Need information on the Strategic Defense Initiative

Author	Topic: Need information on the Strategic Defense Initiative
Boeing Infiltrator Member # 737	written Wednesday, March 31 2004 07:33 Profile #0 I'm currently making a schoolwork about USA:s Strategic Defense Initiative program, also known as the "Star Wars" program. Does anyone here know where (on the Internet) I could find some more information about it? I know that Reagan started it in 1983 to protect USA from Soviet missiles and that Bush has an interest in it as well, but I don't know much more about it... -------------------- Who was born in a house full of pain Who was trained not to spit in the fan Who was told what to do by the man Who was broken by trained personnel Who was fitted with collar and chain Who was given a pat on the back Who was breaking away from the pack Who was only a stranger at home Who was ground down in the end Who was found dead on the phone Who was dragged down by the stone Posts: 595 | Registered: Tuesday, March 12 2002 08:00
laaran Warrior Member # 3621	written Wednesday, March 31 2004 08:06 Profile #1 Yes, they think that Nasa shuttle can be dangerous when they explode. So they want to destroy them before they take off. Posts: 62 | Registered: Thursday, October 30 2003 08:00
Or else o'erleap. Law Bringer Member # 335	written Wednesday, March 31 2004 13:48 Profile Homepage #2 Google turns up some good results with "SDI," "Star Wars," and "Strategic Defense Initiative." Just keep in mind that the scientists were always skeptical about the feasibility of the project, although it never stopped Reagan from sinking huge amounts of money into it. ?Alorael, who looked up a lot of information on this a few years back. He'll see if he can find any of his old bits of paper floating around either on his computer or near his desk. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00
mortification8 Warrior Member # 3417	written Thursday, April 1 2004 15:36 Profile Homepage #3 Actually, this is a very interesting project from a scientific standpoint. At the time Reagan first initiated it, most of the ideas were really beyond technology at the time. However technology has a way of catching up in a hurry, and now it has. Most of the core concepts have either been demonstrated or actually used in weapons and space systems. Popular Science (here) keeps pretty good tabs on the status of the various systems. My favorite is the laser that can fire from a jumbo jet, shooting down planes, missiles, birds, mouth-spiders, and so forth. -------------------- This space intentionally left blank. Posts: 70 | Registered: Monday, September 1 2003 07:00
mortification8 Warrior Member # 3417	written Thursday, April 1 2004 15:59 Profile Homepage #4 Actually, this is a very interesting project from a scientific standpoint. At the time Reagan first initiated it, most of the ideas were really beyond technology at the time. However technology has a way of catching up in a hurry, and now it has. Most of the core concepts have either been demonstrated or actually used in weapons and space systems. Popular Science (here) keeps pretty good tabs on the status of the various systems. My favorite is the laser that can fire from a jumbo jet, shooting down planes, missiles, birds, mouth-spiders, and so forth. -------------------- This space intentionally left blank. Posts: 70 | Registered: Monday, September 1 2003 07:00
laaran Warrior Member # 3621	written Thursday, April 1 2004 22:47 Profile #5 The laser that shoots birds !!! Cool, more fun than normal hunt !! Is it a laser on a satellite ? From an airplane ? Posts: 62 | Registered: Thursday, October 30 2003 08:00
too kraut, don't read Shock Trooper Member # 3980	written Thursday, April 1 2004 23:17 Profile Homepage #6 Wasn't there a laser to be developped that needed a nuclear explosion to fire it? Think about decoy warheads - each requiring a nuclear explosion to be destroyed. I rememberthat things were discussed in "The New Scientist"(UK) and also on "Physics Today" the journal of the American Physical Society (APS). For school purposes I would turn to the AAAS-pulications. Scientific American Articles can be length and boring sometimes but might be worth a try. Posts: 311 | Registered: Friday, February 13 2004 08:00
FZ Shock Trooper Member # 3022	written Friday, April 2 2004 10:20 Profile #7 You might also want to look into the late Edward Teller, who essentially sold the concept to the Reagan administration, and worked on much of the technology. To say the least, he is a very controversial figure to scientists. Posts: 269 | Registered: Saturday, May 24 2003 07:00
Or else o'erleap. Law Bringer Member # 335	written Friday, April 2 2004 10:53 Profile Homepage #8 One of the ideas proposed was to have orbital satellites that would use nuclear detonations to fire lasers. Among the other problems with the idea was the estimated required time to get enough satellites into space to be useful: anywhere from 1000 to 4000 years. ?Alorael, who believes other laser types were proposed as well. Most of the more feasible ones diffused too quickly to be destructive to relatively low-flying missiles. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00
