-
Missile Defense (General thread)
Common Sense Of Missile Defense Continues To Elude Policymakers
Investors Business Daily ^ | Juy 21, 2006 | Brian T. Kennedy
On the Fourth of July, North Korea's Kim Jong Il tested a series of ballistic missiles. Two days later, when questioned about the test, President Bush acknowledged that America's missile defenses were "modest and new."
That they are new is understandable, since only in the last year has America begun to field missile defenses. The modest part, however, is of greater concern, since they are likely to remain modest by design throughout the administration's tenure.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Experts debate space-based BMD assets
[Coyle Takes Aim At Brilliant Pebbles]
United Press International ^ | July 21, 2006 | Jessica Taylor
Experts debate space-based BMD assets
By JESSICA TAYLOR
UPI, July 25, 2006
WASHINGTON, July 21 (UPI) -- A new report claims U.S. anti-ballistic missile defenses must be deployed in space to be effective, but critics disagree.
Several analysts say the study is based on false pretenses and the deployment of defense mechanisms into space is not in national security interests.
The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, a Washington think tank, has issued a study saying the implementation of plans for space missile defense is critical for U.S. national security and an effective system against at least some intercontinental ballistic missiles from so-called rogue states should be in place no later than 2010.
"The absence of a space strategy is a gap in national security," said Robert Pfaltzgraff, president of the IFPA, during a roundtable on the new report hosted by the American Foreign Policy Council, a small conservative Washington think tank, last Friday on Capitol Hill. "Only space can give us a global missile defense."
The threat is even more immediate, many fear, following several missile tests on July 4 by North Korea. While their long range Taepodong-2 ICBM was unsuccessful, several short range No Dong missiles appeared to work effectively in the tests. One of North Korea's main exports is weapons, and Pfaltzgraff said the United States should be increasingly concerned that these short range missiles could end up in the hands of terrorists aiming to launch them from domestic shores.
The IFPA analysts claimed that U.S. ballistic missile defense must be revaluated in light of these developments. However, other analysts said the Bush administration has failed so far in adequately developing its BMD programs.
"This won't do anything for security and will blow the defense budget," said Craig Eisendrath, board chairman for the Project of Nuclear Awareness and a former State Department analyst who dealt with space and nuclear policy.
Similar criticisms were prevalent following President Ronald Reagan's proposal of a Strategic Defense Initiative, also known as "Star Wars," that originally conceptualized deploying nuclear missile defenses in space.
The suggestion was revived again under the current Bush administration with the idea of "Brilliant Pebbles."
"The idea was that a small satellite with good brain that would see enemy missiles and dash off after it, hit it and knock it down," said Philip Coyle, senior advisor at the Center for Defense Information.
However, this concept would have required multiple satellites, perhaps as many as 1,000, in orbit to be effective.
"You can't have one interceptor parked over North Korea," said Coyle. "You need another to take its place."
Coyle also questioned the monetary feasibility of the program.
"It would be, by all measures, very expensive. And it's still problematic as to whether would work," Coyle said. "They've been projecting [costs] for at least 20 years and it doesn't seem to happen."
Pfaltzgraff said that U.S. withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2001 opened up additional options in the use of space-based weapons for missile defense. However, the Bush administration had not adequately explored these options and current U.S. missile defense policies remained virtually unchanged since the Clinton administration, he said.
"Bush will eventually be judged by what he does in the next two years" of his waning presidency, he said.
Eisendraft said U.S.withdrawal from the ABM treaty had been a negative move for the United States and that many of America's missile defense challenges today stemmed from that pullout.
Current ABM defense systems deployed in California and Alaska were inadequate, he said. Should a missile be launched, the 11 ground-based midcourse interceptors currently deployed would probably be unable to distinguish between an actual threat and a decoy.
The United States has also refused to join in a treaty banning the use of space for missile defense. China, Japan, and the European Union are all willing signatories, Eisendraft said, who helped draft the original treaty.
"This is crazy when the rest of the world is completely willing to sign on and kick the rest of this out," he said. "The United States is acting in a completely irresponsible manner."
But the biggest factor in the push for space weaponry is corporate interests rather than economic and security sensibility, said Eisendraft.
"We're dealing with a situation not driven by security aspects but money," said Eisendraft. "Across the board, we're not dealing with anything that's looking promising" in the use of space.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
The Claremont Institute at its Missile Threat site has already pinpointed some of the flaws in the critics analysis:
Coyle Takes Aim at Brilliant Pebbles
July 26, 2006
UPI
Philip Coyle, senior advisor at the Center for Defense Information, was recently quoted in the UPI on the issue of space-based missile defenses and in particular, the Brilliant Pebbles defense system. “The idea was that a small satellite with good brain [sic] that would see enemy missiles and dash off after it, hit it and knock it down,” he said, but noted that such a concept would have required numerous satellites, perhaps as many as 1,000 to be effective. “You can’t have one interceptor parked over North Korea,” he argued. “You need another to take its place.” Coyle also questioned the monetary feasibility of the program. “It would be, by all measures, very expensive. And it’s still problematic as to whether it would work. They’ve been projecting [costs] for at least 20 years and it doesn’t seem to happen.”
Would Brilliant Pebbles work? Coyle does not mention that Brilliant Pebbles had successfully completed its simulation stage and was ready to move to the proof-of-concept, prototype, and performance testing stages when it was effectively starved of funding as the Clinton administration came to power. Nor does he mention that in 1994 NASA launched a deep-space probe mission known as “Clementine,” constructed with first-generation Brilliant Pebbles hardware. The mission, which cost $80 million, effectively “space-qualified” Brilliant Pebbles technology, even though the missile defense program had already been eliminated.
Would Brilliant Pebbles be too expensive? The newly released report by the Independent Working Group entitled Missile Defense, the Space Relationship and the Twenty-First Century—the report cited by the UPI piece—puts the total cost of a 1,000-satellite constellation of Brilliant Pebbles at $16 billion, based on the fully approved Defense Acquisition Board plan from 1991. The figure includes the costs of developing, testing, deploying, and operating Brilliant Pebbles over a 20-year period using a low-to-moderate risk, event-driven acquisition schedule. Many would agree that $16 billion dollars is a small price to pay for the protection of the U.S. and its allies from ballistic missile attack and nuclear devastation.
(
Article,
Link)
» Read the 2007 report:
The Independent Working Group on Missile Defense, the Space Relationship, and the Twenty-First Century (8 MB)
» More stories on:
Analysis,
Policy and
Space-Based Systems
» Missile system details for:
Brilliant Pebbles
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Going on Offense for Missile Defense
Defending ourselves has never made more sense.
by Fred Barnes
08/07/2006, Volume 011, Issue 44
SENATOR CARL LEVIN of Michigan had a grim and unhappy look on his face. For years, he had led Democrats in an effort to slash funding for missile defense. He had planned to seek a cut of $68 million. But with North Korea poised to launch missiles and Iran's relentless drive to go nuclear, the situation had changed. So much so that Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama proposed to boost spending on the missile defense program, now more than two decades old, by an extra $45 million. Even Levin voted yes as it passed 98-0 in late June.
There are two lessons here. One is that Democrats, having kept spending for missile defense at anemic levels during the Clinton years, and having sought to block deployment of an effective system under President Bush, are vulnerable on the issue. And this is an election year in which Republicans, embattled and minimally popular, need every issue they can find. The other lesson is that an election campaign, with the American people paying attention, is the perfect time to debate missile defense and generate national support for a system on land, at sea, and in space. At the least, Democrats would be put on the defensive.
There's no doubt about either the popularity of missile defense or the urgency in deploying a full-blown system to protect America. In a 2004 poll by Princeton Survey Research, 62 percent approved of President Bush's plan to build a missile defense system. A year earlier, in a Gallup Poll, 61 percent said they would be "upset" if money were not being spent on such a system. And in a survey last year sponsored by a pro-missile defense group, 79 percent voiced support for missile defense and 70 percent said it is an "important part" of homeland security.
The need for an antimissile shield was underscored this summer not only by North Korea's missile tests and Iran's race to build nuclear weapons, but by the potential emergence of a worldwide threat. North Korea is believed to have a small nuclear arsenal and is an exporter of weapons. Iran, the world's leading sponsor of terrorists, is developing long-range missiles as well as nukes. If it produces a nuclear weapon, other Middle Eastern nations are likely to follow. Pakistan, an Islamic country with a fragile pro-West government, plans to build more nuclear weapons. And the United States would have no defense in the unlikely event that China or Russia, onetime enemies, unleashed a missile attack.
Bush boldly cleared the way for deploying a missile defense system by withdrawing, in December 2001, from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia. A year later, he ordered Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld "to proceed with fielding an initial set of missile defense capabilities" by 2004 or 2005. These, the president said, "will include ground-based interceptors, sea-based interceptors, additional Patriot (PAC-3) units, and sensors based on land, at sea, and in space."
In 2004, a handful of antimissile missiles were deployed in Alaska. And six Navy ships have been equipped to bring down missiles. The head of the missile defense program at the Pentagon, Lieutenant General Henry Obering, insists these systems would have been able to destroy the one long-range missile fired by the North Koreans on July 4. That missile failed and fell in to the Sea of Japan.
But Obering is only guessing. And the widely held view in the defense community is that the deployment of anti-missile assets by the United States is not keeping pace with the growing missile threat. The war in Iraq, for one thing, has forced serious cuts in funding for missile defense. Planned deployments were delayed and the number of actual antimissile units was reduced. This year, House Republicans have sought to cut spending further.
There's a compelling case for re-engaging missile defense as a top priority of the Bush administration. A comprehensive upgrading of the ship-based Aegis system, which has been successful in eight out of nine tests, makes enormous sense, as ships can be deployed off the Korean coast and near Iran. Expanding the number of antimissile ships would be the fastest way to get near-global coverage at the least cost. Destroyers could probably be equipped for $100 million or less.
For many Americans, ground-based interceptors are the heart of missile defense. But these interceptors have not performed as well in tests as the ship-based ones. The next ground-based test will be crucial in gaining congressional support for missile defense in general.
But the future of missile defense is in space. And Senator John Kyl of Arizona, the savviest advocate of missile defense, is ready to lead an effort next year in Congress to add this strategic element. It would have global reach and not depend, for instance, on where a ship was deployed.
Critics claim this would bring about the militarization of space, but their argument is specious. Space is already militarized. Intercontinental missiles, such as the one North Korea tested, travel through space. Military satellites are already in space.
The midterm election on November 7 will play a critical role in the advancement of missile defense. If Democrats capture either the House or Senate, funding may be dangerously curtailed and deployments postponed. Kyl says Democrats favor a policy of "test forever, deploy never." Democrats have voted to cut spending nine times in the past five years. When they controlled Congress, they slashed billions from missile defense.
To avert this, missile defense must become a major issue in the campaign, addressed by Republican candidates and, especially, the president. The issue can be laid out very simply: We need robust missile defense for the safety of America; Democrats are standing in the way; vote Republican. Under pressure, Democrats might cave and endorse a vigorous missile defense program. But, given their record, don't hold your breath.
Fred Barnes is executive editor at THE WEEKLY STANDARD.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Defense Agency
Press Release
Pentagon
06-NEWS-0020
1 September 2006
Missile Defense Exercise and Flight Test Successfully Completed
Air Force Lieutenant General Henry “Trey” Obering III, Missile Defense Agency (MDA) director, announced today it has successfully completed an important exercise and flight test involving the launch of an improved ground-based interceptor missile designed to protect the United States against a limited long-range ballistic missile attack. The flight test results will help to further improve and refine the performance of numerous Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) elements that will be used to provide a defense against the type of long-range ballistic missile that could be used to attack an American city with a weapon of mass destruction.
The interceptor missile was launched at 10:39 am PDT (1: 39 pm EDT) from the Ronald W. Reagan Missile Defense Site, located at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. For this exercise, a threat-representative target missile was launched from the Kodiak Launch Complex, Kodiak, Alaska.
The exercise was designed to evaluate the performance of several elements of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS), and mission objectives included demonstrating the ability of the Upgraded Early Warning Radar at Beale Air Force Base, Calif., to acquire, track and report the target warhead, and also to assess the performance of the interceptor missile’s rocket motor system and exoatmospheric kill vehicle, which is the component that collides directly with a target warhead in space to perform a “hit to kill” intercept using only the force of the collision to totally destroy the target warhead. Initial indications are that the rocket motor system and kill vehicle performed as designed. Program officials will evaluate system performance based upon telemetry and other data obtained during the test. Although not a primary objective for the data collection flight test, an intercept of the target warhead was achieved.
The test also successfully exercised a wide variety of components and subcomponents as part of the evaluation of system performance, including improved missile silo support equipment, booster/kill vehicle separation, kill vehicle sensor cooling, kill vehicle orientation and positioning and several more.
The Ground-based Midcourse Defense system currently has interceptor missiles deployed at Ft. Greely, Alaska, and at Vandenberg AFB, Calif. Other components of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense include the upgraded Cobra Dane radar in the Aleutian Island chain of Alaska and the upgraded early warning radar at Beale AFB, Calif. A forward deployed air-transportable X-band radar is currently stationed in Japan, and several U.S. Navy Aegis-class cruisers and destroyers with the advanced SPY-1 radar have been modified for integration into the command control, battle management and communication element of the ground-based interceptor system. The new Sea Based X-band radar mounted aboard a large sea-going platform will be integrated into the system later this year, and for this exercise it was used to track the target missile as part of its on-going radar calibration process.
News media point of contact is Rick Lehner, Missile Defense Agency, at 703-501-9157.
Video and still photos will be available to the television network pool in Washington, DC. Point of contact is Chris Taylor at (703) 697-8001. Video and still photos will also be available through the Office of the Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) in Washington. Point of contact is Cheryl Irwin at (703) 697-5331.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Defence: A Special Report: AWDs are a defensive taskforce shield
The Australian ^ | 25th November 2006 | Daniel Cotterill
REPELLING a bomb or missile attack on a naval taskforce is precisely what ships such as air warfare destroyers are designed for.
However, changed strategic circumstances and emerging threats may see the level of defensive capability fitted to our AWDs taken to a whole new level.
It's no secret that the United States has been actively seeking to develop a ballistic missile defence shield to protect North America from attack by a rogue state.
Progress on this ambitious, expensive and diplomatically sensitive project has been solid rather than spectacular, but don't expect the US to give up on the idea any time soon.
With nuclear posturing on the Korean peninsula likely to trigger a regional arms race, the issue of missile defence will become of more direct interest to Australia -- and that's where our new AWDs come in.
Their powerful radars and sophisticated Aegis combat systems, if combined with the appropriate interceptor missile, could prove to be very effective against ballistic missiles.
A small fleet of AWDs, such as the three vessels Defence plans to bring into service progressively from 2013, could provide some protection against ballistic missiles for continental Australia. The concept is under active evaluation in the US, though it has yet to be decided how far Australia is willing to go at this stage towards acquiring such a capability.
According to Defence Minister Brendan Nelson "missile defence is something that we are focussed on. We are certainly working on some missile defence research, internally and also with the US. I believe that Australia does need to consider all options in this regard and I have asked Defence to do some work on it.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.news.com.au ...
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
US Defends Its Opposition To Ban On Weapons In Space
Spacewar.com ^
The United States defended Wednesday its opposition to a new ban on weapons in space, saying it needed to keep its options open amid threats from nations seeking ways to attack US space systems. Robert Joseph, under secretary of state for arms control and security, said he was unaware of plans to deploy weapons in space but that the new National Space Policy does not preclude that option in the future.
Joseph also said terrorism had emerged as a new potential threat to US space operations on the ground.
"Ensuring the freedom of space and protecting our interests in this medium are priorities for US national security and for the US economy," Joseph said in a speech here on the new US space policy made public in October.
"But not all countries can be relied upon to pursue exclusively peaceful goals in space," he said.
"A number of countries are exploring and acquiring capabilities to counter, attack, and defeat US space systems," he said, without naming the nations.
The growing threats require the United States to boost its ability to protect its space assets, he said.
"To achieve this end, the United States needs to remain at the forefront in space, technologically and operationally, as we have in the air, on land, and at sea," he said.
"Specifically, the United States must have the means to employ space assets as an integral part of its ability to manage crises, deter conflicts and, if deterrence fails, prevail in conflict," Joseph added.
While the United States sees "no value" in setting new agreements to ban weapons in space, it will continue abiding "scrupulously" to the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which forbids placing nuclear weapons in space, he said.
Joseph rejected arguments that the weapons ban was needed to prevent an arms race, saying there were "no signs of one emerging."
"Given the vital importance of our space assets, foreclosing technical options to defend those space assets in order to forestall a hypothetical future arms race in space, is not in the national security interest of the United States," he said.
While the US space policy does not direct the development or deployment of weapons in space, it does not close that option, Joseph said after the speech.
"There are no programs that I'm aware of in terms of development and deployment for those types of capabilities," he said in response to a question.
"But the policy itself, while calling for a full range of capabilities to protect our interests and to deny others the use of space for hostile purposes, does not preclude us from moving in that direction at some point in the future," Joseph said
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
U.S. to defend space with military force
The Washington Times ^ | 12/14/06 | Bill Gertz
The United States will use military force in space to protect satellites and other space systems from attack by hostile states or terrorists, the Bush administration's senior arms-control official said yesterday.
The United States will "oppose others who wish to use their military capabilities to impede or deny our access to and use of space," (Robert Joseph) said. "We will seek the best capabilities to protect our space assets by active or passive means."
"No nation, no non-state actor, should be under the illusion that the United States will tolerate a denial of our right to the use of space for peaceful purposes," he said. "We reserve the right to defend ourselves against hostile attacks and interference with our space assets," he said.
Mr. Joseph said yesterday that a number of nations are developing weapons to "counter, attack and defeat U.S. space systems." He did not name the countries. Asked after the speech about the Chinese laser incident, he declined to comment.
"In view of these growing threats, our space policy requires us to increase our ability to protect our critical space capabilities and to continue to protect our interests from being harmed through the hostile use of space," he said.
The White House announced in October that President Bush authorized a new national space policy, the first since 1996, that states that the United States is committed to the peaceful use of space and rejects any nation's attempts to claim sovereignty over it.
The policy also views any attempt to interfere with space systems as an infringement on the right of free passage in space, and describes space capabilities as "vital" to national interests.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
This will impact the space weaponization debate
Space Politics ^ | January 18, 2007 | Jeff Foust
Remember all the debate in the weeks and months following the release of the new national space policy that the US was opening the door to the weaponization of space—and perhaps imperiling the security of its own space assets—by appearing to go down the road of space weaponization? Now comes work from Aviation Week that
China tested, apparently successfully, an anti-satellite weapon earlier this month. The ASAT, fired from a Chinese spaceport, hit and apparently destroyed an aging Chinese polar-orbiting weather satellite on January 11.
(ArmsControlWonk also had some discussion about the ASAT test shortly before the Aviation Week article was published Wednesday evening.)
It will be interesting to see how people on both sides of the space weaponization debate spin this. Is it a sign that the Chinese were not sincere in their opposition to space weaponization, and that therefore the US need to step up its defensive and offensive counterspace efforts, or does it reflect a failure of US policy (including claims that there is no "arms race in space")? Or both?
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
U.S. tells China concerned by satellite-killer test
Reuters via Yahooooo ^ | 1/18/07 | Jim Wolf (Reuters)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States, Australia and Canada have voiced concerns to China over a test in space of a satellite-killing weapon last week, the White House said on Thursday.
"The U.S. believes China's development and testing of such weapons is inconsistent with the spirit of cooperation that both countries aspire to in the civil space area," National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said. "We and other countries have expressed our concern regarding this action to the Chinese."
Using a ground-based medium-range ballistic missile, the test knocked out an aging Chinese weather satellite about 537 miles above the earth on January 11 through "kinetic impact," or by slamming into it, Johndroe said.
Canada and Australia had joined in voicing concern, he said.
Britain, South Korea and Japan were expected to follow suit, an administration official added.
A key concern is debris that could interfere with civilian and military satellite operations on which the West increasingly relies.
On the day of the test, a U.S. defense official said the United States was unable to communicate with an experimental spy satellite launched last year by the Pentagon's National Reconnaissance Office. But there was no immediate indication that this was a result of the Chinese test.
No such publicized destruction of a satellite in space has occurred in at least 15 years, said Marco Caceres, a space expert at the Teal Group, an aerospace consulting firm in Fairfax, Virginia.
SATELLITE-KILLING CAPABILITY
Aviation Week & Space Technology, the first to report the test, cited space sources as saying a Chinese Feng Yun 1C polar orbit weather satellite, launched in 1999, was destroyed by an antisatellite system launched from or near China's Xichang Space Center in Sichuan Province.
The satellite-killing capability demonstrated by China was no surprise to the Bush administration, which revised U.S. national space policy in October with an eye on boosting protection of U.S. civilian and military satellites.
In a major speech about the policy last month, Robert Joseph, the State Department's point man for arms control and international security, said other nations and possibly terrorist groups were "acquiring capabilities to counter, attack and defeat U.S. space systems."
"No nation, no non-state actor, should be under the illusion that the United States will tolerate a denial of our right to the use of space for peaceful purposes," Joseph said on December 13.
In classified projects shielded from public debate, the United States has been widely reported to be developing satellite-killers of its own, using more advanced technologies, including lasers.
Caceres said he expected the test to strengthen the Pentagon's hand in seeking funds from Congress to press a host of costly military space programs, almost all of which are over budget and behind schedule.
"They are going to use this for as much as they can," he said, referring to Pentagon officials. Major corporate beneficiaries could be Lockheed Martin Corp., Boeing Co. and Northrop Grumman Corp., which build U.S. communications, surveillance and early-warning satellites, Caceres added.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Good news: China stuns U.S. intel by testing anti-satellite missile; Update: No defense
posted at 12:27 pm on January 18, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend | printer-friendly
And the race to militarize space is on!
If the test is verified it will signify a major new Chinese military capability.
Neither the Office of the U. S. Secretary of Defense nor Air Force Space Command would comment on the attack, which followed by several months the alleged illumination of a U. S. military spacecraft by a Chinese ground based laser.
China’s growing military space capability is one major reason the Bush Administration last year formed the nation’s first new National Space Policy in ten years, Aviation Week will report.
It gets worse, says Defense Tech:
[I]f this anti-sat weapon was really “kinetic” — i.e., hit-to-kill, non-explosive — instead of a plain ol’ exploding weapon, that’s extremely bad news. That means the booster rocket has to be very accurate “in order to deliver the kill vehicle to the desired initial trajectory…. Then the kill vehicle needs to tweak its trajectory into a precise collision course using on-board propulsion and either on-board target tracking or… command guidance from the ground.” That’s no mean task.
DT wrote about another Chinese experiment in space warfare back in September involving anti-satellite lasers. That wasn’t really a “test,” though — allegedly, the lasers were fired at American orbiters.
