Military Review

Pentagon: ballistic missiles must be shot down at the start

79
In order to provide protection against the most powerful weapons в stories humanity - intercontinental ballistic missiles - the Pentagon is already implementing a number of ambitious and expensive programs to create interceptor missiles. Especially difficult was the concept of the destruction of missiles in the middle and upper parts of the trajectory. For this purpose, special means were developed, such as the GMD missile, an extra-atmospheric homing kinetic EKV ammunition, and a SBX floating radar.

However, a report by experts from the National Research Council of the United States brings a disappointing outcome of these projects. According to the researchers, no more money or resources should be invested in missile interception systems in the final segments of the upward trajectory. It is better to spend money on missile defense systems that can destroy missiles immediately after launch. The publication of the report required more than one package of paper in the foot, because The report analyzes almost all aspects of this issue.

Thus, experts advise not to deploy expensive GMD rocket batteries in favor of other systems. Most likely, the use of GMD will not stop: the United States needs a layered defense, and, moreover, a GMD missile with an EKV interceptor can also be used as an anti-satellite weapon. However, apparently, the emphasis will be placed on the interception of ballistic missiles directly in the launch region.

For this, there are already more or less reliable systems like the Aegis with the SM-3 rocket. Also in the first echelon of missile defense it is planned to use unmanned aerial vehicles, stealth planes, airships, satellites and ground-based launchers of the same SM-3 missiles with an increased radius of action.

Until now, American military experts have said that it is very difficult to shoot down a ballistic missile at the initial stage of dispersal. The time window for a reliable defeat is too narrow - 3-4 minutes before the rocket reaches the longer middle section of the trajectory, in which it is vulnerable only to GMD missiles. Therefore, interception in the middle segment of the trajectory was considered optimal.

Now the Americans will focus on improving systems and increasing the capacity of the missile defense system in the first echelon - the “four-minute one”. This will require a lot of money, which, however, promise great opportunities. So, only early warning satellites will need 650 pieces worth 300 billions of dollars. But to make the missile defense system truly effective, it will take even more satellites - around 2 thousand.

How hard it is to say. New technologies, such as networks of nanosatellites, reusable platforms like X-37В, unmanned aerial vehicles are possible and could solve this problem. In the case of the implementation of such a missile defense system, the United States will receive an unprecedented situational awareness of any region of the planet and, in fact, complete power over the entire Earth.
Originator:
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru
79 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. spender
    spender 17 September 2012 18: 32
    +20
    MBR is better to destroy directly in the mines before launch. It is unlikely that anyone will argue, it remains to determine how to do this and the amers will immediately surrender laughing
    1. Ruslan67
      Ruslan67 17 September 2012 18: 38
      +10
      lay explosives in the case at the manufacturing stage
      1. Civil
        Civil 17 September 2012 18: 46
        +9
        Ruslan67,

        bankrupt factory manufacturer
        1. Ruslan67
          Ruslan67 17 September 2012 18: 53
          +5
          it’s better to buy the grandmothers of the oligarchs who they communized here and rivet rockets there for themselves and iron beds for amers
        2. kopcep
          kopcep 17 September 2012 19: 35
          +4
          Why such difficulties? In the US, soon all goods will be labeled "made in china", incl. and rockets. And he will not stand behind the cross-eyed / crooked / smart-ass. They have a warranty period of 1 year at best.
        3. Odessa
          Odessa 17 September 2012 20: 02
          +5
          Civil,
          bankrupt factory manufacturer

          You’ll have to send Sanka Romanov there. drinks
          1. Rezun
            Rezun 17 September 2012 21: 58
            +3
            Let Romanov remain here ... He has enough work here - Nemtsov, Navalny, Sobchak, Paramonov (sorry-Ponomarev)
            1. crazyrom
              crazyrom 18 September 2012 04: 03
              +4
              Quote: article
              early warning satellites only need 650 pieces worth 300 billion dollars. But to make the missile defense system truly effective will require even more even more satellites - about 2 thousand.


              yeah, 1 trillion dollars to hang the sky over Russia with two thousand satellites! And this is just an alert system! And what missiles are needed to catch our ICBMs in 3 minutes? What are they? This is a real mega-cut of American unsecured candy wrappers.
        4. 76rtbr
          76rtbr 18 September 2012 02: 46
          0
          arrange there locksmith Uncle Vasyuy everything will fall into its own circles.
      2. selbrat
        selbrat 18 September 2012 08: 19
        +1
        Quote: Ruslan67
        lay explosives in the case at the manufacturing stage

        We have to call Krasmash in Krasnoyarsk. And bribe someone. By the way, they are going to make a new rocket there. That will replace the Voevoda. The main thing is that the rocket with the refrigerator is not confused. And then they will put explosives in Biryusa. laughing
    2. Phlegmatic person
      Phlegmatic person 17 September 2012 18: 51
      +1
      Quote: spender
      it remains to determine how to do this

      Do you think why they are fencing off missile defense from us ?! In general, here Ascetic once shared his opinion that under the guise of a missile defense, the Amerians deploy tomahawks, or something else.
      1. Bashkaus
        Bashkaus 17 September 2012 19: 29
        +4
        Tomahawks is certainly very good, but no matter how our overseas partners like it, no matter what the missiles are, missile or offensive and what kind of technical characteristics they have, all these radars and bases will be destroyed by Russia in the last stages of the open threat period as a preventive measure. It does not sound regrettable, but the honor to begin first act of marlison ballet the fighting in World War III fell precisely to Russia))) But this is not as bad as it might seem at first glance, there are two options
        1 who fired the first missiles, he died the second, so for 5-10 minutes we will have a rally with posters "They broke everyone, only one remained")
        2 maybe when phishington gets in the teeth and realizes that he was left without a shield, which means he will be beaten too painfully and perhaps his feet will cool the ardor of warlike chickens. But most likely all the same point 1
    3. lelikas
      lelikas 17 September 2012 18: 52
      +7
      In response, we will launch Chubais into space - he will sweep away all the nanosatellites with his black-and-white nanoplate and
    4. Butterfly net
      Butterfly net 17 September 2012 19: 16
      +2
      There is one option for current, to intercept a rocket at launch in the Urals or somewhere in the Chinese outback is possible only from orbit. Shuttle drones with missile defense on board. A very expensive project, the campaign of the American oligarchs from the military-industrial complex to the end of the spring. Current and audible from America, it is necessary to reduce military spending, it is necessary to reduce public debt, it is necessary to save, but in fact, the opposite is true. Coconuts will surely be destroyed by their greedy oligarchs.
      1. characterization
        characterization 18 September 2012 01: 00
        +1
        There is an agreement on the demilitarization of space, if phasington starts sending rockets into orbit, then Russia will not stand still either immediately hang a couple of three hundred warheads over their heads. The project on this subject has long been ready and is gathering dust in a safe place
        1. sapulid
          sapulid 18 September 2012 01: 40
          0
          Remember the fate of the ABM Treaty. All disarmament treaties were tied to it. America withdrew from the treaty, so what? Are we sending another "Chinese warning"? Iskanders are powerless against launching missiles; there are no other measures yet. Orbit clogging is possible in order to make it impossible for any satellite systems to exist there. It will also hit the Russian Federation, but cheaper and more effective.
    5. Slayer
      Slayer 17 September 2012 21: 53
      0
      To be honest, to completely wash off America (in the literal sense of the word) from the face of the earth, not a single nuclear warhead is needed, it was enough hundreds of 3 kg))) Somewhere near America there is a rock that hangs over the ocean, you can hold on well, you can say by snot , help her a little with explosives and climb a tsunami of more than 40 meters in height)) I don’t remember where, but I read it somewhere)))
      1. Karish
        Karish 17 September 2012 21: 55
        +5
        Quote: Slayer
        To be honest, to completely wash off America (in the literal sense of the word) from the face of the earth, not a single nuclear warhead is needed, it was enough hundreds of 3 kg))) Somewhere near America there is a rock that hangs over the ocean, you can hold on well, you can say by snot , help her a little with explosives and climb a tsunami of more than 40 meters in height)) I don’t remember where, but I read it somewhere)))

        Where such jambs stuff, such glitches ................... wassat
        1. Slayer
          Slayer 17 September 2012 22: 06
          +5
          found))


          The island of La Palma, on which Cumbre Vieja rises, is considered the coolest (literally) and one of the most volcanically active islands in the world. Over the past five centuries alone, 7 major eruptions have occurred on it: in 1470, 1585, 1646, 1677, 1712, 1949, and 1971. During the 1949 eruption, two kilometer-long cracks opened along the Kumbre Vieja ridge, and the western slope slid 4 m down. It is believed that the reasons for such a shift were the pressure of magma and the water that got into the huge gaps heated by the same magma. The resulting giant crack has actually split the mountain into two parts. The instability of the western slope is enhanced by the fact that the eastern and southern slopes, which tend to move, also press on it. In fact, a detached western rock, with a total volume of more than 500 cubic meters. km and weighing half a trillion tons, which is comparable to the weight of the rocky island of Manhattan, now rests on parole and is ready to crawl into the ocean with any jolt, causing a wave almost a kilometer high.
        2. Ascetic
          Ascetic 18 September 2012 01: 15
          +10
          Quote: Karish
          Where such jambs stuff, such glitches ...


          KP: - Does the commander of the Strategic Missile Forces have an idea of ​​the goals for which in the event of a real military threat he will have to shoot?

          Sergey Karakaev: -
          May I answer you this question, allegorically? ... So. Former Chief of the Strategic Missile Forces General Staff Colonel-General Yesin Viktor Ivanovich told me such a case. After his dismissal, he continued to work in the apparatus of the Security Council and once came to the Americans as part of a delegation. So he says: “I’m traveling in San Francisco with the Americans on the bus. Everyone is talking, laughing. And here we drive past the lighthouse. I looked at him and said: "I know this lighthouse." Americans - to him: “How can you know him if this is your first time in San Francisco?” And he replies: “You forgot that I was engaged in nuclear planning. And the lighthouse - it was the aiming point. I will tell you more: next to this lighthouse is the collapse of the earth's crust. So, if a multi-megaton block gets here, then a landslide will happen. And half of California will be in the ocean. After all, they silently drove to their destination "... So we know our "beacons" ...

          Read the full interview with Vladimir Vladimirovich Karakaev here My webpage
    6. Dimonanet
      Dimonanet 18 September 2012 12: 40
      +1
      Or you can launch Our S-400 or S-500 and shoot down their anti-missiles!)))
  2. Ruslan67
    Ruslan67 17 September 2012 18: 35
    +5
    have arrived! nanosatellites will detect nano-missiles and shoot them down with nano-missiles! learn how to PR manure in chocolate dousing and cut the budget for decades to come
    1. Generalissimus
      Generalissimus 17 September 2012 18: 45
      +11
      Back in the USSR, a technology was developed to create clouds in the stratosphere that block any satellites. Small doses of certain metals (and other substances) are sprayed from orbit and receive huge cloud formations of specific properties at any given position in near-Earth space. winked
      Let them launch their thousands of thousands.
      1. Bashkaus
        Bashkaus 17 September 2012 19: 32
        +3
        Yes, you can and the old fashioned way, as in the Stone Age, without any Nano-Pribluda old tires there to burn near the mines;)
      2. Karish
        Karish 17 September 2012 21: 59
        +2
        Quote: Generalissimus
        Small doses of certain metals (and other substances) are sprayed from orbit and receive huge cloud formations of specific properties at any given position in near-Earth space.

        Which are in the atmosphere for years and chasing satellites at their own speed.
        If the satellite is not in geostationary orbit, then the speed of its revolution around the earth is an hour with minutes laughing
        1. Generalissimus
          Generalissimus 18 September 2012 00: 47
          +1
          Which are in the atmosphere for years and chasing satellites at their own speed.
          If the satellite is not in geostationary orbit, then the speed of its revolution around the earth is an hour with minutes

          The meaning is completely different =)
          Such formations block a certain area. Communication and so on are completely absent. The vastness of the area, by and large, depends only on the desire. The tests were very effective, I must say. The colors of the clouds were indescribable. Luminous emerald, ruby ​​.. Fascinating. Several tens of grams of "reagent" - and thousands of square meters. kilometers of such pictures!
          To cover the necessary territories with such a cloud over the United States, for example, or over all of Israel, is no problem. =) Twist your companions as much as you want. yes
    2. Karish
      Karish 17 September 2012 21: 56
      +1
      Quote: Ruslan67
      have arrived! nanosatellites will detect nano-missiles and shoot them down with nano-missiles! learn how to PR manure in chocolate dousing and cut the budget for decades to come

      Development of the NA-NA group, chief designer of Bari.
  3. vladimir64ss
    vladimir64ss 17 September 2012 18: 37
    +1
    Another American Wishlist. They generally want to crush everything that moves.
  4. ShturmKGB
    ShturmKGB 17 September 2012 18: 38
    +3
    Let's say a missile is launched from the Urals, is that what they are planning to shoot over Russian territory? They do not want to admit that the idea is unsuccessful ...
    1. Trailer
      Trailer 17 September 2012 18: 47
      +2
      on the contrary, shooting down a rocket over enemy territory is a very competent option!
      1. Phlegmatic person
        Phlegmatic person 17 September 2012 19: 08
        0
        Trailer,
        So far, the United States does not have the means to shoot down our missiles over our territory.
        1. Trailer
          Trailer 17 September 2012 19: 21
          +7
          They have money, and we have those who cut rockets for that money, and everything that they order.
      2. Bashkaus
        Bashkaus 17 September 2012 19: 42
        +9
        Shiroka, my native country, there are many in it, seas, fields and rivers.
        I don’t know another country like that ...
        Would they look at the globe? What is the speed with which a missile defense from Poland should rush, what would it take to reach Kazelsk in 4 minutes?
        Answer: The distance of more than 700 km of a missile defense must be overcome in 4 minutes. at the speed of 175km / m or 10500km / h
        And if the launch of a rocket near Irkutsk and anti-missiles even in Turkey? oh, how much plan do you need to smoke?
        It remains one-space exploration. But again, not a fact, since the times of the collapse of the USSR, they did not insert the protrusion of the rectum back)))
        1. Veter
          Veter 18 September 2012 07: 03
          0
          Quote: Bashkaus
          at the speed of 175km / m or 10500km / h

          rather than 1060 km / h (17,6 km / min?)
          1. Horde
            Horde 18 September 2012 08: 34
            -1
            Quote: Veter
            Veter Today 07:03 ↑ new 0 
            Quote: Bashkaus
            at the speed of 175km / m or 10500km / h
            rather than 1060 km / h (17,6 km / min?)

            is math wrong? deuce buddy!
          2. Veter
            Veter 18 September 2012 09: 04
            0
            Sorry, 11666 km / h (194,43 km / min) lol
            1. Veter
              Veter 18 September 2012 10: 18
              0
              Quote: Bashkaus
              at the speed of 175km / m or 10500km / h

              but yes, generally correct feel
  5. andrei332809
    andrei332809 17 September 2012 18: 38
    +2
    of course, it's better to fight at the start. and damage to the enemy in the territory. but for this you need to have a pro in space, and in terms of quantity, it is not sickly. Where will civil (if any) satellites "roam the vast theater"? and neither amers nor anyone else will pull such garbage. at least for the foreseeable future
  6. Draz
    Draz 17 September 2012 18: 39
    +4
    Regular show-offs as in 80
    1. VAF
      VAF 17 September 2012 18: 45
      +5
      Quote: Draz
      Regular show-offs as in 80


      This is purely an answer ... to your comment ... at the expense of .... "show-off"! wassat

      On September 14, at the White Sands training ground, Lockheed Martin conducted a successful test of the PAC-3 missile defense system, which destroyed a tactical ballistic missile, ASDNews reports.

      During ballistic missile tests, two missiles were fired. The first destroyed the target, the second hit a falling rocket.

      “We continue to demonstrate the effectiveness of PAC-3 in the interests of protecting our soldiers and allies. We’re constantly improving the missile’s performance, increasing its ability to eliminate a growing number of potential threats, ”says Richard McDaniel, vice president of the PAC-3 missile program.


      RAS-3 is one of the most advanced air defense and missile defense missiles in the world. The missile is designed to destroy tactical ballistic and cruise missiles, aircraft and helicopters of the enemy. As the most technologically advanced missiles, the RAS-3 significantly increase the combat power of the Patriot complex by installing 16 missiles instead of four, as on the previous version of the Patriot RAS-2.

      1. Generalissimus
        Generalissimus 17 September 2012 18: 55
        +11
        Only you forgot to mention that this type of missile - PAC-3 - is effective against ballistic missiles with a range of up to 1100 kilometers. Agree, this is not the same thing to bring down ICBMs.
        Yes, against tactical missiles - this is a good US move forward. But, for example, the Iskander is more difficult to shoot down than the Minuteman, due to the peculiarities of Iskander's flight. And the PAC-3 was practiced on minutemans. Nothing outstanding. Russia cannot be impressed by this, at least.

        The article deals with several other things. Because "show-off" and PAC-3 from different areas.

        In reality, while their tasks are really at the level of "show-off" - nothing more. The stated tasks can be solved using hypersound, or a laser. But that's a different story. With their cockroaches.
        1. VAF
          VAF 17 September 2012 20: 08
          +2
          Quote: Generalissimus
          Yes, against tactical missiles - this is a good US move forward. But, for example, the Iskander is more difficult to shoot down than the Minuteman, due to the peculiarities of Iskander's flight.


