|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
U.S. Plans: Activist Group Provides More Details on Decoys Used in Intercept Test By Mike Nartker The report, written by David Wright, co-director of the UCS Global Security Program, details the decoys probably used during a successful missile interceptor test conducted Oct. 14. The test was the fifth hit in seven intercept tests of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. In May, the Bush administration announced that information on the target sets used in future missile defense tests would be classified (see GSN, May 17). UCS said the information in its report was based on public statements and technical analyses of previous missile defense test. The Oct. 14 test probably involved five targets — a mock warhead, a large balloon decoy, two small balloon decoys and the final stage of the target missile, a modified Minuteman ICBM, called the Multi-Service Launch System, which releases the decoys, according to the report. The three balloon decoys and the MSLS were reportedly identical to those used in a March intercept test, the report says (see GSN, March 18). The UCS report says the large balloon decoy and the MSLS would give off an infrared signature about three times larger than that of the mock warhead. The two small balloon decoys would give off an infrared signature about twice as large as that of the mock warhead, the report says. These larger infrared signatures make it easier for the missile interceptor to distinguish between the mock warhead and the decoys. “While using such decoys may be appropriate for early stages of testing, the Pentagon should make clear that these tests do not provide a meaningful test of discrimination that is relevant to real-world situations,” the report says. “While adding decoys of this type makes the tests somewhat more complex, it does not create a more demanding discrimination task.” As in previous missile defense tests, the Oct. 14 test required that the missile defense system know in advance how the target warhead and decoys will appear to the interceptor’s sensors, according to the report. This is necessary because the interceptor compares the infrared signatures it detects to pre-programmed information on the expected appearance of object, the report says. “Discrimination will rely on the defense having detailed prior knowledge about how all the objects will appear to the defense sensors — an assumption that is highly unrealistic,” the report says. The Oct. 14 test also did not use a tumbling warhead, even though missile defense test plans created under the Clinton administration called for its use in an intercept test by this time, the report says. It would be more difficult for an interceptor to detect a tumbling warhead since the motion would create fluctuations in its infrared signature, it says. While such a fluctuating infrared signature would be easy to detect when compare to the relatively uniform signatures of the decoys, previous tests have involved decoys that emitted signatures similar to that of a tumbling warhead, according to the report. For further information, see:
| ||||||||||
Back to top
