New Nukes?

This is coolbert:

Here are the type of headlines that during the era of the Cold War, used to scare the pants off of folks.

"New nuclear warhead design for US"

A NEW nuclear warhead. "Don't we already have enough of them?" That is the reaction of most people.

In this case, you have to read the article further to fully understand, or at least TRY to understand, what is occurring.

"The chosen design was developed in a Californian laboratory and is based on a warhead already tested in the 1980s."

"The new warhead, due to be operational in five years' time, will be used to replace Trident missiles on submarines."

A NEW warhead that is at least twenty years old. The initial design was developed twenty years ago. And already tested? NO nuclear testing has occurred since since 1992. Presumably this missile warhead was part of testing prior to the current testing moratorium? Will be almost thirty years old when deployed. NEW??

And from the Russians, this headline.

"Putin unveils 'new super missile'"

"These missile systems don't represent a response to a missile defense system, but they are immune to that. They are hypersonic and capable of changing their flight path."

New super missile?? NO. The currently being deployed Russian Topol mobile ICBM with a steerable hypersonic reentry vehicle. That reentry vehicle does just not proceed on a predictable ballistic course, but can maneuver. The hypersonic vehicle carrying the nuclear warhead is not subject to intercept in the conventional manner as it is normally understood an anti-ballistic missile [ABM] system works.

Those that are devoted readers to this blog will remember my prior blog entry on the Russian hypersonic reentry vehicle, nuclear capable.

NEW? NEW? Please!!

coolbert.