Slashdot Mirror
US Missle Interceptor Tests a Success
An anonymous reader writes to mention that the U.S. Missile Defense Agency and Lockheed Martin recently reported success in the test flight of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system. "THAAD is designed to defend U.S. troops, allied forces, population centers and critical infrastructure against short- to intermediate range ballistic missiles. THAAD comprises a fire control and communications system, interceptors, launchers and a radar. The THAAD interceptor uses hit-to-kill technology to destroy targets, and is the only weapon system that engages threat ballistic missiles at both endo- and exo-atmospheric altitudes."
Obligatory.
The THAAD interceptor uses hit-to-kill technology to destroy targets
This is far superior to the "miss-to-kill" technology they were employing in previous models.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
Is that better than THAC0?
Proud member of the American Non Sequitur Society. We might not make much sense, but boy do we love pizza!
It uses kinetic energy to destroy a target (1/2 * m * v**2), no explosives onboard.
At first, I was thinking "Great, now all we can defend ourselves against all of those ICBMs that Al-Queda has laying around". But then I realized that there are countries that don't have the luxury of having a few thousand miles of ocean between them and their enemies. I think this technology would be great if deployed to South Korea, Japan, Tiawan, or Isreal. Nothing says "Screw you, Kim" like a system to completely nullify the technology that he's spent years and an equivalent of about his entire country's GDP to develop. Or a note from the IDF to hezbollah: "Can you please stop shooting missiles at us? I'm getting tired of re-loading the launcher".
Is that the American word for "missile" or something ?
Hezbollah has announced they have developed an anti-anti-missile missile. "Take that, you zionist pigs!" said one spokesman. Currently Lockheed Martin is developing an anti-anti-anti-missile-missile missile to counter this new threat.
It used to be Theater High Altitude Area Defense.
When President Camacho is elected, it will be changed to "Totally Huge Awesome Area Defense".
Brought to you by Carl's Jr.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
whether or not the system can defend against the recently developed random-trajectory missile developed by Russia.
I thought that the President had basically annulled that treaty, by saying that it was with a country that no longer exists, and thus is not in force anymore (or something like that).
If you look on the top of the page you linked to, it says "The State Department web site below is a permanent electronic archive of information released prior to January 20, 2001. Please see www.state.gov for material released since President George W. Bush took office on that date."
A quick Google search reveals that the U.S. dumped the 1972 ABM treaty in December of 2001.
There are a lot of things that I take issue with Bush for, but this frankly isn't one of them; I've always been of a mind that it's lunacy to prevent nations from defending themselves. If the world is getting dangerous because of ICBMs, maybe that should be the focus of restrictions, not systems that protect from them. But then again, I've never been down with the whole "MAD" concept in general.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
That's actually how the THAAD tests work. Same with Aegis, and the GMD (ground-based on the coast).
They use nothing but the actual hardware that's in the field. No special stuff to track the target. This is actually a working, real-world style system. Typically, they put the operator on alert for a couple of days or a week (at least in Aegis tests), and they fire it sometime during that window without notifying anyone. They also usually fire a couple of other missiles at the cruiser (well, near misses) that the crew also has to destroy while launching their interceptor.
It's a neat, nearly totally mature capability and it is currently a real deterrent.
There is no question as the technology is perhaps the worst kind. A lucrative defense contract that produced a system that doesnt work in real world scenarios. Are you so misled by a defense contractor's press release to ask a followup question or are you being sarcastic?
k i/Article_Archives/weekly07250301.asp to give you a high school primer on the physics of distance vs speed, which is noticeably independent of the targetting concerns. We wont hear about this until the system " unfortunately fails to counter" a simple rocket launched from a truck somewhere near Washington D.C.
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/about_us/Dr_David_Suzu
"If you build a missile defense that is so fragile almost anything an adversary does will cause it to collapse, then you invite a weak adversary to (attack)" - Theodore A. Postol
Often wrong but never in doubt.
I am Jack9.
Everyone knows me.
it defeats the progress we've made in terms of MAD over the REAL threats to humanity in terms of nuclear weapons
MAD became obsolete the moment an opponent showed up that didn't care whether they lived or died so long as you didn't survive. It was useful against the USSR and China, but not against anyone that we would not qualify as 'sane'.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
That may have been true with respect to Mutually Assured Destruction, but I think that this is aimed more at modern asymmetrical warfare. These days the US doesn't really fear massive barrages from the Soviet Union or China as much as it fears a single missile from North Korea or Iran with a nuclear warhead. Something which can inflict tens of thousands of casualties.
Response to such an event would be difficult. To prevent it from happening again we'd have to inflict massive, disproportionate damage on the enemy, thus incurring truly epic international hatred. We wouldn't even be 100% certain of being able to identify the enemy.
This throws the balances of MAD out of whack. I can actually believe North Korea would try such a thing and believe they could get away with it. It knows that the first thing China would do is insist that the US take no retaliation, and back it up with real MAD. Shooting down that one missile (or at least making North Korea believe we could) dramatically reduces the risk.
(Note: I'm not an expert in international relations. There are plenty of people who would say that the US is busily making the world a more dangerous place, and has been since before our latest Iraq debacle. I'm just trying to explain the actions in terms of our own perceptions. "Truth", if there is such a thing, may well differ.)
Obviously, someone managed to shoot an i out with the thing.
Get off my launchpad!