Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!cbnews!military
From: c8636248@cc.nu.oz.au
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Ballistic missiles
Message-ID: <1990Aug11.015251.20139@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 11 Aug 90 01:52:51 GMT
References: <1990Aug5.042309.27779@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: University of Newcastle
Lines: 28
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: c8636248@cc.nu.oz.au
In article <1990Aug5.042309.27779@cbnews.att.com>, mark@jarthur.Claremont.edu (Mark Anderson) writes:
 
> This brings up the converse. How hard would it be to hack an IBCM to deliver
> a satellite to LEO? Take the bus out from a MIRV and replace with say a
> final stage and a satellite? Could you take a SSNB and turn it into a launch
> site for small photorecon type satellites? (Not a KH14!) Aside from the
> reaction of the USSR of a US sub doing satellite launches, would it work? A
> mobile, hardened, hard to kill (hopefully) satellite launcher would be
> useful in a conventional warfare scenario with ASAT enagements.
 

   I am sure this is going to be well out of date and deluged by far more
knowledgeable replies, but anyway...
   There is no problem about turning an older, perhaps obsolescent ICBM into
a launch system; the US did with the Titan series way back when (I'm sure
there I've seen mention of it in with the regard to the Mercury program, even
if it was only in 'The Right Stuff'), and the USSR still uses one of their
earlier ICBM designs (SS-9?) today. In fact, I think it's still one of their
major launch vehicles. You tend to feel that this is a clear case of 'if it
ain't broke, don't fix it.' Of course, I dare say they needed some tinkering
before they were used as people, rather than equipment, movers.

      Andrew Hide
      Computer Science Honours
      University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia