Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    US ABM Systems

    Share

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Austin on Mon Jul 11, 2016 3:04 pm

    Strategic Capabilities of SM-3 Block IIA Interceptors (June 30, 2016)
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Strategic Capabilities of SM-3 Block IIA Interceptors (June 30, 2016)

    Post  max steel on Mon Jul 11, 2016 9:44 pm

    Austin wrote:Strategic Capabilities of SM-3 Block IIA Interceptors (June 30, 2016)

    That satellite destruction was made possible because the sat position was predetermined from where and when it will be passing by, rest Block II-A are for IRBMs (forget ICBMs) like Korean Mudsang etc. But the question is can they intercept Iskanders ?
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Wed Jul 20, 2016 10:21 pm

    Science group warns of shortcomings in U.S. missile defense

    The U.S. missile defense system to counter attacks from rogue states like North Korea has no proven capability to protect the United States and is not on a credible path to achieve that goal, a science advocacy group said on Thursday.

    The ground-based midcourse missile defense system, which has deployed 30 interceptors in Alaska and California, has been tested under highly scripted conditions only nine times since being deployed in 2004, and failed to destroy its target two-thirds of the time, the Union of Concerned Scientists said in a report.

    "After nearly 15 years of effort to build the GMD homeland missile defense system, it still has no demonstrated real-world capability to defend the United States," said Laura Grego, a UCS physicist who co-authored the report.

    Deficiencies in the program, which has cost $40 billion so far and is being expanded to include 44 interceptors by 2017, are due largely to a Bush administration decision to exempt the system from normal oversight and accountability, to rush it into service by 2004, Grego said in an interview.

    "Instead of getting something out to the field that worked well or worked adequately, in fact this has been a disaster. It's done the opposite," she said.

    The Obama administration's efforts to improve oversight while keeping the system outside the normal development and procurement process have contributed to the problems, she said.

    "The lack of accountability has had and will have real lasting effects, especially for a system ... that's strategically important. It should be held to the highest standards, the highest rigor," she added.

    The Missile Defense Agency said in a statement the rapid deployment requirement in the law that created the system was "a driving factor" in the delivery of a ground-based interceptor with "reliability challenges."

    The agency said the problems had led to changes in the interceptor's design and a program to improve reliability, including use of more mature technologies. The MDA said it was seeking ways to reduce the risks of deploying equipment still under development.

    The UCS report echoed criticisms the homeland missile defense system has faced from other quarters. A Pentagon assessment in 2015 found that flight testing of the system was still "insufficient to demonstrate that an operationally useful defense capability exists."

    A February report by Congress's Government Accountability Office said the MDA was taking a "high-risk" approach by buying interceptors still under development for operational use.

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    US expert says THAAD can’t distinguish between real and decoy warheads

    Post  Austin on Sun Oct 23, 2016 10:29 am

    US expert says THAAD can’t distinguish between real and decoy warheads


    http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/764068.html

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Austin on Sun Oct 23, 2016 6:17 pm

    Found this interesting


    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Found this interesting

    Post  Austin on Sun Oct 23, 2016 6:18 pm

    US expert says THAAD can’t distinguish between real and decoy warheads


    http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/764068.html

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Austin on Sun Dec 11, 2016 7:17 am

    Interesting concept to kill MIRV

    Get Ready Russia, China, Iran and North Korea: America's Missile Defense Program Is Going 'Star Wars'

    The Multi-Object Kill Vehicle can simultaneously destroy ICBMs and decoys with a single interceptor.


    The Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency is in the early phases of engineering a next-generation “Star Wars”-type technology able to knock multiple incoming enemy targets out of space with a single interceptor, officials said.

    The new system, called Multi-Object Kill Vehicle, or MOKV, is designed to release from a Ground Based Interceptor and destroy approaching Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles, or ICBMs -- and also take out decoys traveling alongside the incoming missile threat.

    “We will develop and test, by 2017, MOKV command and control strategies in both digital and hardware-in-the-loop venues that will prove we can manage the engagements of many kill vehicles on many targets from a single interceptor. We will also invest in the communication architectures and guidance technology that support this game-changing approach,” a spokesman for the Missile Defense Agency, told Scout Warrior a few months ago.

    Decoys or countermeasures are missile-like structures, objects or technologies designed to throw off or confuse the targeting and guidance systems of an approaching interceptor in order to increase the probability that the actual missile can travel through to its target.

