About SM-3 missile

By: bring_it_on - 20th December 2015 at 18:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

The only intercept record I could find was against SRBM - hardly flattering for such a system.

Should have looked at MDA's website (or Raytheon's)...

At approximately 7:33 p.m. Hawaii Standard Time, Oct. 3 (1:33 a.m. EDT, Oct.4), a medium-range ballistic missile target was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, Hawaii. The target flew northwest towards a broad ocean area of the Pacific Ocean. Following target launch, the USS Lake Erie detected and tracked the missile with its onboard AN/SPY-1 radar. The ship, equipped with the second-generation Aegis BMD weapon system, developed a fire control solution and launched the SM-3 Block IB guided missile to engage the target. The SM-3 maneuvered to a point in space and released its kinetic warhead. The kinetic warhead acquired the target reentry vehicle, diverted into its path, and, using only the force of a direct impact, engaged and destroyed the target.

http://www.mda.mil/news/13news0009.html

^ Video - http://www.mda.mil/video/2013_aegis_ftm22.mp4

During the test, a target representing a medium-range ballistic missile was air-launched from a U.S. Air Force C-17 aircraft over the broad ocean area southwest of Hawaii. An AN/TPY-2 radar in Forward Based Mode, located at PMRF, detected the target and relayed target track information to the Command, Control, Battle Management, and Communication (C2BMC) system. The Aegis Weapon System at the Aegis Ashore site received track data from C2BMC and used its component AN/SPY-1 radar to acquire, track, and develop a fire control solution to engage the target. The Aegis Weapon System then launched the SM-3 Block IB Threat Upgrade guided missile from its Vertical Launch System. The SM-3’s kinetic warhead acquired the target reentry vehicle, diverted into its path, and destroyed the target using the kinetic force of a direct impact.

http://www.mda.mil/news/15news0011.html

^ This particular test actually involved an IRBM flying an MRBM trajectory

Video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQaGHCZFmKY

Although the MDA classifies it a Midcourse interceptor

It is a Mid-Course system with a minimum altitude of 100 KM+ making some SRBM's outside of its reach (hence THAAD and SM6).

this could hardly put in jeopardy ICBM`s, but shouldn`t at least be capable to pose athreat to MRBM and IRBM ?

The current systems intercept (mid-course) SRBM's (up to 1000 km ranged BM's) and MRBM's (1000-3000 km ranged weapons), with the SM3 Block II A set to expand the envelope considerably to cover IRBM's (3000-4500 km weapons).

Any reports regarding intercepts against ICBM`s smaller brothers ?

Assent phase capability (for ICBM's) was expected with the SM3 Block II B which has now been put on pause for the moment for the Standard Missile system . ICBM capability is going to be the domain of the Ground Based Mid-Course defense system and tests against ICBM targets will probably happen over the next five years as that system is matured further (plenty of technical challenges still to overcome). Technically, Raytheon had plans for a 27 inch diameter missile for the Block IIB, and it retained the same kill-vehicle as the Block IIA (and IB) until a common kill vehicle was ready. I wouldnt completely rule out Block IIB in the future since the decision to hack it was primarily a political one.

Phase III weapon just began testing and Phase 4 has been deferred for the moment.

http://www.mda.mil/news/15news0009.html

By: bring_it_on - 21st December 2015 at 15:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Good links man, thanks

Is a ship or ground based aegis system able to cope with more targets at the same time ?

It can do that with the organic SPY-1 tracking 100+ objects. However, the higher baselines of these systems can both launch on remote, and engage on remote. Launch on remote capability is available for a while now and is enhanced with the AEGIS 5.0 capability that essentially involves the SM3 being launched without the SPY-1 acquiring the target. The AN/TPY-2 or other NATO sensors acquire the ballistic missile, and the SM3 is launched based on that. Once the missile enters the SPY-1's sector the SPY-1 guides the intercept. With Aegis 5.1, engage on remote capability will also be made possible which does not require the ballistic missile to be picked up by the SPY-1 at all. Some of the AEGIS destroyers that are on baseline 9, and all the AEGIS destroyers under contract come with IAMD capability where they can target and conduct air- and missile defense mission simultaneously whereas they could only do one at a time earlier.

The Purpose of the SM3 is to engage at very long ranges in the mid-course stage of flight that has a lot many benefits compared to terminal intercept. The AEGIS and the SM3 however are part of a layered system that has THAAD and the PAC-3MSE, PAC-3, and PAC2GEM-T that make up the lower tier terminal intercept capability. In case of a massive raid at the theater level, all of these systems will work together (hence the launch on remote capability that has now been demonstrated successfully). The evolution of the Patriot system from an Air Defense system to an Air and Missile Defense System (with a lot more focus on Missile Defense), and the entry of the THAAD into the mix is an effort to essentially counter massive salvos at the tactical level. Do note however that the SM3 cannot engage very short range Ballistic Missiles that would be defended against by the THAAD and the PAC-3/MSE (or SM6 in case such a weapon were to be launched at a ship). These missiles are important given forward based troops may come under attack from various Scuds, Scud+, Fateh's etc etc. In OIF, the Pac2 and PAC-3 intercepted 9 such missiles but going forward that task will fall upon PAC-3 MSE and the THAAD hence the greater missile load (traded off for longer ranged missiles) to fend off huge salvos.

http://www.mda.mil/news/12news0011.html

Another capability recently demonstrated that will help in case of defending against a salvo of cruise and ballistic missiles was the recent PAC-3 MSE intercept of a low flying cruise missile using a Sentinel radar, without relying on the main Patriot radar. That provides great flexibility and what the IBCS set out to achieve specially since better cruise missile defense capability was sought from the system post OIF.

By: bring_it_on - 21st December 2015 at 18:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

IRBM/MRBM are solvable puzzles in terms of intercept either kinetic/proximity fuse whatever, the gorilla in the room it`s still the ICBM

The MDA determines the 'gorilla in the room' by looking at the threat. At the moment the threat does not have ICBM's (The threat being Iran and Noko) so they are developing a multi-layered capability against SRBM's, MRBM's, and IRBM's. ICBM capability will be required later as no one is naïve enough to think these two threats will not have at some point in their future ICBM capability.

It takes a lot of work to achieve that capability looking at the entire kill chain that has Space, Sea, Land and now cyberspace based components. The Ground Based Mid-Course defense does have ICBM capability although it is unlikely to be fully tested until early next decade. Intercepting an ICBM approaching CONUS involves a lot more than just the missile, and I would argue the Long Range Discriminating Sensor (contract was awarded this year) is far more important in the medium and long term that improving the probability of intercept of the missile. The current plan is to develop the ICBM target, develop a more reliable kill vehicle and continue to bring industry together to design the Common Kill Vehicle and the Multi Object Kill Vehicle (Anti-MIRV). Along the way they'll test the system against an ICBM target around 2020 (unless MDA gets a budget boost earlier) and the capability will get better with the LRDR sensor going operational. If an urgent ICBM capability is required (to protect targets outside of CONUS) they could revive the Block IIB SM3 that uses the same 2-color kill vehicle and a larger 27 inch diameter body or build more Ground based mid course defense interceptors.

Concurrent to ICBM defense the MDA has to enhance SRBM, MRBM and IRBM capability against increasingly complex countermeasures and that involves staying one step ahead of the threat by creating target missiles that preempt countermeasure adoption by either Iran or NoKo. Its a very very expensive and complicated thing to do since you develop a capability, field it, test it, upgrade it, test it, red-team the threat (countermeasures), upgrade it, test it and move on. Testing is as critical to development in the ABM game hence the MDA has always resisted any effort to boost interceptor deployment (such as the East Coast plans) at the expense of testing.

If you are thinking of a Russian or Chinese ICBM threat then neither system is going to deter against those since 40 GBMD interceptors are insignificant to fend off against them and it would be extremely foolish to even develop the sort of capacity in the two AEGIS ashore sites that could threaten Russian deterrence. Any ballistic missile engagement with China would have to be tactical (theater limited) unless either side wants to risk WW3 and any investment to develop significant Anti-ICBM capacity (capacity not capability) will cause an arms race that is in no one's long term interest.

1. Boost phase - SM3

Boost phase interceptors would have been the Air Launched H2K (ALHTK) and the NCADE missile. The Airborne laser was a non kinetic boost phase interceptor. The SM3 cannot target anything that is still in the atmosphere. It has been claimed that it has a minimum altitude of between 100-120 km.

By: bring_it_on - 21st December 2015 at 18:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

The SM3 is a space weapon, it cannot intercept anything inside the atmosphere and it was never intended to be used against aircraft.

By: bring_it_on - 21st December 2015 at 23:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

It CANNOT intercept anything inside the atmosphere be it a missile, or an airplane. It is an exoatmospheric weapon that employs an exoatmospheric kill vehicle in space that destroys through kinetic impact. Same applies to the ground-based mid course defense systems.