Skip to comments.
Critics Say Missile Defense System Unworkable
Reuters via NYTimes.com ^
| 12/17/2002
Posted on 12/17/2002 4:07:54 PM PST by GeneD
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-68 next last
To: dighton
That's an item of personal interest, having lived a few blocks away, long ago, from a Nike base....If they were "Herc's", you were in the atomic age and didn't know it.
(shhhhhhh, Martin Sheen might find out he lived by them too)
21
posted on
12/17/2002 5:17:58 PM PST
by
elbucko
To: elbucko
Nike-Zeus later became known as Nike-X, and then Spartan.
Wags insisted that Spartan was really an acronym:
Superior Performance And Range Through Advanced Nomenclature.
22
posted on
12/17/2002 5:18:52 PM PST
by
Poohbah
To: elbucko
Sounds like you've read B. Bruce-Briggs' The Shield of Faith. A very useful reference book. ANd he's very witty, too.
23
posted on
12/17/2002 5:19:53 PM PST
by
Poohbah
To: rickmichaels
I guess the Wright Brothers should never have wasted their time.Timely post. It is the 99th. Anniversary of the Wright's flight at Kitty Hawk, today the 17th. of December, 2002.
24
posted on
12/17/2002 5:23:12 PM PST
by
elbucko
To: GeneD
Any aerospace engineers here who are working on telemetry and vector issues on this thing. I'd really like to know, in generic and unclassified terms, some of the difficulties involved.
To: Poohbah
Wags insisted that Spartan was really an acronym:..There is an element of truth in your post. The Zeus was killed on the drawing board. The efforts of a few to keep it alive turned into only comical PR.
However, had the Zeus, Sprint and other missile intercept systems that were aborted, been developed, at least experimentally, the NYT article above would not have been written.
26
posted on
12/17/2002 5:31:24 PM PST
by
elbucko
To: elbucko
Spartan and Sprint were actually deployed operationally.
There were some semi-serious problems with the Safeguard system--the biggest being that 100 interceptors had to cope with thousands of warheads.
If MIRV technology had simply proved too unreliable for operational use, terminal-phase ABM might have been a bit more cost-effective.
27
posted on
12/17/2002 5:34:02 PM PST
by
Poohbah
To: Poohbah
Sounds like you've read B. Bruce-Briggs' The Shield of Faith.No, actually I haven't, but I'll find a copy. When the Army closed its CONUS Air Defense Command, I left and didn't look back. The Nike stuff I know is from memory. I am amazed, though, at the info on the Internet. In my time it was all mostly, "SECRET". Now it's public domain.
28
posted on
12/17/2002 5:37:10 PM PST
by
elbucko
To: elbucko
You might be interested in some of the VCE nuclear weapons movies. Good music, interesting film footage of nuclear tests, not heavy on the polemics.
29
posted on
12/17/2002 5:39:59 PM PST
by
Poohbah
To: Southack
The system is intended to protect the United States against long-range enemy missiles. But there have been three failures in the eight major tests involving attempts to shoot down a long-range dummy warhead in space over the Pacific Ocean, including the most recent test on Dec. 11." This is a 62.5% success rate. AIDS drugs are successful nowhere near 62.5% of the time. Would the NYT now suggest that we quit using or developing drugs to help those infected with aids?
I doubt it.
30
posted on
12/17/2002 5:40:19 PM PST
by
RJL
To: RJL
Also, the test failures happened early on. The recent tests have gone smashingly well.
31
posted on
12/17/2002 5:43:41 PM PST
by
Poohbah
To: backhoe
THEL is a key program. If directed energy weapon systems mature as I hope they can in the next 5 years, and with proper tracking systems to boot, you won't need 'kill vehicles' such as the one that failed last week. A ground-based laser platform could do the job.
Then, the bastards couldn't build nukes fast enough to ever reach the point where they could overwhelm this defense, as we can build lasers faster then they can build nukes.
To: Poohbah
Spartan and Sprint were actually deployed operationally.I didn't know that. It must have been a sparse coverage. I did participate on some tests of Sprint, but by then the Army was undergoing changes from a conscription service to the volunteer.
I do know some Patriot crewman from those days. It was called SAM-D then. I am glad it was saved, but its performance in the Gulf is not a surprise to me.
33
posted on
12/17/2002 5:45:42 PM PST
by
elbucko
To: RJL
Interesting.
34
posted on
12/17/2002 5:47:08 PM PST
by
cornelis
To: elbucko
If they were "Herc's", you were in the atomic age and didn't know it.Since I'm not Martin Sheen, cool!
35
posted on
12/17/2002 5:48:41 PM PST
by
dighton
To: big bad easter bunny
"Ruth made a big mistake when he gave up pitching."
- Tris Speaker, 1918.
To: Poohbah
You might be interested in some of the VCE nuclear weapons movies.I hate to post my ignorance (knowingly) but what is the acronym, "VCE"?
I did, however get to see some interesting movies while at Air Defense as officer cadet. Mostly from WWII.
37
posted on
12/17/2002 5:51:22 PM PST
by
elbucko
To: elbucko
I didn't know that. It must have been a sparse coverage.100 interceptors total--70 Spartan, 30 Sprint--deployed at Grand Forks AFB, North Dakota. There was going to be a second site at Malmstrom AFB, in Montana. It got cancelled in the wake of the ABM Treaty.
It was never intended to be a nationwide coverage, just coverage for the ICBM sites around Grand Forks, Minot, and Ellsworth.
38
posted on
12/17/2002 5:51:24 PM PST
by
Poohbah
To: elbucko
VCE is the company marketing this stuff.
Two of their titles are "Trinity and Beyond" (nuclear tests from 1945-1962, along with the first Chinese nuclear test in 1964), and "Nuclear 911" (film footage of nuclear weapons-related mishaps and the response to those mishaps.)
Do a Google on the titles, you'll find 'em.
39
posted on
12/17/2002 5:53:08 PM PST
by
Poohbah
To: GeneD
This article reeks of a tone I've heard often from liberal friends: "if ain't perfect , better not do it". Heck, it's only nuking a major American city we're talking about, right? Better not do it, 0% chance is better than 62% right?
Now, when I point out the abysmal rate of sucess of liberal social programs -- welfare deepening not reducing poverty, needle-exchange increasing drug dependency, then , well, "we just need to keep working harder at it" .
Ignorant boobs.
40
posted on
12/17/2002 5:54:18 PM PST
by
mikenola
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-68 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson