Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Interceptor missile hits test target
CNN.Com - U.S. ^ | Thursday, February 24, 2005 Posted: 8:49 PM EST (0149 GMT) | AP

Posted on 02/24/2005 8:25:04 PM PST by F15Eagle

WASHINGTON (AP) -- An experimental naval interceptor shot down a short-range ballistic missile target during a test over the Pacific Ocean on Thursday, missile defense officials said.

It is the fifth kill in six tries for the interceptor, called a Standard Missile-3, said Rick Lehner, a spokesman for the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency.

During the test, a target ballistic missile, similar to a Scud, was launched from the island of Kauai at 4 p.m. ET. The USS Lake Erie, a cruiser equipped with the Aegis radar system and stationed 100 miles offshore, tracked the ballistic missile and then fired the interceptor to shoot it down. Two minutes later, the missiles collided.

The SM-3 interceptor will be deployed on ships later this year, Lehner said.

Also involved in the test was the Aegis destroyer USS Russell, which tested some of its missile-tracking systems.

The SM-3 doesn't have the range of the experimental land-based national missile defenses located in Alaska and California, and it is envisioned for use in protecting allies or U.S. forces from short-range ballistic missiles launched over a body of water. Potential scenarios where it could see action include missiles fired by North Korea at Japan, or by China at Taiwan.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aegis; miltech; missiledefense; sm3

1 posted on 02/24/2005 8:25:06 PM PST by F15Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

The target was hit outside the atmosphere and during descent.


2 posted on 02/24/2005 8:33:01 PM PST by familyop ("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

The Union of Concerned Scientists is deeply saddened.


3 posted on 02/24/2005 8:49:40 PM PST by MonroeDNA (Religeous nutcases cause most problems.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

Are they sending a video of this event to Kin Jong Il?


4 posted on 02/24/2005 8:51:40 PM PST by msnimje
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

what is the range for the Standard-3?


5 posted on 02/24/2005 9:08:39 PM PST by prophetic ("I think you can be an honest person and lie about any number of things."--Dan Rather)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

Wait a minute! The MSM told me NMD was a failure. They said this is all a waste of money. They said we could simply rely on the goodwill of North Korea, Iran etc.

Now I don't know what to think.

< /sarcam>


6 posted on 02/24/2005 9:11:33 PM PST by Straight Vermonter (Liberalism: The irrational fear of self reliance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Defender2; Cincinatus' Wife

bump


7 posted on 02/24/2005 9:13:41 PM PST by risk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prophetic

Classified.

The missile is not capable against surface or air-breathing threats, and its warhead is only effective outside the atmosphere - but it works.


8 posted on 02/24/2005 9:14:03 PM PST by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr

Layered defense is what is going to work. We need a variety of systems and attack modes to defeat ballistic missile threats. The particle beam/laser ray isn't there yet, but this will do for now to reduce enemy confidence in their probability of success. No point in pi$$ing off Superman if you can't really hurt him...


9 posted on 02/24/2005 9:19:53 PM PST by RKV ( He who has the guns, makes the rules.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RKV

True - though with the ABL system looking as though it really does work, the only "hole" we have left is midcourse or cruise - and if we can get the land-based interceptors to work (without Microsoftish problems), that will probably be covered, too.


Here's a stray thought I had - with the SM3 and more and more surface naval forces becoming missile combatants, there's a possibility that the battleship could come back as a missile-heavy or missile-only combatant. After all, with cruise missiles and SM2s, it doesn't need to get nearly as close to its target as the big gun battleships did. And since missiles require a lot of freeboard as opposed to main gun ammo, it would make sense there, too.

I'm thinking something about the size of our old Iowa class ships that carries up to 1000 SM-class or Tomahawk missiles, split among SAM, SSM, and ABMs - plus a naval version of the ABL.


10 posted on 02/24/2005 9:28:19 PM PST by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr

Why all this "Kiss me,come catch me"? What is the significance of this arms development?


11 posted on 02/24/2005 10:06:56 PM PST by CBart95
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: CBart95

Uh, say what?


12 posted on 02/24/2005 10:11:30 PM PST by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle
Why do only the misses make the front page!

It was good to read about this interception.

13 posted on 02/24/2005 10:22:48 PM PST by RAY (They that do right are all heroes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MonroeDNA
The Union of Concerned Scientists is deeply saddened.

Probably a lot of Demon Rats were too.

14 posted on 02/24/2005 10:27:34 PM PST by Mark17
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: risk

Thanks for the ping.


15 posted on 02/24/2005 11:09:37 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RKV
Layered defense is what is going to work. We need a variety of systems and attack modes to defeat ballistic missile threats. The particle beam/laser ray isn't there yet, but this will do for now to reduce enemy confidence in their probability of success. No point in pi$$ing off Superman if you can't really hurt him...

It is shaping up to be that way. Land-based, Sea Based, and the Airborne Laser once that becomes operational.

16 posted on 02/24/2005 11:15:54 PM PST by Paul_Denton (The UN is UN-American! Get the UN out of the US and US out of the UN! http://asiasec.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RAY

I'm guessing since they call it a Standard 3 that it's pulled up on the rails like the SAM Standard used to bring down aircraft (unfortunately, what the USS Vincennes released a number of years ago). The Standards are automatically pulled from below via commands from the Aegis system to engage the targets. They must have expanded Aegis to have a fourth or higher third plane (depending upon how they classify it: sub, surface, air, ballistic engagement).

if so, that would be a pretty slick system. But you don't want to get labeled "incoming hostile" or "imminent threat" accidentally, that's for sure. (Not the official terms, just to demonstrate).


17 posted on 02/24/2005 11:31:17 PM PST by F15Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

BTTT


18 posted on 02/25/2005 3:34:06 AM PST by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prophetic

"what is the range for the Standard-3?"

I thought that we were going to have a Monty Python skit going.

Bridge Keeper
What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?

Arthur
What do you mean? An African or European swallow?

Arrrggghhhhhhhhhh


19 posted on 02/25/2005 6:14:45 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz (60 votes and the world changes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

Actually, it launches straight out of the VLS cell and does not require the rail-type launcher, which is part of what distinguishes it from the SM 2ER Block IV-A, which was the prior ABM system. The other part is that the SM 2ER IV-A was actually just as capable against air and sea threats as the regular SM 2ER, which the SM3 isn't - but the SM3 is faster and is thought to have a much longer range, which allows it to intercept ICBMs above the atmosphere, which the other one couldn't.


20 posted on 02/25/2005 7:55:24 AM PST by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr

IIRC, the thought among US naval officers now is to just attach large "missile supply ships" to AEGIS cruisers/destroyers. Just a big boat full of VLS cells, a pilothouse, and propulsion.


21 posted on 02/25/2005 8:21:02 AM PST by gura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr

Thanks. Yeah I wondered how it would have enough range if it was roughly the size of the SAM's. Pretty wild stuff.


22 posted on 02/25/2005 9:52:01 AM PST by F15Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle
It is the fifth kill in six tries for the interceptor, called a Standard Missile-3

They need to come up with a cooler name...

23 posted on 02/25/2005 9:57:47 AM PST by Mannaggia l'America
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mannaggia l'America
Standard Missile 3

Sounds like a name that would be given by a North Korean rocket scientist.

24 posted on 02/25/2005 12:44:06 PM PST by FarRightTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson