New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's
war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars"
defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make
the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an
application of science be successful? Is a militarized space
inevitable, necessary or impossible?
Read Debates, a
new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every
(1281 previous messages)
- 03:15am Apr 12, 2002 EST (#1282
4/12/02 3:00am (continued)
Questions from rshow55
4/10/02 6:40pm :
"...To work, these systems have to do specific things, and do
these things together..."
Umm, the two systems work toward the same end but only need to
work together in a context of communication. Both are individually
controlled but coordinated by the the satellite launch
detection/tracking system that produces the initial warning and
tracks progress of the missile(s). It's that system that will
determine wheter or not an interceptor should be launched. I imagine
that decision would be made long after the target missile has left
the engagement envelope of the ABL.
"...Are the technical objectives these systems have to meet
reasonable in terms of known laws of physics, and relevant
experience in engineering?..."
Same question again, same answer as above. You're slipping a bit,
Robert. Usually you don't run the same scenery by on the same page,
let alone in the same post.
"..." If function of these systems requires breakthroughs,
compared to previous open literature theory or experience --- what
are these breakthroughs?..."
All the individual working pieces needed for integration
into working systems are there in the open literature. The
breakthroughs have already been made. Evidence? That's easy. None
of this stuff even existed 30 years ago.
"...How do the results needed compare quantitatively to
results that have been achieved in the open literature by engineers,
applied physicists, or other people who measure carefully?..."
Midcourse intercept system: The results acheived are at least
four out of six successful intercepts. That's a 66% success rate for
a just-now being tested system. Not bad, but not perfect. I predict
that the percentage of successes in the next six test shots will be
far better because of lessons learned in the first six. That's how
test programs work, Robert.
ABL - While I'm certain that all the individual parts have
already been tested for this system, the integration of those parts
is not yet to the test phase. We'll just have to wait and see what
that test program produces.
"...If breakthroughs are required, how do they compare to test
results that have been made available to date?..."
Almost the same question as above but this time you want to
compare "required breakthroughs" to "test results". How would one do
that? Full scale test programs generally don't happen until
after any necessary breakthroughs have been made. You're
asking for a comparison of apples and oranges again, and again I
ask, if such a comparison could be quantified, what would the units
be? Orpples? :-)
"...These missile defense programs need to be evaluated in a
reasonable tactical context, subject to the countermeasures that can
reasonably be expected and specified."
Ahem. That's what test programs are all about, Robert. If you had
any personal experience in the fields of physics or engineering,
you'd know that.
I haven't said anything here that hasn't been said before on this
thread. These "questions" that you've pronounced to be so important
seem to have little substance when exposed to the harsh glare of
- 03:52am Apr 12, 2002 EST (#1283
"Palestinian Saga 1930-2002"
That's a good article, lchic but don't forget that it represents
only a tiny portion of the Israeli saga. Israel has been the jewish
homeland for thousands of years.
Also, the term "Palestine" I think, was coined by colonialists in
the last century. Before that, there were no "Palestineans". They
were just arabs who moved into Israel. A "nation of Palestine" has
New York Times on the Web Forums Science