Home Forums Chat Forum Missiles on the roof approved

Viewing 9 posts - 161 through 169 (of 169 total)
  • Missiles on the roof approved
  • monkey_boy
    Free Member

    big_n_daft
    Free Member

    binners – Member

    If I lived in Saaaaaaarf Laaaaaaaaandan I’d be asking questions like: just how accurate are surface to air missiles? What percentage of them hit their intended target? And what happens to the ones that miss?

    Anyone know?

    They are accurate, a trained operator can hit a large model aircraft flying head on

    the missiles are operator guided and use the principles of SALOSBR (IIRC). With HVM the engagement time is so short (about 10-12secs to max range) that prelaunch tracking is key to accuracy. It is easier to correct with old slower Javelin system which took around 30 secs to max range.

    they will probably have strict arc’s of fire and airspace control via ADKIS (??) is they can get it work or whatever they have replaced it with. I can’t remember if the missile self destructs if it loses the beam or not

    if they had airlifted the tracked HVM its like playing space invaders

    the missiles are safe in the context of the flats, they are designed to survive squaddies on a battlefield

    big_n_daft
    Free Member

    I feel unhappy about the thought of missiles in built up areas. If an aerial conveyance is shot down, the bits will fall on actual people. Better to put a defended circumference further out into the countryside surely, where debris can fall into fields?

    air defence works in a series of layers, as the threat moves it gets tackled by the relevant resource for that chunk of airspace

    hvm is a point defence system (based on a FGA/pop-up helo threat), the point in this case is the stadium. The final layer would be GPMG’s but I imagine they drew the line through spraying 50 round bursts of 7.62 1 in 1 over the Olympic park

    nick1962
    Free Member

    So why aren’t they on top of a big building at Canary Wharf?

    big_n_daft
    Free Member

    You mean the secret ones that everyone knows about because they’ve been on the BBC? These ones
    Lexington Building, Fairfield Road, Bow, Tower Hamlets – high-velocity missile
    Fred Wigg Tower, Montague Road Estate, Waltham Forest – high-velocity missile
    Blackheath Common, Blackheath (Lewisham/Greenwich) – rapier
    William Girling Reservoir, Lea Valley Reservoir Chain, Enfield – rapier
    Oxleas Meadow, Shooters Hill, Greenwich/Woolwich – rapier
    Barn Hill, Netherhouse Farm, Epping Forest – rapier

    No-one will ever link any airborne incident with these, rgardless of whether they get fired or not, will they?

    which means that anyone with internet access and a map and a few minutes to stand in the planned locations could work out what the arcs for the missiles are

    So why aren’t they on top of a big building at Canary Wharf?

    too far out probably, point air defence sticks close to the potential target and thus creates a GDA, the Navy and Air Force will be covering that airspace

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    Isn’t there the slightest possibility of a Greenham Common scenario here- ie, a spoof? The real defences are located in completely different locations and these are either tokens or complete dummies to mask the fact and to focus attention on the wrong areas.

    nick1962
    Free Member

    oo far out probably, point air defence sticks close to the potential target and thus creates a GDA, the Navy and Air Force will be covering that airspace

    same distance according to google
    nothing to do with big business of course

    big_n_daft
    Free Member

    same distance according to google
    nothing to do with big business of course

    As the two locations are a considerable distance apart they can’t be compared, 100m makes a difference when siting hvm detachments according to google.

    I imagine the large warship in the Thames makes up for the lack of HVM on Canary Wharf, either that or they are not publishing that location for security reasons.

    But don’t let a proper air defence plan get in the way of some class war rhetoric

    big_n_daft
    Free Member

    Isn’t there the slightest possibility of a Greenham Common scenario here- ie, a spoof? The real defences are located in completely different locations and these are either tokens or complete dummies to mask the fact and to focus attention on the wrong areas.

    Anyone would think it took 6-8 hvm detachments to create an effective GDA rather than the two published locations

Viewing 9 posts - 161 through 169 (of 169 total)

The topic ‘Missiles on the roof approved’ is closed to new replies.