 |
| |
|
|
Gatekeeper
|
 |
United States of America
Feb 2000
time: 23:17
|
|
Everyone:
Heh. Don't believe me? Then take a look at this article and judge for yourself, fellow 'Polytubbies:
quote:
Weather delays full flight test of missile defense system
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) Bad weather Wednesday forced the military to scrub the first full flight test of its national missile defense system in nearly two years.
It is just heavy cloud cover, Rick Lehner, a spokesman for the Missile Defense Agency, said of conditions Wednesday evening off the Alaskan coast.
The launch was being put on hold for 24 to 48 hours.
The $85 million test comes as the military is in final preparations to activate missile defenses designed to protect against an intercontinental ballistic missile attack from North Korea or elsewhere in eastern Asia.
During the test, a target missile will be launched from Kodiak Island, Alaska, and an interceptor missile will fire from Kwajalein Island in the central Pacific Ocean.
Because the launches will test several new aspects of the missile defense system, Lehner said the interceptor actually shooting down the target is not a primary goal of the mission.
The test is the first in which the interceptor uses the same booster rocket that the operational system uses, Lehner said.
Two previous tests scheduled for this year were delayed due to technical problems. In earlier testing, which critics derided as highly scripted, the interceptors went five-for-eight when launched with the goal of hitting target missiles. |
Dear Lord! You're telling me, Mr. Military Official, that "heavy cloud cover" prevents the effective use of the multi-billion dollar anti-missile defense system?! I'd double over laughing if it weren't for the ungodly price tag and the fact that Pyongyang, et al., can check the weather conditions over Alaska before deciding whether or not to crater Los Angeles or Seattle before being turned into a glowing parking lot in return.
Ha! Our government at work, folks! Thank every deity in existence that I live in a relatively rural area, away from high-value tactical and strategic targets. Well, for the most part (those missile fields in North Dakota are still on somebody's "to-kill" list ...).
Gatekeeper
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Gatekeeper
|
|
United States of America
Feb 2000
time: 23:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
The idea of testing is to test under ideal conditions, so you can test the missile system, and not the weather conditions. |
This really does make me wonder, though, if the system would work in less-than-ideal weather conditions in this case, under cloudy skies. Especially considering that fact that previous tests of this system meant having targeted missiles specially equipped to make them more obvious to the interceptor missile.
I mean, what are the odds an attack is going to take place a nice, clear sunny day, and that the inbound warheads will be nice enough to wave big flags screaming, "I'm here! Not there, HERE, DANGIT! Can't you see?!"
Surely our R&D folks have guidance systems on these "killer pebbles" capable of penetrating a variety of crappy weather.
Gatekeeper
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
The idea of testing is to test under ideal conditions, so you can test the missile system, and not the weather conditions. |
How exactly does testing on a cloudy day test the weather conditions?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shmily_dana
|
|
Tucson,AZ USA
Aug 1999
time: 05:17
|
|
The always want to have good weather on flight tests so that they can get photos.
Also, I imagine they have telemetry coming out of the missile. Need good weather for good reception.
There are also range safety issues that mandate good weather.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Admiral
|
 |
of the peace and coexistance movement
Feb 2001
time: 00:17
|
|
The reason that some of us are opposed to the idea of the ABM system is the nature of the threat environment today. The cold war is over. No matter how strong China gets, it has economic ties to the west that it can not risk breaking for a wee bit of nuclear war. North Korea is being much-touted at the moment as a serious nuclear threat, but let's examine this seriously. NK has a very slim chance of building a nuclear missile(s) in the next fifteen years, and if they did, our missile shield wouldn't help.
First, why would they use it against the mainland US. We are not in a war with them right now, and if they chose to do that, we would utterly destroy them. The whole point of MAD was that in any first strike, one had to utterly obliterate the other side, and there is no way that NK could ever possess that capability. Much more likely, they would use it as a diplomatic tool, and try to use it to bargain with SK. In this case, a US missile shield would be worthless. Also, the NK state is a secular state. Therefore, they do not believe that if they die while fighting the capitalist oppressors, they will go directly to heaven. Therefore, they will not risk certain death just to kill a couple million Americans.
Much more threatening are the terrorists, anational groups dedicated to punishing the US and the West for percieved transgressions. These groups are extremely unlikely to be able to construct ICBMs, or any sort of cold war-esque system for attacking the US. If they do get their hands on nukes, the could much easier put on onto a ship, and sail it into like Boston harbor, and then set it off. It is a much more cost effective solution for the terrorists, and currently, there's not a lot we could do about it.
Now, in a perfect world, where we had infinite resources, it would be nice to create a missile shield to defend America, but we do not have infinite resources. Rather, our resources are stretched somewhat thin. Therefore, it makes little sense to be spending trillions on the ABM system when it does not address the majority of threats out there today. Throw in its lack of success, as documented above, and it becomes a threat to national security. As Gatekeeper pointed out, if we had spent the money on the equipping our military, Rumsfeld's "the army we have now," would have been better prepared for the Iraq war, and casualties would have been diminished, and the situation would be generally better.
To me, this failure shows that the Pentagon/Defense Department are out of touch with the modern military world, and I do not understand how anyone can defend them.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:17
|
|
I agree with Admiral on the system in general
On the testing I agree with Drake . . . In early tests you go for optimum conditions to maximize the test data. Once you prove something can work in the ideal scenario, I think you can work on making it work in less than ideal situations
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Gatekeeper
|
|
United States of America
Feb 2000
time: 23:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by The diplomat
I don't understand why people are against a missisle defense system. Do you want the US to be defenseless against a missile attack? Do you want North Korea to nuke a US city?
No complex piece of technology will work the first time out. There will always be initials failures as we test and improve the technology. When we develop a new fighter jet, it takes years to perfect the technology. But shouldn't we try to have a system that can offer us some protection against a missile attack? Even if it only works half the time, that would be still be a 50% chance of saving millions of lives. Isn't that better that nothing? |
Would this line of reasoning also apply to social programs that cost taxpayers bundles of money, but only save maybe 3 in 10 people who actually use them? Or would that be a waste of taxpayer money?
As for anti-missile defense systems, I have no problem with them, so long as they're working as advertised. This one is being drummed up by various interested parties as the be all and end all of defending America from "rogue" nations and terrorists groups, and that worries me. Moreso since it's not perfect, not even good, and is costing taxpayers a lot of money. What's this going to be? Star Wars II? Are we going to find out 10 to 20 years from now that, hey, this system never really worked, was never meant to, but did succeed in deterring or bankrupting those who opposed us? That's how it was with Star Wars I. I don't know if our opponents will fall for the same tactic twice.
Gatekeeper
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17.
Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-12-2004 13:17
OMFG!!1!1" on all of its previous tests according the military. 
ACK!
|