3 ms·

Don't most countries (especially the neighbors to those with violent tendencies) have automatic defenses against missiles? If Japan has such a system, did it fa

Don't most countries (especially the neighbors to those with violent tendencies) have automatic defenses against missiles? If Japan has such a system, did it fail to trigger? I just find it very weird that a missile would be able to pass across a country uninterrupted.

clarkmoody 9y ago
If the missile were on a ballistic trajectory that would not impact anywhere on land, perhaps it's better to let it fly on over into the ocean? Shooting it down could reveal anti-missile capabilities that may be saved for a more serious impact threat.
- patates 9y ago
  This makes total sense. Well, unless the missile makes an unexpected turn :) Are there any past examples of such "tests"? I couldn't figure out how to google it.
  - khuey 9y ago
    Unlike a cruise missile, ballistic missiles are not really capable of turning in that way.
rroriz 9y ago
Maybe NK had this exact same question
freehunter 9y ago
Shooting down a missile with another missile is very difficult, especially if it's an ICBM moving at full speed. Couple that with the fact that Hokkaido is as far north as you can get in Japan (as far from Tokyo and other major population centers further south, so there may not be missile defense systems there. Israel's Iron Dome only has a range of 70km, so I doubt, even if Japan had better technology, that they'd have one of these set up everywhere across the islands. Being that Hokkaido is so far north, if you look on a map it's very very close to Russia. Not knowing the exact trajectory that it took, it's plausible that it went over Japanese airspace but was obviously not on a trajectory to impact the island itself. The article doesn't say where it was headed, just that it was in Japanese "airspace", and that it landed off the coast. So plenty of reasons why it wasn't shot down. I'll add one more: the last thing you want to do is try to shoot down a test rocket and fail. Because if you fail on the test, the enemy will be more willing to believe you'd fail on the real thing, too.
- kuschku 9y ago
  NHK just reported on TV it passed directly over Hokkaido, but landed 1200km straight east of Hokkaido in the sea.
dboreham 9y ago
You don't want to unnecessarily expose the capabilities of your countermeasures. So no ABM launch unless absolutely necessary.
MBCook 9y ago
Even if you have a perfectly effective system you have to deal with the fact that when you shoot a missile down debris is going to fall. If you shoot a nuclear missile down, nuclear debris is going to fall. Depending on where the missile is projected to land it might be a better idea not to shoot it.

clarkmoody 9y ago

If the missile were on a ballistic trajectory that would not impact anywhere on land, perhaps it's better to let it fly on over into the ocean? Shooting it down could reveal anti-missile capabilities that may be saved for a more serious impact threat.

patates 9y ago
This makes total sense. Well, unless the missile makes an unexpected turn :) Are there any past examples of such "tests"? I couldn't figure out how to google it.
- khuey 9y ago
  Unlike a cruise missile, ballistic missiles are not really capable of turning in that way.

rroriz 9y ago

Maybe NK had this exact same question

freehunter 9y ago

Shooting down a missile with another missile is very difficult, especially if it's an ICBM moving at full speed. Couple that with the fact that Hokkaido is as far north as you can get in Japan (as far from Tokyo and other major population centers further south, so there may not be missile defense systems there. Israel's Iron Dome only has a range of 70km, so I doubt, even if Japan had better technology, that they'd have one of these set up everywhere across the islands. Being that Hokkaido is so far north, if you look on a map it's very very close to Russia. Not knowing the exact trajectory that it took, it's plausible that it went over Japanese airspace but was obviously not on a trajectory to impact the island itself. The article doesn't say where it was headed, just that it was in Japanese "airspace", and that it landed off the coast. So plenty of reasons why it wasn't shot down. I'll add one more: the last thing you want to do is try to shoot down a test rocket and fail. Because if you fail on the test, the enemy will be more willing to believe you'd fail on the real thing, too.

kuschku 9y ago
NHK just reported on TV it passed directly over Hokkaido, but landed 1200km straight east of Hokkaido in the sea.

dboreham 9y ago

You don't want to unnecessarily expose the capabilities of your countermeasures. So no ABM launch unless absolutely necessary.

MBCook 9y ago

Even if you have a perfectly effective system you have to deal with the fact that when you shoot a missile down debris is going to fall. If you shoot a nuclear missile down, nuclear debris is going to fall. Depending on where the missile is projected to land it might be a better idea not to shoot it.