Firedrake Infiltrator Member # 2242	written Friday, April 2 2004 10:59 Profile #9 I remember that it involved lasers to destroy missles once they left the atmosphere or something like that. -------------------- "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster... when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss also gazes back into you." -Friedrich Nietzsche "There is no dodging the quad laser." -Ignignok Posts: 469 | Registered: Thursday, November 14 2002 08:00
Rupert Agent Member # 618	written Friday, April 2 2004 11:17 Profile Homepage #10 Technically speaking, if some-one developed a tpe of counter-missile, that is to say, a missile to intercept the incoming warhead. It could (theoretically) be used safely to "down" the incoming nuke. This is because, unless the nuke's own detonater activates it, the chances of it going off when hit by the "counter-missile", are in fact, minutely small. For example, shooting a bullet from a standard .45 into the center of the warhead, would only make it go off less than 1 in a million times. Hitting the outer casing to knock it off trajectory would have an even smaller chance than that. -------------------- I like to say quack because I can, I like to say moooo because I can, but I don't like saying ergle flmp because I can never pronounce phenomenon first try. In conclusion, quack, moooo and phenonemenonmenonnon... Oh Poo. http://s4.invisionfree.com/Ultimate_RP/index.php Try it! Posts: 1487 | Registered: Sunday, February 10 2002 08:00
Boots Shock Trooper Member # 455	written Friday, April 2 2004 11:48 Profile #11 Another problem often cited with satellite lasers, at least back in the '80s: a trillion dollar weapons system will have difficulty surving an impact at orbital velocity with a few dollars worth of gravel. Granted, this was only a meaningful objection when SDI's "mission" was against the Soviet Union, which had the capacity to put gravel, or anything else it wanted, into space. Now that SDI is meant to protect against the phantom rogue states of the future, well, it's bound to be the most successful defense system in history, as well as an extremely effective mechanism for the upward redistribution of wealth. [ Friday, April 02, 2004 12:05: Message edited by: Boots ] -------------------- Winter comes: game over -- he's in the driveway removing snow with a flame-thrower. Posts: 265 | Registered: Saturday, December 29 2001 08:00
Firedrake Infiltrator Member # 2242	written Saturday, April 3 2004 11:53 Profile #12 Wasn't the program started in the late 60's and early 70's? I don't remember much on it but I think it started in the early 70s or something -------------------- "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster... when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss also gazes back into you." -Friedrich Nietzsche "There is no dodging the quad laser." -Ignignok Posts: 469 | Registered: Thursday, November 14 2002 08:00
Boots Shock Trooper Member # 455	written Saturday, April 3 2004 13:10 Profile #13 That depends, as always, on how one defines "program." SDI proper is a creature of the mid-80s (Reagan announced it in 1983). In the late-60s, the US did, however, claim to be working on a ground-based program called (I think) first "Sentinel" (by Johnson) and then "Safeguard" (by Nixon: I cannot remember the exact relationship between the two). This was after the Soviet Union had rejected the US call for sharp restrictions on anti-ballistic missile systems; and in this respect, "Sentinel"/"Safeguard" seems to have been advanced largely as a bargaining move. In which case, it "worked." In 1972, the Soviet Union and US signed the ABM treaty, by whose terms each nation could build only one localized missle defense system (or something like that; again, my memory is not to be trusted), thus furthering what had been US policy throughout the Cold War: at all costs, do nothing to reduce or dilute the offensive deterrent provided by nuclear weapons. By 1983, US strategic goals had begun to shift, although even then, in its initial phases, SDI was announced as a policy intended to cohere (how was unclear) with the ABM Treaty, and Reagan tended to justify it on the grounds that the Soviets violated the agreement first. It wasn't until Bush's National Missile Defense program announcement in 2001 that the US formally broke the terms of the ABM Treaty. At that point, US hegemony could no longer plausibly present itself as the effect of mutually assured destruction (there being no balancing threat with which to spook other countries into a US-controlled bloc), so a purely offensive missile policy had outlived its shelf-life. [ Saturday, April 03, 2004 13:11: Message edited by: Boots ] -------------------- Winter comes: game over -- he's in the driveway removing snow with a flame-thrower. Posts: 265 | Registered: Saturday, December 29 2001 08:00