While the American army has spent richly to defend the rocket in the last few decades, it has “aiming”, he argues recently changed report The American Physical Society, published by the Public Affairs Panel, Non -Profit organization that studies physics and other scientific problems.
The authors who have noticed that American rocket defense funds usually escalate only in response to such things as “presidency of support,” came to the conclusion that the current American system could not reliably remove missiles and heads from North Korea, not to mention attacks from more sophisticated actors.
Montgomery tells Wired that the US should be particularly concerned about advanced ballistical and hypersonic missiles from China, Russia and Iran.
Going into space
Laura Gregi, senior research director in the Union of interested scientists and co -author of the report, says that he understands why Trump’s administration wants to launch rocket capture from space.
Personals fired from land places may have to overcome hundreds of miles horizontally, while intercepting in space only has to travel a tiny distance to reach the missile and stop it on their tracks. “Most of the intuition of people is that the space is far away,” says Gregi. “But in this case the space is close. The space is more or less as close as possible.
Gregi adds that the idea of building a futuristic anti-Misilian system in the sky has been occupying and turned off American leaders for decades. President Ronald Reagan proposed a similar plan in the early eighties called the “War” program by critics, which consisted of a cosmic Laser system to shoot down ballistics. While the type of reagan technology proposed using Or feasible Gregi says they are at that time.
Montgomery claims that the US government will probably have to choose between building a new space system or building a land system, because it would simply be too expensive to make both. “If you go to the second path of older systems now, you will inevitably start later space means,” he says.
But Grego claims that he believes that based on a space rocket capture system would be very sensitive and impractical, because it requires the use of rocket intervals worn on board satellites. Because satellites would constantly move in relation to the earth’s surface, the US would need an astronomical amount of captivating to ensure full protection.
Gregi says that it works only when it is completely complete. “If you can separate this constellation and hit the hole, using anti -sealist weapons or other types of attacks on the system, this whole thing becomes useless,” he explains.
Gregi adds that the capturing system based on the space system would probably cost a trillion dollars between building, launching and replacing the capture-nave, taking into account the fact that the novel technology developed by SpaceX has helped reduce the costs of satellite premiere in recent years. Satellites circulating in Earth in a low earth orbit also fall into the atmosphere and burn, and after about three years, which means that the components will replace regularly.