It’s worth reading the whole post at Arms Control Wonk by Dr. Jeffrey Lewis, an expert in this area who’s calling this “a very disappointing day”:
In my forthcoming book, Minimum Means of Reprisal, I warned that China might move toward ASATs as a counter to the development of US missile defense and conventional strike capabilities—although I thought we might have more time than this…
If China has conducted an ASAT test, this is extremely bad. I had been hoping that the Bush Administration would push for a ban on anti-satellite testing, either in the form of a code of conduct. The Bush folks, however, have been fond of saying that wasn’t necessary, because “there is no arms race in space.”
Well, we have one now, instigated by an incredibly short-sighted Chinese government.
Update: Noah Schachtman of Defense Tech e-mails with a link to DT’s latest post and a pithy warning that “this [development] is REALLY bad.”
There’s nothing we can do to defend our eyes in the sky as of this moment, and there won’t be for years to come. And every new test, of which more are expected, complicates things further:
The Chinese trial could “lead to nearly 800 debris fragments of size 10 cm or larger, nearly 40,000 debris fragments with size between 1 and 10 cm, and roughly 2 million fragments of size 1 mm or larger,” the Union of Concerned Scientists’ David Wright notes on the Arms Control Wonk blog. “Roughly half of the debris fragments with size 1 cm or larger would stay in orbit for more than a decade.”
Update: Canada, South Korea, Australia, and Japan are all expected to lodge protests. This is a seriously big deal.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Russians say China's reports a LOAD OF HOOEY..... Doubled posted this in both China Threat thread and here, because it is an issue of Missile Defense... and China appears to be lying.
Russia - Reports that China missile hits satellite are rumors - Ivanov
Interfax.ru ^ | January 19, 2007
MOSCOW. Jan 19 (Interfax) - Reports that a Chinese ballistic missile has hit a satellite are "highly exaggerated rumors," Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said.
"I have heard reports to that effect, and they are quite abstract. I'm afraid they don't have such an anti-satellite basis. The rumors are highly exaggerated," Ivanov told reporters in Moscow.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070119/59365283.html
MOSCOW, January 19 (RIA Novosti) - The Russian defense minister denied Friday allegations that China launched a ballistic missile January 11 that destroyed a satellite.
CNN, a U.S.-based global television network, earlier said that a U.S. National Security Council spokesman confirmed a report in the magazine American Aviation Week and Space Technology that China last week destroyed one of its old meteorological satellites with a medium-range ballistic missile.
"I have heard such rather unsubstantiated reports, and I am afraid they are unfounded," Sergei Ivanov said. "There is nothing to comment on. The rumors are largely exaggerated."
However, Japan, Australia and the United States have already expressed concern over the alleged weapons test and the theoretical possibility that China could shoot down satellites operated by other countries.
China has yet to confirm the destruction of its satellite, but is likely to face stern criticism for an attempt to spread an arms race into space.
Ivanov, who is also deputy prime minister, said Russia has always opposed the militarization of space and will continue to do so.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Navy Tests High-Tech Railgun in Virginia
AP ^ | 18 Jan 2007 | AP
DAHLGREN, Va. — Normally, new weaponry tends to make defense more expensive. But the Navy likes to say its new railgun delivers the punch of a missile at bullet prices.
A flashy demonstration of the futuristic and comparatively inexpensive railgun weapon Tuesday at the Naval Surface Warfare Center had Navy brass smiling.
The weapon, which was successfully tested in October at the King George County base, fires nonexplosive projectiles at incredible speeds, using electricity rather than gun powder.
The technology could increase the striking range of U.S. Navy ships more than tenfold by the year 2020.
"It's pretty amazing capability, and it went off without a hitch," said Capt. Joseph McGettigan, commander of NSWC Dahlgren Division.
"The biggest thing is it's real not just something on the drawing board," he said. "It could go to the field right now. We just want to improve it, to make it better."
The railgun works by sending electric current along parallel rails, creating an electromagnetic force so powerful it can fire a metal projectile at tremendous speed.
Because the gun uses electricity and not gunpowder to fire projectiles, it's safer, eliminating the possibility of explosions on ships and vehicles equipped with it. Instead, a powerful pulse generator is used.
The prototype fired at Dahlgren is only an 8-megajoule electromagnetic device, but the one to be used on Navy ships will generate a massive 64 megajoules. Current Navy guns generate about 9 megajoules of muzzle energy.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
'Star Wars' missile test heralds new arms race in space
The Times ^ | January 19, 2007 | Tim Reid
The White House reacted with alarm and anger last night after China successfully destroyed a satellite with a ballistic missile, the first space test of such offensive military technology by any nation in more than 20 years.
Using a ground-based medium-range ballistic missile, the test knocked out an ageing Chinese weather satellite 537 miles above the Earth on January 11 through “kinetic impact”, or by slamming into it, Gordon Johndroe, President Bush’s national security spokesman, said.
The test comes amid increasing fears within the Bush Administration over potentially hostile nations and terrorist groups acquiring technology to destroy crucial US space systems on which the country — and particularly its military — heavily depends. It will inevitably stoke fears in Washington of a potentially dangerous new arms race in space.
The last US anti-satellite test took place in 1985. But Washington halted such Cold War-era testing, concerned by debris that could harm civilian and military satellite operations on which the West increasingly relies for everything from guiding warplanes to internet access.
“The US believes China’s development and testing of such weapons is inconsistent with the spirit of co-operation that both countries aspire to in the civil space area,” Mr Johndroe said. “We and other countries have expressed our concern regarding this action to the Chinese.”
Chinese military experts say that the country’s military capabilities lag about 20 years behind developed nations. Official Chinese figures show that defence spending has been rising by more than 10 per cent a year since 1990.
Aviation Week & Space Technology, the first to report the test, cited sources saying that a Chinese Feng Yun 1C polar orbit weather satellite, launched in 1999, was destroyed by an anti-satellite system launched from or near China’s Xichang Space Centre in Sichuan province.
David Wright, of the US-based Union of Concerned Scientists, said that the satellite pulverised by China could have broken into 40,000 fragments from 1cm to 10cm, or up to 4in, roughly half of which would stay in orbit for more than a decade. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office said last night:
“The UK raised this issue with the Chinese authorities on Wednesday. Our concern is the possible effects of debris in outer space caused by the break-up of the satellite.”
Washington’s concerns over the threat to its satellites as China embarks on its “Star Wars” programme triggered an aggressive revision of its national space policy in October that asserted America’s right to deny access to space to anyone hostile to its interests. In a speech about the policy last month, Robert Joseph, the State Department’s chief arms control and international security official, said that other nations and possibly terrorist groups were “acquiring capabilities to counter, attack and defeat US space systems”.
He added: “No nation, no non-state actor, should be under the illusion that the United States will tolerate a denial of our right to the use of space for peaceful purposes.”
China insists that its military policy is purely defensive, but its repetitions appear intended to allay fears among its neighbours that it is developing an increasingly formidable array of weaponry.
Less than two weeks ago, military manufacturers unveiled China’s home-made fighter jet, the Jian-10. China has just released its first defence White Paper in two years that sets out ambitious goals for the People’s Liberation Army. The paper focused heavily on the need for technological modernisation.
The US has been researching “satellite-killing” technology of its own, experimenting with lasers on the ground that could disable and destroy spacecraft.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
China anti-satellite test sparks space junk outcry
Jan 19 6:16 AM US/Eastern
China's test of an anti-satellite weapon has sparked concerns that the trial had caused dangerous debris to scatter into orbit, potentially threatening commercial and military satellites of other nations.
The website space.com, quoting sources that it did not identify, said the January 1 strike against the old Chinese weather satellite had caused it to smash up into "hundreds of pieces, fluttering through low Earth orbit."
http://www.breitbart.com/images/2007...lt-245x174.jpg
"The mess of space junk does put other satellites, including the International Space Station, at some risk," space.com's Leonard David said, adding though that the chances of a strike were "very small."
The main repercussion of the Chinese test has been fears of an arms race in space -- but debris is another big source of concern.
The space age reaches 50 years on October 4 this year -- the anniversary of the launch of the Soviet satellite Sputnik -- and there are hundreds of thousands of pieces whirling in orbit, the result mainly of exploded rocket stages and broken-up satellites.
David Wright, co-director of the Global Security Programme at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), a US private advocacy group, said the satellite that was destroyed had a mass of 750 kilogrammes (1,650 pounds) and was orbiting at an altitude of 850 kilometers (520 miles).
Many commercial, military and navigational satellites orbit in the region of 900 kilometers (560 miles), he said. The maximum altitude of the International Space Station is around 450 kilometers (280 miles).
"The collision would be expected to completely fragment the satellite into millions of pieces of debris -- nearly 800 debris fragments of size 10 centimeters (four inches) or larger, nearly 40,000 debris fragments with size between one and 10 centimeters (half to four inches) and some two million fragments of size one millimeter (0.04 inch) or larger," said Wright.
"At the very high speeds these debris particles would have, particles as small as one millimeter (0.04 inch) can be very destructive."
Most satellites do not carry sufficient shielding for even tiny particles like this, and in any case shielding is ineffective against any debris larger than about one centimetre (half an inch) in size," said Wright in a statement.
The orbital region "is very heavily used by satellites for both civil and military uses, which are threatened by the added debris," he warned
Among those who voiced fears was Australia, which said on Friday that, in addition to worries about the militarisation of space, "we're concerned about the impact that debris from destroyed satellites could have on other satellites, which are very expensive pieces of equipment."
The danger from debris comes from the enormous speeds at which they travel, which means even very small pieces impact with high energy.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Questions deepen over satellite-killer test
Russia doubts it happened...China is mum about it....
MSNBC ^ | Jan19,2006 Updated: 35 minutes ago | MSNBC staff and news service reports
The uproar over claims of a Chinese anti-satellite weapon test rose on Friday, but China's foreign ministry said it had no information about the test — and Russia's defense minister said he doubted it even took place as reported.
Reports of the Jan. 11 test, in which a Chinese missile firing took down one of its own aging weather satellites, sharpened a long-running controversy over space weapons. If the test took place as reported, the incident would stand as the first time a ground-based missile destroyed an orbiting satellite, and would raise a significant new threat for a U.S. military that is becoming increasingly dependent on satellite surveillance communications.
On Friday, Britain and Japan joined the United States, Canada and Australia in voicing concern. Deputy White House press secretary Dana Perino said China had not yet responded to Washington's inquiries. "We do want cooperation on a civil space strategy, so until we hear back from them or have more information, I don't have any more to add," she said.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
I don't really believe the word coming out of Russia on this. My gut tells me it is more TAA shenanigans to sow confusion.
After all, the US government came out and admitted this happened.
Perhaps Russia is playing the doubt card to make the US look hawkish and paint us as the war-hungry bad guy trying to pick a fight with China.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
China Confirms It Has Shot Down Satellite
AllHeadlineNews ^ | 1/23/07 | Jacob Cherian
Beijing, China (AHN) - China confirmed Tuesday that it had tested anti-satellite weapon.
However, it added that the nation does not have intentions of an arms race in space.
Beijing said it had officially told the governments of the U.S., and Japan about the missile test.
The Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said China was interested only in "peaceful development of outer space."
The satellite intercept test is said to be the first of its kind in well over 20 years and there are concerns that it may give rise to a space arms race.
An article in the American Aviation Week and Space Technology was one of the first to report that the test had taken place.
In the report, it was said that the Chinese Feng Yun 1C polar orbit weather satellite was obliterated by an anti-satellite system launched from or near Xichang Space Center in China on January 11.
The test is believed to have taken place approximately 537 miles above the earth.
U.S. National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe, who confirmed the report last Thursday said at the time, "(the U.S.) believes China's development and testing of such weapons is inconsistent with the spirit of co-operation that both countries aspire to in the civil space area".
The U.S. space policy, revised in October, says Washington reserves the right to freedom of action in space, and the U.S. itself is said to be working on research on "satellite-killing" weapons, reports BBC.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
U.S. missile defense maturing, latest test a success
Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:14pm EThttp://i.today.reuters.com/images/spacer.gif
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Within a year, the U.S. missile defense system should be able to guard against enemy attacks, while testing new technologies, the deputy director of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said on Monday.
The United States activated the ground-based system last summer when North Korea launched one long-range and six short-range missiles.
North Korea's intercontinental Taepodong 2 missile fell into the Sea of Japan shortly after launch but the short-range tests appeared successful, said Brig. Gen. Patrick O'Reilly, deputy director of the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency.
O'Reilly said there would be no formal announcement that the system was operational. He predicted the capability to defend against enemy missiles and to continue testing and development work would be achieved within a year.
"It's just a matter of maturation," he told reporters after a speech hosted by the George C. Marshall Institute, a public policy group.
O'Reilly said work by North Korea and Iran on long-range ballistic missiles underscored the need for a viable U.S. missile defense system.
The war between Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah militants last summer also highlighted the dangers of ballistic missiles and their use by non-state actors, he said. "We know we must be prepared for all contingencies."
O'Reilly said the missile defense system, which includes sea-based and ground-based interceptors, and powerful X-Band radar systems, achieved success in 14 of 15 flight tests.
Through the end of 2007, the program will focus on protecting the United States from threats from the Middle East and North Korea, expanding coverage to U.S. allies and boosting protection against shorter-range threats.
In 2008 and beyond, there would be increased focus on countering unconventional attacks and increasing the U.S. inventory of interceptors and sensors, O'Reilly said.
RUSSIA IS WARY
On Saturday, the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), built by Lockheed Martin Corp, intercepted a target shot from a barge. It was the first test of THAAD since its move to the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Hawaii.
Two more THAAD intercept tests are planned for 2007, along with three tests of the Aegis Standard Missile-3 interceptors against short- and medium-range targets, O'Reilly said.
The agency also plans two tests of long-range ground-based interceptors in late spring and early fall.
The United States has 14 interceptors in Alaska and two in California, primarily to counter North Korea. O'Reilly said the number in Alaska would grow to 21 within eight months.
By 2011, plans call for some 40 interceptors in Alaska and four at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, he said.
He said negotiations were just beginning with Poland to host up to 10 ground-based interceptors and with the Czech Republic about fielding an advanced radar station.
Asked about the concerns of Russian officials, O'Reilly said the United States was talking with Moscow and hoped to convince it that placing U.S. missile defenses in eastern Europe could also enhance Russia's security as well.
He gave no timeline for completing negotiations with Poland and the Czechs, but said the United States was "always looking at all our options" if either country chose not to proceed.
http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...1-ArticlePage2
Jag
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Russia and China are playing "word games", as you said Ryan.
I don't for a second believe that Russia isn't hoping like hell that China can knock our stuff out.
If they can, then they figure all ground based MD is useless..... if that's the case, when they decide to have at it with us, they will do everything they can to take out satellites and nuke our missile installations.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Russia capable of hitting US missile shield: general
AFP ^ | Mar 5, 2007 | Staff
Russia's bomber force would have no trouble destroying planned US missile defense sites in Europe, its head said Monday as the country's security council warned of new policies to counter NATO.
"Since the components of the anti-missile defence system are weakly protected, all types of our aircraft are capable of using electronic countermeasures against them and physically destroying them," Interfax news agency quoted Lieutenant General Igor Khvorov as saying.
The Kremlin has fiercely protested US plans to install an anti-missile system in Poland and the Czech Republic. Washington insists it would not be aimed at Russia but designed to counter attacks from countries such as Iran and North Korea.
Khvorov also said Russia is modernizing its fleet of Tu-160 strategic bombers, with two updated versions of the aircraft expected to be ready this year.
Known as Blackjack to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, the Tu-160 is a highly manoeuvrable supersonic strategic bomber.
Meanwhile the national security council said Russia is to adopt a new military doctrine in response to the "strengthening" of NATO forces, in the latest sign of worsening relations between the two sides.
"The analysis of the international situation shows that recourse to military force is increasingly the policy of leading world states," the council said in an announcement that the new doctrine was in preparation.
"The military policy of the principal countries devotes more and more energy to the modernisation of the armed forces," including updating their weapons technology and strategies, it said.
"Military alliances are strengthening, and especially NATO," the Russian security council claimed.
"Armed forces are being used above all as a principal instrument for pursuing the economic and political interests of countries" in the West, it said.
The council statement echoed hard-hitting speeches by Russian President Vladimir Putin last month.
In Moscow on February 22 Putin warned, "We are encountering a dangerous disdain for international law, ambitions to use military force to achieve personal interests," in what appeared to be a veiled reference to the United States.
His comments came less than two weeks after he made a full-frontal assault on US foreign policy in a speech in Munich, saying the United States had "overstepped its borders in all spheres."
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Russian Air Force Could Easily Incapacitate Planned U.S. Missile Defenses
Quote:
Russia's air force would be capable of easily knocking out missile defense sites the United States wants to place in Europe, news agencies quoted a top general as saying Monday in the latest bellicose remarks in response to the U.S. plans.
Lt. Gen. Igor Khvorov, who is in charge of Russia's strategic bomber force, said the installations the United States plans to deploy in Poland and the Czech Republic will be an easy target for his aircraft, Interfax and RIA-Novosti news agencies reported.
"Since missile defense elements are weakly protected, all types of our aircraft are capable of applying electronic countermeasures against them or physically destroying them," Khvorov was quoted as saying.
The statement follows a stream of other comments from Russian government leaders and military officials who have harshly criticized the U.S. plans. The head of Russia's missile forces said last month that his forces would be capable of targeting the putative facilities if the country's leadership decided to do so.
The United States has said the planned defenses would not be aimed at Russia, and were intended to defend against missile attacks from countries such as Iran. President Vladimir Putin has said, however, that he does not trust the American claims and warned that Russia would take countermeasures.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
THAAD Radar Completes Successful Target Tracking Test
MDA. ^ | March 8, 2007 | MDA
Lt. General Henry “Trey” Obering, Missile Defense Agency director, announced today the successful completion of an important radar data collection flight test for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense element. The test was conducted on March 5 and involved the launch of a shortrange target missile from an aircraft over the Pacific Ocean.
The short-range target missile was launched at approximately 2:30 p.m. Hawaii Time (8:30 p.m. EST) from a U.S. Air Force C-17A transport aircraft approximately 400 miles west of the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, Hawaii. The target missile was extracted from the rear of the C-17A aircraft by parachute. The missile’s rocket motor then ignited, sending it on a planned trajectory over the Pacific Ocean.
The target missile’s flight was successfully tracked by the THAAD radar, now designated as Army Navy/Transportable Radar Surveillance, or AN/TPY-2. Preliminary indications are that all radar data collection objectives were met.
(Excerpt) Read more at mda.mil ...
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
US Missile Shield a Threat to Europe Unity: Chirac
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/missiles/US_Missile_Shield_Threat_to_Europe_Unity_Chirac160 010886.php ^ | www.defencetalk.com
The U.S. anti-missile shield project, which is strongly opposed by Russia, risks creating “new lines of division in Europe,” French President Jacques Chirac warned March 9.
”The project raises numerous questions which require consideration before they are answered,” the French leader told a press conference following a summit of EU heads of state and government in Brussels.
”We have to be very careful not to encourage new lines of division in Europe,” said Chirac, attending his last formal European summit.
The United States wants to build a bank of 10 interceptors in Poland from next year to shoot down missiles that might be fired from “rogue states” like Iran or North Korea.
The interceptors would home in on information provided by a tracking station to be set up in the Czech Republic, as well as a forward operating radar at an undisclosed location in the Caucasus.
Moscow has reacted angrily to the plan and senior Russian military figures have warned that they might target the missile-shield sites with their own weapons.
Washington maintains that the new part of the shield — to be fully operational by 2013 — would protect not only eastern parts of the United States, but also many of its European allies.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Homeland Security to test anti-missile system
Valley Press on ^ | Monday, April 9, 2007. | ALLISON GATLIN
PALMDALE - The Department of Homeland Security plans to evaluate unmanned, high-altitude vehicles as a platform for a counter-missile defense system for commercial airliners in answer to the threat of shoulder-fired missiles being used to attack aircraft as they take off or land.
While seeking bids for development of such a system, the department plans to conduct trials using the Northrop Grumman Corp.'s Global Hawk and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems' Predator B aircraft.
Both are built and tested in the Antelope Valley; Global Hawk at Northrop's facility at Air Force Plant 42 in Palmdale and Predator B at General Atomics' site at Grey Butte.
The risk-reduction testing may also include the NASA ER-2 - a variant of the high-altitude U-2 spy plane - and Scaled Composites' Proteus aircraft, according to the department's bid solicitation. The ER-2 aircraft are stationed at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, while the Proteus is a product of Mojave-based Scaled Composites.
The ground-based missile launchers are known as "man-portable air defense systems," or MANPADS. Originally developed in the Vietnam War era as defense against air attacks, they have become increasingly sophisticated weapons capable of offensive threats. Consisting primarily of 6-foot-long launch tubes, the systems can be carried easily and set up by a single person in under a minute.
The Department of Homeland Security plan calls for using proven high-altitude, unmanned systems coupled with defensive counter-measure systems located either on board the aircraft or on the ground around an airport.
In the latter case, the airborne system would carry a missile warning system that would then alert the defense countermeasure on the ground, according to the department solicitation.
According to the solicitation, "the payload design and application must be suitable for employment aboard a Global Hawk or Predator B (unmanned vehicle)."
(Excerpt) Read more at avpress.com ...
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
America knew about China's secret anti-satellite test
The Times of India ^ | 23 Apr, 2007 l 1250 hrs IST | The Press Trust of India (PTI)
WASHINGTON: American intelligence had picked up signs about preparations of an anti-satellite test by China in January this year but the US government decided to keep quiet as it felt it had little leverage with Beijing.
The United States had detected two previous tests of the system, dubbed the SC-19 by American intelligence on July 7, 2005, and Feb 6, 2006. Neither struck a target. In neither case did the Bush administration complain to the Chinese, a senior official said.
In December 2006 and early January of this year, US intelligence agencies picked up signs that preparations for a third Chinese anti-satellite test appeared to be underway. The mobile missile launcher for the Chinese SC-19 was repeatedly detected on the Songlin pad, according to American officials familiar with the classified reports.
In early January, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, which collects and analyzes reconnaissance information, also warned that an SC-19 test was possible that month.
The presumed target for the test was an old Chinese weather satellite known as the Feng-Yun-1C. The US Air Force was carefully tracking the satellite on the day of the test, checking its location six times that day instead of the normal two, according to Geoff Forden, a research associate at the Massachusetts Institute.
Senior Bush administration officials debated how to respond and even began to draft a protest, but ultimately decided to say nothing to Beijing until after the test.
The administration felt constrained in its dealings with China because of its view that it had little leverage to stop an important Chinese military program.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
The location where I work will be on FOX news sometime this morning, and the crew that visited here will be out on an Aegis cruiser this morning sometime.
