian missile technology is currently 2 generations ahead of the US today.
@@rodpanhard I actually saw a test what appears to have been a Star Wars anti-missile missile defense system test sometime in the late 1980's. I saw two objects appear in space. One I believe was green and the other was red. Each object appeared to have shot a laser at the other one. One shot the other object and it was gone. My brother in law was with me and saw the same thing. He was in special forces in Vietnam and he also concluded that this was an anti missile defense test. Just what I saw take it for what it is worth.
@@tedmetre6933 40 years ago, that technology should be so much better today then.
russia did it first.
@@rodpanhardRussia may claim to be ahead of America in land based ICBMs, but they have nothing on any of America's cruise missiles. Both nations are ahead in different subsets of land attack missiles.
Great video! This is what I do for a living and you reported pretty darn fairly and accurately about almost everything involving the current state of US BMD!
I have never understood those who say even a limited nuclear defense is useless. Thanks for a great look at a very misunderstood topic.
When you have 5900 warheads incoming yes it basically is useless.
@@killman369547that's because you have a very simple concept or understanding. Back in the 1960s and 70s we had no hope of intercepting absolutely any incoming ICBM. Currently with our technology we can intercept a good portion of those missiles, in fact enough that a missile strike by North Korea which wouldn't be more than a dozen missiles at the most, is almost guaranteed to not succeed. Now that's just based on the technology that we currently know about, where do you think that technology will be in the next 20 or 30 years😂
@@Wyomingchief the mutually assured destruction doctrine does not work if both sides don't have mutually assured destruction. For better or worse, the billions spent on sketchy intercept systems only encourages adversaries to develop quantities or qualities of weapons to overcome those systems.
@@Adamroable Not if you can make the interceptors cheaper than ICBMS, then overwhelming the system is not feasible. And yes, mutually assured destruction is important....only if superpowers are obedient enough to let rivals be able to destroy their country for the greater good.
@@hamzamahmood9565 I dont get the point tbh. The US can legally park an SSBN in international waters 12miles outside St.Petersburg, just like the Russians can legally park an SSBN in international waters 12 miles outside New York. Nobody gonna intercept their 200 nukes befor they go off.
Damn man you do a hell of a job presenting this kind of info! Been follower of yours since the beginning and you never fail to impress. Thank you for keeping me informed!
Thanks 🙏 a ton of the credit goes to the video editors and animators
full of false and misinformation and bias as always. perhaps less videos and more quality. but hey everything for the views. hence the clickbaits.
@@riskinhos please list all the "false & misinformation" in this video
@@nolongerblocked6210
1:46 incorrect. they can be not purely defensive. they can have other targets. example, russia using anti ballistic missiles against land targets in ukraine. 5:05 doesn't answer the question. you don't need thousands of nukes to have nuclear deterrence. you only need if you are the agressor and need to feed the military lobby and promote imperialism. no one dares to attack france or india or pakistan. neither has thousands.
6:34 misleading. USA had A LOT more nukes in the 50's through 70s. and and in 1980 USSR had 30k and USA 23K. more than enough to obliterate planet earth.
7:30 patriot was never developed as an anti ballistic missile defense system. it was purely designed as a anti-aircraft system. It was only in 1988 that it was modified to have limited capability against tactical ballistic missiles. and even today it can't target ICBM's.
the shift in focus from star wars wasn't to patriot systems at all. that's completely wrong.
7:50 when bushed pulled out of ABM he prompted russia and other countries like china to start developing advanced ICBM's to overcome future USA ABM systems to keep mutual assured destruction. can't believe you didn't talked about MAD. that's why nowadays you have insane state of art ICBM's with counter countermeasures capable of defeating ABM defenses while USA is still in the ancient era using minuteman ICBM's from the 60s. genius move.
13:55 can't believe you didn't mention the major gap in the north. modern russian ICBM's are designed to go through there instead of having the shortest route. not even mentioning SLBM's.
14:35 large number of warheads since one missile can carry several. what counts is the number of warheads. 100x12 is much higher than 1x400.
15:04 false and misinformation. it wasn't by far the largest ballistic missile attack. in fact very few ballistic missiles were used. they aren't even ICBM's. and there was given a prior warning. all very well documented. the biggest ballistic missile attacks were made by USA against targets in the middle east and afghanistan and by russia in ukraine. it has no comparison whatsoever to this ridiculous tiny media stunt shitty almost mock inconsequent attack from iran.
16:50 missile test failures are normal. they are tested to make sure the final version works correctly.
nice quoting laura grego she's very right.
Yeah but he's full of shyt
Alaska use to have missile silos everywhere you can still find old abandoned one out in the woods
So did most of the rest of the United States especially the middle of the country further away from attack from other countries like Russia you can even buy the abandoned missile sites many people have converted them into modern homes and some of the big ones have been turned into condos by rich people selling each condo for a shit ton of money for people to live in Case of nuclear war or other major events that might destroy us
Are they for sale?
@@fusion9619 on government and state land unfortunately
they are everywhere across USA, AZ, NV, NE, TX, all over
Newer ones are better hidden.
This is what I was just saying, the missle defence system is an INCREDIBLE miracle!
The fact that this many incoming supersonic projecticles can be knocked out is mind blowing.
EDIT: For those who are claiming "they aren't super sonic", Iran shot missles such as "EMADs" which could move at Mach 11, not only is that super sonic, that's HYPERsonic. Anything above Mach 1 is supersonic. Most of Irans munitions were over supersonic speeds but probably not mach 11 speeds, slower drones and missles are much cheaper, which made up the bulk of the hundreds of munitions launched.
TL;DR, yes the missle defence system is incredible.
Hypersonic not supersonic. Well maybe the cruise missiles were supersonic but ballistic missiles travel at hypersonic speeds upon reentry.
@ so irans ballistic missiles were moving at hypersonic speeds when intercepted?
@@warrenpeas Yes.
Well over Mach 5
@@warrenpeasAlthough they technically aren't hypersonic missiles, because 'hypersonic' in this instance refers to high levels of maneuverability rather than speed.
Come on, Iran told the US the missiles were coming, what direction they would be coming from and they used the oldest slowest ones they had and they did it on the weekend when the US stock market was closed. Iran did everything possible to make the strike symbolic, and deliberately set out not to kill anyone. If it was hypersonic missiles the US defence systems are never stopping them.
"This isn't the Missile Defense System you are looking for..."
-Obi Wan D.O.D.
Classic, and spot on. We only know about the stuff that isn't top secret.
@@dadthelad pretty much, the US does not like sharing our core defense/attack strategies whatsoever. There can only be arguments and hypothesis until it has been fully disclosed, and proven
Great content as allways! congrats! keep up with the good work!
This was absolutely BRILLIANT. You have an amazing team of researchers. Can’t believe you got all this information from open source. It’s staggering. Congratulations.
I hate the mindset of "You can't hope to succeed, so don't try, it just antagonizes our enemies" mindset.
I know someone could smash in my front door. Does that mean I shouldn't lock it? I know my car can be hotwired. Does that mean I should leave the windows down and the key in the ignition?
I'll sleep better knowing that at least we'd *try* to save ourselves.
So I see that you're not a leftist. Leftist would tell you to leave the keys to your car on the porch, so the criminals won't kick down you door, just let them have the car. It's what the far left Canadian police chief said last month. DEI, we'll let you pass or get the job because of your skin color, so you don't even have to try.
Right? Better to antagonize your enemies than make it as easy as possible for them.
I had similar thoughts when watching this video. I would rather have it than not.
That has always been the position of the Union of "concerned" scientist - an anti-US pro-communism propaganda organization from the beginning. Reagan had the moral desire to protect US civilians without requiring us to threaten the murder millions of Soviet/Russian people if some crazy colonel launched a couple of MIRVed missiles (8-12 warheads each). The UCS response - "you can't guarantee 110% effective protection against an all out attack, therefore it is wasteful to even try, even if you can get to 90% effectiveness". But they were OK with the USSR developing anti-missile defenses...
One of the best and informative videos ya'll have done . Kudos !!!
I appreciate how this video keeps things "real" and also how we are addressing the challenges which inevitably occur".
Looking especially unhinged recording from the living room 😂 good vid brother, thanks for your hard work!
good up to date video.
Thank you.
You lose when you give up. Ignore the naysayers and keep developing better defense systems.
kind of blows my mind anyone would argue against the defense system. It's like saying not to wear body armor because a machine gun will get you. Like... we know. It's to stop rogue bullets. There's no telling if one day a non state actor will launch something at CONUS, especially when you have countries like NK or Iran who might sell devices on the black market, or give them to their proxies. A defense system also gives another choice beyond retaliate
Am I crazy or just American for thinking 100 billion dollars for missile defense isnt enough?
This video as many others from Capi is amazing! It got me thinking a lot on how caoable we can be to defend ourselves 🇺🇸
Thanks buddy your videos are above and beyond better then most similar videos . The way you pump out tonssssss of information , but able to keep it light and still find ways to make us laugh even when talking about nukes haha its not an easy job. But you pull it off . Nice work
THAAD is Based.
THAAD CHAD
his full name is Theodore
Exoatmospheric intercept was based
THAAD is THICC.
@@HavocHerseimno middle or last name😂😂😂 just straight Theodore 😂
Ahh yes. The sea-based x-band radar. For when you get asked how much of the Pacific you want to be able to see and the answer is yes
and new ICBM's will just cross the north pole and make it irrelevant.
@@riskinhos
I could never imagine so thoroughly missing the point the way you just did
Sea BASED
@@riskinhosbro forgot about NORAD
@@chugachuga9242 norad is irrelevant.
Great video as always. Love learning the intricacies of topics you cover. With that said, could you PLEASE do an educational video about Niger and what in the world is going on there. This looks like an absolute cover up by some high ups at the pentagon, would to see your insight.
As a Soldier/sailor from the 90s we tend to actually over estimate enemy capabilities. Like every timr I went to NTC the Krasnovians kick our butts
Now imagine they make an interceptor missile that takes an incoming missile back to where it came from 😂
Politely requests that it turn around
But they accidentally build it so good that it just goes right back into the tube and rearms
Achievement unlocked: return to sender
Return to sender in bejing
Return to sender missile
You needed to bring in Habitual Linecrosser for this episode. He's the known SME on missile defence.
I’m meeting him at the end of June I’ve heard great things
Lesgooo
@Taskandpurpose Cappy, lots of folks know about Navy S.E.A.L.s, or Navy Officer fighter pilots. But very few understand it is actually U.S. Navy Enlisted FIRE CONTROLMEN who operate, maintain, and repair these advanced shipboard radar and missile systems. It is the Fire Controlmen who actually locate, track, and destroy enemy hostile missiles. FCs don't get their due.
I was stationed with HHB 2/44 Air Defense Artillery Regiment at Campbell. We had Avengers and stinger manpads. But there are Patriot missiles that are for longer and bigger threats
Great cover of the topic. Was always extremely concerned about this why we didnt take it seriously but that makes sense.
If you haven’t watched "Dr. Strangelove," you should stream that brilliant Cold War black comedy ASAP. Stanley Kubrick directed.
Agreed 👍 one of my favorite movies growing up
We all must protect our precious bodily fluids
This is a little off topic. But i would say people should watch everyone of his movies 😂.
I’ve owned it for years but never watched it. I think right now it would freak me out.
@@pbinnj3250 I doubt it. It's a dark comedy
Absolutely fantastic video! This channel ages like fine wine.
Great as always!
Working for the agency responsible for the subject you were talking about, I can’t tell you what you got right and wrong in the video. You don’t know the half of what technology and current interceptors we use and have. But you are correct on about 2 generation ago technology and strategy.
Always good to hear we have technology we aren’t allow to know exists defending us. If it’s anything as crazy as the anti satellite missile then we are fairly safe.
The difficult thing about defense is that it needs to succeed every time. An attack only needs to succeed once.
Losing a single large city would be catastrophic, but at the end of the day... the people living in every other city in the entire country will be grateful the system was there.
Wrong.
Defense only needs to degrade the enemies attack appreciably.
Iron dome did not have 100% success in Israel, but try telling the people of Israel that Iron Dome is a waste of money.
If it's a nuke, yes.
If it's a drone like the ones Iran sent, there's a little more fudge factor.
Yeah that's completely wrong and it's not a theory that Any Nation uses to base their defense on. Or for that matter they don't deface their attack strategy on that. A defense doesn't have to be right every single time they just have to be right the majority of the time. Because no country is going to launch an attack with icbms if they know that there's a good possibility that a majority of them are going to be taken out. Because by taking out most of them not even all of them just most of them, you just ensured that whoever you attacked can now retaliate.
hm. If you think you can winn, a pre emptive is usually a good idea.
Just gonna say, @Taskandpurpose , always enjoy your channel, thank you for the effort you invest
Watching videos of Chuck LaDue and Bill Carpenter developing the Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle is such a trip. The Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle seeks out its target using multi-color sensors, a cutting-edge onboard computer and a rocket motor that helps it steer in space. EKV guides to the target and, with pinpoint precision, destroys the threat using nothing more than the force of a massive collision. It moves like a poltergeist.
I was watching some of the test footage of those things from 2008 , absolutely insane gravity defying stuff
@@Taskandpurpose I know I'm supposed to be solemn but it amazes me how we went from biplanes dropping flechettes to exoatmospheric kill vehicles in only one hundred years
Great post! And to those who argue against the system because it’s not fool proof, a 50% intercept rate is a hell of a lot better than 0% especially when we’re talking about nukes. Having great offensive and defensive capabilities as well as keeping your opponent strategically ambiguous about what those capabilities are is the most effective deterrent to war.
Super interesting! Thanks for sharing.
The video is amazing. And thank you T&P team for making me part of this. Thank a lot
You bet 👍:)
Cool Stuff - my Dad was involved in the design of Pave Paws radars in the 1970s - following the Cobra Dane system. I was aboard an Ticonderoga class cruiser during some of the BMD testing - didn't pay too much attention since I hunted subs for a living.
Interesting and well researched, thank you!
