Righton! Thanks, Tigg!
The Pentagon thinks the anti-missle missle failed because of two faulty heat sensors that failed in the final stages of the interception but it could take weeks to know for sure. This failure is not a setback for the program, after all the reason tests are made is to find out what is wrong with a program and fix it.
"A anti-ship missile, 'stealth' Kh-65S cruise missile" do you guys have any information about this russian missile. And do the West have any equivalent missile to this one? if it does, so how is it to compare with the Russian one ?
The U.S. military has only two anti-ship missles, the Harpoon, and a version of the Tomahawk. Both of these are very accurate and reliable. But Russia has two big advantages in their anti-ship missles. First is the range. Some Russian anti-shipping missles have ranges of over 250 miles, which is far greater than either the Tomahawk or the Harpoon. Second is speed. Both the Harpoon and the Tomahawk are subsonic. Most modern Russian missles have cruising speeds of more than Mach 2 and some increase their speed to about Mach 4 in the final minutes of interception.
Janes has reported that an airbreathing variant of the AMRAAM may have been used in the Gulf War.
The russian most modern anti-ship missle is "Moskit". It has cruise speed over mach 2 and by the time it approaches the target, it will automatically lower it altitude down to only 5 metre from sea level. They said that with this extremly low altitude, the ship's air defense like SAM or anti-aircraft artilery become useless. "Moskit" is the Russian new generation anti-ship missle, and obviously is a big threat to US and NATO because Russia is willing to export to any country in the world who have money... a modified Mig-29 can carry this dangerous weapon. In the future I think Iran, Iraq, India, China..ect If they decide to equip their fighters with this missle, then nothing is going to be easy for NATO and US.....
Virtually all modern anti-ship missiles posess TFF capabilities, and pretty much everybody has point defense anti-missile weaponry to defend against it.
With projects like the NMD, THAAD, PAC-3, Standard Missile 3, and SLID, all which are based on hit-to-kill technology, it seems the US is going to adopt these types of weapons. The application of these weapons ranges from long-range inteceptors which travel many miles to short-range inteceptors which travel as little as 250 meters to hit and kill their targets.
I saw a NOVA report on the lasers, and basically, the damned things are just too heavy, right now, to be effective. I'd place my bets on one of those rail-guns. Talk about your optimal kinetic-kill vehicle! Try firing a hockey puck at about 99% the speed of light. I think that would knock a missile off-course. Anyone have any up-to-date research on rail guns? I haven't researched them in at least 10 years; not since superconductors were the "hot" theme in science...
My last posted I told people that the russian new generation SAM system S-400 had capable of intercepting stealth fighter, and many more hard detected targets, many one didn't want to believe it was true.. in fact they doubt about it. Now, the first information source from the West shows that clearly the russian S-400 really has above capability:
I'm going to assume that since the IRIS-T is evolved from the MICA and Archer, that it's an EU project? Or is it a Raytheon deal?
Okay, next question: What happened to the anti-missile missile that missed it's target over the Pacific a few weeks back. Does anyone feel that the technology works, and will it be good enough to deter North Korea or China from aggression? Also, what about a report I heard in the news regarding a Chinese warhead technology that could move randomly when re-entering, and so, throw off potential beam weapons or kinetic kill vehicles?
Comments?
Rich the Whareagle
By God on Sunday, January 30, 2000 - 09:45 pm:
As for detering North Korea and China, I think the fact that any launch by those countries against the U.S. will assure that country's destruction in a U.S. counterattack is sufficient deterrence.
The warhead you're talking is called a MARV. Manuevarable Re-entry Vehicle. It is what it is called, a warhead that can manuever when it reenters the atmosphere. I don't know of any Chinese missles that carry MARVs but the new Russian Topol missles do. It's interesting to note that the MARV will effectively render an anti-missle system like the one that the U.S. plans to build obsolete even before it is built. It will be difficult enough to hit a regular Re-entry vehicle, impossible to hit one that can manuever.
By phong on Monday, January 31, 2000 - 01:54 pm:
As I know, Russians have great anti-ship missile technology. They claimed that their anti-ship missle is at least ten years a head to compare with the West's.... Is it really true?
By God on Monday, January 31, 2000 - 05:16 pm:
By Jaq on Monday, January 31, 2000 - 09:45 pm:
Also, of the 150 or so black projects in the US military for this year, some are expected to be in the field of air-to-air missiles, but of course there is no confrimation of this.
Finally, a larger portion of the US Defense R&D budget goes towards balck programs now than during the Cold War. So maybe around 2015-20202 well get to see what the US is working on right now (which includes [of course only rumors] visual/acoustic [cancelling out sonic booms]/IR/enhanced radar stealth, anti-gravity [through the use of energy beams], of course Aurora, new air-to-air weapons, and a myriad of other promising programs which were cancelled due to "budget cuts" [kinda like thr F-117 program?] although the overall R&D budget has not decreased.)
For more check out janes website, look under the article about the pentagon's billion dollar projects.
By Hornet on Tuesday, February 1, 2000 - 10:26 am:
By Tiger on Thursday, February 3, 2000 - 04:33 pm:
Back in the 60's, they would have been a real threat, but countermeasures do exist, and they are reasonably effective.
Tiger, out.
By Jaq on Thursday, February 17, 2000 - 11:39 pm:
Does anyone know if there are any projects for anti-missile missiles for use on fighters or bombers in the works?
Let's get wild. Are lasers that far off? It doesn't take THAT much power to fire an effective laser (5 km would easily be far enough, and a megawatt is only 1341 hp, which is far exceeded by modern jet engines). If I was an AF general, i'd sure as hell want something- whether laser or an air variant of the SLID- to protect those 20, 2 billion dollar B-2s.
Just Trying to stir up some controversy-
Jaq
By Whareagle on Sunday, February 20, 2000 - 08:57 pm:
By flanker on Thursday, March 9, 2000 - 12:25 pm:
LONDON, March 8, (AFP) - 00:10 GMT - The capabilities of a new Russian-designed family of
surface-to-air missile systems (SAMs) have been underestimated, the Jane's Information Group warned Wednesday.
Citing the forthcoming 2000-01 edition of Jane's Land-Based Defence, the group said in a press
release that the S-300 and S-400 SAM systems would "create major problems for (air strike)planners for years to come".
The new family of SAMs has been developed by the Russian missile manufacturer Almaz Central Design Bureau and will "become widespread both inside and outside Russia," the statement said.
The new S-400 Trieumf SAM is capable of intercepting "stealth" targets, cruise missiles and short-to-medium-range ballistic missiles at a range of up to 400 kilometers (250 miles), it said, adding that the missiles would be mass produced and "are compatible with the defence needs of many countries in Asia and the Middle East."