Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

U.S. Missile Shield Won't Work

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • U.S. Missile Shield Won't Work

    U.S. Missile Shield Won't Work, Scientist Group Says

    Thu May 13, 2:10 PM ET Add U.S. National - Reuters to My Yahoo!


    By Jim Wolf

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The multibillion-dollar U.S. ballistic missile shield due to start operating by Sept. 30 appears incapable of shooting down any incoming warheads, an independent scientists' group said on Thursday.


    A technical analysis found "no basis for believing the system will have any capability to defend against a real attack," the Union of Concerned Scientists said in a 76-page report titled "Technical Realities."


    The Pentagon (news - web sites)'s Missile Defense Agency rejected the report, whose authors included Philip Coyle, the Defense Department's top weapons tester under former President Bill Clinton (news - web sites) from 1994 to 2001.


    "Even the limited defense we are mounting provides a level of protection against an accidental or unauthorized (intercontinental ballistic missile) launch or a limited attack where we currently have no protection," said Richard Lehner, an agency spokesman. "It would be irresponsible to not make it available for the defense of our nation and our people."


    Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the senior Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee (news - web sites), concurred with the report's findings. The Bush administration should stop buying missile-defense interceptors until they are proven to work through "combat-realistic" operational tests, he said in a statement.


    The first U.S. deployment involves 10 interceptor missiles to be stored in silos in Alaska and California. The initial goal is to protect all 50 U.S. states against a limited strike from North Korean missiles that could be tipped with nuclear, chemical or biological warheads.


    'KILL VEHICLES'


    Boeing Co. is assembling the shield, which would use the interceptors to launch "kill vehicles" meant to pulverize targets in the mid-course of their flight paths, outside the Earth's atmosphere.


    Guided by infrared sensors, the vehicles would search the chill of space for the warheads. So far, the interceptors have scored hits five times in eight highly controlled tests.


    The report's authors said demonstrating such a "hit-to-kill" capability was not the primary, or most difficult, missile-defense challenge.


    Even unsophisticated "countermeasures" that could be mounted by countries such as North Korea (news - web sites) remain an unsolved problem, they said.


    For instance, inflatable balloons or other decoys coated with a thin polyester film could be given the same infrared signature as a warhead, the scientists said. The project could also be confused by sealing the warhead in a large balloon so the kill vehicle could not pinpoint its exact location, or tethering several balloons to it.


    Overstating the defensive capabilities was irresponsible, said the report by the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based group. It cited past Pentagon statements the capability was limited only by the number of interceptors.


    "If the president is told that the system could reliably defend against a North Korean ballistic missile attack, he might be willing to accept more risks when making policy and military decisions," the report said.


    "I actually worry that it's worse than useless, that it's really dangerous," George Lewis, a report co-author who is associate director of the security studies program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (news - web sites), told reporters at a briefing.


    The General Accounting Office (news - web sites), Congress's nonpartisan investigative arm, said last month the system's effectiveness would be "largely unproven" when it becomes operational.


    The Pentagon estimates it will need $53 billion in the next five years to develop, field and upgrade a multilayered shield also involving systems based at sea, aboard modified Boeing 747 aircraft and in space.

  • #2
    There's only one way to find out if it 'really' works, and hopefully we never will.

    It might work, it might not. I think it probably works if conditions are favorable.

    It only needs to shoot down 2-3 weapons, that is what it's designed for. So if each of the minuteman intercepters is actually 20% effective then the whole system does it's job.

    PS- all this talk of decoys is utter sideshow smoke and mirrors. Neither the DPRK nor China have MIRVed weapons. Decoys are totally irrelevant to this weapons system.

    Comment


    • #3
      Btw, russian television showed a little film about ongoing tests for Anti-MissileDefence-missiles.

      As I understand it is a WH that can use athmospheric maneuvers to change it's trajectory, or even "bounce" off the athmosphere as a ping-pong ball.

      Red and Green lines - intercontinental and orbital ballistic trajectories.
      Yellow - trajectories using athmopheric maneuvers

      Image 1


      Image 2 :

      Comment


      • #4
        The missile defense shield isn't for use against Russian missiles except maybe for the erroneous 'oh shit!' scenario of an accidental launch.

        Neither the US nor Russia has any prayer of stopping a nuclear attack from the other....which is the real reason russia is no threat, and we're no threat to them.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by M21Sniper
          The missile defense shield isn't for use against Russian missiles except maybe for the erroneous 'oh shit!' scenario of an accidental launch.

          Neither the US nor Russia has any prayer of stopping a nuclear attack from the other....which is the real reason russia is no threat, and we're no threat to them.
          Speaking of "Oh shit, I didnt mean" that scenario. There is an operational missile shield over Moscow and surrounding area since the 70s. The shield consists of 3 layers. If I remember correctly the two most outer ones rely on nuclear tipped interceptor missiles and the lower one on highly manueverable special SAMs. It is calimed to be effective against "accidental" launches and somewhat effective against an attack.

          Comment


          • #6
            We can throw a nuke at a bunch of nukes too, it's not to big of an acomplishment.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by berkut
              Speaking of "Oh shit, I didnt mean" that scenario. There is an operational missile shield over Moscow and surrounding area since the 70s. The shield consists of 3 layers. If I remember correctly the two most outer ones rely on nuclear tipped interceptor missiles and the lower one on highly manueverable special SAMs. It is calimed to be effective against "accidental" launches and somewhat effective against an attack.
              Huh huh ;)
              http://pvo.guns.ru/abm/a35.htm
              Read the last line before "sources"

              The very similar system was used in the US ... it was Nike Hercules
              Last edited by lurker; 14 May 04,, 23:55.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Praxus
                We can throw a nuke at a bunch of nukes too, it's not to big of an acomplishment.
                "Coulda, shoulda, woulda" does not count.

                Comment


                • #9
                  It is called the Nike Hercules as Lurker pointed out. It was first introduced in 1958.
                  Last edited by Praxus; 15 May 04,, 00:07.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Both systems were retired in the middle of the 80s.

                    Returning to the topic - one more interesting link:
                    Missile Defence Limitations in Testing

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Don't you have something better to pick then a stupid graphic depicting something about a SINGLE PART of the Missile Defense System in only a few of it's tests?

                      Even if each part of the system only managed to knock down 50% of the incoming missiles, not many missiles will get through.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Praxus
                        Don't you have something better to pick then a stupid graphic depicting something about a SINGLE PART of the Missile Defense System in only a few of it's tests?

                        Even if each part of the system only managed to knock down 50% of the incoming missiles, not many missiles will get through.
                        It depends on a number.

                        As Sniper pointed out above - if US or Russia would use all their arsenal - noone would survive anyway.

                        I agree to that, - it doesnt matter if you got hit by 2000 warheads or just 1000, oyu would be very dead anyway.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Very true, I agree too.

                          Im talking about a limited release of course.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Anyway the title of this thread should be "US NMD shield probably works against the types of targets it's actually intended to stop".

                            Those targets would be one or two unitary warheads on the tops of Chinese or DPRK missiles.

                            Frankly even one MIRVed SS-18 would be more than it could handle(the same is true for the Russian ABM system around Moscov fending off any more than 1 or 2 MIRVed Trident D-5 SLBMs).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              China has the MIRV capability. They proved that in multiple satellites lauched from same rocket already.

                              Here is the DF-31 ICBM payload:



                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X