    If the seeker or guidance systems of a “kill vehicle” technology on a Ground Base Interceptor, or GBI, cannot discern an actual nuclear-armed ICBM from a decoy – the dangerous missile is more likely to pass through and avoid being destroyed. MOKV is being developed to address this threat scenario.

    The Missile Defense Agency has awarded MOKV development deals to Boeing, Lockheed and Raytheon as part of a risk-reduction phase able to move the technology forward, Lehner said.

    Steve Nicholls, Director of Advanced Air & Missile Defense Systems for Raytheon, told Scout Warrior the MOKV is being developed to provide the MDA with “a key capability for its Ballistic Missile Defense System - to discriminate lethal objects from countermeasures and debris. The kill vehicle, launched from the ground-based interceptor extends the ground-based discrimination capability with onboard sensors and processing to ensure the real threat is eliminated.”

    MOKV could well be described as a new technological step in the ongoing maturation of what was originally conceived of in the Reagan era as “Star Wars” – the idea of using an interceptor missile to knock out or destroy an incoming enemy nuclear missile in space. This concept was originally greeted with skepticism and hesitation as something that was not technologically feasible.

    Not only has this technology come to fruition in many respects, but the capability continues to evolve with systems like MOKV. MOKV, to begin formal product development by 2022, is being engineered with a host of innovations to include new sensors, signal processors, communications technologies and robotic manufacturing automation for high-rate tactical weapons systems, Nicholls explained.

    The trajectory of an enemy ICBM includes an initial “boost” phase where it launches from the surface up into space, a “midcourse” phase where it travels in space above the earth’s atmosphere and a “terminal” phase wherein it re-enters the earth’s atmosphere and descends to its target. MOKV is engineered to destroy threats in the “midcourse” phase while the missile is traveling through space.

    An ability to destroy decoys as well as actual ICBMs is increasingly vital in today’s fast-changing technological landscape because potential adversaries continue to develop more sophisticated missiles, countermeasures and decoy systems designed to make it much harder for interceptor missile to distinguish a decoy from an actual missile.

    As a result, a single intercept able to destroy multiple targets massively increases the likelihood that the incoming ICBM threat will actually be destroyed more quickly without needing to fire another Ground Based Interceptor.

    Raytheon describes its developmental approach as one that hinges upon what’s called “open-architecture,” a strategy designed to engineer systems with the ability to easily embrace and integrate new technologies as they emerge. This strategy will allow the MOKV platform to better adjust to fast-changing threats, Nicholls said.

    The MDA development plan includes the current concept definition phase, followed by risk reduction and proof of concept phases leading to a full development program, notionally beginning in fiscal year 2022, Nicholls explained.

    “This highly advanced and highly technical kill vehicle takes a true dedication of time and expertise to properly mature. It is essential to leverage advancements from other members of the Raytheon kill vehicle family, including the Redesigned Kill Vehicle,” Nicholls said.

    While the initial development of MOKV is aimed at configuring the “kill vehicle” for a GBI, there is early thinking about integrating the technology onto a Standard Missile-3, or SM-3, an interceptor missile also able to knock incoming ICBMs out of space.The SM-3 is also an exo-atmopheric "kill vehicle," meaning it can destroy short and intermediate range incoming targets; its "kill vehilce" has no explosives but rather uses kinetic energy to collide with and obliterate its target. The resulting impact is the equivalent to a 10-ton truck traveling at 600 mph, Raytheon statements said.

    “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,” an MDA official said.

    Kris Osborn became the Managing Editor of Scout Warrior in August of 2015. His role with Scout.com includes managing content on the Scout Warrior site and generating independently sourced original material. Scout Warrior is aimed at providing engaging, substantial military-specific content covering a range of key areas such as weapons, emerging or next-generation technologies and issues of relevance to the military. Just prior to coming to Scout Warrior, Osborn served as an Associate Editor at the Military.com. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army - Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at CNN and CNN Headline News. This story originally appeared in Scout Warrior.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1093
    Points : 1093
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  miketheterrible on Sun Dec 11, 2016 7:59 am

    What the hell does this have to do with s-300 series of aa systems or Russian systems altogether if it is American? I understand you can read English, no?

    Word of advice to people - before moving onto another system that is likely to fail, better get your current systems working. Thaad and alike seem to be common failures against 1960 missiles.

