Agency: Anti-Missile Tests = Bad
The American missile defense system is so lame that more tests may only undermine its value as a deterrent.
That's the word from the Final Report of the Missile Defense Agency's Independent Review Team (IRT). The Washington Post first noted the report on Thursday. But Arms Control Wonk Jeffrey Lewis has combed through the document, and discovered its most controversial conclusions.
The IRT recommends five changes, the cumulative effect of which will be to make testing less likely:
1. Establish a More Rigorous Flight Readiness Certification Process
2. Strengthen Systems Engineering
3. Perform additional ground-based qualification testing as a requirement for flight testing
4. Hold contractor functional organizations accountable for supporting prime contract management
5. Assure that the GMD [ground-based midcourse defense] program is executable
The general effect of these recommendations is to create a presumption against conducting any scheduled flight test—what the IRT calls "Prove why should fly." For good measure, the IRT recommends making the next integrated flight test a "non-intercept" test.
Imagine that: First, MDA rushes a defense that won’t defend to meet a deadline that just happens to coincide with a Presidential election. Then, MDA scales way back on necessary testing, lest the bad guys figure out the damn thing doesn’t work.
THERE'S MORE: "IRT is totally going to deny this is their purpose," the Wonk adds in an e-mail. But the team's assertion, that "'successful flight testing is a strategic issue' is so damning." As IRT notes...
The dissuasion and deterrence value of these assets will be:
* Increased by successful flight tests
* Decreased by unsuccessful flight tests
'Nuff said.
Proof of concept has already been determined by multiple successful missile intercepts. To be quoted as lame is un-intelligent and narrow minded at its best.
The MDA can not be expected to deploy a 100% effective ABS system at this time. It is designed to be deployed and improved as new technology comes to bear and improvements to current technology are made. Why should it be any other way?
Using this theory you could say cops with bullet proof vests are lame.
ABS is not 100% yet however if only a few Nuclear missiles can be intercepted why should we not intercept them? Add to that the ABS is designed to be a laired defense. It does not rely entirely on one system or flight phase of a Ballistic Missile. This is a redundantly layered defense system designed to take multiple shots at the missile(s).
Its worth was proved in Iraq twice with the Patriots Missile system. The Patriot is also not 100% effective however each missile it shot down in Iraq potentially saved a number of lives. Once again Proof of concept was made in GW 1 and GW 2. By the way valuable data was gained in GW 2 and incorporated into the current Patriots PAC-3.
"Nuff Said"
Indeed.
Posted by: Andy at November 20, 2005 5:57 PM