To the people of Europe, please purchase and read my book KNDU187, prior to placing US false NMD technologies in your home country. Many secrets for you to figure out. 
KNDU187 paper back book is available. Fiction, or is it? 

ORDER by clicking here on: KNDU187  or on Amazon.com 

NiraSchwartz.com
 National Missile Defense [NMD] Fraud;
Government Corruption; 
and
  Trials Exhibits
Whistle Blower [Qui-Tam] Cases: 

D.C. 96-3065 RSWL - Appeal 9th Circuit Case 03-55495
D.C. 01-4937 RSWL - Appeal 9th Circuit Case 03-55571 - Petition

US Federal Claims Cases: 03-37C - US Court of Appeal 05-5063 - US Supreme 
US Federal Claims Cases: 03-786C - US Court of Appeal 04-5113

CA State BAR Complaint: 05-2875; Appeal; First Response; US Supreme 05-11161
NAVY Complaint:  20050489 - Final Decline to accept
FOIA - Refused

D.C. 06-4010 DDP (JCx)Schwartz vs. Government, MIT, LLNL, AERO
Appeal to the 9th Circuit case 07-55091

Home
KNDU187 Book
KNDU2008 Patent
Criminal Reports
Jamieson Committee
Fragile NMD Technology
GAO Reports
US Attorney General
Case 96-3065 RSWL
Physics Laws
FBI Letter
Consulting US Government
Government Corruption
Please Help
Contact me
N. Korea Threat
Raytheon CV 01-4937 RSWL
Boeing & HOT BACK-UP
Raytheon Legal VA
MIT/LL False Reports
My Reply 05-5063
International
Current News
Northrop/G. HR Manual
'SSSS' Yellow
NAVY - Games
US Supreme Court
Links
Letter to US President
Wally Beitzel Deposition
Conflict Of Interest
ARMY Scope Of Work
NMD Contract DASG60-90-C-0165
Ray Maddalone Deposition
Roy Danchick Deposition
Henry J. Crowder Deposition
NMD-My-Copyrights
New Warhead Patent
Hon. Congressman H. Berman
FOIA - refused
State Bar Complaint
Case D.C. 06-4010 DDP (JCx)




On June 1995 the Institute of Defense Analysis [IDA] assigned Jamieson Committee [currently runs by Retired General Snelzer] to review TRW's [Currently Northrop/Grumman] NMD technology. The Jamieson Committee concluded/recommended the following in a serial of reports:

  • The Jamieson Committee stated that the TRW's NMD [Currently Northrop/Grumman] Algorithms is fragile,  and I quote the Committee report:  

            " (U) The algorithm must be more robust against signature variations." 

[Which means a Fragile Technology that will NOT comply with the US Government Technical Requirement Document TRD] See Jamieson_Report

        "Signature" means Infrared Signal [IR] that is emitted from the warheads and the deployed objects and collected by the US Kill Vehicle sensor. These signals are transferred to the TRW's Algorithms to farther process to select the warhead out of the verity of objects and decoys deployed by the enemy on our land.

  • The Jamieson Committee went farther and recommended means to increase robustness of the Fragile Technology . It recommended to incorporate Frequency analysis of the IR signal, which TRW's NMD [Currently Northrop/Grumman] nor Raytheon Technology failed do.
  • Questions:  
    1)    Why Jamieson Committee was reporting only that TRW's NMD [Currently Northrop/Grumman] Algorithms and NOT on the technology Concept was fragile? 
    2) Why Scientist of such a class as Jamieson Committee failed to analyze the technology concept and talked only on Algorithms? 
    3) Is the fact that TRW and Raytheon failed to extract frequency of the IR signal should be an alarm that the Concept does Not comply with Physics Laws? 
    4) Was Jamieson Committee aware that TRW [Currently Northrop/Grumman] and Raytheon made an effort to incorporate IR signal frequency into their calculations and the effort failed?
    My Answer: On 1995-1999 I have read the Jamieson Committee report and analyzed it many times. Scientist such as Jamieson Committee are knowledgeable with the fact that any technology has a Concept that must comply with physics laws.  That ONLY concepts that pass the test of compliance with physics laws should be translated into Algorithms that are downloaded into the computers, to do the job of selecting the warhead.  Jamieson committee was very careful NOT to talk about Technology concept because.  It was part of the cover-up.
    Scientists that are of the scale of Jamieson Committee know that if the technology does NOT incorporate frequency analysis of IR signal, the Concept is deadly wrong. Did the Jamieson Committee scientist were aware that incorporating frequency analysis did NOT improve technology robustness, and it stays as fragile as before, and even more fragile? Did they know that the technology Concept did not comply with Physics laws? Yes, they knew from my analysis reports while working at TRW, and at least from additional 13 reports that I created while consulting the US Government during 1996-2000. But we have to remember that this is ARMY committee and the ARMY was interested in getting the billion of dollars regardless the fact that technology performance was in noncompliance with the Government requirements [TRD]. The personal interest of ARMY officials was and is endangering the Nation Security.  This Cover-up reports were only a small effort to assure the continuance of the river of money to the ARMY.