Surface-to-air missiles for the Olympics

ubersonic said:
If they were using rapiers from the 1950's yes :P
Click to expand...

*sigh*

The Rapier was only invented in 1960s. Entered service in '71. Has an operational range up to 6.8km, with an operational ceiling of 3km. That's not even far enough to reach the border of London.

The system must have sight of the target in order to track it. The Missile is remote guided, not self-guided.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapier_(missile)
 
Dj_Jestar said:
*sigh*

The Rapier was only invented in 1960s. Entered service in '71. Has an operational range up to 6.8km, with an operational ceiling of 3km. That's not even far enough to reach the border of London.

The system must have sight of the target in order to track it. The Missile is remote guided, not self-guided.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapier_(missile)
Click to expand...

It was mostly sarcasm, the rapier has been improved since then, its operational range has been extended and it has radar guided blind fire capability.

http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/artillery-air-defence/1513.aspx
 
You all forget that they'll know about aircraft entering airspace very early due to the ship based on the Thames.

There is a huge no-fly zone around London for the Olympics, jet scramble takes a few minutes.
 
Last edited:
Dj_Jestar said:
"Blindfire" is only for when it is cloudy. It is still operated and guided from the ground unit. It needs Line of Sight ;)

See the entire section dedicated to "Blindfire" in the link I posted.
Click to expand...

It has a radar range of 10 miles, visual range is less than 10 miles. And I wasn't talking about "blindfire" I was talking about blind fire hence why I wrote it that way.
 
Last edited:
I weren't aware SAMs could stop the kinds of terrorist attacks we are expecting. Last time I checked, Islamic fundamentalists don't have jet fighters, and SAMs wouldn't be deployed on hijacked airliners.

Virtually every single terrorist attack on British soil has been through individuals and packages. These SAMs wouldn't have been able to stop the IRA, or Al Qaeda, or the like. They can't even stop poor civilians like Charles Meneze ;) Nations capable of deploying planes requiring SAMs to take down are participating in the olympics themselves!

What on earth could the SAMs possibly be for? *chortle* fine waste of taxpayer's money, typical of the Orwellian state that Britain has been mastering for the last decade and a half now.
 
ubersonic said:
It has a radar range of 10 miles, visual range is less than 10 miles. And I wasn't talking about "blindfire" I was talking about blind fire hence why I wrote it that way.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Radar range. Not Operational range. The Missile is only effective up to 6.8km.

The Missile has to be tracked within line of sight of the Rapier unit. Radar does not let you see round corners.

And you clearly were talking about "Blindfire".
 
KNiVES said:
I weren't aware SAMs could stop the kinds of terrorist attacks we are expecting. Last time I checked, Islamic fundamentalists don't have jet fighters, and SAMs wouldn't be deployed on hijacked airliners.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing they are supposed to be a deterrent to would be hijackers whether hijacked airlines they would be shot down or not.
 
This story comes across as typical NIMBYism to me, and another debate the government can't win. No doubt if they didn't deploy SAM sites and God forbid, there was an incident involving a hijacked aircraft, the government would be criticised for not taking enough steps to defend the games :rolleyes:
 
Dj_Jestar said:
Yeah, Radar range. Not Operational range. The Missile is only effective up to 6.8km.
Click to expand...

8.2km


Dj_Jestar said:
The Missile has to be tracked within line of sight of the Rapier unit. Radar does not let you see round corners.
Click to expand...

Of course, but the target does not have to be in visual LOS range of the unit to launch/guide the missile.


Dj_Jestar said:
And you clearly were talking about "Blindfire".
Click to expand...

I clearly was not hence why I used the term "blind fire" (the ability to aim at/target things without visual line of sight by using radar/heat/other forms of tracking) in context instead of "blindfire".
 
Radar is directional. You must have live of sight for it to work. As is infra-red. As is optical tracking.

You're wrong. Get over it.
 
KNiVES said:
I weren't aware SAMs could stop the kinds of terrorist attacks we are expecting. Last time I checked, Islamic fundamentalists don't have jet fighters, and SAMs wouldn't be deployed on hijacked airliners.
Click to expand...


Yes they would, that's the only reason why they are there. If it's a choice between taking down a hijacked airliner with 2-300 people on board or letting it slam into a packed stadium of 50,000 they will shoot it down. Or atleast I hope they would. Many people still believe that the fourth jet in the 9/11 attacks was shot down after they realised what was happening, I'm not saying that's true but I would understand why they would have done it if it was true.
 
Dj_Jestar said:
Radar is directional. You must have live of sight for it to work. As is infra-red. As is optical tracking.

You're wrong. Get over it.
Click to expand...

I never said it didn't need line of sight, I know how radar works, I said it didn't need VISUAL line of sight as your OP suggested, and can do it with radar.
 
The only problem I have with the defence plan is that they made it known to the entire world where all the sites are being deployed, which just makes them targets themselves.
 
Westyfield2 said:
Sounds well cool.

I live near an MOD site... helps you sleep at night knowing that not so far away are armed guards looking out for baddies :p.
Click to expand...

Depends, i highly doubt the MOD cares for anyone else plus you never know when one of those "armed gaurds" could go mentally insane and shoot at civilians, perhaps even steal a military vehicle and crash it.

Hell i saw an American soldier steal a bloody Abrams tank in a US city, granted it was on one of those police shows, still...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom