DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Missiles » Missile Defense Prepped; Kim Yawns

Missile Defense Prepped; Kim Yawns

ft04_1_5.jpgSo the U.S. has decided to turn on its Alaska-​​based mis­sile defense sys­tem, in response to North Korea’s impend­ing launch. Kim Jong-​​il ain’t exactly quak­ing in his boots, I imag­ine.
The Ground-​​based Midcourse Defense sys­tem hasn’t suc­cess­fully inter­cepted a mis­sile since October of 2002. Five of its last ten flight tests, it flunked. And the last two times it tried to hit an oncom­ing mis­sile, the inter­cep­tor didn’t even leave the ground. Things have got­ten so bad that the Missile Defense Agency’s inde­pen­dent review team con­cluded last year that more tests may only under­mine the GMD’s value as a deter­rent. (Here’s a com­pre­hen­sive list of all of the GMD tests — past, cur­rent, and future — from the Center for Defense Information.)
Missile defense back­ers might point to a positive-​​sounding test run in April. But that was just a “data col­lec­tion” flight. “No inter­cep­tor mis­siles were used,” CDI notes.
UPDATE 01:42 PM: “This ‘mis­sile defense sys­tem ini­ti­ated’ shit is the biggest yawner of a story all day,” says one knowl­edge­able source. “I’m exag­ger­at­ing… but it takes approx­i­mately two sec­onds to flip those sor­ties to oper­a­tional.“
The source also won­ders whether the North Koreans are really plan­ning to launch a “mis­sile,” at all. What if it’s a small satel­lite they’re try­ing to get into orbit, instead? [The South Koreans seem to be ask­ing the same ques­tion.]
Lastly, the source won­ders whether the U.S. would even be will­ing to launch a mis­sile inter­cep­tor, given the system’s uneven track record. “What mes­sage do we send if we miss?” he asks.
UPDATE 5:38 PM: Joe Cirincione reminds us that the North Koreans ain’t exactly mas­ter mis­sileers. “The last time they fired a long-​​range mis­sile was in 1998, it went about 1300 kil­lome­ters and failed to put its tiny pay­load into orbit,” he says.
UPDATE 5:58 PM: The Nelson Report thinks it’s all a PR stunt. “if theres one thing all ana­lysts of N. Korea agree on, its that Dear Leader Kim Jong-​​il just loves being the cen­ter of atten­tion. By that cri­te­ria, the so far big non-​​event of the week…an alleged Taepodong-​​2 ICBM test…is already a HUGE suc­cess.“
UPDATE 6:13 PM: Some have sug­gested that if the GMD inter­cep­tors in Alaska aren’t work­ing, then U.S. forces will used the sea-​​based, Aegis sys­tem to knock down a Korean launch.
Not likely.
The Aegis is designed to “detect, track, inter­cept, and destroy Short Range Ballistic Missiles (SRBMs) to Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBMs),” accord­ing to the mil­i­tary. Long-​​range, inter­con­ti­nen­tal bal­lis­tic mis­siles — which fly higher than SRBMs and IRBMs — won’t be touched by the Aegis, unfor­tu­nately. Besides, the Aegis’ SM-​​3 inter­cep­tors don’t have the oomph to take down an ICBM.
What the Aegis cruis­ers can do is track the big­ger mis­siles, to help the inter­cep­tors in Alaska. But that’s about it.
UPDATE 8:38 PM: If you’re look­ing for an arti­cle that’s either flat wrong or mis­lead­ing on just about every aspect of mis­sile defense — from Airborne Lasers to so-​​called Taepodong-​​2s to Aegis inter­cep­tors, this right here would be your story.

Share |

June 20th, 2006 | Missiles, Strategery | 196017 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/06/20/missile-defense-prepped-kim-yawns/Missile+Defense+Prepped%3B+Kim+Yawns2006-06-20+18%3A18%3A17david_axe You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Look Out, Pyongyang? Rail Gun in the Works | Jets get Internet … Finally! » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Harry Toor says:
    June 20, 2006 at 2:49 pm

    —
    “What mes­sage do we send if we miss?” he asks.
    —
    Why not send two, hehe.

