Behind the Scenes at a Minuteman ICBM Test Launch (airandspaceforces.com)
- Reference: 0175440763
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/24/11/09/2135243/behind-the-scenes-at-a-minuteman-icbm-test-launch
- Source link: https://www.airandspaceforces.com/us-launches-minuteman-iii-icbm-three-test-warheads/
> The Minuteman III missiles that form a critical leg of the U.S. nuclear triad each carry one nuclear-armed reentry vehicle. But the missile that was tested carried three test warheads... The intercontinental ballastic missile (ICBM) test was controlled by an airborne command post in a test of the U.S. ability to launch its nuclear deterrent from a survivable platform.... Gen. Thomas A. Bussiere, the commander of Air Force Global Strike Command, said in a release: "An airborne launch validates the survivability of our ICBMs, which serve as the strategic backstop of our nation's defense and defense of allies and partners...."
>
> The three test reentry vehicles — one high-fidelity [2]Joint Test Assembly , which carries non-nuclear explosives, and two telemetry Joint Test Assembly objects — struck the Reagan Test Site near the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands roughly 30 minutes later after launch, a flight of about 4,200 miles. "They make up essentially a mock warhead," Col. Dustin Harmon, the commander of the 377th Test and Evaluation Group, the nation's operational ICBM test unit, said in an interview with Air & Space Forces Magazine. "There's two different types. One is telemetered, so it's got a radio transmitter in it, it's got antennas, gyroscopes, accelerometers — all the things that can sense motion and movement. And we fly those or we can put one in there that's called a high-fidelity. That is assembled much like an actual weapon would be, except we use surrogate materials, and so we want it to fly similarly to an actual weapon. ... It has the explosives in it that a normal warhead would to drive a detonation, but there's nothing to drive...."
>
> The U.S. government formally notified Russia in advance of the launch in accordance with a 1988 bilateral agreement. More than 145 countries were also provided with advance notice of the launch under the [3]Hague Code of Conduct — an international understanding on launch notifications. The U.S. also provided advance notice to China, a DOD spokesperson told Air & Space Forces Magazine. China notified the U.S. of an ICBM launch over the Pacific Ocean in September. There is no formal agreement between Washington and Beijing that requires such notifications, but each side provided them to avoid miscalculations.
Test launches happen three times a year, according to the article, yielding "several gigabytes of data" about reentry vehicles, subsystems, and payloads. "There are 400 Minuteman III missiles currently in service across Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Wyoming."
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader [4]SonicSpike for sharing the article.
[1] https://www.airandspaceforces.com/us-launches-minuteman-iii-icbm-three-test-warheads/
[2] https://www.energy.gov/nnsa/articles/joint-test-assembly-flight-tests-national-security-necessity
[3] https://www.state.gov/hague-code-of-conduct-against-ballistic-missile-proliferation-hcoc/
[4] https://www.slashdot.org/~SonicSpike
Sounds good to me (Score:3)
USA tests work perfectly fine
Russia tests explode in the silo before launch.
Re: (Score:1)
Litte detail there people like you do not get: A nuclear attack in Russia kills the US as well (and the rest of the human race) due to no agriculture after that for 100 years or so. The whole thing is just a complete waste of money and effort.
Re: Sounds good to me (Score:2)
LOL, the thing is, with the recent election results the USA public clearly disagrees with you. They voted to install a Russian-style autocracy. Soon, the only difference will be whether you serf for a Gringo megacorp or a Russky oligarch. And by the sounds of it, you will actually love your owner's boot.
Re: (Score:1)
With the current, very reliable, climate models, this is a certainty. Nuclear war cannot be survived by either side or any bystanders. I do doubt the people in charge understand that though. They like to ignore most of reality.
Re: Wasted money (Score:3)
I don't understand why you'd draw that equivalence. There have been thousands of nukes set off since the 40s. Many of them were surface explosions. One more isnt causing nuclear winter.
[1]https://youtu.be/dGFkw0hzW1c [youtu.be]
[1] https://youtu.be/dGFkw0hzW1c
Why explosives at all? (Score:2)
Thinking about it just a little and knowing that the typical nuclear bomb explodes above it's target, I'd guess immediately after satisfying the needed conditions they destroy the package just to keep the test article from cratering. Although I can't imagine I'd want to be anywhere near the shredded material either. Maybe there's a different reason? Maybe just need to make things go 'boom'?
So that crap now starts again? (Score:1)
Seriously? Was one cold war not bad enough?
Re: (Score:2)
Nuclear armament is a genie that can't easily be put back in the bottle.
Re: (Score:2)
That genie got out of the bottle, ransacked the premises, went back into the bottle to grab extra suitcases, packed more stuff, caught a flight to Hawaii, and has been livestreaming his vacation for the past 5 years.
Nuclear treaties are dropping like flies, missile arsenals are growing again, and at least half a dozen non-nuclear countries are seriously considering going nuclear. And the US is about to slam its borders shut and stop caring about anything except ourselves. Last time we did that, it took
Hypocrites (Score:2)
Pointing fingers to countries which test their own long range ballistic missiles, and yet doing the same thing and expanding your own arsenal is just being a big hypocrite. As long as the US is still creating new nukes and expanding their arsenal, any other country has the same right to do so as a protection against the bullies like the US.
Re: (Score:2)
as a protection against the bullies like the US.
So tell us, which country, or part of a country, is the U.S. currently occupying and claiming as part of the U.S.? In fact, which country has the U.S. recently invaded with hundreds of thousands of troops? Tell us which country the U.S. has been bribing people to vote a certain way.
Yeah, thought so. Considering the U.S. is only doing the test as the result of another country testing (and failing) its own nuclear missile launch, how is this the fault of the
must be a dense surrogate (Score:2)
except we use surrogate materials, and so we want it to fly similarly to an actual weapon.
I presume you'd need something close in density to the warhead's plutonium or whatever the fissile material is, to get similar performance with the same overall density... But of course, with no explosion, the surrogate wouldn't be consumed. So that kinda implies something that is not significantly lethal when dispersed after the warhead lands.
Re: (Score:2)
> This is still a pretty slow pace. When do they plan to deploy it....2064?
If you stored a gun in your home for self defense, how often would you feel comfortable NOT testing it to make sure it’s going to work when you need it to. Including your own performance with it.
This is more operational validation. In hopes we never have to use it as more than the mild deterrent it is.