    Also, system will be countered with newer tech like quasi ballistic missile systems that currently exist and change in countermeasure systems and hypersonic.  What this is, is proposing against something that is being replaced anyway.

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Austin on Sun Dec 11, 2016 8:07 am

    miketheterrible wrote:What the hell does this have to do with s-300 series of aa systems or Russian systems altogether if it is American? I understand you can read English, no?

    Word of advice to people - before moving onto another system that is likely to fail, better get your current systems working. Thaad and alike seem to be common failures against 1960 missiles.

    Also, system will be countered with newer tech like quasi ballistic missile systems that currently exist and change in countermeasure systems and hypersonic.  What this is, is proposing against something that is being replaced anyway.

    That is why I said Interesting concept , I mean the MKOV concept to hit MIRV , Like ABM caryying MKV to kill BM MKV
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1093
    Points : 1093
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  miketheterrible on Sun Dec 11, 2016 8:10 am

    Nothing interesting in it or even smart. Even north Koreans can do this. Take BM with MIRV, convert warhead to carry multiple of conventional little warheads in a shotgun effect, and blast it at target.

    It just that they can't get their current system to even work as intended. Just look at Saudi Arabia and how so many Yemen BM survived.  So this will be another money sink.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 445
    Points : 445
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sun Dec 11, 2016 11:49 am

    Austin wrote:Interesting concept to kill MIRV

    Get Ready Russia, China, Iran and North Korea: America's Missile Defense Program Is Going 'Star Wars'

    The Multi-Object Kill Vehicle can simultaneously destroy ICBMs and decoys with a single interceptor.



    Anyone who designed it is a egomaniac, messianic psychopath.

    It is an attacking system, target of it is to be able to deliver a nuclear strike without any fear of the retaliation.


    It is against the nuclear non proliferation treaty as well, because it will increase the number of warheads and delivery vehicles.


    Direct consequence of any kill system like this:
    -cancellation of any arm reduction treaty
    -development and fielding new type of nuclear delivery vehicles
    -Military alliance between china/russia (maybe india?)
    -Scaling up the Chinese nuclear stockpile and delivery capacity
    -Increasing the military spending in chine to 10%, and fielding a military that never been seen in the history ( and making the US military compared to Chinese as big as the UK military is compared the the US )
    -Occupation of Taiwan by china


    The bare minimum that it will cause is new generation of icbms with multiple bus systems, and increasing the number of ballistic missiles/warheads.


    JohninMK

    Posts : 4550
    Points : 4607
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  JohninMK on Sun Dec 11, 2016 12:33 pm

    Singular_Transform wrote:
    Austin wrote:Interesting concept to kill MIRV

    Get Ready Russia, China, Iran and North Korea: America's Missile Defense Program Is Going 'Star Wars'

    The Multi-Object Kill Vehicle can simultaneously destroy ICBMs and decoys with a single interceptor.



    Anyone who designed it is a egomaniac, messianic psychopath.

    It is an attacking system, target of it is to be able to deliver a nuclear strike without any fear of the retaliation.

    It is against the nuclear non proliferation treaty as well, because it will increase the number of warheads and delivery vehicles.

    Direct consequence of any kill system like this:
    -cancellation of any arm reduction treaty
    -development and fielding new type of nuclear delivery vehicles
    -Military alliance between china/russia (maybe india?)
    -Scaling up the Chinese nuclear stockpile and delivery capacity
    -Increasing the military spending in chine to 10%, and fielding a military that never been seen in the history ( and making the US military compared to Chinese as big as the UK military is compared the the US )
    -Occupation of Taiwan by china

    The bare minimum that it will cause is new generation of icbms with multiple bus systems, and increasing the number of ballistic missiles/warheads.
    Think you might be missing the point of all this puff. It is creating a scenario to generate more profit opportunities for the MIC. They already have upgrade contracts for the existing systems that need sorting, their need now is for the R&D to start on the next generation of profit creators.

    Don't forget that the MIC really don't care how well their products actually work and the militaries plan round the reality. In the situation where it did actually matter then the world would have been destroyed and no-one would be left to be held to account.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 445
    Points : 445
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sun Dec 11, 2016 1:31 pm

    JohninMK wrote:
    Think you might be missing the point of all this puff. It is creating a scenario to generate more profit opportunities for the MIC. They already have upgrade contracts for the existing systems that need sorting, their need now is for the R&D to start on the next generation of profit creators.

    Don't forget that the MIC really don't care how well their products actually work and the militaries plan round the reality. In the situation where it did actually matter then the world would have been destroyed and no-one would be left to be held to account.

    Doesn't matter.

    Even if the Raytheon ship empty containers ,and making false claims the Chinese/Russian/_Indian political / military planners will be prompted to react , and to start to pump out new warheads and rocket systems.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1093
    Points : 1093
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  miketheterrible on Sun Dec 11, 2016 2:18 pm

    Pretty much. Russia will end up researching ways to bypass such systems or render them useless and China will build up their arsenal so that if 10 - 40% of their arsenal can be destroyed, then they can still cause enough damage to end the world.

    It is just another nuclear arms race, but with anti ballistic missile defense systems added to the equation.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  GarryB on Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:26 am

    Yes... the whole point of the ABM treaty was to KEEP MAD.

    Without mutually assured destruction you need trust... ahahahahahahahahahaha and that is worth exactly nothing.

    It does not matter if it works or not... if the users think it works the result will be they will think they are working from a position of strength... the fact that they will be destroyed too will come as little consolation when they start a war and everyone loses.

    Multiple intercept ABM systems have been on the agenda since day one... they tended to be third stage upgrades set for the early 2020s.

    The first stage is basic, while the final stages are supposed to offer comprehensive protection from all ICBM and SLBM threats.

    In other words INF treaty and new START go out the window and simple overwhelming the enemy becomes the easy option.

    Of course a nuclear powered jet motor powering large unlimited cruise missiles becomes another option too.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1093
    Points : 1093
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Multi-Object Kill Vehicle

    Post  miketheterrible on Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:38 am

    There are multiple of systems capable of dealing with such threats. The technology behind this has been undergoing development since the 60's. Essentially, the systems track and trace standard ballistic paths, especially when they are in space. But what if the missile doesn't fly in a standard trajectory? This is what the Russians have been working on and developing. Quasi-Ballistic missile path. Right now, only known missile capable of this is the Iskander. But future ballistic missiles will be using this concept. Other way is making them faster, and well, that is already happening too. Especially with development of hypersonic systems. Then of course is changing the decoy structure so that it confuses the ABM system. And then there is the idea of striking the ABM sites first and foremost by overwhelming the system with cruise missiles and short range BM's. long range, air launched cruise missiles and even ground launched ones are ideal. But due to silly military agreements, Russia cannot build long range, ground multi-launched cruise missile systems or US and rest of the west cries alot.

    So other method is Russia to simply also to further move its development of Nudol and S-500 system. I have no idea where they currently are with that though. Hopefully we will see it soon.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10222
    Points : 10710
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  George1 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 12:05 pm

    New US Missile Hits Target in Space

    The US Department of Defense Missile Defense Agency and Raytheon have successfully tested a missile that intercepts enemy missiles in space.

    The SM-3 IIA missile can sense ballistic missile attacks from space and neutralize the threats. The SM-3 made its debut by eliminating a ballistic missile fired from the Navy’s USS John Paul Jones destroyer.

    The idea for the mission was conceived and motivated, in part, by Star Wars, according to Scout Warrior’s Kris Osborn. “Now that technology is getting better,” he said, “exoatmospheric” missiles can intercept short- and medium-range ballistic missiles descending from outer space. The anti-missile technology would come in handy if the medium-range DF-16 missile tested by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army gets deployed.

    The next-generation missile is being developed by both Washington and Tokyo, Scout reported. Further, the US plans to deploy the missile in Poland by 2018. The successful launch took place in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Hawaii.

    Raytheon said that the 21-inch airframe allows US and Japanese forces to defend a larger area. “Now we have a higher sensitivity—so that is just a better seeker,” Raytheon SM-3 program director Amy Cohen said.

    “The SM-3 Block IIA missile is a larger version of the SM-3 IB in terms of boosters and the kinetic warhead, which allows for increased operating time,” the Missile Defense Agency said in a statement. Other officials asserted that the test was a “critical milestone” and that it was a “vitally important” achievement for preparing against “increasing ballistic missile threats around the world.”
    The first SM-3 interceptor in a double shot missile defense test rockets skyward to strike out a ballistic missile target off the coast of Kauai, Hawaii.

    The administration of US President Donald Trump has made state-of-the-art missile defense a top priority.

    https://sputniknews.com/military/201702071050411099-new-missile-hits-space-target/


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

    avatar
    nomadski

    Posts : 92
    Points : 94
    Join date : 2017-01-02

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  nomadski on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:28 pm

    This missile defense idea must be thought of , for use against nuclear missiles . But nature of nukes is self limiting . Say by some fluke that a war starts between two nuke armed nations . ( in reality this is very difficult to imagine . Just look at India and Pakistan . Their version of " war " , is a twenty gun salute across the himalayas . Causing avalanches ! Since the fear of nukes keeps them away from even a conventional skirmish ) . And one nation launches a limited strike . Then even the best missile defences can not stop all nuke attacks. Remember other attacks like suitcase nukes ! And say one gets through and kills a million people . Then the nation suffering this attack must retaliate . The choice is then to launch a similar attack or a larger attack . A larger attack will invite even a larger response . Ultimately leading to mutual assured destruction . So the only alternative is to launch and allow the destruction of a similar target , in the other country . So the politicians will allow enemy missile to hit target . To avoid total destruction . They may even do it themselves . After this initial exchange . Both sides will quickly declare peace ! So missile defence is useless and waste of money .
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:51 am

    Actually the real danger of ABM systems is that over time as they develop some people might get the idea that they are actually effective.

    No one is going to launch a limited strike... that is just western bullshit.

    I think the best analogy is a western gun fight.

    The western belief was gradual escalation... two guys start swearing and cursing each other and then throw bottles and plates at each other... escalating to punches and throwing chairs and tables and eventually one will go for their gun and then so will the other.

    The reality is that no one is going to pick up a chair to throw if the risk is that the other guy will then go for their gun while you have your hands full... you go for your gun first and try to kill the other guy so they don't shoot you.

    Back to countries it takes about 30 minutes for ICBMs to make the trip so even after you launch the other guy has 30 minutes to launch their missiles.

    Once it is confirmed the enemy has launched an attack it can be assumed a primary target is your nuclear capability so you have to launch a full retaliatory strike or let his missiles destroy your missiles before you can use them.

    There wont be any graduated response.

    ABM defences actually make nuclear war more likely because it could lead one side to over confidence... believing they could survive... whether they can or cannot is not important... they just need to think they can for it to be dangerous.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10222
    Points : 10710
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  George1 on Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:08 pm

    US Deploys THAAD System in South Korea

    The United States military has started deployment of THAAD system in South Korea, US military official stated.

    Lockheed Martin shows the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, or THAAD missile being launched from a mobile launcher at Kauai's Pacific Missile Range Facility

    TOKYO (Sputnik) — The United States has started the process of deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-ballistic missile system in South Korea, media reported Tuesday citing a Defense Ministry official.

    According to the Yonhap News Agency, parts of the system were delivered on Monday to the Osan Air Base in Pyeongtaek, 43 miles south of Seoul.

    The THAAD system has a range of over 200 kilometers (125 miles) and is designed to intercept short, medium and intermediate ballistic missiles at the terminal incoming stage. The agreement on THAAD between South Korea and the United States was reached in July 2016, spurred by North Korea's nuclear program development.

    Earlier, US Department of Defense spokesman Navy Commander Gary Ross told Sputnik that Missile launches by North Korea confirmed that the decision to deploy the THAAD system to South Korea was right.

    On Monday, media reported that North Korea fired four ballistic missiles, and three landed in Japan's exclusive economic zone, triggering a negative reaction from, Seoul, Tokyo and their allies.

    https://sputniknews.com/asia/201703071051327217-usa-deploys-thaad-korea/


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

    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Mon May 01, 2017 10:37 pm

    A flawed missile defense system generates $2 billion in bonuses for Boeing


    While homeland missile defense system faltered, prime contractor Boeing Co. collected $2 billion in bonuses.
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Mon May 01, 2017 10:49 pm

    Can the U.S. defend against a North Korean missile strike?
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Mon May 01, 2017 10:58 pm

    A test of America's homeland missile defense system found a problem. Why did the Pentagon call it a success?
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Mon May 01, 2017 11:03 pm

    U.S. missile defense system is ‘simply unable to protect the public,’ report says



    JohninMK

    Posts : 4550
    Points : 4607
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  JohninMK on Mon May 01, 2017 11:15 pm

    max steel wrote:A test of America's homeland missile defense system found a problem. Why did the Pentagon call it a success?
    Any update since that article Max?

    Sponsored content

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Aug 18, 2017 6:28 pm