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
  • Af-Cam
  • 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
  • Crazy Ivan
  • 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
  • F-35 Watch
  • 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 Bubble with Joe Buff
  • 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
  • PEO Soldier
  • 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

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • 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 Radar M.I.A.

Missile Radar M.I.A.

When you’re a kid in Little League, the first lesson your coach drills into you is to keep your eye on the ball. And what works on the sandlot goes double for missile defense: the better you can see the target, the higher your chances are of hitting it.
SBX.jpgThat’s why the Missile Defense Agency has been so hyped about its Sea-Based X-Band Radar, or SBX. The $815 million, 28-story, orb-like contraption has the ability, in theory, to tell which way a baseball is spinning — from 3,000 miles away. That’s the kind of vision any hitter would kill for. No wonder the SBX quickly became one of the centerpieces of the Bush Administration’s revamped anti-missile strategy, after it took office.
But there’s catch. In order to spot the most incoming ICBMs, the radar’s converted oil rig platform has to be positioned near Alaska’s Aleutian Islands — an “unforgiving [stretch] of the Bering Sea where winter weather can be so violent that the islands have been nicknamed ‘the birthplace of winds,’” the Chicago Tribune tells us. And considering how bad the SBX was roughed up during “its first long ocean voyage,” in the comparatively calm waters from the Gulf of Mexico to Hawaii, that isn’t inspiring a lot of faith in the system’s survivability. Scheduled to leave Hawaii after repairs eight months ago, the SBX won’t head out to Alaska until “at least later this fall.” Needless to say, the radar will miss the next round of missile defense testing, scheduled for this week.

“That radar is absolutely packed with sensitive electronics, and… salt water, wind and waves don’t go well with sensitive electronics,” said Philip Coyle, who as assistant secretary of defense from 1994 to 2001 was the Clinton administration’s chief weapons evaluator.
He went on: “The bottom line is that the designers of this system didn’t begin to contemplate the realistic conditions under which the X-Band would have to operate. When you look at all the facts, you really have to wonder what the people who designed this thing were thinking…“
[What’s] more, a recent independent assessment obtained by the Tribune lists dozens of concerns from naval and defense experts about the design and administration of the radar vessel…
Among the findings:
– The sensitive radar… is mounted atop a vessel that might need to be towed to safety in the event of rugged Alaskan seas, but its one towing bridle likely would be underwater and impossible for a rescue ship to use anytime waves reached more than 8 feet.
– Although the SBX may be hundreds of miles away from support ships, it lacks a quickly deployable rescue boat in the event of a man overboard, does not have a helicopter landing pad certified for landing the most common U.S. Coast Guard and Navy rescue helicopters, and its crews have not been trained “for heavy weather or cold-weather operations.“
– And, ironically, the X-Band, considered one of the nation’s foremost technologies in defending against foreign missiles, has minimal security itself. Many critics speculate that it is vulnerable to attack by enemy nations or terrorist groups.

“This is no surprise and again demonstrates MDA’s [Missile Defense Agency’s] stubborn refusal to accept that engineering and logistical limitations can be just as damning as anything else the weapon systems can come up against,” says missile guru Victoria Samson, with the Center for Defense Information. “What with Thursday’s test of the GMD [Ground-based Midcourse Defense] system, it would’ve been nice to see how the SBX would play in there, which it would have done — probably — if it’d made it to Adak [Alaska] last year as planned. Instead, what we’re getting from the GMD tests are conjectures because there are too many placeholders to make up for the actual components which are missing.”

Share |

August 28th, 2006 | Missiles | 32529 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/08/28/missile-radar-m-i-a/Missile+Radar+M.I.A.2006-08-28+19%3A18%3A24noahmax You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Disaster Tech Pushes Ahead | Rapid Fire 08/28/06 (Updated) » »

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. JJ says:
    August 28, 2006 at 2:39 pm

    Anybody know who wrote the “independent assessment” the Tribune is talking about?

    Reply
  2. Noah Shachtman says:
    August 28, 2006 at 2:50 pm

    JJ:
    It’s from a team within the Missile Defense Agency. I’ve linked the report in the main post.
    nms

    Reply
  3. JJ says:
    August 28, 2006 at 5:35 pm

    Thx! I found out later that it was POGO who had originally obtained the report and provided it to the Trib, but the Trib failed to acknowledge this.

