/k/ - Weapons » Thread #27705930

[22 / 3 / ?]

Minuteman IV? NOPE its GBSD

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 22:10:42 No.27705930 View Reply Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27707269 >>27707479 >>27708964

>The US Air Force's (USAF's) plans for replacing the Boeing LGM-30G Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) are being formed now, and the solution could have some commonality with future US Navy (USN) submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs)

>The Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) programme - previously known as Minuteman IV - is now undergoing an analysis of alternatives to determine specific attributes

Looks like any future ICBM will have common parts with any proposed Trident successor.

http://www.janes.com/article/55465/us-icbm-replacement-to-soon-emerge-officials-seek-slbm-commonality

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 23:59:18 No.27707269 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27707627

>>27705930
Commonality with a new Trident? Neat concept

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 00:05:08 No.27707349 Report Delete

Quoted By:

I wish I could find the article, but there was a news blurb a couple of years ago about a large diameter solid motor R&D effort that was quite a big wider than the Trident II. It's probably related to these programs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 00:15:14 No.27707479 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27707587

>>27705930
If they're going with a common missile system that means it will be MIRV'ed which means the next strategic reduction talks have already failed.

I head something about them reviving Midgetman.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 00:24:16 No.27707587 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27707667

>>27707479
MIRVed missiles have always been a thing. It could be the new missile will be single warhead but multi decoy warhead system.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 00:28:02 No.27707627 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27707269
I suspect the commonality will be limited to certain section of equipment like guidance systems, warhead mounts, specific casings, etc.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 00:30:15 No.27707667 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27707587
Of they've always been thing you fuckwit, but the last nuclear reduction talks have been about banning MIRV'ed land-based missiles.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Minuteman.jpg, 23KiB, 337x450

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 00:33:32 No.27707706 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27708539 >>27709956

Am I the only one that wants them to keep the Minuteman name just out of tradition?

It's a pretty cool weapons system. Been in service since 1970, providing the backbone for the most powerful military force the world has ever known.

The first microchips ever to be used outside of a laboratory were commissioned by DARPA for it.

And the name just screams freedom.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 01:48:30 No.27708539 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27708660

>>27707706
>It's a pretty cool weapons system.

You never worked MMIII.

It's served more than it's time, but it should've been replaced decades ago.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 02:05:35 No.27708660 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27708694 >>27709061 >>27710400

>>27708539
+1

The ICBM program needs a new everything. The missiles themselves arent as old as you would think, but the support infrastructure is 1960's technology. Tons of the equipment used is manufactured by companies that have gone bankrupt, and as a result replacement parts are getting harder (or more expensive) to find.

Stepping inside an LSB is like entering a portal to the past. I wonder what bullshit the russians have to put up with with even older, shitter infrastructure and hypergolic fuels. I still dont understand how they havent had a Damascus style incident yet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 02:10:56 No.27708694 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27709286

>>27708660
>I still dont understand how they havent had a Damascus style incident yet.
The Russians don't tend to keep ground based missiles in service as long as the US does. Their oldest missiles date from the mid 1980s.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 02:48:10 No.27708954 Report Delete

Quoted By:

since we're talking ICBMs, here's one of the crazier things the military has done with nukes.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96A0wb1Ov9k

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 02:50:37 No.27708964 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27709061 >>27709295 >>27710086

>>27705930
I still dont understand why they threw the Peacekeeper into the trash. I mean that WAS the Minuteman successor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 03:02:50 No.27709061 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27709429

>>27708660
i like the one wrench that was being overnighted between bases..

>>27708964
treaty worries, which went nowhere. then no more USSR so budget slashed

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 03:30:28 No.27709286 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27708694
They also can cover things up far better than the US can.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 03:32:02 No.27709295 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27708964
Start II said they would dump Peacekeeper if the Russians dumped Satan.

Start II fell through when the US withdrew from the ABM Treaty but for some reason the US proceeded as if it still applied, getting rid of Peacekeeper while the Russians kept their Satans in active service.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 03:54:37 No.27709429 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27709854

>>27709061
>i like the one wrench that was being overnighted between bases..

You have no idea...

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO LUCHTMACHT_FOTO_S_5-9-2009_13-36 (...).jpg, 1MiB, 3461x2358

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 05:41:21 No.27709854 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27709429
story time

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 06:14:47 No.27709956 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27707706
>pic
But Minuteman doesn't have hemispherical coverage

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 07:12:00 No.27710086 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27710093

>>27708964
>I still dont understand why they threw the Peacekeeper into the trash.

End of Cold war, congress, cost and START II. Only 114 Peacekeepers were built as congress in it's infinite wisdom canceled 100 missiles in 1985 due to delays and cost overruns. Only 50 of 'em were ever deployed and another 50 were used on testing. Minuteman was kept because of economies of scale in maintaining and upgrading missiles.

>I mean that WAS the Minuteman successor.

No, it was Titan II replacement.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 07:15:40 No.27710093 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27710086
It wasn't a Titan II replacement. They filed completely different roles.

Titan II had a single 9mt warhead, Peacekeeper had 10x 300kt (upgradeable to 475kt) warheads. Titan II had a CEP of about 2-3km, while Peacekeeper had a CEP of less than 50m.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 09:06:38 No.27710400 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27708660
This is largely on purpose. Older systems are less susceptible to EMP and failures due to prolonged age.

Subject

Name

E-mail

Password

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these boards

Your latest searches

Minuteman IV? NOPE its GBSD