Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Share

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9423
    Points : 9915
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  George1 on Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:52 pm

    US Navy Tested Anti-Missile Defense in Europe for the First Time (VIDEO)


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


    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9423
    Points : 9915
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  George1 on Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:20 pm

    New US Missile Defense Radar to be Ready for Testing by 2020

    The new LRDR system will be ready to be analyzed in five years.

    WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The new US Long Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR) system will be ready to be analyzed in five years, defense contractor Lockheed Martin said in a release on Monday.

    "Lockheed Martin’s proposed LRDR system will be built on an aggressive timeline ready for operational testing in Clear Air Force Station, Alaska by 2020," Lockheed Martin stated.

    On Thursday, the US government awarded Lockheed Martin $784 million to create a new missile defense radar computer in Moorestown, New Jersey and at Clear Air Force Station, Alaska. The work is expected to be completed by January 21, 2024 when the contract ends.

    The radar defense system will have an electronic antenna and a locale to contain and use the antenna.

    Lockheed Martin Integrated Warfare Systems and Sensors Vice President Carl Bannar said this new system met the needs of the US national defense.

    "The United States has a limited number of ground-based interceptors to detect threats, yet the number of potential missile threats — and countermeasures used to hide those threats — is growing," Bannar said. "Our offering meets the MDA’s [Missile Defense Agency] vision for LRDR by pairing innovative radar discrimination capability with proven ballistic missile defense algorithms."

    Bannar noted that the new radar system built on previous US missile defense instruments.

    "Our mature, scalable, GaN [gallium nitride]-based S-Band technology was ideally suited for this high-performance ballistic missile defense application," Bannar concluded.

    The US Missile Defense Agency in Huntsville, Alabama is handling the LRDR contract with Lockheed Martin.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20151026/1029132098/lockheed-lrdr-test-alaska.html#ixzz3piOHRFZo


    _________________
    "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 Thu Nov 05, 2015 8:17 pm

    Lockheed Martin Delivers First Upgraded PAC-3 Missile Interceptors affraid Suspect


    Hope Saudis are listening recently PAC-3 failed to intercept BMs with predicted flight path.





    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Nov 05, 2015 8:36 pm

    Lockheed Martin the World's Best and Biggest Bullshiter about capabilities of their products.


    Visit Lookheed Shmartin to find out more bullshit!

    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 Nov 13, 2015 9:45 pm

    SM-3 fails to engage ballistic missile Block-IB failed  Neutral


    PS:- Block-IB SM-3 missiles are for SRBM's and MRBM's.

    As we all know US has planned European Phased Adaptive Approach Missile Defense(basically to defend their ass from Russian tactical nukes flying over europe): Phase IV May happen in 2022 which Russia is actively opposing has following plans:




                                                          Current Status

    We are talking SM-3 Block II with mach 15+ speed here, not Patriot's, and the numbers being proposed keep growing. The press conference in 2013 after the announcement made it quite clear “restructuring” the Block IIB program means killing it. Maybe that’s why the image of the Block IIB is so blurry in the last set of briefing slides.Luckily, the Block-IIB which had sufficient range cancelled.



    Mind you SM class of missiles are the best defensive missiles aka shield US got .



    Yup U.S. Announces EPAA Phase IV cancellation, increase in number of GMD national missile defense interceptors from 30 to 44

    Planned deployment of the high-speed SM-3 Block IIB interceptor to Poland (and the corresponding 4th phase of European Phased Adaptive Approach) has been cancelled.



    Last edited by max steel on Thu Jun 02, 2016 2:44 pm; edited 2 times in total

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Nov 14, 2015 1:42 am

    Of course it failed, the missiles weren't using the tactical nuclear warheads NATO has been hiding through out Europe, like they were intended to! Why do you think NATO is so secretive about tactical warheads that they have deployed? I also suspect that the missiles may also be designed to act as an offensive weapon, with one flip of the switch (and using different program algorithms) they convert from a ABM missile to a MRBM, and with all the secrecy and lack of transparency, no one can totally be sure that's not the case. Considering the range and speed of the SM-3 Block II's, I wouldn't be surprised if they were MRBM's disguised as ABM's.

    But don't worry NATO, Russia could just as easily do the same. Russia could just as easily convert hundreds (if not thousands) of their ballistic targets (used for testing S-300PMU2, S-400 batteries) in to full blown SRBM's and MRBM's in short order, and rapidly produce warheads for them by putting spent fuel rods in front of their Fast-Breeder reactors, and creating weapons grade uranium rather quickly. Russia can also take the shipping container versions of the Kaliber 3M-14 SLCM's, and place them on river rafts all over Russia's extensive network of rivers, totally and legally circumventing the INF treaty entirely!!!

    Considering the countermeasures Russia could engage in to counter NATO ABM's, one can quickly realize that U.S. based Neocon's are putting the mad in MAD!