          I agree, only one problem remains .... not solved for us .... how to "Iskandeo" there ..... to deliver ???? Will it not fly by itself? wink

          What the hell. I forgot, we have the whole 4 barges of Mistralka ....... we will load them ... and ... let's go amers wassat

          And it's even better to ask Kamovtsev to upgrade the Ka-52K super-attack naval helicopter for Iskander fellow

          Then it’s for sure ... it will be necessary for Amers to give up immediately !!! soldier lol
          1. DIMS
            DIMS 17 September 2012 20: 15
            +1
            "Iskander" can destroy anti-missile launchers and radars. Thus, ensuring the delivery of a nuclear strike.
          2. Generalissimus
            Generalissimus 17 September 2012 20: 40
            +9
            I agree, only one problem remains .... not solved for us .... how to "Iskandeo" there ..... to deliver ???? Will it not fly by itself? wink

            What the hell. I forgot, we have the whole 4 barges of Mistralka ....... we will load them ... and ... let's go amers


            I do not understand your logic. =)
            The point is that your example with PAC-3 is inappropriate. It is designed to intercept ballistic missiles with a range of up to 1000 km. The article is about ICBMs, and Draz and spoke out that the interception at the start is at the moment only show-offs. I agree with him. And here is your example with PAC-3? He is from another opera. It is impossible to intercept ICBMs with the help of PAC-3. If by chance only.

            As for the Iskander, they fly off perfectly from the Kaliningrad region. For the same Poland. PAC-3 is unlikely to intercept them even with these new missiles. But I agree that the RAS-3 is a step forward in US air defense. But not particularly impressionable.

            That is all I said. I don’t understand what the Mistral, Kamov, and other banter are now.

            I am already aware that you are against "all dobryams". I support. But why take the position of "vseobosrams"? She is no better than "all-good". It seems that you are in captivity of a certain position and sometimes it plays a cruel joke with you.
            1. VAF
              VAF 17 September 2012 21: 29
              +6
              Quote: Generalissimus
              I do not understand your logic. =)


              I’ll try to explain, but first, go to the article about "deactivation of our missiles" and see a photo ... of this "mothballed our missile defense"!

              And then, sincerely hope so, you look at my koment a little differently!

              I absolutely don’t joke about Draz (if you look closely, I gave him a +!) wink since he is completely right that ICBMs cannot be intercepted if they are not launched from Siberia or the Far East, even if the "notorious" "super-system" Aegis is present there.

              And about the Mistralki, I did not read it carefully, I thought that you do not want to "destroy" the European missile defense system, but purely continental!

              Therefore, I apologize humbly! drinks


              Quote: Generalissimus
              It seems that you are captured by a certain position and sometimes it plays a trick on you.


              She, at large, just .. "burst", I admit! The mood ... not very much, so I climbed ... in the wrong place! request

              Quote: Generalissimus
              It is impossible to intercept ICBMs with the help of PAC-3.


              Here, they are absolutely right, even when launches from the territory of a closed joint-stock company and Central Military District through the territory of Europe, missile defense is powerless, because almost no time! soldier
              1. Generalissimus
                Generalissimus 17 September 2012 21: 52
                +12
                go to the article about "deactivation of our missiles" and see the photo ... of this "mothballed our missile defense"!

                And then, sincerely hope so, you look at my koment a little differently!


                Yes, I don’t need to go in - I’m not aware of it by hearsay. There are enough problems.
                I have a strong conviction that we have little time, but our armored train still doesn’t get used to it - either the firewood is wet, the driver is drunk, or the ammunition is not loaded.

                Believe me, what’s already being done is a tremendous celebration. Because a couple of years ago, at all the meetings where I attended, there was just mourning among the people doing our military-industrial complex. On the sidelines this was pronounced - carcasses of light, prepare slippers white. There was full confidence that Russia would not survive the 25 year as a single sovereign, independent state. We only discussed scenarios during the breaks. And such a turn with GPN 2020 - it was even unexpected. It’s as if they switched someone. Personally, I got some optimism.

                Now our armored train would be correctly withdrawn, so as not to be late.

                Therefore, I apologize humbly!
                There was nothing to worry about.
                drinks
                1. OSTAP BENDER
                  OSTAP BENDER 17 September 2012 22: 05
                  +3
                  Generalissmus! Thank you for your optimism in our pessimistic writings! Apparently, you are a knowledgeable person, so that also raised my mood a little !!!! You +
                2. VAF
                  VAF 17 September 2012 22: 51
                  +6
                  Quote: Generalissimus
                  Believe me, what’s already being done is a tremendous celebration.


                  Well, if we consider it from this point of view. then yes ... of course, there are shifts, or rather, not shifts, but "shifts"! +! drinks

                  But I ... so to speak, I have always been ... a practitioner and until I myself ... "try" ... I will never say my word, and then ... a real opportunity appeared ...... "try" well and today in the morning I rushed off to the "bride" ...... looked, climbed, tried everything and probed ...... CM -b..t (!!!), ... killed (!!! !) would ... fuck (forgive me Mr. Smirnov) ... but you can't put it another way ... and then we are surprised that .... that's why ... "angry as dogs"! fool

                  Quote: Generalissimus
                  Personally, I got some optimism.


                  so ... after "testing" with my own hand .......... the same picture, here is just a view ... from the side, but the name ... is retouched, and so ....... replace the ASP on the ILS ...... yes stick the MFD?

                  You know what the pilots say ... we are not bombing now .... we are now ... "throwing" wassat
                3. Ascetic
                  Ascetic 18 September 2012 01: 35
                  +4
                  Quote: Generalissimus
                  On the sidelines this was pronounced - carcasses of light, prepare slippers white. There was full confidence that Russia would not survive 25 years as a single sovereign, independent state. We only discussed scenarios during the breaks. And such a turn with GPV 2020 - it was even unexpected. It’s as if they switched someone. Personally, I got some optimism.


