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.

 

The Patriot Missile System!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:06 AM
link   
Before giving millions of dollars to the US for the patriot missile system, i wonder if the Indian military leaders would care to read this article.
And this article isnt alone. There are posts all over the web about how bad the missile is. Look at this:



"The results of these studies are disturbing. They suggest that the Patriot's intercept rate during the Gulf War was very low. The evidence from these preliminary studies indicates that Patriot's intercept rate could be much lower than ten percent, possibly even zero." (Statement of Theodore A. Postol before the U.S. House Of Representatives Committee on Government Operations, April 7, 1992)




Heres a link to the full article (U'll have to read it all)

www.cdi.org...

[edit on 5/3/2005 by MickeyDee]




posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:22 AM
link   
www.cbsnews.com...

“If the system is confusing missiles with planes, that is just not just a minor glitch,” says Mason. “The two are so different, that it’s difficult really to imagine a system could do that.”

“They were seeing what were called spurious targets that were identified as incoming tactical ballistic missiles. Sometimes, they didn't exist at all in time and space. Other times, they were identifying friendly U.S. aircraft as incoming TBMs.”

On March 25, a U.S. Air Force pilot flying an F-16 fighter jet got a signal that he was being targeted by radar he believed was coming from an enemy missile system. He fired one of his own missiles in self-defense and hit the system that was tracking him -- not an enemy, but the Patriot battery where Riggs was reporting.

“The best evidence that we found supports between two and four intercepts out of 44,” says Cirincione. “About a 10 percent success rate.”

Just a few quotes from that source.

Now to me, if America has spent 6Billion on the PAC-3 System, you’d expect it to work. If it only has a 10% success rate, makes up targets, targets allied planes, etc, etc, this is in fact a very big problem.

Also, if I remember correctly CBS is owned by Viacom and the Chairman of Viacom is Sumner Redstone, who’s a Republican. So, if a republican is willing to say something bad about something the Bush administration is pouring money into - it must be going fairly bad. (Although, I can’t remember if he’s registered Republican, just remember reading it somewhere.)



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:28 AM
link   
What more proof do India need???



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:42 AM
link   
skating on thin ice here: I think the Indian government is well aware that the Patriots aint that super duper watertight shield, but might buy them anyway for political reasons to maintain favourable relations with the U.S. government ???

But anyway, something is better than nothing , name me one current missileshield that you can buy that works flawlessly....



[edit on 5-3-2005 by Countermeasures]



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:42 AM
link   
hmmm some hope for defense, or NO defense. Chance to stop incoming missile, or NO Chance to stop incomng missile. No guarantee is coming with the system.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:45 AM
link   
S-400 has passed tests that the Russian's have done. PAC-3 has not passed these tests.

The only reason India would buy the PAC-3, would be because America is either A) Offering them an amazingly good deal or B) India wants to stay on good terms with America and knows buying Russian tech could ruin this.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   
I recently came across the following news release:

Lockheed Martin Conducts Successful PAC-3 Test

A Patriot Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3) missile interceptor successfully destroyed a mock tactical ballistic missile during a test today, U.S. defense contractor Lockheed Martin announced (see GSN, March 2).

During the test, conducted at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico, two PAC-3 interceptors were “rippled-fired” at a Patriot legacy missile modified to represent a short-range ballistic missile, Lockheed Martin said. The target simulated the flight characteristics of a Scud-type missile.

“Today’s test provided even more evidence that the PAC-3 missile can protect our forces from ballistic missile attack,” Lockheed Martin Vice President Steve Graham said in a statement. “The success rate of the PAC-3 missile is second-to-none when it comes to air-defense missiles,” he added (Lockheed Martin release, March 4).


What I want to know is how can the LockMart VP say the PAC-3 is second to none if it is such a piece of crap? If he is lying can he be held accountable by the families of those who lose their lives in future missile attacks?
OR
Has the PAC-3 system undergone enough improvements since it's collosal failures in the 1st Gulf War, to be considered a reliable system?

Also I came across this article:

Taiwan to Buy Six Missile Batteries Within 15 Years

Taiwan plans to purchase six Patriot Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3) missile interceptor batteries from the United States within the next 15 years, the National Defense Ministry said yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 20).

The exact costs of the PAC-3 batteries is still being negotiated, but the budget for the purchase is expected to be executed next year, Deputy Defense Minister Chen Chao-min said in a report to the Taiwanese Legislature’s defense committee. All six batteries are expected to be delivered and deployed by 2019, he said (TaiwanNews.com, March 4).


Well, hopefully by the time the Taiwanese get the PAC-3 in 2019 it will be functioning properly...

What I really think strange is IF the PAC-3 sucks so bad presently, WHY is Pakistan upset that the US wants to sell them to India - if my enemy was thinking about buying a defense system that was totally incapable of protecting said enemy, I would be overjoyed that they would acquire and deploy such a white elephant.

Oh well, just a few rambling thoughts on the subject...



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:52 AM
link   
This is perfect planning by the US.
India will buy the system from the US and stay on good terms with the western world for not buying the Russian system.
And Pakisatn will stay good friends because they know that the patriot doesnt work.
The same goes for China/Taiwan!



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:54 AM
link   
U.S. Missile Defense System Flunks Test

"A test of the national missile defense system failed Monday when an interceptor missile did not launch from its island base in the Pacific Ocean, the military said. It was the second failure in months for the experimental program."
www.cbsnews.com...

To be honest, Pakistan will kick up because they're given the chance to make it look as though India's not going to take a peaceful route of Kashmir.

Also, a lot of companies say their product is the best, second to none, etc, basic business.

As for Taiwan, who else will sell it to them? Russia won't, nor will Isreal, as they both trade weapons to China so America is their last option. Plus, it might put a little fear into China once they do have the system.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:56 AM
link   
Hell, i could have saved everyone the trouble and told yall the damn thing dont work.

I used to be in a Patriot Missile battery, and we spent more time having to shut down and figure out bugs than anything, not to mention weird things like false real scud alerts with no training tapes or Radar on.

But we always sell our crap to third world countroies because we know it doesnt work.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 09:11 AM
link   


But we always sell our crap to third world countroies because we know it doesnt work


Since when was India a third world country?
They actually have all the makings of a superpower!



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Patriot in its original form was never meant to be an anti missle system. It now has that capability, but given it's design and lack of maneuvarbility it's not all that good. And it never had that mission prior to Gulf War I. As it is, the Aegis Standard-3 missile has just intercepted an incoming missile last week in a test.

Until we have a "from the ground up" anti-missle system fielded, the missle intercept mission will literally be hit or miss.

That being said, India can use anything it gets to help deflect Pakistani misslies.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 09:21 AM
link   
They are still a third world country.

Economically, its still a diseased, impoverished nightmare. They have no stable working industrial complex of their own. Thier govornment is still racked with corruption, their economy is still very weak, and they cannot feed their own populations succesfully.

Its still a third world country. it might have the potential to move above that, but for now, they are still dirt poor and dependant on food and aid from the west.

Chinma is a completely different story.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 09:23 AM
link   
The US are also planning this sale to Taiwan.
How will china take that???
Not very well i suppose!



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 09:29 AM
link   
It all depends on the amount of missiles they get with the system. China already has 700 pointing at Taiwan, by 2019 they will have enough newer missiles that the PAC-3 won't find easy to target.

I doubt China cares much, it'll just make Taiwan waste its money. After all, the PAC-3 doesn't defend against sea. Which is the larger threat.

I doubt china cares - this is a waste of money and they'll see it as a good thing.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 09:32 AM
link   


they will have enough newer missiles that the PAC-3 won't find easy to target


The PAC-3 would find it hard to target a B-2 nevermind an incoming missile.

Or maybe im wrong, because the Patriot has probably brought down more coalition planes than it has missiles!




posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
They are still a third world country.

Economically, its still a diseased, impoverished nightmare. They have no stable working industrial complex of their own. Thier govornment is still racked with corruption, their economy is still very weak, and they cannot feed their own populations succesfully.

Its still a third world country. it might have the potential to move above that, but for now, they are still dirt poor and dependant on food and aid from the west.

Chinma is a completely different story.



hello mr.

i am from india its is fine to live.
india economics is 7 largest after usa, china.....
india has stable and working industrial complex check your any product enquiery it should be out sourced to india. indian it is ruling whole world
it is not borrwed from any western world it is bulit by indian people.
india can feed whole usa. we are second largest milk producer after usa.
india is no longer take aid from out side we provide a aid to poor countrys
india is not dirty it is love that we provide.
and only thing is politics.but look at your own president who spoke lie on many occassion to prove that saddam has weapon of mass destruction
for politics i useed one line [in batroom[politics]every body is nude]


so check your word before giving any opnion



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Just remember by Definition the Third World is: “The developing nations of Africa, Asia, and Latin American.” most people have no clue that China and India would be on the ‘lower end’ of the ‘First World’ scale. But, India just like every country has problems that it’s reforming and changing - as I’m sure you’d know.

To be honest, it’s more the definition of Third, Second and First worlds that cause the problem - not people.

As for India getting the PAC-3 system, what do you think?



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Guys, look at all of the information.

www.pbs.org...

40 to 70 % succes rate is not "zero"



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   
The 70% and 40% were initial statistics that they still count and use to this day. PAC-3, has passed hardly any of the tests it has undergone.

So why would it fail these and yet still have such a high success rate? It doesn't add up.

To me, it's more likely the dodgy scud missiles Iraq was using didn't hit the targets and were added to the success rate for America's PAC-3 System - especially when you read the report I linked to earlier.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join