The GMD system is designed to repel a “limited” missile attack by a non-superpower adversary such as Iran or North Korea.
The nation’s defense against a massive nuclear assault by Russia or China still relies on “mutually assured destruction,” the Cold War notion that neither country would strike first for fear of a devastating counterattack.
TRANSLATION: THE U.S. HAS NO REAL MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM, SO IF CHINA DECIDED, "SCREW IT! WE'RE GOING TO NUKE YOU INTO OBLIVION!", THEY COULD.
GIVEN CHINA'S POPULATION, THEY MIGHT NOT MISS THE MILLIONS AMERICA'S NUKES WOULD TAKE OUT?
ABOVE MAP: Sites that the Missile Defense Agency is being forced to study as a potential third site for the GMD system: Fort Custer Training Center, near Battle Creek, MI.; Camp Ravenna Joint Military Training Center, near Akron, OH; and Fort Drum, NY. (Source: Google Earth)
[No one in that agency has asked for a 3rd site, they don't want a 3rd site, but Congress is forcing the issue.]
MAYBE CONGRESS HASN'T BEEN LISTENING TO ALL THOSE SAD MDA REPORTS GIVEN TO THEM ABOUT THE FAILURES AND PROBLEMS WITH THE EXISTING GMD SYSTEM, OR ARE THEY JUST TOO STUPID TO COMPREHEND WHAT THEY'RE TOLD?
The U,S,missile defense system is plagued with oversight and accountability issues.
Missile defense systems continue to demonstrate poor reliability as the 2015 report showed.
(This is a PDF, instant download.)
~FROM THE L.A. TIMES:
Pentagon skips tests on key component of U.S.-based missile defenseAgainst the advice of its own panel of outside experts, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency is forgoing tests meant to ensure that a critical component of the nation’s homeland missile defense system will work as intended.
The tests that are being skipped would evaluate the reliability of small motors designed to help keep rocket interceptors on course as they fly toward incoming warheads.
The components, called alternate divert thrusters, are vital to the high-precision guidance required to intercept and destroy an enemy warhead traveling at supersonic speed – a feat likened to hitting one speeding bullet with another.
Forgoing the tests “increases the risk for reliability issues going undetected,” according to a newly released report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The report says that such testing “verifies proper performance and workmanship.
In precisely scripted flight tests above the Pacific, interceptors have failed to hit mock enemy warheads about half the time.
The new GAO report concludes that the missile agency’s flight testing has been “insufficient to demonstrate that an operationally useful defense capability exists.”
~ FROM BACK IN 2013, SAME STORY:
Regardless of Outcome, System Not Ready for Prime Time, UCS Says ... failed test of the problem-plagued Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD)
Over the last decade, the system has failed eight of 15 intercept tests, including the last three in a row, despite the fact that the tests were highly scripted. That means the GMD system operators knew ahead of time where and when the target would be launched, and exactly what it looked like.
Fixing the problems uncovered by recent failures will cost more than $1.3 billion, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO).
DID YOU GET THAT?
FIXING THE PROBLEMS WOULD COST LESS THAN $2 BILLION, BUT CONGRESS HAD RATHER MAKE THE MDA SPEND OVER $4 BILLION TO BUILD A NEW SITE AND EQUIP IT WITH MORE FAULTY MISSILES.
YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK, AMERICA!
YAY, TEAM CONGRESS, RIGHT?
~ $40-billion missile defense system proves unreliable - LA Times
$40,000,000,000... divided by 2... THAT MEANS EACH OF OUR 2 CURRENT FACILITIES ARE COSTING US $20 BILLION EACH, BUT CONGRESS WANTS "JUST" $3.6 BILLION FOR A 3rd FACILITY?
THE MATH JUST DOESN'T WORK, DOES IT?
WELL, NEITHER DOES ANYTHING ELSE, SO....
FROM THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS:
February 8, 2017
"The existing U.S.Ground-based Midcourse (GMD) System sites in California and Alaska have been home to America's "missile defense" for many years.
Many of the GMD system’s problems are rooted in decisions made more than 10 years ago. In 2002, the Bush administration mandated the MDA to field a system by the fall of 2004 to defend the United States against a theoretical missile attack.
To facilitate this deadline-driven approach, the Bush administration and Congress loosened or set aside the normal requirements and oversight processes for new weapons systems, which allowed the MDA to field technology under development that has not passed the rigorous milestones normally required.
Consequently, the MDA fielded equipment with completely unknown capability.
Officials inside the MDA are skeptical about what starting this expensive project would do to their priorities in a constrained budget environment, including improving the reliability and effectiveness of the existing system.
Improving reliability and effectiveness would be a good thing.
The GMD system has been plagued with serious reliability problems and has a poor test record."
THAT'S PUTTING IT MILDLY.
The US missile defense system is a joke | New York Post
JULY 14, 2016
The ground-based midcourse missile defense system, which has deployed 30 interceptors in Alaska and California, has been tested under highly scripted conditions only nine times since being deployed in 2004, and failed to destroy its target two-thirds of the time, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) said in a report.
“After nearly 15 years of effort to build the GMD homeland missile defense system, it still has not demonstrated real-world capability to defend the United States,” said Laura Grego, a UCS physicist who co-authored the report.
“Instead of getting something out to the field that worked well or worked adequately, in fact this has been a disaster. It’s done the opposite,” she said.
The Obama administration’s efforts to improve oversight while keeping the system outside the normal development and procurement process have contributed to the problems, she said.
[8 YEARS OF BUSH, 8 YEARS OF OBAMA AND NO PROGRESS? IS IT INTENTIONAL?]
“The lack of accountability has had and will have real lasting effects, especially for a system … that’s strategically important. It should be held to the highest standards, the highest rigor,” she added.
A Pentagon assessment in 2015 found that flight testing of the system was still “insufficient to demonstrate that an operationally useful defense capability exists.”
A February report by Congress’s Government Accountability Office said the MDA was taking a “high-risk” approach by buying interceptors still under development for operational use."
CONGRESS DOESN'T CARE ABOUT ANY OF THE ABOVE ASSESSMENTS, FAILURES, OR THE LESS COSTLY ABILITY WE HAVE TO FIX THE DAMNED THING.
INSTEAD, THE IMBECILES ON THE HILL ARE INSISTING THAT ALMOST $4 BILLION BE SPENT FOR A NEW FACILITY, KNOWING THE TWO OLD ONES HAVE FLAWS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED AND REMEDIED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
SO, INSTEAD OF APPLYING THOSE BILLIONS TO FIX THE EXITING PROBLEMS OF AN UNRELIABLE MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM, CONGRESS WANTS TO CREATE A NEW PROBLEM BY SPENDING $3.6 BILLION JUST TO BUILD THIS FACILITY (AS IF THAT WILL STAY WITHIN 'BUDGET') , AND ANOTHER $2.6 BILLION TO FILL IT WITH MISSILES?
WHY?
BECAUSE $$$$$$$, THAT'S WHY....KA-CHING, KA-CHING!
$$$$$$ FOR THEIR STATES, THEY SAY, IN THE FORM OF JOBS, THEY LIE, WHAT WOULD HAVE TO BE PURCHASED LOCALLY TO BUILD THE THING, ETC...OR SO THEY SAY, BUT THAT IS NOT HOW IT WORKS.
BASICALLY, CONGRESS IS PLAYING THE OLD GAME OF "LOOK WHAT I'M DOING FOR MY BELOVED CONSTITUENTS AND MY STATE, SO RE-ELECT ME, I LOVE YOU."
BS!
THEY'RE DOING WHAT THEY'VE ALWAYS DONE...SUCKING UP TO THOSE WHO WILL BE HANDED THE CONTRACTS FOR THIS STUPID STUNT.
IT'S THE BIG MONEY FOLKS WHO MAKE THE REALLY BIG CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS, AFTER ALL.
LET'S TALK MONEY
"Congressional delegations (with a few exceptions) from Michigan, New York and Ohio have crossed party lines and asked the Missile Defense Agency to support locating the site in their respective states. Their support appears to be largely driven by an interest in creating jobs.
Each proposed site is in an economically depressed area, and many in the local communities are understandably eager for an infusion of federal cash to generate new job opportunities.
Let’s talk about money.
This would be an expensive project.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated that a new site would cost at least $3.6 billion to build and operate over the first five years.
This includes ground equipment ($1.2 billion); developing the site, building the facilities, and constructing the silos ($1 billion); the cost of buying 20 interceptors ($1.3 billion), and operations costs ($100 million).
For the full complement of 60 interceptors, it would cost at least $2.6 billion more.
There’s no military requirement for an additional missile defense site. Nor was the idea of building a third site the result of a rigorous study of what would best improve the system’s ability to intercept ballistic missile threats to the homeland.
Admiral William Gortney stated: "If I had one more dollar to do ballistic missile defense, I wouldn't put it against the east coast missile site."
Pentagon officials have gone on record as being concerned that the current TWO sites need work, that the entire defense system has never been proven to work when faced with decoys and other countermeasures.
Many connected to the system itself have cautioned that the interceptors themselves could use work, COULD be made more efficient.
The GMD system has been plagued with serious reliability problems and has a poor test record.
[WHY NOT "FIX WHAT'S BROKEN" INSTEAD OF ADDING TO THE PROBLEM WITH THE COST OF ANOTHER FACILITY HOUSING THAT THE MILITARY ITSELF QUESTIONS AS A VIABLE DEFENSE SYSTEM?]
But you can count on Congress to run with this idea and push for it as hard as it can.
Every year since 2012, Congress has attempted to dedicate/earmark money to build [a third] site, despite Pentagon budgets that never included a dime for it. "
WELL, MISSILE DEFENSE IS "ON TRACK" TO COMPLY WITH IDIOTIC CONGRESSIONAL WISHES.
FROM THE MDA's OWN WEBSITE: (EMPHASIS MINE)
"The MDA continues to prepare the congressionally-mandated Continental United States Interceptor Site (CIS) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to evalue sites for a potential additional ground-based interceptor site.
This EIS is required by the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act.
The Department of Defense has NOT made a decision to deploy or construct an additional interceptor site.
There currently is no expressed military requirement for an additional ground-based interceptor site.
An EIS is being prepared for the following military installations:
1- Fort Custer Training Center – Michigan Army National Guard, Augusta, Michigan
2- Camp Ravenna Joint Military Training Center – Ohio Army National Guard, Portage and Trumbull Counties, Ohio
3- Fort Drum, Fort Drum, New York
On January 16, 2016, MDA designated the Center for Security Forces Detachment Kittery Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape Facility (SERE East), Redington Township, Maine, as an alternative considered but not carried forward due to significant environmental impacts, cost and constructability issues.
The MDA announced the availability of the Draft EIS in the Federal Register on May 31, 2016.
The MDA encouraged all interested members of the public, as well as federal, state, and local agencies to review and provide comments on the Draft EIS. Comments received will be addressed in the Final EIS.
Please continue to check back on this site for updates, handouts, news releases and official reports.
Public Comment Period:
The MDA extended the public comment period for the Draft EIS. Due to the complexity of the Draft EIS, cooperating agencies requested an extension to the public comment period to have additional time to review the Draft EIS.
The public comment period was set to end July 18 and was extended by 30 days.Notice of this extension was issued in the Federal Register on July 15.
The public comment period ended August 17, 2016. MDA is still on track to complete the Final EIS later this year."
I DO WONDER HOW MANY RESIDENTS OF THOSE TOWNS "STUDIED" EVER HERD ABOUT THAT "PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD".
WAS IT PUBLISHED IN LOCAL NEWSPAPERS, AIRED ON LOCAL TV?
THAT MDA SITE ALSO HAS A "NEWS" LINK AND WE SEE THAT MAYBE FORT DRUM WILL GET THE NOD ON THE 3rd FACILITY BEING CRAMMED DOWN MDA's THROAT?
MDA Opens Missile Defense System Data Terminal at Fort Drum
July 21, 2016 - Ground-based Midcourse Defense The U.S. Missile Defense Agency, along with the U.S. Army, held a ribbon-cutting ceremony today at Fort Drum, New York, for the In-Flight Interceptor Communications System (IFICS) data terminal. A critical link in the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system, the data terminal is designed to send and receive messages to the Exo-atmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV) while in flight, constantly transmitting target updates. The data terminal also relays data from the EKV back to the GMD fire control system.
AND IN OTHER MISSILE DEFENSE "NEWS":
U.S., Japan Successfully Conduct First SM-3 Block IIA Intercept Test
Feb. 3, 2017 - International Cooperation The U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA), the Japan Ministry of Defense (MoD), and U.S. Navy sailors aboard USS John Paul Jones (DDG 53) successfully conducted a flight test Feb. 3 (Hawaii Standard Time), resulting in the first intercept of a ballistic missile target using the Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IIA off the west coast of Hawaii.
