North Korea

[HashiriyaS14]

Anyone else watching this missile situation with baited breath?

I don't think that North Korea is crazy, I think they do this to gain bargaining power to get oil and other resources from the west. Even if they were crazy, there's no way there's a functional warhead on that missile, it's just a test. They know the world's watching.

My interest in it is this:

Does anyone think the US will attempt to swat the missile out of the sky if it launches and heads over international waters? We've got a couple AEGIS cruisers parked over there right now, and they're supposed to be capable of hitting ballistic missile targets.

The quirk is, AFAIK, AEGIS was adapted to ballistic targets to hit INCOMING warheads that were headed for a Carrier Battle Group. In that situation, you have a bunch of missiles and closing speed is on your side. The AEGIS ship can fire off half a dozen shots and almost certainly hit an incoming warhead. You keep shooting, target gets closer, chance of hitting improves.

On the other hand, in this Korean situation, they'd be trying to shoot at a ballistic target that is pulling AWAY from the area. You keep shooting, target gets faster and farther away, chance of hitting decreases.

I'm not sure the closing speed is going to be high enough for the AEGIS shots to catch/hit the missile. I REALLY want to see them try though, as it'd be a great proof-of-concept. I wonder what the

It would mean the US could effectively stop ANY small-scale ICBM launch close to water just by parking AEGIS cruisers there. No fancy-schmancy directed-energy SDI needed. Of course, the SDI stuff would still be needed for a large-scale exchange, but not for rogue states with small arsenals.

[WDRacing]

A Partriot would do the job just fine. We have literally thousands of Patriot batteries all over SK. Depending on the trajectory, I'm sure we'll blast that thing as soon as it leaves NK airspace.

Eitherway, IMO anything NK related is a non issue. They have 4 working light bulbs left and they pass them around at night for security.

[HashiriyaS14]

A Partriot would do the job just fine. We have literally thousands of Patriot batteries all over SK. Depending on the trajectory, I'm sure we'll blast that thing as soon as it leaves NK airspace.

The flight ceiling on the AEGIS system (i.e. RIM-161 Standard) is about double the Patriot's, so it would depend on how quickly you got the shot off.

If you're right next door with a Patriot, I'm sure you could hit it, but the AEGIS shot could probably nail it in space. They have anti-satellite capacity at something like 150 miles up, and the range is like 3 times that of a Patriot shot.

It's an interesting thought though. A Pat shot would probably be the best bet of stopping a launch from somewhere more landlocked, i.e. Iran.

[audtatious]

Let'em have their toys. Right now they can only hit Palin-ville. No big loss I hear.

Seriously, it gives NK more chips to play p0ker with regardless of whether we can knock it out or not.

[smockers83]

I feel that they're only there to protect Japan. If it enters Japanese airspace, then the two destroyers there will shoot it down. If it is determined within the first couple of minutes that it could be headed towards the US, I'm sure there's another set of these destroyers waiting closer to us. It should only take a few minutes to determine where the missile is going and predicting its landing by measuring the speed and trajectory.

Plus, even if the two destroyers in the Sea of Japan are the ones positioned to destroy it if it's determined to head towards the US, I bet ours will outpace the Korean one. However, this is not how the system works because the defense missiles work by force of impact. If our missile starts chasing their missile, it's just going to snuggle up against it.

[HashiriyaS14]

Plus, even if the two destroyers in the Sea of Japan are the ones positioned to destroy it if it's determined to head towards the US, I bet ours will outpace the Korean one. However, this is not how the system works because the defense missiles work by force of impact. If our missile starts chasing their missile, it's just going to snuggle up against it.

The AEGIS missiles only have a ~270 naut-mile range, they have to score a hit on the way up. They can't chase the target all the way across the ballistic flight path.

Granted, NK isn't really shooting at us, it's just a test, but if the AEGIS ships are going to try for a shot, they'll try in the first couple minutes.

[Cold_Zero]

My interest in it is this:

Does anyone think the US will attempt to swat the missile out of the sky if it launches and heads over international waters? We've got a couple AEGIS cruisers parked over there right now, and they're supposed to be capable of hitting ballistic missile targets.

Even though it would be cooler than hell to hit their missile as it is going up, I doubt the US will try. I think that if they (NK) shoots it over Japan, they (Japan) would be well within their rights to shoot it out of the sky. The only problem with the Aegis Destroyers and Cruisers that we have forward deployed is that they are based in Yokosuka Japan. The wrong side of the island to be taking pot shots at NK missiles.

Quote »The quirk is, AFAIK, AEGIS was adapted to ballistic targets to hit INCOMING warheads that were headed for a Carrier Battle Group. In that situation, you have a bunch of missiles and closing speed is on your side. The AEGIS ship can fire off half a dozen shots and almost certainly hit an incoming warhead. You keep shooting, target gets closer, chance of hitting improves.[/quote]From my understanding, AEGIS integrates the defense systems of all the ships in the SAG or CVBG and uses them to engage/defend against multiple targets. The Soviet doctrine for surface warfare was to take out the Carrier battle groups first, so the their surface, subsurface and air platforms are designed to overwhelm the battle group's defenses with a barrage of SS-N xx and Kitchen missiles. AEGIS was designed to combat this doctrine.

Quote »On the other hand, in this Korean situation, they'd be trying to shoot at a ballistic target that is pulling AWAY from the area. You keep shooting, target gets faster and farther away, chance of hitting decreases.

I'm not sure the closing speed is going to be high enough for the AEGIS shots to catch/hit the missile. I REALLY want to see them try though, as it'd be a great proof-of-concept. I wonder what the

It would mean the US could effectively stop ANY small-scale ICBM launch close to water just by parking AEGIS cruisers there. No fancy-schmancy directed-energy SDI needed. Of course, the SDI stuff would still be needed for a large-scale exchange, but not for rogue states with small arsenals.[/quote]From my understand the object is to hit the ICBM while in flight or coming down. The current problems with have with our defense system is:1. Determining between decoys and I/TBMs2. Defending against MRV once they have delpoyed3. Having a system that stretches long enough to defend against all the potential TBM/ICBM targets that could be aimed at the US.

The only problem with using ships borne systems to defend against TBMs is that you have to be in the right place at the right time and you can't move assets into place fast enough to defend against the threat. Which is why we have designed a series of systems to be integrated into one Missile Defense system by land (THAAD and MIM-104F), sea (Standard Missile 3) or space.

Incidently, my buddy that I went to High School with was interviewed by PBS when the Lake Erie (CG-70) was shooting down satellites (test ballistic missiles). He was the Combat System Office when they were doing the tests.

"Don't Give Up the Ship."bud

[HashiriyaS14]

From my understanding, AEGIS integrates the defense systems of all the ships in the SAG or CVBG and uses them to engage/defend against multiple targets. The Soviet doctrine for surface warfare was to take out the Carrier battle groups first, so the their surface, subsurface and air platforms are designed to overwhelm the battle group's defenses with a barrage of SS-N xx and Kitchen missiles. AEGIS was designed to combat this doctrine.

Yep, just like in:

From my understand the object is to hit the ICBM while in flight or coming down.

Yeah, that's what I always thought to. I guess that's what the AEGIS ships are for then, to hit it coming down if it goes to Japan, not to hit it going up if they think it's headed for US soil.

I was just postulating as to whether or not an AEGIS shot COULD hit one on it's way up if it were close enough.

The current problems with have with our defense system is:1. Determining between decoys and I/TBMs2. Defending against MRV once they have delpoyed3. Having a system that stretches long enough to defend against all the potential TBM/ICBM targets that could be aimed at the US.

The only problem with using ships borne systems to defend against TBMs is that you have to be in the right place at the right time and you can't move assets into place fast enough to defend against the threat. Which is why we have designed a series of systems to be integrated into one Missile Defense system by land (THAAD and MIM-104F), sea (Standard Missile 3) or space.

Incidently, my buddy that I went to High School with was interviewed by PBS when the Lake Erie (CG-70) was shooting down satellites (test ballistic missiles). He was the Combat System Office when they were doing the tests.

"Don't Give Up the Ship."bud

All very true. Do I sense a fellow Defense Tech nerd?

[smockers83]

I dunno about the AEGIS system, but I know that the missile defense system in general shoots missiles down when they are out of the atmosphere so that as debris re-enters, it burns up instead of affecting down below. At least that's what it's intentions are. 270 miles is definitely long enough to shoot a missile that is out of the atmosphere.

[HashiriyaS14]

I dunno about the AEGIS system, but I know that the missile defense system in general shoots missiles down when they are out of the atmosphere so that as debris re-enters, it burns up instead of affecting down below. At least that's what it's intentions are. 270 miles is definitely long enough to shoot a missile that is out of the atmosphere.

Yeah, altitude isn't the problem, it's just a matter of how far the ICBM has gotten before you get the AEGIS shot off.

The RIM-161's have been proven capable of anti-satellite duty (LEO only of course, not geosync).

[Cold_Zero]

Incidentally, my brother in law's father use to work on the Nike Missile batteries here in Indiana. Their job was to guard against Soviet bombers coming across the Arctic Circle on their way to Cincinnati. The missiles were tipped with tactical nuclear warheads and the idea was that they would launch in the middle of a b0mber cluster and take out the whole wing. Pretty crazy stuff.

[HashiriyaS14]

Incidentally, my brother in law's father use to work on the Nike Missile batteries here in Indiana. Their job was to guard against Soviet bombers coming across the Arctic Circle on their way to Cincinnati. The missiles were tipped with tactical nuclear warheads and the idea was that they would launch in the middle of a b0mber cluster and take out the whole wing. Pretty crazy stuff.

Yep, many of the old Nike batteries relied on using nuclear warheads. This would, of course, create problems with EMP's, and so countering incoming warheads with nukes at high altitudes has been off the table as an ABM tactic for a long time.

Very neat stuff though. Those old Nike-Ajax missiles were cool looking.