[F] 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?

Earliest MessagesPrevious MessagesRecent MessagesOutline (7161 previous messages)

lunarchick - 05:47am Jul 18, 2001 EST (#7162 of 7168)

    'AN old scheme to put swarms of tiny killer satellites in space as a shield against ballistic missiles will get a new look under the Pentagon's expanded missile defence program, a senior defence official said.
Although such a system is far off, the Pentagon begins work next year on concepts for space-based "kill vehicles" that would be tried in an experiment in space in 2005 to 2006, said Rob Snyder, executive director of the Ballistic Missile Defence Organisation.

The experiment would involve boosting a killer satellite into space and then flying it against a target warhead, he told reporters at a missile defence conference here yesterday.

In the experiment, the "kill vehicle" will not be stationed in orbit, Snyder said, but in concept it would "work the same way Brilliant Pebbles worked".

Brilliant Pebbles, a program pursued during the heyday of the Star Wars effort and later abandoned, called for using thousands of tiny orbiting killer satellites to attack and destroy intercontinental missiles as they boost into space.

"The old Brilliant Pebbles constellation, depending on whether you wanted to protect part of the world or the whole world, could have been as many as 3,600 or 4,000 of these satellites in orbit," said Snyder.

"So they would be close enough when the boost happened they could get at it with divert capability on the vehicle," he said.

He said the experiment is a new initiative by the Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defence Organisation, which has been instructed by the White House to accelerate testing and development of a broad range of missile defences that are now banned under the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Moscow.

The new administration of President George W Bush has played down its plans for missile defences in space, emphasising instead its intention to develop ground, air and sea based defences against intercontinental ballistic missiles.

But Snyder said there were advantages to using space as a platform for missile defence systems like Brilliant Pebbles.

"There's an advantage of global interceptors in the sense that they are always there," he said.

Bush's proposed missile defence shield received a boost last Saturday, when an interceptor missile fired from Kwajalein Atoll in the South Pacific hit a dummy warhead launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

Although the test is being hailed as a success, especially after the Pentagon had failed two out of three previous tries, the Defence Department yesterday said it would take several months before experts can fully assess its results.

In the meantime, the United States could come into conflict with the ABM treaty as early as next February, when it conducts another series of tests .................. The remarks constitute the first specific indication of when Bush's plan to deploy a nationwide anti-missile shield could come into conflict with the ABM treaty.'

lunarchick - 05:49am Jul 18, 2001 EST (#7163 of 7168)

Note how difficult it is, insurance wise and statististically, to get even ONE satellite into space.

lunarchick - 07:09am Jul 18, 2001 EST (#7164 of 7168)

Groups of planes - precision placement flying - testing

Handling complexity: 64m pixel screen coming soon

lunarchick - 07:14am Jul 18, 2001 EST (#7165 of 7168)


lunarchick - 07:21am Jul 18, 2001 EST (#7166 of 7168)

BioWeapons: Is the US wimpish over biological weapons? Would the world understand a more aggressive stance? Ken Alibek thinks so. He has a unique perspective. In 1992, he blew the whistle on the Soviet Union's Biopreparat biowarfare machine. The programme was one of the great deceptions of the cold war because the Soviet Union had signed a treaty banning such work. At its height, Biopreparat employed 10,000 scientists at 40 sites. Kanatjan Alibekov (Alibek's birth name) was second-in-command at Biopreparat so his defection made him a fabulous prize for the US. Now he's a key researcher at a major US biodefence contractor. When Rachel Nowak caught up with him, she found a man full of contradictions--and dire warnings Photo: Gigi Cohen

More Messages Unread Messages Recent Messages (2 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Cancel Subscriptions  Search  Post Message
 Email to Sysop  Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense

Home | Site Index | Site Search | Forums | Archives | Shopping

News | Business | International | National | New York Region | NYT Front Page | Obituaries | Politics | Quick News | Sports | Science | Technology/Internet | Weather
Editorial | Op-Ed

Features | Arts | Automobiles | Books | Cartoons | Crossword | Games | Job Market | Living | Magazine | Real Estate | Travel | Week in Review

Help/Feedback | Classifieds | Services | New York Today

Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company