EAPS Kinetic Interceptor

The American aircraft manufacturing company Lockheed Martin presented a unique solution - the EAPS kinetic interceptor missile, which can completely change the air defense armament. In the creation of "EAPS" designers used a miniature technology "hit-to-kill" - a blow to lose. Externally, “EAPS” is similar to a miniature copy of an anti-aircraft missile, about one meter long, 5 centimeters in diameter and weighing three kilograms. The kinetic mini-rocket is intended to destroy in a direct collision many types of air and flying targets:
- anti-aircraft missiles;
- unguided rockets;
- anti-tank missiles;
- artillery shells of different caliber;
- aerial bombs;
- mortar min.

A kinetic interceptor mini-missile as part of the newest air defense system experienced 26.05.2012 of the year at the White Sands training ground in New Mexico. The tests were carried out in collaboration with the RDECOM / AMRDEC technology, weapons and engineering innovation center. During the tests, the kinetic interceptor was launched in a vertical position, after which he performed a number of flight maneuvers to test the aerodynamics in motion, to verify the correct operation of the control system and data collection. According to the developers, in the very near future a full-scale test (with flying targets) of the new air defense system will be carried out.

For the US air defense units of the ground forces, this development is an invaluable contribution at this time - after all, today they have only one such system to counter unguided and guided projectiles. This is an artillery system "C-RAM", created on the basis of the ship's anti-aircraft gun "Phalanx". The main disadvantages of "C-RAM":
- large dimensions, the system is made on the chassis of a four-axle truck;
- insufficient for today range of application;
- causing collateral damage to ammunition that did not fall on the target.

The latest kinetic mini-missile interceptor "EAPS" does not have the above disadvantages and intercepts ammunition and missiles at a safe distance from the protected unit. The applied fire control system ensures the destruction of the target with a direct hit. Today, only SM-3, the anti-missile defense of the United States, can boast of this.

EAPS is designed as a small mobile forward-based air defense system. The chassis used is not specified, but it is probably “HMMWV”. The small size of the rocket and, accordingly, the launcher, in principle, will allow to install / re-equip any armored vehicle used in the ground forces of the United States Army. Such a solution can dramatically increase the protection of armored vehicles and personnel of infantry units from enemy artillery and mortar fire. It should be borne in mind here that the new system will not be able to provide protection against massive artillery fire or against the use by the enemy of complexes of multiple launch rocket systems.

The main purpose of the EAPS system is to intercept and destroy single targets such as a projectile / mine, creating an original umbrella over the protected subunit, which will weaken the fire impact on the subunit. To obtain target designation of a kinetic mini-missile interceptor, modern counter-battery radars of the "AN / TPQ-36" type can be used.


Information sources:
http://defense-update.com/20120607_eaps-i.html
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/lockheed-martin-conducts-successful-eaps-150000182.html
http://vpk.name/news/70714_miniraketaperehvatchik_peretryahnet_pvo.html

Comments

[Svistoplyaskov]

The racket is certainly interesting, but 1 meter is not so small. And what is the price? And in general, the most important thing here is not a rocket, but a guidance system!

[matex]

As for the guidance system, there is a hint in the article that counter-battery radars of the “AN / TPQ-36” type can be used for this. But I wonder about efficiency since a direct hit is necessary to destroy a shell, which is not an easy task.

[borisst64]

Quote: matex

to destroy a projectile requires a direct hit, which is not an easy task

Let's not dissemble, get on an artillery shell (to get hit rather than a massive fire), this is an impossible task. There is no equipment that is capable of such a goal: detect, calculate the trajectory, calculate the destruction algorithm, destroy.

[Passing]

Quote: borisst64

to hit an artillery shell (namely to hit rather than a massive fire) is an impossible task.

And what is the fundamental problem? Approximate guidance from a ground-based radar + optical system in the final section (for example, a matrix thermal imaging seeker). Actually all direct-hit missiles work on this principle, the technology has been developed by the Americans.
It is a pity that our people do not itch at all in this direction.

[11 black]

Quote: Passing by

to hit an artillery shell (namely to hit rather than a massive fire) is an impossible task.

why so? After all, they shot down the satellite by a direct hit, and there the speed is many times higher ...

[755962]

The guidance system confuses me. Well, what kind of "nimble" ACS you have to be, or whatever it says, to intercept the same projectile (well, the mine will change speed along the hinged trajectory) !?

[neri73-r]

Gentlemen, what are you talking about? What are the problems, a simple example is the active defense system "Arena", "Drozd", etc. In this case, I mean

detect - calculate the trajectory - calculate the defeat algorithm

! Yes, in the Arena there is a directed explosion, not a direct hit, but the time and distance are less than when using a mortar mortar, a shell from an SPG or a rocket! Similar technologies exist in Israel and other countries.

[gor]

why the toad presses?))))))))))))))))))))))) they do not believe

[snek]

A very interesting missile, but there is not enough information yet - I would like to know the probability of intercepting a target and the maximum characteristics of intercepted targets (speed, altitude, etc.)

