American soybean program of the 80s. Strategic Defense Initiative. “The plans are not impressive”
The US Missile Defense Agency is “not opposed” to the development of space-based ballistic missile interceptors, previously proposed by US lawmakers.
“We are exploring options in case the government decides that such funds are necessary,” said the agency’s director, General Samuel Greaves, recently, noting that the legal basis for conducting such work has now been created by Congress.
Indeed, the 2018 and 2019 defense budget bills included a clause stating that the agency is “authorized” (depending on internal priorities and missile defense mission requirements) to initiate development of a space-based interception system targeting ballistic missiles in the active site trajectories. Presumably, by 2022, the first prototype of such a system can be demonstrated in practice, if there are no problems with the scientific and technical background or financial restrictions.
The system, as noted, should be of a “regional” nature, which, together with the discussions that took place in US political and expert circles in 2016–2017, indicates primarily the problem of outstanding progress, which in Lately North Korean missile launchers demonstrate. However, the creation of a fundamentally new type of missile defense system also creates global problems.
Pebbles in orbit
The space strike echelon of missile defense immediately evokes memories of Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative - SDI. At that time, the United States, at least on paper, set the task of creating a multi-layered system of dense defense against an equal opponent. This caused a rather nervous reaction in the USSR and forced them to spend many billions on symmetrical (creating their own missile defense) and asymmetrical (developing countermeasures) steps.
By the way, the rocket industry has held on well from this scientific and technical background since the 1990s: modern missile systems bear the stamp of that time, and their technical specifications took into account “promising missile defense systems of a potential enemy.”
In addition to fantastic designs such as X-ray orbital lasers pumped by nuclear explosion(that is, a direct violation of the Outer Space Treaty), in the late 1980s the United States began to seriously consider the concept of mass deployment of orbital platforms with small homing interceptors that were supposed to attack Soviet ballistic missiles emerging from the atmosphere. The project was named Brilliant Pebbles.
It was criticized, defended, the architecture was redone, the feasibility study was recalculated. As a result, he entered 1991, when SDI as a dense missile defense system against a massive missile attack completely lost its relevance. In its place came the GPALS (Global Defense Against Limited Attacks) project, whose effective buffering capacity was calculated based on approximately 200 warheads attacking the continental United States. Brilliant Pebbles were to become a key element of GPALS.
But it also remained on paper. By 1999, the United States moved on to the deployment of a “national missile defense” project, which to this day provides only extremely limited protection of US territory from single launches. The European (third) position area was supposed to be a copy of the two American ones, but Barack Obama canceled the plans by installing SM-3 anti-missile missiles there, the current (deployed and undergoing tests) modifications of which are not yet capable of resisting intercontinental missiles at all, but only medium-range missiles. There was no place for space strike weapons in these plans.
However, the ideas of a space interception echelon remained on the agenda and periodically (whenever Iran or the DPRK demonstrated another success in rocket production) surfaced in the press and reports about initiative projects. This applied to both orbital interceptors and, more recently, talk about space laser systems.
Are your opponents ready?
Many American experts have criticized and continue to criticize the idea of a space echelon of missile defense weapons, from different points of view. The economic utopian nature of the project, the immaturity of technology, and the clearly destabilizing nature of the system are noted.
The latter should be especially noted. The space echelon, deployed to confidently destroy missiles from Iran and the DPRK, will, as experts note, cover large areas of Eurasia, including China. This immediately creates tension in relations with Beijing. Let us recall that one of the combat patrol areas of Russian submarine missile carriers Far East, according to the American military, is located in the Sea of Okhotsk, and in this case, space assets could potentially threaten it as well.
As we have already written, space strike missile defense systems as an idea are not at all new, and solutions for domestic fifth-generation missile systems (Topol-M, Bulava, Yars, Sarmat) provide for the possibility of enemy deployment of such systems. In particular, we're talking about about adaptive acceleration modes with maneuvering and flat trajectories, in which the rocket does not leave the atmosphere for as long as possible in comparison with optimal flight profiles. This increases the rocket's energy requirements, reduces the payload, but increases the likelihood of its delivery.
But not so long ago we were shown a means that fundamentally (using current and promising technologies) eliminates the impact of a space missile defense echelon. These are rocket-gliding systems with hypersonic gliders - for example, the Russian Avangard.
After acceleration, the glider does not move along a ballistic trajectory in airless space (as is the case with ballistic missiles, whose load at apogee can reach an altitude of 1200–1500 km), but dives back and glides in the atmosphere at an altitude of only 50–60 km. This rules out the use of orbital interceptor missiles as they were designed to counter ballistic targets.
For a “pebbles” type system, another platform is already needed, including a “return part” with thermal protection and other requirements for mechanical strength. This increases and complicates the final product (of which a lot is needed) and increases the cost of the entire orbital defense complex by an order of magnitude. Difficulties also arise when using orbital-based lasers against atmospheric targets (power requirements increase, defocusing increases).
The system is being built
However, if the strike echelon of missile defense systems still looks hypothetical (as in previous approaches), then the decision to fundamentally update the space echelon of missile defense information systems in the United States has been made irrevocably.
The American military points out that the architecture of current orbital surveillance systems was basically formed several decades ago and in modern conditions already looks archaic, especially with the likely deployment of hypersonic combat weapons.
Let us recall that the classic scheme for warning of a missile attack looks like recording by space means the launch of missiles from enemy territory with the clarification of the situation using a ground echelon of radar stations at the moment when the missiles rise above the radio horizon to a high altitude, that is, 10–15 minutes before hitting target.
However, as we showed above, in the case of hypersonic gliders, this algorithm does not work: detecting the launch of the booster of the booster-gliding system by satellites is possible, but the currently available radars will not see anything until the glider approaches the approach distance of 3-5 minutes. At the same time, the glider has the ability to maneuver sweepingly along the course, unlike ballistic weapons, which completely confuses the determination of not only its final goal on the territory of the defender, but also the very fact of an attack on him.
Therefore, space detection means are becoming a key element in the defense system against an enemy armed with gliders. The situation looks similar with the detection of purely atmospheric cruise missiles at hypersonic speed: the space echelon is also extremely important here, since such products are already quite noticeable (unlike modern “stealth objects”, low-altitude and subsonic).
This creates confusion not only with the hypothetical missile defense strike echelon, but also with countermeasures. In recent years, many countries (in particular, Russia and China) have been actively developing anti-satellite systems, the effectiveness of which in countering space-based missile defense systems (whether information or attack) can hardly be overestimated. At the same time, this, in turn, further destabilizes the situation: the party that has received a strike on critical components of the satellite infrastructure must make a difficult choice about further escalation of the conflict (in this case, it is possible that in a nuclear form).
Context of organizational activities
It should be noted that all this is happening in the context of Donald Trump’s head-on push for the decision to create a separate branch of the armed forces in the United States - the space forces. At first met with friendly resistance from the military and congressmen, the idea is gradually being integrated into the work process of the Washington bureaucracy.
Thus, on August 7, one of Trump’s main opponents in the past on this line, Secretary of Defense James Mattis, radically changed his position. “Mad Dog,” who had previously commented skeptically on the topic of space forces, suddenly came out in support of their creation.
“It is necessary to henceforth consider outer space as one of the theaters of military operations, and the creation combat command- one of the steps in this direction that can now be taken. "We fully agree with the President's concerns about protecting our space infrastructure, and we are addressing this issue as other countries develop the capabilities to attack it," he said.
At the same time, Mattis cleverly avoided the question of whether he was talking about creating a new type of armed forces (following the president) or about strengthening existing organizational structures.
