Comments by "verdebusterAP" (@verdebusterAP) on "" video.

The simple route is simply buy more AEGIS SHORE systems as well mobile launchers
1
Not Necessarily true the simple and cheap route is just buy a few more AEGIS ASHORE as well develop mobile launchers that can carry up 16 PAC-3s or 4 SM-6 There many ways to reuse existing weapons to keep the price down
1
@M16_Akula-III Unless they design the ASHORE launcher with simple system where once the missiles are expended, the empty cells slide down and out and fresh cell comes forward and up They need mobile launchers that can take over while the main launchers reloads The Typhon launcher for example can hold up 4 SM-6s and the Army has it set up with 16 missiles across 4 launchers Two launchers with quad packed PAC-3s and 2 with SM-6s The SM-6 block II are better equipped for BM and if you want expanded capabilities , certify the Typhon with the SM-3 Both the SM-6 and SM-3 are excellent at BM
1
@M16_Akula-III Incorrect Alaska would need 3 Hawaii 1 West 5 East 6,- One for DC specifically Gulf 3 and lastly 4 for the Mid country So at most 22-24 Now if you went with complete MK-41 ASHORE, possibly 50 billion Now if you went radar and Typhon launchers The SPY-7 aka Long Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR) 1 Hawaii 3 on each coast plus 1 in the Gulf and DC Alaska already has one so say 12 radars, you are only at 10 billion Plus 100 Typhoon launchers is 18 billion So additional 2 billion for set up and software 30 billion The current Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD), cost between 30-40 so the key factor is existing weapons that would be resused which would lower cost
1
@M16_Akula-III For complete coverage using Aegis Ashore for 24 units is 50 billion using combo SPY-7 and Typhon is 30 billion But there are also existing defenses that can lower the cost Example the Ticonderoga class carry up 122 missiles and there was proposal where they build docks and moor the ships to act as missile batteries
1