THeBlueCashew

Quote from: "cc"The U.S. has "successfully intercepted" an intercontinental ballistic missile (//http) during the first test of its ground-based intercept system, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said Tuesday............



........... The ICBM-target was launched from the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site on Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands, 4,200 miles away.



"The intercept of a complex, threat-representative ICBM target is an incredible accomplishment for the GMD [Ground-based Missile Defense] system and a critical milestone for this program," said Missile Defense Agency Director Vice Adm. Jim Syring. ............



This is the first ever intercept of a long range ICBM .. "Like hitting a bullet with a bullet ... far up in space" ... will give Kim something to think on  :wink:

QuoteIn a move that is being described by officials as "historic," and has the manufacturers of the systems drooling about making and selling more of them the US managed to "successfully" intercept an "ICBM" today at the Ronald Reagan Missile Defense Test Site, in Kwajaleiin Atoll.



This is meant to be interpreted by the public, and particularly the check-writers in Congress, as proof the US missile defense system "works" and could shoot down ICBMs fired by North Korea at the US mainland, across the Pacific Ocean, foiling a potential attack.



The missile defense system actually only managed to shoot down a slower moving, "threat-representative" ICBM-styled target, and then with exact specifications from the side that fired the object about the target's size, time of firing, and precise trajectory.



That means knowing every bit of information about the target, the US missile defense system managed to physically hit the object under 100% optimal conditions, which should be little assurance of its functionality, particularly since previous tests under similarly optimal conditions have succeeded only about half the time.



An actual ICBM would not only be faster, but the US wouldn't know its exact specifications, exact trajectory, or the specific instant it was fired. Perhaps the biggest problem is they wouldn't have this data weeks in advance to pre-position the missile defense exactly where it would have the best shot of doing something.



//http://news.antiwar.com/2017/05/30/us-missile-defense-success-doesnt-translate-to-battlefield-readiness/

Quote from: "Romero"

QuoteIn a move that is being described by officials as "historic," and has the manufacturers of the systems drooling about making and selling more of them the US managed to "successfully" intercept an "ICBM" today at the Ronald Reagan Missile Defense Test Site, in Kwajaleiin Atoll.



This is meant to be interpreted by the public, and particularly the check-writers in Congress, as proof the US missile defense system "works" and could shoot down ICBMs fired by North Korea at the US mainland, across the Pacific Ocean, foiling a potential attack.



The missile defense system actually only managed to shoot down a slower moving, "threat-representative" ICBM-styled target, and then with exact specifications from the side that fired the object about the target's size, time of firing, and precise trajectory.



That means knowing every bit of information about the target, the US missile defense system managed to physically hit the object under 100% optimal conditions, which should be little assurance of its functionality, particularly since previous tests under similarly optimal conditions have succeeded only about half the time.



An actual ICBM would not only be faster, but the US wouldn't know its exact specifications, exact trajectory, or the specific instant it was fired. Perhaps the biggest problem is they wouldn't have this data weeks in advance to pre-position the missile defense exactly where it would have the best shot of doing something.



//http://news.antiwar.com/2017/05/30/us-missile-defense-success-doesnt-translate-to-battlefield-readiness/

Likely about as "successful" as an F-35 test. Billions of dollars later...

Quote from: "RW"Yeah that reads like the Edmonton Sun.

Quote from: "cc"A pretty good shot for the first test.



There will be misses along the way as they make it harder each time (as planned), but long range it will be great protection so that goofball sites like anti-war etc. can attack "shields" as very bad as vs swords

Quote from: "cc"Fair point. It may cause others to "try to" make existing missiles less detectable, but that's not an arms race. It's pretty hard to even try to be undetectable with a physical presence and with fire as necessary to propel a missile  .... to infra red and other detection methods located in space.

Quote from: "Angry White Male"Bow down to the superior Germanic Peoples for inventing the modern missile!

Quote from: "Shen Li"Han Chinese invented rockets when Europeans were living like the baboons they really are.