It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Missile defence shield test fails

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 05:30 AM
link   

BBC NEWS
The first test in almost two years of the planned multi-billion dollar US anti-missile shield has failed.
The Pentagon said an interceptor missile did not take off and was automatically shut down on its launch pad in the central Pacific.

A target missile carrying a mock warhead had been fired 16 minutes earlier from Kodiak Island in Alaska.

The Pentagon is spending $10bn a year on the missile system, which was meant to be in operation by the end of 2004.

The Missile Defence Agency said an "unknown anomaly" was to blame for the system shutting down.


link



spend a couple of billion on something that doesnt work and blame some unknown anomaly




posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 05:36 AM
link   
OMFG this is funny as hell, I LOL'ed at this one.
Typical technology, its new, great, awesome powers, and it doesn't work properly until the v2.3 update is released. LOL.

AH, you gotta love this stuff. Its good job for you guys that the N.Koreans DON'T have Nukes capable of getting anyone except the south. You could imagine it:

"There firing sir!"
"The sheild will get it"
"#SYNTAX ERROR"
*stunned silence*

At least they should fix everything soon if the estimates are right. But, they tend to not be.

Well, thats two failiures.... third time lucky anyone?
It'll be impressive if it ever gets working.



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 06:23 AM
link   
I know the Missile shield gets alot of criticism but this is the most important military program going,it's just a matter of time before a country launches a misssile against the U.S and it's better to have a chance at stoping it then to have millions of people dead and the rest of people wondering what if?

It has the potential to stop the end of the world from happening,we need it!



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 06:30 AM
link   
the post already excist

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 06:30 AM
link   
Um, The end of the USA isn't the end of the world. Not unless you cause it anyhows.

The countries that hate the US don't yet have the capability to fire these missiles. You could have attacked them instead of Iraq eh? But Bush's decision stuck. N.Korea -vs- Iraq, the country that was harmless one. Yay!


Its impressive but you hardly *need* it. I agree it will be good once its up.



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Teh_Gerbil
Um, The end of the USA isn't the end of the world. Not unless you cause it anyhows.

The countries that hate the US don't yet have the capability to fire these missiles. You could have attacked them instead of Iraq eh? But Bush's decision stuck. N.Korea -vs- Iraq, the country that was harmless one. Yay!


Its impressive but you hardly *need* it. I agree it will be good once its up.


North Korea/China/Russia/ hate and have the capability to hit the U.S and it doesn't nessisarly have to be an attack on the U.S it could be any where,once one country launches it's a chain reaction (the domino effect)and where do you think the majority of the missiles outside of the U.S are aimed....At the U.S!!! and in all likelyhood the end of the USA would be the end of the world.



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 07:06 AM
link   

and in all likelyhood the end of the USA would be the end of the world.


You care to explain how that one works exactly?????????



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 08:54 AM
link   
its very simple really its called MAD.... They launch a nuke before it lands we fire off a scaled response to the attack. Now russia who has the US always targeted as well as china sees the launch. Lets say NK is the target. its really close to russia and china. So they fire on us thinking that we firing on them. We see there there missles. We fire at them with our remaining Peacekeepers. They fire what they have left and the hole world burns to nice snow white ash...



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by shadarlocoth
its very simple really its called MAD.... They launch a nuke before it lands we fire off a scaled response to the attack. Now russia who has the US always targeted as well as china sees the launch. Lets say NK is the target. its really close to russia and china. So they fire on us thinking that we firing on them. We see there there missles. We fire at them with our remaining Peacekeepers. They fire what they have left and the hole world burns to nice snow white ash...



And in a complete "who shot nice guy eddy moment"
who exactly destroyed Europe then???????

[edit on 15-12-2004 by paperplane_uk]



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by paperplane_uk

Originally posted by shadarlocoth
its very simple really its called MAD.... They launch a nuke before it lands we fire off a scaled response to the attack. Now russia who has the US always targeted as well as china sees the launch. Lets say NK is the target. its really close to russia and china. So they fire on us thinking that we firing on them. We see there there missles. We fire at them with our remaining Peacekeepers. They fire what they have left and the hole world burns to nice snow white ash...



And in a complete "who shot nice guy eddy moment"
who exactly destroyed Europe then???????

[edit on 15-12-2004 by paperplane_uk]


It wouldn't matter!think about it ,with that many nuclear weapons going off the fallout alone would be enough to wipe Europe/Africa/ and south america out ,the only place you might have a chance is at the south pole(antarctica)



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Here is that website on the nuclear chain reaction that would occur if one country launched; I posted this before but some may have missed it:
funnyjunk.com...

As for the missile shield, calling it a "failure" I think is pretty premature. The technology is still too new. Rocket failures and crashes are expected with anything like this. It is part of the learning process. Back when the Soviets launched Sputnik, and the population of the U.S. panicked, NASA and the Air Force didn't see any big deal over what Russia had done. But then the space program got this huge boost, because the gov't politicians didn't understand anything about that. So of course as part of the learning process, what happens: the U.S. launches rockets which turn over and crash. That was EXPECTED. Only the stupid media portrayed them as failures, "collossal failures" quoting them, which the guys involved in the rocket program couldn't believe.

The truth was the U.S. launched always on deadline, and accomplished all the goals it had set out to do. Nothing was a failure in the space program, despire what the public thought.

The same is true for the missile defense right now. A missile defense system is COMPLICATED. You could write a book on how complicated it is to intercept and shoot down one missile, let alone make a "shield." There's TONS of variables involved. So you can't plan it out and then expect it to work "just like that." Problems are going to occur and you learn from the mistakes. That is how the space program has always worked here and it was very successful that way.

What they need is to just keep funding the program and working at it, and eventually the U.S. will succeed hopefully, and if they do, great. A missile shield could be a lot of help in the future. You never know.

Nothing ventured nothing gained remember. The fact that the media is calling it a "failure" when this is one of the very first tests of a "missile" pretty much shows that they don't know what they are talking about. But what would journalists understand about shooting down missiles anyhow??

I am not saying the missile shield will become a reality, but I mean don't knock it 'till it has been awhile.



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 02:02 PM
link   
the thing I find funny is this



Wednesday's trial had been put off four times because of bad weather at launch sites and, on Sunday, because a radio transmitter failed.


So let me see if I understand this right - once the system is finally operational - it will be ineffective / non-operational during bad weather?



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by paperplane_uk

and in all likelyhood the end of the USA would be the end of the world.


You care to explain how that one works exactly?????????


Simple nuclear winter. The US has enough nukes to cause this alone not even factoring in another countries nukes like Russia or China.

Airburst nukes sending radiation into the air and the sun getting blocked out for months means most plants die and world food production grinds to a halt. All they people that didnt get nuked get to die a slow deth from starvation or radiation.

But not just the US would get hit during a nuclear war. The US has alot of bases in other countries which are targets, And allies of both parties get hit as well. If Russia and the US go at it expect countries like the UK and China to get hit.

[edit on 15-12-2004 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Understanding that things can go wrong during testing is realistic. During a test like this one, if I were in charge, I would wait and delay it because of weather. Especially if I was doing data collection!

It's about data collection- not wether or not it was raining or inclimate weather!

I'm personally glad it was just a test, that the interceptor failed during a test and not when a live missile was inbound. It's sorta like having a gun that jams on you, better to have it do it practicing, than when you would really need it.

Imagine how hard it would be to do test in the future if it was "up." Test and get it right! But you can imagine that someones head took a roll.


[edit on 15-12-2004 by Tuatara]



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by paperplane_uk
And in a complete "who shot nice guy eddy moment"
who exactly destroyed Europe then???????

[edit on 15-12-2004 by paperplane_uk]


[sarcfasm]Cos everyone wubs us..[/sarcasm]



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucretius
the thing I find funny is this



Wednesday's trial had been put off four times because of bad weather at launch sites and, on Sunday, because a radio transmitter failed.


So let me see if I understand this right - once the system is finally operational - it will be ineffective / non-operational during bad weather?


Just noticed that...

"No, we can't have nuclear war today! Its raining! Stop, be nice N.Korea, huh?"

I doubt Russia would nuke the US as:
A) They would go to war with them anyway, their militray is a bit underfunded and undermaintained.
B) Half their nukes probably are decaying...
China probably wants to support its growing economy at the moment.
N.Korea's nuclear capacity is not big enough at the moment to pose a threat to the US. Hell, they will probably never do again, their country is falling apart.

Us Brits would brew a cuppa Tea if nuclear war broke out. And of course, it'd be a "Jolly bad show" on the part of who launched the first nuke.



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 06:52 AM
link   
NPR had an expert on yesterday - can't remember his name - who stated that President Bush, two years ago (after the last test failure) shutdown the testing and development phase of this system and went straight to deployment.

Therefore, for the past 2 years, instead of being able to make sure the system works, or fix what doesn't, they've been busy building a deployment system for something that doesn't work yet.



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Hahaha, thats almost as bad as the cold war days where both sides launched dodgey submarines that wern't finished.

Also the SA80 springs to mind...

But that really is a joke, why the hell would they do that? Surely that is just a waste of resources...



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 08:01 AM
link   
I'd bet it's all BS. Personally I think we've had an anti-missile system since the mid 80's. Not a very good one perhaps, but I'm inclined to believe it's simply been improved upon over time. I think such failed "tests" are just bluffing, especially considering the timing (while facing a potential Pacific missile attack scenario from NK).



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Lets say russia Nk and china go at it with a few extras throun in from outher countrys . think UK is going to be ok do you? well lets say No fall out reaches you and no nuks hit your country .Hope you enjoy your tea
Because there is still nearly a billion chines and whats left of russia and they are sitting in radioacctive rubble they still have guns and tanks and even there bare hands now even if spring does come the land is unable to grow a thing the water undrinkable .So just were do you think thous billion people are headed? You think they will just sit there and starve?
Nukler ware will truly be the end of wars because men will keep killing for any scraps left untill there are no men or no scraps left . And even though these countrys cant get to the states walking it wont help thous left alive here eather as hords of people poor out of the runined citys into the country destroying everething in there path .
Man may servive this war and if he does the next will be with rocks and very few people. expect the drop off in killing to start when the poplation numbers get under 500,000 and the end poplation of man will probly be under 300,000 then slowly start going up again .This has been the patteren from the begining of our writen history its only our high tek that has allowed our numbers to get so high in the last 100 years.
go back more then 200 years the worlds poplation ranged from 300,000 to 600,000 and the closer it got to 600,000 the more wars and sickness started cutting it back down. The natrial poplation limet for humans is someware around 500,000 world wide now we are just cheating natcher and this can not continu .



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join