U.S. Eyes Global Strike Capability Within 2 Hours

[ShiningIce]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon (news - web sites) is seeking to develop a drone in the next two decades that could strike any spot on Earth from the continental United States within two hours.





The so-called Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle, which would be designed to hit targets about 9,000 miles away, should be available by about 2025. Hypersonic means traveling at more than five times the speed of sound.


The goal is to demonstrate a system that could carry out prompt "global reach missions" without using overseas bases, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Pentagon's cradle of new technologies, said in a notice released quietly two weeks ago.


"DARPA and the Air Force share a vision of a new transformational capability that would provide a means of delivering a substantial payload from the continental United States to anywhere on Earth in less than two hours," the notice said.


"This capability would free the U.S. military from reliance on forward basing to enable it to react promptly and decisively to destabilizing or threatening actions by hostile countries and terrorist organizations," said DARPA, which is jointly sponsoring the project with the U.S. Air Force.


Some of the system's building blocks should make it possible to launch a "prompt global strike" from the continental United States as early as about 2010 using rocket boosters, the draft notice said.


The program envisions a reusable, remotely piloted craft that could take off from a regular runway with 12,000 pounds (5,443 kg) of bombs and missiles or a new, rocket-assisted means of delivering such munitions, a draft overview said.


The project is called FALCON, short for Force Application and Launch from CONUS, or the 48 states, excluding Alaska and Hawaii, that make up the continental United States.


Jan Walker, a DARPA spokeswoman, described the effort as "technology development and demonstration," as opposed to a plan to build, buy or deploy such a capability. Any such acquisition plans ultimately hinge on the U.S. Congress's power of the purse.


The draft notice cited U.S. military operations in Bosnia, Afghanistan (news - web sites) and Iraq (news - web sites). "While advancements in target identification and precision strike have been abundantly demonstrated, deficiencies in engaging and defeating time-critical and high-value, hard and deeply buried targets have also been revealed," it said.


The overview said the United States may find it increasingly difficult to use overseas bases to react quickly to perceived threats.


DARPA and the Air Force will host a so-called "Industry Day" on July 8 in Arlington, Virginia, to give contractors interested in the project the big picture, a notice on DARPA's Web site said.

 

[AffectionateDan]

They've had this capability for decades...

...it's a drone piggy-backed on the SR-71, although the one I saw was mostly a supersonic cruise missile. I'm sure whatever they're cooking up now is 50 times more destructive, not to mention going to get the world on their ear against us (again).

 

[avethibaltus]

Gee, doesn't anyone trust the government any more? They are just trying to protect democracy and our democratic way of life which the rest of the world is eager to snatch from our grasp. We all know that don't we?


Good thing the Iranians or North Koreans haven't come up with such a weapon, otherwise we'd have to call up the Reserves and National Guard to go over and save them from themselves.

 

[Cosmo_ac]

I think...

I think the [point is, what happens if thw wrong person get's control of those weapons? I'm not talking about some forun country, i'm talking about a person who is in charge of the US. Very easy to say it will never happen, but, i'm skeptic. and just think, what if somebody, like the next hitler, ever got control of the US's might? Think about it for a while.

 

[TKpervert]

Too many checks and balances for that to happen here.
The US has had the ability to destroy the world for 45 years, so what's new?

I worry more about other nations than I do about the United States.

 

[qjakal]

Options...

This sounds more like a deterrence strategy than a viable offensive tactic. Raining missiles/bombs and destruction from above is the specialty of our Air Force, and it's already unmatched, so it seems like overkill unless the purpose is to make it well known that we can utilize this system if pushed too far....

Some of that article doesn't ring true though, since there's a LOT of military development and general testing based in Alaska. Seems to me it'd be more logical to integrate technology of this type with the existing long range strike capabilities that we have already...*shrug*..perhaps this is a new form of diplomacy or scare tactic aimed at the fundamentalist movement. Q

 

[red indian]

Well..........

.......what ever its supposed to be for, lets hope the U.S. Military is better at aiming it than its present weapons!

 

[Cosmo_ac]

too many checks and balances? i doudt it, but i'd like to hope for it.

 

[TKpervert]

too many checks and balances? i doudt it, but i'd like to hope for it.

Ok, when I said that, I was thinking of documentaries I've seen that in order for us to fire an ICBM, the orders are received in code (changed daily) and two psychologically stable strach military guys are required to simultaneously insert their keys into the colsole to activate and target the ICBM and send it on its way.

Now, I have no clue about how our Polaris subs with sixteen hydrogen-tipped missles work, I hope one psycho can't fire off a salvo because his girlfriend sent him a Dear John.

My worries aren't about my country doing something stupid.

My worries are about the fact that no matter how strong we are, no matter how much offensive power we have, we can't defend against the 'dirty bomb' sitting on the dock at the port of Long Beach waiting to be picked up by Mohammed and set off in downtown Los Angeles.

Or the suitcase nuke in a pickup truck driven by Ahmed, set off at the base of the Sears Tower in Chicago.

I need another beer.

 

[red indian]

Good point TK, but.................

.......I still worry about "Mr Oreilly" and "Mr Mcafferty" who set off bombs in England and Northern Ireland and then piss off to the U.S. who,s courts then refuse to release them to U.K. authorities because their "Human Rights" will not be respected if they are returned. Compare that fact to the situation we have now with the U.K. people now held in Cuba with no "Human Rights" who the U.S. are also refusing to release! go figure!!!

 

[TKpervert]

Good points Red, I'm sure, but when it comes down to international law, I'm clueless.

It's unfortunate that the learned folks who are charged with practicing international law are also clueless.

They sit at their desks in the morning thinking 'is it lunchtime yet ?'

Is that new admin with the shapley legs that go all the way from the floor to her yummy ass wearing that SHORT black mini-skirt today ?

They're no better than you and me.

A bit cynical perhaps, but this is how the world works daily from sunrise to sunset, every single day. Any arguement with that ?

I need another beer.

NURSE !!!!

 

[avethibaltus]

"I worry about other nations more than I do the US..."

Don't be worried about someone else getting weapons like this, it is already in the hands of the most dangerous and aggressive nation on earth. Eyeball those history books and see who has conducted the most large scale ***offensive*** military operations this century. It certainly wasn't China, Russia, Iraq, Iran or North Korea.

The only people that think we aren't a clear and present danger to peace and stability in the world are US.