Keep your eyes on the news. (They can't give us a firm time, but I got the following information)
Quote:
The Fox crew who visited the JNIC facility back on March 29th will be attempting multiple live reports on 24, 25 and 27 April from an Aegis Cruiser. We understand the JNIC portions will be aired the morning of Tuesday, April 24, however, Fox has not been able to provide a concrete time of the broadcast since there are a lot of variables involved. If a solid time is provided from Fox News, that information will be sent out as a JNIC Announcement.
Fox news will, as usual, be shown all day on the televisions in the JNIC High Plains Cafeteria for anyone interested in attempting to view the broadcast. The broadcast can also be viewed from individual unclassified LAN systems using the Viewer program.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
I just saw the piece at around 11:36am ET.
It was about 2 minutes long and they indicated they would have other reports over the next couple days.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Raytheon Missiles Engage Ballistic Missile and Airborne Targets Over the Pacific Ocean
defensetalk.com ^
PACIFIC MISSILE RANGE FACILITY, KAUAI, Hawaii: In a first-of-its-kind dual missile defense test today, Raytheon Company produced Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) and Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) simultaneously engaged targets over the Pacific Ocean.
This was the first time a U.S. Navy ship demonstrated simultaneous ship engagements against both cruise and ballistic missile targets. It was the eighth successful intercept for the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system's SM-3.
The SM-3 Block IA destroyed a short-range ballistic missile target in space while SM-2 Block IIIA engaged a cruise missile threat at a lower altitude. Both intercepting missiles were fired from guided missile cruiser USS Lake Erie (CG 70) by the ship's crew. The ballistic missile target was launched from the U.S. Navy's Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai. The subsonic cruise missile target was launched from a range aircraft.
"The success of the SM-3 program is a validation of our strong Missile Defense Agency, Navy and contractor team," said Louise Francesconi, president of Raytheon Missile Systems. "This strong customer relationship and our ability to balance kill vehicle, missile and system requirements helped to ensure a successful mission."
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
http://www.nowpublic.com/navy_ballis...s_at_sea_today
This site has the most recent video of the tests yesterday. No audio or I broke something/.....
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
That's our Democrat party, always looking out for our national security!
House Panel Considers Cuts for Missile Defense
Quote:
The Bush administration’s proposal to construct two American missile defense bases in Europe has roiled relations with Russia and provoked sharp questioning even in NATO capitals, where critics ask: With the system still unproven and, under the best of circumstances, years from completion, why rush construction now?
Now the Democratic majority in Congress is moving toward budget cuts aimed at slowing the administration’s plans to break ground this year on one of the bases, in Poland. Representative Ellen O. Tauscher, a California Democrat who is a member of the House Armed Services Committee, said the committee would approve “only prudent investments” in what she labeled “high-risk, immature programs” to shoot down long-range missiles, like the system advocated for Europe.
The administration wants to begin digging silos for 10 interceptors in Poland and laying the foundation for a tracking radar in the Czech Republic this year to defend Europe against what it calls a looming long-range ballistic missile threat from Iran. But in a vote scheduled for Wednesday, the House committee was expected to approve only a study of the “political, technical, operational, force structure and budgetary aspects” of the European sites.
The bill, still under consideration late Wednesday, would cut $160 million from funds proposed for construction in Poland, as part of $764 million in cuts from the $8.9 billion the administration has sought for the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency in 2008.
A cut of $160 million would prevent breaking ground on the interceptor silos in Poland, while leaving funds to move forward with buying the 10 interceptor missiles and installing the radar for the Czech Republic, Congressional officials say.
The bill would also face a vote by the full House. Similar discussions are under way in the Senate, where the new Democratic majority is also skeptical of missile defense.
Administration officials say the proposals for two antimissile bases in former Soviet satellites in Central Europe are a modest but important step toward establishing a system of high-technology global sentries capable of shooting down warheads fired off by an adversary with a limited arsenal of ballistic missiles.
But in a critical assessment of the missile defense program issued in March, the Government Accountability Office noted that the antimissile program “cannot yet be fully assessed because there have been too few flight tests conducted to anchor the models and simulations that predict overall system performance.”
In an interview, Lt. Gen. Henry A. Obering III, director of the Missile Defense Agency, took issue with the report, saying, “I do believe we are on the right path.” The American military is moving at full speed to prove that the system is capable of destroying a long-range enemy warhead in an environment that he says mirrors a real-world threat, and has its next test scheduled along the West Coast for the end of this month.
Even so, the administration says the United States must begin pouring concrete soon to have the European system operating by 2012 — to counter an Iranian long-range missile ability that American intelligence warns will be reached between 2010 and 2015. Pentagon officials have said that the emerging European system can also incorporate improvements in technology.
Last month, the administration opened a campaign in which the secretaries of state and defense, along with a team of other senior officials and generals, canvassed European capitals, including Moscow, to explain the limited nature of the system under consideration.
Daniel Fried, the assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, said recently that the missile defense system in Europe was intended to help protect American forces serving in NATO nations, and to help guarantee the security of those allies, at a time when the United States was moving ahead with its own system of missiles and radars to guard American territory.
“The fact is alliance security should be indivisible,” Mr. Fried added. “And if Europe is vulnerable to Iranian missiles, that means we’re insecure as well.”
Russia has little to fear from the bases proposed for the former Soviet satellites, American officials say, because the limited missile defense architecture under consideration — the 10 interceptors — is not even a tiny shadow of the Reagan-era “Star Wars” program that dreamt of an impenetrable missile shield. The price tag of the European system is small by comparison, at $3.5 billion.
Kremlin leaders rejected a peace offering of American-Russian cooperation on missile defense that was carried to Moscow by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, but Russian leaders agreed to set up a joint commission to examine the fine print of the plan. The Russians also demanded a high-level session to debate details of proposed missile defenses in Europe, which is likely to lead to a meeting in September between Mr. Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and their Russian counterparts, Mr. Fried said.
As discussions with the Russians accelerate, administration and military officials are expected to emphasize their position that the location, size and design of the missile defense sites in Central Europe clearly illustrate that the system poses no threat to Moscow’s hundreds of missiles and thousands of warheads.
General Obering said the sites in Central Europe were not positioned to intercept Russia’s strategic nuclear missiles, as they would fly over the North Pole, and not over Europe, if fired at the United States.
“It doesn’t matter that the deployment poses no plausible physical threat to Russia’s deterrent, because Moscow fears it might serve as a toehold that could be expanded and upgraded in the future,” said Wade Boese, research director for the Arms Control Association, a research and advocacy group here. “The administration should be careful that its response to a projected or hypothetical threat does not create a much bigger problem with Russia.”
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
BMD Focus: The Battle To Save The ABL
Quote:
Democrats on Capitol Hill have declared war on the ambitious Airborne Laser anti-ballistic missile program, but the three giant aerospace contractors who are building the ABL are already fighting back.
War was declared on Tuesday when the Strategic Forces Subcommittee of the Armed Services Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives announced it was slashing $400 million from the $517 million requested for the development of the troubled and widely criticized program in its markups to the annual defense appropriations bill. If that cut goes through, it may be curtains for the ABL, whose prime contractor is Boeing.
The subcommittee, chaired by Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., also took a swipe at the Bush administration's cherished program to deploy BMD systems in Central Europe over the next five years. The administration requested $300 million. Tauscher and her committee cut that in their markup to around $160 million. In all, the subcommittee proposed cutting around 9 percent of the total Bush administration budget request for ballistic missile defense -- a proposed total of $764 million in cuts out of an $8.9 billion request.
Other military space or BMD programs took big hits, too.
"Worried that military space programs cannot be completed on schedule and within budget, the subcommittee cut $200 million from the Alternate Infrared Satellite System, $150 million from the Global Positioning Systems III and $80 million from High Integrity GPS," Defense News reported.
The subcommittee's decision is not the final word in the budget process, however. The bill may be heavily amended and some of the cuts restored in a reconciliation conference with the Senate. Or President George W. Bush, who has already shown his willingness to veto military funding bills crafted by the Democrats on Capitol Hill when they attempt to derail major policies, may swing his own ax on the bill.
But Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin, the "big three" defense aerospace contractors most involved in the ABL, are not sitting back waiting for their congressional supporters to step in and fight Tauscher's proposed cuts. They are already out in the marketplace of ideas making their case for saving the ABL.
In a joint statement issued Tuesday, the three giant companies noted that the Airborne Laser is intended to provide a boost-phase intercept capacity to shoot down intercontinental ballistic missiles after they are launched.
They said the ABL program "remains on track to complete a lethal demonstration in 2009 that will validate the unique contribution ABL can bring to an integrated ballistic missile defense system (BMDS) as a boost phase element."
"The laser system fired effectively at full power and full duration during ground testing in 2005," the statement said. "In 2007, low-power flight tests for the beam control/fire control system will be complete and the high-power laser integration inside the aircraft will begin. In 2008, we will begin high-power system testing that will culminate in an early 2009 lethal demonstration.
"We stand on the verge of fully demonstrating a revolutionary warfighting capability," the companies said. "ABL technical risk has been substantially reduced as a result of previous investments by both Democratic and Republican administrations and congressional guidance. Given the importance of the boost-phase mission and the proximity of demonstrating ABL's capabilities, it would be imprudent to cripple or terminate this program just when we are on the cusp of demonstrating ABL's capability.
"We most respectfully urge Congress to support the full fiscal year '08 budget request for the Airborne Laser program," the joint statement said.
If the ABL program goes operational it will involve pairs of giant aircraft carrying the weapons that will patrol within friendly airspace at altitudes of around 40,000 feet, ready to track and acquire as targets ascending ICBMs.
A key attraction of the ABL concept is that, whereas the fastest ballistic missile or ABM interceptor can accelerate to 15,000 to 18,000 miles per hour, lasers fire at the speed of light, which is 186,000 miles per second.
It should also be noted that Tauscher and her subcommittee were by no means hostile to the U.S. BMD program in general. The Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance noted Tuesday that Tauscher's Strategic Forces Subcommittee "has authorized and added an additional $94 million to the Missile Defense Agency's budget, as well as sustaining full funding for all the current development, testing and deployment for near-term missile defense systems for a total $8.236 billion."
"In addition, this same subcommittee also recommended fully funding the $1.4 billion separate missile defense request by the U.S. Army to address the current missile threats through terminal missile defense systems," the MDAA said.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
U.S. May Share Missile Info With China
Quote:
The United States would "seriously" consider sharing technology and missile warning intelligence with China, the U.S. defense chief said Sunday.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters attending the Shangri-la Asian security meeting that he has not made such an offer but would be open to it. "I think if the Chinese were to express an interest in it, we would certainly take it seriously," he said.
The Russian government in April rejected a similar offer in its protests against a U.S. anti-ballistic missile defense system comprising 10 interceptors and a radar facility to be built in Poland and the Czech Republic.
China is concerned about U.S-Japan cooperation on a missile defense system, which would be primarily concerned with North Korea, which has launched long-range ballistic missiles toward Japan in recent years.
Gates reiterated the assertion that the missile defense systems under discussion were meant to counter rogue states or terrorists with missiles, rather than large countries like China and Russia, whose arsenals could easily overwhelm the limited system.
"In neither case is ballistic missile defense aimed at either at weakening the deterrent of either China or Russia," he said.
"I think it is worth reaffirming that the missile defenses that we are planning, both at home and abroad, both in Europe and in Asia, are intended to deal with the acquisition of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction by either rogue countries or rogue governments or terrorist groups," Gates said.
Missile defense is not the only subject China expressed concern about. U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Marine Gen. Peter Pace said a Chinese general said he was not pleased by the annual U.S. report on Chinese military power.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Quote:
Missile defense is not the only subject China expressed concern about. U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Marine Gen. Peter Pace said a Chinese general said he was not pleased by the annual U.S. report on Chinese military power.
LMAO. So what? They want us to take it back and say we're very worried, you chinese are big and tough? Grow up already.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
FOXNEWS.COM HOME > WORLD
Russia Promises Retaliation if Weapons Deployed in Space
Thursday, September 27, 2007
http://www.foxnews.com/images/service_ap_36.gif
MOSCOW — The chief of Russia's space forces on Thursday said Moscow would have to retaliate if others deploy weapons in space — a stern warning to the United States.
While Col.-Gen. Vladimir Popovkin did not name any specific country, he was clearly referring to U.S. plans for space-based weapons, which the Kremlin had vociferously opposed.
"We don't want to wage a war in space, we don't want to gain dominance in space, but we won't allow any other nation to dominate space," Popovkin said in televised remarks. "If any country deploys weapons in space, then the laws of warfare are such that retaliatory weapons are certain to appear."
President Vladimir Putin has criticized U.S. plans for space-based weapons, saying it could trigger a new arms race.
When China tested an anti-satellite missile in January, Putin said that the move was a response to U.S. plans for space-based weapons.
Russia and China have strongly pushed for an international agreement banning space weapons, but their proposals have been stymied by the United States.
"It's necessary to legalize the game rules in space," Popovkin said. He warned that the complexity of space weapons could trigger a war.
Satellites may fail on technical reasons, but their owner could think they were incapacitated by an enemy and could be tempted to retaliate, Popovkin said.
"If that happens, a nation might ask a legitimate question: could it be the beginning of an effort to deafen and blind it," Popovkin said.
President Bush signed an order last year tacitly asserting the U.S. right to space weapons and opposing the development of treaties or other measures restricting them.
Bush also had pushed an ambitious program for space-based missile defense, and the Pentagon is working on missiles, ground lasers and other technology to shoot down satellites.
The U.S. plans have worried Russia, which also has strongly criticized U.S. plans to deploy missile defense elements in Poland and the Czech Republic. Putin has rejected U.S. assertions that the missile defense sites in Europe were necessary to confront a prospective missile threat from Iran and said they threatened Russia's nuclear deterrent.
The dispute has badly damaged the Russian-U.S. relations, also strained over U.S. criticism of the Kremlin's backsliding on democracy and rifts over global crises.
Popovkin said Russia would modernize components of its air and missile defense systems. He said, in particular, that the military would build a new early warning radar near Armavir in southern Russia's Krasnodar region to replace aging Soviet-built radars it currently shares with Ukraine.
Such radars are intended to detect the launch of an enemy's ballistic missiles.
Popovkin also said that Russia in 2009 would start testing a new generation of satellites to spot missile launches. He said more than 60 military and dual-purpose satellites are currently in orbit.
-
Re: Missile Defense (General thread)
Here is the reason that the Russians are so up in arms about Poland and about Missile Defense.
Missile Defense Based in Poland Might Stop REussian Attack Aimed at U.S.
The Wall Street Journal Online ^ | September 26, 2007 | KEITH J. WINSTEIN
Missile Defense Based in Poland Might Stop Attack Aimed at U.S.
By KEITH J. WINSTEIN September 26, 2007 11:44 p.m.
A proposed missile defense system in Poland would be able to intercept Russian missiles launched at the U.S., according to an analysis by a prominent missile-defense critic.
The Missile Defense Agency, a part of the Department of Defense, strongly disputes the calculations, by Theodore A. Postol, a professor of national security policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Mr. Postol is best known for his criticism of the efficacy of the Patriot antimissile system's performance in the 1991 Gulf War.
As part of its negotiations with Poland and Russia over the proposed European-based missile shield, the Pentagon has said that the proposed system "would not be capable" of intercepting Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles launched at the U.S.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...