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 - 09:28pm Jul 11, 2001 EST (#6947 of 6951)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

MD5419 rshowalter 6/19/01 9:22am ... MD5420 rshowalter 6/19/01 9:22am

On the matter of testing, and the general need for technical sanity in the administration's unpatriotic madness here, I'm very glad that Senator Levin comes from Michigan , capital of the auto industry, and a place where people can judge the difficulties in the execution of complex systems.

Missile Defense is a lot more complex, and has tigher tolerances, than auto manufacture -- but it seems to me that it is enough to know how difficult auto manufacture is, to judge how crazy the administration's proposals are. These issues can be CHECKED. By real engineers, with real names, in public (preferably with details posted for inspection on the net) with credentials at stake. The issues that matter, on the proposals so far, are unclassified. MD5414 rshowalter 6/19/01 7:15am

MD4427 rshowalt 6/1/01 11:54am ... MD4533 rshowalter 6/6/01 2:22pm
MD4611 rshowalter 6/8/01 1:58pm ... MD4666 rshowalter 6/9/01 6:12pm
MD4686 rshowalter 6/10/01 11:52am .... MD4726 rshowalter 6/10/01 11:24pm
MD4852 rshowalter 6/12/01 12:23pm ...

And in the time since, the technical probabilities of the Missile Defense program have been discussed -- the program is dubious in the extreme -- and can fairly be described as a "shuck".
MD6859 rshowalter 7/10/01 4:14pm ... MD6860 rshowalter 7/10/01 4:31pm
MD6861 rshowalter 7/10/01 4:36pm

I'm prepared to go forward with much of the checking that can be applied to missile defense on the basis of the most fundamental facts, which are all in the open literature. I can get good engineers to assist with that. Many of the basic facts, including the fact that it is easy to immunize a missile or warhead from lasar damage (something the contractors must have known for years) are in this thread. http://www.phy.davidson.edu/jimn/Java/Coatings.htm

rshowalter - 10:17pm Jul 11, 2001 EST (#6948 of 6951)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Interesting, if ambiguous, language from gisterme , our "Bush administration stand-in .... MD3084 gisterme 5/2/01 7:51pm

" By "plenty of ways to show it" do you mean ways other than the President of the United States coming right out and saying it? As you contemplate that question, keep in mind that Bill Clinton is no longer president. "

rshowalter - 10:19pm Jul 11, 2001 EST (#6949 of 6951)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Clinton, for all his failings, quite often, though not always, favored the direct, honest approach on technical matters -- and admitted technical mistakes -- especially ones that he had largely inherited. Sometimes, I wish that George W. Bush would rise to that standard . . at least on this matter.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense