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

Skip to comments.

US missile defence radar hits stormy seas ($815 platform flounders)
The Register ^ | Sept 4, 2006 | Lester Haines

Posted on 09/05/2006 1:53:01 PM PDT by theBuckwheat

The future of the US's much-hyped, $815m Sea-Based X-Band Radar (SBX) platform is in serious doubt after a raft of sceptics expressed doubts that the sea monster could ever effectively operate in its intended final mooring off Alaska's Aleutian Islands.

The SBX - designed to detect incoming ICBMs - is currently wallowing in Hawaii after repairs necessitated by a light battering it received during its first ocean voyage from the Gulf of Mexico, Defencetech reports. Its eventual home is described by the Chicago Tribune as "unforgiving [stretch] of the Bering Sea where winter weather can be so violent that the islands have been nicknamed 'the birthplace of winds'."

And that's where SBX might come seriously unstuck. Philip Coyle, assistant secretary of defense from 1994 to 2001 in the Clinton administration, commented: "That radar is absolutely packed with sensitive electronics, and...salt water, wind and waves don't go well with sensitive electronics.

"The bottom line is that the designers of this system didn't begin to contemplate the realistic conditions under which the X-Band would have to operate. When you look at all the facts, you really have to wonder what the people who designed this thing were thinking..."

(Excerpt) Read more at theregister.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: defense
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

1 posted on 09/05/2006 1:53:03 PM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat
And that's where SBX might come seriously unstuck. Philip Coyle, assistant secretary of defense from 1994 to 2001 in the Clinton administration, commented: "That radar is absolutely packed with sensitive electronics, and...salt water, wind and waves don't go well with sensitive electronics.

Wow. You mean the US Navy can't use radar?

2 posted on 09/05/2006 1:54:01 PM PDT by BeHoldAPaleHorse ( ~()):~)>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat
...($815 platform flounders)

Perhaps if they had spent a bit more on it...

3 posted on 09/05/2006 1:55:23 PM PDT by TChris (Banning DDT wasn't about birds. It was about power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse

This has me salty...


4 posted on 09/05/2006 1:55:24 PM PDT by dubie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TChris

Must've bought a ChiCom-built platform at Wally Mart...


5 posted on 09/05/2006 1:56:51 PM PDT by BeHoldAPaleHorse ( ~()):~)>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat

$815 for a radar platform. Was it made out of Legos?


6 posted on 09/05/2006 1:57:29 PM PDT by CougarGA7 (Place Your Ad Here!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse

This radar is a product of the Missile Defense Agancy without much (hardly any) cooperation or blessing by the U.S. Navy. The Navy, I think it is safe to say, didn't want any part of this thing. The Navy is involved in warships....which this thing unquestionably is not.


7 posted on 09/05/2006 1:57:57 PM PDT by John Carey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse
Aegis Radar System, no salt or water or wind.


8 posted on 09/05/2006 1:58:19 PM PDT by USS Alaska (Nuke the terrorist savages - In Honor of Standing Wolf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TChris

$815.00.... lol


9 posted on 09/05/2006 1:58:27 PM PDT by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat
That thing is interesting, but huuuuuuuge and vulnerable. It's basically a monolithic, fragile white basketball.

The part of the Aleutians it's going to?

The natives call it, "The birthplace of all wind", or something --tailor made for Dorothy and Toto, 'cept -40.

10 posted on 09/05/2006 1:58:43 PM PDT by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse
Philip Coyle, assistant secretary of defense from 1994 to 2001 in the notoriously anti-military Clinton administration
11 posted on 09/05/2006 1:58:43 PM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilisation is aborting, buggering, and contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat

Sounds like the peacenik lobby, to me. Anytime you plan to spend money on the military, you can expect a Democrat to come up with some reason why it's a waste.


12 posted on 09/05/2006 1:59:34 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gaijin
Kind of reminds me of Texas Towers.

Texas Tower

13 posted on 09/05/2006 2:00:50 PM PDT by CougarGA7 (Place Your Ad Here!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat

And this thing wasn't placed on land because.....


14 posted on 09/05/2006 2:01:13 PM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat
SBX is a humongus X-Band radar on an oil rig. The oil rig has to be towed around for mobility (it can only make a few knots on its own power), but once emplaced it's plenty stable.

This mode of basing was chosen because it was intended for tests in the Aleutians, western Pacific and off Hawaii. It takes days to emplace, but it's as safe as any oil rig. Actually, once emplaced it's probably more seaworthy than an Aegis destroyer.
15 posted on 09/05/2006 2:01:49 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (NYT Headline: 'Protocols of the Learned Elders of CBS: Fake But Accurate, Experts Say.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr

See #15.


16 posted on 09/05/2006 2:02:25 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (NYT Headline: 'Protocols of the Learned Elders of CBS: Fake But Accurate, Experts Say.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CougarGA7

I don't want to put too fine a point on this but, as a person who is the product of an unusual education, I thought I would point out that "founder" in the word for a ship or vessel in trouble in shoal water or on the rocks. "Flounder" is is fish (noun) or it can mean "To move or act clumsily and in confusion." But usually, for a vessel at sea, the word preferred is "founder."

Don't take offense. I was trained as a newspaper editor by guys thatwent snakey over things like this!


17 posted on 09/05/2006 2:02:56 PM PDT by John Carey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse

As a resident of Hawaii I would be most pleased to see SBX permanently moored in the local waters.

We are, after all, the primary targets for the North Korean missiles.


18 posted on 09/05/2006 2:04:50 PM PDT by bluejay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Carey

Lol. Nit-picking?


19 posted on 09/05/2006 2:04:57 PM PDT by CougarGA7 (Place Your Ad Here!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: USS Alaska

WARSHIP!!! Article is about BARGE!!!


20 posted on 09/05/2006 2:05:08 PM PDT by John Carey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 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