Glad to hear that new and improved missile defense systems are being worked on....the more we have, and the more layers of defense, the less likely one will get through. I was amazed at the Israeli/US/UK response to the Iranian incoming missiles, drones and the high % that were taken out. It gives me some hope!
When the world goes to heck you'd wish you'd had a semi functioning defence system instead of nothing
Won't make any difference.
@@ejkalegal3145it could. You don’t know. No one really knows
@@PicklebeanZarf I know.
@@ejkalegal3145As someone from a state fairly low on the target list, the more missiles they are forced to send at important targets the better.
Didn’t know we had a domestic air defense system
I didn’t know much about it until I started digging into it , it’s a bit of a controversial topic considering people disagree over its usefulness
It's a less spoken about part of defense. NORAD doesn't fuck around and has more eyes and ears than the public knows about because being scared of MAD doesn't work as well when the populace of one side thinks they have a better chance of surviving.
you don't. it doesn't work. doesn't defend any shit. we will still all die on a nuclear apocalypse.
Try flying into the Norfolk naval base. They have the naval AWACS doing circles 24x7. One plane doesn't land until its replacement is on station. It may not be a missile defense, but they don't tell you everything on the base tour.
@@johnhaller5851 AWACS can't even detect ICBM's. they weren't even designed for it neither it's part of their mission. they are completely irrelevant for this
I work contracts for these satellites. The whole purpose for them being built is to protect us in the event of a nuclear war. They can track hypersonic missiles so well that any land-to-air missile can shoot them out of the sky. I’m no engineer but being in these meetings and listening to them talk about it is fascinating. No other country but the U.S. has been able to build a network like this.
All talks but never tested. Just like tge abrams tanks.
@@anyetitan8410your comparing tanks to space warfare how cute
Your comprehension is kindergarten
@@anyetitan8410 they're tested all the time by defense companies in accordance with our military. No reason to give a 300 mil contract to a defense company for a product that doesn't work.
@dochudson7284 just like the abrams tanks were tested in Ukraine?
Trust me when there's an all out war, you want your missle defence to be as savvy as possible
Won't make any difference.
@@jb-xc4oh it could make a significant difference
If You people think the US will be reacting to nuclear launch, and not initiating it, you are mistaken.
We've all seen what the former president and the people around him are capable of. There are Secret Service and Capitol police wearing the Qanon logo as a badge of honor. And they carry and defend the Football.
Also, the US nuclear defense is not as this describes it. They are small, extremely high acceleration SAMs located in certain Baltic, former USSR states. They catch the ICBMs from behind, and create a real mess of where they are launched from. But this will never happen, when SOP is to launch 1/3rd of the entire nuclear arsenal under 60 seconds. And 1/3 of those penetrate the earth and upheave the soil at a magnitude 7.0, obliterating any and all silos and bunkers within a radius of 10km. 1/3 air burst, and blank out half a continent comms and power grid in EMP. And the remaining 1/3 detonate within 5,000'AGL and wipe the slate clean on everything that ever existed within eyesight.
@@jj4791 Do you think the Russians haven't planned for any of this.
@@jj4791if the US wanted to initiate a war, Russia would've been wiped after WW2 ended
This is what happens when you build a system to defeat everything the enemy MIGHT have, rather than what the enemy actually possesses.
...and really when it comes to building a system to stop missiles capable of annihilating cities and rendering Earth uninhabitable...I approve of this approach.
President Ronald Reagan was mocked, ridiculed and demonized (mostly by the opposing political party) when he proposed the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) which his domestic enemies derisively and pejoratively referred to as "Star Wars". They claimed it was not feasible or impossible. Turns out Reagan may have been on to something. Many posit that the fall of the USSR may have been caused by a realization on the part of the Soviets that there was no way their economy could sustain the kind or research and development funding required to come even close to closing that technological gap. They essentially surrendered without any shots being fired - at least up to this time. Things could change.
Great episode, Chris.
So true, they hurling barbs at Reagan mercilously for everything they could think of. Even today we're finding new things that Reagan was right about.
It was mocked legitimately. It was at the time not feasible or possible. Bear in mind that SDI proposed laser and particle weapons that didn't exist and were in no way possible at the time. Only when they switched to the 'brilliant pebbles' approach of orbital missiles was it in any way out of the realm of science fiction. Frankly it only served to heighten tensions in an already precarious time of the Cold War.
@@leeboy26 I mean several of the ideas were in fact possible if reuse was not considered a requirement. Which is exactly what many designs were willing to do. Turns out if you don't care about the satellite surviving a chemical laser with enough power to destroy a missile is pretty easy mind you it will destroy itself but better that then a city.
@@spartanonxy Not to mention the free electron laser, which nobody seems to be talking about. And probably for a very good reason. Not only does it work, it's tunable on the fly, and as long as you have power, it fires. Not aware of any heating issues, but i could very easily be wrong about that.
I know there was talk at one point about putting these on aircraft carriers for anti-ship missile defense. Would not surprise me if there isn't research going on about that right now.
@@jeromethiel4323 FEL's do have heating issues. Small scale ones usually don't but it becomes worse as they scale up. But there are a lot of ways to mitigate that. There has been research into FEL based defenses for decades it is just until recently it has been small scale research since there were few threats that other options were not as good or better overall.
Thank you.
So long as the tracking is coming in from Pine Gap in Australia, everything is ok.
As someone from post-soviet country with experience with Russian and western hardware, i can say one:
With Russian weapons, what is declared they are able to do is usually complete nonsence maybe possible at ideal circumstances.
With western weapons what is declared is usually far bellow what these weapons are capable at worst circumstances.
If west says: We do not have the weapons to shoot down Russian ICBMs what they says is: Our weapons at the worst circumstances are able to intercept only 95% of them 😂😂😂
The West does their best to hide their true capabilities. Russia/Soviets do their best to make intimidating claims about their true capabilities.
worry not. 5% of the russian nuclear arsenal is enough to cause a nuclear holocaust and wipe out all life on earth.
also, from USA DoD reports and from independent groups the russian nuclear arsenal is well maintained and far more advanced than the usa one which uses ancient missiles from the 60s.
What country are you from?
That's what Ukrainians would say and then they got whipped by those subpar Russian weapons while the US Patriots got smashed....
You don't have to like the truth but you can look up what real experts have to say on the topic.
Well, Ukraine proves you otherwise. Same equipment, different design. Burns just the same. All just a bunch of marketing and non-smart people falling for it.
But let's not speculate and look at Iran vs Israel, how's that "Iron Dome" working out? I wonder how many missiles they have left.
There are a variety of missile threats. The GMD you focus on addresses the fastest/longest range ICBM threat - the toughest of all. The western systems for addressing less capable threats - slower and shorter range - are much more successful: US Patriot, THAAD, and SM3; Israeli Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow.
We did it guys! Every time he sais "NUCLEAR", instead of "NUCULAR", warms my little heart.
Great presentation
New video. I think there are likely some new missiles in service that we just haven’t heard about yet.
A lot of experts seem really invested in missile defense not working. This is a weird anti-Reagan artifact. And the point about North Korea or Iran is obvious. It certainly seems describing interception success probability as “very low” strains credulity at this point.
Yooooo I was working on the one in Saudi. That's wild. Almost got a BSM for fixing the satcom link. That's crazy.
We likely don't use decoys, just as easy to put another warhead in it's place. It's not about stopping all missiles, but 98% such as demo in Israel, it's a great defense just knowing it's working, like MAD. You didn't speak about Aegis. It's a great tested system up to outer space using Standard Missile, new version. These are already operational aboard Aegis Cruisers.
“You can create missiles way faster than interceptors.”
We obviously need to fix that.
Lmao how
With the power of the Military Industrial complex. @@randybobandy9828
@@randybobandy9828actually we can create the Interceptor missiles way faster than Russia can create icbms or for that matter China. Don't believe the hype
Maybe we can make interceptor lasers? Shoot down missiles with high-powered wavelengths of light. Nothing we know of can move faster.
@@grasshopper8901 UK has made some laser interceptors called Dragonfire but I believe they are short range interceptors and (from what I imagine) it would take a massive amount of energy for long distance interception as well as incredible accuracy.
P.s Dragonfire has reported to be able to hit a coin sized target from 1km away - but the exact range and specification is still classified.
It also helps that most of Russias weapons like the once vaunted hypersonic missile turned out to be garbage
You fell for the propaganda bro. Always remember; pics or it didn't happen, and when you get pics, actually examine them to make sure they back up the claims. Kinzhal is mostly an extremely successful weapon. Very few have been shot down. Fast missiles are inherently harder to defend against because you have to place your defenses much closer to what you want to protect
@@alexdunphy3716so you basically didn't say anything
@@alexdunphy3716 sure comrade nice try may your murderous owners will give you some worthless rubles for your effort
@@stefthorman8548 I'm disagreeing that the Russian hypersonic missiles "turned out to be garbage". The only one that has actually been used proved to be very effective and hard to shoot down. All the whining about "it's just a ballistic missile it's not a real hypersonic" is just cope. It flies and maneuvers at hypersonic speed and it's hard to shoot down.
@@alexdunphy3716at the end of the day, it's hard to buy what Russia says when Ukraine still lives. Russian propaganda would have us believe they could overrun eastern Europe in a few months, everyone thought Ukraine would fall in two weeks. That didn't happen, it throws all Russian claims into question. At the end of the day reality is different from propaganda. Even if Ukraine loses now, to last 3 years against Russia means Russia severely underperformed. So why would we take their information on their weapons as fact?
Limiting the number of defenses instead of warheads is insane. Screw the treaty, we should have as many interceptors as we want.
Not really. The reason for a ban on defenses is that it contradicts the idea of MAD. If one side can launch a nuclear assault and have confidence that they won’t be destroyed by a retaliatory strike, it makes pushing the button easier.
Effectively as the number of defenses increase, it lowers the risk of launching nuclear weapons. Therefore making it more likely for a nuclear war to occur.
Yes they could if taken out in the Primary or Secondary Phase but before separation (that is intact prior to re-entry phase)
God bless America 🇺🇸🙏
Cappy, while you showed many of the US ABM systems, the mixing up of many systems and the oversimplification of both the test record and using criticisms that are decades old, which are repeated endlessly by naysayers, unnecessarily confuses the issues. Scoffers are always academics who have no access to the classified engineering that has been ongoing for decades now. The first issue is that there are SEVERAL programs besides the GMD which was the first system put into practice almost 20 years ago now. The other main ABM program is the sea-based exo-atmospheric interceptor program, the family of SM-3 missiles onboard US and Japanese destroyers and cruisers. These programs have made significant progress since I retired over a decade ago (I was involved in engineering both the GBI EKV and the SM3 Block IIA programs). The MDA will not say anything more than that their interceptors are meant for "rogue" launches from N Korea, but lets just say that there are other targets SM3s in particular have in mind.
Aside from these two programs, which should not be judged by tests more than a decade old, there are shorter-range antimissile systems such as THAAD (renamed from Theater High Altitude Air Defense to Terminal High Altitude Air Defense), Patriot PAC-3 and GEM versions, which have been used in Ukraine to intercept Russian Iskander IRBMs, and as you mentioned, Israeli Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 programs.. These last two along with David's Sling Stunner missiles (co-produced by Rafael and Raytheon/RTX) were recently used to intercept almost all the Iranian ballistic missiles headed for Israel. This barely scratches the surface of BMD, of course - the MKV program has also been in development at several contractors for well over a decade.
Also it's good for that "One Mistake" fired
You should do a video on the KAI T-50 Golden Eagle and its variants. As far as trainers go it need to chill.
When the anti missile system can shoot down 100% of any launch then it can chill. Since missile development hasn`t slowed nor does it look like it will that day will never come. Anti missile systems are not always missiles. My Father spent a portion of his military career building the DEW line.
To be honest, against a falling warhead, only missiles can be an interceptor. Maybe Railguns. Kinetic projectiles have the best results. Russians are using nuclear tipped missiles as interceptors.
make it 120%, just to be on the safe side
America's been telling the world since the 80s they can shoot shit down in space...why is everyone so surprised now that they've done it in combat?
Yeah, dumb. It is one thing to do something in a test environment, but then again American weapons are better than we tell you so 🤷♂️
@@Meyer-gp7nqI mean we've done it in the test environment with the THAD(100%pk)
And the Patriots system along with the sm-6 have done it numerous times period and that's just what we know about🎉😂😂
Wasn't the f15 the first plane to shoot a missile into space, like over 20 years ago.
Absolutely,its so much better that we have to try it!
Love the t shirt. I think the USA's MD should always be evolving and getting better.
Chris I like your work so much I went out and maxed out all my credit cards just so that I could go to your sponsor😂😂😂
I was just thinking about credit card sponsorship
US defense tech is always better than we thought 😂
Apparently... I didn't realize how advanced our radar and tracking systems really were. That 95ft tall massive building radar in Alaska is insane.
no it is WAY BETTER THAN WE ARE ALLOWED TO KNOW...
@@randybobandy9828funny thing is it's been there for decades and it's been public knowledge for almost as long. If you take your time to do a little research, you would be absolutely floored how far Advanced our defense systems are. We just don't talk about it and brag like Russia
US always sucked an now we know.
I hope to puit it to the test. That would be proof.
@@carloshenriquezimmer7543 There's probably things in area 51 that are much greater than we can imagine.
15:49.
Dam... somehow i'm recall Foraged alliance when listening to this...
Good work excellent video
A small nuclear warhead on an intercept missile is a not a bad idea for several reasons. Firstly, it's very effective against bomber formations of the 60s. There is no fallout. The EMP will kill electronics in missiles and bombers. You don't have to hit your target directly, you just need to be in the area.
Yeah, but how far does the EMP travel? Could we end up disabling friendly systems below the intercept?
@@hanrockabrand95true what if the EMP ruins other interceptors electronics or just ruins their targetting even if just for a second it could doom a city.
That was the NIKE system from the 1960s. They have moved beyond that.
@speedy01247 The EMP, by itself, could cause trouble for a city below the detonation. Power outage, fried hard drives, communications blackout, just a generally bad time.
it's actually a great idea but EMP won't kill electronics in the missiles they are shielded and rely on inertial/stellar guidance. perhaps only in ancient ones like in the minuteman that usa uses.
What about Aegis cruisers in the Pacific? Aren't those part of our protection?
Yes ! I wanted to cover the lesser known ICBM systems and detection methods . I’ve covered Aegis a bunch , also THAAD
Recently released SM-3 (Standard Missile) launched from AEGIS cruisers/destroyers can also do mid course interception.
@@Taskandpurpose
Lots of folks know about Navy S.E.A.L.s, or Navy Officer fighter pilots. But very few understand it is actually U.S. Navy Enlisted FIRE CONTROLMEN who operate, maintain, and repair these advanced shipboard radar and missile systems.
It is the Fire Controlmen who actually locate, track, and destroy enemy hostile missiles. FCs don't get their due.
The Army & Marines have MOS (Military Occupational Specialty).
The Navy has "rates" & NECs (Navy Enlisted Classification).
Just as the Army needs its 11B Infantrymen and the Marines need their 0311 Infantrymen,
for a Navy surface warship to put ordnance on time, and on target, it is the Fire Controlmen who get it done.
FCs saved hundreds of lives in Israel last weekend.
Chris . . . having been PRECOM Crew on USS Ticonderoga (CG-47) we always knew the day was coming when the U.S. Navy would have BMD capability, and it has . . . but limited it is. If you happen to be next to, on or near the ballistic missile target in question there is NO DOUBT we can handle the threat today. However, if that target is inland not near a coast, or a cruise missile ingressed across the coast in a less populated and less surveilled area . . . then protection is 'not so much'. The ICBM arcs at 5,000 mile altitude and it takes the missiles in Fort Greely, AK or Vandenberg, CA to stop them. The SM-3IIB program was canceled because the required liquid fuel to make it work were considered too volatile to bring aboard ship. Now that larger Vertical Launch Cells are considered . . . a solid rocket version may well be in our future.
However, IMHO the CONUS region needs Aegis Ashore distributed along the coasts and borders to detect the threat, and missile systems should be at least protecting major population areas.
TORCH OUT!
Interesting video, but I think there isn't really any way to gauge the real progress made on these programs without being an actual project member with enough authority. Great video!
Great videos, thanks!
Thanks for watching
@@Taskandpurpose are you deleting super thanks??
I'm not American. I'm curious why Americans don't seem to appreciate their military dominance. You have radar sites all over the world. Hell, you were able to transport one that was built on an oil rig all the way to Korean waters. That's just insane. You somehow forgot how you became the only true world power.
As an American, I’m very aware of our dominance in almost every military aspect. What I’m scared of these days, is if our leadership would actually let us know if someone fired on us, or would they be able to make a decision in time to deter a threat. It’s not our capabilities, it’s who in control of them.
Further more, we’re currently depleting all our Ammo, oil reserves, missiles, and other systems sending them to other countries, and funding wars elsewhere. Our current administration is putting us in a vulnerable situation. We’re nearing a point where we won’t have enough resources to fight a war if it comes down to it.
@@isaacbryan7104look, what you need to do is go into depth into the aid packages that have been sent to Ukraine and Israel, look at what has been sent and what we are holding back. Our trump cards, our Navy and air force are fully intact, not a single fighter jet or ship has been given away.
Artillery shells and javelins expire anyways, and those we are building 21 billion dollars of the new package went to industrial expansion to produce more ammunition. We are the world's largest producer of oil(not that we are giving away oil? Gonna need a source for that)
Also at the end of the day, Russia and Iran are busy fighting our allies. Russia has lost thousands of vehicles and people fighting Ukraine, not a single currently serving American servicemen has been killed, in turn Russia is bogged down and bleeding. It's a total strategic win, your enemy fights and dies while you don't spend lives only hardware. We are not being left vulnerable because our land enemy (Russia) is stuck fighting Ukraine, our air and sea enemy (China) faces an untouched US Navy and Air force. We will be fine.
Agreed. Also Russians thought they were number 2 in world but now I’m pretty sure they are 3rd after China. So who knows who is who until it’s in play. Even then sometimes Goliath gets taken down.
Because the Pentagon is corrupt and so is 75% of Gov. Officials in the 🇺🇸
@@isaacbryan7104 Those countries where you're sending resources to are the ones fighting those wars for you. Also, you're only sending the old stuff which you are going to dispose of anyway. Proxy wars is one of the US' specialties.
I think that the question posed to close this video is a very important one, because strategic deterrence maintains equilibrium (and survival) via the beliefs of armed governments regarding the threats posed and the balance of power. For example, once the USA started documenting serious questions of our unilateral power on the global stage a few years ago, then the entire narrative of legitimacy degraded with it. Thus, there now are all sorts of conversations about regional conflicts and proxy wars, where the USA is a potential actor but not necessarily the dominant force (i.e. "global police force"). But this recent case study is regarding traditional conflicts, as opposed to strategic / nuclear deterrence that is traditionally framed through the lens of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). And so, the trust and belief in the capability to strike and/or defend strikes is crucial in any balance of power, but in MAD doctrine it is the _first strike_ capability of adversaries needing to be constrained above other considerations; were a nation-state to appear vulnerable to complete annihilation by a first strike, with less than 30 minutes to mount a response (as was described in the video), then MAD prescribes that deterrence would rapidly erode and be follow very soon after with complete and utter disaster. Naturally, the same calculation of posture and possibility is important to the other side of MAD calculations, but these totalitarian adversaries of the USA don't publish and progress their defensive capabilities in the same way, as many others here in the comments have pointed out. And so, in the end, if the USA cannot convince our own citizens of our deterrence might, based upon our past assertions and history of maintaining deterrence, then both our allies and adversaries may change their minds regarding the threats and consequences of a _first strike_ . Such a change to the balance of power is unacceptable to the strategic defense, with no less than global survival within the ante for well over half a century at this point. Personally, I hope for the courage and fortitude that all parties remain committed to continued de-escalation of the global nuclear arms race, but this goal cannot be achieved in weakness either, nor without vigilance as to the credibility of all of our adversaries and allies combined. Thank you for making this video, and reminding so many of the importance of these defensive efforts.
I'd design interceptor missile war head with emp + shrapnel to stop the ballistic / hypersonic glide missile (emp will fry electronics)
Maybe better tha your average inantryman thought but not the average Aegis class destroyer sailor😂😂😂
So upon alert of an incoming threat, the president needs to make a decision in about 15-20 minutes on whether or not humanity goes extinct.
Gulp.
Significantly less. Try 5-6 minutes.
They have contingency plans and run drills for that very reason. The decisions are already made for any scenario, the President just needs to give the order. Plus, it's pretty unlikely anyone is just going to surprise launch nukes completely out of the blue. It'll be after a bunch of escalations.
Joe Biden takes 20 minutes to decide what flavor of ice cream to eat.
Humanity would be extinct no matter his decision.
Humanity would not go extinct from a nuclear war in modern times. Civilization in the northern hemisphere would collapse and there would famines in the southern hemisphere but the southern hemisphere would survive.
Marker missiles. ..whenever theres a launch fire is returned to that same area
Everyone: Wow! The US is really good at missile defense.
Habitual Line Crosser: ... No shit. I've been telling you that for two years...
LASERS. KEEP DUMPING THE ENTIRE BUDGET INTO LASERS LMAO. DON'T STOP.
I've been saying this for years!!! The US needs to leapfrog technologies just like we've done in the past with smart bombs and stealth.
First off they are, second off lasers take time to kill as the beam has to burn through the metal first so it’s tricky making it work for fast moving targets made out of metals like titanium that are designed for hypersonic speeds.
Nitpicking:
- What do you mean "one of the largest attacks"? Regardless of how you define "ballistic missile", More than a 100 ballistic missiles fired at once is the largest single BM attack (barrage) ever launched at any point in history, even if you consider reports that about half of the launches resulted in mid-air failures (according to reports). According to reports from the IDF spokesperson - there were 9 hits to two IAF bases in the south, which - assuming said failure rate and that no Iranian BM is MIRV capable - is a 85% kill rate for the Israeli "wall" initiative, or better if the failure rate was lower than 50%.
- I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but from sources I can find the GBMD sensor system was not involved in intercepting the Iranian missiles, except maybe as a manual (i.e. not integrated) early warning for an attack we knew was about to happen (because the Iranians have specifically said so hours before the launch). Except for a few lower flying BMs that were reportedly intercepted by US forces in Iraq, the interception was done entirely by Israeli assets and specifically the Great Pine EWR whose actual range is classified but believed to be as much as possible 1000km - which should cover nicely almost the entire distance from an Iranian launch site. I once had an air defense soldier brag to me that they can see launches all the way to Iran - I'm assuming he exaggerated but possibly not by much.
- The Arrow system that is indeed majority funded by the US, is 100% Israeli development - US contributed only funding, in exchange for being a primary partner for testing and deployment, and (lets face it - probably the primary reason the US was interested in funding the project) having a veto power on Israel exporting it to other countries.
Buddy Israel is the USA and the USA is Israel
Theres a big globe on the island of hawaii around south point in kau towards the mountain . I always new it was a radar but never knew for what . You can drive by next to it on a secret road . Theres a fence but wasnt sure if its running or not since its kind of hidden by the hills from the main road but id guess from the location where it is on , it has a pretty good view of the ocean