Say the usa and soviet union in cold war. History has records of incidents were dalse alarms (including one from the sun) almost started nuclear armageddon.
How did they keep testing missiles (ICBM) with longer and longer ranges without it being detected as a real missle?
Not to mention there are still states that are neighbored by hostile countries and still manage to do their ICBM tests with ranges encompassing multiple continents. How do they manage it?
In: Other
Communication
Every missile test and rocket launch is publicized with a listed trajectory and launch window because they all look like real missiles because they are!
If the US wants to test a Trident missile out they’ll put out a public statement saying what they’re launching, when they’re launching, what is it’s end target, and what corridor will it travel in. Any deviation in these parameters is cause for concern by potential targets
But each and every sizable rocket launch triggers the launch detection satellites in orbit which watch for big heat signatures of rocket/missile launches
If the USA launches from Vandenburg AFB ([https://abcnews.go.com/US/us-launches-icbm-california-overnight-test/story?id=68773164](https://abcnews.go.com/US/us-launches-icbm-california-overnight-test/story?id=68773164)) then everyone is basically OK because everyone on the planet knows that Vandenburg is our test facility. Also under START we are required to give nations telemetry that tells them it is a test ([https://www.state.gov/new-start/](https://www.state.gov/new-start/)).
*To enhance transparency, the Parties annually exchange telemetric information on a parity basis, for up to five ICBM and SLBM launches per year. These measurements of various technical parameters are made to monitor missile performance during ICBM and SLBM flight tests.*
If one launches from Wyoming or Montana – we are all screwed, those are nuclear tipped missiles.
That is for Russia and the USA, the two nations with the most ICBMs, by far. It gets dicier when we are talking about non-signatory countries, like Israel. Israel conducts missile tests ([https://www.timesofisrael.com/iai-tests-short-range-ballistic-missile-hitting-2-small-floating-targets-at-sea/](https://www.timesofisrael.com/iai-tests-short-range-ballistic-missile-hitting-2-small-floating-targets-at-sea/)) but they tend to be of pretty short range. I don’t know for certain, but I am sure they tell Russia and the USA before they do these things, and tell them repeatedly and insistently so as to avoid being nuked into oblivion by mistake.
Then there is someone like North Korea, where we don’t really know what they are going to do, and if they tell us, we don’t believe them in any real way. This is where the MAD theory comes into play, they can saber rattle but if they launch and it even suggests it will hit a major country or ally they will be nuked into oblivion.
Only a few countries can launch ICBMs that can hit anywhere in the world, those countries are Russia, USA, China, Britain, and France. Those nations tend to have diplomatic relations which will prevent us from cross nuking each other because of an error. The risk is just too high.
Step one, don’t point it at your enemy.
Kwajalein Atoll is where the US aimed many of its test ICBMs. It’s a little circle Of islands in the middle if the Pacific Ocean.
Really far from Russia and China.
Other people have covered the diplomatic and technical controls that allow tests to happen without anyone panicking, but something else worth considering is that a test involves one missile at a time. This in and of itself is enough to distinguish it from an attack.
A single missile is not, to the best of my knowledge, capable of destroying an entire nation’s ability to retaliate. As a result, if you see a single missile launch, you can afford to wait and see if it’s a test or not. If it turns out to be an attack, you don’t really lose anything by waiting (launching earlier isn’t likely to reduce your losses to the single missile that’s already in the air) until it lands and you know for sure. Whereas if it wasn’t an attack, you just started WWIII for no reason.
Presumably quite a bit of it can come down to relatively straightforward maths too. If you know you’ve got a rocket design that has been tested to a certain range then you develop a propellant which burns with the same thrust for 20% longer you can work out what the additional burn time means for the range and validate with static testing, none of which require a full blown launch.
I’m not an expert but I don’t think anyone has answered the specific part of your question about how they test the range. As far as I know they usually use a “lofted” trajectory. Instead of shooting it at a lower angle for a longer distance, they shoot it almost vertically to test how high up it goes.
Latest Answers