01-27-2017, 04:40 PM
(01-27-2017, 04:18 PM)Mikebert Wrote:(01-27-2017, 03:40 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: The problem with the MX and for that matter, US land based ICBMs in general is that for some strange reason, the US, even with our wonders of Motor City technology, completely sucks at TELs. We've never had a TEL that can support ICBMs. Meanwhile, Russia and the PRC have really good TELs. Not only can a TEL drive anywhere there are passable roads, it can be put on a plane, a train, or a ship. That is excellent flexibility. For example, what if, airlift suddenly set up a bunch of SS-18s or DF-41s on TELs in some African country. Talk about a chess move. We can't do that. The best we can do is have a sub slowly putt its way to a point in navigable waters.When you use an acronym (TEL) you should spell it out in the first use, so the reader knows to what your are referring. Otherwise what you write is incomprehensible.
Transporter Erector Launcher.
As for the rest, TBC, I have to go back to work.
