Slashdot Mirror


Why Drones Could Be the Future of Missile Defense

An anonymous reader writes "With North Korea's failed missile launch Friday, it is clear many nations around the globe are attempting to acquire missiles that can carry larger payloads and go further. Such moves have made the United States and its allies very nervous. Missile defense has been debated since the 1980's with such debate back once again the headlines. Most missile defense platforms have technical issues and are very expensive. One idea: use drones instead. '... a high-speed (~3.5 to 5.0 km/s), two-stage, hit-to-kill interceptor missile, launched from a Predator-type UAV can defeat many of these ballistic missile threats in their boost phase.' Could a Drone really take down a North Korea missile? 'A physics-based simulator can estimate the capabilities of a high-altitude, long endurance UAV-launched boost-phase interceptor (HALE BPI) launched from an altitude of approximately 60,000 feet. Enabled by the revolution in UAVs, this proposed boost-phase interceptor, based on off-the-shelf technology, can be deployed in operationally feasible stations on the periphery of North Korea.'"

2 of 167 comments (clear)

  1. SBX-1 by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not a drone, but the US Navy's Sea-based X-band RADAR (SBX-1) — a completely self-propelled (max speed: 8 knots), semi-submersible modified oil platform designed for use in high winds and heavy seas — is also part of the Missile Defense Agency's Ballistic Missile Defense System. It can track an object the size of a baseball from about 3000 miles away. SBX-1 sailed to the region to monitor the North Korean launch:

    http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/29/navy-ships-out-radar-system-ahead-of-north-korea-launch/

    A brief history of SBX-1 — great pictures: http://www.mda.mil/global/documents/pdf/sbx_booklet.pdf

  2. Re:Parent post written by anti-US propagandist by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The major powers already have enough offensive to destroy anyone else.

    However, they can't use it because of mutual assured destruction. Or put another way, they can use it, but the retaliation would be too devasting to contemplate.

    On the defense side, a missle defense system disables the enemies ability to first strike on us. This is a good thing, and is the defensive aspect to a missile defense system.

    However, a missile defense system disables the opponents ability to retaliate our first strike, and is a crucial element to enabling us to first strike with impunity. That is a very VERY offensive element to missle defense systems.

    That said, we still should participate in the missile defense race, it would be beyond foolish to let our opponents develop missile defense while we have none.

    However, the humanist in me would argue that the minute we developed strategic missile defense that we should give it away. The world will be a better place if NOBODY can first strike on anyone.

    The world will not be a better place if any nation, including the US, can first strike with impunity.