US ABM Systems

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

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

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

More good news


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


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

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



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

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

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

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






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

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

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

read the second link

max steel wrote:

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

read the second link

Hmm.

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

Lockheed Martin Delivers First Upgraded PAC-3 Missile Interceptors


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

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


Visit Lookheed Shmartin to find out more bullshit!

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


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.

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!

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

PAC 3 test video.

Former US ambassador to Russia, McFail, claims that the US can take out 90% of Russian ICBMs in any confrontation.

All I can say is: McFail and his bosses are certifiable retards.

The question should be brought up to him that what system is capable of doing that? Since PAC 3 proved it couldn't handle Scud missiles which Russia has not operated in a very long time, and Russia's nuclear arsenal are in ICBM's.

Or does he mean the Aegis destroyers?  Cause as well, such systems are incapable of dealing with anything more than a 1,000km two stage missile, which is also questionable in the method of testing.  Or THAAD? Which also failed most of its tests.

I think they need to re-work their propaganda.  Cause there is enough evidence to prove that these systems are ineffective yet they still spew it, even if the data is open.  I wonder who they are fooling? Themselves or their people?

The other 10% of missiles would cause so much devastation that the whole point is moot anyway.

sepheronx wrote:The question should be brought up to him that what system is capable of doing that? Since PAC 3 proved it couldn't handle Scud missiles which Russia has not operated in a very long time, and Russia's nuclear arsenal are in ICBM's.

Or does he mean the Aegis destroyers?  Cause as well, such systems are incapable of dealing with anything more than a 1,000km two stage missile, which is also questionable in the method of testing.  Or THAAD? Which also failed most of its tests.

I think they need to re-work their propaganda.  Cause there is enough evidence to prove that these systems are ineffective yet they still spew it, even if the data is open.  I wonder who they are fooling? Themselves or their people?

The other 10% of missiles would cause so much devastation that the whole point is moot anyway.

The problem is that this statement reveals a dangerous delusion of the US elites. They actually believe they can win a nuclear war with Russia.
The 10% is acceptable to them as they give a rat's ass about their own people (see how they deprive them of good paying jobs and let cities
like Detroit rot away).

This statement by McFail has let the cat out of the bag and it explains why the US and its minions are so brazen.

http://www.rbc.ru/society/28/06/2013/863813.shtml

OK, I screwed up, it was Rogozin who made the statement and not McFail. McFail has a record of making the usual anti-Russian
statements so I fell into a bias trap.

But by installing Missile shield in Europe , one day their wet dreams will come true .


If Russia does counter ABM deployment in Eastern Europe with short range ballistic missiles and improved reentry vehicles/boosters, we have the exact situation that the ABM treaty was designed to prevent.

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.