Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
11/20/2019 5:07:11 PM
Posted: 7/31/2009 5:14:21 PM EST

Raytheon Standard Missile-3 Achieves 15th Hit-To-Kill Intercept in Space

PACIFIC MISSILE RANGE FACILITY, KAUAI, Hawaii, July 31, 2009 /PRNewswire/ –– A Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) Standard Missile-3 destroyed a short-range ballistic missile target in space July 30. The test marked the 15th hit-to-kill intercept for SM-3 and the 19th missile intercept of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense program.

"SM-3 is a mature and proven solution for defeating threat ballistic missiles," said Dr. Taylor W. Lawrence, Raytheon Missile Systems president. "This intercept proved once again that SM-3 is the right choice for protecting the U.S. and its allies against the growing ballistic missile threat."

The target ballistic missile was launched from the U.S. Navy's Pacific Missile Range on Kauai while the crew of the guided missile destroyer USS Hopper (DDG-70) fired the SM-3.

SM-3 is being developed as part of the Missile Defense Agency's sea-based Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. The missiles are deployed on U.S. Aegis cruisers and destroyers and Japanese destroyers to defend against short- to intermediate-range ballistic missile threats in the ascent and midcourse phases of flight. Raytheon also is developing the kinetic warhead for SM-3.

Raytheon Company, with 2008 sales of $23.2 billion, is a technology and innovation leader specializing in defense, homeland security and other government markets throughout the world. With a history of innovation spanning 87 years, Raytheon provides state-of-the-art electronics, mission systems integration and other capabilities in the areas of sensing; effects; and command, control, communications and intelligence systems, as well as a broad range of mission support services. With headquarters in Waltham, Mass., Raytheon employs 73,000 people worldwide.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 5:20:28 PM EST
The Japanese have it? I'm sure Dear Leader won't be happy.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 8:05:58 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/31/2009 8:06:24 PM EST by marksman121]
Originally Posted By 4v50:
The Japanese have it? I'm sure Dear Leader won't be happy.


I think the JDF bought 15 SM-3's. Or it could have been the SM-2 Block IV.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 8:15:28 PM EST
"Ballistic missiles". Yeah, sure.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 8:19:16 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/31/2009 8:37:38 PM EST by mattja]
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:13:47 PM EST
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:15:46 PM EST
Cut funding now for food stamps
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:17:11 PM EST
Originally Posted By raven:
Cut funding now for food stamps


I wish we would cut off all welfare and food aid.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:17:15 PM EST

Originally Posted By lysm:
"Ballistic missiles". Yeah, sure.


Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:18:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/31/2009 9:23:14 PM EST by mattja]
Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?


Nothing. Although, for that configuration you won't need a MK72 booster and you will want a fragmentation warhead, not a kinetic kill vehicle.

Actually, you won't need the 3rd stage motor either, so it's overkill. I guess an SM2 is what you need. And it should be more cost effective.

When I left, we were working on the early design stages of RIM-66G, so that gives you some insight as to how long ago it was.

I did get to see classified films of live fires in Vietnam. It's a hell of a lot better today.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:20:41 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/31/2009 9:24:04 PM EST by Spenser_Burrows]

Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?

EDIT, answered above by somebody actually knows what they're talking about.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:25:28 PM EST
Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?


The terminal intercept system is designed for use in space, it wont work as well in an atmosphere as a conventional system. Which happen to be cheaper to boot.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:26:08 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/31/2009 9:26:45 PM EST by Spenser_Burrows]

Originally Posted By mattja:
Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?


Nothing. Although, for that configuration you won't need a MK72 booster and you will want a fragmentation warhead, not a kinetic kill vehicle.

Actually, you won't need the 3rd stage motor either, so it's overkill. I guess an SM2 is what you need. And it should be more cost effective.

When I left, we were working on the early design stages of RIM-66G, so that gives you some insight as to how long ago it was.

I did get to see classified films of live fires in Vietnam. It's a hell of a lot better today.

I have a question, is there any reason we couldn't build SM3 launchers on land for ballistic missile defense?
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:26:26 PM EST
Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?


I would guess cost.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:32:57 PM EST
Originally Posted By Spenser_Burrows:

I have a question, is there any reason we couldn't build SM3 launchers on land for ballistic missile defense?


No can do!

This is a Navy system! The chair force would never allow it to be used on land!
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:34:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/31/2009 9:35:35 PM EST by marksman121]
So I take it that THAAD and AEGIS seen as just the first part of a national missile defense system in addition to being a theater defense? Are they looking at using a land based 'strategic' system for protection from ICBM threats?
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:39:24 PM EST

Originally Posted By marksman121:
So I take it that THAAD and AEGIS seen as just the first part of a national missile defense system in addition to being a theater defense? Are they looking at using a land based 'strategic' system for protection from ICBM threats?

Well, if we can already shoot something in orbit down with AEGIS and the SM3, I don't see why we couldn't just put an AEGIS radar and an SM3 launcher in a building on land, call it good and start enjoying economies of scale (other than the whole Air Force/Navy thing ).
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:44:01 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/31/2009 9:44:55 PM EST by marksman121]
Originally Posted By Spenser_Burrows:

Originally Posted By marksman121:
So I take it that THAAD and AEGIS seen as just the first part of a national missile defense system in addition to being a theater defense? Are they looking at using a land based 'strategic' system for protection from ICBM threats?

Well, if we can already shoot something in orbit down with AEGIS and the SM3, I don't see why we couldn't just put an AEGIS radar and an SM3 launcher in a building on land, call it good and start enjoying economies of scale (other than the whole Air Force/Navy thing).


They did it with Phalanx IIRC.

ETA- Said Phalanx B and Centurion.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:47:48 PM EST
Originally Posted By Spenser_Burrows:

Originally Posted By mattja:
Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?


Nothing. Although, for that configuration you won't need a MK72 booster and you will want a fragmentation warhead, not a kinetic kill vehicle.

Actually, you won't need the 3rd stage motor either, so it's overkill. I guess an SM2 is what you need. And it should be more cost effective.

When I left, we were working on the early design stages of RIM-66G, so that gives you some insight as to how long ago it was.

I did get to see classified films of live fires in Vietnam. It's a hell of a lot better today.

I have a question, is there any reason we couldn't build SM3 launchers on land for ballistic missile defense?


I think due to the missiles limited range and velocity, ship launching, close to the point of where the enemy missile is launched (think Sea of Japan), is what it was designed for.

But that's not to say it could not be launched from the ground in other defensive scenarios.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 9:50:31 PM EST
I love engineering.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 10:01:13 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/31/2009 10:02:03 PM EST by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?

That's what SM-2 is for...

SM-3 is designed & equipped to deal with missile threats, but it was developed from an antiaircraft missile...

The AEGIS ships are primarily designed as anti-air warships...

Link Posted: 7/31/2009 10:01:38 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/31/2009 10:02:20 PM EST by marksman121]
What was the Airborne Laser's mission? I thought it was going to be like SAC where they had at least one patrolling the CONUS or maybe have it in an area like Alaska near a possible launch site.
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 10:02:34 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/31/2009 10:02:48 PM EST by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By marksman121:
What was the Airborne Laser's mission? I thought it was going to be like SAC where they had at least one patrolling the CONUS or have in a area like Alaska near a possible launch site.

ABL is boost-phase kill...

It's not good for defending CONUS *from* CONUS, but it is good for shooting missiles down just after launch...


Link Posted: 7/31/2009 10:04:20 PM EST

Originally Posted By Spenser_Burrows:

Originally Posted By mattja:
Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?


Nothing. Although, for that configuration you won't need a MK72 booster and you will want a fragmentation warhead, not a kinetic kill vehicle.

Actually, you won't need the 3rd stage motor either, so it's overkill. I guess an SM2 is what you need. And it should be more cost effective.

When I left, we were working on the early design stages of RIM-66G, so that gives you some insight as to how long ago it was.

I did get to see classified films of live fires in Vietnam. It's a hell of a lot better today.

I have a question, is there any reason we couldn't build SM3 launchers on land for ballistic missile defense?

We have a land-based system already, with launch silos in Alaska.

The 'cool' part about SM3, is that you can load them into the existing STANDARD missile tubes on AEGIS warships....

Which provides missile defense 'On the Go'....
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 10:05:26 PM EST

Originally Posted By Spenser_Burrows:

Originally Posted By marksman121:
So I take it that THAAD and AEGIS seen as just the first part of a national missile defense system in addition to being a theater defense? Are they looking at using a land based 'strategic' system for protection from ICBM threats?

Well, if we can already shoot something in orbit down with AEGIS and the SM3, I don't see why we couldn't just put an AEGIS radar and an SM3 launcher in a building on land, call it good and start enjoying economies of scale (other than the whole Air Force/Navy thing ).

It's an ARMY/Navy thing...

Air Defense Artillery (land based SAMs and antimissile systems) is an Army mission, not AF...
Link Posted: 7/31/2009 10:20:35 PM EST
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


Small world. I too also worked at the Pomona GD plant from 85 to early 90 in DSD.

.
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 3:00:01 AM EST
Glad it works!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just in time to get the can since the world lives in peace and harmony now.
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 3:20:08 AM EST
Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Spenser_Burrows:

Originally Posted By marksman121:
So I take it that THAAD and AEGIS seen as just the first part of a national missile defense system in addition to being a theater defense? Are they looking at using a land based 'strategic' system for protection from ICBM threats?

Well, if we can already shoot something in orbit down with AEGIS and the SM3, I don't see why we couldn't just put an AEGIS radar and an SM3 launcher in a building on land, call it good and start enjoying economies of scale (other than the whole Air Force/Navy thing).

It's an ARMY/Navy thing...

Air Defense Artillery (land based SAMs and antimissile systems) is an Army mission, not AF...


Yep, the ADAFCO is an Army officer.
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 3:42:46 AM EST
Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?


Because it is not designed for it. Besides we have the SM-2 Block IIIB M/U2 and SM-2 Block IVA for that.
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 3:44:40 AM EST
Originally Posted By mattja:
Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?


Nothing. Although, for that configuration you won't need a MK72 booster and you will want a fragmentation warhead, not a kinetic kill vehicle.

Actually, you won't need the 3rd stage motor either, so it's overkill. I guess an SM2 is what you need. And it should be more cost effective.

When I left, we were working on the early design stages of RIM-66G, so that gives you some insight as to how long ago it was.

I did get to see classified films of live fires in Vietnam. It's a hell of a lot better today.


Sorry, but an SM-3 won't work for an aircraft. And the Mk72 booster is the same one that is on the SM-2 Block IV/IVA. The Mk72 adds a kinetic edge against fast moving and high altitude air breathers, not to mention a longer range. Not to mention the kill vehicle isn't appropriate for an aircraft.
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 3:48:53 AM EST
Group Buy?
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 3:50:47 AM EST

Originally Posted By raven:
Cut funding now for food stamps

No, No, No. We have to cut funding and provide these dollars for gay artists.

Link Posted: 8/1/2009 4:26:35 AM EST
Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Spenser_Burrows:

Originally Posted By mattja:
Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By mattja:
As a former worker on the SM program when it was at General Dynamics Pomona Division, this makes me smile.

I love that missile.

An earlier test


What keeps the SM-3 from being able to be used for anti-aircraft use?


Nothing. Although, for that configuration you won't need a MK72 booster and you will want a fragmentation warhead, not a kinetic kill vehicle.

Actually, you won't need the 3rd stage motor either, so it's overkill. I guess an SM2 is what you need. And it should be more cost effective.

When I left, we were working on the early design stages of RIM-66G, so that gives you some insight as to how long ago it was.

I did get to see classified films of live fires in Vietnam. It's a hell of a lot better today.

I have a question, is there any reason we couldn't build SM3 launchers on land for ballistic missile defense?

We have a land-based system already, with launch silos in Alaska.

The 'cool' part about SM3, is that you can load them into the existing STANDARD missile tubes on AEGIS warships....

Which provides missile defense 'On the Go'....


The Navy keeps forgetting we're up here. Plus we don't have to worry about getting STD's/getting in fightsbeatup by marines on shore leave

This is all just part of a layered defense and I'm glad their layer works well. They get ALOT more tests than we do, and thus get more publicity and support.
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 4:50:04 AM EST
Originally Posted By marksman121:
So I take it that THAAD and AEGIS seen as just the first part of a national missile defense system in addition to being a theater defense? Are they looking at using a land based 'strategic' system for protection from ICBM threats?


