Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Share

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  max steel on Thu May 28, 2015 9:21 pm

    Cruise Missile Defense a Higher US Defense Priority


    United States military is shifting its focus from ballistic missile defense to defending the US homeland against cruise missile attacks.

      Homeland cruise missile defense is shifting above regional ballistic defense in my mind, as far as importance goes,” Admiral Winnefeld said in a speech at the Center for Strategic International Studies.On Friday, the US House of Representatives passed a budget with a specific provision directing the Department of Defense to develop a strategy to detect and defeat Russian cruise missiles. Laughing

    In recent months, the United States has started testing its Joint Land-Attack Cruise Missile Elevated Netted Sensor (JLENS) System to detect incoming cruise missiles and other low-flying objects around the Washington, DC area.

    Winnefeld commented that the United States is working to put JLENS in place as well as other systems to enhance its early warning capability.
    The US Department of Defense will also be focused on “changing out” some of the older systems currently used to intercept a cruise missile heading toward Washington, DC.

    Eventually, advanced cruise missile defense systems will be set up to defend other “important” parts of the United States, but not the entire country, Winnefeld noted, adding that budgetary constraints limit the extent of missile defense.

    The Defense Department requested a total of $8.8 billion in appropriations for 2016 to support all aspects of US missile defense, including programs to counter cruise missile threats.




    http://sputniknews.com/military/20150519/1022338708.html#ixzz3bSkE0a9g


    EXPLAIN WHAT JLENS IS EXACTLY ? I GUESS IT IS A COPY OS RUSSIA'S ABM ? ISN'T IT

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  max steel on Fri May 29, 2015 12:52 pm

    Thanx and Garry can you explain what JLENS is and how washington d.c. can defend itself from cruise missile attack as you mentioned no nation can avoid fully an incoming cruise missile attack .

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    US ABM Systems [Missile Defense Agency]

    Post  George1 on Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:41 pm

    The current US NMD system consists of several components.

    1. One major component is Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD), consisting of ground-based interceptor (GBI) missiles and radar in the United States in Alaska, which would intercept incoming warheads in space. Currently some GBI missiles are located at Vandenberg AFB in California.

    2. Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. A major component is a ship-based system called the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. several US Navy ships were fitted with SM-3 missiles to serve this function, which complements the Patriot systems already deployed by American units. Also, warships of Japan and Australia have been given weapons and technology to enable them to participate in the American defense plan as well.

    3. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) is a program of the US Army, utilizing ground-based interceptor missiles which can intercept missiles in the upper part of the atmosphere and outside the atmosphere.


    Last edited by George1 on Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:20 pm; edited 1 time in total

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  George1 on Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:42 pm

    US Defense Contractor Raytheon Launches State-of-the-Art SM-3 Missile

    The first live-fire test of Raytheon's new Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IIA missile has been announced by US and Japanese officials; the multi-billion-dollar project is currently being jointly developed by the two countries.

    Last weekend saw the first live-fire test of Raytheon Company's new Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IIA missile, which is being jointly developed by the United States and Japan, news reports said.

    The test, which was carried out from the Point Mugu Sea Range off the coast of California, was a success, according to Rick Lehner, a spokesman for the US Missile Defense Agency.

    His praise was echoed by Taylor Lawrence, president of Raytheon's missile systems business, who said that "the success of this test keeps the program on track for a 2018 deployment at sea and ashore."

    The United States reportedly spent more than two billion on the program, while Japan contributed around one billion dollars to the project.

    The SM-3 IIA is a modified version of an earlier SM-3 missile, which is compatible with the US Aegis combat system designed to destroy incoming ballistic missile threats in space.

    More powerful rocket motors and key technology improvements will allow the new missile to protect larger regions from short- to intermediate-range ballistic missile threats.

    The goal of Saturday's non-intercept test was to analyze performance of the missile's nosecone, steering control section and booster separation, US officials said.

    According to Riki Ellison, head of the non-profit Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, three more years of testing for the new missile are planned before it is slated to be put on service on US Navy Aegis ships, aboard Japan's Kongo-class destroyers, and at land-based Aegis Ashore sites in Poland and Romania.

    On June 3, Raytheon published its 2014 Corporate Responsibility Report, which stressed the company's commitment to enriching the lives of people, strengthening its performance and reducing its impact on the planet. The report highlighted Raytheon's third consecutive recognition by The Civic 50, an NGO, as one of "the nation's most community-minded companies." Raytheon sells missiles to the United States as well as countries such as Japan, Israel, and Saudi Arabia.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/world/20150608/1023071234.html#ixzz3cSwq4MEE

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  George1 on Sat Jun 20, 2015 2:25 am

    Pentagon Building Cruise Missile Shield Across US, Citing 'Russian Threat'

    As Baltic and Nordic countries continue to express unfounded fears about Russian aggression, paranoia fever appears to have its hold on the United States. The Pentagon is quietly installing a cruise missile defense shield in major US cities, despite the financial fiasco of previous attempts to install similar technology.

    "A handful of senior military officials, including several current or past NORTHCOM commanders, have been among those quietly dinging the bell about cruise missile threats, and it’s beginning to be heard," Thomas Karako, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, told Defense One.

    To counter that threat, the Pentagon is working to install a high-tech radar system that would track incoming, low-flying missiles. Installed in aerostat balloons over major cities, as well as onboard warships off the coast, the radar would transmit warning signals to F-16 fighter jets if an enemy missile were detected.

    The Pentagon has remained fairly quiet about the details of the missile defense shield, giving little indication of what the total cost would be to the taxpayer. But the cost of other failed defense shield attempts could provide some idea.

    Last year, the Los Angeles Times reported on the costly endeavor of the Midcourse Defense System (GMD), a shield developed by Northrop Grumman and Raytheon. During a trial run, the GMD failed 8 out of 16 tests, with each test costing $200 million.

    That, of course, was only a fraction of the total.

    "Although American taxpayers have spent $40 billion during the past decade to develop the GMD system, the missile shield’s performance is spotty at best," according to the LA Times, "even in carefully choreographed tests that are more predictable and less challenging than an actual attack would be."

    Earlier this year, it was reported that the US Defense Department had requested a total of $8.8 billion in the 2016 budget for all missile defense systems. Given the complexities of developing a system of countering cruise missiles, which are relatively small and agile, a large portion of those funds could go toward the new project.

    "While ballistic missile defense has now become established as a key military capability, the corresponding counters to cruise missiles have been prioritized far more slowly," Karako said.

    "In some ways, this is understandable, in terms of the complexity of the threat, but sophisticated cruise missile technologies now out there are just not going away and we are going to have to find a way to deal with this – for the homeland, for allies and partners broad, and for regional combatant commanders."

    Even if the technology is developed effectively, implementing the system will also prove costly.

    "This is a big country and we probably couldn’t protect the entire place from cruise missile attack unless we want to break the bank," Admiral Sandy Winnefeld, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in a speech. "But there are important areas in this country we need to make sure are defended from that kind of attack."

    But all the money being poured into the project seems especially pointless given that it’s meant to defend against an illusory threat from Russia.

    "The only nation that has an effective cruise missile capability is Russia," Admiral William Gortney, head of US Northern Command said during a House Armed Services hearing in March.

    These concerns were echoed by former NORAD commander General Charles Jacoby last August during a missile defense conference.

    "We’ve made a case that growing cruise missile technology in our state adversaries, like Russia and China, present a real problem for our current defenses," Jacoby said.

    The US isn’t the only one spending millions on false threats from an "aggressive" Russia. Earlier on Friday, it was reported that the Finnish government had bid $3.72 million on a plot of land within its own borders to prevent a Russian citizen from obtaining the deed.

    "This was done, as far as can be judged, to ramp up the anti-Russian hysteria and give a propagandist boost to the myth of a 'military threat' from the East," the Russian foreign ministry responded in a statement.

    Russia’s deputy defense minister Anatoly Antonov echoed the sentiment:

    "The US is ramping up the issue of ‘Russian violations’ to justify their own ostensibly responsive military action that would be aimed at ensuring American 'leadership' in confrontation with the mythical ‘Russian military threat’ that Washington drums up regardless of all facts to the contrary," he said earlier this month in response to the US accusing Russia of missile violations.

    It looks like that "anti-Russia hysteria" will now cost Americans billions.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/us/20150619/1023606597.html#ixzz3dYbiGPu6


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  George1 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:26 pm

    US Awards $870Mln Contract to Develop Missile Defense Command System

    The US military awarded Lockheed Martin a contract worth three-quarters of a billion dollars to continue the development of a ballistic missile defense (BMD) command and control program that allows senior US officials to plan BMD operations, the Department of Defense stated in a press release.

    WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The C2BMC is an operational system that enables the US President, Defense Secretary and combatant commanders to conduct ballistic missile defense planning, according to the Defense Department.

    “[Lockheed Martin] has been awarded a maximum $870,000,000… [to develop] the command and control, battle management and communications [C2BMC] system located worldwide for the Ballistic Missile Defense System,” the release said on Monday.

    The development of the C2BMC, the release explained, will enhance US homeland defense while meeting requirements for the planned deployment of BMD systems to NATO allies, referred to as the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA).

    Lockheed Martin plans to perform the development in Arlington, Virginia; Huntsville, Alabama; and Colorado Springs, Colorado, with an expected completion date of December 31, 2021, the release added.

    C2BMC integrates globally deployed sensors, radars, satellites and interceptors into a single network, providing commanders with a unified picture of missile threats across the globe, according to an earlier Lockheed Martin press release.

    In March 2015, a Defense Department spokesperson announced that EPAA will include deployment of anti-ballistic missiles and BMD systems to Romania in 2015 and Poland in 2018.

    US authorities are reportedly considering deploying missiles to Europe to counter Russia’s alleged violations of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty. Russian officials have pointed out that US missile defense launchers stationed in Poland and Romania are violations of the INF treaty.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20150623/1023718416.html#ixzz3dulrSCtG


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jul 10, 2015 12:23 pm

    max steel wrote:Thanx and Garry can you explain what JLENS is and how washington d.c. can defend itself from cruise missile attack as you mentioned no nation can avoid fully an incoming cruise missile attack .

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JLENS

    Just airborne radar coverage on the cheap based on aerostats and interceptors... but they would need hundreds to get proper coverage of the US... perhaps thousands as Russian cruise missiles could be launched from container ships and approach the US from any direction... including flying through Mexico or Canada...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    US Missile defence

    Post  George1 on Wed Jul 15, 2015 10:18 pm

    NATO to Remain Nuclear Alliance as Long as Atomic Weapons Exist


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  George1 on Sat Jul 25, 2015 1:42 pm

    Lockheed Martin Inks $1.5Bln Deal to Sell US, Allies Patriot Missiles


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5665
    Points : 6071
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  Austin on Wed Aug 05, 2015 8:22 pm

    FUTURE MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEMS

    http://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/System-Brief-3-Future-BMD.pdf

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  sepheronx on Wed Aug 05, 2015 8:27 pm

    Thats US advertisement. What does that have to do with S-300 and 400?

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    FUTURE MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEMS

    Post  max steel on Wed Aug 05, 2015 8:47 pm

    Austin wrote:FUTURE MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEMS

    http://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/System-Brief-3-Future-BMD.pdf

    Crap. They are thinking of lasers to destroy incoming ballistic missiles both from sir land and sea.  Not possible.

    S-Band Radar station is there in Alaska already which is being used to track missiles coming from asia pacific at usa. Nothing new.

    Redesigned Kill vehicle for their Ground based interceptors in alaska. Well usa interceptors using ce-1&2 kill vehicle are purely unreliable. I ve shared a link on this forim somewhere exposing usa interceptors flaws.

    Space based radars to overcome geostrategic limit isnt a problem. Russia can do it too.

    Kill vehicle in space to destroy decoys well as far as I know militarization of space isnt allowed under a treaty. Though If usa wants to militarize space better for russia to drop start and inf treaty. It would be interesting to see if murikans will make new nuclear icbms or not. Their nuclear force is all 80s.

    THAAD-ER to kill hypersonic gliding vehicles in future. lol!

    Boost Phase missile defense system to target russian icbms before they release their decoys and mirvs. Sounds like a wishful thinking more of a wet dream.

    My opinion on your linked pdf.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  George1 on Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:01 am

    NORAD Commander: Our Missile Defense Strategy Won’t Work

    Despite spending billions on a state-of-the-art missile defense system, North American Aerospace Defense commanders have admitted that it would be largely ineffective in preventing an incoming attack. The solution? Adding an offensive element to that defense.

    "We’ve made incredible strides in missile defense," Admiral Bill Gortney, head of NORAD and US Northern Command, said during a recent Space and Missile Defense conference, according to Breaking Defense.

    Those successes include the development of an SM-6 interceptor capable of shooting down both cruise and ballistic missiles.

    But those defense systems are expensive, which lead Gortney to another conclusion.

    "Not only is it unaffordable, it will not work," he said. "We are going to lose this fight on our current strategy."

    That’s because no matter how many pricey defense systems are purchased, it would never be enough to counter every potential threat.

    So what’s a defense department to do? According to earlier assessments by outgoing Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert, the solution is two-fold.

    Firstly, NORAD could consider organizing a global network for quickly transmitting targeting data across various militaries and branches. That type of grid has been in the works for the past decade, with little to show for it. But a renewed interest could push the project forward.
    The United States has plans to ask Canada to install a new missile sensor system in that country's part of the Arctic, in order to upgrade old sensors and be able to detect multiple types of missile threats.

    "That was one of the things we think we need to really invest in [to] get firing-quality track data…for all the domains," Gortney. "We need to do that across DoD."

    Such a network may not be far beyond the realm of possibility.

    "We have the technology. The technologies are probably all out there," Gortney said, according to Breaking Defense. "It’s getting it aligned."

    The second phase involves a strategy known as “left of launch.” Using targeting data, NORAD could identify incoming missiles before they’re launched, and initiate a preemptive attack on launch installations.

    "When you really look at 'left of launch,' it does involve having a rather deep understanding of your adversary first and foremost…even before it [the missile] is on the launch pad," Gortney said. "If it’s going upright and it has a target that we care about in its system, to me we’re a bit late to the problem."

    "And that’s why the offensive capability of our whole military apparatus is important," he added.

    While Gortney does not specify a threat that could potentially overwhelm NORAD’s capabilities, he did allude to growing Russian capabilities during a testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee in March.

    "Should these trends continue over time,” he said, “NORAD will face increased risk in our ability to defend North America against Russian air, maritime and cruise missile threats."

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/us/20150812/1025680080/Losing-NORAD-Missile-Defense-Strategy.html#ixzz3ieFjZPUq


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  max steel on Sat Aug 15, 2015 11:18 am

    Lockheed, Raytheon To Develop Advanced Kill Vehicle Concepts dunno

    Lockheed Martin and Raytheon will develop concepts for a kill vehicle capable of taking out multiple objects simultaneously under study contracts from the U.S. Missile Defense Agency valued at $9.7 million each.

    The Multi-Object Kill Vehicle, or MOKV, consists of several miniaturized kill vehicles launched atop a single interceptor. It is considered a long-term technology that would be deployed around 2025 to address a key weakness of current missile defense technology: the inability to distinguish between missile warheads, and decoys and other objects.

    The program appears to be a resurrection of the Multiple Kill Vehicle that U.S. President Barack Obama terminated shortly after taking office in 2009. The threat has advanced since then as has the technology available to the MDA, industry sources say.

    “Under this new contract, the contractor will define a concept that can destroy several objects within a threat complex by considering advanced sensor, divert and attitude control and communication concepts,” the Pentagon said in its announcement.

    U.S. Navy Vice Admiral James Syring, the MDA’s director, is expected to discuss the program during a speech Aug. 12 here at the Space and Missile Defense Symposium, industry officials said.

    Work on the contracts is expected to be completed by May 2016, the Defense Department said in the announcement.

    Currently, the MDA’s ground-based interceptors each carry a single kill vehicle designed to home in on an incoming missile warhead and destroy it by force of impact.

    “Ultimately, these Multi-Object Kill Vehicles will revolutionize our missile defense architecture, substantially reducing the interceptor inventory required to defeat an evolving and more capable threat to the Homeland,” Syring said in March 18 testimony to the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee.

    The MDA’s budget request for 2016 includes funds for MOKV concept definition as part of the Common Kill Vehicle program, but does not specify how much is allocated to the effort.

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  max steel on Tue Sep 01, 2015 5:48 pm

    Northrop Grumman Beats BAE in Army Antimissile System Competition


    The Army has selected a new antimissile system for its combat helicopters after a tightly contested matchup between two of the nation’s top defense contractors.

    The Army on Friday awarded Northrop Grumman a $35.3 million contract to produce a laser antimissile system, called common infrared countermeasure, or CIRCM, to protect aircraft from shoulder-fired, heat-seeking missiles and other guided weapons.

    BAE Systems is the current supplier of antimissile systems for Army helicopters, so the Army’s decision is seen as a big blow to the company.

    The Aug. 28 award, however, far from guarantees Northrop will become the Army’s only CIRCM supplier. The contract gives the Army ample opportunities to test the equipment before it commits to buying large quantities of the systems.

    Northrop officials hailed the award as recognition that the company’s CIRCM offering gives the Army better technology than what it current has.

    “We believe there is only one company that has been selected,” said Jeff Palombo, sector vice president and general manager of Northrop Grumman's land and self-protection systems, in Rolling Meadows, Illinois.

    The contract awarded Friday funds 21 CIRCM “B kits” that will be tested in different Army helicopters, Palombo told National Defense Aug. 31. “The initial award provides incremental funding for the nonrecurring engineering portion of the job.”

    Full production would begin in 2019. The Army has budgeted about $1 billion over the next five years for the program, including contractor and government costs.

    Both Northrop and BAE had successfully tested prototypes over a three-year development program that ended in March. The Army on June 4 asked both firms to submit their best and final offers.

    Palombo said between now and October 2017, the Army will be able to exercise options for further development and low-rate initial production of the systems.

    “Like many engineering and manufacturing development contracts, there are time-phased options,” he said. “The customer always has the opportunity to put options on their contracts at their discretion.”

    All options were priced in the bidders’ proposals, such as low-rate production orders to equip Army Chinook, Blackhawk and Apache helicopters. There are also options for the A-kits for those airplanes, which are the electronics and mechanical parts that are necessary to install the CIRCM system in the aircraft.

    The Army structured the contract so it can first test the systems and ask for changes before it buys larger quantities. “EMD options are becoming more common” in military contracts, Palombo said. “During EMD you’re going to build units upfront, then you do environmental, integration, qualification and reliability testing,” he said. The company would make design or engineering modifications based on test results. “It’s very typical of the government to not order all the options at once but rather wait until the system is sufficiently tested and matured before they put those other options on contract.”

    That flexibility would allow the Army, for instance, to choose options to equip different helicopter models based on needs and available funding.

    The new CIRCM would replace an existing infrared countermeasure system made by BAE Systems that the Army bought six years ago for emergency combat deployments but now considers too heavy and too expensive.

    Northrop and BAE are the nation’s only manufacturers of directional infrared countermeasures. Northrop Grumman currently supplies infrared countermeasures to the Air Force and Navy for both helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. BAE officials had argued that choosing Northrop for the Army work would further consolidate the market and possibly eliminate a competitor.

    Paul Roberts, spokesman for BAE Systems Electronic Systems, said the company was “disappointed by this decision.” In a statement to National Defense, he said the company has not yet decided whether it will protest the award. “We are currently considering all of our options as we prepare to be briefed by the Army about the decision."

    Palombo said Northrop’s “open systems architecture” likely gave it the edge, as it would make it easier to update the system over time, if enemies deploy more advanced missiles. Older aircraft missile-warning systems use flare dispensers to confuse the sensors of incoming missiles. Newer missile designs have more complex seekers that are able to defeat flares.

    The Army wants to eventually procure CIRCM in large quantities so it can provide aircraft with 360-degree coverage.

    “Infrared missile threats are constantly changing,” said Palombo. “So we make sure our systems are kept relevant as technology changes to make sure we can address any new threats,” he added. “An open architecture lends itself to rapid changes.”

    http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=1937#.VeW1XgMjB7s.facebook

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  George1 on Sat Sep 12, 2015 2:00 am

    US Moving Ahead With Regional Missile Defense Systems Despite Iran Deal

    The United States will keep working on a missile defense system in the Gulf, despite the nuclear deal with Iran, which has the largest inventory of short- and medium-range cruise and ballistic missiles in the region.

    In July, the United States and five other major world powers reached a deal aimed at curbing Iran's nuclear program in exchange for lifting of sanctions.

    On Thursday, Senate democrats blocked a Republican-backed effort to kill the agreement, giving President Barack Obama a major victory and clearing the way for the deal's implementation.

    Because the deal does not cover Iran's work on ballistic missiles, the Pentagon will continue to push for cooperative missile defense programs, Robert Scher, assistant defense secretary for strategy, plans and capabilities, told lawmakers, according to Reuters.

    "There is no doubt in my mind that Iran's ballistic missile activities continue to pose a risk to the United States and our allies and partners in Europe, Israel, and the Gulf," he told the House Armed Services Committee's strategic forces subcommittee.

    US Air Force Brigadier General Kenneth Todorov, the former deputy director of the US Missile Defense Agency, said he saw growing momentum for a Gulf missile shield, Reuters reported.

    "The worst mistake we could make if the deal happens is to say, 'We can let our guard down,'" he told an event hosted by the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, a non-profit group that lobbies for missile defense programs.

    In May, President Obama met with Gulf allies and the group underscored their commitment to the defense system, as Washington tried to relieve uneasiness in the Gulf over a more powerful Iran once sanctions are lifted.

    Gulf countries will have to cooperate more to create a truly integrated system, Todorov said. One feasible option would be to integrate missile systems that are already in use by individual countries.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20150911/1026895203.html#ixzz3lTgAeDw9


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  max steel on Fri Sep 25, 2015 11:58 am

    The Pentagon’s
    $10-billion bet gone bad

    -multiple kill vehicle is a bust , ineffective system .


    $40-BILLION MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM PROVES UNRELIABLE

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  George1 on Fri Sep 25, 2015 12:30 pm

    max steel wrote:The Pentagon’s
    $10-billion bet gone bad

    -multiple kill vehicle is a bust , ineffective system .


    $40-BILLION MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM PROVES UNRELIABLE

    Nice, good news..


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  max steel on Fri Sep 25, 2015 9:15 pm

    'PROVEN' SM-3 MISSILE INTERCEPTOR MAY ONLY SUCCEED 20 PERCENT OF THE TIME, SAY PHYSICISTS confused

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    SM-3 MISSILE INTERCEPTOR

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Sep 25, 2015 11:23 pm

    max steel wrote: 'PROVEN' SM-3 MISSILE INTERCEPTOR MAY ONLY SUCCEED 20 PERCENT OF THE TIME, SAY PHYSICISTS    confused

    That is already 2.5 times better than what Patriot achieved in Iraq against old ass Scuds. Progress, it's something...

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  max steel on Sat Sep 26, 2015 11:37 pm

    More good news


     
    How a $2.7 billion air-defense system became a 'zombie' program JLENS failed to perform as promised



    I was discussing about it on another thread and now i got all my answers.Quite revealing actually , once again thanks to LA Times . These guys do authentic and real journalism .

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  max steel on Mon Sep 28, 2015 11:45 pm

    New Missile Killer Performs Test Flight, on Schedule for 2018 Deployment



    The United States and Japan have conducted the first flight test of a new version of the Standard Missile-3 (SM-3 Block IIA).

    This new missile interceptor is designed to extend the reach of current AEGIS Ballistic Missile defense systems deployed on naval ships and ashore. It is being developed jointly by the two countries at a combined cost of $2 billion. When deployed, the new missile will extend the defensive capability of AEGIS BMD systems to intercept intermediate-range ballistic missiles (missiles capable of attacking targets at ranges of up to 5,500 km.). The current SM-3 Block IB can only engage short- and medium-range ballistic missiles (with attack ranges of up to 3,000 km.). The SM-3 block IIA, has a maximum speed of roughly 4.5 km/s.

    Saturday’s test evaluated the performance of the missile’s nose cone, steering control, booster separation, and the performance of second- and third-stage propulsion. “The success of this test keeps the program on track for a 2018 deployment at sea and ashore,” said Taylor Lawrence, president of Raytheon’s missile systems section.

    The flight test, from the Point Mugu Sea Range, San Nicolas Island, California, was performed by The Technical Research and Development Institute (TRDI), Japan’s Ministry of Defense (MOD), and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA), in cooperation with the U.S. Navy.






    Must Read and comments also : Why Russia Keeps Moving The Football On European Missile Defense


    Last edited by max steel on Tue Sep 29, 2015 12:10 am; edited 1 time in total

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  sepheronx on Tue Sep 29, 2015 12:05 am

    Please don't post American propaganda news claims in Russian boards.

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  max steel on Tue Sep 29, 2015 12:11 am

    sepheronx wrote:Please don't post American propaganda news claims in Russian boards.


    read the second link

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    US ABM systems

    Post  sepheronx on Tue Sep 29, 2015 12:26 am

    max steel wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:Please don't post American propaganda news claims in Russian boards.


    read the second link

    Hmm.

    After reading it, I can also counter with saying "Well, it isn't just the parameters. But we have evidence of modern PAC-3 missiles performing really, really poorly against scud missiles, as shown in Yemen.

    Sponsored content

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 3:32 pm


      Current date/time is Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:32 pm