Thus, it is very likely that the 11th (Space) Combat Command in the military structure will be transformed into a sixth branch of the force, along with the US Army ( ground forces), Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard. Fortunately, as we see, a serious scope of work has already been planned for him.
“A long time ago, in a galaxy very far away...” - this is the title that began the world-famous film by George Lucas “Star Wars”. Over time, this phrase became so commonly used that no one was surprised when it began to refer to very real programs for creating space-based armed forces.
The book you are holding in your hands is dedicated to the history of “Star Wars,” but not the fictional ones raging in a distant galaxy, but the real ones, which began here on Earth, in the quiet of design bureaus and computer centers. You will read about the rocket planes of the Luftwaffe, the Red Army and the US Air Force, about space bombers and orbital interceptors, about the program missile defense and ways to overcome it.
And at present, the history of military astronautics has not yet reached an end. We are experiencing another episode of Star Wars, and it is not yet clear who will emerge victorious from the eternal battle between good and evil.
SOI program
Sections of this page:
SOI program
The successful launch of the first Soviet intercontinental ballistic missile, the R-7, in August 1957, initiated a number of military programs in both powers.
The United States, immediately after receiving intelligence data about the new Russian missile, began creating an aerospace defense system for the North American continent and developing the first Nike-Zeus anti-missile system, equipped with anti-missiles with nuclear warheads.
Using anti-missile with thermo nuclear charge significantly reduced the requirement for guidance accuracy. It was assumed that the damaging factors of a nuclear explosion of an anti-missile would make it possible to neutralize combat unit ballistic missile, even if it is 2–3 km away from the epicenter.
In 1963, development began on the next generation missile defense system - Nike-X. It was necessary to create a missile defense system that was capable of providing protection from Soviet missiles the whole area, and not a single object. To destroy enemy warheads at distant approaches, the Spartan missile was developed with a flight range of 650 km, equipped with a nuclear warhead with a capacity of 1 megaton. Its explosion was supposed to create in space a zone of guaranteed destruction of several warheads and possible false targets. Testing of this anti-missile began in 1968 and lasted three years.
In case some of the warheads of enemy missiles penetrate the space protected by Spartan missiles, the missile defense system included complexes with shorter-range Sprint interceptor missiles. The Sprint anti-missile missile was supposed to be used as the main means of protecting a limited number of objects. It was supposed to hit targets at altitudes up to 50 km.
Authors American projects The missile defense system of the sixties was considered to be only powerful nuclear charges as a real means of destroying enemy warheads. But the abundance of anti-missiles equipped with them did not guarantee the protection of all protected areas, and if they were used, they threatened to cause radioactive contamination of the entire US territory.
In 1967, development of the zonal limited missile defense system “Sentinel” began. Its kit included the same “Spartan”, “Sprint” and two radars: “PAR” and “MSR”. By this time, the concept of missile defense not of cities and industrial zones, but of areas where strategic nuclear forces and the National Control Center are based, began to gain momentum in the United States. The Sentinel system was urgently renamed “Safeguard” and modified in accordance with the specifics of solving new problems.
The first complex of the new missile defense system (of the planned twelve) was deployed at the Grand Forks missile base.
However, some time later, by decision of the American Congress, this work was stopped as insufficiently effective, and the built missile defense system was mothballed. and the United States sat down at the negotiating table on limiting missile defense systems, which led to the conclusion of the ABM Treaty in 1972 and the signing of its protocol in 1974.
It would seem that the problem is settled. But it was not there…
* * *
On March 23, 1983, US President Ronald Reagan, addressing his compatriots, said:
“I know that you all want peace, I want it too.<…>I appeal to the scientific community of our country, to those who gave us nuclear weapons, to use their great talents for the benefit of mankind and world peace and to put at our disposal the means that would render nuclear weapons useless and obsolete. Today, consistent with our obligations under the ABM Treaty and recognizing the need for closer consultation with our allies, I am taking an important first step. I am directing a comprehensive and vigorous effort to define a long-term research and development program that will begin to achieve our ultimate goal of eliminating the threat from nuclear-capable strategic missiles. This could pave the way for arms control measures that would lead to the complete destruction of the weapons themselves. We seek neither military superiority nor political advantage. Our only goal - and it is shared by the entire nation - is to find ways to reduce the danger nuclear war».
Not everyone understood then that the president was upending the ideas that had been established for almost two decades about ways to prevent nuclear war and ensure a stable world, the symbol and basis of which was the ABM Treaty.
What happened? What changed Washington's attitude toward missile defense so dramatically?
Let's go back to the sixties. This is how a well-known columnist for the American Time magazine described the way of thinking that the American military-political leadership adhered to in those years regarding the ABM Treaty:
“At the time, some observers thought the agreement reached was somewhat strange. Indeed, the two superpowers were making a solemn commitment not to defend themselves. In reality, however, they reduced the possibility of attacking each other. The ABM Treaty was important achievement. <… >If one side is able to protect itself from the threat of a nuclear strike, it receives an incentive to spread its geopolitical weight to other areas, and the other side is forced to create new, better models of offensive weapons and at the same time improve its defense. Therefore, the proliferation of defensive weapons is as much anathema to arms control as the proliferation of offensive weapons.<…>Missile defense is “destabilizing” for a number of reasons: it stimulates competition in the field of defensive weapons, with each side seeking to equal, and perhaps even surpass, the other side in the field of missile defense; it stimulates competition in the field of offensive weapons, with each side seeking to be able to “overcome” the other side’s missile defense system; Missile defense may finally lead to illusory or even real overall strategic superiority.”
This observer was not a military specialist, otherwise he would not have missed another consideration that guided the parties when deciding to limit missile defense systems.
No matter how strong a missile defense system is, it cannot become completely impenetrable. In reality, missile defense is designed for a certain number of warheads and decoys launched by the other side. Therefore, missile defense is more effective against a retaliatory strike by the other side, when a significant, and perhaps the overwhelming majority of the enemy’s strategic nuclear forces have already been destroyed as a result of the first disarming strike. Thus, with the presence of large missile defense systems, each of the opposing sides, in the event of a confrontation that heats up, has an additional incentive to launch a nuclear attack first.
Finally, a new round of the arms race means new burdensome expenditures on resources, of which humanity is becoming increasingly scarce.
It is unlikely that those who prepared Ronald Reagan's speech on March 23, 1983, did not analyze all the negative consequences of the stated program. What prompted them to such an unwise decision?
They say that the initiator of the Strategic Defense Initiative program (SDI, Strategic Defense Initiative) is one of the creators of the American thermonuclear bomb Edward Teller, who had known Reagan since the mid-1960s and always opposed the ABM Treaty and any agreements that limited the ability of the United States to build up and improve its military-strategic capabilities.
At the meeting with Reagan, Teller spoke not only on his own behalf. He relied on the powerful support of the US military-industrial complex. Concerns that the SDI program might initiate a similar Soviet program were dismissed: the USSR would find it difficult to accept a new American challenge, especially in the face of already emerging economic difficulties. If the Soviet Union did decide to do this, then, as Teller reasoned, it would most likely be limited, and the United States would be able to acquire the much-desired military superiority. Of course, SDI is unlikely to ensure complete impunity for the United States in the event of a Soviet nuclear retaliatory strike, but it will give Washington additional confidence when carrying out military-political actions abroad.
Politicians also saw another aspect in this - the creation of new colossal loads for the USSR economy, which would further complicate the ever-increasing social problems and will reduce the attractiveness of the ideas of socialism for developing countries. The game seemed tempting.
The president's speech was timed to coincide with debates in Congress on the military budget for the next fiscal year. As Speaker of the House of Representatives O’Neill noted, it was not about national security at all, but about the military budget. Senator Kennedy called the speech "reckless Star Wars plans."
Since then, no one has called Reagan’s speech anything other than a “Star Wars plan.” They talk about a curious incident that occurred at one of the press conferences at the National Press Club in Washington. The presenter, who introduced Lieutenant General Abrahamson (director of the SDI Implementation Organization) to reporters, joked: “Whoever, when asking the general a question, avoids using the words “star wars” will win a prize.” There were no contenders for the prize - everyone preferred to say “Star Wars Program” instead of “SDI.”
Nevertheless, in early June 1983, Reagan established three expert commissions that were supposed to assess the technical feasibility of his idea. Of the materials prepared, the most famous is the report of the Fletcher Commission. She concluded that, despite major unresolved technical problems, the technological advances of the last twenty years in relation to the problem of creating missile defense look promising. The commission proposed a scheme for a layered defense system based on the latest military technologies. Each echelon of this system is designed to intercept missile warheads at various stages their flight. The commission recommended starting a research and development program with the goal of culminating in the early 1990s with the demonstration of core missile defense technologies. Then, based on the results obtained, decide whether to continue or close work on creating a large-scale ballistic missile defense system.
The next step towards the implementation of SDI was Presidential Directive No. 119, which appeared at the end of 1983. It marked the beginning of scientific research and development that would answer the question of whether it was possible to create new space-based weapons systems or any other defensive means capable of repelling nuclear attack on the USA.
* * *
It quickly became clear that the allocations for SDI provided for in the budget could not ensure a successful solution to the ambitious tasks assigned to the program. It is no coincidence that many experts estimated the real costs of the program over the entire period of its implementation at hundreds of billions of dollars. According to Senator Presler, SDI is a program that requires expenditures ranging from 500 billion to 1 trillion dollars (!) to complete. The American economist Perlo named an even more significant amount - 3 trillion dollars (!!!).
However, already in April 1984, the Organization for the Implementation of the Strategic Defense Initiative (OSIOI) began its activities. It represented the central apparatus of a large research project, in which, in addition to the organization of the Ministry of Defense, organizations of civilian ministries and departments, as well as educational institutions. The central office of the OOSOI employed about 100 people. As a program management body, the OOSOI was responsible for developing the goals of research programs and projects, controlled the preparation and execution of the budget, selected performers of specific work, and maintained day-to-day contacts with the US Presidential Administration, Congress, and other executive and legislative bodies.
At the first stage of work on the program, the main efforts of the OOSOI were focused on coordinating the activities of numerous participants in research projects on issues divided into the following five most important groups: the creation of means of observation, acquisition and tracking of targets; creation of technical means that use the effect of directed energy for their subsequent inclusion in interception systems; creation of technical means that use the effect of kinetic energy for their further inclusion in interception systems; analysis of theoretical concepts on the basis of which specific weapon systems and means of controlling them will be created; ensuring the operation of the system and increasing its efficiency (increasing the lethality, security of system components, energy supply and logistics of the entire system).
What did the SDI program look like as a first approximation?
The performance criteria after two to three years of work under the SOI program were officially formulated as follows.
First, the defense against ballistic missiles must be capable of destroying a sufficient portion of the aggressor's offensive forces to deprive him of confidence in achieving his goals.
Secondly, defensive systems must sufficiently fulfill their task even in the face of a number of serious attacks, that is, they must have sufficient survivability.
Thirdly, defensive systems should undermine the potential enemy’s confidence in the possibility of overcoming them by building up additional offensive weapons.
The SOI program strategy included investment in a technology base that could support the decision to enter the full-scale development phase of the first phase of SOI and prepare the basis for entering the conceptual development phase of the subsequent phase of the system. This distribution into stages, formulated only a few years after the promulgation of the program, was intended to create a basis for building up primary defensive capabilities with the further introduction of promising technologies, such as directed energy weapons, although initially the authors of the project considered it possible to implement the most exotic projects from the very beginning.
Nevertheless, in the second half of the 80s, elements of the first-stage system were considered such as a space system for detecting and tracking ballistic missiles in the active part of their flight trajectory; space system for detecting and tracking warheads, warheads and decoys; ground detection and tracking system; space-based interceptors that ensure the destruction of missiles, warheads and their warheads; extra-atmospheric interception missiles (ERIS); system combat control and connections.
The following were considered as the main elements of the system at subsequent stages: space-based beam weapons based on the use of neutral particles; Upper Atmospheric Interdiction (HEDI) missiles; an on-board optical system that provides detection and tracking of targets in the middle and final sections of their flight trajectories; ground-based radar (“GBR”), considered as an additional means for detecting and tracking targets on the final part of their flight path; a space-based laser system designed to disable ballistic missiles and anti-satellite systems; a gun ground-based with projectile acceleration to hypersonic speeds (“HVG”); ground-based laser system for destroying ballistic missiles.
Those who planned the structure of SDI thought of the system as multi-tiered, capable of intercepting missiles during three stages of ballistic missile flight: during the acceleration stage (the active part of the flight path), the middle part of the flight path, which mainly accounts for flight in space after how the warheads and decoys are separated from the missiles, and in the final stage, when the warheads rush towards their targets on the downward trajectory. The most important of these stages was considered the acceleration stage, during which the warheads had not yet separated from the missile and could be disabled with a single shot. The head of the SDI Directorate, General Abrahamson, said that this is the main meaning of “Star Wars”.
Due to the fact that the US Congress, based on real assessments of the state of work, systematically cut back (reductions up to 40-50% annually) the administration’s requests for projects, the authors of the program transferred some of its elements from the first stage to subsequent ones, work on some elements was reduced, and some disappeared completely.
Nevertheless, the most developed among other projects of the SDI program were ground-based and space-based non-nuclear missile defenses, which allows us to consider them as candidates for the first stage of the currently created missile defense of the country's territory. Among these projects are the ERIS anti-missile for hitting targets in the extra-atmospheric region, the HEDI anti-missile for short-range interception, as well as a ground-based radar, which should provide surveillance and tracking missions at the final part of the trajectory.
The least advanced projects were directed energy weapons, which combine research into four basic concepts considered promising for multi-echelon defense, including ground- and space-based lasers, space-based accelerator (beam) weapons, and directed energy nuclear weapons.
Projects related to a complex solution to a problem can be classified as work that is almost at the initial stage.
For a number of projects, only problems that remain to be solved have been identified. This includes projects to create nuclear power plants, based in space and with a power of 100 kW with power extension up to several megawatts.
The SOI program required an inexpensive, universally applicable aircraft, capable of launching a payload weighing 4500 kg and a crew of two into polar orbit. OOSOI required firms to analyze three concepts: a vehicle with vertical launch and landing, a vehicle with vertical launch and horizontal landing, and a vehicle with horizontal launch and landing.
As announced on August 16, 1991, the winner of the competition was the Delta Clipper project with vertical launch and landing, proposed by McDonnell-Douglas.
All this work could continue indefinitely, and the longer the SDI project was implemented, the more difficult it would be to stop it, not to mention the steadily increasing almost geometric progression allocations for these purposes.
On May 13, 1993, US Secretary of Defense Espin officially announced the termination of work on the SDI project. It was one of the most serious decisions of the Democratic administration since it came to power. Among the most important arguments in favor of this step, the consequences of which were widely discussed by experts and the public around the world, President Bill Clinton and his entourage unanimously named the collapse of the Soviet Union and, as a consequence, the irretrievable loss of the United States as its only worthy rival in the confrontation between the superpowers.
Apparently, this is what makes some modern authors argue that the SDI program was originally conceived as a bluff aimed at intimidating the enemy leadership. They say that Mikhail Gorbachev and his entourage took the bluff at face value, got scared, and out of fear they lost the Cold War, which led to the collapse of the Soviet Union.
It is not true. Not everyone in the Soviet Union, including the country's top leadership, took on faith the information disseminated by Washington regarding SDI. As a result of research conducted by a group of Soviet scientists under the leadership of Vice-President of the USSR Academy of Sciences Velikhov, Academician Sagdeev and Doctor of Historical Sciences Kokoshin, it was concluded that the system advertised by Washington “is clearly not capable, as its supporters claim, of making nuclear weapons.” powerless and outdated”, to provide reliable cover for the territory of the United States, and even more so for its allies in Western Europe or in other areas of the world." Moreover, the Soviet Union has long been developing own system A missile defense system, elements of which could be used in the Anti-SOI program.
The Cold War was not only the largest geopolitical event of the 20th century, but also became the strongest catalyst for scientific breakthroughs in the field of military technology. The rivalry between the two superpowers gave rise to a spiral of arms race, which resulted in a mass of breakthrough technologies and concepts.
A striking military concept was the program put forward by then US President Ronald Reagan, the Strategic Defense Initiative. Also, such a program received a bright name in the press - SDI’s “Star Wars Program”.
Strategic Defense Initiative
The US Strategic Defense Initiative program provided for the active use of weapons in outer space. The Earth's near-Earth orbit has not been actively used for military purposes (except for the use of spy satellites).
The United States was the first to think about launching a weapons system into orbit.
To practice an attack or defense against an attack from the USSR. In addition, the Star Wars program was responsible for big hopes not only the military, but also private companies associated with space, as this promised multi-billion dollar contracts.
The essence of the program was to destroy enemy nuclear warheads in low-Earth orbit, thereby creating a reliable missile defense system along the perimeter of the entire territory.
The US nuclear doctrine is calculated and involves the first delivery of a nuclear strike of both limited and full power in the event of a threat to national interests even outside its own territory.
Soviet doctrine assumed a massive retaliatory strike.
The desire to completely secure the territory of the entire country also had many political benefits for the presidential administration. First of all, the Star Wars program is related to the fact that the presence of such a defense system would allow the United States to confidently dictate its will not only to the Soviet Union, but to the entire world, which would mean world hegemony.
After detente between the USSR and the USA in the 70s, another round of hostile confrontation and even greater armament of both countries began. The Americans, developing plans to strike the territory of the USSR, were only afraid of retaliatory actions, since a retaliatory strike with nuclear weapons from the USSR would with 100% probability completely destroy the United States as a state. That is why the United States began to take steps to create a guaranteed means of protection.
The project assumed the presence of a number of means of destroying warheads.
The development of the SDI program in the United States began at the end of the 70s, naturally, in strict secrecy. Reagan, announcing in his famous speech about the evil empire and the Star Wars program, was only making a publicity stunt - a concept neither then nor now can be realized at the current level of technology development.
The development also took place in high secrecy throughout the 80s and required funding of several tens of billions of dollars.
The political leadership in the person of Reagan hurried scientists and work on the Star Wars program went in several alternative directions at once. Electromagnetic, laser and weapons based on other physical principles were tested.
Above American SDI All defense enterprises were operating.
The ultimate goal of the project was to completely cover the territory of North America and minimize damage as much as possible.
It was planned to complete the production and implementation of the complex by the end of the 90s, at which time the missile defense system covers most of the country's territory. However, the developers of the SDI program in 1983 faced a lot of problems that did not allow them to ultimately implement the project.
These problems were both financial in nature and purely applied - the impossibility of implementing certain stages of SDI in the United States at the level of technological development. The result was a complete fiasco of the Star Wars program.
Development of the program ended in the late 80s. According to some reports, about $100 billion was spent on it. However, despite the failure of the implementation of this system, the developments were successfully applied in other defense areas. The current missile defense system located in Europe is only a small part of the Americans' unrealized plans.
SOI Components
Reagan's Star Wars SDI program was a combination of several components, which included:
- The ground part constituted the framework of the system.
The automated processes of targeting and destroying warheads are controlled from the ground. These processes are controlled by the systems of the US missile defense system - NORAD. This control center coordinates the actions of space objects, monitors the threat in the form of single or massive launches of enemy missiles and makes the final decision on a retaliatory strike and the use of a missile defense system.
After receiving a signal from space or ground-based radars about the start of a mass launch, the missile defense system activates ground-based launch silos with nuclear warheads using the signal and prepares the missiles for launch.
The threat signal was sent to all authorities and military units.
In addition, the signal was also received by satellites in orbit, which were supposed to relay the signal to the orbital elements of the missile defense system to destroy incoming ballistic missiles. Orbital elements must be carried out in a certain way (electromagnetic, laser, wave, or interceptor missiles located on orbital combat platforms).
- The ground-based interception system was supposed to become the second and final echelon of destruction of enemy missiles, after their passage of space missile defense.
The system, under an agreement between the USA and the USSR, covers the operational areas - Washington and the base on Cheyenne Mountain (NORAD). In reality, only the second missile defense system is functioning.
Some of them are launchers with specialized missiles that are capable of intercepting carriers at low altitude. Such ammunition is itself equipped with a nuclear charge (since the interception accuracy at the enormous speed of the warhead is low and area coverage is required for reliable interception).
- The main component was to be a grouping of spacecraft of different operating principles.
The devices were supposed to be divided into two main types: satellites that signal the start of a nuclear attack and devices that should disable incoming warheads in low-Earth orbit using a certain type of radiation.
The type of destruction of nuclear weapons remained open on the agenda - various experiments were carried out with laser weapons, radiation of electromagnetic waves and others. As a result, none of the types guaranteed 100% destruction of the warhead, which served main reason cancel all programs.
None of the types guaranteed 100% destruction of the warhead.
Satellites must shoot down missiles while still approaching, without causing significant damage to US territory.
SDI is a system for destroying targets by combat spacecraft After the destruction of the warheads, it was planned to destroy strategic objects on the territory of the USSR with a direct strike, or in the case of striking first and repelling the residual strike of the Soviet army. Also, these devices were supposed to disable the Soviet space orbital group, thereby blinding the enemy.
After Reagan's announcement in 1983 that work on the Star Wars project had begun, the Soviet leadership became greatly concerned about the threat of neutralizing a nuclear retaliatory strike and decided to develop countermeasures. Well-known defense design bureaus of the country participated in the creation of this system.
The changes concerned the development of a new type of intercontinental missiles capable of penetrating most missile defense components. Improvements have also been made to the troop control system in the event of the main control units failing.
this year a new missile under the designation r-36M “Voevoda” was put into service
Such work was crowned with complete success. By 1985, a new missile was put into service under the designation R-36M “Voevoda”, which received the name “Satan” in the West, modernized since its introduction in 1970. Nuclear ammunition is endowed with high speed characteristics.
The missile is based in a silo and during launch has a mortar type of ejection, which allows it to reach a launch speed of 230 km/h (thanks to the design of the engines, the missile launches even in a nuclear cloud).
After acceleration, the rocket enters low-Earth orbit and shoots off heat traps (the Americans were unable to solve the problem of combating false targets). Descending in orbit, the warhead is divided into 10 warheads, each of which carries a charge with a power of 1 megaton (the equivalent of TNT is enough to destroy a city of a million people).
A strategic weapons control system has also been developed, called “Perimeter”, and in the west “Dead Hand”. The principle of its operation was as follows: two missiles with hardware that signal the launch of missiles from enemy territory are patrolling in orbit in a constant monitoring mode.
The missiles are equipped with sensors that constantly monitor the situation for changes atmospheric pressure, weather conditions, changes in the magnetic field and other parameters that indicate the beginning of a massive nuclear attack. The information is transmitted to the control center.
Also, in the absence of a response from the center (if command posts are destroyed by the enemy), the elements of the complex themselves send warhead launch codes to silos, strategic bombers and nuclear submarines, where the launch is carried out either with the help of crews or automatically.
The principle of operation is the inevitability of a retaliatory strike even without human participation, which is why the American side, after the end of the Cold War, insisted on the abolition of the Perimeter complex.
As history shows, the adoption of the SDI program in fact turned out to be an operation to disinform the enemy in order to involve the USSR in the arms race. The Cold War inflicted a crushing defeat on the mighty power, destroying its economy and country.
On March 23, 1983, the fortieth US President Ronald Reagan announced to the Americans the beginning of the creation of a large-scale missile defense system that would be guaranteed to protect the country from the Soviet nuclear threat. “I have given the order to undertake comprehensive and intensive efforts to conduct a long-term research and development program to achieve our ultimate goal of eliminating the threat posed by strategic missiles with nuclear warheads,” said the American leader’s address. This date can easily be called the apotheosis of the Cold War.
This project was called the “Strategic Defense Initiative” (SDI), but with the light hand of journalists it became better known to the public as the “Star Wars program.” There is a legend that the idea for such a project came to Reagan’s head after watching the next episode of George Lucas’s space opera. Although SDI was never implemented, it became one of the most famous military programs in human history and had an impact significant influence on the outcome of the Cold War.
This program involved the creation of a powerful anti-missile “umbrella”, the main elements of which were located in low-Earth orbit. The main goal of the Strategic Defense Initiative was to achieve complete dominance in outer space, which would make it possible to destroy Soviet ballistic missiles and warheads at all stages of their trajectory. “Who owns space, owns the world,” the defenders of this program liked to repeat.
Initially, the “Star Wars program” was carried out exclusively by the Americans, but a little later the main allies of the United States in the NATO bloc, primarily Britain, joined it.
To say that the Strategic Defense Initiative was an ambitious project is an understatement. In terms of its complexity, it cannot be compared even with such famous programs as the Manhattan Project or Apollo. Not just most of SDI components were supposed to use more or less known and proven military technologies at that time (anti-missile defense), while the basis of the striking power of Star Wars was supposed to be weapons developed on new physical principles.
The Strategic Defense Initiative was never put into practice. The scale of the technical problems faced by the developers forced the American leadership to quietly shut down the program ten years after its spectacular presentation. However, it gave practically no real results. The amount spent on Star Wars is impressive: some experts estimate that SDI cost the American taxpayer $100 billion.
Naturally, in the course of work on the program, new technologies and design solutions were obtained and tested, however, given the amount of investment and the extensive PR campaign, this clearly looks insufficient. Many developments were later used to create the existing US missile defense system. The main thing that American designers and the military understood is that at the current level of technology development, unconventional methods of intercepting ICBMs are not effective. Therefore, the current missile defense is built on old, proven missile defenses. Lasers, railguns, kamikaze satellites today are more of a curious exotica than a real and effective weapon.
However, despite the almost complete lack of technical results, SDI had very important political consequences. Firstly, the start of development of a space-based missile defense system further worsened relations between the two superpowers - the USA and the USSR. Secondly, this program further intensified the controversy surrounding medium-range ballistic missiles, which at that moment were actively deployed by both warring sides. Well, the most important thing is the fact that the Soviet military and political leadership believed in the reality of the implementation of the Strategic Defense Initiative and even more desperately joined the arms race, for which the USSR simply did not have the strength at that moment. The result was sad: the economy of a huge country could not withstand such overstrain, and in 1991 the USSR ceased to exist.
Soviet scientists repeatedly informed the leadership about the impossibility of implementing the SDI program, but the Kremlin elders simply did not want to listen to them. So if we consider the Strategic Defense Initiative as a large-scale bluff of the American intelligence services (this is a favorite topic of domestic conspiracy theorists), then this strategy was truly a success. However, it is likely that the truth is somewhat more complex. It is unlikely that the United States would have started such an expensive program just to ruin the Soviet Union. It brought significant political bonuses to President Reagan and his team, as well as huge profits for the bigwigs in the military-industrial complex. So, probably, few people grieved about the lack of real results of the Strategic Defense Initiative.
Finally, we can say that the United States has not abandoned the idea of creating a missile defense “umbrella” capable of protecting their country from a possible nuclear strike (including a massive one). Currently, the deployment of a multi-layered missile defense system is in full swing, which is much more realistic than President Reagan's Star Wars. Such American activity causes no less concern and irritation in the Kremlin than it did thirty years ago, and there is a high probability that now Russia will be forced to join a new arms race.
Below will be a description of the main components of the SOI system, the reasons why this or that component was never implemented in practice, as well as how the ideas and technologies contained in the program subsequently developed.
History of the SDI program
The development of missile defense systems began almost immediately after the end of World War II. The Soviet Union and the United States appreciated the effectiveness of the German “weapon of retaliation” - the V-1 and V-2 missiles, so already in the late 40s, both countries began to create protection against the new threat.
Initially, the work was more theoretical in nature, since the first combat missiles did not have an intercontinental range and could not hit the territory of a potential enemy.
However, the situation soon changed dramatically: in the late 50s, both the USSR and the USA acquired intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) capable of delivering a nuclear charge to the other hemisphere of the planet. From that moment on, missiles became the main means of delivering nuclear weapons.
In the United States, the first strategic missile defense system MIM-14 Nike-Hercules was put into operation at the end of the 50s. The destruction of ICBM warheads occurred due to anti-missiles with a nuclear warhead. "Hercules" was replaced by more perfect complex LIM-49A Nike Zeus, which also destroyed enemy warheads with thermonuclear charges.
Work on the creation of strategic missile defense was also carried out in the Soviet Union. In the 70s, the A-35 missile defense system was adopted, designed to protect Moscow from a missile attack. Later it was modernized, and until the very moment of the collapse of the USSR, the capital of the country was always covered with a powerful anti-missile shield. To destroy enemy ICBMs, Soviet missile defense systems also used anti-missiles with a nuclear warhead.
Meanwhile, the buildup of nuclear arsenals proceeded at an unprecedented pace, and by the early 70s a paradoxical situation had developed, which contemporaries called a “nuclear deadlock.” Both warring sides had so many warheads and missiles to deliver them that they could destroy their opponent several times. The way out of this was seen in the creation of a powerful missile defense that could reliably protect one of the parties to the conflict during a full-scale exchange of nuclear missile strikes. A country possessing such a missile defense system would gain a significant strategic advantage over its opponent. However, the creation of such a defense turned out to be an unprecedentedly complex and expensive task, surpassing any military-technical problems of the twentieth century.
In 1972, the most important document was signed between the USSR and the USA - the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense Systems, which today is one of the foundations of international nuclear security. According to this document, each side could deploy only two missile defense systems (later the number was reduced to one) with a maximum ammunition capacity of one hundred interceptor missiles. The only Soviet missile defense system protected the country's capital, and the Americans covered the deployment area of their ICBMs with anti-missiles.
