Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!ukma!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!tek@CS.UCLA.EDU
From: tek@CS.UCLA.EDU (Ted Kim (ATW))
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: ABM
Message-ID: <6253@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 5 May 89 00:34:45 GMT
References: <5553@cbnews.ATT.COM> <5739@cbnews.ATT.COM> <5881@cbnews.ATT.COM> <6183@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Lines: 27
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: tek@CS.UCLA.EDU (Ted Kim (ATW))

In article <6183@cbnews.ATT.COM> asulaima@udenva.cair.du.edu (SULAIMAN) writes:
> ...
>The Sovs as mentioned put their
>system around Moscow. The US for reasons best known chose not to put such a
>system up. 
> ...

I believe the US actually did put an ABM system on line at Grand
Forks, North Dakota to protect the ICBMs. Then later (circa mid 70s),
they shut it down for cost reasons. I am not sure how much of the
system was actually in place, but the plan was:

The Safeguard ABM system consisted of two missiles. The long range
Spartan (formerly Nike-Zeus) and the short-range Sprint missile. Both
missiles used nuke warheads. I think the Sprint used the technology
later associated with the neutron warhead. Targets were picked up by
using the Perimeter Acquisition Radar (PAR) and closer in by some
other radar system (the name of which escapes me right now).

Ted Kim                           ARPAnet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu
UCLA Computer Science Department  UUCP:    ...!ucbvax!cs.ucla.edu!tek
3804C Boelter Hall                PHONE:   (213) 206-8696
Los Angeles, CA 90024             ESPnet:  tek@ouija.board