New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Holes in the Missile Shield

The national missile defense now being deployed by the U.S. should be replaced with a more effective system

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

00

Anti-Ballistic-Missile Systems. Richard L. Garwin and Hans A. Bethe in Scientific American, Vol. 218, No. 3, pages 21-31; March 1968.

Countermeasures: A Technical Evaluation of the Operational Effectiveness of the Planned U.S. National Missile Defense System. A. M. Sessler et al. Union of Concerned Scientists and MIT, April 2000. Available at www.ucsusa.org/publications/report.cfm?publicationID=132

Report of the APS Study Group on Boost-Phase Intercept Systems for National Missile Defense. D. Kleppner et al. in Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol. 76, No. 3, pages S1-S424; July 2004. Available at www.aps.org/public_affairs/popa/reports/nmd03.cfm

Technical Realities: An Analysis of the 2004 Deployment of a U.S. National Missile Defense System. L. Gronlund, D. C. Wright, G. N. Lewis and P. E. Coyle III. Union of Concerned Scientists, May 2004. Available at www.ucsusa.org/global_security/missile_defense/page.cfm?pageID=1403

Boost-Phase Intercept

Scientific American Magazine Vol 291 Issue 5This article was published with the title “Holes in the Missile Shield” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 291 No. 5 ()
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican112004-2MF9synDKqR2ksp6IOZrgS

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe