successfully intercepted a long-range missile target on Dec. 5 in a simulated attack to test the defense system it wants to expand in Eastern Europe to counter attacks from North Korea or Iran.
"This was the largest, most complex task that we've ever done," said Lt. Gen. Patrick O'Reilly, director of the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency.
But the target missile's countermeasures, intended to simulate decoys from enemy missiles - precisely what critics of the defense shield doubt the system could overcome - failed to deploy, he said.
"Countermeasures are very difficult to deploy," he said, adding that "there are many threats today that don't have countermeasures."
The interception took place at 3:29 pm (2029 GMT), Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said, making the effort the eighth successful intercept out of the 13 tests conducted since 1999, with the last successful test taking place in September 2007.
Overall military chiefs approved of the effort.
"I am extremely pleased," said O'Reilly at a press briefing.
"All the systems were working together," he added, referring to the complex alignment of radars, sensors and timing to coordinate the high-octane missile.
Brian Green, deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategic capabilities, added that the effort was an "operationally realistic test."
The effectiveness of the defense shield has been questioned by some scientists who claim the program would be unable to distinguish between a missile and a decoy - precisely what failed to be realized in the Dec. 5 effort. 
The test is seen as a crucial step towards a controversial anti-missile shield Washington plans to base in Eastern Europe.
The Bush administration wants to install a radar facility in the Czech Republic and 10 interceptor missiles in neighboring Poland by 2014.
The test of the project, which so far has cost the Defense Department about $100 billion, comes at a critical time before president-elect Barack Obama moves into the White House on Jan. 20.
Obama has so far not committed to the missile defense shield.
One of his senior foreign policy advisers, Denis McDonough, has indicated however that Obama would support the program if the technology proves viable.
Moscow has repeatedly voiced strong objections to the shield plan, which Washington insists is not directed against Russia but at "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea.
In late November Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin urged Obama to drop the planned shield in Eastern Europe.
"This project is aimed against the strategic potential of Russia. And we can only give it an adequate response," he said.
Earlier last month Moscow raised alarm in Western capitals by warning it could place missiles in the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, close to Poland, in response to the plan.
On Friday the interceptor missile was launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, as the target - a fake warhead mimicking long-range ballistic missiles from nations like North Korea - was set off from the Alaskan island of Kodiak. Additional Info: Views from Readers
On December 5, a rocket launched from Kodiak, Alaska was intercepted by a rocket launched from Vandenburg AFB in California
1. It wasn't a resounding "success": According to Lt. Gen. Patrick O'Reilly, head of the Missile Defense Agency, "...the target did not release planned countermeasures designed to try to confuse the interceptor missile. O'Reilly did not say what those countermeasures were, but they often include decoys or chaff to throw off shoot-down attempts." Apparently the technology to shoot down a real enemy missile which would have countermeasures is not yet working.
2.It wasn't a truly realistic test: The "test" was very tightly controlled - everybody knew when the interceptor would be launched and its probable path (they've launched targets from KLC before). One wonders what would happen if they actually had to scramble an interceptor with no prior warning. Now that would be a true test.
3. If the U.S. can't launch an ICBM that works the way it should, why do we think other countries can? Neither North Korea or Iran has ever successfully fired a missile that had any chance of landing anywhere near the U.S. Right now, if North Korea got really lucky, they might be able to hit the tip of the Aleutians. We are sure the folks out there appreciate the expenditure of ten billion dollars a year to help them sleep more soundly.
4. It's ALL about the money: Roughly $10 billion is spent per year on the program, which is run by defense contractor Boeing Co. but includes work by most of the nation's largest weapons makers. It is spread across three branches of the military and is composed of missiles, radar and satellites designed to intercept missiles during different stages of flight.
5. Fortunately, President-elect Barack Obama expressed skepticism about the capabilities of the system during his campaign, leading to speculation he may reduce the program's scope. Russia has strongly objected to plans to install missile interceptors in Eastern Europe.
6. At least the true character of the KLC has finally been admitted. According to the AP: "WASHINGTON - The Defense Department said today it shot down a missile launched from a military base in Alaska..."
7. Finally, Kodiak desperately needs a new high school and a new police station and jail. Our roads are a mess and infrastructure in Kodiak, Alaska and all across the United States is crumbling. Take a drive down Mission Road past the Salvation Army and ask yourself: Is Missile Defense worth it? Friday's test cost between $120 million to $150 million.
1 comment:
How Do We Define Success?
On December 5, a rocket launched from Kodiak, Alaska was intercepted by a rocket launched from Vandenburg AFB in California
1. It wasn't a resounding "success": According to Lt. Gen. Patrick O'Reilly, head of the Missile Defense Agency, "...the target did not release planned countermeasures designed to try to confuse the interceptor missile. O'Reilly did not say what those countermeasures were, but they often include decoys or chaff to throw off shoot-down attempts." Apparently the technology to shoot down a real enemy missile which would have countermeasures is not yet working.
2.It wasn't a truly realistic test: The "test" was very tightly controlled - everybody knew when the interceptor would be launched and its probable path (they've launched targets from KLC before). One wonders what would happen if they actually had to scramble an interceptor with no prior warning. Now that would be a true test.
3. If the U.S. can't launch an ICBM that works the way it should, why do we think other countries can? Neither North Korea or Iran has ever successfully fired a missile that had any chance of landing anywhere near the U.S. Right now, if North Korea got really lucky, they might be able to hit the tip of the Aleutians. We are sure the folks out there appreciate the expenditure of ten billion dollars a year to help them sleep more soundly.
4. It's ALL about the money: Roughly $10 billion is spent per year on the program, which is run by defense contractor Boeing Co. but includes work by most of the nation's largest weapons makers. It is spread across three branches of the military and is composed of missiles, radar and satellites designed to intercept missiles during different stages of flight.
5. Fortunately, President-elect Barack Obama expressed skepticism about the capabilities of the system during his campaign, leading to speculation he may reduce the program's scope. Russia has strongly objected to plans to install missile interceptors in Eastern Europe.
6. At least the true character of the KLC has finally been admitted. According to the AP: "WASHINGTON - The Defense Department said today it shot down a missile launched from a military base in Alaska..."
7. Finally, Kodiak desperately needs a new high school and a new police station and jail. Our roads are a mess and infrastructure in Kodiak, Alaska and all across the United States is crumbling. Take a drive down Mission Road past the Salvation Army and ask yourself: Is Missile Defense worth it? Friday's test cost between $120 million to $150 million.
Post a Comment