Anti-Ballistic Missile Fails

[Nickdfresh]

U.S. missile defense test fails
Interceptor shuts down, does not launch
Wednesday, December 15, 2004 Posted: 5:42 PM EST (2242 GMT)


WASHINGTON (AP) -- An interceptor missile failed to launch early Wednesday in what was to have been the first full flight test of the U.S. national missile defense system in nearly two years.

The Missile Defense Agency has attempted to conduct the test several times this month, but scrubbed each one for a variety of reasons, including various weather problems and a malfunction on a recovery vessel not directly related to the equipment being tested.

A target missile carrying a mock warhead was successfully launched as scheduled from Kodiak, Alaska, at 12:45 a.m. EST, in the first launch of a target missile from Kodiak in support of a full flight test of the system.

However, the agency said the ground-based interceptor "experienced an anomaly shortly before it was to be launched" from the Ronald Reagan Test Site at Kwajalein Atoll in the central Pacific Ocean 16 minutes after the target missile left Alaska.

An announcement said the interceptor experienced an automatic shutdown "due to an unknown anomaly."

The agency gave no other details and said program officials will review pre-launch data to determine the cause for the shutdown.

The military is in final preparations to activate missile defenses designed to protect against an intercontinental ballistic missile attack from North Korea or elsewhere in eastern Asia.

Wednesday's test was to have been the first in which the interceptor used the same booster rocket that the operational system would use.

In earlier testing of tracking and targeting systems, which critics derided as highly scripted, missile interceptors went five-for-eight in hitting target missiles.


Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



The target missile launches from Kodiak, Alaska, Wednesday morning.

[Nickdfresh]

This will protect the homeland from terrorists! Fucking brilliant!

[Big Train]

So your saying the military shouldn't be prepared for other threats? I understand they need to be working on terrorism as a major priority, but they should not be working on other things?

[Nickdfresh]

How about spending billions on weapons that work? This thing is a piece of shit and a violation of the 1972 ABM Treaty.

[Big Train]

Nick, in your world we would all still be living in caves and bitching. Things take time to develop whether you are talking missle defense or a fuckin lightbulb. You would have told Edison to go fuck himself..

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Big Train
Nick, in your world we would all still be living in caves and bitching. Things take time to develop whether you are talking missle defense or a fuckin lightbulb. You would have told Edison to go fuck himself..

Brilliant! Uh...no! Simple cost vs. benefit analysis says it is quite stupid to pursue this thing. We used to have ABM's that worked, but they found it was easy to put counter measures such a MIRV's that would detached from the ICBM and basically 'spam' the system because some MIRV's would be decoys, and a few would have actual warheads. The ABM's were/are easily fooled. This system costs way too much and will be essentially useless. Hell, the Patriot Surface to Air Missile (SAM) system still has significant problems and it's been in service for almost 20 years now.

And you were saying about caves Big Train?

[Big Train]

Nick, you ignorant slut, , I am speaking from a conceptual point of view. Missle defense as a concept is a viable one and one that needs to be explored. Yes it is expensive and if this design doesn't work, YES, scrap it. However, research and development of these systems must continue to go on.

Thank you for all those facts though, they were helpful.

Caves are your state of mind Nick, where you come out of to selectively hear what's going on around you. As you are the person who quotes me the most, I appreciate the attention, but pay attention to what else is going on in the world.

[Nickdfresh]

No Big Train. Tis I that has seen the sun at the entrance of the cave as you continue to be enthralled and entranced by the puppet masters you hopeless fool!

"These are but shadows of the chair." --Plato

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Big Train
Nick, you ignorant slut, , I am speaking from a conceptual point of view. Missle defense as a concept is a viable one and one that needs to be explored. Yes it is expensive and if this design doesn't work, YES, scrap it. However, research and development of these systems must continue to go on...

"It's like hitting a bullet with a bullet." Ain't gonna happen in a practical sense. For every measure we take, any enemy can very cheaply counteract it.

[Big Train]

So your take on it is what?

Plane based lasers, Star Wars, land based missles, no concept will EVER work under ANY circumstance, so why bother?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Big Train
So your take on it is what?

Plane based lasers, Star Wars, land based missles, no concept will EVER work under ANY circumstance, so why bother?

Keep throwing money at it! That will solve all the technical glitches.

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
For every measure we take, any enemy can very cheaply counteract it.

That's quite unlikely...

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by ELVIS
That's quite unlikely...

Sorry Elvis. Wrong again! Do some research on how effective the much vaunted Patriot system was against the Iraqi SCUDs in Gulf War I and get back to me.

[ELVIS]

No comparison...

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by ELVIS
No comparison...

An analogy. The "Interceptor" missile can be fooled by a decoy every time. Besides, did you notice that the successful tests were basically fixed so that the missile would only had one target to attack, and it still was very limited. Now imagine 20 targets (Multiple Reentry Vehicles or MIRVs) coming from ONE inbound ICBM. We are wasting money on this piece of shit to pay defense contractors.