[neri73-r]

A missile can be good, it can be good guidance, but only to fight against solitary targets, for example, from terrorist attacks on a military base or something like that, where a small amount of attack means is used (mines, shells, Kasan missiles, etc.) d ..), against a salvo, for example, Msta-S is a dead number !!! Comparison of the price-quality of this rocket and the shell was not near!

[griha988]

it seems to me that this is for Israel to fight the Palestinian kassam. I see no more use for these missiles.

it is not clear why such a PU for a three kilogram rocket?

[11 black]

I’m wondering - what range can it have with such dimensions and launching from the ground by air? well 2-3 km no more
then the question is how many installations are needed to close, for example, all of Palestine? won't it be a bit much? (although it may well be that yousses will drive your friends on the cheap, but it’s still illogical)

rather, these rockets will cover the art of the battery from return fire - otherwise I see no reason for the possibility of firing at mines and shells

[Svistoplyaskov]

Volley from Grad is the best missile defense! Cheap and cheerful!

[snek]

Well, this is from the cycle "tanks on enemy airfields are the best air defense". It sounds, of course, beautiful, but, as a rule, it is quite difficult to be realized in life.

[grig1969]

It is interesting to know the opinion of specialists about this idea:
to "highlight" all incoming targets with radars directed inland (in the direction opposite to the border) so that passive radars could catch the "illumination" signal and transmit them where necessary :). The benefit here may be that the "illuminating" radar will be more difficult to detect and, accordingly, destroy. Of course, the "target" can only be found after crossing the border. However, a combination is possible here - one radar looks outward - the other - into the interior of the country (or the perimeter of the protected object). It is important - given that mostly rockets and airplanes are suitable at ultra-low altitudes - is it possible to "catch" them with often placed inductive or capacitive sensors - which would then turn on the radar in the appropriate direction (so that it would not "shine" in advance).

[11 black]

Quote: grig1969

to "highlight" all incoming targets with radars directed inland (in the direction opposite to the border) so that passive radars could catch the "illumination" signal and transmit them where necessary :). The benefit here may be that the "illuminating" radar will be more difficult to detect and, accordingly, destroy.

nothing complicated will be found in it ...
Now, as soon as the plane flies into the irradiation zone, a STR (irradiation warning system) is activated that indicates an approximate vector to the signal source.
the exact coordinates, of course, will not be indicated, but it will immediately be clear to the pilot that he is being irradiated from behind, and it is much easier to destroy the radar at the border than in the depths of the defense ... so it makes no sense to mine ...

[Vyalik]

It’s one thing to shoot down missiles, another thing is artillery shells. And especially with massive shelling. Or mortar shelling. Thought may be good, but it’s realizable .....

[Gocha kurashvili]

Well, if an artillery shell shoots at the approach of a cassette with foil or something else ??? How to detect it?

[postman]

Author: "The applied fire control system ensures the destruction of the target with a direct hit. "boast of" only United States anti-missile defense missiles "SM-3""
But what about:
1.THAAD with KKV rocket

2. Patriot PAC-3 with ERINT missile

??

[djerel]

EAPS is just one of the further modifications / development options for PAC-3. The article refers to rockets not from Lockheed Martin.

EAPS extends our legacy of accuracy and lethality first demonstrated in our combat-proven PAC-3 Missile.

From here - http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2012/june/mfc-060712-LMCond
uctsSuccessful.html

[postman]

Quote: djerel

EAPS is just one of the further modifications / development options for PAC-3

?
PAC-3 is another modification of the WHOLE Patriot complex, the EAPS kinetic interceptor program.
The essence of the rocket and it is significantly different from MIM 104F in terms of performance
I wrote about this.
The author claims "the only" (according to SM-3)
I refute this /
and MIM 104F and EAPS are LM co. after all, no one denied this

And RIM-161A (SM -3 Block1) is Raytheon

[matvey.z]

You can add: GBI-PLV
14 mine launchers have already been deployed in Alaska

and GBI-PLV

[Dimon Lviv]

"The main purpose of the EAPS system is to intercept and destroy single targets such as a projectile / mine" - yeah, this racket costs tens of thousands of dollars, and a blank for a cannon - a couple of tens of dollars ... Let them put into service, let them.

[grig1969]

"there will be nothing difficult in detecting it ...
now, as soon as the plane flies into the irradiation zone, the STO (radiation warning system) is triggered, which indicates the approximate vector to the signal source "- however, at this moment the aircraft will already be detected and are in the air defense coverage area

[bazilio]

I do not agree with some comrades, even if this missile will regularly shoot down shells, then the ratio of the cost of the rocket and the shell is not in favor of the rocket, yes. However, one must take into account not only the cost of the rocket but also the value of the object protected by it.

[Uncle]

Another expensive project, such as SDI. Just to invest.