The other meaning of FOB

[unixronin]

According to the Reg, DARPA is working on a conventional-warhead fractional-orbital bombardment system that can be fired from a Mk.41 vertical-launch tube.  If the tech can be made to work (and the SM-3 Standard's existing capabilities argue that it probably can), the new ArcLight program (yes, they re-used the name) could theoretically enable the US to put a 100lb precision-guided warhead anywhere in the world on thirty minutes' notice.

Comments

Re: FOB Old Idea

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Sure, it's an old idea ... basically dates back to the Nazi skip-bomber idea.

One of the problems, heck really the *only* deal killer is a conventionally armed FOB system is indistinguishable from a nuke.

Well, to a point. It would necessarily produce a very similar radar, visual and IR track. Once it lands, though, it's going to be pretty clear it was a conventional warhead. At this point in time, as far as we know, only the US and Russia have the probable capability to intercept an incoming FOB warhead.

I saw a proposal for a similar system that could put a reinforced company of asault troops anywhere in 180 minutes - basically a suborbital spaceplane - the limiting factor was the level of acceptable acceleration.

Yeah, I think I probably saw the same article. Wasn't it in one of the Popular Wild Speculation magazines a while back...?