                  I completely agree with you and have similar feelings. For example, recently I and my colleagues have not crawled out of business trips. For example, since May of this year I have had Novosibirsk 4 times, Krasnoyarsk-2raz, Nizhny Novgorod, Samara, Peerm and smaller ones, let’s say the settlements of our vast Motherland. So that "switched"we are good
        2. Karish
          Karish 17 September 2012 22: 05
          +2
          Quote: Generalissimus
          Only you forgot to mention that this type of missile - PAC-3 - is effective against ballistic missiles with a range of up to 1100 kilometers. Agree, this is not the same thing to bring down ICBMs.

          Israel has it, which means America will have it any second when it wants it. project financing for 70% from America, we develop and manufacture
          The United States will finance Israel’s creation of the Hetz-3 missile defense system, which will destroy ballistic missiles in space.

          The new missile defense system arrow-3 has been developed by israel aerospace industries together with the american corporation boeing since 2009. The program is funded by the Government of Israel with the active assistance of the United States Missile Defense Agency (mda).

          The first tests of the arrow-3 system took place in July 2011 and were recognized as successful. It is planned to adopt this system in 2014. The new missile defense system arrow-3, unlike the previous version arrow-2, will be capable, according to the assurances of the developers, of hitting enemy ballistic missiles at an altitude of up to 100 kilometers.
          1. with
            with 17 September 2012 22: 26
            +2
            Quote: Karish
            Karish

            I'm just wondering if you yourself believe in what you are writing or Hezbollah has already purchased Albatross missile systems ???))) bully
          2. Generalissimus
            Generalissimus 17 September 2012 22: 41
            +8
            Quote: Karish
            Israel has it, which means America will have it any second when it wants it. project financing for 70% from America, we develop and manufacture


            You do not quite understand what you are talking about. =) Neither Patriot nor Arrow are capable of intercepting M (monthly continental) BRs. Understand the heavy strategic ICBMs that we are talking about - this is not SCAD, and not even Iskander.

            There are completely different speeds, there are maneuvering warheads in hypersound, there are powerful anti-aircraft missile countermeasures of any type on anti-aircraft missiles, there are false active and passive targets.
            This is a completely different level.
            Therefore, the Americans wish to intercept our ICBMs at other stages of the flight, and dream of a launch site. For on the battlefield, you should rather pray, not bring down. What you mentioned is good against Iran. =) And not against ICBMs.
            In addition, this discussion should then go in a different direction. There are also concepts of the conditions for overcoming the missile defense, the threshold value for the supersaturation of the capabilities of the enemy’s missile defense, and it is not only and not so much in the number of missile defense as in other missile defense parameters.
            Therefore, the effectiveness of Israel’s air defense and missile defense even with this complex, if the declared characteristics are achieved, is far from a factor of Israeli security even from Iran. Not to mention the more serious players - God grant you not to have them. =)
            1. with
              with 17 September 2012 23: 35
              0
              Quote: Generalissimus
              You do not quite understand what you are talking about.

              Generalissimus, you are growing before my eyes, although I never doubted your abilities !!!))) drinks
              Bravo!
              1. Generalissimus
                Generalissimus 17 September 2012 23: 54
                +1
                Is it 5 by behavior? smile I am doing my best.
                1. with
                  with 18 September 2012 00: 02
                  0
                  Quote: Generalissimus
                  Is it 5 by behavior?

                  This is bigger bully this is 10 for knowledge of the subject !!!))) bully
                  ... And a prize in the studio !!!))) wassat
                  Attention prize 16 * +
                  1. Yarbay
                    Yarbay 18 September 2012 00: 09
                    +1
                    Quote: met
                    This is more than 10 per knowledge of the subject !!!)))

                    Does this mean that he knows about ICBMs?))))
                    and who can take apart the Kalashnikov assault rifle in 15 seconds and then not assemble it, is that nothing?))))
                    1. with
                      with 18 September 2012 00: 41
                      0
                      Quote: Yarbay
                      Does this mean that he knows about ICBMs?))))
                      and who can take apart the Kalashnikov assault rifle in 15 seconds and then not assemble it, is that nothing?))))

                      For you, Alibek, and for the analysis of Kalash, here!)) bully
                      Attention; 16+
          3. VAF
            VAF 17 September 2012 23: 09
            +7
            Quote: Karish
            Israel has it, which means America will have it any second when it wants it. project financing for 70% from America, we develop and manufacture


            Sasha, greetings, +! The Generalisimo is 100% right! All this is missile defense ...... "obuvanie" amerovskih taxpayers (in terms of just missile defense. And not testing new technologies and the production of missiles for air defense)!

            Since (math ... stubborn thing)! We take it and .. stupidly consider ..... taking into account real factors in relation to the land base of missile defense in Poland (the option with the ground base of missile defense in Romania, due to its great distance from the places of deployment of Russian ICBMs, makes no sense to consider).

            And so ... tracking the flight path of ICBMs can begin 140 seconds after its launch at an altitude of 150 km.
            The radar in Failingdale Moore will be connected to tracking for 170 seconds the flight of ICBMs, at the end of the operation of the main engine of the third stage of the rocket.
            The interceptor will start for 200 seconds of the ICBM flight, which by this moment will be at an altitude of 315 km and the warhead will separate from it.

            When accelerating to a speed of 5,5 km / s, the flight altitude of the interceptor can be equal to the flight altitude of the warhead at different ranges depending on the angle of attack of the BC interceptor with respect to the Earth's surface.

            For example, at an angle of attack close to the optimal value of 55 degrees. such conditions are realized at an altitude of 1050 km: for a combat unit for 560 sec flight at a range of 2750 km, for an interceptor - for 360 sec flight at a range of 1100 km.

            Estimates of the possible characteristics of the SM-3 Block II interceptor show that he is not capable of reaching such conditions, starting from the missile defense base in Redsikovo.

            Therefore, the trajectories of the warhead and the interceptor do not intersect (the interceptor is three minutes late).

            Given the full functioning of the PTSS space system by 2020, the time required to make a decision to launch an interceptor after detecting a ballistic missile launch can be estimated to be reduced to 100 seconds (instead of 200 seconds, as was the case in the above scenario).

            But even under such a condition (in reality difficult to reach), the trajectories of the SM-3 Block II interceptor and the RS-12M ICBM combat unit, launched from the Vypolzovo missile base, will not intersect (the interceptor will delay 80 s). !!!!!

            That’s all .... the small box, it turns out ... just opens! wink drinks
        3. postman
          postman 18 September 2012 00: 10
          +1
          Quote: Generalissimus
          against ballistic missiles with a range of up to 1100 kilometers

          In TTX This is not.
          MIM-104F: Just the maximum range for a ballistic target: 20 km (160 km aerodynamic), altitude 24 km.

          ERINT hit with a direct hit MGM-52 Lance

          Lockheed Martin is working hard on an air-based option (F-15C Eagle, F-22 Raptor and P-8A Poseidon media)
          instead of PTB

          5.2m MIM-104F integrates on the F-15C like the 4,1m AGM-88
          1. Generalissimus
            Generalissimus 18 September 2012 00: 21
            +1
            In TTX This is not. MIM-104F: Just the maximum range for a ballistic target: 20 km (160 km aerodynamic), altitude 24 km.


            You indicated the effective range of the anti-aircraft missile itself.
            And 1000 km is a class of ballistic targets.
            PAC-3 is designed to destroy, among other things, short-range ballistic missiles - up to 1000 km.
            1. postman
              postman 18 September 2012 11: 40
              0
              [quote = Generalissimus] You specified the effective range [/ quote]
              We are talking about intercepting a ballistic target.
              it should intercept (according to its performance characteristics) at the final section of the flight. It does not matter to it (this is an ICBM or Iskander).
              True speed of the ICBMs up to 7,8 makhorov.
              In any case, he covers the object.
              And it can’t shoot at the start (physically it can, only who will let it go to the launch site).

              And you wrote:
              [quote = Generalissimus] It's about your example with RAS-3 inappropriaten It is designed to intercept ballistic missiles with a range of up to 1000 km [/ Quote]

              There is no connection, Mu TTX 104 and range targets.
              It will intercept BR and ICBMs with a range and 5000 km.
              HE COVERES THE OBJECT (anyway)
              1. Generalissimus
                Generalissimus 18 September 2012 15: 06
                -1
                ... hmm.
                Quote: Postman
                There is no connection, Mu TTX 104 and range targets.
                It will intercept BR and ICBMs with a range and 5000 km.


                =) there is a connection and there is still some. How would I explain to you ... Just imagine that you are sitting with a DShK and covering your barn. Po-2 and Su-34 fly at you and both want to bomb you. Po-2 you knock down - no questions. Su-34 - no.
                So is the case with ICBMs. =) When the developers claim that their complex works on short-range ballistic missiles, it means exactly what they are saying.
                The longer the BR range, the greater the speed, large GHGs, the great capabilities of warheads, the great countermeasures of avionics and so on. These are different classes of missiles, understand? Iskander and Voivode, it's like a Moped and Ferrari.

                On the final section of the trajectory, intercepting ICBMs is generally very difficult. RAS-3 is not designed for this.
                It’s even easier to explain, I don’t already know.
                1. postman
                  postman 18 September 2012 18: 52
                  +3
                  Quote: Generalissimus
                  How would I explain to you ... Just imagine that you are sitting with a DShK

                  Yes, not worth it!
                  My VUS: C200 and S-300, my civilian E-1.. So what you bring does not make any sense.
                  And ICBMs (strategic) and
                  Quote: Generalissimus
                  short range
                  (as you say) BR, but in fact, according to the classification, a tactical ballistic missile moves along the same trajectory - a ballistic one. Well, if you do not take into account all sorts of "maneuvering hypersonic warheads", which no one has yet seen.
                  For PRO, everything is one, this is a goal that approaches the object in the cone area up to about 30 degrees (from the vertical). The most difficult zone to intercept, except for the PMV (but there are other speeds)
                  7,9 km / s (in Minuteman-3, considered the fastest), the speed of entry into the upper atmosphere (from 300 to 150 km), then it is practically impossible to move at such speed practically.
                  At an altitude of 50 km, using your terminology, that "Po-2, that Su-34", well, that is. Tactical ballistic missile and ICBM warheads will move at the same speed.
                  This is the so-called. 2nd atmospheric echelon. Do you suppose that from an altitude of 50-75 km the warhead "flies" from the 1st space?
                  The car is a direct word, and does not evaporate.
                  Coverage Range 104F, as I wrote above: 24 and 20. A little. But what to do.
                  The same interception (BB ICBMs), missile defense is attributed to the S-400 and even the S-300 (are you admitting there? But not here?)
                  During the 15 test of the 1999 of the 104F year, a direct missile was destroyed by a direct hit, which was the 2 and 3 stages of the Minuteman-2 ICBM.

                  Quote: Generalissimus
                  When developers announce

                  they declare a lot of things and place 104 in Europe.
                  Quote: Generalissimus
                  The greater the range of the BR,

                  It depends on what height.
                  Quote: Generalissimus
                  On the final section of the trajectory, intercepting ICBMs is generally very difficult. RAS-3 is not designed for this.

                  Are you sure:?
                  Iskander - K in planning mode - yes. And what about Dongfeng-21?
                  Example: the flight speed of a detached warhead rocket R-12, which at the end of the AC was 4 km / s, at an altitude of 25 km was 2,5 km / s.
                  The Americans say that their "Redstone" had a speed of 5 km / s at the meeting point, but no one believes this.
                  The speed of the meeting of the ICBM BG (and tactical BR) is secret information, it is not in the open press.
                  Quote: Generalissimus
                  It’s even easier to explain, I don’t already know.

                  You all very simply explained, um. .. even for me.
                  You simply draw a dividing line: between the speed at the meeting point and the speed at the end of the ACTIVE section of the trajectory. and do not confuse them. and consider atmospheric resistance (depending on altitude).

                  It is not possible to move in the atmosphere with speeds 10М (3,4 km / s and more
                  At M = 10, temperature = 5800К (on the surface of the suns 6000К)
                  Tungsten - Smelting 3700 K
                  If I am not mistaken, SR-71 at a speed of M = 2,7 instantly warmed up to 700 K, being at an altitude of 24 km
                  1. Generalissimus
                    Generalissimus 18 September 2012 20: 08
                    0
                    Do not be offended, but where does your higher education institution and specialties?
                    Well, I also have a specialty in diploma: rocket science. So what?
                    It is not possible to move in the atmosphere with speeds 10М (3,4 km / s and more
                    At M = 10, temperature = 5800К (on the surface of the suns 6000К)
                    Tungsten - Smelting 3700 K
                    If I am not mistaken, SR-71 at a speed of M = 2,7 instantly warmed up to 700 K, being at an altitude of 24 km


                    Who would have thought?
                    But "Tactical Missile Armaments" are working on the product from 12-13 M. winked Maybe they don’t know? You tell them. And then they, as I know, are doing pretty well so far.
                    You need to take a little interest in the methods of temperature removal from aircraft with hypersound.
                    For example, with ablative coating it is possible to fly with 20-25 M.


                    During the 15 test of the 1999 of the 104F year, a direct missile was destroyed by a direct hit, which was the 2 and 3 stages of the Minuteman-2 ICBM.
                    You contradict yourself. These targets are just steps minuteman - PH stage. The fall rate is clearly not a warhead. The trajectory is "constant". Comparing them with warheads - not even hypersonic, but maneuvering, as on the outdated Topol-M - is ridiculous.
                    "maneuvering hypersonic warheads", which no one has yet seen.

                    Nobody is you personally? =) The mace is our first rocket with hypersonic maneuvering warheads.
                    Therefore, the fact that warheads of ICBMs in dense layers of the atmosphere fly at a speed of 300m / s is already a thing for Russia in the past, like a ballistic trajectory as such.
                    Maneuvering on 6 Machs - more than 6km / s. In tests, the warhead carried out a chain of complex maneuvers and successfully hit the target. About the fact that she does not exist, she did not know.

                    Existing missile defense systems at the present time are simply not capable of calculating flight paths of a similar target in real time. And they will not be able, according to the most optimistic estimates for potential opponents of Russia, for at least another 30 years.

                    The same, Iskander, by the way, also has a quasi-ballistic trajectory. Because even his PAC-3 gets tired of intercepting. Everything, of course, depends on the number of interceptors. But also on the number of BRs, too. =) But our calculated data shows that the promising Patriot PAC-3 air defense system cannot be intercepted.

                    But in general, you generally approach the issue from the wrong side.

                    I do not want to discuss further. And then soon I will become illiterate shkolota, judging by your statements.
                    1. with
                      with 18 September 2012 20: 41
                      0
                      During the 15 test of the 1999 of the 104F year, a direct missile was destroyed by a direct hit, which was the 2 and 3 stages of the Minuteman-2 ICBM.


                      Let me add, sensors were installed on the minuteman, postman What does that say to you ??)) bully
                      Generalissimus, You again ten points!
                      But consider it is useless to argue with shkolota, they simply pull out numbers and articles, not only not understanding them (sometimes they don’t even see dates), but they don’t even want to include logic, not to mention the laws of physics, etc.
                      Bravo for patience!
                    2. Generalissimus
                      Generalissimus 18 September 2012 23: 52
                      0
                      Quote: Generalissimus
                      more than 6km / s

                      nonsense - in a hurry.
                      more than 6 thousand / km.h
      2. sergey32
        sergey32 17 September 2012 19: 04
        +1
        If a missile goes from Siberia through the North Pole, where do I need to deploy anti-missile launchers to shoot down ICBMs at launch?
        1. Generalissimus
          Generalissimus 17 September 2012 19: 12
          0
          Sea launch. If we do not control the Arctic. But we will.
          1. sergey32
            sergey32 17 September 2012 20: 40
            0
            Will they put on ice in the Arctic?
      3. Tristar13
        Tristar13 17 September 2012 21: 58
        +1
        Yes, an achievement! Point down! I wonder how many missiles spent ....
  7. Generalissimus
    Generalissimus 17 September 2012 18: 39
    +2
    In Russia, the development of a space orbital minesweeper-cesspool truck is underway.
  8. Nevsky
    Nevsky 17 September 2012 18: 41
    0
    But will the Americans not choke, or rather the gut will not tear? wassat
  9. Trailer
    Trailer 17 September 2012 18: 51
    +10
    I propose putting the following weapons into orbit in the right amount, and at the right moment, just blow it up and watch the consequences. Do not start a new arms race!
    1. Phlegmatic person
      Phlegmatic person 17 September 2012 19: 07
      +3
      Trailer,
      we’ll throw two cars with nails into space and that’s it.

      Just like Zadorny.
      1. Trailer
        Trailer 17 September 2012 19: 19
        0
        It was so. The Germans took a steam bath, why do they shoot guns in the cold, and ours simply poured boiling water over them. they thought a lot about what pen to write in space, and ours wrote with a simple pencil. And here also probably it is necessary.
        1. patsantre
          patsantre 17 September 2012 19: 38
          0
          Quote: Karavan
          they thought a lot about what pen to write in space, and ours wrote with a simple pencil.

