JUST before dawn on 29 March, the world鈥檚 most advanced missile flared into
life, illuminating the New Mexican desert. It streaked towards its target at
thousands of kilometres an hour . . . and missed, exploding 10 seconds
later.
This is the sixth time in a row that the US military鈥檚 Theater High-Altitude
Area Defense (THAAD) system has failed to intercept a ballistic
missile鈥攖he job it was designed for. And the timing could hardly be more
embarrassing: Congress is pressing for a major increase in spending on
anti-ballistic missile technology.
So far THAAD has run up a bill of $4 billion. Its backers are putting
a brave face on the latest flop. 鈥淲hile we鈥檙e not where we want to be, I am
encouraged,鈥� Lieutenant General Paul Kern of the US Army鈥檚 Acquisition Corps
told reporters at a Pentagon briefing last week. He points out that the missile
came within 10 to 30 metres of its target.
Advertisement
But other observers are less sanguine. 鈥淥h my God, these guys can鈥檛 hit the
broad side of a barn,鈥� says Joseph Cirincione, director of the Carnegie
Non-Proliferation Project in Washington DC. 鈥淭hey鈥檙e serving up clay pigeons to
this thing to pop out of the sky, and it still can鈥檛 hit.鈥�
Indeed, THAAD鈥檚 target in the latest test was virtually a sitting duck. The
missile it was meant to hit had been designed to mimic incoming Scuds, which are
large and relatively slow. THAAD is supposed to destroy small, fast
warheads.
Congressional backers of anti-ballistic missile technology are blaming the
company that built the system, Lockheed Martin of Bethesda, Maryland. 鈥淢ost of
the failures, if you look at them, are due to contractor quality control,鈥� says
Pete Peterson, a spokesman for Congressman Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania.
But Jeffery Adams, a spokesman for Lockheed Martin, disputes this claim. 鈥淲e
entirely disagree with that,鈥� he says. 鈥淨uality takes precedence over anything
else, including cost and schedule.鈥�
If, as some experts suggest, shooting down ballistic missiles is really
beyond the capacity of even the best available technology, the US government may
be poised to throw good money after bad. Congress has just passed a bill that
requires the US to deploy a national ballistic missile defence system
(This Week, 27 March, p 27).
The $6.6 billion project would use a 鈥渒ill
vehicle鈥� based on the same broad principles as THAAD. There are also other
projects in the pipeline, such as an airborne laser and a sea-based defence
system.
While a less ambitious project鈥攁 modified Patriot missile鈥攄id
score a direct hit on a Scud-like target last week, sceptics believe that
building an effective national missile defence system is still way beyond reach.
鈥淎t the rate we鈥檝e been going in the past fifteen years, it seems that it will
not be technologically feasible in the lifetime of anyone now living,鈥� says John
Pike of the Federation of American 快猫短视频s in Washington DC.