    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 Nov 21, 2015 10:03 am

    Raytheon moves forward with Multi-Object Kill Vehicle program

    Knowing MKV is a bust ( see my link on previous page) still they are going forward with it. Actually, using MKV in space is useless - you will have to have hordes of target discrimination radars from different sites operating simultaneously with a hell-knows-what effectiveness. Because in space you cant reliably determine if this is a light well made decoy or a real warhead. Meanwhile a clouds of passive jamming units are said to be a kilometres long. This is why all major BMD-system always have a pretty tough "low-tier" intercepting units, like Gazelle - cause atmosphere is their ally. And if you read MDA papers on their success - they don't even plan to intercept a tough ICBM with a extensive countermeasures system - cause all main BMD component needed to overcome it are either dead or just a shadow of their former self.

    In reality modern MDA-approach suffers from many factors, and even polygon launches are not that successful. Yeah, TGA-issue, glancing blow issue. Massive launch haven't even been tested.

    ----------------------------------------

    Patriot takes out two ballistic missiles in latest test


    Another staked goat test Smile


    Last edited by max steel on Tue Jan 05, 2016 8:12 am; edited 3 times in total

    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 Nov 21, 2015 10:47 am


    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4798
    Points : 4845
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  Militarov on Sun Nov 22, 2015 12:57 pm



    PAC 3 test video.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9423
    Points : 9915
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  George1 on Thu Dec 10, 2015 1:46 pm

    US, Japan Test Advanced SM-3 Missile for Aegis System - US Navy

    The US Missile Defense Agency and the military development agency of Japan’s Ministry of Defense conducted a successful test of a Standard Missile-3 in California, the US Navy announced on its website.

    WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The firing, which took place on Tuesday, was the second such test of the SM-3 Block IIA on the Point Mugu Sea Range; the first took place June 6, the report added.

    "Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division… Point Mugu, California hosted a live-fire test of the Standard Missile-3 Block IIA missile… developed by the United States and Japan for use with the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense program," the Navy said on its website on Wednesday.

    Japan already operates US-built Standard Missile-3 interceptors.

    The Standard Missile-3 Block IIA is a three-stage missile designed to intercept ballistic missile threats above the earth's atmosphere, destroying them with a kinetic warhead that collides with the threat warhead at very high speed.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20151210/1031509097/us-japan-aegis.html#ixzz3tvC4T06X


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


    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9423
    Points : 9915
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  George1 on Tue Jan 12, 2016 11:59 am

    US Navy Approves Aegis System Anti-Missile Upgrade

    The US Navy has granted certification to Baseline 9.C1 version of the Aegis missile defense system.

    WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The US Navy has granted certification to the latest Baseline 9.C1 version of the Aegis missile defense system, which is claimed to be able to destroy air, ballistic missile targets simultaneously, Lockheed Martin stated in a press release.

    "The Aegis Combat System Baseline 9.C1 offers unprecedented capabilities, including simultaneous air and ballistic missile defense [BMD]," Lockheed Martin Aegis Programs Director Jim Sheridan said in the release on Monday.

    Baseline 9.C1 includes the latest ballistic missile defense programming and upgrade, and has the capability to shoot down ballistic missiles in both the upper and lower atmosphere, Lockheed Martin said.

    "The BMD capabilities of Baseline 9.C1 are also present in Aegis Ashore, the ground-based missile defense program that is the second phase of the US Phased Adaptive Approach to protect Europe from ballistic missile attack," the release explained.

    The US Navy and Missile Defense Agency conducted four tests on the USS John Paul Jones last summer, during which the Aegis system successfully intercepted two ballistic missile and two air warfare targets, the release added.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20160112/1032973412/us-navy-approves-aegis.html#ixzz3x1iWCLWp


    _________________
    "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 Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:17 pm

    George1 wrote:US Navy Approves Aegis System Anti-Missile Upgrade

    The US Navy has granted certification to Baseline 9.C1 version of the Aegis missile defense system.

    WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The US Navy has granted certification to the latest Baseline 9.C1 version of the Aegis missile defense system, which is claimed to be able to destroy air, ballistic missile targets simultaneously, Lockheed Martin stated in a press release.

    "The Aegis Combat System Baseline 9.C1 offers unprecedented capabilities, including simultaneous air and ballistic missile defense [BMD]," Lockheed Martin Aegis Programs Director Jim Sheridan said in the release on Monday.



    "The BMD capabilities of Baseline 9.C1 are also present in Aegis Ashore, the ground-based missile defense program that is the second phase of the US Phased Adaptive Approach to protect Europe from ballistic missile attack," the release explained.

    The US Navy and Missile Defense Agency conducted four tests on the USS John Paul Jones last summer, during which the Aegis system successfully intercepted two ballistic missile and two air warfare targets, the release added.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20160112/1032973412/us-navy-approves-aegis.html#ixzz3x1iWCLWp


    So now SM-3 can engage against BMs both in upper and lower atmosphere with this upgrade.

    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 Wed Jan 13, 2016 8:09 pm

    U.S. Modernizes Nuclear Weapons, ‘Smaller’ Leaves Some Uneasy


    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 Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:47 pm

    Human error damaged US nuclear-armed Intercontinental Ballistic Missile: US Air Force


    Three US Air Force airmen have been stripped of their nuclear certifications after a "mishap" caused nearly USD 1.8 million in damage to an intercontinental nuclear ballistic missile in 2014, officials said.

    The incident occurred when the Minuteman III nuclear missile, assigned to the 90th Missile Wing at Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming, became "non-operational" during a diagnostic test on May 16, 2014, according to a statement released by the US Air Force.

    While troubleshooting the issue, the maintenance team chief "mistakenly performed an action not directed by the technical guidance," the statement said.

    Air Force officials did not specifically address whether or not radiological material was released when the missile was damaged, but said the incident did not result in any injuries or threaten public safety.

    Further details as to the nature of the "mishap" remain murky, as the full report from the military's Accident Investigation Board remains classified, CNN reported.

    The Air Force insists that the maintenance team chief was properly trained for the task he was performing but made a mistake that resulted in damage to the missile.

    In response to the incident, the Air Force said it has "strengthened technical guidance, modified training curriculum, and shared information with the other missile wings regarding the conditions that led to the mishap. More than a year later the three airmen were recertified and returned to duty.

    The Minuteman III is the only land-based Intercontinental Ballistic Missile system used by the United States and is one component of its nuclear triad.

    The other two parts of the triad include the Trident submarine-launched ballistic missile and nuclear weapons carried by long-range strategic bombers.

    First deployed in the 1960s as part of the US nuclear deterrent programme, the Minuteman system's effectiveness is largely tied to the idea that missiles can be launched quickly and at any time.

    Missiles are dispersed in hardened silos and connected to an underground launch control where crews are on standby around-the-clock.

    The US currently has 450 Minutemen III missiles at Warren AFB in Wyoming, Malmstrom AFB in Montana, and Minot AFB in North Dakota.

    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 Feb 02, 2016 7:05 am

    Missile Defense Agency orders more THAAD interceptors

    The U.S. Missile Defense Agency will purchase 20 additional Lot 8 interceptors under a contract modification with Lockheed Martin.

    The modification, valued at $198.7 million, will support the Missile Defense Agency's Terminal High Altitude Area Defense project, bringing the cumulative value of the contract up to $822 million.

    THAAD is designed to protect population and high-value infrastructures from short and medium-range ballistic missile attacks, using interceptors to engage incoming targets. The system is capable of intercepting missiles inside and outside of the atmosphere.

    Work on the contract will be performed at several locations in Texas, Alabama, and Arkansas, and is expected to be complete by September 2019.

    Lockheed Martin announced they received a $528 million contract to produce and deliver THAAD missile systems in early January 2016. The systems were to be used by the U.S. Army to enhance its ballistic missile interception capabilities.

    DerWolf
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 60
    Points : 62
    Join date : 2015-12-06

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  DerWolf on Tue Feb 02, 2016 11:46 am

    I seems US has the missile shield against ballistik missiles a top priority. Obviously this is against Russia or China missiles not n korea or iran as they say.

    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 Feb 02, 2016 7:44 pm

    DerWolf wrote:I seems US has the missile shield against ballistik missiles a top priority. Obviously this is against Russia or China missiles not n korea or iran as they say.

    Did you know that the anti-ballistic missiles that were to be placed in Poland were converted Minuteman rockets, with the first two stages being converted Minuteman II (nuclear ICBM). In other words identical launch signature as a nuclear strike. How effin stupid is that?
    (they were officially implemented to stop Iranian missiles....yeah Mad

    DerWolf
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 60
    Points : 62
    Join date : 2015-12-06

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  DerWolf on Tue Feb 02, 2016 8:35 pm

    max steel wrote:
    DerWolf wrote:I seems US has the missile shield against ballistik missiles a top priority. Obviously this is against Russia or China missiles not n korea or iran as they say.

    Did you know that the anti-ballistic missiles that were to be placed in Poland were converted Minuteman rockets, with the first two stages being converted Minuteman II (nuclear ICBM). In other words identical launch signature as a nuclear strike. How effin stupid is that?
    (they were officially implemented to stop Iranian missiles....yeah Mad
    Does this means that those interceptors deployed in Romania and those that will be put in Poland are offensive missiles with nuclear warhead. Things seems that will escalate quickly, Russia wont tolerate this missile and army build- up near its borders.

    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 Feb 02, 2016 9:25 pm

    No I didn't say that and they're not carrying nuclear warheads. Yes those ashore abm sites can also potentially be used as land based cruise missile to target Russian assets like in Kaliningrad.

    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 Feb 09, 2016 4:41 pm

    Your Pocket Guide to How U.S. Missile Defense Works

    U.S. ballistic missile defense systems are designed to protect the U.S. homeland, deployed military forces, and allies from limited attacks. The Pentagon originally sought development of ballistic missile defense (BMD) technology to counter the Soviet nuclear threat during the Cold War, but its focus in the twenty-first century has shifted to defending against potential strikes from regional actors, particularly Iran and North Korea. Proponents of BMD stress its role in the projection of U.S. power and its value as a deterrent, while critics question its reliability and high costs. In recent years, some military analysts have said that the planned expansion of U.S-NATO missile defense systems in the former Soviet bloc has unnecessarily frayed relations with Moscow.

    How does ballistic missile defense work?

    Ballistic missiles can be launched from a variety of platforms, including silos, trucks, trains, submarines, and warships. There are four general classifications based on the maximum distance the missile can travel: short range (less than 1,000 kilometers); medium range (1,000–3,000 kilometers); intermediate range (3,000–5,500 kilometers); and intercontinental (more than 5,500 kilometers).

