Comparing anti-missile systems in the world

[Grand Danois]

who is this new system built by? where abouts will it be based and which countries are funding it? do you know how long it will be before it enters service if it ever does. I doubt the british government will support it, the amount of defence cuts we are getting is outragous. I thought that the patriot and other missiles like the israeli arrow could also shoot down ballistic missiles. correct me if im wrong.

could you give me a bit of info on the THAAD system, a website or your own personal knowledge? thanks!!

Oh. Forgot about the Arrow. Know to little to comment on if it is supposed to deal with ICBMs.

As to Europe: Built by the US, funded by the US. The future development of Patriot, MEADS, is an US/German/Italian undertaking though.

The UK Govt offered to host the 10 GBI that will probably be set up in Poland/Czech Republic. The radar at Fyllingsdale has been upgraded to be part of a BMD.

When it will go into service in Europe - depends more on politics than how long it will take to deploy it.

What I know of THAAD? Just what I pick up now and then. There's plenty on the web.

 

[Jambo_100]

missile defence

britain is open to air/missile attack. we have no way to shoot down incoming missiles such as scud. the best land based air defence missile we have is the rapier and that only has a range of about 5km.

so any ideas about what britian is going to do about missile defence? when the new "son of starwars" is built will that be capable of taking out missiles inbound for the UK and europe?

i found out that one of our new type 45 destroyers based in the meditaranian sea could shoot down a ballistic missile bound for europe. i no the type 45 is good but im not sure if the government would have one in the medertaranian sea 24 hours a day seven days a week.

take a look

http://navy-matters.beedall.com/imagesbig/t45-bmd.jpg

 

[Viktor]

Grand Danois - tell me something.

THAAD is designed to intercept exo-atmospheric and endo-atmospheric threats.
Its missile can reach and destroy targets 150km in hight - so im interested, SCUD like missile while in flight reaches max atitude of aprox 150km and missiles with longer range have even higher hight peak whitch means faster re-entry speed. So in order to achive hit THAAD needst to have prety fast missile.
1. Do you have any information about it?
2. Is THAAD constructed to handle balistic missiles with depresed trajectory concernig THAAD is constructed to hit missiles in space with kill vehicle?
3. Do you know what are maximum target speed THAAD can handle?
4. i had something else in mind but forget it now.
5.THAAD is not constructed to be mid-course interceptor like GBI does it? Whitch in that case means it can handle missiles only in therminal phase whitch is not bad but not wery good either because even IRBM will have high peak atitude and hell of a speed during re-entry?

 

[Viktor]

take a look

http://navy-matters.beedall.com/imagesbig/t45-bmd.jpg

Jambo_100 unles Type 45 does not have SM-3 with AEGIS or like radar I think it is just a propaganda picture and even if it has SM-3 has not chances against ICBM more MRBM and some IRBM - by my opinion it curently makes most potent balistic missile defence.

PS.

Whery useful in case China decides to hit US pacific bases with balistic missiles before it lounches offensive Taiwan.

 

[Grand Danois]

Grand Danois - tell me something.

THAAD is designed to intercept exo-atmospheric and endo-atmospheric threats.
Its missile can reach and destroy targets 150km in hight - so im interested, SCUD like missile while in flight reaches max atitude of aprox 150km and missiles with longer range have even higher hight peak whitch means faster re-entry speed. So in order to achive hit THAAD needst to have prety fast missile.
1. Do you have any information about it?

Very little. It seems to me that THAAD is the system of the three US systems there is least information on. Most of it is on press releases on tests and the occasional pentagon briefing to congress on the progress of development. All of it is vague, convoluted and delayed. This also makes it hard to figure out what it is capable of and what the engagement envelope is. Of course, this is also very sensitive data anyway. That is the reason why I used "supposed to".

But above is the official numbers, plus the 200 km range.

This is why I looked up what kind of target it had engaged for this recent test.

2. Is THAAD constructed to handle balistic missiles with depresed trajectory concernig THAAD is constructed to hit missiles in space with kill vehicle?
3. Do you know what are maximum target speed THAAD can handle?
4. i had something else in mind but forget it now.
5.THAAD is not constructed to be mid-course interceptor like GBI does it? Whitch in that case means it can handle missiles only in therminal phase whitch is not bad but not wery good either because even IRBM will have high peak atitude and hell of a speed during re-entry?

No, I don't know the speeds it can handle, but it seems that the goal is quite ambitious. I seems it will be able to handle the speeds of a high end IRBM/low end ICBM in the terminal phase, which should indicate that it could handle some depressed and/or endoatmospheric intercepts depending on engagement geometry. The same goes to midcourse intercepts. My personal opinion is that it has the potential - again depending on precise circumstances.

IMV the strength of these systems really is the battle management systems, which will really increase the footprint that can be covered with confidence.

If the programme is succesful, I think that THAAD can potentially have a greater impact than the GMD, due to deployability, survivability and cost. Though the range of the GBI is much greater.

For instance, the GBI that may be stationed in Europe are nearly useless against, hypothetically, Russian ICBM, as they are fired almost at point blank. This has to do with engagement geometry.

A batallion of THAAD, however, may bleed a significant number of ballistic missiles/warheads. And it could be layered with GMD and MEADS.

Basically, how the defences are deployed and their numbers, and how the offense employs its BMs has a lot to say. I don't think THAAD will reliably take down an ICBM. That would be the job of the GBI. A sidenote to that is, as I have reflected on it, that if the GBI in Europe was intended for Russia, then they would have been deployed deeper in Western Europe than Poland.

Mind you, just using this as an example. I don't see any agressive posture towards Russia in this.

 

[Viktor]

Mind you, just using this as an example. I don't see any agressive posture towards Russia in this.

LOL Just wait and see. I do however as for now think you are little overconfident but I may turn out to be wrong after all because US is realy puting up its efort and money to finaly have credible ABM.
USA has at the moment some excelent ideas and project most of it is in to early stages of development to be disscused jet but if developt will cause massive nuclear power shift.

Never the less check this out.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gene...Test Intercepts Target Lower Than Ever Before

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

Besides im little confused about atitude interception capabilities of S-400.

For instance:

New [ZRS] S -400 will enter into the troops [KSPN] in July - August 2007

Moscow, on April 5. ([ITAR]- TASS). New antiaircraft-missile system S -400 it will enter into the troops of the special-purpose command in July - August 2007, reported at the press conference the commander-in-chief of forces of the special-purpose command ([KSPN]) colonel general Yuri Solovyev.

“We expect to obtain this complex in July - August, to conduct its method and firing of technology, to and then place it on standby alert”, he said. According to Solovyev, the system S -400 “triumph” several times exceeds that existing S -300 “on the noise protection, along the purposeful channels, on the shooting at the high-speed purposes”.

Solovyev recalled that new [ZRS] “can work on the hypersonic purposes, which fly with a speed of up to 3 thousand m/s at the heights to 150 km ". It reported that the first regiment, which already in August will intercede to standby alert on S -400, “will simultaneously obtain the rockets of the increased radius of action”.

“All our efforts are now directed toward that so that the industry would as fast as possible place technology on the range for the test launchings with the subsequent setting to standby alert”, said commander.

“Over the long term [ZRS] S -400 it can be the component part of the system [VKO] together with other complexes”, focused attention General. It informed, that S -400 has the capability to work in neighbor space and is capable of accomplishing the tasks of nonstrategic [pro].

http://www2.worldlingo.com/SG57TOc3OQEKP5Q...mbqN3/translate


besides that take a peak into this

Russia too has developed the S-400 surface-to-air missile system with an anti-ballistic missile capability. The Standard SM-2 Block IV, THAAD, and S-400 missiles would also intercept ballistic threats outside the atmosphere or at very high altitudes but are limited to defending a smaller area than a system like EKV

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/weapons/q0223.shtml



I mean I thout S-400 depending on the missile will have 40km height max interception posibilities as most of the sources said, or some new missile is developt or deployed.

Sorry for my bad englis!

 

[Grand Danois]

LOL Just wait and see. I do however as for now think you are little overconfident but I may turn out to be wrong after all because US is realy puting up its efort and money to finaly have credible ABM.
USA has at the moment some excelent ideas and project most of it is in to early stages of development to be disscused jet but if developt will cause massive nuclear power shift.

I may be overconfidence. I would rather call it optimistic.

Never the less check this out.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gene...Test Intercepts Target Lower Than Ever Before

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

Besides im little confused about atitude interception capabilities of S-400.

For instance:

http://www2.worldlingo.com/SG57TOc3OQEKP5Q...mbqN3/translate

The two links don't work.

I gather from your excerpts, that SRBM-MRBM should be possible to intercept. The 3km/s, 150km height seems to be the characteristics of the ballistic missile it is capable of intercepting, rather that the altitude of the intercept itself. It is thus not in conflict with "neighbor space", which I take means "near space" or somewhere between 25-100km altitude. This is not in conflict with the high-altitude capability for the S-400 of 40km.

Lastly, if "non-strategic" is the classification of the target BM the S-400 is capable of intercepting, it would mean less than a 1000km throw-distance in the old Soviet terminology. This fits with above information.

However, this is from an excerpt of an automated translation, and you would have to read it in the original language to see if it fits.

besides that take a peak into this

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/weapons/q0223.shtml

I mean I thout S-400 depending on the missile will have 40km height max interception posibilities as most of the sources said, or some new missile is developt or deployed.

Sorry for my bad englis!

Haven't checked up if this particular missile has been deployed. THAAD uses a KKV for intercept.

No worries regarding your English.

 

[Mouse]

I have heard rumours that several major powers tested using lasers to intercept missiles, do any one know anything about this?

 

[Chrom]

I have heard rumours that several major powers tested using lasers to intercept missiles, do any one know anything about this?

Lasers have 2 major unavoidable drawback - they are affected by weather conditions and they cant kill resonable protected warhead. First can be somewhat avoided by placing them on aircrafts - but essencially it is just experements. I dont see any sign what lasers could be deployed as ABM in next 20 years unless major yet unknown technolgy will be discovered.
Thats said, i see quite good potencial in lasers as anti-aircraft systems. Just not ABM.

 

[Grand Danois]

Looking at contracts awarded early this year and a GAO report on THAAD contracts, it seems that the first THAAD battery has a production cost of 831 million USD. That includes the radar, 6 launchers, command vehicles and 48 rounds. The rounds cost roughly 5 million USD each.

Now that is cheap. Wonder what full rate production costs would look like? 500 million USD per battery?

If one uses a conservative range of 150km, 10 batallions would cover every square inch of European NATO soil. That's a mere 20 billion USD for 40 radars and 2000 rounds. Or less than 1% of the European defence budgets if acquisition is spread over 8 years.

And it shares battlespace management with MEADS, SBIRS, AEGIS BMD, BMEWS, and will probably also with SMART-L/S-1850M carrying frigates and destroyers. It slots seamlessly together.

SBIRS, AEGIS BMD, and the SMART-L have already been tested. The two former in this recent test.

I get more and more convinced that it will handle ICBMs...

This has the potential to have much more impact than 10 GBI in Poland.

And what a market.

Why don't the Euro politicians get going before the US swipes the market?

 

[gf0012-aust]

Lasers have 2 major unavoidable drawback - they are affected by weather conditions and they cant kill resonable protected warhead.

Depends on which laser technology and system is being discussed.

the issue is also co-operative targetting - see above.

Granted if the target path is obstructed by particles etc it may have a performance impact.

 

[Jambo_100]

I have heard rumours that several major powers tested using lasers to intercept missiles, do any one know anything about this?

the USA have converted a Boing 747 into a missile interception aircraft. i dont no to much about it, i dont even know if its in service but it looks pretty awesome. it has a laser on the nose and shoots down incoming missiles.

 

[Chrom]

Depends on which laser technology and system is being discussed.

the issue is also co-operative targetting - see above.

Granted if the target path is obstructed by particles etc it may have a performance impact.

No laser technology can deal with smoke or heavy rain. Also current laser beams are too weak to disintegrate protected warheads.
But of course laser have big potencial in destroying less protected targets like ATGM's or aircrafts.

 

[gf0012-aust]

No laser technology can deal with smoke or heavy rain.

well, thats true, but you're going to exercise other options if its adverse weather.

Also current laser beams are too weak to disintegrate protected warheads.

depends on whether you're wanting to initiate the equiv of a kinetic kill - or if its as a disruption "kill". either way you need to lock on to the target for sufficient time to trigger a result

But of course laser have big potencial in destroying less protected targets like ATGM's or aircrafts.

thats true, but you also don't need to make it a star wars solution and try to create blue sky through the target. targetting individuals is illegal under the conventions and agreements, but you could make a mess of sensor systems on an aircraft (assuming that you could hold it on target long enough to generate a result)

 

[eckherl]

No laser technology can deal with smoke or heavy rain. Also current laser beams are too weak to disintegrate protected warheads.
But of course laser have big potencial in destroying less protected targets like ATGM's or aircrafts.

You do not think that you can adjust the power setting on a laser to burn thru fog, rain or smoke, I did it all the time on my tank.

Correct me if I am wrong but I would think that you could place a special coating or material on a object to deflect a laser beam.

 

[zeroyon04]

I'm surpised that more people aren't talking about the SM-3. It is by far the best ABM system in my opinion. It uses a KKV that has been proved in flight tests to be very highly reliable (and 100% certainty of target destruction in case of a hit, which is almost 100% anyways). Almost all of the SM-3's flight tests have been successful while only a few of THAAD's have been.

KKV's (like on THAAD and SM-3) are better than proximity warheads (like on the Arrow) in my opinion. Advantages of using a KKV over a proximity fuse explosive warhead are that even if the warhead explodes near the target, the explosive blast and associated shrapnel from the blast do not have nearly as high of a chance of bringing down the target compared to ramming it with a KKV and ensuring complete target destruction. This can be compared to shooting a bullet through the side of a plane in flight (which in reality won't do much at all, regardless of what hollywood shows), and hitting that plane with another plane head-on.

The SM-3 has a much longer range than THAAD (over 500km vs 200km), a higher reliablility rate, and a higher missile speed. The SM-3 can be deployed to more locations (because it is sea-based and most of the planet is water). The biggest difference is that THAAD is land based while the SM-3 is sea based. The THAAD is cheaper too.

Search for videos by the username "AegisBMD" on youtube if you want to see videos of it in action, there are plenty.

 

[Chrom]

You do not think that you can adjust the power setting on a laser to burn thru fog, rain or smoke, I did it all the time on my tank.

What you mean by "adjust"? Making it weaker? What is the purpose?
It is possible to burn throught fog or smoke, but it greatly reduce range/strenght of the beam, and will only work on relative close ranges anyway. Nothing like 10+ km you will want for ABM defence. Note, if 20% of LRF beam will come throu smoke it could be enouth... if onlu 20% of killer-beam reach its target it would mean no kill.

Correct me if I am wrong but I would think that you could place a special coating or material on a object to deflect a laser beam.

Reflective or ablative material will work.

 

[metro]

What you mean by "adjust"? Making it weaker? What is the purpose?
It is possible to burn throught fog or smoke, but it greatly reduce range/strenght of the beam, and will only work on relative close ranges anyway. Nothing like 10+ km you will want for ABM defence. Note, if 20% of LRF beam will come throu smoke it could be enouth... if onlu 20% of killer-beam reach its target it would mean no kill.
Reflective or ablative material will work.

As I undestand it, ABL is pretty much a go! However, the one problem that remains is, "how can we keep a 747 in the air 24/7 and "cover the world"? Well, I believe the original thinking was to use "air ships/blimps" in lower orbit, that contain extrmely small mirrors that adjust due to the targets location.. they can act as relays also. now with the development of nano-satalites, this may be the best answer to guiding the laser to a certain point in the world.
The lasers that are now used, are powerfull enough to burn throug and destroy a missile... or veicle, or person.
the ability to rspond at the speed of light will change warfare forever.
We're not ver close on HPMs as they are much more difficult to control.
This is complecated and i'll try to explain more later, but there is a great book called EBOMB on this subject.

 

[Big-E]

What you mean by "adjust"? Making it weaker? What is the purpose?
It is possible to burn throught fog or smoke, but it greatly reduce range/strenght of the beam, and will only work on relative close ranges anyway. Nothing like 10+ km you will want for ABM defence. Note, if 20% of LRF beam will come throu smoke it could be enouth... if onlu 20% of killer-beam reach its target it would mean no kill.
Reflective or ablative material will work.

What is the big deal? Clouds don't extend far into the troposphere. If the ABL flies above cloud level it can target the vehicle when it comes out with plenty of time for intercept. Reflective/ablative material won't work if the temperature increase melts it.

 

[metro]

What is the big deal? Clouds don't extend far into the troposphere. If the ABL flies above cloud level it can target the vehicle when it comes out with plenty of time for intercept. Reflective/ablative material won't work if the temperature increase melts it.

yep, and you don't even need to see the target (come below the clouds), the DE can be re-directed focusing at the same target, but a different angle, from a distance.
It can burn thrugh a cruise missile (or several).