Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!cbnews!military
From: jwm@stdc.jhuapl.edu (Jim Meritt)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Reliability of Ballistic Missiles
Message-ID: <6842@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 24 May 89 04:11:06 GMT
References: <6747@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: JHU-Applied Physics Laboratory
Lines: 24
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: jwm@stdc.jhuapl.edu (Jim Meritt)
}From: ken%prism@gatech.edu (Ken Seefried iii)
}Now I have a question about accuracy.  In the 'real' world of nuclear
}conflict, how useful is a nuclear weapon that has 50-yard accuracy
}outside of a few, specific missions (taking out a silo or underground
}bunker)?  I guess the deeper question is:  Given a confligration
}where multi-megaton devices are being lobbed about, does precise
}accuracy buy you anything?  After all, what good is a deep
}communication bunker when all your means of production and a
}substantial portion of your population is gone.  Put another way, does
}buying a few expensive, accurate weapons beat more in-expensive, lesss
}accurate weapons.

I think the idea is something along the lines of proportional counter
attack.  You threaten a military target as a counter-attack against attacks
on military targets.  While a missle silo for the Air Force may be miles
away from anything, Navy piers and bases have this tendency to be right
next to (or insdie of) heavy residential areas. A small nuc carefully
placed could put most of SURFLANT out of action.  A small nuc not so
carefully placed toward the same target could wipe out Virginia Beach
and REALLY escalate things.  Ibid taking out the Pentagon while leaving
the Congress intact to surrender...