    Ballistic missiles have three stages of flight: boost phase, which begins at launch and lasts until rocket engines finish; midcourse phase, the longest stage, when the projectile is on its parabolic path to the target; and terminal phase, when the detached warhead reenters the atmosphere, often traveling less than a minute to impact. (Cruise missiles, by contrast, are jet-engine powered weapons that fly low and level to the ground, often avoiding enemy radar, before striking their target.)

    Defeating a ballistic missile involves four functions: detection, discrimination (separating the missile from everything else), fire control (determining exactly where to intercept), and killing (hitting the missile with some type of interceptor). However, the effectiveness of BMD systems in test trials has been mixed, and critics continue to question their value in realistic battle conditions.

    What is the history of U.S. missile defense?


    The Pentagon launched an intensive effort to counter the threat of Soviet intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in the mid-1950s, when a number of competing programs was initiated by the U.S. Army, Air Force, and Navy. But by 1972, with U.S. and Soviet arsenals growing exponentially, Washington and Moscow signed the Antiballistic Missile Treaty(ABM), limiting to two the number of missile defense sites each could maintain.

    In the early 1980s, the Reagan administration expanded research and development of space- and ground-based defensive systems, and unveiled the Strategic Defense Initiative[PDF], later nicknamed “Star Wars.” The next year, the army tested its Homing Overlay Experiment, the first successful demonstration of a hit-to-kill vehicle.

    Meanwhile, tactical systems, or theater missile defense, continued to develop. U.S. Patriot missile batteries, originally designed to intercept Soviet intermediate-range ballistic missiles in Western Europe, were deployed to the Middle East during the Persian Gulf War. While they proved ineffective at defending against Scud attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia in 1991, the concept drew increased attention and funding during the 1990s. By the latter part of the decade, BMD advocates pushed for a full-blown national missile defense system, citing nascent North Korean, Iraqi, and Iranian threats.

    Leading defense officials in the George W. Bush administration envisioned an integrated, layered defense capable of defeating enemy missiles on a global scale. Early in his first term, Bush withdrew the United States from the ABM treaty and instructed the Pentagon to “proceed with fielding an initial set of missile defense capabilities.” The first ground-based missile interceptor was installed at an army base in central Alaska in July 2004.

    What are the primary missile defense systems?

    The U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is developing a number of systems that could offer multiple opportunities to defeat limited ballistic missile attacks. These systems are not designed to shield against large-scale nuclear attacks from Russia and China. MDA has spent roughly $100 billion on missile defense since 2002, and plans to spend roughly $8 billion per year through 2017—around two percent of the Pentagon’s base budget.

    There are four primary BMD programs:

    Ground-Based Midcourse Defense
    : The most complex and costly component of the U.S. missile defense system is designed to destroy intermediate- and long-range ballistic missiles in space. As of summer 2014, twenty-six interceptors were located at Fort Greely, Alaska, and four at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, with plans to increase this arsenal to forty-four by 2017. In a June 2014 test, an interceptor launched from Vandenberg destroyed a target missile launched from the Marshall Islands, marking the first successful hit (out of four tries) since 2008. But experts say the technology is still unreliable and needs further testing. Meanwhile, some U.S. officials are advocating for the construction of a third interceptor site on the Eastern seaboard, and the MDA is assessing prospective locations.

    Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense: Considered the most reliable component of missile defense, this traditionally sea-based system is designed to intercept short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. The Missile Defense Agency and the Navy plan to increase the number of BMD-capable Aegis warships from 33 in 2014 to 43 by 2019. As of June 2014, the Pentagon said the system had twenty-eight successful intercepts out of thirty-four tests.

    Terminal High Altitude Area Defense: THAAD is a rapidly deployable, truck-mounted system capable of intercepting short- and medium-range ballistic missiles inside and just outside the atmosphere. Three THAAD systems were operational as of mid-2014, but the Pentagon is expected to expand this to seven. In April 2013, the Army deployed a THAAD battery to Guam to help defend the U.S. territory from North Korean intermediate-range ballistic missiles.

    Patriot Advanced Capability–3: The PAC-3 is the successor to the systems deployed in the Persian Gulf War and the most mature system in the U.S. missile defense arsenal. Rapidly deployable, the system is vehicle-mounted and employs sensors to track and intercept incoming missiles in their terminal phase, at lower altitudes than THAAD systems. The PAC-3 was used during combat missions in Iraq in 2003 with mixed success. PAC-3 batteries have been deployed to several nations including South Korea, Afghanistan, and Turkey, among others, and more than a dozen nations have purchased variants of the system.




    What is the threat from North Korea?

    North Korea has several hundred short-range and medium-range ballistic missiles, and is developing an intermediate-range missile (Taepo Dong–2) that analysts say would be able to hit the continental United States should it become operational. The TD-2 succeeded in placing a satellite in orbit in December 2012—the first successful space launch after repeated failures in the years prior. However, experts say the feat does not translate into a reliable missile, and that further testing is needed. North Korea’s missiles are capable of delivering conventional warheads and, potentially, biological and chemical munitions.

    U.S. intelligence officials say that TD-2 missiles could, in theory, deliver a nuclear payload to the United States, but noted that without further testing, the potential for this was low in the near term. Experts suspect Pyongyang has four to ten plutonium-based nuclear weapons, but analysts continue to speculate whether the regime has mastered the miniaturization technology required to mount a nuclear warhead on its missiles. Several UN Security Council resolutions passed in recent years prohibit North Korea from developing nuclear or ballistic missile technology.

    What is the threat from Iran?


    Experts say Iran has the largest ballistic missile arsenal in the Middle East, having obtained most of this from its allies, particularly North Korea. The majority of Iran’s ballistic missile inventory consists of Scud missiles with a range of up to approximately 500 kilometers. Tehran views these as important tactical weapons, but experts say their ability to strike U.S. and allied targets in the region is limited because they would need to be launched from vulnerable positions along the Persian Gulf. Furthermore, analysts say these missiles are not very accurate and serve more as a psychological threat to large urban and economic centers in the region.

    The Islamic Republic is also building a stockpile of longer-range ballistic missiles that are able to hit any target in the Middle East, including Israel, but analysts say these weapons suffer from significant inaccuracy.

    U.S. intelligence officials have warned in recent years of Iran’s potential to deliver weapons of mass destruction with these missiles. In the 2014 U.S. Worldwide Threat Assessment [PDF], Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Iran has “the means and motivation to develop longer-range missiles, including an intercontinental ballistic missile.” Tehran claims its controversial nuclear program is intended solely for peaceful applications, but Western analysts continue to speculate whether the regime has decided to pursue a nuclear weapon. Pursuant to UN Security Council Resolution 1929 , Iran is forbidden from developing ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads.


    How does the United States collaborate with allies?


    A major component of U.S. military strategy is partnering with allies around the globe to expand their ballistic missile defense capabilities. The Aegis BMD system is the linchpin of the Obama administration’s plan for a phased deployment of a missile defense umbrella in Europe, which is intended to protect U.S. forces and NATO allies from regional threats like Iran. NATO leaders adopted missile defense as a principal alliance objective at their 2010 Lisbon Summit and approved the integration of U.S. and allied BMD efforts. In February 2014, the USS Donald Cook arrived in the port of Rota, becoming the first of four Aegis warships to be based in Spain. The first land-based versions of the system, so-called Aegis Ashore sites, are expected to be operational in Romania by 2015 and in Poland by 2018.

    In Asia, Japan is the Pentagon’s closest collaborator in this arena. Tokyo has procured a layered missile defense system from Washington, including Aegis-equipped destroyers and Patriot missile batteries. Analysts say the two longtime allies partner in a way that is highly interoperable, and note they are working to jointly develop future BMD systems. The United States has also provided BMD technology to South Korea, which bought Aegis warships and Patriot missile batteries. But while all three nations are wary of the looming ballistic missile threat from North Korea, analysts note that deep-seated tensions between Tokyo and Seoul have kept them from cooperating on BMD and other military matters.

    The United States is also assessing ways for Australia, which is building several Aegis-equipped destroyers, to contribute to missile defense in the Asia-Pacific region.

    In the Middle East, missile defense cooperation is a major component of Israel’s strategic relationship with the United States, experts say. In recent years, the United States and Israel have jointly funded and developed several rocket and missile defense systems, including the so-called Iron Dome, which was first deployed in 2011 to guard against very short-range rocket attacks (under 90 km) from potentially hostile neighbors; David’s Sling; and the Arrow I, II, and III systems, designed to counter strikes from regional actors, particularly Iran. Although there is some debate surrounding Iron Dome’s effectiveness, many analysts say the system hits the vast majority of its intended targets and, as a result, has altered Israel’s military strategy in recent conflicts with Hamas. Many believe that without the system Israel would have been forced to carry out more intense military assaults.

    What are the tensions with Russia?


    Missile defense has aggravated U.S.-Russian relations in recent years, particularly with U.S.-NATO plans to deploy BMD assets in the former Soviet bloc. Former U.S. defense secretary Robert M. Gates writes in his 2014 memoir that the missile defense issue dominated the U.S.-Russia relationship during his stints in both the George W. Bush and first Obama administrations.

    The Pentagon has stated repeatedly that the system is only designed to guard against limited attacks from regional actors like Iran, but the Kremlin believes the technology could be updated to intercept their missiles and may eventually tip the strategic balance toward the West. “The military people realize missile defense is part of the strategic arsenal of the United States,” Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said in February 2014. “When a nuclear shield is added to a nuclear sword, it is very tempting to use this offensive defense capability.”

    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 Feb 20, 2016 12:19 am

    US not safe against ballistic missiles, despite billions spent on defense system – govt report






    ‘Basic physics proves US missile defense system useless’

    JohninMK
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3360
    Points : 3403
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  JohninMK on Tue Feb 23, 2016 1:46 pm

    The Pentagon's $40 billion missile defense system, designed to shield the US from incoming ballistic missiles attacks, could not be made workable, Theodore Postol, professor emeritus of Science, Technology and National Security at MIT told RT.

    The system, which is a major component of Washington's national missile defense strategy, is formally known as the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD). It is supposed to intercept even nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles.

    However, a report, released by the Government Accountability Office last week, showed that the technology at the heart of the GMD has limited capabilities. Postol is less optimistic. "I think basic physics would tell you that this system not only doesn't work, but it will never be able to work," he insisted.

    "This has nothing to do with engineering technology, it has to do with the basic physics that the system tries to exploit in order to tell the difference between decoys and warheads. This is a fundamental problem with the system," he explained.

    In addition, the United States "ruined" its relations with Russia while pouring billions of dollars into the GMD, Postol added.

    "The mindless pursuit of the system has caused the break with Russia and has created high levels of tension when none of this should have happened," Postol noted. "This is an indication of a massive failure in US political leadership with regard to doing sound things for not only the defense of the US, but also for global stability."

    By continuing the program, the US, according to the expert, also risks ruining relations with China.


    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20160223/1035213138/ballistic-missile-defense-gmd.html#ixzz40zjBbSDk

    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 Feb 23, 2016 3:32 pm

    JohninMK wrote:[i]The Pentagon's $40 billion missile defense system, designed to shield the US from incoming ballistic missiles attacks, could not be made workable, Theodore Postol, professor emeritus of Science, Technology and National Security at MIT told RT.




    I've shared it already (in above post). Moreover, US gmd is a failure everyone knows which they meant to use against ICBM's. Their SM-3 block IIA and THAAD is for BM's including PAC-3 .

    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 Feb 29, 2016 6:40 pm

    GaN-Based Patriot Prototype Preps For Public Debut


    Raytheon's bet on a new radar for its Patriot air and missile defense system is now fully functional and ready for its public debut at the Association of the US Army’s Global Force Symposium in Huntsville, Alabama, in March, company officials said.

    Raytheon executives took a few reporters on a tour of the company’s Integrated Air Defense Center, where they build Patriot systems and the radar technology they pitched as the future of air and missile defense: Gallium Nitride (GaN) Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar. The facility houses a foundry for GaN and its predecessor Gallium Arsenide.

    It's a sizable bet. Raytheon has invested over $200 million to develop GaN technology over 16 years, augmented with US government investment over time, Ralph Acaba, the company’s vice president of Integrated Air and Missile Defense, said Wednesday.

    The Patriot system was fielded to the Army in 1982 and Raytheon has continuously upgraded the system with investments from the US and 13 partner nations. The system is expected to stay fielded until at least 2040.

    But Raytheon has not been able to rest on its laurels. Lockheed Martin developed a competing air and missile defense system called the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) and is directly competing with Raytheon stateside and abroad for future deals.

    “The future is about how do you continue to put in capability, how do you continue to allow for the growth of the system, how do you continue to bring the cost of the operating system down, the reliability up, how do you prepare it for the future of air and missile defense where it’s plugging into a network to be compatible with the Army’s [Integrated Air and Missile Defense] concept that is the future,” Acaba said. “Active arrays are key to that [and] GaN is the next technology that those arrays are going to be built out of.”

    Patriot radars currently use Gallium Arsenide (GaAs), a semiconductor material. Raytheon believes GaN will bring exponentially more capability to the Patriot system and double the system's reliability. Moving to a GaN radar also frees up space in the system to add redundancy, or future capability like the Integrated Battle Command System, the command and control for the Army's future air and missile defense system.

    And the “beauty of the active array technology, you’ve got distributed elements so that anyone of them dies, no big deal, you’ve got plenty of redundancy,” Acaba said.

    Additionally, the GaN radar integration into Patriot required very few new software changes. “It wasn’t zero changes, but it was miniscule,” Acaba said, “and we were up and tracking targets, I think, within a few days.”

    Raytheon didn’t decide to develop GaN technology to answer any future Army requirements, Acaba stressed. “It was really around continuing the process of always looking ahead, what’s next, not just take the next order, but where should we be headed and how should we be positioned so when the Patriot partners are ready to take the next step we’ve got the solution.”

    The US Army and several foreign countries appear to be ready to take the next steps when it comes to bringing on new capability in air and missile defense.

    The Army is funded in fiscal year 2017 to hold a competition for an IAMD radar. It hasn’t publicly laid out requirements or how it might conduct a competition.

    Raytheon is waiting for the service to detail its plan and is “positioned to respond to anything from an immediate upgrade to the current radar to a clean-sheet, brand new radar to everything in between,” Acaba said.

    Raytheon spent the last two years building a demonstrator and expects to be ready to get into a government test program within two years. “We’ve started burning not just technical risk, but started burning down schedule,” Acaba said. "I think we are less than two years from getting this capability ready to get into a [government] test program."

    The GaN-based Patriot's trip to Huntsville in March will likely be one of the only times it’s displayed in public in the near-term. Afterward, it is set for tests, including field tests as early as late 2016.

    “Once we get that into the test program we really do want to use the time wisely, so we are not going to put this radar on the road to go to a bunch of different shows,” Acaba said. The radar will "come back here and go deep into tests" with plans to get it out into field testing as early as later this year, he added.

    The GaN radar development also comes at a time when other countries are taking serious looks at either upgrading missile defense capabilities or buying something new. Raytheon received export approval for the GaN AESA radar last year.

    Acaba noted that Japan, Spain and Greece are looking into upgrading their Patriot systems while Sweden, Romania, Czech Republic and Finland are potential new customers in addition to Poland and Turkey.

    Poland announced in the spring of 2015 that it had picked Patriot for its new air and missile defense program, called Wisla. Lockheed was also in the running but the Polish government excluded it from the competition because MEADS was not yet a fielded system.Germany and the MEADS team have since begun working to mint a continuing development contract while looking for more countries to partner with.

    Poland and the US government began negotiations to purchase Patriot, but a Polish presidential election that ousted those in office when Patriot was picked has created uncertainty over the program's future there. The Polish Ministry of Defense has re-initiated discussions with the MEADS team.

    Before news that discussions between Poland and the MEADS team had restarted, Acaba said Wednesday that Poland was “conducting its assessments,” and said a new government re-examining decisions from a previous government is a “natural process.”

    He said the company and the US Army are working to provide all requested information about the Patriot deal to the Polish government and said he expects the government to finish its assessments in a couple of months.

    “I’ve seen no indication this is going to be a six-month or a year assessment. I think they just want to do their due diligence on the process that was followed and what exactly the requirements are of the system that they are going to procure,” he said.

    Turkey is also weighing its options after dropping an earlier decision to acquire the country’s first long-range air- and anti-missile defense system from a Chinese contractor. Both Patriot and MEADS are back on the table there.

    In Sweden, “we’ve been talking with them for the past year or so and they’ve expressed significant interest,” Acaba said. “They see similar threats as others and so I think they are getting closer to identifying specific requirements, both dollars and funding, and I think they are close and they are closely following what is going on in Poland.”

    Whether Sweden decides on a competition or to conduct a study, “is unclear to me, but I see enough evidence that they are looking, [but] they are not just talking to us,” Acaba added.

    Romania, Czech Republic and Finland “are further behind,” Acaba said, but, “they have expressed interest.”

    Acaba noted that Belgium has also shown an interest. And the countries listed as potential customers is not exhaustive, he added.

    While it appears that Germany will develop the MEADS system, Acaba said the country is serious about upgrading the Patriot systems it already has in its inventory. Germany has said it plans to keep its Patriot systems until at least 2030 while it develops its next-generation system.

    The Patriot Configuration 3+ is the latest version of the system. It includes a new radar digital processor, the "Modern Man" control station considered more comfortable for the operators, and a modern adjunct processor.

    “I think they are headed down the Configuration 3+ path and in fact they have already started taking delivery of items to get there,” Acaba said of Germany.

    Acaba said he expected Germany to make Patriot upgrade awards in the fiscal 2017 or fiscal 2018 timeframe.

    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 Apr 08, 2016 7:01 pm

    SERIOUS FLAWS REVEALED IN U.S. ANTI-MISSILE NUCLEAR DEFENSE AGAINST NORTH KOREA

    Two serious technical flaws have been identified in the ground-launched anti-missile interceptors that the United States would rely on to defend against a nuclear attack by North Korea.

    Pentagon officials were informed of the problems as recently as last summer but decided to postpone corrective action. They told federal auditors that acting immediately to fix the defects would interfere with the production of new interceptors and slow a planned expansion of the nation's homeland missile defense system, according to a new report by the Government Accountability Office.

    As a result, all 33 interceptors now deployed at Vandenberg Air Force Base in Santa Barbara County and Ft. Greely, Alaska, have one of the defects. Ten of those interceptors — plus eight being prepared for delivery this year — have both.

    Summing up the effect on missile-defense readiness, the GAO report said that "the fielded interceptors are susceptible to experiencing … failure modes," resulting in "an interceptor fleet that may not work as intended."

    The flaws could disrupt sensitive on-board systems that are supposed to steer the interceptors into enemy missiles in space.

    The GAO report, an annual assessment of missile defense programs prepared for congressional committees, describes the problems in terse, technical terms. Defense specialists interviewed by The Times provided more detail.

    The interceptors form the heart of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, GMD for short. Four of the massive, three-stage rockets are stationed at Vandenberg and 29 at Ft. Greely.

    They would rise out of underground silos in response to an attack. Atop each interceptor is a 5-foot-long "kill vehicle," designed to separate from its boost rocket in space, fly independently at a speed of 4 miles per second and crash into an enemy warhead — a feat that has been likened to hitting one bullet with another.

    The GMD system was deployed in 2004 as part of the nation's response to Sept. 11, 2001, and a heightened fear of attack by terrorist groups or rogue states. It has cost taxpayers more than $40 billion so far and has been plagued by technical deficiencies.

    One of the newly disclosed shortcomings centers on wiring harnesses embedded within the kill vehicles' dense labyrinth of electronics.

    A supplier used an unsuitable soldering material to assemble harnesses in at least 10 interceptors deployed in 2009 and 2010 and still part of the fleet.

    The same material was used in the eight interceptors that will be placed in silos this year, according to GAO analyst Cristina Chaplain, lead author of the report.

    The soldering material is vulnerable to corrosion in the interceptors' underground silos, some of which have had damp conditions and mold. Corrosion "could have far-reaching effects" because the "defective wiring harnesses" supply power and data to the kill vehicle's on-board guidance system, said the GAO report, which is dated May 6.

    When Boeing Co., prime contractor for the GMD system, informed government officials of the problem last summer, they did not insist upon repair or replacement of the defective harnesses, according to the report.

    Instead, Missile Defense Agency officials "assessed the likelihood for the component's degradation in the operational environment as low and decided to accept the component as is," the report said.

    The decision minimized delays in producing new interceptors, "but increased the risk for future reliability failures," the report said.

    Chaplain told The Times that based on her staff's discussions with the Missile Defense Agency, officials there have "no timeline" for repairing the wiring harnesses.

    The agency encountered a similar problem with wiring harnesses years earlier, and the supplier was instructed not to use the deficient soldering material. But "the corrective actions were not passed along to other suppliers," according to the GAO report.

    L. David Montague, co-chairman of a National Academy of Sciences panel that reviewed operations of the Missile Defense Agency, said officials should promptly set a schedule for fixing the harnesses.

    "The older they are with that kind of a flawed soldering, the more likely they are to fail," Montague, a former president of missile systems for Lockheed Corp., said in an interview.

    The second newly disclosed defect involves a component called a divert thruster, a small motor intended to help maneuver the kill vehicles in flight. Each kill vehicle has four of them.

    The GAO report refers to "performance issues" with the thrusters. It offers few details, and GAO auditors declined to elaborate, citing a fear of revealing classified information. They did say that the problem is different from an earlier concern that the thruster's heavy vibrations could throw off the kill vehicle's guidance system.

    The report and interviews with defense specialists make clear that problems with the divert thruster have bedeviled the interceptor fleet for years. To address deficiencies in the original version, Pentagon contractors created a redesigned "alternate divert thruster."

    The government planned to install the new version in many of the currently deployed interceptors over the next few years and to retrofit newly manufactured interceptors, according to the GAO report and interviews with its authors.

    That plan was scrapped after the alternate thruster, in November 2013, failed a crucial ground test to determine whether it could withstand the stresses of flight, the report said. To stay on track for expanding the fleet, senior Pentagon officials decided to keep building interceptors with the original, deficient thruster.

    The GAO report faulted the Missile Defense Agency, an arm of the Pentagon, for "omitting steps in the design process" of the alternate thruster in the rush to deploy more interceptors. The skipped steps would have involved a lengthier, more rigorous vetting of the new design, defense specialists said. The report said the omission contributed to the 2013 test failure.

    All 33 interceptors now deployed have the original, defective thruster. The eight interceptors to be added to the fleet this year will contain the same component, GAO officials told The Times.

    The missile agency currently "does not plan to fix" those thrusters, despite their "known performance issues," said the GAO report.

    Contractors are continuing to work on the alternate thruster, hoping to correct whatever caused the ground-test failure. The first test flight using the alternate thruster is scheduled for late this year.

    The GAO had recommended that the Pentagon postpone integrating the eight new interceptors into the fleet until after that test. Defense Department officials rebuffed the recommendation, the report said.

    In a response included in the report, Assistant Secretary of Defense Katharina G. McFarland wrote that delaying deployment of the new interceptors "would unacceptably increase the risk" that the Pentagon would fall short of its goal of expanding the GMD system from 33 interceptors to 44 by the end of 2017.

    Asked for comment on the report, a spokesman for the Missile Defense Agency, Richard Lehner, said in a statement that officials "have in place a comprehensive, disciplined program to improve and enhance" the GMD system "regarding the issues noted by the GAO."

    "We will continue to work closely with our industry partners to ensure quality standards are not only met, but exceeded," the statement said.Boeing declined to comment.

    The GMD system is designed to repel a "limited" missile attack by a non-superpower adversary, such as North Korea. The nation's defense against a massive nuclear assault by Russia or China still relies on "mutually assured destruction," the Cold War notion that neither country would strike first for fear of a devastating counterattack.

    GMD's roots go back to the Clinton administration, when concern began to mount over the international spread of missile technology and nuclear development programs. In 2002, President Bush ordered "an initial set of missile defense capabilities" to be put in place within two years to protect the U.S.

    To accelerate deployment, then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld exempted the missile agency from the Pentagon's standard procurement rules and testing standards.

    Engineers trace the system's difficulties to the breakneck pace at which components were produced and fielded. In precisely scripted flight tests above the Pacific, interceptors have failed to hit mock-enemy warheads about half the time.

    As a result, the missile agency projects that four or five interceptors would have to be fired at any single enemy warhead, according to current and former government officials. Under this scenario, a volley of 10 enemy missiles could exhaust the entire U.S. inventory of interceptors.

    The Obama administration, after resisting calls for a larger system, pledged two years ago to increase the number of interceptors to 44. Both Republicans and Democrats in Congress have pushed for further expansion. The House this month passed a bill authorizing $30 million to plan and design a site for interceptors on the East Coast. The White House called the move "premature."

    Sponsored content

    Re: US Ballistic Missile Defense Systems

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 4:54 am


      Current date/time is Sun Dec 04, 2016 4:54 am