To intercept or not?

c/Commander said:
I'm biased, as my girlfriend is in Japan right now, but, I say, if they launch that thing over the Sea of Japan, take it out. SM-3 up the tailpipe. Japan is close enough that any launch is a major threat to both the Japanese population and US interests in the region.
Click to expand...

I didn't even consider the other nations that could be affected.

Now I say, when it get's 10' off the ground - starwars the chunck of steel!
 
Yes-
Japan, South Korea, Russia, Australia, New Zealand - all in range of this weapon, all at least on decent terms with the US. The US is the only power in this world with decent capabilities to destroy airborne ballistic weapons. We need to act - nothing says "Sit down and shut the hell up" like a few VLS Ticonderogas off the coast of your country.
 
c/Commander said:
Yes-
Japan, South Korea, Russia, Australia, New Zealand - all in range of this weapon, all at least on decent terms with the US. The US is the only power in this world with decent capabilities to destroy airborne ballistic weapons. We need to act - nothing says "Sit down and shut the hell up" like a few VLS Ticonderogas off the coast of your country.
Click to expand...

Too bad the DDX-21 isn't ready for deployment!
 
DD(X) is a program designed to produce destroyers with enhanced land-attack capability...so I don't think the advances in air defense over the Burke- and Ticonderoga-class vessels would be that great. As I'm sure you are well aware, we have very capable crews on very capable ships, and if that missile goes up in a manner that the Japanese or US governments don't like, it's toast. Hopefully. Now, if the politicians decide to back down, on either side, that's another story.
 
c/Commander said:
DD(X) is a program designed to produce destroyers with enhanced land-attack capability...so I don't think the advances in air defense over the Burke- and Ticonderoga-class vessels would be that great. As I'm sure you are well aware, we have very capable crews on very capable ships, and if that missile goes up in a manner that the Japanese or US governments don't like, it's toast. Hopefully. Now, if the politicians decide to back down, on either side, that's another story.
Click to expand...

Your information on DDX-21 is incomplete.

The vessel is a total arena armament ship. It is capable of much more than what you have mentioned. You mentioned the VLS systems on the Tyco class cruisers. What weapons systems are carried in the VLS systems? Are you aware that the DDX-21 is also a VLS platform?

The information below has been found from a simple Google search. You need to drop the cadet commander mantra and realize that you have not been given access to the full story.

— Multi-mission
— Offensive and defensive combat-capable
— Lethal
— Meets USMC fire support needs
— Automated gun system fires long-range
155 mm projectiles
— State-of-the-art missile systems
— Stealthy
— Minimal radar cross section
— Minimal acoustic signature
— Minimal infrared signature
— Minimal magnetic signature
— Fully Integrated
— One cohesive system for all warfare areas
— One computing enviroment
— Intelligent
— Optimized C4I capabilities extend from
ship to other assets
— Powerful
— Integrated power system
— Capacity for new energy-based weapons
— Adaptable
— Future-proof system design concepts
— True multi-mission flexibility
— Open architecture for computer and
ship systems
— Survivable
— Automated damage control
— Enhanced battle-damage resistance
— State-of-the-art missile systems
— Habitable
— Optimized working/living conditions
— Staterooms for crew
— Economical
— Highly automated
— Reduced crew requirements
— Fuel-efficient power system
— Enhanced supportability
— Pioneering
— Precursor of the 21st Century fleet
 
Last edited:
Don't worry, I'm well aware of the focus of DD(X), and I know it's not entirely a land-attack development. My point was, the current Aegis systems do their job very well, and any developments of Aegis that will be placed on DD(X) is speculation. The fact that DD(X) will even be built in the near future (10-15 years) is speculation as well. The only thing that I have seen for sure is that it will be an enhanced land attack platform to replace the BBs for amphib. assaults.
 
c/Commander said:
Don't worry, I'm well aware of the focus of DD(X), and I know it's not entirely a land-attack development. My point was, the current Aegis systems do their job very well, and any developments of Aegis that will be placed on DD(X) is speculation. The fact that DD(X) will even be built in the near future (10-15 years) is speculation as well. The only thing that I have seen for sure is that it will be an enhanced land attack platform to replace the BBs for amphib. assaults.
Click to expand...

You are well aware? Who are you trying to fool? As a highschool cadet you have no clearance, you have no inside information.

You seem to be trying to fool everyone here. You cannot be more aware of the DD(X) than I am. What I can put on this board comes from the freedom of information act and is readily available on Google. Your information might not be from Google, but all you have is specualtion from someone that is feeding you a line of crap.

Your claim to know more than is possible for someone without clearance is first basically a lie and second bordering on releasing classified information if any of it were true.

The good news for you is that you are full of that brown stuff that we all express through our spincter and anyone with any common sense can see that.

Stop now.
 
Last edited:
I'll respond in a PM...

Anyway...any responses that are on topic? Agree with a shootdown, disagree, neutral, whatever?
 
Last edited:
OK guys, let's get back to reality here. First of all, everyone has got to remember that North Korea is a sovereign country, with all of the same "rights" as any other country, including the US. In addition, North Korea has been at war with the US, Canada, Britain, and a few others since that fateful day that they crossed into South Korea. They are allowed to defend themselves, and they are allowed to design, test, and build weapons systems that will enhance their defensive and offensive capabilities. In this regard, they are no different form the US, a country that has conducted literally hundreds of nuclear and missile tests, most of which were done outside their borders.
IMO, if NK does indeed launch a missile, they will not be so stupid as to launch it towards an area that is defended by anti-missile systems... and besides, they don't have to. All they want to do is to send a message, and it is quite simple: "We can hit anywhere in Japan right up to the west coast of North America, so you better start taking us more seriously" As to what they really want, well, that is the real wait and see.
Remember one thing, though. In spite of the fact that NK has got to be the strangest country on the planet, they are not interested in national suicide. As things stand, they are at odds with the west, Russia, Japan, South Korea, and in many ways, China. Any moves they make are limited to the fact that they cannot threaten all of them at once, or they could find life a great deal more difficult than it already is. And for them, it is already difficult enough.

Shootdown? Nah, no need, unless you want to test the anti-missile system. I'm in the wait and see camp.

Dean.
 
Last edited:
Your "sovereign nation at war" goes two ways - the United States, being at war with North Korea, is allowed to defend itself if it feels that it or its interests are being threatened.

Also, in 1998 North Korea tested the first iteration of this missile, the Taepodong I, by shooting it right over northern Japan. I call that a direct threat, especially if you don't know what the payload, if any, is.

If the missile is detected on a bearing that could threaten the US or its allies, shoot it down. If it's headed towards the Arctic, I don't see that that's a huge problem.
 
Up here in Alaska, a good portion of the state is in the Arctic, and we have a large military presence. If a DPRK missile flies toward us, we will treat it with a little more urgency than other places (not all, but some, so don't stomp on my nuts). I won't go into too many details out of OPSEC, but I will say that we have some sensitive assets up here that we wouldn't want to lose.
 
Maytime said:
Up here in Alaska, a good portion of the state is in the Arctic, and we have a large military presence. If a DPRK missile flies toward us, we will treat it with a little more urgency than other places (not all, but some, so don't stomp on my nuts). I won't go into too many details out of OPSEC, but I will say that we have some sensitive assets up here that we wouldn't want to lose.
Click to expand...

Of course you are speaking of your assets, right?

Stand tall, stand proud and do your job!

Thanks for doing your job.
 
c/Commander said:
Your "sovereign nation at war" goes two ways - the United States, being at war with North Korea, is allowed to defend itself if it feels that it or its interests are being threatened.
Click to expand...

It does indeed, and that is why I believe that NK will not send their missile anywhere close to any Allied countries or their interests. It would not overly surprise me if the missile went into the ocean off of South China, and that would tell me that the Chinese gave tacit approval for the launch. If it does happen that way, the Chinese protests that you will hear afterwards will be for show only.

c/Commander said:
Also, in 1998 North Korea tested the first iteration of this missile, the Taepodong I, by shooting it right over northern Japan. I call that a direct threat, especially if you don't know what the payload, if any, is.
Click to expand...

It is indeed a threat, and that is, IMO, a definite shootdown.

c/Commander said:
If the missile is detected on a bearing that could threaten the US or its allies, shoot it down. If it's headed towards the Arctic, I don't see that that's a huge problem.
Click to expand...


It is not a problem at all. Most missile tests take great pains to avoid other country's territories to avoid this kind of tension. if you do have to fly it over someone else, then you ask permission. The US has routinely tested missiles over Canada, and France has also had to ask permission to test their missiles. If you do not, and the missile gets shot down, well, hey, you're asking for it. I simply hope (although it is a small hope) that NK will be allowed to finish this test, simply because we will learn more about their capabilities if the missile actually flies to it's target. But given their geographic location, they do not have a lot of choice. Besides, if the US does have to shoot it down, it would also be a great test for the anti-missile system, and it would save money to boot!

Dean.
 
Depending on the set course and the actual range of this weapon, a missile over the Arctic could easily hit the northern United States. If a trajectory that would allow that missile to hit is detected, obviously, that's another shootdown.

A shootdown solely to make a political statement could go either way - it depends on how the Koreans would react - which I doubt anyone actually can guess to.
 
c/Commander said:
Depending on the set course and the actual range of this weapon, a missile over the Arctic could easily hit the northern United States. If a trajectory that would allow that missile to hit is detected, obviously, that's another shootdown.

A shootdown solely to make a political statement could go either way - it depends on how the Koreans would react - which I doubt anyone actually can guess to.
Click to expand...
Sure...No one thought Japan would kamakazi Pearl Harbor, but they did...Guess it's an Asian spark of spontanaity..haha Just kidding to all the Asians here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top