http://tw.news.yahoo.com/article/url/d/a/100519/19/25wxf.html
科學家：美飛彈防禦計畫是科技神話
更新日期:2010/05/19 05:05 陳政一
（法新社華盛頓18日電） 一項新研究指稱，美國飛彈防禦計畫是奠基於「科技神話」，在軍方的測試中，攔截飛彈大多未能擊落來襲的彈頭。
兩位美國科學家在研究標準三型飛彈（SM-3）的10次測試後做成結論，這型目的在擊落彈道飛彈的攔截飛彈，僅有1至兩次直接擊中模擬彈頭。
康乃爾大學（Cornell University）的路易斯（George Lewis）和麻省理工學院（MIT）的波斯托（Theodore Postol）在最新一期的「當前武器管制」（Arms Control Today）雜誌中寫道：「這意味在實際的戰鬥中，彈頭不會被摧毀，而會繼續朝目標前進並引爆，在標準三型飛彈的10次測試中，有8、9次是如此。」
五角大廈曾描述這些在2002至2009年間進行的測試獲得成功。
這兩位科學家在一篇名為「具有瑕疵和危險的美國飛彈防禦計畫」文章中說，美國政府對於飛彈防禦系統的說法「只不過是謊言」，「由這些科技神話衍生出的政策策略很有可能導致外交政策災難」。
但是美國飛彈防禦署（Missile Defense Agency）今天駁斥這項研究的說法，稱這些說法「有瑕疵、不正確且誤導」。
美國官員和學者對於攔截飛彈擊中火箭本身或其彈頭的重要性，向來意見相左。
飛彈防禦署在聲明中說，標準三型飛彈測試「顯示，飛彈攔截器在與預期撞擊點相距幾英寸的範圍內擊中目標本身或彈頭，這是經過計算，目的在對各型彈頭造成最大損害」。
該署發言人李納（Richard Lehner）說，先前的一些測試根本沒有使用模擬彈頭，因為目的僅是擊中目標飛彈。
波斯托長久以來一直懷疑美國的飛彈計畫，他從前曾協助暴露1991年波斯灣戰爭發射的愛國者（Patriot）防禦飛彈大多失敗。
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100518/pl_afp/usmilitarymissileweapons_20100518204520
Study says US missile defense weapons deeply flawed
Tue May 18, 4:45 pm ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) – US missile defense plans are based on "technical myths" and interceptors have mostly failed to knock out incoming warheads in military tests, a new study argues.
Two American scientists reviewed 10 tests of the SM-3 "kill vehicle," designed to take out ballistic missiles, and concluded that the interceptor succeeded in directly hitting mock warheads in only one or two cases.
"This means that, in real combat, the warhead would have not been destroyed but would have continued toward the target and detonated in eight or nine of the 10 SM-3 experimental tests," wrote George Lewis of Cornell University and Theodore Postol of MIT in the latest issue of "Arms Control Today."
The Pentagon had described the tests between 2002 to 2009 as successful.
The US administration's claims about the missile defense system are "nothing more than a fiction" and "the policy strategy that follows from these technical myths could well lead to a foreign policy disaster," wrote the scientists in an article titled "A Flawed and Dangerous US Missile Defense Plan."
The authors also questioned if a network of early-warning satellites and radar could precisely track missiles and distinguish them from debris or decoys.
But the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) on Tuesday rejected the findings of the study, calling them "flawed, inaccurate and misleading."
Defense Secretary Robert Gates retained confidence in the missile defense program, his press secretary told AFP.
"Secretary Gates tracks our missile defense program closely and he continues to have a high degree of confidence in its capabilities, including those of the SM-3 system," press secretary Geoff Morrell said in an email.
US officials and the authors of the study disagreed over the importance of the interceptors striking the body of a rocket or its dummy warhead.
The SM-3 tests "showed that the interceptor's kill vehicle impacted the target body or warhead within inches of the expected impact point that was calculated to maximize damage against a variety of warhead types," the MDA said in a statement.
MDA spokesman Richard Lehner said some of the earlier tests did not use mock warheads at all because the goal was merely to hit the target missile.
One of the authors of the study, Postol of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is a long-time skeptic of missile defense who previously helped expose the failure of most Patriot anti-missile weaponry in the 1991 Gulf War.
Much is riding on land and sea-based US missile defenses, with President Barack Obama arguing the system will help counter the threat posed by Iran's missiles and will allow for scaling back the American nuclear arsenal.
本文於 修改第 1 次
本城市首頁
看回應文章
等級：8
