Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans
for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be
limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI
all over again?
For example, United States nuclear policy simply can't be
presented in public, according to the usages of disciplined
beauty.
It is too illogical, disproportionate, misshapen, inconsistent,
and ugly.
*****
Russian policy CAN be presented by standards of disciplined
beauty -- but by these standards, much can be seen to be based on a
false assumption - the assumption that the US truly is preparing for
a first strike. Russia has believed some bluffs that the US has
tried hard to have her believe. But they are false assumtions, that
should be reevaluated, in the cause of peace.
lunarchick
- 04:09am Apr 21, 2001 EST (#2456
of 2464)
lunarchick@www.com
Russia
scores LOW here
lunarchick
- 04:13am Apr 21, 2001 EST (#2457
of 2464)
lunarchick@www.com
Essayist_Cooke
on Russia/China
lunarchick
- 04:20am Apr 21, 2001 EST (#2458
of 2464)
lunarchick@www.com
APRIL 20, 15:58 EST
Weapons System Is Complex
By SUSANNE M. SCHAFER Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) — The much-acclaimed Aegis weapons system sought
by Taiwan, and bitterly opposed by China, is designed to manage a
wide-ranging air and sea battle from a single ship.
Yet sometimes lost in the debate over whether the Bush
administration should sell the Aegis to Taipei are these realities:
The Aegis-equipped ships wouldn't be built until the end of the
decade, the system's advanced software is still in development and
its missiles can't blow Chinese weapons out of the sky — yet.
The projected developments in the Aegis system are what Taiwan
may want if it perceives itself threatened by a mainland Chinese
submarine blockade or missile attack, said military analyst Loren
Thompson of the Lexington Institute, a research group in Arlington,
Va.
``As of today, Taiwan is really naked against those threats,''
Thompson said in an interview.
The Navy has yet to develop a sea-based anti-missile defense
system, even though the Aegis system is seen as its possible basis.
The service first installed the Aegis (pronounced E'-jihs) system
on the cruiser USS Ticonderoga in 1983. It is a complex and
integrated system of radars, computers, underwater sensors and
weapons whose primary mission is to help defend carrier battle
groups from attacks on air, land and sea.
The Aegis name comes from Greek mythology, the shield of Zeus. He
lent it to the goddess Athena, who had the snake-covered head of
Medusa wrought into the shield.
The Aegis battle system is supposed to give the commander on a
ship a wraparound picture of threats that could come from more than
100 sightings at a time: enemy aircraft, missiles, other surface
ships, even submarines.
Instead of the more commonly seen rotating radars, the Aegis'
``phased-array'' SPY-1 radar emits a blanket of impulses from the
front, back and sides of the ship. Returned signals convert to
map-like digital displays on big blue screens in the ship's Combat
Information Center, or CIC.
It detects, identifies and then places a priority on threats
approaching at supersonic speeds. It calculates what weapons should
be fired and when to destroy the targets.
``It takes the hostile contact all the way from detection to
engagement,'' said Navy spokesman Lt. Bill Speaks. ``It is capable
of conducting simultaneous warfare on many fronts, whether it is
air, surface or underwater, for the ship's crew.''
The combat system is carried on two types of U.S. ships -
Ticonderoga-class cruisers and Arleigh Burke class destroyers. There
are 27 Aegis-type missile cruisers and 31 of the destroyers
currently in the fleet, Speaks said. Some 15 additional Arleigh
Burke destroyers are planned, he said.
Chinese officials have denounced the proposed sale of the Aegis
system to Taiwan, particularly given its potential as a sea-based
anti-ballistic missile system.
Such an upgrade to the system is some time away, given work under
way with upgrades to missiles and computer software.
Another unknown element in the equation is price, said Anthony
Cordesman, a defense analyst at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies. ``We don't really know the cost of this,''
Cordesman said.
In 1996, when several Arleigh Burke ships were ordered, the Navy
put the price tag at $1.15 billion each.
Preside
(6
following messages)
![[F]](../_images/site.gif)
New York Times on the Web Forums 
Science
Missile Defense
