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

    Missile Defense

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 Thursday.

Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (1281 previous messages)

gisterme - 03:15am Apr 12, 2002 EST (#1282 of 1285)

gisterme 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 reality.

gisterme - 03:52am Apr 12, 2002 EST (#1283 of 1285)

lchic 4/12/02 1:45am

"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 never existed.

More Messages Recent Messages (2 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  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 2002 The New York Times Company