Correct. LINK
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 4:51:31 AM EST
Originally Posted By lysm:
"Ballistic missiles". Yeah, sure.


Link Posted: 8/1/2009 4:54:06 AM EST
Originally Posted By Spenser_Burrows:

Originally Posted By lysm:
"Ballistic missiles". Yeah, sure.









Its amazing what US engineers can do.
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 5:37:56 AM EST
AP/ August 1, 2009 Raytheon enters Sporting Market.

Raytheon Sur-Shot 12 gauge Target Seeking Loads. For Trap, Sporting Clays or other Shooting Games. Not legal for hunting in most states.

A 12 gage round fireable from any smooth-bore with an Improved Cylinder or lesser choke, the new Sur-Shot TS will improve your score almost immediately. A phased array radar and proximity fuse microchip is powered by a piezoelectric charge generator that uses the firing of the round to provide up to .7 seconds of power to acquire, track, and detonate the round near your target. Small, single-charge solid-fuel rockets around the perimeter of the base change direction in response to the radar data.

Developed for the civilian market, this application of Raytheon’s work on the SM-3 Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense program, uses proprietary command and control technology with pyrotechnic assistance form Winchester-Olin corporation.

Boxes of 25 Sur-Shot TS 12 gage rounds are available at a MSRP of $300.00.

Raytheon Company, with 2008 sales of $23.2 billion, is a technology and innovation leader specializing in defense, homeland security and other government markets throughout the world. With a history of innovation spanning 87 years, Raytheon provides state-of-the-art electronics, mission systems integration and other capabilities in the areas of sensing; effects; and command, control, communications and intelligence systems, as well as a broad range of mission support services. With headquarters in Waltham, Mass., Raytheon employs 73,000 people worldwide.
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 6:01:48 AM EST
I want some of those 12ga shells only $12 a round lol..
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 6:23:08 AM EST
Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Spenser_Burrows:

Originally Posted By marksman121:
So I take it that THAAD and AEGIS seen as just the first part of a national missile defense system in addition to being a theater defense? Are they looking at using a land based 'strategic' system for protection from ICBM threats?

Well, if we can already shoot something in orbit down with AEGIS and the SM3, I don't see why we couldn't just put an AEGIS radar and an SM3 launcher in a building on land, call it good and start enjoying economies of scale (other than the whole Air Force/Navy thing).

It's an ARMY/Navy thing...

Air Defense Artillery (land based SAMs and antimissile systems) is an Army mission, not AF...


I think your forgetting about the gear (Alert Missiles) at Vandenberg AFB. (We Own the big radars and other goodies for detecting launches too)
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 6:30:31 AM EST
So....

ABL works in Boost Phase
SM-3 works in what ever phase the missile is in space
Patriot works in Terminal Phase

Did I get that right and did I miss any other ABM technologies we have?


I'm really glad to hear this works btw. I say we put some in off the coasts of Japan and Iran, just for kicks.
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 7:02:23 AM EST
Originally Posted By Matt_The_Hokie:
So....

ABL works in Boost Phase
SM-3 works in what ever phase the missile is in space
Patriot works in Terminal Phase

Did I get that right and did I miss any other ABM technologies we have?


I'm really glad to hear this works btw. I say we put some in off the coasts of Japan and Iran, just for kicks.


That's just about it. There is the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) program floating around out there, and it is doing well. It is pretty much designed for short to Medium range balistic missiles. Army has/is getting it, and somebody over in the desert wants it, but I can't remember who is buying it. Japan is showing interest, but the Chinese are starting to get pissed. Israeli Arrow system can be part of the Anti-Missile picture also. We are assisting them with that program, and they have been using some of our west coast ranges for testing. I think they tried one last week or so and it didn't get off the launcher for some reason. Toss in Patriot, and that should just about be the entire package. Wait, I think somebody is now talking about hanging Patriot or SM-? on Aircraft..... so the plot thickens.
Link Posted: 8/1/2009 8:21:17 AM EST
Originally Posted By marksman121:
Originally Posted By raven:
Cut funding now for food stamps


I wish we would cut off all welfare and food aid.


Make em take a piss test like I do so I can work
That would add about 75% of that budget back into our Federal budge

Top Top