    Reply
  4. pedestrian says:
    August 29, 2006 at 10:41 am

    If you want to mention about weather, whatever the platform is, rather sea based, air based, or space based systems, there is always chance of weather and climate hazards. Even satellites are facing difficulties of extreme conditions in space. It is true that this sea based systems is also likely encounter such bad weathers, but in long terms it is still worth compared to air platforms which is limited in how long it may stay in air for monitoring incoming missiles. As an addition, there are solutions to counter weather and climate hazards as well to decrease the damage.

    Reply
  5. Byron Skinner says:
    August 29, 2006 at 1:01 pm

    Good Morning Folks,
    Hold on maybe Global Warming might be comming to the rescue. If we can believe what Al Gore and his followers are saying this will soon be a tropical paradise and they will have to worrry more about interference for air traffic for the Club Med. then weather.
    Or if you don’t believe Al Gore this was just a dumb idea, but at $815 million, it’s a cheap oops.
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner

    Reply
  6. J says:
    September 5, 2006 at 8:53 am

    Its simple really…
    1) what do we want ? (SBX platform)
    2) what environment is it going to be in ? (assume bad sea conditions)
    3) Safety for crew and emergencies ? (yes, lifeboats,etc)
    4) Security ? (yes lots)
    5) Rig, do we retro fit or build from scratch (I’d say scratch, more cost effective than modifications)
    See ! all that above will give you a good base line to
    start building a state of the art SBX sea platform
    that can cope with sea conditions, saftey and security.
    AND it did cost a dime.
    So what can be said about the original designers ?
    I’d ask for my money back…
    Good Idea, poor planning and design makes for a money eating project.
    Just my Cent’s worth.

    Reply
  7. Les Izmore says:
    September 6, 2006 at 8:55 pm

    This anti-missile platform is a prime example of what happens when the military industrial complex has the checkbook. Check out our attempted development of dirigibles between the wars. They couldn’t handle the natural environment either but the brass knew better and they flew them until they crashed. A freshman engineering student at any college could have taken one look at these plans and seen the inherent stability problems. How many folks will die when this thing turns turtle during a hundred year storm? Of course by that time all the checks will have been well cashed.

    Reply
  8. Mike says:
    September 8, 2006 at 2:10 am

    Too bad a good story got in the way of the facts. Think the Bearing Sea is tough, check out the North Sea where this vessel was designed to operate. Sad, really, how false information propagates. The tangible workings of SBX are fine. It’s the politics, rumors and misinformation that bog down the system. Typical I guess.….

    Reply
  9. ms says:
    November 29, 2006 at 7:26 pm

    Why is it going all the way to Alaska. Why not park it 200 miles off the coast of N. Korea.
    just a thought

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
    • And, the Vertical Landing
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
    • JFCOM’s JOE Whacks Defense Industry
    • New F-35B Hover Video
    • China’s Shipbuilding in a Regional Context
    • Debating the Pros and Cons of LCS
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
    Recent Comments
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      Gees the price is on the roof already. Maybe we just...
      roland
    • Ft. Irwin, Where You At?
      I was the driver for BoB Gaygos, B Co 6/31st Commander....
      Ricky houltzhouser
    • Ft. Irwin, Where You At?
      Luis, I was Captain Gaydos, driver Sgt. Houltzhouser in...
      Ricky Houltzhouser
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
      If you really want to win the war permanently, it will...
      steven
    • Cover Your Computer Mics and WebCams
      Another question, how would I physically obstruct the...
      Curious
    • Cover Your Computer Mics and WebCams
      whats a good way to physically cover my laptop webcam?...
      Curious
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
      But, the Eurotrash airplane ISN'T better… The Boeing...
      WillyPete
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      Gee, I wonder why? Oh! Maybe it's because the...
      WillyPete
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      It would also help, a LOT to 'limit' excess...
      WillyPete
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      And flush ALL those dollars already spent down the...
      WillyPete
  • 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| © 2010 Military Advantage