Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    US ABM Systems

    Share
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10210
    Points : 10698
    Join date : 2011-12-23
    Location : Greece

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  George1 on Wed Oct 21, 2015 8:22 pm

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


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

    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:47 am

    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.




    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5361
    Points : 5598
    Join date : 2012-10-25

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:06 am

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


    Visit Lookheed Shmartin to find out more bullshit!
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Sat Nov 14, 2015 2:15 am

    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 6:14 pm; edited 2 times in total
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4495
    Points : 4674
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Nov 14, 2015 6:12 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!
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Sat Nov 21, 2015 2:33 pm

    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 12:42 pm; edited 3 times in total
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Sat Nov 21, 2015 3:17 pm

    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5515
    Points : 5560
    Join date : 2015-09-03
    Location : Serbia

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Militarov on Sun Nov 22, 2015 5:27 pm



    PAC 3 test video.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10210
    Points : 10698
    Join date : 2011-12-23
    Location : Greece

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  George1 on Thu Dec 10, 2015 6:16 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

    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10210
    Points : 10698
    Join date : 2011-12-23
    Location : Greece

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  George1 on Tue Jan 12, 2016 4:29 pm

    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

    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Tue Jan 12, 2016 4:47 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.

    Austin

    Posts : 6230
    Points : 6636
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Austin on Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:15 pm

    THAAD-ER

    http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?137702-THAAD-Extended-Range&p=2288497#post2288497
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7255
    Points : 7555
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  sepheronx on Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:49 pm

    Kinda cool actually. Odd though they reduced the number of missiles per system though.  As well, wasnt thaad kinda lackluster in performance?

    Anyway, gives Russia some insight of potential issues they will need to overcome.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4495
    Points : 4674
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:18 pm

    Austin wrote:THAAD-ER

    http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?137702-THAAD-Extended-Range&p=2288497#post2288497

    Austin, you've been a member long enough to know not to link to other forums, you could've easily just copied the image links and posted them here...but it seems that simple task was too difficult.
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Sat Feb 06, 2016 4:33 am

    Are S-500 and THAAD-ER comparable ? US wants THAAD-ER to intercept hypersonic cruise missiles.


    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 774
    Points : 776
    Join date : 2015-11-07

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Isos on Mon Feb 08, 2016 3:30 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Austin wrote:THAAD-ER

    http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?137702-THAAD-Extended-Range&p=2288497#post2288497

    Austin, you've been a member long enough to know not to link to other forums, you could've easily just copied the image links and posted them here...but it seems that simple task was too difficult.

    Interesting to see that the US are still using inclined lunchers and not VLS like S-400/500. Are they stupid or is there a strategy behind this idea ??

    JohninMK

    Posts : 4537
    Points : 4594
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  JohninMK on Tue Feb 23, 2016 6:16 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
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Tue Feb 23, 2016 8:02 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 .

    Bankoletti

    Posts : 4
    Points : 6
    Join date : 2016-02-27

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Bankoletti on Sat Feb 27, 2016 7:46 am

    Isos wrote:

    Interesting to see that the US are still using inclined lunchers and not VLS like S-400/500. Are they stupid or is there a strategy behind this idea ??

    Vhile generally more advanced, VLS technology has some disadvantages compared to inclined launchers:

    1. Inclined launchers don't require a "cold-lauch" technology - therefore they are cheaper, technologically easier to produce and/or maintain.
    2. Missiles don't require addinitonal perpendicular boosters to direct the missile towards the target immediately after the launch before main missile motor starts.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16276
    Points : 16907
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  GarryB on Sat Feb 27, 2016 11:38 am

    Vhile generally more advanced, VLS technology has some disadvantages compared to inclined launchers:

    1. Inclined launchers don't require a "cold-lauch" technology - therefore they are cheaper, technologically easier to produce and/or maintain.
    2. Missiles don't require addinitonal perpendicular boosters to direct the missile towards the target immediately after the launch before main missile motor starts.

    Vertical launchers don't require cold launch either.

    Angled launchers are limited as to the direction they can engage aircraft... they must be facing the direction of the threat... which is a problem when the direction of the threat is unknown or variable.

    A vertically launched Kalibr cruise missile does not use side thrusters to orient the missile immediately after launch.

    Most long range missiles with two stages and therefore a solid rocket booster generally don't do very much manouvering immediately after launch... they tend to go up and slowly roll into the direction they are being launched.

    For a very long range SAM a steep climb is actually rather beneficial in terms of kinetic range performance... if the target appears within about 5km it would already be within the minimum effective range of most large SAM systems anyway.


    _________________
    “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
    Militarov

    Posts : 5515
    Points : 5560
    Join date : 2015-09-03
    Location : Serbia

    Judging by presentation shots, THAAD ER is to have x3 the range of baseline THAAD. Which should be about 600 km give or take

    Post  Militarov on Tue Mar 22, 2016 2:04 pm

    Judging by presentation shots, THAAD ER is to have x3 the range of baseline THAAD. Which should be about 600 km give or take.

    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Fri Apr 08, 2016 10:31 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."
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    THAAD ABM System

    Post  max steel on Sat Apr 16, 2016 11:48 pm

    Guess US is also working on GAN semiconductor for their THAAD-ER radars. ( Quoting someone from another forum)



    RAYTHEON AWARDED $29.3 MILLION PHASE 3 CONTRACT FOR WIDE BANDGAP SEMICONDUCTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

    Raytheon Company has been awarded a $23.9 million phase 3 contract from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to continue work on the agency's Wide Bandgap Semiconductor (WBGS) Development program.

    Raytheon is demonstrating that transmit-receive modules using GaN-powered monolithic microwave integrated circuit amplifiers have a significant performance advantage in that they provide significantly higher radio frequency power with greater efficiency than current modules. GaN technology significantly extends the warfighter's reach into the battlespace by increasing radar ranges, sensitivity and search capabilities. Alternatively, the technology enables reduction in the size of the antenna, which improves transportability and reduces acquisition and lifecycle costs without sacrificing performance.


    This 38-month phase of the program is a collaboration between DARPA and the Missile Defense Agency (MDA). Its objective is to rapidly mature and demonstrate the capabilities of gallium nitride (GaN) to improve the performance of missile defense radars. To accelerate the technology development, it will combine the results of Raytheon's DARPA-funded WBGS Phase 2 and the MDA-funded Next Generation Transmit Receive Integrated Microwave Module programs.

    "Our research continues to demonstrate that GaN technology will improve the capability and performance of current and future military systems," said Michael Del Checcolo, vice president of Engineering for Raytheon Integrated Systems. "Under the WBGS program, we have the opportunity to combine research findings from multiple organizations, allowing us to develop and provide the most advanced technologies to help keep our warfighters and homeland safe."
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2979
    Points : 3011
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  max steel on Wed Apr 20, 2016 5:20 pm

    US Army Uses Northrop Grumman-Built System to Destroy Multiple Targets in Air and Missile Defense Test




    The IBCS utilized sensors and interceptors from different air defense systems connected at the component level to operate on the IBCS integrated fire control network. Using tracking data from Sentinel and Patriot radars, the IBCS provided the command-and-control (C2) for a Patriot Advanced Capability Three (PAC-3) interceptor to destroy a ballistic missile target and a PAC-2 interceptor to destroy a cruise missile target.

    IBCS replaces seven legacy C2 systems to deliver a single integrated air picture and offer the flexibility to deploy smaller force packages. By networking sensors and interceptors, IBCS provides wider area surveillance and broader protection areas. With its truly open systems architecture, IBCS enables integration of current and future sensors and weapon systems and interoperability with joint C2 and the ballistic missile defense system.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10210
    Points : 10698
    Join date : 2011-12-23
    Location : Greece

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  George1 on Fri Apr 29, 2016 7:03 am

    Obama Plans to Spend $38Bln on Missile Defense Over Next Five Years

    President Barack Obama has approved $38 billion for the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) through 2020 despite it only conducting one successful test against an intercontinental ballistic missile in eight years, a Government Accountability office (GAO) report revealed.

    WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — An earlier GAO report on US missile defense on February 17, 2016 stated that the MDA had failed to demonstrate through flight testing that it could defend the US homeland against the current missile defense threat.

    It also noted that a full assessment of the system’s effectiveness was currently not possible.

    "MDA plans to spend around $38 billion through fiscal year 2020 to continue its efforts to develop, integrate, and field BMDS [ballistic missile defense systems] elements and targets necessary for testing," the report said on Thursday.

    The MDA has claimed only one successful interception of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM)-like target in the past eight years of tests.

    "Since 2002, MDA has received approximately $123 billion to develop and deploy the BMDS, which is a highly complex group of systems," the GAO report stated.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/us/20160429/1038805092/missile-defense-obama.html#ixzz47AugKWhr


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


    Sponsored content

    Re: US ABM Systems

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:43 pm