Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US Downs Dummy Ballistic Missile in Successful Test
Reuters ^ | 24FEB05 | Jim Wolf

Posted on 02/24/2005 5:55:22 PM PST by familyop

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A missile fired from a U.S. Navy ship off Kauai, Hawaii, intercepted and destroyed a mock warhead on Thursday, the fifth success in six such test of the fledgling U.S. anti-missile shield's sea-based leg, the Pentagon announced.

"We had a successful hit-to-kill intercept," said Richard Lehner, a spokesman for the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency.

The target was tracked from the cruiser Lake Erie using the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Weapon System developed by Lockheed Martin Corp. It was launched from the U.S. Pacific Missile Range Facility at Barking Sands, Kauai.

The ship fired a Standard Missile (SM)-3 at the target outside the earth's atmosphere during the descent phase of flight, Lockheed said. Raytheon Co. is developing the SM-3.

The Defense Department plans to field up to 30 SM-3 missiles on Aegis-equipped ships by 2007 to destroy short- and medium-range ballistic missiles in mid-flight. Other systems are being developed to defend at different stages.

For the ground-based mid-course leg of ballistic missile defense, managed for the Pentagon by Boeing Co., five of eight shoot down tests have been completed successfully.

Interceptor missiles failed to launch from their silos in the last two ground-based tests because of hardware and software glitches.

The Pentagon plans to spend roughly $10 billion a year over the next five years on all aspects of missile defense. The initial "layered" shield is designed to thwart missiles that could be fired from North Korea, possibly tipped with nuclear, chemical or germ warheads.

Last fall, the Japan-based Arleigh Burke-class destroyer Curtis Wilbur became the first component of the anti-missile shield to be put on patrol in the Sea of Japan to guard against North Korean attack.

Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed, the Pentagon's No. 1 supplier, calls Aegis the world's premier naval defense system, capable of defending against air, surface and underwater threats.

Currently deployed on 68 U.S. Navy cruisers and destroyers, the Aegis system is also being supplied to Spain, Japan, South Korea, Norway and Australia.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Hawaii; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: aegis; lockheedmartin; miltech; missiledefense; usn
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last
To: PatriotGirl827
Didn't the idiot J. F'n Kerry say in one of the debates that he would "shut that program down" if he was elected?

I searched johnkerry.com, and I believe that following is representative of Senator Kerry's disregard for missile defense:

As President, Kerry Will Build a Realistic, Effective Defense Against Ballistic Missiles. Regarding a sensible missile defense system, John Kerry has stated: “I support the development of an effective defense against ballistic missiles that is deployed with maximum transparency and consultation with U.S. allies and other major powers. If there is a real potential of a rogue nation firing missiles at any city in the United States, responsible leadership requires that we make our best, most thoughtful efforts to defend against that threat. The same is true of accidental launch. If it were to happen, no leader could ever explain not having chosen to defend against the disaster when doing so made sense. I opposed the Bush Administration’s decisions to proceed with early deployment of a national missile defense system and to abrogate the ABM treaty, destroying an important arms control achievement while also doing damage to important international relationships.

Kerry Will Streamline Large Weapons Programs Such as Missile Defense To Pay For Larger Army—Will Add 40,000 Troops to Active Duty, Not Iraq. John Kerry will add 40,000 troops to the active duty Army to prevent and prepare for other possible conflicts. Kerry will also emphasize electronics, advanced sensors and munitions in a ‘systems of systems’ approach to transformation, reducing total expenditures on missile defense, and further reforming the acquisition process, this proposal can be made budget neutral. [www.JohnKerry.com/issues/national_security/newthreats.html]

Kerry Wants to Shape National Defense to Defend Against Modern Battles—Not Unproven Missile Defense Systems. “Instead of over-relying on weapons and tactics to fight the battles of the past, against enemies out in the desert or on open seas, we must build mobile and modern forces to prevail against terrorists hiding in caves or in the heart of a city. We must broaden our capabilities to create a military ready for any mission, from armored battle to urban warfare to homeland security. Yes, we must invest in missile defense. But not at the cost of other pressing priorities. We cannot afford to spend billions to deploy an unproven missile defense system. Not only is it not ready, but it’s the wrong priority for a war on terror where the enemy strikes with a bomb in the back of a truck, or a vial of anthrax in a briefcase.” [Remarks at the Truman Presidential Library, Independence, MO; AP, 6/3/04]

The above comes from here. The underlining is my own emphasis.

A Kerry Presidency would have been a foreign policy disaster of the first water.

41 posted on 02/24/2005 6:47:42 PM PST by snowsislander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: familyop

It's a hit !


42 posted on 02/24/2005 6:48:07 PM PST by ChadGore (VISUALIZE 62,041,268 Bush fans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: canadianally
Does anyone else find it odd that this "success" occurred on the very day that Canada said "no, eh"?

Fascinating.

43 posted on 02/24/2005 6:48:11 PM PST by mitchbert (Facts Are Stubborn Things)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77

Yeah...how was it on the McCloy? My dad was a destroyer man...WWII and Korea. When I was up in the North Atlantic in 1976, I remember seeing one of our escorts, the bow was taking green water, then you could see the screws come out, and the whole time, the ship was rolling and yawing. The water was so whipped up that the surface was white and frothy.

Nobody was allowed on deck, all the planes had 24 point tiedowns. Me and two of my buddies wanted to see what it looked like at the bow, so we went out in the catwalk (keeping our heads down so they couldn't see us from the bridge)

We watched the big, bulbous bow of the carrier come ponderously up out of the water, and TONS and TONS of water cascaded off of it...it was stunningly unbelievable! Then the ship paused, and that bow went back into the water...the only thing I can compare it to is that picture of the North Sea lighthouse with the wave crashing around it....

It looked like the whole bow of the carrier was going to submerge the way the bow entered the water and kept going...the three off us nearly killed each other leaving footprints on each others backs trying to get through the hatch!

Needless to say, we weren't in any danger. No way the bow was even close to going under, but it sure didn't look that way to us. Without a doubt, that was the most vivid memory I have of all the time I spent at sea.


44 posted on 02/24/2005 6:50:06 PM PST by rlmorel (Teresa Heinz-Kerry, better known as Kerry's "Noisy Two Legged ATM")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: familyop

I think some of the successes are being reported as failures to keep our adversaries guessing if it will work or not.


45 posted on 02/24/2005 6:52:22 PM PST by Rebelbase (Who is General Chat?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop

This was helpful, but not a very meaningful or demanding test. The launch target and interceptor were in close proximity, possibly just past the boost phase. More impressive would be an intercept at the beginning of reentry. Lets hope for that soon--then some real cheering should be directed the Chicom way.


46 posted on 02/24/2005 6:52:41 PM PST by petertare (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arkinsaw
Did the Canadians inform us of the date that they were going to say no so we could do the many weeks of preparation necessary to conduct such a test? Maybe we asked the Canadians to tell us the date of their announcement so we could prepare in advance for it.

You probably nailed that bang on but it will be of no consequence up here. The CBC, Toronto Star and other liberal media will utterly ignore it, and I fully expect to see all manner of smarmy columns in the liberal press shortly about how wise a decison this was...it will never work...weapons in space will harm women and children...you name it.

I'm 42 years old. This is the most stupid, short sighted and cynical decision I've ever seen made by any government. I'm glad I'm a sane man, 'cause I'm really PO'd today. I really didn't think Martin would do this.

47 posted on 02/24/2005 6:54:48 PM PST by mitchbert (Paul Martin is a spineless ditherer. That's a Fact. And Facts Are Stubborn Things .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: canadianally
"Does anyone else find it odd that this "success" occurred on the very day that Canada said 'no, eh'?"

I understand your perspective on the coincidence, but it's not likely that the Liberal Party decision to avoid spending more money on defense, for now, had anything to do with our Navy's test/exercise. Such tests/exercises are planned well in advance. Beyond many other logistics, many training schedules for various elements must be planned, recorded and distributed before such an exercise can be carried out.
48 posted on 02/24/2005 6:59:03 PM PST by familyop ("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77

We must be getting old. I remember when we were the leading edge of the sword because we had the NEW SM-2's onboard. I am proud to say that I was on the fire-control system for 3 ASROC shots. "Standby, SHOOT!", then a big whoosh. What a blast!


49 posted on 02/24/2005 7:00:20 PM PST by ExpatGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Sure, it's easy to shoot down a dummy missle. What about one that went to college?


50 posted on 02/24/2005 7:01:48 PM PST by Dutch Boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: familyop
My thanks go out to the following:

The honorable Mr. Ronald Reagan. Thank you for your fearless and bold leadership that helped to bring this vision to reality.

To the honorable Mr. George W. Bush. For upholding the legacy of Americanism, as espoused by President Reagan, and recognizing a good idea when your presented with one.

51 posted on 02/24/2005 7:02:14 PM PST by semaj ("....by their fruit you will know them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: canadianally

"Although I consider the decision short-sighted and obtuse (yes, I am Canadian), the government of Canada officially turned down an invitation to involve itself with missle defense today."


I don't know why Canadians are opposed to being involved in this thing. I don't know if there will ever be a realistic defence against large scale missile attacks, but it looks as if there's a realistic chance that this can protect us from smaller attacks. Not that I see anyone flinging missiles at Canada anytime soon, but you never know. Stupid decision, in my opinion.

Now if just one of Pakistan or India were to get hold of this technology in working form some day ...


52 posted on 02/24/2005 7:04:02 PM PST by -YYZ-
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: familyop
US Downs Dummy Ballistic Missile ... mock warhead...

Just like Jeff Gannon was a fake reporter, this was only a dummy missle according to Reuters.

There was nothing dummy about the missle. It was a genuine ballistic missle, with an inert warhead of course. The dummy description was to minimize the accomplishment.

53 posted on 02/24/2005 7:12:00 PM PST by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: -YYZ-

I don't know why the Canadiens aren't board with this concept either. After all, it is a purely DEFENSIVE undertaking. Seems to me like any nation in the world that doesn't have evil designs in mind would enthusiastically support the development.


54 posted on 02/24/2005 7:12:41 PM PST by Nucluside
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: petertare
"The launch target and interceptor were in close proximity, possibly just past the boost phase. More impressive would be an intercept at the beginning of reentry."

The posted news column above states, "...during the descent phase of flight." And that is only one layer of several layers in the overall program. It's already a very successful program.
55 posted on 02/24/2005 7:17:06 PM PST by familyop ("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
When I was up in the North Atlantic in 1976, I remember seeing one of our escorts, the bow was taking green water, then you could see the screws come out, and the whole time, the ship was rolling and yawing.

That sounds about right. (but we were single screw). On one trip we were taking green water on the signal bridge. The bullet proof plexiglass on the forward gun mount got smashed in, several antennas broke off the mast and were hanging by their guy wires.
Our carrier was the Intrepid, she was out of Quonset Pt RI, we were part of ASW Group 4. Eventually they turned us into an R&D ship. We got the first SATNAV system on the east coast. Then they put a van into the DASH hangar and a spool of cable with microphones. We became the first mobile SOSUS station. Then they added the "golfball", which was manned by civilians. I'm betting it was a satcomm because I had to shut down the WLR-1 every time they wanted to do something. The skipper at that time went on to be CINCLANTFLT. When she was retired, rather than razor blades, they sold her to the Mexican Navy.
Another quick story - we were pulling into Keil Germany. I was on sea and anchor detail, manning the starboard pelorous. Suddenly someone on the bow noticed the anchor chain was missing. Apparently one of the links gave way and the anchor and all went splash. They went into full panic mode as they thought it might have hit our SQS-26X. Fortunately no damage to the sonar dome. As it turns out, using google I found several such events, apparently the shipyard did something wrong with the anchor chain on several DEs. :)
56 posted on 02/24/2005 7:22:13 PM PST by ProudVet77 (It's boogitty boogitty boogitty time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77
I had an AC duct right above my rack and had the same problem on several ocassions.

I had a top rack on the Berkeley, DDG-15, port side waterline forward. To get into it I had to grab a pipe, swing my legs up, switch to another pipe to swing my butt in, then grab another pipe to slide the rest of my skinny bod into the rack, sliding up under the pipe. When an alarm sounded, I'd bolt up and smack my head on that last pipe, every time.

That said, sleeping on the waterline forward was great. My head was about a foot from the hull. The water rushing by past my head, the gentle rocking of the boat; I've never slept like that before or since. Then again when the boat wasn't "gently" rocking, but was behaving more like a giant was using it in a cruel game of badmitten, well, it would throw me up into that third pipe over my head. Heck of a way to wake up. BAM! OW! (expletives deleted).

57 posted on 02/24/2005 7:23:48 PM PST by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77
I had to shut down the WLR-1

Another WLR-1 jockey. :-) I'm probably one of a very few people here that knows what that is. I was an EW on the Berkeley, '80-'81.

58 posted on 02/24/2005 7:28:03 PM PST by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77

Boy, did I ever have that wrong, '81-'83, not '80-'81. Wow. How did I do that?


59 posted on 02/24/2005 7:30:35 PM PST by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: familyop
US Downs Dummy Ballistic Missile in Successful Test

Subheading: DU swallowed up in a descending ball of fire

60 posted on 02/24/2005 7:34:11 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper (Smoke free since January 16, 2005)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson