User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 6:20:28 PM EDT
[#1]
The Japanese have it? I'm sure Dear Leader won't be happy.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 9:05:58 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 9:15:28 PM EDT
[#3]
"Ballistic missiles". Yeah, sure.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 9:19:16 PM EDT
[#4]
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 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:13:47 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
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? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:15:46 PM EDT
[#6]
Cut funding now for food stamps
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:17:11 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
Cut funding now for food stamps I wish we would cut off all welfare and food aid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:17:15 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: "Ballistic missiles". Yeah, sure.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:18:17 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
Quoted:
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:20:41 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: Quoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:25:28 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
Quoted:
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:26:08 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 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? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:26:26 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
Quoted:
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:32:57 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
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!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:34:17 PM EDT
[#15]
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?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:39:24 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: 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 ). |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:44:01 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:47:48 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:50:31 PM EDT
[#19]
I love engineering.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 11:01:13 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: Quoted: 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... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 11:01:38 PM EDT
[#21]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 11:02:34 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: 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... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 11:04:20 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 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'.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 11:05:26 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: Quoted: 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... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2009 11:20:35 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
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. . |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 4:00:01 AM EDT
[#26]
Glad it works!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just in time to get the can since the world lives in peace and harmony now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 4:20:08 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 4:42:46 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
Quoted:
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 4:44:40 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 4:48:53 AM EDT
[#30]
Group Buy?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 4:50:47 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: Cut funding now for food stamps No, No, No. We have to cut funding and provide these dollars for gay artists. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 5:26:35 AM EDT
[#32]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 5:50:04 AM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
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 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 5:51:31 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
"Ballistic missiles". Yeah, sure. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 5:54:06 AM EDT
[#35]
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Ballistic missiles". Yeah, sure.
Its amazing what US engineers can do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 6:37:56 AM EDT
[#36]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 7:01:48 AM EDT
[#37]
I want some of those 12ga shells only $12 a round lol..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 7:23:08 AM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
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) 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 7:30:31 AM EDT
[#39]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 8:02:23 AM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2009 9:21:17 AM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:
Quoted:
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 |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
