Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!ucsd!pacbell.com!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Anti-Balistic Missiles Now
Message-ID: <1990Dec19.005547.23769@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 19 Dec 90 00:55:47 GMT
References: <1990Dec7.011307.474@cbnews.att.com> <1990Dec17.050212.27963@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Lines: 23
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell)
In article <1990Dec17.050212.27963@cbnews.att.com> ab3o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Allan Bourdius) writes:
>Ballistic missiles are not considered a threat to naval battle groups. 
>Neither the CWIS (be it a Vulcan-Phalanx or a Goalkeeper) or the Phoenix
>has an anti-ballistic missile capability.
 
  To my knowledge, the two things that differentiates most SSM's and ballistic 
missiles are that ballistic missiles come in fast and from high elevations. 
  But several SSM's are designed to come in from high elevations, for example
those seaskimmers that use a final popup manuever or the various big russian
anti shipping missiles who cruise at high altitude and make a steep dive towards
the target.
  I would assume that the Phalanx is built to handle both those types, so
the reason behind that it can't handle ballistic missiles must be their speed.

  Does anyone know how fast the warhead of a ballistic missile travel during the
final phase?

-bertil-
--
"Words on the net aren't usually worth the paper they are written on."