New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

rshowalter - 07:42am Jul 6, 2001 EST (#6662 of 6668)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Interesting posts from gisterme. I've got a full day ahead of me, after a full, pleasant day yesterday. While I'm getting some things organized, and savoring the situation, I'd like to repeat the following posts, especially because of what has been posted here since.

MD6641rshowalter 7/5/01 12:21pm .... MD6642 rshowalter 7/5/01 12:29pm
MD6643 rshowalter 7/5/01 12:46pm

I'd also like to refer again to a string of postings, on September 25th 2000 from an all day (more than eight hour) meeting between me and a ranking and well informed representative of the United States government.that started with the proposal of

MD266 rshowalt 9/25/00 7:32am .... MD267 rshowalt 9/25/00 7:33am
MD268 rshowalt 9/25/00 7:35am .... MD269 rshowalt 9/25/00 7:36am

and ended with an offer of mine, MD304 rshowalt 9/25/00 5:28pm .

That offer still stands.

rshowalter - 08:07am Jul 6, 2001 EST (#6663 of 6668)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

MD5993 rshowalter 6/25/01 1:05pm

Some might like MD5994 rshowalter 6/25/01 1:05pm especially - it has a quote worth remembering, from a fine detective story writer.

Here's a comment on things that are hard to do, if not impossible.
MD5995 rshowalter 6/25/01 1:30pm

I know a guy who juggles well. He does other very hard things well also. But he can't do these hard things, all at the same time. How many "breakthrough miracles" of technology can DOD get to work, in the same system, all at the same time?

It is worth remembering how competent they aren't and what their leadership clearly does not understand - when asking the question.

rshowalter - 10:27am Jul 6, 2001 EST (#6664 of 6668)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

MD6000 smartalix 6/25/01 2:52pm cites an excellent article -- important enough to issues of deception and lying by the administration -- discussed here on this thread, that I'm posting it in full, with some bolding for emphasis, and some comments.

June 25, 2001 Pentagon Study Casts Doubt on Missile Defense Schedule By JAMES DAO http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/25/politics/25MISS.html

"WASHINGTON, June 24 — An internal Defense Department study concluded last year that testing on the national missile defense program was behind schedule and unrealistic and had suffered too many failures to justify deploying the system in 2005, a year after the Bush administration is considering deploying one.

"The August 2000 report from the Pentagon's Office of Operational Test and Evaluation, only recently released to Congress, offers new details about problems the Pentagon has encountered in developing antimissile technology. And it raises questions about how quickly an effective system can be made operational.

"The Pentagon is studying proposals to deploy a limited system — but one that would violate the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty — as soon as 2004. In recent weeks, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld has indicated a willingness to deploy a system before tests have been completed if an attack seems imminent.

"But as an example of unrealistic testing, the report cited an October 1999 test in which a Global Positioning System inside a mock warhead helped guide an intercept missile toward a target over the Pacific. That test was successful, but two more recent flight tests failed.

"None of those tests used the kinds of sophisticated decoys that a real ballistic missile would use to confuse an antimissile system, the report said. Instead, the decoy in each test was a large balloon that did not look like a warhead and that the kill vehicle's sensors could easily distinguish from the target.

"The report also asserted that the Pentagon had not even scheduled a test involving multiple targets, the likely situation in an attack. And it found software problems with a training simulator that made it appear as if twice as many warheads had been fired at the United States as had been intended in a 1999 exercise.

"The simulator then fired interceptors at those "phantom tracks," and operators were unable to override it, the report said.

"The report, which President Bill Clinton read just before deferring initial construction on a missile system last September, acknowledged that the program was still in its early stages and was progressing well on some fronts. But it concluded that unless testing was significantly accelerated, at significantly higher cost, the program would not be ready for use against real attacks for several years.

"Deployment means the fielding of an operational system with some military utility which is effective under realistic combat conditions," the report states. "Such a capability is yet to be shown to be practicable for NMD," or national missile defense.

"Officials with the Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defense Organization disputed parts of the report, saying that the Global Positioning System used in the 1999 test did not guide the kill vehicle to the target. They also contended that the simulator did not fire at "phantom" missiles.

"They acknowledged software problems with the simulator but said those flaws had been fixed. And they asserted that future tests, perhaps starting next year, would involve tougher situations, including more sophisticated decoys, multiple warheads and different trajectories.

(more)

(4 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense