Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.
Tip for Defense Tech?
SEND IT!
It’s Confidential!
|
Home » Missiles
Missiles
Thursday, February 26th, 2009

Back in 2008, US Pacific Command scored big when they knocked down a decaying US satellite with a sea-launched interceptor. Now ABC reports that CINCPAC, Adm. Timothy Keating, is ready to break out the flyswatter again — this time under operational conditions.
In an exclusive interview with ABC News’ Martha Raddatz, Adm. Timothy Keating, head of the U.S. Pacific Commands, said that the military is prepared to shoot down any North Korean ballistic missile — if President Obama should give the order.
If a missile leaves the launch pad we’ll be prepared to respond upon direction of the president,” Keating told ABC News. “I’m not a betting man but I’d go like 60/40, 70/30 that it will, they will attempt to launch a satellite. There’s equipment moving up there that would indicate the preliminary stages of preparation for a launch. So I’d say it’s more than less likely.”
With plenty of Aegis assets floating around the ring of fire, ground-based interceptors at Vandenberg AFB, CA and Alaska, and a whole mess of radars that put Superman’s x-ray vision to shame.… there’s no doubt we could pull this off. But, like with all things defense, the question is whether or not we should.
Sure, the idea might appeal to those of us whose responsibility for national security and statecraft stop at the “publish” button on our blogs — watching the Norks hopes for both a space program and a credible nuclear deterrent dissipate in a cloud of interceptor smoke sure to hell appeals to me– but what about the State department wonks who are responsible for turning off the North Korean nuclear program? What happens if the North Koreans step up raids along their borders, seize an American ship, or send nuclear scientists and supplies to Iran — or Syria?
The North Koreans are, by nature, aggressive creatures. But that doesn’t mean they’re stupid. In the fifty plus years since the ceasefire, they’ve frequently pushed us right up to our absolute, no shit limit, then quickly backed down. It’s a strange amalgamation of diplomacy, politics, and warfare –a harsh calculus of slaps and handshakes– that the Norks have mastered in their half-century of dealing with the West.
In other words, Kim Jong Il is damned good at being a gigantic pain in the ass.
So do we provoke him? Is it necessary? Does the benefit outweigh potential cost? I venture a cautious yes (let our new CiC play a little hardball), but what say you?
–John Noonan
Posted in Missiles | 48 Comments »
Tuesday, August 12th, 2008
Posted in Missiles | 9 Comments »
Friday, August 1st, 2008
Been quite a year for Minot AFB…
Truck carrying missile booster tips in N.D.
A military transport vehicle carrying an unarmed Minuteman III booster tipped over Thursday morning on its way to a 91st Missile Wing launch facility at Minot Air Force Base, N.D.
Early reports show the vehicle tipped over on the gravel access road after the road gave out under the truck, according to an Air Force official. The accident occurred between the sparsely populated towns of Makoti and Parshall, N.D., about 70 miles southwest of Minot, right off County Road 24.
They are still investigating now but we know there is no danger to the public and no nuclear materials were onboard the vehicle at the time of the accident, said Maj. Laurie Arellano, an Air Force Space Command spokeswoman.
The standard firings usually ensue after public kerfuffles with nukes. But at this point, I’m not sure there’s anyone left at Minot to fire…
–John Noonan
Posted in Missiles | Comments Off
Monday, October 1st, 2007
Isnt it funny how news like this is greeted with a collective yawn from most of the media?

Its another example of what they call in the journalism world a dog bites man event.
Boeing announced this weekend a successful intercept of a ballistic missile in space of its mission representative exo-atmospheric kill vehicle. In the past, there would have been much made of this successful test, but now, its only news of a test fails the man bites dog event.
The test of the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system began at 4:01 p.m. Eastern when a long-range ballistic missile target lifted off from the Kodiak Launch Complex in Alaska. Seventeen minutes later, military operators launched an interceptor from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. As the interceptor flew toward the target, it received target data updates from the upgraded missile-warning radar at Beale Air Force Base, Calif. After flying into space, the interceptor released its exoatmospheric kill vehicle, which proceeded to track, intercept and destroy the target warhead.
The test, GMD’s seventh intercept overall, was the second intercept with an operationally configured interceptor since September 2006.
WATCH THE MISSILE TEST VIDEO…
With another intercept under our belts, we have even greater confidence that the GMD system, if called upon in a real-world scenario, will defend the nation against a limited ballistic missile attack,” said Scott Fancher, Boeing vice president and program director for GMD. The Boeing-led test was highly complex, involving a wide range of assets, including the Sea-Based X-Band Radar (SBX). SBX, a powerful new sea-based sensor developed by Boeing, tracked the target missile to prepare for the next GMD flight test, which will see SBX provide target updates to an in-flight interceptor for the first time.
I guess its an example of how far the missile defense debate has come. Its no longer about whether you can hit a bullet with a bullet, as opponents used to say, was impossible. Now the debate is more about whether a radar in the Czech Republic will alienate the increasingly paranoid Russian government.
GMD defends the nation against a limited number of long-range ballistic missiles, with interceptors deployed in underground silos at Vandenberg and Ft. Greely, Alaska. An integral element of the global ballistic missile defense system, GMD also consists of radars, other sensors, command-and-control facilities, communications terminals and a 20,000-mile fiber optic communications network. The U.S. government has announced plans to extend this capability to Europe.
Yes it has been expensive. Yes its been a long time coming. Yes there are many more hurdles to overcome. But the fact that this story gained little traction, is an even louder endorsement of the system than the actual space kill.
– Christian
Posted in Missiles | 117 Comments »
Monday, June 18th, 2007

The continued problems being encountered in flight tests of the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) could lead to resurrection of the air-launched Tomahawk missile. The JASSM — designated AGM-158 — was initiated in 1995 following cancellation of the Tri-Service Standoff Attack Missile (TSSAM) because of massive cost increases.
The Lockheed Martin AGM-158 had won out in competition with the McDonnell Douglas AGM-159 design. Procurement of the Lockheed Martin JASSM began in December 2001 with the missile intended for use on the F-15 Eagle, F-16 Fighting Falcon, F/A-18 Hornet, and F-35 Lightning II (Joint Strike Fighter) as well as on the B-1B, B-2A, and B-52H Stratofortress strategic bombers.
Some 600 JASSMs have been produced, but testing continues to indicate poor reliability. During tests launches from December 2006 to April 2007, the Air Force reported a system reliability of only 58 percent. Coupled with increased costs, this reliability factor has led Department of Defense officials to question the efficacy of the program, even at this late date.
(more…)
Posted in Missiles | 8 Comments »
Tuesday, June 5th, 2007

Russia recently launched a new Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) capable of carrying Multiple Independently targeted Re-entry Vehicle (MIRV) warheads, ostensibly intended to penetrate the U.S. ballistic missile defense system. The improved Topol-M missile launched on 29 May was fired from a mobile launcher at the Plesetsk launch site in northwestern Russia. Its test warhead was reported to have landed on target about 3,400 miles down range on the Far Eastern Kamchatka Peninsula.
The TOPOL-M — given the Soviet designation RS-24 and the NATO designation SS-27 — also has a submarine-launched variant known as the Bulava (NATO SS-N-30).The naval missile will be carried by the new submarines of the Borey class. Statements from Russian officials indicate that the Topol-M and Bulava are being upgraded with new warheads and other countermeasures (probably decoys) to counter the U.S. ballistic missile defense system now being deployed. If these missiles are specifically intended to overcome U.S. defenses, their warheads can be expected to have maneuvering re-entry vehicles, called MaRVs in the strategic lexicon.
MaRV warheads were developed by the United States during the Cold War in response to Soviet ballistic missile defenses, but were never installed on ICBMs.
(more…)
Posted in Missiles | 16 Comments »
Tuesday, May 15th, 2007
Lockheed Martin, which builds the Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile, had some disappointing results during a test last week that raised even more difficult questions about the ongoing development program.
(Photo from Lockheed Martin)
From the Orlando Sentinel:
Last week, the company confirmed that “anomalies were experienced” in four JASSM tests conducted at a missile range in Utah in early May.
Lockheed would not provide details or speculate on the cause, citing an ongoing inquiry into what went wrong.
Three missiles apparently missed the target area entirely and one hit pay dirt but failed to detonate properly.
“If you’re a JASSM supporter, this could not have come out at a worse time,” noted Christopher Hellman, a defense analyst for the Center for Arms Control & Non-Proliferation, a think tank in Washington, D.C.
(more…)
Posted in Missiles | 23 Comments »
Friday, April 27th, 2007

The Pentagons Missile Defense Agency tested a key leg in its missile shield triad yesterday, shooting down both a sub-sonic cruise missile in the atmosphere and a ballistic missile in space with a ship-based interceptor.
To say the least, missile defense has been extremely controversial over the years, and it is a subject of heated debate over whether the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on systems over the years have been worth the cost.
But it is worth chalking up this test in the win column for the embattled agency.
From a Raytheon release:
In a first of its kind dual missile defense test, Raytheon Company-produced Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) and Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) simultaneously engaged targets over the Pacific Ocean.
This was the first time a U.S. Navy ship demonstrated simultaneous ship engagements against both cruise and ballistic missile targets. It was the eighth successful intercept for the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense systems SM-3.
The SM-3 Block IA destroyed a short-range ballistic missile target in space while SM-2 Block IIIA engaged a cruise missile threat at a lower altitude. Both intercepting missiles were fired from guided missile cruiser USS Lake Erie (CG 70) by the ships crew. The ballistic missile target was launched from the U.S. Navys Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai. The subsonic cruise missile target was launched from a range aircraft.
This test, Flight Test Mission-11, was the second with the Block IA version of SM-3, and the first IA with a full-capability solid divert and attitude control system. Raytheon is delivering Block IA rounds for operational use on Navy cruisers and destroyers.
The SM-3 Block IA provides increased capability to engage short– to intermediate-range ballistic missiles. The SM-3 Block IA incorporates rocket motor upgrades and computer program modifications to improve sensor performance, missile guidance and control, and lower cost. It also includes producibility and maintainability features required to qualify the missile as a tactical fleet asset.
Its definately worth noting the complexity of such a test. Two different kinds of missile threats, tracked by the Aegis radar system that was feeding information to two different interceptors — each with its own seeker technology — to a terminal kill. Experts on both sides of the debate recognize the sterility of such tests. In the real world, adversaries might incorporate decoys and other defenses to keep their missiles from being shot down.
But, despite the incredible costs, its important to remember that well-meaning people are hard at work trying to solve a problem and a threat that has so far kept most nations helpless to confront militarily.
(Gouge: MS)
– Christian
Posted in Missiles | 13 Comments »
Saturday, March 3rd, 2007
Posted in Missiles | 56 Comments »
Monday, February 12th, 2007
We do not have any direct evidence that insurgents in Iraq are using advanced surface-to-air missiles (sometimes called MANPADS from MAN-portable Air Defense System); just best guesses, for now. But with the loss of five (and maybe even six or seven) helicopters in quick succession — and an insurgent video apparently showing the latest loss to be a missile casualty — the possibility needs to be considered.
Early MANPADS like the Russian SA-7 are fairly primitive, homing in on exhaust heat. As they steer towards the hottest object in their field of view, they can easily be lured away by decoy flares (or even the sun).
With more advanced missiles, it becomes a game of cat and mouse between the electronics in the missile seeker head and the countermeasures seeking to confuse it. Advanced seekers can not only discriminate flares from engines, but they can be smart enough to home in on the source of the flares. Advanced laser-based countermeasures like CLIRCM do not blind or dazzle seekers as is sometime supposed, but produce a signal which generates false targets and sends the missile off course.
Some missile makers claim that their seekers can beat all known countermeasures; some countermeasures manufacturers claim to be able to defeat all known missiles.
Certainly better missiles need better countermeasures. It’s interesting that the proposed defenses for civilian airliners against terrorist MANPADS only goes up to the level of Stinger Basic, a technology now 20 years old.
Earlier missiles were intended to get close enough to have some chance of damaging an aircraft with shrapnel; modern warheads are contact fuzed, indicating that they are expected to actually hit the target. And hit in a specific place: the missile can discriminate between single-engine, multi-engine aircraft and helicopters and select the optimum point of vulnerability. The recent models are designed to send a dense pattern of high-speed fragments through the target for maximum damage, and the explosion may be enhanced by fuzing which detonates any unused fuel. Their destructive power is formidable.
This leads to last-ditch defenses like aim-point biasing, relatively cheap countermeasures (compared to the multi-million dollar laser jammers) to get the warhead to strike the less flight-critical parts of a helicopter and make the difference between a hit that results in a hard landing and one that destroys the helicopter completely.
Another way of dealing with the threat is to gets the MANPADS first. While Rules of Engagement are unlikely to be changed to alow helicopters to open fire at will, the AirCrcaft CounterMeasures (ACCM) laser provides one option. This is a laser dazzler fitted to helicopters to illuminate potential threats on the ground. The laser makes it much harder to target a helicopter, but more significantly the reaction of the person targeted gives a clue as to whether they are an insurgent getting ready to fire or an innocent civilian.
Another new approach, Ares notes, is DARPA’s Battlefield Helicopter Emulator, an expendable decoy drone which produces the same noise and heat signature as a real helicopter. It may seem like an expensive option — but losing helicopters is a far more costly prospect.
Helicopters operate at low speed and low altitude, making them especially vulnerable to MANPADS. Heavy armor is not an option except for attack choppers like the AH-64 Apache; transport, utility and scout craft carry much lighter protection. And in Afghanistan, even the Soviets’ armored Mil-24 Hind gunships proved vulnerable to Stinger MANPADS.
The situation in Iraq has its parallels with the conflict then. The main importance of new missiles would not be in shooting down helicopters, but on the morale of both sides. The Mujahideen took new heart that the previously invincible Devils Chariot could be defeated. Soviet helicopter crews found themselves facing an opponent who could shoot back, and were forced to adopt more evasive tactics which limited their effectiveness.
A similar decrease in effectiveness could happen in Baghdad.
“Based on what we have seen, we’re already making adjustments in our tactics and techniques and procedures as to how we employ our helicopters,” Maj. Gen. William Caldwell was reported as saying earlier.
Previously, US helicopter cover has prevented insurgents from operating from rooftops. If exposing helicopters becomes too risky, then that cover will be more limited. In this way, just a handful of MANPADS could have a significant impact on the ground battles. Which makes the timing of these latest helicopter losses — just before the surge of US troops arrives for a make-or-break operation in Baghdad – highly significant.
(My thanks to Jim O’Halloran, editor of the authoritative Janes Land Based Air Defence for providing an insider view on this topic.)
– David Hambling
Posted in Missiles, Planes, Copters, Blimps | 43 Comments »
|
|
Recent Comments
Hey jack ass (fart) at any time durring that triade did you watch the video?...
Valcan
This episode is another demonstration that there aren't good...
Westerner
The Department of Homeland Security
Kevin
something about stacking 40mm grenades behind each other...
DC2 Jennings
I think the point is that we're not currently in a global war against...
Philo
That's a bet I don't mind losing sammy boy.
Philo
Looks like you lost that bet.
Sam
I discussed it with one of the MetalStorm's armorers. It is a...
Steve
"This is not the first Muslim soldier to commit treason against his...
Sam
On shrapnel popping the airbags….I don't think that will be a...
Noah Mayer