New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

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?

gisterme - 07:52pm Jul 3, 2001 EST (#6522 of 6540)

rshowalter wrote ( rshowalter 7/2/01 7:27pm ): "The arguments of MD6418 rshowalter 7/2/01 5:26pm have now been reinforced,..."

No they haven't, Robert.

"...because a responsible person, working to refute them, produced a ridiculous example, thinking it refuted my points, when the example actually supported my position."

Just giving you a little rope, Robert, to see what you'd do with it. :-) I was curious to see if you'd create a tempest in the teapot and then HANG YOUR HAT ON IT. You did.

"...What kind of hacks are feeding you information, gisterme ? -- I don't think you deserve to be embarrassed like this..."

I'm not the least bit embarassed, Robert. You should be embarassed by all your electronic bloviating...if you've looked at these links...

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cst/occppr02.htm http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/sbl.htm

Nobody "feeding" me anything, Robert. That's another wacky assumption of yours, based on nothing.

"...If they make this sort of mistake when it puts you at risk -- how many mistakes do you think these guys leave laying around unchecked?..."

You reveal your desire to instigate undue paranoia.

"...These guys are sloppy -- they must be leaving "little" mistake time bombs, laying around, invalidating design calculations and program decisions..."

What guys are those, Robert? I seems that you've made the mistake here.

"...I'd be angry at these guys, if I were you ! Could they be Democratic plants?..."

Go ahead an be angry at them, Robert. After all, they ARE figments of your adimittedly over-active imagination. :-) Forgive the ploy, Robert; but I felt it would reveal some things about your tactics that needed to be shown. It did.

lunarchick - 07:57pm Jul 3, 2001 EST (#6523 of 6540)
lunarchick@www.com

One big blur

gisterme - 08:08pm Jul 3, 2001 EST (#6524 of 6540)

rshowalter wrote ( rshowalter 7/3/01 4:12pm ): "It seems to me that the Bush administration is eager, irrationally eager, to build a system that cannot be built, based on arguments that are clearly, checkably false.

That can't be something that gisterme and other US representatives can reasonably want..."

What "seems to you", Robert, and the facts are doing most of the diverging here, Robert.

What are the "clearly, checkably false arguements" you're talking about, Robert? Do you mean gisterme 7/3/01 7:52pm ?

gisterme - 08:14pm Jul 3, 2001 EST (#6525 of 6540)

Happy independence day to you too, Robert and to anybody else who cares. You Londoners may not be able appreciate that quite so much. :-) Has the Queen sent US a bill for Boston Tea Party damages lately? I understand she has from time-to-time.

gisterme - 08:34pm Jul 3, 2001 EST (#6526 of 6540)

rshowalter wrote: "...But if it happens to be easy, would you have numbers (perhaps expressed in microradians) for the angular resolution of your radars?..."

MY radars, Robert? Oh, my. Didn't know I had any. It would take a pretty big antenna to achieve microradian resolution with a radar, wouldn't it Robert? Let's see, with sub-millimeter wavelenghts...maybe if we used the entire state of Arizona...Naa. Bad Idea. Senator McCain would never approve. :-) Maybe a radar interferometer...

Joking aside, your point is right, radars can't begin to approach that kind of angular resolution. Their best accuracy is for ranging and they must be quite good at tracking since that's what they're used for. A large-antenna radar could probably give position data about as accurate as GPS data for a re-entry vehicle a couple of thousand miles distant. Since the BMD radar hasn't been built yet, I'm sure it was being simulated by the GPS data being transmitted from the target vehicle in the recent intercept tests. Radar guidance could get an interceptor into the "ball park" but the terminal guidance would have to be done by sensors on the interceptor.

gisterme - 08:34pm Jul 3, 2001 EST (#6527 of 6540)

I'm out too.

smartalix - 10:58pm Jul 3, 2001 EST (#6528 of 6540)
Anyone who denies you information considers themselves your master

...without addressing the points I brought up in my post about the technology.

lunarchick - 08:03am Jul 4, 2001 EST (#6529 of 6540)
lunarchick@www.com

2008: China : Executions

1000 executions over past 3 months .. as China Spring Cleans for the GAMES bid! Going price for organs of the dead - $AUS15,000 per corpse.

If China does get 'The Games' would ethical athletes actually want to attend?

rshowalter - 08:10am Jul 4, 2001 EST (#6530 of 6540)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

I wouldn't.

But the atheletes won't have a choice, it that's where the Olympics is.

(10 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense