Anti-Ballistic Missile: MDA or DCA

targett.jpg

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070928/ap_on_re_us/missile_defense_1

Boeing’s ICBM interceptor took out a target missle launched from Alaska.  The article says the “warhead” was tracked, intercepted, and destroyed.  That was quite an achievement.  We crewdawgs know that warheads aren’t very big.

They’re calling it the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system, and the Missile Defense Agency (commanded by an Army Maj General) runs the system.  It sounds more like a Defensive Counter Aerospace system.  Aerospace includes the environment from the surface of the Earth upward to infinity.  I was almost ready to say it should be an Air Force project, but we’re not “aerospace” anymore.  We’re “air and space.” It’s a shame.  

 We abandoned the traditional term during General Foggleman’s tenure as COS for unknown reasons, then returned to our aerospace roots under General Ryan, after a polite but insistant group of doctrineers impressed upon him the value of the term.  However, after he left office, we returned to the Air & Space verbage, much like a dog returns to its vomit.

So Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system . . . bun by the MDA it is. And it’s a $49 billion investment over the next five-years.  That’s a good business for Boeing, and part of a good system to make terrorist-nation’s ballistic missiles a poor investment. 

Along the way, I hope we don’t shoot down too many of our own ballistic missiles.  In a terrorist-infested world, we don’t have many to spare.  It just makes sense.

One Response to “Anti-Ballistic Missile: MDA or DCA”

  1. quality seo says:

    quality seo …

    Anti-Ballistic Missile: MDA or DCA « BOB Blog… Good job

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.