MSG Tripps wrote:

The USN can destroy your satellites, motherfucks.

Any one feeling lucky want to step up and give it a shot?

Well....  punks?

Steady Bucko,

Don't lose your load prematurely. It don't meen didly if you can't shoot down this 1960's era tech:



And we are no closer to being able to counter the above then we were in the 1970s. Because for all the doctored anti missle tests and countless billions in star wars spending we have not come any closer to dealing with the fundamnetal reality. Which is that it is far easier and vastly cheaper to place simple existing sensor jamming systems on incoming ballistic missiles then it is to shoot them down. Especially when they have 8 to 12  re-entry vehicles. Or even worse are fractional-orbital missiles that have already been built but withdrawn by treaty because their target could not be deduced from tracking.

Last edited by Johnny Rotten (2008-02-21 20:26:56)

Can't we all just get along?

MSG Tripps wrote:

Johnny Rotten wrote:

And we are no closer to being able to counter the above then we were in the 1970s.

That may be an interpretation.

Hey I didn't make this particular reality, I just live in it

I was pulling your chain Sarge, but yes, you are correct in facts although I will point out that the fundamental problem in the effectiveness of anti ballistic missile countermeasures remains. We have come a long way since the 1970s in sensor technology and guidance. The ability to discriminate a target from countermeasures has advanced. The use of a network of target tracking as in this deployment of a modified Aegis system and kinetic warhead on a Standard missile to shoot down that falling satellite is an example of a measure of progress towards the ABM goal.


But as far as I can tell the ABM system still would be wholly ineffective against a few incoming missiles with Multiple Reentry vehicles. And the prospects do not look good. This was the original problem with ABM from the early 1960s, which led to us pursuing MAD policy.

Countermeasures have already been built and tested for addition to our current missiles that show just how effective they would be.


"In April 2004, a General Accounting Office report concluded that “MDA does not explain some critical assumptions—such as an enemy’s type and number of decoys—underlying its performance Goals.” It recommended that “DOD carry out independent, operationally realistic testing of each block being fielded” but DOD responded that “formal operational testing is not required before entry into full-rate production"

And we haven't even begun to address the problem of  missiles that obtain orbit before deploying multiple reentry vehicles, dummies and ABM sensor countermeasures. A Fractional Orbital bombardment system  gets around our current ABM system slated for deployment and the tracking network showcased in destrpying that weather satellite.  Crucial early deducements could not be made of where the target or flight path was from the boost phase or still ascending reentry vehicles released from ICBMs. Let alone deal with incoming multiple reentry vehicles and decoys overwhelming our system.

We haven't begun to deal with this because we were able, by treaty, to get the Soviets to withdraw from deployment the Fractional orbital MRV systems they had built. But you can bet that the Chinese, and eventually others, could also easily build those now with their existing payload rockets.

Nor has any info come out on countering manuverable rentry vehicles because the entire technology is so classified. It is known that we have built reentry vehicles with manuverable hypersonic  flight characteristics. Can our current kinectic ABM even deal with something like that during the very short period when they have to intercept?



The only reason we aren't facing dealing with these threats in our ABM deployment is by the strength of our previous cold war treaties.  The tech exists, heck the missiles were already built way back in the 1970s to defeat our current and planned ABM system.

Even with all the doctored tests, fudged for political and funding reasons, of the currently deployed kinetic kill ABM's, the current succeses are pretty cool tech. I was involved with the rebuilding to operational capabilities of the targetting systems at a Nike museum. As part of the Military's hand over to the Park Service they released all these previously classified media from early kinetic kill tests of Nike Zeus. Back then they ran into problems with presicion of the guidance systems and concluded in secret that it could not achieve reliability without advances in electronics, networked and onboard guidance. But they didn't stop efforts till they had fudged their own test to achieve a missile kill for political reasons. It has taken 45 years to get to square 1 results on this problem.

My point being that if you are going to believe that this will keep you safe from foreign boogeymen in the future you are dreaming. Miltary modernization spending and force or theater Anti missile protection are one thing, but the politicians who sell us this missile shield snake oil are disingenuous and dangerous to our survival.

Last edited by Johnny Rotten (2008-02-22 11:22:33)

Hey, who doesn't like a day at the races for fun and profit.