Israel and U.S. Successfully Complete David’s Sling Weapon System Intercept Test Series
Jan. 25, 2017 - International Cooperation The Israel Missile Defense Organization (IMDO) of the Directorate of Defense Research and Development (DDR&D) and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA) successfully completed a test series of the David’s Sling Weapons System, a missile defense system that is a central part of Israel’s multi-layer anti-missile array.
MDA conducts SM-6 MRBM intercept test
Dec. 14, 2016 - Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense The Missile Defense Agency and sailors aboard USS John Paul Jones (DDG 53), an Aegis baseline 9.C1 equipped destroyer, successfully fired a salvo of two SM-6 Dual I missiles against a complex medium-range ballistic missile target, demonstrating the Sea Based Terminal endo-atmospheric defensive capability and meeting the test's primary objective.
Missile Defense Agency Conducts Distributed BMD Ground Test
Oct. 3, 2016 - BMD Ground Test The Missile Defense Agency (MDA), in conjunction with the Joint Functional Component Command for Integrated Missile Defense, U.S. Northern Command and U.S. Pacific Command, today completed a ground test to assess the performance of the Ballistic Missile Defense System.
Throughout the 12-day test, ballistic missile defense systems participated in various simulated threat scenarios to evaluate how the system would respond in the event of an actual attack. MDA conducts ground tests regularly to help the agency and combatant commanders develop missile defense doctrine, train operators and assess the current system.
WE CAN ALSO SEE AMERICA AND OUR MDA HELPING NATO ALLIES 'MISSILE-UP' AGAINST THAT BIG, BAD BOOGEY-MONSTER, RUSSIA....IT MUST LOOK LIKE A BRISTLING PORCUPINE ALL ALONG THE RUSSIAN BORDER WITH SO MANY MISSILES DEPLOYED OVER THERE, AND MORE ON THE WAY.
U.S. and Poland Break Ground on Aegis Ashore Site in Poland (external link opens in new window)
May 13, 2016 - Aegis Ashore
Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System-Romania Operationally Certified (external link opens in new window)
May 12, 2016 - Aegis Ashore
NOW IF RUSSIA CAME OVER AND "HELPED" MEXICO DO THE SAME TO "DETER AGGRESSION" FROM THE USA, ALL HELL WOULD BREAK LOOSE, RIGHT?
ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS LOOK BACK AT THAT "CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS" IN THE 1960s.
AND LET'S NOT FORGET THAT 'BAY OF PIGS'.
POOR OLD MEXICO HAS TO TAKE CARE OF ITSELF IN THE FACE OF "IMMINENT DANGER" FROM AN ATTACK BY THE USA, JUST AS THOSE NATO NATIONS SHOULD BE DOING.
HOW MANY MEXICAN MISSILES ARE POINTED AT TEXAS AFTER ALL, EVEN NOW, IN THE FACE OF THE NEW 'UNFRIENDLY" ADMINISTRATION OF DONALD TRUMP?
ZERO.
HOW MANY RUSSIAN MISSILES WERE TILTED TOWARD POLAND AND ROMANIA, ETC, BEFORE AMERICA WENT OVER TO "HELP" THOSE NATIONS ...AND SENT THEM NUKES?
I'D WAGER ZERO.
I WONDER...DOES RUSSIA AND CHINA AND PAKISTAN AND FRANCE AND THE U.K. AND GERMANY ALL ENCOURAGE THEIR UNIVERSITIES TO GET INVOLVED IN DOING RESEARCH FOR THEIR MILITARY LIKE AMERICA DOES?
DO THEY HAVE A "PLAYBOOK" FOR THEIR COLLEGES?
ANYBODY KNOW?
University Programs Playbook
A resource to guide universities through the process of submitting proposals for research.
THE MDA EVEN HAS A GAME, YES, A GAME, ON THEIR WEBSITE SO WE CAN ALL PLAY "PROTECT AMERICA"!
https://www.mda.mil/careers/interceptor.html
ARE THEY LOOKING FOR HELP WITH THAT GAME OR...?
IF ANYONE GOES AND "PLAYS", PLEASE DO POST YOUR SCORES IN THE COMMENTS SECTION...I PROMISE TO OKAY THOSE POSTS!
DO YOU GET THE FEELING WE ARE "FUBAR", AMERICANS?
_________________________
Fake News about Chinese Nuclear Weapons
02/13/2017
For more information on the missile defense kill vehicles, see this UCS fact sheet.
For more background on the missile defense system, see UCS’s missile defense materials.
//WW
No comments:
Post a Comment