    Reply
  2. Edward Liu says:
    June 20, 2006 at 3:07 pm

    What mes­sage do we send if we miss? If you work in the defense indus­try, then the mes­sage is clearly that we’re not spend­ing any­where near enough on mis­sile defense, but a few hun­dred tril­lion dol­lars more in the next defense bud­get will get us MUCH closer than we EVER were before. =8^)

    Reply
  3. C-Low says:
    June 20, 2006 at 3:12 pm

    What are you guys going to do if WE HIT?
    In one fail swoop the mis­sile threat short mass assaults from either Russia or China is gone. In one fail swoop all those Tin Horn Dictators that spent their starv­ing peo­ples rice quo­tas on that new slick long range mis­sile to threaten the US and west is gone poof in a cloud of smoke. In an ever-​​increasing rate there­after the threat from Russia and China becomes less and less. In one fail swoop every­thing changes and the crazed dic­ta­tor hold­ing the US pop hostage with bal­lis­tic mis­siles is gone good rid­dens.
    Of course the more batty sec­tion the audi­ence will scream ohhh the US will abuse this world dom­i­nat­ing power ohhhh the real evil is US. Of course that negates the fact we are the only nation in the world that had the oppor­tu­nity to con­quer the entire world (WW2 45–55 we were the only Nuclear power with no rival short Russia who a hand­ful of nukes would have salved in short order) but we not only passed we helped free most of the 3rd world from their colo­nial pow­ers and even rebuild those same pow­ers home­lands.
    BMD changes every­thing shifts the whole table. A true world turn­ing event it would be.

    Reply
  4. sglover says:
    June 20, 2006 at 3:12 pm

    “What mes­sage do we send if we miss? If you work in the defense indus­try, then the mes­sage is clearly that we’re not spend­ing any­where near enough on mis­sile defense, but a few hun­dred tril­lion dol­lars more in the next defense bud­get will get us MUCH closer than we EVER were before. =8^)“
    And don’t for­get, if the inter­cep­tor even clears its launcher, the mis­sile defense crowd will call it a “near miss”.

    Reply
  5. Sarge says:
    June 20, 2006 at 3:20 pm

    I can’t believe they are STILL flog­ging this fly­ing Maginot line crap.
    Another waste of money.

    Reply
  6. Noah Shachtman says:
    June 20, 2006 at 3:29 pm

    C: I think we’d all be beyond psy­ched if the GMD hit. But con­sid­er­ing the track record, that doesn’t seem par­tic­u­larly likely.
    E: LOL!
    nms

    Reply
  7. sglover says:
    June 20, 2006 at 3:30 pm

    “In one fail swoop the mis­sile threat short mass assaults from either Russia or China is gone. In one fail swoop all those Tin Horn Dictators that spent their starv­ing peo­ples rice quo­tas on that new slick long range mis­sile to threaten the US and west is gone poof in a cloud of smoke. In an ever-​​increasing rate there­after the threat from Russia and China becomes less and less. In one fail swoop every­thing changes and the crazed dic­ta­tor hold­ing the US pop hostage with bal­lis­tic mis­siles is gone good rid­dens.“
    First of all, the phrase is “one fell swoop”: http://​www​.world​wide​words​.org/​q​a​/​q​a​-​f​e​l​1​.​htm
    Otherwise, even if your premise is cor­rect (that the mis­sile defense gad­getry will work as adver­tised), you seem to be gloat­ing about hypo­thet­i­cal tri­umphs that went by the boards round about 1989. I’m not sure where you’re get­ting these strange notions about the Russians and the Chinese bran­dish­ing their nuclear arse­nals to get what they want. Perhaps you’ve been trapped in a time cap­sule, stocked with too many Tom Clancy books.….
    Anyway, there’s a lot of (fully jus­ti­fied) crit­i­cism of the vast expense of the boon­dog­gle, but that’s only one facet. The deeper rea­son for skep­ti­cism is that “mis­sile defense” is a response to a prob­lem that was solved decades ago, through MAD. Kim Jong-​​Il can rat­tle his (under­whelm­ing) mis­siles all he wants; he knows that actu­ally using them would be the last deci­sion he’ll ever make. Meanwhile, al Qaeda types can look at those use­less inter­cep­tors buried in the per­mafrost, and laugh.

    Reply
  8. Nah says:
    June 20, 2006 at 3:51 pm

    C-​​Low, if some­one attacks us with a bal­lis­tic mis­sile, then we pum­mel the crap out of them, and they cease to be a threat. This inevitable reac­tion is what keeps tin-​​horn dic­ta­tors from attack­ing us, not a hyper-​​expensive BMD sys­tem of dubi­ous effectiveness.

