[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 (7699 previous messages)

lunarchick - 03:02am Aug 1, 2001 EST (#7700 of 7773)

Following the Bristol Hospital report UK related to the non-reporting of 'incidents' in those hospitals ... doctors hiding mistakes rather than putting information into the pool.

It seems that 2% of deaths in Aussie hospitals are also related to the same failure as above.

That the 'truth' is not put forward, means that the systems and processes can not be tweaked universally to provide an improved service.

As the UK determined. It's the 'same' mistakes that are not dealt with that occur over and over!


Relating this to MD it seems that the 'does it work on paper' basics are still undetermined ... as stage two, then three, are allowed to occur.


lunarchick - 03:08am Aug 1, 2001 EST (#7701 of 7773)

Fuel Efficiency Report - USA - (cars)

rshowalter - 07:49am Aug 1, 2001 EST (#7702 of 7773) Delete Message
Robert Showalter

Good to have you back, almarst . You raise points in MD7695 almarst-2001 7/31/01 11:30pm ... that may be of some special interest on this board.

You ask:

" Is there a need for propaganda in a democratic society?

This much is clear - all through complex societies, democratic or not, people in compromised positions, in and out of government, stand in need of public deception to protect or advance their interests.

Why should a fraudulent story that is a big lie be carried in "The Washington Times" ?

Somebody wanted that story there. The interest that planted the story may be governmental, and perhaps you'd say it probably is. Maybe rightly. But don't rule out the possibility that it was planted by the representative of a contractor. Because the Scramjet program in American, which has been ongoing of 40 years, is based on a gross technical mistake, long since, in my view, become a fraud.

The idea of the scramjet is that a hypersonic ramjet, that uses oxygen from the atmosphere, "could" outperform rockets, which have to carry their own oxidizer as a major part of their mass load. It is a "fine" idea, except for a key problem, that should have been clear thirty years ago, when I knew of the problem. The design requirements for the aerodynamics of the hypersonic ramjet are inconsistent with the mixing requirements needed to get the fuel and oxygen into contact -- mixing rates are much too low to permit the scramjet to produce useful thrust. This is a problem built into basic physics, and has been easy to show for years. But for 40 years, the Scramjet program (perhaps under different names, but the same basic technical program) has gone on in the United States.

Now, the Washington Times story carried the message

" The Russians have a scramjet working ! "

How useful that could be to the contractors, and government contract officers, who have been responsible for the scramjet fiasco in the United States !

MD7225 rshowalter 7/19/01 11:42am ... MD4473 rshowalter 6/3/01 7:55pm

We need right answers -- not wishful thinking carried to ridiculous extremes to justify exorbitant funding of far-fetched, back-of-the-envelope Buck Rogers schemes that could not stand up to public, competent, clear cross-examination. Missile defense has a number of decisively important technical issues involved, some but not all set out on this board, that should be dealt with in this way. If Russia, and NATO countries besides the US wanted these technical issues checked at the level possible in the open literature -- in enough detail, and with good enough quality presentation, to stand in public, it would happen.

Item: An attempt to do a first flight test on a scramjet under continuous development of 40 years failed (or was surreptitiously aborted.)

How useful it woud be to some interested parties if they could "establish" that, though our "scramjet" program failed, the Russians have theirs working.

Money in the bank, and protection from criticism, too.

When one sees "big lie" techniques, again and again, from the secret side of the US military industrial complex, it is worth remembering the information here carefully -- there is a great deal behind it -- C.I.A. Opens Files on Hitler by DAVID JOHNSTON ... and those files have much to teach us about what has happened in the Cold War. MD5545 rshowalter 6/20/01 12:53pm

lunarchick - 07:51am Aug 1, 2001 EST (#7703 of 7773)

'Going Back to Crawford' By Robert Parry July 6, 2001

Less than six months into his unusual presidency, George W. Bush has begun telling his followers that he is ready to “go back to Crawford” if he doesn’t get his way on his conservative policies.

The threat comes as Bush is losing control of Washington’s political agenda in the wake of the Democratic takeover of the U.S. Senate, his sagging poll numbers, and the Senate’s passage of a patients' bill of rights last week. The warnings about “going back to Crawford” – the site of his Texas ranch – appear to have been uttered in frustration over his political troubles and to keep Republicans in line. .... see

More Messages Unread Messages Recent Messages (70 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