[JumpCrisscross]

> Satellite launch is so much easier than storable SAM/ABM

Sure. But the hard part of SAM/ABM doesn’t need to be in the propulsion for many use cases, e.g. those where heightened readiness states are predictable. We’re using storable missiles for use cases where that storability isn’t adding any value.

[cpgxiii]

Where exactly is that storability not needed? In the VLS cells of USN warships? In the missile canisters of field-mobile SAM batteries being driven cross-country (which, for survivability on the modern battlefield need to be moving a lot more)?

The only real cases a non-storable SAM/ABM is viable are where the target being protected is so small and so known that (1) all missile infrastructure on/near the target is vulnerable and (2) sufficient advance warning is available to handle liquid fuels as needed. There is really only one case of this: Guam. I think there is a case that a dedicated unique-to-Guam liquid-fueled SAM/ABM farm would go a long way to addressing stockpile and magazine depth concerns.

[JumpCrisscross]

> There is really only one case of this: Guam

Every U.S. base has this need. Stored munitions take out the first wave. That buys time to fuel the plentiful replacements.

[nixon_why69]

Which means US servicemen handling extremely dangerous chemical oxidizers under fire. This stuff reacts explosively with everything, including common metals and anything organic.

Admittedly, it allows you to sidestep the regulatory hassles with handling those chemicals in the US, we can order troops to do all sorts of non-OSHA bad ideas, but wouldn't it be easier to just do the dangerous chemical handling on US soil, on a 9-5 in factory?

[JumpCrisscross]

> Which means US servicemen handling extremely dangerous chemical oxidizers under fire

Fueling and oxidizing is automated now. The only risk would be the oxidizer being struck. But that isn’t super different from storing any ammunition.

> wouldn't it be easier to just do the dangerous chemical handling on US soil, on a 9-5 in factory?

No, it’s not. Particularly when you factor into the risk calculation the inevitability of exhausting those stockpiles in a conflict.

[nixon_why69]

Man, this is such a weird hill to stand on.

Are we talking HTP+Kerosene or UDMH+N2O4 here? The article said HTP in which case you have 1% breakdown to water per year which will be an ongoing problem for stockpiles. N2O4 is nastier but more stable when contained.

Either way, you're going from "dangerous chemistry in the plant" to "dangerous chemistry in the plant, through a global logistics network, and in operations". The solid rocket fuel is pretty stable after it's built, just don't light it on fire or drop it too hard. Room temperature oxidizers are terrifying.

[JumpCrisscross]

> a weird hill to stand on

To be clear, I know a good amount about rockets and less about missiles. I’m standing on this hill. I won’t die on it.

> Are we talking HTP+Kerosene or UDMH+N2O4 here?

I’m thinking kerosene or even methane. UDMH is a toxic mess.

> you have 1% breakdown to water per year which will be an ongoing problem for stockpiles

Sort of? It’s a nuisance. Not a dealbreaker. Certainly not an issue compared to running out of munitions.

> to "dangerous chemistry in the plant, through a global logistics network, and in operations"

The dangerousness of an energetics plant is not comparable to that of managing HTP. (And at a certain point, LOX becomes economically competitive for base protection.)

> solid rocket fuel is pretty stable after it's built, just don't light it on fire or drop it too hard

It’s great while you have them. Then you run out. That’s the current situation. Lots of perfect for a while, and then rationing while the enemy gets free hits.

Put two militaries against each other, one which can mass produce and fuel liquid rockets against one with fewer solid ones, and the former has an attrition advantage while the latter has a readiness one. If one only has solid-fueled rockets being made at a tiny clip, where the AP all comes from one plant, they become an easy adversary to defeat.