Missile defense in place in Alaska, but will it work?

The Seattle Times ^ | July 17, 2005 | Alex Fryer

[ArrogantBustard]

EMP should fry any electronics in the re-entry vehicle?
The theory of anti-ballistic-missile nukes was that the neutron flux from the explosion would screw up the physics package on the incoming warhead(s).

attempting to hit enemy missile that probably has countermeasures, decoys and might carry MIRV just seems unreasonably hard.
It apparently doesn't seem unreasonably hard to the folks who are actually doing it. ;'}

[ko_kyi]

I just read about it on a webpage.

If the technology was that advanced in 1972 I wonder how far we have come in 35 years.

[Schwaeky]

Self preservation my friend... They are in range of weapons launchable from North Korea and Red China, so preserving one's life, and the lives of your subscribers and advertisers (follow the money) trumps partisan politics..

[Schwaeky]

Even if it is not close enough to incinerate a warhead with a nuke, a high altitude air burst's EMP could render the warhead harmless (other than being a fast falling projectile..)

[Schwaeky]

ONce this is fully operational, whenever it is, Lil Kim tries anything he's going to be very ronery!!!

[RightWhale]

One can always put a nuclear tip on a missile and explode it close to an oncoming missile

There has been considerable analysis of this method. It is not as effective as kinetic weapons due to fratricide.

[ScreamingFist]

So long as "no one" in China or North Korea knows that is a very good thing. Confusion to our would be enemies!

To paraphrase Dr. Strangeglove, "What good is a a DOOMSDAY device if no one knows about it, ehhh, ehhhh?".

This isn't a doomsday device, but it can influence strategic planning in China and North Korea whether it works, presently, or not.....;)