![[F]](../_images/site.gif) New York Times on the Web Forums  Science
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?
    (3079 previous messages)
rshowalter
- 07:34pm May 2, 2001 EST (#3080
of 3082) 
Robert Showalter
showalte@macc.wisc.edu
This is a fine response:
"So I can't buy your "orders of magnitude"
argument either Robert. How do you KNOW that orders of magnitude
performance improvements are necessary for any part of the
existing BMD system? What are the "number of areas" you're talking
about? If you do know, then post the numbers so we can check 'em.
:-)
I presume from the "we" that I'm talking to somebody who, one way
or another, knows somebody important, and can do the checking.
I also assume that you can, through the good offices of the NYT,
or in some other way, establish that (I don't have to know who
you are, or how you check, but somebody I trust does have to know.
I'll trust TIMES folks, and within limits, people they trust. )
If that can be done, and I'm told that it can, I'll take the time
to carefully set out some of the resolution requirements you
actually have, that involve physics that is unlikely to change, and
physics and engineering practices that are of longstanding and not
classified, for
trajectory plotting, to the required resolution
for interception, real time
actuator control problems, including trade-offs
between resolution and speed
vibration and mechanical noise problems (for
instance, ships rock, airplanes bounce and vibrate, and even in
space, the dynamics aren't always easy if things have to happen
fast -- especially if multiple shots at different targets have to
happen quickly
And I'll look around for some other problems, too, in control
theory (especially if your targets do any jiving you don't account
for) and in other places.
rshowalter
- 07:35pm May 2, 2001 EST (#3081
of 3082)
Robert Showalter
showalte@macc.wisc.edu
And, perhaps, a few things about the human responses, and
the problems with complexity, which have concerned people because of
the number of lines of code missile defense seems to require.
* * *
In my view, which I'm prepared to put to the test, it isn't just
that there are order of magnitude shortfalls in areas not likely to
change fast. -- Some of them, I believe, can be vividly illustrated
so that people can understand them.
I'd like to have my stuff checked by people "outside of security
limitations", as well as inside, who have something to lose -- such
as PE tickets -- as I'll have mine to lose. ---
If two different checking teams get different answers, those
ought to be resolvable, on the technical matters here, in workable
ways.
Perhaps I'll find I owe you an apology. If I do, I'll be as
emphatic and honorable about it as I can be.
rshowalter
- 07:36pm May 2, 2001 EST (#3082
of 3082)
Robert Showalter
showalte@macc.wisc.edu
Suppose that there turn out to be many order-of-magnitude
shortfalls (one might include the ones Professor Postol and
coworkers think they have.)
What would you do? What would the administration do? Are there
inputs of technical information that would cause you to say:
" This seemed like a good idea, and we gave it
a good shot, but for reasons we just couldn't anticipate -- it
didn't work out.
That happens to people.
If the missile defense people acknowledge those perfectly
human and inescapable limitations, we can get closer to right
answers.
Who knows? Maybe in trying to show why something can't be done, a
way might be worked out to accomplish something?
  
 
New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Missile Defense
Enter your response, then click the POST MY MESSAGE
button below.
See the quick-edit
help for more information.
| 