    Reply
  9. Haninah says:
    June 20, 2006 at 4:32 pm

    I’ll sec­ond the gen­eral spirit of what Nah and sglover said, but I wanted to throw out one thing: if this mis­sile does fly, and if we do try to inter­cept it, my money is on us going with Aegis, rather than GMD. This is because a) Aegis has shown itself less likely to embar­rass us b) an Aegis SM-​​3 costs orders of mag­ni­tude less than a GMD inter­cep­tor and c) we’d want to show off our notional abil­ity to pro­tect Japan using Aegis ships in the Sea of Japan.

    Reply
  10. Dblhdr says:
    June 20, 2006 at 6:25 pm

    Now would be a good time to send up our new AirBourne Laser weapons sys­tem and fry that North Korean Bird in mid flight. It would be a good demon­stra­tion to the world that we had the tech­nol­ogy to pro­tect our­selves, and if for some rea­son it didn’t work we could deny that we were ever there and try to fig­ure out what went wrong.

    Reply
  11. Edward Liu says:
    June 20, 2006 at 10:30 pm

    C-​​Low: valid ques­tions, all.
    None of which have much bet­ter answers with a mis­sile defense shield, even if it did work.

    Reply
  12. Raymond P says:
    June 21, 2006 at 9:36 am

    I am not going to be sur­prised if the US Navy goes after this launch, it is very, very rare the right col­lec­tion of events occur where the Navy has this oppor­tu­nity to grab some good PR, some­thing the Navy needs right now under the bud­get crunches.
    Think about it, the AEGIS sys­tem is very lim­ited due to rel­a­tively short range of the SM-​​3. You have to have the right equip­ment in the right place at the right time to even use the AEGIS option, but thanks to good intel and bad weather, the US Navy has that exact sce­nario avail­able.
    While the SM-​​3 sys­tem is effec­tive at ter­mi­nal phases, it can also be effec­tive dur­ing the launch phase if it can get close enough to the launch site. In this sit­u­a­tion, the launch site is on the coast, in a known posi­tion, so the Navy can actu­ally get in range of the launch site with­out vio­lat­ing treaties. The Navy also has had plenty of time to posi­tion their ships thanks to bad weather. The ques­tion is, do the 2 destroy­ers in the Sea of Japan have SM-​​3s onboard?
    The only down­side is the Navy option only exists if the US intends to shoot it down no mat­ter what, because it would be hit dur­ing the launch phase before it reached higher alti­tude, which is before any­one could deter­mine what the launch is all about. If the US intends to shoot the mis­sile down no mat­ter what, then the Navy option is best (and prob­a­bly the only option unless North Korea really has gone insane), because it can hit the mis­sile before it gets to Japan, Alaska, the West Coast, Guam, or the mid­dle of the Pacific where inter­cep­tors are unlikely to be in range of the ICBM.
    It isn’t a per­fect sce­nario for sure, but it is cer­tainly an option if the US Navy is plan­ning for it. At ~200 nau­ti­cal miles from the North Korean coast­line, due to the loca­tion of the launch site, 2 AEGIS ships should be able to guard the entire Japanese coast­line and be in posi­tion to inter­cept dur­ing the launch phase of a high orbit ICBM track­ing over Japan, assum­ing they get a good track dur­ing launch.

    Reply
  13. Tim says:
    June 21, 2006 at 11:48 pm

    If they launch, it would actu­ally be good for us.
    Right now, we have very lit­tle infor­ma­tion about
    their launch­ers; being able to actu­ally track a
    launch would be a great prac­tice and data
    gath­er­ing oppor­tu­nity. In fact, I’d be tempted
    to burn off an inter­cep­tor just to get some nice,
    close up, real­is­tic track­ing data.
    As far as what to do if it is a satel­lite launch,
    well, you don’t HAVE to kill it. Just fly by nice
    and close and show you could have. Or at least
    that’s our story if we miss :)

    Reply
  14. David says:
    June 24, 2006 at 12:50 am

    Kim Jong II needs income. The U.S. has effec­tively taken steps to blocks large amounts of rev­enue flow­ing to North Korea. If North Korea launches the mis­sile, they can take orders worth tens of mil­lions from the world’s mal­con­tents. If U.S. shoots it down– at any stage, the U.S. val­i­dates the potency of the North Korean mis­sile as a threat. That makes it worth even more.
    You don’t want it to launch at all. So, naval maneu­vers are held off North Korea and there is much media spec­u­la­tion about Ageis attacks. Bush acti­vates his defense indus­try BMD boon­doogle. During the dis­trac­tion, three Stealth bombers fly over and pre-​​emptively nix the mis­sile site.
    Japan says, “Geez, glad the Ageis were there.” Ignorant American pub­lic says, “Geez, glad Bush built the mis­sile defense.” Kim Jong II says, “Geez, I for­got about that option,” and is reduced to tak­ing orders for his nuclear weapons. The region is forced to con­cede that the U.S., not China is the ulti­mate power in the region. The rest of the world breaths a sigh of relief. What’s not to like?
    David

    Reply
  15. Nigel Nuedecker says:
    July 6, 2006 at 12:26 am

    Here’s an aspect to this whole North Korean tale which no one will talk about and you have to won­der why. The man who spent BILLIONS suc­cess­fully manip­u­lat­ing our polit­i­cal sys­tem to bring the hard right and theo­cratic to power IS involved in all aspects of this story.
    Dear Leader’s Paper Moon
    http://​www​.prospect​.org/​w​e​b​/​p​a​g​e​.​w​w​?​s​e​c​t​i​o​n​=​r​o​o​t​&​a​m​p​;​n​a​m​e​=​V​i​e​w​P​r​i​n​t​&​a​m​p​;​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​I​d​=​9​868
    Read sec­tion 17 here
    http://​cell​whit​man​.blogspot​.com/​2​0​0​4​/​1​0​/​i​n​d​e​p​e​n​d​e​n​t​-​w​a​s​h​i​n​g​t​o​n​-​t​i​m​e​s​.​h​tml
    and read all of this, this is the hot potato none of them will touch.
    http://​www​.medi​achan​nel​.org/​v​i​e​w​s​/​d​i​s​s​e​c​t​o​r​/​a​f​f​a​l​e​r​t​3​5​6​.​s​h​tml

    Reply
  16. Bob Morgan says:
    July 6, 2006 at 1:45 pm

    CONSPIRACY THEORY????
    US microwave LASER scram­bled guid­ance com­puter on NK mis­sile? This may have been rea­son for mul­ti­ple mis­siles beign launched, LASER takes time to recharge and sev­eral of the mis­siles had guidance/​stability mal­func­tions?
    Balistic mis­sil is at it’s most ven­er­a­ble at slowes poing of path, just after lift off. Knowing flight path and with lots of time to get LASER ships in posi­tion. No won­der mul­ti­ple guideance fail­ures?
    LASER would not even need ot pen­er­ate skin only short out a few chips on cir­cuit boards. US would not want this known as Missiles could have hit Japan due to US inter­ven­tion? NK sci­en­tists are now work­ing on “shield­ing” for guid­ance sys­tem. So; next stage is to tar­get LASER Destroyers with short range mis­siles or per­haps in an all out war, a Nuk of US ships in the Sea of Japan just before launch?
    Sleep tight tonight our law enforce­ment is round­ing up the Miami 7 for tar­get­ing the Sears tower, soon they will have need boots, prison issued and we all will sleep safe and sound. Sig Heil to Herr Gonzalez. Bob Morgan

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
      In DTI this article is credited to Sharon...
      Wembley
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Jews wasn't a threat for anyone, that's why this was a tragedie
      A.g.
    • Quick-Deploy 120mm Mortar
      The 120 is mounted in the back of a mortar track and...
      SSG Knapp 11C3O
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "I am a New Yorker, and have seen the holes in the ground where...
      Sam
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "This is not the first Muslim soldier to commit treason against his...
      Sam
    • Time to Pull the Plug
      4. The Iraqi Rebels went underground to penetrate OUR and...
      Osher Doctorow
    • Time to Pull the Plug
      Some questions about the Gen. Petraeus Iraqi "Surge"...
      Osher Doctorow
    • The Non-lethal Claymore
      There is a non lethat weapon put out by laser energitics name daser...
      red
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      These guys seem to have had the right idea for a while,...
      TheBoogyMan
    • Airbag Defense
      Hey jack ass (fart) at any time durring that triade did you watch the video?...
      Valcan
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage