Reagan's star war finally come true

[firejuggler]

ref :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strate...nse_Initiative


and the article:
ICBM caugh and destroyed, in exosphere

https://gizmodo.com/u-s-destroys-moc...rin-1845695116

[tServo]

Originally Posted by firejuggler

ref :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strate...nse_Initiative


and the article:
ICBM caugh and destroyed, in exosphere

https://gizmodo.com/u-s-destroys-moc...rin-1845695116

Call me skeptical.

I remember when they were doing the tests previously the system was so horribly inaccurate that they had to "juice" the intercepts by placing transponders in the targets to guide the ABM in. This, of course, was so that they could claim an inflated kill ratio. Do we have any assurance they have stopped cheating?

And what about the problem of simply overwhelming the ABM system with reams of cheap dummy warheads? Have they solved that problem?

These headlines and press releases are just so the defense contractor can continue to get funding.

The Dakotas and Montana are littered with the decaying remnants of giant Air Force installations that were part of an earlier ABM system.

[tServo]

I found two more tidbits in another article:

The ABM missile was launched by a destroyer fitted with an AEGIS defense system. Perhaps you might remember the Iranian civilian airliner shot down by a different US warship with the same system? It was highly touted that it could track and shoot down multiple incoming threats simultaneously. In reality, it couldn't tell the difference between a f F-14 and an lumbering Airbus A300.

Also, the test was hailed because it intercepted the target waaaaay high up beyond the atmosphere. The problem with that is that dummy warheads look identical to real ones way up there.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by tServo

I found two more tidbits in another article:

The ABM missile was launched by a destroyer fitted with an AEGIS defense system. Perhaps you might remember the Iranian civilian airliner shot down by a different US warship with the same system? It was highly touted that it could track and shoot down multiple incoming threats simultaneously. In reality, it couldn't tell the difference between a f F-14 and an lumbering Airbus A300.

Also, the test was hailed because it intercepted the target waaaaay high up beyond the atmosphere. The problem with that is that dummy warheads look identical to real ones way up there.

This is great! With the new system, we'll be able to destroy our own satellites! Low earth orbit will be unusable in no time!

[LaurV]

Yep, the business of the future, make some toy that goes to orbit and collect the garbage and metal/scraps/dust/whatever and brings it back to Earth (or sends it out of orbit, to Sun, Jupiter, Andromeda, whatever).

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by LaurV

Yep, the business of the future, make some toy that goes to orbit and collect the garbage and metal/scraps/dust/whatever and brings it back to Earth (or sends it out of orbit, to Sun, Jupiter, Andromeda, whatever).

The "Kessler effect" or [echo chamber]The Kessler Syndrome! [/echo chamber] is named for a NASA scientist. But it looks like somebody else got on it first: ESA commissions world’s first space debris removal

[kladner]

I am skeptical because the ABM-launching ship presumably could know the target's launch location and maybe launch time. Just knowing the location gives them an advantage..I suspect staged "test" to impress Congress Critters and get 'billions and billions" more $$$s.

[TommyJ]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

The "Kessler effect" or [echo chamber]The Kessler Syndrome! [/echo chamber] is named for a NASA scientist. But it looks like somebody else got on it first: ESA commissions world’s first space debris removal

As far as I've heard, quite a few space debris removal projects are in the final stages of testing. Swiss, Japanese, British, American companies are actively involved in this issue. Explain to me the skepticism of previous commentators? There is work to be done. So someone will do it. And make money on it.