The meaning of this agreement was that, without the ability to create a powerful missile defense system, each of the parties was defenseless against a crushing retaliatory strike, and this was the best guarantee against rash decisions. This is called the principle of mutually assured destruction, and it is this principle that has been reliably protecting our planet from nuclear Armageddon for many decades.
It seemed that this problem decided on long years and the established status quo suits both sides. That was until the beginning of the next decade.
In 1980 presidential elections In the USA, Republican politician Ronald Reagan won, who became one of the most principled and irreconcilable opponents of the communist system. In those years, Soviet newspapers wrote that “the most reactionary forces of American imperialism, led by Reagan,” came to power in the United States.
A few words need to be said about international situation that time. 1983 can be called the real peak of the Cold War. Soviet troops have been fighting in Afghanistan for four years, and the United States and other Western countries supported the Mujahideen with weapons and money, the number of armed forces of NATO and the Warsaw Pact reached its maximum, nuclear arsenals The two superpowers were literally bursting with warheads and ballistic missiles, and Pershing continued to be deployed in Europe. The hands of the Doomsday Clock showed three minutes to midnight.
A few weeks (March 3, 1983) before the announcement of the start of SDI, Reagan called the Soviet Union an “Evil Empire.”
The Strategic Defense Initiative almost immediately attracted enormous public attention, not only in the USA, but throughout the rest of the world. In America itself, a broad PR campaign for a new government initiative has started. Videos were shown in movies and on television that described the principles of operation of the new missile defense system. The average person had the impression that the implementation of the Strategic Defense Initiative would take several years, after which the Soviets would have a very difficult time.
Very soon, not only American firms and scientific centers, but also companies from the UK, Germany, Japan, Israel and other US allies. By 1986, the management of the SDI program had concluded more than 1.5 thousand contracts with 260 contractors in different countries of the world. The Germans developed guidance and stabilization systems for lasers and railguns, recognition systems and radar stations. Britain was busy creating new supercomputers, developing software and power units. In Italy, new composite materials, control system elements and kinetic weapons were developed.
Initially, many experts (including Soviet ones) pointed out that the Strategic Defense Initiative project was a big American bluff that could not be implemented. Despite this, the leadership of the USSR took American plans seriously and began to look for an adequate response to them. In 1987, it became known that the Soviet Union was developing a similar program. Modern historians are still arguing about whether Ronald Reagan himself believed in the reality of his plans or was outright bluffing.
However, in 1991, the USSR collapsed, the Cold War was over, and there was no longer any point in spending huge amounts of money on a war in space. In 1993, the US Secretary of Defense officially announced the termination of the Strategic Defense Initiative. Today, the US Missile Defense Agency is developing missile defense, including European missile defense. Few people know that it was originally called the Office of the Strategic Defense Initiative. The leaders of the Missile Defense Agency, as they did thirty years ago, explain to ordinary people that they are solving a very difficult technical problem: learning to shoot down one bullet with another.
SOI Components
The Strategic Defense Initiative was conceived as a comprehensive, in-depth missile defense system, the main part of which was located in space. Moreover, the main means of destruction of the system had to work on the so-called new physical principles. They were supposed to shoot down enemy missiles at all four stages of their trajectory: at the initial stage (immediately after takeoff), at the moment of separation of warheads, ballistic and at the stage of warhead entry into the atmosphere.
Nuclear-pumped lasers. X-ray lasers pumped by a nuclear explosion were proposed by SDI developers almost as a panacea for a possible Soviet missile attack. Such a laser is a nuclear charge with special rods installed on its surface. After the explosion, most of the energy is channeled through these guides and turns into a directed stream of powerful hard radiation. An X-ray laser pumped by a laser explosion is still the most powerful laser device today, although, for obvious reasons, it is a disposable device.
The author of this idea was physicist Edward Teller, who previously led the creation of the American thermonuclear bomb. Estimated power similar weapons was so great that they wanted to use it to destroy even ground objects through the entire thickness of the atmosphere.
Nuclear charges were planned to be launched into orbit using conventional ICBMs immediately after the start of an enemy missile attack. Each of them had to have several rods in order to simultaneously hit a whole group of ballistic targets.
In the mid-80s, tests of these weapons began in the United States, but they raised so many complex technical problems that it was decided to abandon the practical implementation of the project.
Work on the creation of X-ray lasers continues in our time, not only in the West, but also in Russia. However, this problem is so complex that we will definitely not see practical results in this area in the next decade.
Chemical lasers. Another “non-traditional” component of SDI was to be chemically pumped lasers placed in low-Earth orbit, in the air (on airplanes) or on the ground. The most notable were the “death stars” - orbital stations with laser systems with a power of 5 to 20 mW. They were supposed to destroy ballistic missiles in the early and middle sections of their trajectory.
The idea was quite good - in the initial stages of flight, the missiles are very noticeable and vulnerable. The cost of one laser shot is relatively small and the station can produce many of them. However, there was one problem (it has not been solved to this day): the lack of sufficiently powerful and light power plants for such weapons. In the mid-80s, the MIRACL laser was created, and quite successful tests were even carried out, but the main problem was never solved.
Airborne lasers were planned to be installed on transport aircraft and used to destroy ICBMs immediately after takeoff.
The project of another component of the Strategic Defense Initiative - ground-based lasers - was interesting. To solve the problem of low power supply of laser combat systems, it was proposed to place them on the ground, and transmit the beam into orbit using a complex system of mirrors, which would direct it to take-off missiles or warheads.
In this way, a whole range of problems were solved: with energy pumping, heat removal, and security. However, placing the laser on the earth's surface led to huge losses as the beam passed through the atmosphere. It was calculated that to repel a massive missile attack, it is necessary to use at least 1 thousand gigawatts of electricity, collected at one point in just a few seconds. The US energy system simply would not be able to handle such a load.
Beam weapon. This means of destruction was understood as systems that destroy ICBMs with a stream of elementary particles accelerated to near-light speeds. Such complexes were supposed to disable the electronic systems of missiles and warheads. With sufficient flow power, beam weapons are capable of not only disabling enemy automation, but also physically destroying warheads and missiles.
In the mid-80s, several tests of suborbital stations equipped with beam installations were carried out, but due to their considerable complexity, as well as unreasonable energy consumption, the experiments were discontinued.
Railguns. This is a type of weapon that accelerates a projectile using the Lawrence force; its speed can reach several kilometers per second. Railguns were also planned to be placed on orbital platforms or in ground-based complexes. Within the framework of SDI, there was a separate program for railguns - CHECMATE. During its implementation, the developers managed to achieve noticeable success, but they failed to create a working missile defense system based on electromagnetic guns.
Research in the field of creating railguns continued after the closure of the SDI program, but only a few years ago the Americans received more or less acceptable results. In the near future, electromagnetic guns will be placed on warships and ground-based missile defense systems. It will not be possible to create an orbital railgun even today - too much energy is needed for its operation.
Interceptor satellites. Another element that was planned to be included in the SOI system. Having realized the complexity of creating laser systems for intercepting missile weapons, in 1986 the designers proposed making miniature interceptor satellites that would hit targets with a direct collision as the main component of the SDI system.
This project was called "Diamond Pebbles". They planned to launch a huge number of them - up to 4 thousand pieces. These “kamikazes” could attack ballistic missiles on takeoff or during the separation of warheads from ICBMs.
Compared to other SDI projects, the Diamond Pebble was technically feasible and reasonably priced, so it was soon seen as a core element of the system. In addition, unlike orbital stations, tiny interceptor satellites were less vulnerable to attack from the ground. This project was based on proven technologies and did not require serious scientific research. However, due to the end of the Cold War, it was never implemented.
Anti-missiles. The most “classic” element of the SDI program, it was originally planned to be used as the last line of missile defense. Even at the beginning of the program, it was decided to abandon the traditional nuclear warheads of anti-missile missiles at that time. The Americans decided that exploding megaton charges over their territory was not a good idea and began developing kinetic interceptors.
However, they required precise aiming and target determination. To make the task a little easier, Lockheed created a special folding structure that unfolded outside the atmosphere like an umbrella and increased the likelihood of hitting a target. Later, the same company created the ERIS anti-missile missile, which as an interceptor had an octagonal inflatable structure with weights at the ends.
Projects to create anti-missile missiles were closed in the early 90s, but thanks to the SDI program, the Americans received a wealth of practical material, which was already used in the implementation of missile defense system projects.
But how did the Soviet Union react to the deployment of the SDI system, which, according to its creators, was supposed to deprive it of the opportunity to deliver a crushing nuclear strike on its main enemy?
Naturally, the activity of the Americans was immediately noticed by the top Soviet leadership and was perceived by them, to put it mildly, nervously. The USSR began preparing an “asymmetric response” to the new American threat. And, I must say, the best forces of the country were thrown into this. The main role in its preparation was played by a group of Soviet scientists under the leadership of the Vice-President of the USSR Academy of Sciences E.P. Velikhov.
As part of the USSR’s “asymmetric response” to the deployment of the SDI program, it was primarily planned to increase the security of ICBM launch silos and strategic nuclear missile carriers, as well as the overall reliability of the control system of Soviet strategic forces. The second direction of neutralizing the overseas threat was increasing the ability of Soviet strategic nuclear forces to overcome a multi-echelon missile defense system.
All tactical, operational and military-strategic means were gathered into a single fist, which made it possible to deliver a sufficient blow even in the event of a preemptive attack by the enemy. The “Dead Hand” system was created, which ensured the launch of Soviet ICBMs even if the enemy destroyed the country’s top leadership.
In addition to all of the above, work was also carried out on the creation of special tools to combat the American missile defense system. Some elements of the system were considered vulnerable to electronic jamming, and various types of anti-missile missiles with kinetic and nuclear warheads were developed to destroy elements of space-based SDI.
High-energy ground-based lasers, as well as spacecraft with a powerful nuclear charge on board, which could not only physically destroy enemy orbital stations, but also blind its radar, were considered as means of countering the space component of the SDI system.
Velikhov’s group also proposed using metal shrapnel launched into orbit against orbital stations, and aerosol clouds that absorb radiation to combat lasers.
However, the main thing was something else: at the time President Reagan announced the creation of the SDI program, the Soviet Union and the United States each had 10-12 thousand nuclear warheads only on strategic carriers, which even theoretically cannot be stopped by any missile defense even today. Therefore, despite a wide advertising campaign for the new initiative, the Americans never withdrew from the ABM Treaty, and Star Wars quietly sank into oblivion in the early 90s.
If you have any questions, leave them in the comments below the article. We or our visitors will be happy to answer them
Battle for the Stars-2. Space confrontation (part II) Pervushin Anton Ivanovich
SOI program
SOI program
As it quickly became clear, the allocations for SDI provided for in the budget could not ensure a successful solution to the ambitious tasks assigned to the program. It is no coincidence that many experts estimated the real costs of the program over the entire period of its implementation at hundreds of billions of dollars. According to Senator Presler, SDI is a program that requires expenditures ranging from 500 billion to 1 trillion dollars (!) to complete. The American economist Perlo named an even more significant amount - 3 trillion dollars (!!!).
However, already in April 1984, the Organization for the Implementation of the Strategic Defense Initiative (OSIOI) began its activities. It represented the central apparatus of a large research project, in which, in addition to the organization of the Ministry of Defense, organizations of civilian ministries and departments, as well as educational institutions, participated. The central office of the OOSOI employed about 100 people. As a program management body, the OOSOI was responsible for developing the goals of research programs and projects, controlled the preparation and execution of the budget, selected performers of specific work, and maintained day-to-day contacts with the US Presidential Administration, Congress, and other executive and legislative bodies.
At the first stage of work on the program, the main efforts of the OOSOI were focused on coordinating the activities of numerous participants in research projects on issues divided into the following five most important groups: the creation of means of observation, acquisition and tracking of targets; creation of technical means that use the effect of directed energy for their subsequent inclusion in interception systems; creation of technical means that use the effect of kinetic energy for their further inclusion in interception systems; analysis of theoretical concepts on the basis of which specific weapon systems and means of controlling them will be created; ensuring the operation of the system and increasing its efficiency (increasing the lethality, security of system components, energy supply and logistics of the entire system).
What did the SDI program look like as a first approximation?
The performance criteria after two to three years of work under the SOI program were officially formulated as follows.
First, the defense against ballistic missiles must be capable of destroying a sufficient portion of the aggressor's offensive forces to deprive him of confidence in achieving his goals.
Secondly, defensive systems must sufficiently fulfill their task even in the face of a number of serious attacks, that is, they must have sufficient survivability.
Thirdly, defensive systems should undermine the potential enemy’s confidence in the possibility of overcoming them by building up additional offensive weapons.
The SOI program strategy included investment in a technology base that could support the decision to enter the full-scale development phase of the first phase of SOI and prepare the basis for entering the conceptual development phase of the subsequent phase of the system. This distribution into stages, formulated only a few years after the promulgation of the program, was intended to create a basis for building up primary defensive capabilities with the further introduction of promising technologies, such as directed energy weapons, although initially the authors of the project considered it possible to implement the most exotic projects from the very beginning.
Nevertheless, in the second half of the 80s, elements of the first-stage system were considered such as a space system for detecting and tracking ballistic missiles in the active part of their flight trajectory; space system for detecting and tracking warheads, warheads and decoys; ground detection and tracking system; space-based interceptors that ensure the destruction of missiles, warheads and their warheads; extra-atmospheric interception missiles (ERIS); combat control and communications system.
The following were considered as the main elements of the system at subsequent stages: space-based beam weapons based on the use of neutral particles; Upper Atmospheric Interdiction (HEDI) missiles; an on-board optical system that provides detection and tracking of targets in the middle and final sections of their flight trajectories; ground-based radar (“GBR”), considered as an additional means for detecting and tracking targets in the final part of their flight path; a space-based laser system designed to disable ballistic missiles and anti-satellite systems; ground-based gun with projectile acceleration to hypersonic speeds (“HVG”); ground-based laser system for destroying ballistic missiles.
Those who planned the SDI structure envisioned the system as multi-tiered, capable of intercepting missiles during three stages of ballistic missile flight: during the acceleration stage (the active part of the flight path), the middle part of the flight path, which mainly accounts for the flight in space after how the warheads and decoys are separated from the missiles, and in the final stage, when the warheads rush towards their targets on the downward trajectory. The most important of these stages was considered the acceleration stage, during which the warheads of multi-shot ICBMs had not yet separated from the missile, and they could be disabled with a single shot. The head of the SDI Directorate, General Abrahamson, said that this is the main meaning of “Star Wars.”
Due to the fact that the US Congress, based on real assessments of the state of work, systematically cut down (reductions to 40–50% annually) the administration’s requests for project implementation, the authors of the program transferred its individual elements from the first stage to subsequent ones, work on some elements was reduced , and some disappeared completely.
Nevertheless, the most developed among other projects of the SDI program were ground-based and space-based non-nuclear missile defenses, which allows us to consider them as candidates for the first stage of the currently created missile defense system of the country.
Among these projects are the ERIS anti-missile for hitting targets in the extra-atmospheric region, the HEDI anti-missile for short-range interception, as well as a ground-based radar, which should provide surveillance and tracking missions on the final part of the trajectory.
The least advanced projects were directed energy weapons, which combine research into four basic concepts considered promising for multi-echelon defense, including ground- and space-based lasers, space-based accelerator (beam) weapons, and directed energy nuclear weapons.
Projects related to a complex solution to a problem can be classified as work that is almost at the initial stage.
For a number of projects, only problems that remain to be solved have been identified. This includes projects to create nuclear power plants based in space and with a capacity of 100 kW with an extension of power up to several megawatts.
The SOI program also required an inexpensive, universally applicable aircraft capable of launching a payload weighing 4,500 kilograms and a crew of two into polar orbit. OOSOI required firms to analyze three concepts: a vehicle with vertical launch and landing, a vehicle with vertical launch and horizontal landing, and a vehicle with horizontal launch and landing.
As announced on August 16, 1991, the winner of the competition was the Delta Clipper project with vertical launch and landing, proposed by McDonnell-Douglas. The layout resembled a greatly enlarged Mercury capsule.
All this work could continue indefinitely, and the longer the SDI project was implemented, the more difficult it would be to stop it, not to mention the steadily increasing almost exponentially of allocations for these purposes. On May 13, 1993, US Secretary of Defense Espin officially announced the termination of work on the SDI project. It was one of the most serious decisions of the Democratic administration since it came to power.
Among the most important arguments in favor of this step, the consequences of which were widely discussed by experts and the public around the world, President Bill Clinton and his entourage unanimously named the collapse of the Soviet Union and, as a consequence, the irretrievable loss of the United States as its only worthy rival in the confrontation between the superpowers.
Apparently, this is what makes some modern authors argue that the SDI program was originally conceived as a bluff aimed at intimidating the enemy leadership. They say that Mikhail Gorbachev and his entourage took the bluff at face value, got scared, and out of fear they lost the Cold War, which led to the collapse of the Soviet Union.
It is not true. Not everyone in the Soviet Union, including the country's top leadership, took on faith the information disseminated by Washington regarding SDI. As a result of research conducted by a group of Soviet scientists under the leadership of Vice-President of the USSR Academy of Sciences Velikhov, Academician Sagdeev and Doctor of Historical Sciences Kokoshin, it was concluded that the system advertised by Washington “is clearly not capable, as its supporters claim, of making nuclear weapons.” powerless and outdated,” to provide reliable cover for the territory of the United States, and even more so for its allies in Western Europe or in other areas of the world.” Moreover, the Soviet Union had long been developing its own missile defense system, elements of which could be used in the Anti-SOI program.
From the book Battle for the Stars-2. Space Confrontation (Part I) author Pervushin Anton IvanovichHYWARDS Program In support of the RoBo and Brass Bell projects, the Air Force initiated a research program called the HYWARDS Program. hypersonic weapons" - "HYWARDS". The tasks solved within its framework were first formulated in the requirements for a promising
From the book Battle for the Stars-2. Space Confrontation (Part II) author Pervushin Anton IvanovichThe Lunex program A serious alternative to the Apollo program could be the secret lunar landing program prepared by the US Air Force command and now known as Lunex (from Lunar Expedition). This program was submitted for consideration
From the book Chernobyl. How it was author Dyatlov Anatoly StepanovichASAT program Ultimately, the US military chose the ASAT system (“ASAT” is short for “Air-Launched Anti-Satellite Missile”), which provides for the deployment of anti-satellite missiles on combat aircraft. ASAT Aircraft Interception Missile System
From the book Creating an Android Robot with Your Own Hands by Lovin JohnThe “Cold” program I already mentioned above that from 1993 to 1996, at the request of the Russian Space Agency, within the framework of the state-supported scientific research and experimental program “Eagle”, research was carried out on development trends and opportunities
From the book Spaceships author Bobkov Valentin NikolaevichThe SDI program As it quickly became clear, the allocations for SDI provided for in the budget could not ensure the successful solution of the ambitious tasks assigned to the program. It is no coincidence that many experts assessed the real costs of the program throughout
From the author's bookThe “Fon” program In the early 70s, research and development work was carried out in the USSR under the “Fon” program with the aim of creating a promising missile defense system. The essence of the program was to create a system that would make it possible to keep everything “in sight”
From the author's bookChapter 3. Program Its full name " Working programm testing turbogenerator No. 8 Chernobyl nuclear power plant in joint run-down modes with a load of its own needs.” There is nothing outstanding in the Program, an ordinary program, normally written. She gained fame
From the author's bookProgram The block diagram of the program is shown in Fig. 8.17. After turning on the power, the drive motor is turned off and the microcontroller begins to search for the brightest light source by turning the servomotor. If the light source is too bright, the mode turns on
From the author's bookProgram 1 'Microcontroller 1start:High 4: low 4 'LED blinkingb7 = 0button 5,0,255,0,b7,1,avoid 'Checking obstaclepot 7, 255, b0 'Reading CdS sensor 1pot 6, 255, b1 'Reading CdS sensor 2if b0<= 250 then skip ‘Достаточно темно?If b1 >= 250 then slp ‘Yesskip: ‘Noif bo > 25 then skip 2 ‘Too much lightif b1< 25
From the author's bookProgram 2 'Microcontroller 2b4 = 150 'Setting the middle position of the servomotorstart:peek 6, b1 'Reading microcontroller data 1let b0 = b1 & 7 'Masking except the first three bitsif b0 = 0 then slp 'Sleep timeif b0 = 1 then rt 'Turn rightif b0 = 2 then lt 'Turn leftif b0 = 3 then fw 'Move
From the author's bookProgram for the microcontroller The 16F84 microcontroller controls the operation of three servomotors. Availability large number unused I/O buses and space for the program provides the opportunity to improve and modify the basic model
From the author's bookPICBASIC program 'Six-legged walking robot'Connections'Left servomotor Pin RB1'Right servomotor Pin RB2'Tilt servomotor Pin RB0'Move forward onlystart:for B0 = 1 to 60pulsout 0.155'Tilt clockwise, lift right sidepulsout 1.145' Left feet in place pulseout 2, 145 'Right
From the author's bookBASIC Program The BASIC program is very simple. After finding the printer port address, the program controls the operation of the air valve through pin 2.5 REM Air valve solenoid controller10 REM John Iovine15 REM Find the printer port address20 DEF SEG = 025 a = (PEEK(1032) + 256 * PEEK(1033))30 REM
From the author's bookThe Mercury program Almost during the same period of time, starting in 1958, the United States also began work on a wide front to implement the first manned space program in this country, Mercury. At the end of the 50s, the United States did not have a sufficiently powerful launch vehicle,
From the author's bookThe Apollo program Under this name, in the 60s, a huge complex of work was carried out in the United States, the main goal of which was to land a man on the Moon. The implementation of a program whose prestige was far from last place, required spending about
From the author's bookASTP Program For about a decade and a half, space technology in the USSR and the USA developed relatively independently. One of the motives for joining forces was the desire to be able to provide mutual assistance in space. For this it was necessary first of all