Talk:Ground-Based Midcourse Defense

Picture of the Orbital Boost Vehicle

The picture identified as the Orbital Boost Vehicle is actually a "Payload Launch Vehicle" (PLV)used for early flight tests of the Kill Vehicle. The PLV was the top two stages of a Minuteman modified for the test and was made by Lockheed Martin...

Ground Based Midcourse Defense System

This article seems to describe the Ground Based Midcourse Defense System as described in the Missile Defense Agency article. Even the FAS article linked as a reference describes Ground-Based Missile Defense as a category of systems, not one system. A quick google search doesn't turn up much for Ground-Based Missile Defense, but seems to point to Midcourse rather than missile. Any opinions? Any problem with moving to Ground Based Midcourse Defense? Ref:([1],[2]) --Dual Freq 23:36, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

You're correct the article was misnamed. Although it is a ground-based missile defense (and fits the acronym GMD), the correct name is Ground-Based Midcourse Defense. I'll change all linked articles to reflect this. Joema 15:36, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Information about tests

Some information about tests are incorrect and should be corrected

http://www.cdi.org/pdfs/gmd%20ift2.pdf

Matrek 07:00 pm, Sept 03, 20076 (ET)

I updated the grammar. Also, this link is dead now. Mark Underwood (knowlengr) 22:49, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

New Test Information

An interceptor test was reported today by DoD. I'm updating the success %, but those more knowledgeable about this topic should update the table and add this reference, or a more authoritative one. Sorry, I couldn't do it myself. Mark Underwood (knowlengr) 22:53, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

You should at least try to add the reference to the article when making updates. See WP:CITE and Help:Footnotes for more info in doing references in the articles. -Fnlayson (talk) 03:03, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

A "citation needed" tag was added to the mission designation for FTG-07. Do the rest of the missions need a citation as well? MarcusMaximus (talk) 22:20, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

• A cite has been added for that designation and description of the test. There references that list the designations for the older tests. -Fnlayson (talk) 23:18, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

What's the basis for the following bolded statement that appears in the table entry for FTG-07? I can't find it in the reference: "This intercept test repeated FTG-05 using an improved CE-I EKV." The MDA release says the FTG-07 target was launched from Kwajalein Atoll, not Kodiak like FTG-05, so the test scenarios were different. MarcusMaximus (talk) 16:23, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

• The current ref. 20 on pages 5 and 6 implied that is based off the 2008 test (FTG-05). But re-reading it now I am not so sure. I will remove the FTG-05 from the entry. The CE-I part is also stated in today's AF Magazine Daily Report. I do not see an FTG designation in the text in the July 5 MDA release. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:54, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

We can deduce from reading the July 5, 2013 MDA press release that the FTG-07 target was launched from Kwajalein, whereas the FTG-05 entry in the table says it was launched from Kodiak (although the reference for FTG-05 is now defunct -- UPDATE: I fixed it). Therefore, FTG-07 was not a repeat of FTG-05. Also, I found a more explicit reference for FTG-07 as the designation of the July 5, 2013 test: [3] I'm not sure where you would like it inserted so I'll leave it up to you. MarcusMaximus (talk) 16:59, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot! I found the FTG-05 release at MDA news archives page. I added that test record link at the top of the table since it covers multiple tests. -Fnlayson (talk) 17:16, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Capitalization: Ground-Based versus Ground-based

The Missile Defense Agency, the prime contractor Boeing, and the Center for Strategic & International Studies refer to GMD as the Ground-based Midcourse System rather than Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (lowercase b instead of uppercase B in "Ground-based"). The use of a lowercase "b" appears to be the predominate usage when referring to the proper name of GMD. However, one of the components of GMD is called the "Ground-Based Interceptor" (GBI) where the "B" in "Ground-Based", when referring to the GBI, is nearly-universally capitalized. While there is a redirect from Ground-based Midcourse Defense to Ground-Based Midcourse Defense, I wonder if it would be proper to switch it so that Ground-based Midcourse Defense is the main article and Ground-Based Midcourse Defense' would be a redirect. Comments?

— Archer1234 (talk) 21:57, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

The WP:MOS (manual of style) governs phrases which are designed for readability. Based on the manual of style, Ground-Based Midcourse Defense would be 'ground-based midcourse defense'. The initialisms GMD, GBI, etc., are likely taken from defense/military contractor sources. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 23:34, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the very first link above, 'Missile Defense Agency', has GMD. So that's the precedent. The GBI usage is capitalized, likewise. It was likely the precedent. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 23:42, 15 December 2018 (UTC) I have not followed the 'https://missilethreat.csis.org/system/gmd/' but my experience has been that this kind of source follows Wikipedia, to the extent that they conform to our manual of style, so I am cautious about using them as a guide. 23:47, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Name of ICBM

What is the name of the ICBM used as a target in those intercept tests? 71.31.30.66 (talk) 04:22, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

I have noticed that Hera (rocket) missiles have been used, but the press releases never explicitly mention them as the IRBMs (not ICBMs) used in the tests, do they. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 05:26, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

I have noticed the same, too. I'm not sure whether they added a stage to Hera. I couldn't find anything in the press. 71.31.30.66 (talk) 15:47, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Likely surge in traffic, cleanup soon needed

Given that a movie involving a hypothetical nuclear war scenario is to debut soon, it might be good to get cracking on a facelift for this page. --RADONVALKYRIE (talk) 20:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Why would there be any expectation that a movie would lead to a sudden surge of interest in the GBMD system, or the related article? Is it referenced specifically in the movie? It would help if you identified the film in question, but typically we don't overhaul an article just because there's an expectation of popular culture interest. Interested editors who do find their way to the page can make any improvements they'd like, and we can deal with vandalism through the standard means. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 20:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Among other things, it is the... What's novelization but for a film? It's the movie version of a book, Nuclear War A Scenario. Among the things that happens is that midcourse defense is lampooned as impossible, and GBMD fires a four shot salvo but misses entirely. The book, and presumably movie, is presented and intended to be a realistic depiction of an atomic escalation scenario. I submit that may cause at least some interest in this page.

--RADONVALKYRIE (talk) 01:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

A film adaptation. I guess this is for the Annie Jacobsen book? Per Hollywood Reporter it just got optioned earlier this month, doesn't have a director yet and production has yet to begin. If it does actually get Denis Villeneuve as the director, I'm sure you're correct that it'd attract some interest but it's not debuting any time soon, so we've got plenty of time to improve the page. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 01:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)