A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics


Centerfield is the blog of the Centrist Coalition. Send story ideas to cf at centristcoalition . com

Explore the Centrist Blogosphere, an aggregator which lists the latest posts by Centrist bloggers

These bloggers are part of the Centrist Coalition:
Ambivablog
Another Opinion
Austin Centrist
Charging RINO
Donklephant
Maverick Views
The Moderate Voice
Moderate Voters
Stubborn Facts

Independent Nation

Center Links:

<< ? The VCWC # >>

Independent Nation

Radical Middle

Resources:

 

February 24, 2008

Caveats On The New Ballistic Missile Defense System

The big problem is that we can't get overconfident in this thing. It has a real potential to save many lives, but in war, it absolutely will let a few through, even once it's mature (see below), Like other modern missile defense systems, probably somewhere between a tenth and two tenths would get through even if everything goes right. If we go to war with Russia or China, we need to be ready to see several cities hit. I hope we won't be so stupid.

Sec'y Gates and newspapers have been far too optimistic about it, calling it a working BMD system. It is a good step, but there's a big difference between a stable satellite with a well-known orbit and a ground-launched missile launched by a hostile power in a spot and time of their choosing.

It's really in what we engineers call beta test, tests in deployment stage. It's going to take a few years before we can ACTUALLY rely on shots on ballistic missiles actually completely doing their jobs.

Whether or not the project managers and were aware, every big project ever done and ever in the future faces engineering constraints in terms of low reliability until long test periods - first a very limited alpha test, then a deployed beta, are behind us. If they ever work - the bigger the project, the lower the odds of success, the longer it takes to work out bugs.

At that, there's another constraint that HAS been obeyed: be incremental. Tacking on a series of increasing abilities, like to an existing missile system (Standard), is much likelier to work than building something from scratch. That's why this is on board faster and cheaper than the special-purposes ballistic defense systems also being worked on.

Alot of infrastructure is needed to pull this off, not much less than was used around MAD. For it to work, more launching systems than the enemy nation has must be permanently stationed and alert near the suspect nation. It's only going to work well in conjunction with a largely circumvallating ballistic radar net. I see plans for such a thing, but it seems very much work in progress yet. And its decision time is crazily low. That'll make it hard to be sure it'll work to catch surprise launches, and there'll be several false launches, hopefully not on aircraft.

UPDATE: Only forgot the most important caveat. Updated appropriately.

Posted by Jon Kay at February 24, 2008 04:07 PM
Comments

You make great points Jon. Consider this: laser systems (ground, air and sea-based), aircraft launched interceptors, rail technology providing multiple fast moving debris fired in target pathway, all as part of emerging technology. I think there is a great chance that as these technologies mature in the next several years, the over-lap will start to provide some real capability to deter missle and crusie missile threats, despite Russia's manueverable mirv warheads and ground launched cruise missiles, the later, more the threat from faceless adversaries. The Beta test for the air borne laser is coming up soon as the miltary plans to put some lasers on gunships. I don't think the recent test displays the latest capability in the black zone, but field testing of certain components. The rail technology is also being beta tested. So the multi-level approach is beginning to produce results critics predicted would not happen anytime soon.

Posted by: Maxtrue at February 24, 2008 04:31 PM

How much is this supposed to cost us in total by the time its all truly viable? Will it prevent a nuclear bomb coming across the border in a truck or smuggled up on the beach? And if it can't, how much good is it?

Not trying to be flip or glib here. Simply pointing out that it begs the same question as "we could build a plane where everyone would survive a crash, but then a flight to cleveland would cost $20 grand.

Posted by: kritter at February 24, 2008 09:00 PM
(Comments on this entry may be closed after 7 days to prevent spam)




Do you choose the politicians, or do they choose you? Find out how to put the people back in charge.

Declare Your Independence - Unity08.com

Archives


Recent Entries

July 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    


Powered by
Movable Type 2.661