"Carrier Killer"

#2
#2
We have known about this for a long time. Thank previous unsaid US administrations for giving them the technology.

Meanwhile, the argument is slowly sliding in favor of us who think carriers are a thing of the past.
 
#3
#3
A quote dated Mid 2008 on this subject (Aviation week). All should be well or will be soon.

Tests this summer of Raytheon Standard Missile 2 weapons from the Aegis cruiser USS Lake Erie were intended to demonstrate technology for a quick-reaction defense against ballistic missiles in their terminal phase. In the dry terminology of missile defense, this may not sound critical, but it indicates that the Navy is very worried about a new threat: the anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM).

Indications are that China, in particular, is developing an ASBM - an intermediate-range ballistic missile tipped with a guided warhead. The weapon outranges any sea-based weapon, including strike aircraft, and is hard to intercept with the most widely used versions of the Standard Missile, which are designed to hit aircraft.

The Navy is responding rapidly, according to RAdm Alan Hicks, program director for Aegis missile defense at the Missile Defense Agency. (Hicks spoke at the Space & Missile Defense Conference in Huntsville on Tuesday.)

The first step involves modifying the inventory of some 100 SM-2 Block IV missiles. These were high-performance weapons designed to knock down the supersonic high-altitude cruise missiles carried by Tu-22M3 Backfire bombers. (The Block IV program was terminated with the end of the Cold War.)

The FTM-14 missile defense test, carried out off Hawaii on June 5 (and featured on the cover of the latest DTI) demonstrated the ability of the modified Block IV and the 3.6.1 upgrade to the Aegis computer system to defeat ballistic missiles. Despite an overall shortage of engineering manpower to implement its missile-defense program, the Navy is rushing the 3.6.1 modifications into service and will complete them before the end of 2009, Hicks said.
Click to expand...
 
#4
#4
From reading this, I was wondering how effective the SM2 in coop with AEGIS would be against one of these??? The last time I was underway, on a CG in a battlegroup, they test fired the SM2 twice against drones and missed both times. Just wondering how effective that system really is?
 
Last edited:
#5
#5
BearCat204 said:
From reading this, I was wondering how effective the SM2 in coop with AEGIS would be against one of these??? The last time I was underway, on a CG in a battlegroup, they test fired the SM2 twice against drones and missed both times. Just wondering how effective that system really is?
Click to expand...

were the missles armed? how bad was the miss?
 
#7
#7
BearCat204 said:
From reading this, I was wondering how effective the SM2 in coop with AEGIS would be against one of these??? The last time I was underway, on a CG in a battlegroup, they test fired the SM2 twice against drones and missed both times. Just wondering how effective that system really is?
Click to expand...

Drones with no countermeasures? That's not good....
 
#8
#8
DC Vol said:
He said they were drones.

:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I thought that he meant "were the SM2s armed?"....although if SM2s are designed to be hit-to-kill (which I think they are), whether or not they were armed wouldn't really matter if we missed.
 
#9
#9
joevol320 said:
were the missles armed? how bad was the miss?
Click to expand...

Not sure what the actual details were, I was not a FC nor did I have anything to do with that part of the ship. I was with the aviation group, if that tells you anything about how much actual knowledge I would have on the shoot. I just know that both of them missed and when you are talking about a missile interception and how bad it was missed, I would think that even if it missed by the slightest margin, it would still be classified as a bad miss lol.
 
#11
#11
BearCat204 said:
Not sure what the actual details were, I was not a FC nor did I have anything to do with that part of the ship. I was with the aviation group, if that tells you anything about how much actual knowledge I would have on the shoot. I just know that both of them missed and when you are talking about a missile interception and how bad it was missed, I would think that even if it missed by the slightest margin, it would still be classified as a bad miss lol.
Click to expand...

How long ago was this?
 
#13
#13
MontereyVol said:
Here we go again.
Click to expand...

Hey...I was being nice...low-altitude defense has its possibilities considering the doppler can actually work. And, I would hope that we could at least hit drones...particularly without countermeasures. That was my attempt at being fair! :)

Edit: I made a post a while back that I was going to try to throw off some of my biases and be more open to the potential of the idea until I see more information that I can't currently see right now (though I still think I'm right :p....I'm just not as adamant about it).
 
Last edited:
#14
#14
BearCat204 said:
Not sure what the actual details were, I was not a FC nor did I have anything to do with that part of the ship. I was with the aviation group, if that tells you anything about how much actual knowledge I would have on the shoot. I just know that both of them missed and when you are talking about a missile interception and how bad it was missed, I would think that even if it missed by the slightest margin, it would still be classified as a bad miss lol.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. In testimony after the Gulf War about the effectiveness of the Patriot Missile (which is a hit-to-kill design), the MDA or the Army one defined an intercept as "a missile and a target passing in the sky." So, who knows what a hit would be.
 
#16
#16
TennTradition said:
Not necessarily. In testimony after the Gulf War about the effectiveness of the Patriot Missile (which is a hit-to-kill design), the MDA or the Army one defined an intercept as "a missile and a target passing in the sky." So, who knows what a hit would be.
Click to expand...

Anytime that you have MDA(Missile Defense Agency) in a conversation, there is bound to be confusion. I have been working with them during our transfer of THAAD to the DoA. From top to bottom, they are the most confused and inept agency in the Missile Defense community.
 
#17
#17
TennTradition said:
Hey...I was being nice...low-altitude defense has its possibilities considering the doppler can actually work. And, I would hope that we could at least hit drones...particularly with countermeasures. That was my attempt at being fair! :)
Click to expand...

all I am going to say is they will get one chance to use the ACBM, whether we hit or miss in our defense systems.

There are as many problems on getting the missile to target as there are in engaging it.
 
#18
#18
BearCat204 said:
Not sure what the actual details were, I was not a FC nor did I have anything to do with that part of the ship. I was with the aviation group, if that tells you anything about how much actual knowledge I would have on the shoot. I just know that both of them missed and when you are talking about a missile interception and how bad it was missed, I would think that even if it missed by the slightest margin, it would still be classified as a bad miss lol.
Click to expand...

i was just curious, because a armed sm2 doesn't have to be too closed to damage a missle enough knock of course. normally if a missle is close to a target, it's enough to knock them out.

i used to work on seasparrow and i know it had a pretty large kill radius for it's size. i wonder if the missles had trouble finding the target
 
#19
#19
MontereyVol said:
all I am going to say is they will get one chance to use the ACBM, whether we hit or miss in our defense systems.

There are as many problems on getting the missile to target as there are in engaging it.
Click to expand...

Very interesting....now, why the "here we go again" post...that's more negative than me! :p
 
#20
#20
joevol320 said:
i was just curious, because a armed sm2 doesn't have to be too closed to damage a missle enough knock of course. normally if a missle is close to a target, it's enough to knock them out.

i used to work on seasparrow and i know it had a pretty large kill radius for it's size. i wonder if the missles had trouble finding the target
Click to expand...

I am really not sure if it was a problem with the missiles or the AEGIS or the people who were doing the shoot. Just wondering the effectivness of the SM2/SM3 agaist a large missile like this "carrier killer"
 
#21
#21
joevol320 said:
i was just curious, because a armed sm2 doesn't have to be too closed to damage a missle enough knock of course. normally if a missle is close to a target, it's enough to knock them out.

i used to work on seasparrow and i know it had a pretty large kill radius for it's size. i wonder if the missles had trouble finding the target
Click to expand...

Seems like that could work for a drone...or a conventional missile aimed at a target, which is what we're talking about here...not so much a nuke though...gotta do more than just knock off course.
 
#22
#22
joevol320 said:
i was just curious, because a armed sm2 doesn't have to be too closed to damage a missle enough knock of course. normally if a missle is close to a target, it's enough to knock them out.

i used to work on seasparrow and i know it had a pretty large kill radius for it's size. i wonder if the missles had trouble finding the target
Click to expand...

Pretty sure you already know this but the Seasparrow would be ineffective against this type of missile. Great system for its time though.
 
#24
#24
MontereyVol said:
I just recalled an earlier thread we had a looooong discussion on and started wondering if we were going to get into this argument again :)
Click to expand...

If you'll notice my edit above (made while you were typing your post), I will try to avoid said loooong discussions - though I make not promises :).
 
#25
#25
MontereyVol said:
I just recalled an earlier thread we had a looooong discussion on and started wondering if we were going to get into this argument again :)
Click to expand...

So we have terminator robot soldiers and what are the carriers going to be replaced with?

terminator_12.jpg
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top