4 ms·
You’re making speculative leaps of logic based on jack shit as evidence.
by ZanyProgrammer 5y ago
You’re making speculative leaps of logic based on jack shit as evidence.
- sudosysgen 5y agoHow so?
- ZanyProgrammer 5y agoAre you totally sure the same systems that defend US naval vessels are present in Erbil, Iraq?
- sudosysgen 5y agoThey definitely aren't. Supposedly there is Patriot and C-RAM, whereas warships use AEGIS. However, Patriot is based on largely the same technology as AEGIS (PESA engagement radar, TVM, Hit-to-kill capability, etc...), is supposed to have a high kill probability against these targets, and like the SM-3, is made by Raytheon. So if Patriot can't intercept SRBMs reliably, it's unlikely that another missile system made by the same company using the same technology could intercept MRBMs reliably.
- tyingq 5y ago>largely the same technology At a high level right? Like both "PESA" radars, but completely different implementations. Similar, but not at all the same missles, etc. And it's not clear a Patriot system was in Irbil, in the right spot anyway, right? So this all could mean something, but that's unclear.
- sudosysgen 5y agoIt seems the air defences were indeed in Erbil: https://globalcomment.com/how-effective-air-defences-in-iraqi-kurdistans-erbil-airport-reduce-risk-of-escalation-between-us-and-iran-backed-militias/ https://globalcomment.com/how-effective-air-defences-in-iraq... As far as implementation, yes of course the implementation would be different, but it bears to notice it is made by the same company. Is it really reasonable to expect Raytheon to fail at making competent air defences and greatly overstate their capabilities for Patriot, whereas their naval missiles are nearly perfect?