New York Times Forums
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [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 (17174 previous messages)

bluestar23 - 04:24pm Nov 10, 2003 EST (# 17175 of 17186)

from the above:

THAAD THEATRE HIGH ALTITUDE AREA DEFENSE MISSILE SYSTEM, USA

The THAAD (Theatre High Altitude Area Defense) missile system is an easily transportable defensive weapon system to protect against hostile incoming threats such as tactical and theatre ballistic missiles at ranges of 200km and at altitudes up to 150km.

The THAAD system provides the upper tier of a "layered defensive shield" to protect high value strategic or tactical sites such as airfields or populations centers. The THAAD missile intercepts exo-atmospheric and endo-atmospheric threats. The sites would also be protected with lower and medium tier defensive shield systems such as the Patriot PAC-3 which intercepts hostile incoming missiles at 20 to 100 times lower altitudes.

bluestar23 - 04:26pm Nov 10, 2003 EST (# 17176 of 17186)

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/meads

MEADS site, replacement for Patriot....

bluestar23 - 04:27pm Nov 10, 2003 EST (# 17177 of 17186)

from the above:

MEADS MEDIUM EXTENDED AIR DEFENSE SYSTEM, GERMANY, ITALY, USA:

The Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS), is planned to replace Hawk and Patriot systems worldwide. MEADS will protect maneuvering forces and fixed installations against attack by current and next-generation tactical ballistic missiles, low and high altitude cruise missiles, remotely piloted vehicles, maneuvering fixed wing aircraft and rotary wing aircraft. The total system is designed for rapid deployment and tactical mobility.

A three-year Risk Reduction Effort (RRE) program, awarded in July 2001, is investigating measures to reduce development risks and costs for critical elements. These efforts include assessment of technologies identified in the participating countries' evolving air defense concepts. This program prepares for their decision to enter into the Design and Development (DD) Phase. A proposal for the DD phase was submitted by MEADS International in July 2003. At the end of the RRE phase there will be a Final System Demonstration in Italy, when MEADS will track and engage a live target. MEADS is expected to enter service in 2012.

cantabb - 04:34pm Nov 10, 2003 EST (# 17178 of 17186)

lchic - 04:12pm Nov 10, 2003 EST (# 17172 of 17177)

Cantabb ... don't be erroneous in the first instance ... nb no one reads your posts

BUT you still seem to not only read my posts, but sopmehow feel obliged to respond to them specifically. That's AFTER your on-again-off-agian "Ignore" charade !

And, so long as you continue this charade, I'd be around to remind you and others of that.

lchic - 04:36pm Nov 10, 2003 EST (# 17179 of 17186)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

How big the 'learning to talk to each other' investment?

lchic - 04:37pm Nov 10, 2003 EST (# 17180 of 17186)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

Cantabb ... keep dipping your goose feather into the virtual ink pot ... no one reads your stuff

cantabb - 04:40pm Nov 10, 2003 EST (# 17181 of 17186)

lchic:

That reminds me, the answer to what I asked you, lchich a number of times -- the same question you have been demanding of others: Your employment affiliation ? and Your real vested-interest in this thread?

Hope you,re NOT here just to carry water for rshow 55 ?

More Messages Recent Messages (5 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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