          No need to believe the tales, even on this site it seemed to be published where this story came from. It seems that the amers used pencils in the same way, but some private company developed this pen on its own initiative, and the USSR even bought it.
    2. Bashkaus
      Bashkaus 17 September 2012 19: 48
      0
      It will be beautiful. We can’t understand Russia in our minds, only we thought of throwing German German knights off the horses and drowning in the lake in winter, only in our country can a tanker start a tank with a clear shot;). Only we can think up to pour out in space a bunch of nails to hit the satellite of the enemy. And by the way, the idea is very good, even the argument that they will clog the Earth’s orbit does not fail, because after the conflict, satellites will not be needed anyway (((
      1. nikoli25
        nikoli25 17 September 2012 22: 00
        +1
        in the subject of nails, we have killer satellites, it’s a ball in an aluminum case, filled with explosives and balls, like bearings. launched into space and tm explodes-space fragmentation grenade. there are canned in working condition.
    3. ICT
      ICT 17 September 2012 20: 44
      0
      our first anti-satellite weapon was based on this principle, a satellite was put into orbit, conditionally, in the second third round it went into the orbit of the desired satellite and exploded, and a cloud of fragments carried the desired object into parts
    4. with
      with 17 September 2012 20: 52
      +2
      Quote: Karavan

      I propose putting the following weapons into orbit in the right amount, and at the right moment, just blow it up and watch the consequences. Do not start a new arms race!

      Modern developments are already a state secret (concerns a bucket with nails). bully
      There is no point in littering the space with "garbage", there is already enough of it. The USSR conducted more than a dozen tests of anti-satellite weapons, launching Cyclone missiles from Baikonur (a conversion version of the old Soviet R-36, known in the west as SS-9). The satellites approached the target at a distance of about 1-1.5 km and exploded, throwing 15000 (15 thousand) tungsten carbide balls towards the target. And hardly any target was able to survive after such a blow.
      1. andrei332809
        andrei332809 17 September 2012 22: 07
        0
        nikoli25
        on ISs a slightly different principle was. I will not say which, but very effective. Now there are no Ises in orbits, thanks to Humpback and Yolkin.
        Satellite fighter IC
        1. with
          with 17 September 2012 23: 01
          +3
          Quote: andrei332809
          on ISs a slightly different principle was. I will not say which, but very effective.

          Satellite fighter
          This project turned out to be the simplest, most effective and cheapest of all. The principle of operation of the satellite fighter was as follows: with the help of a powerful launch vehicle, an interceptor satellite was put into orbit around the Earth. The initial parameters of the orbit of the interceptor were determined taking into account the parameters of the orbit of the target. Already in low Earth orbit, with the help of an onboard propulsion system, the fighter carried out a series of maneuvers that made it possible to draw close to the target and destroy it by exploding itself. The interception of the target was supposed to be carried out at the first or third turn. Of great importance in the creation of such a system was the accuracy of launching the interceptor into near-Earth orbit.

          The fighter satellite was a relatively simple spacecraft with a shape close to the sphere and weighing about 1400 kilograms. It consisted of two functional compartments: the main compartment, equipped with a control and guidance system for the target (according to some reports, including optical systems), as well as carrying about 300 kilograms of explosives, and the engine compartment. The casing of the apparatus was made in such a way that after the explosion, it disintegrated into a large number of fragments scattering at high speed. The radius of the guaranteed defeat was estimated at 1 kilometer. Moreover, in the direction of travel of the satellite, the target was hit at a distance of up to 2 kilometers, and in the opposite direction - no more than 400 meters. Since the expansion of the fragments was unpredictable, the target located at a much greater distance could also be hit.
          Subsequently, the satellites underwent significant modernization and it can be said that since 1976, a second-generation satellite fighter was launched into space.

          Quote: andrei332809
          Now there are no Ises in orbits, thanks to Humpback and Yolkin.

          The last test of the anti-satellite system in the Soviet Union was conducted on June 18, 1982 and became an integral part of the largest exercises of the Soviet Armed Forces. In these exercises, which covered a vast territory, the entire personnel of the Soviet armed forces participated. The scenario of a full-scale nuclear war was played out, during which the possibility of using anti-satellite systems was also tested.

          Currently, the satellite fighter has been abandoned - it is outdated both technically and morally, and now it occupies an honorable place in the list of achievements of the national space program.
          But he was replaced by new projects, information on which is much less today, and which allow the Russian leadership to be sure that everything in control is in orbit.
          In particular, it is known, for example, that the space-based elements of the American missile defense system, as well as any other orbital objects, if necessary, can be easily destroyed with the help of the newest Russian Laska spacecraft, which use electromagnetic pulses as weapons.
          1. andrei332809
            andrei332809 17 September 2012 23: 40
            +1
            welcome met.
            I touched the IP alone. inside he saw neither explosives nor shrapnel. but some thing was sticking, but it was sheathed. The principle was somehow tricky, not involving the destruction of IS itself. And still this thing could change orbits on command. With respect
            1. with
              with 18 September 2012 02: 01
              0
              Quote: andrei332809
              welcome met.

              Good evening! hi
              Quote: andrei332809
              I touched the IP alone. inside he saw neither explosives nor shrapnel.

              Shrapnel is, it cannot but be !!)) bully
              Quote: andrei332809
              and this thing could change orbits on command good

              Well, it was intended for this, flies up and KAAK BAMTS and PPC !!!)) bully drinks
          2. postman
            postman 18 September 2012 00: 30
            +2
            Quote: met
            This project turned out to be the simplest, most effective and cheapest of all.

            ASM-135 ASAT 13 was cheaper (at times, if not in an order), more mobile, faster.
            Any airfield suitable for f-15 made it possible to intercept satellites with virtually any orbital inclination.
            1. with
              with 18 September 2012 01: 13
              -3
              Quote: Postman
              ASM-135 ASAT 13 was cheaper (at times, if not in an order)

              What are the numbers please !!!))) bully
              Quote: Postman
              more mobile, faster.

              The strong news is how many turns the satellite made while the 15th got to it ???)) bully
              Quote: Postman
              Any airfield suitable for f-15 allowed to intercept satellites with almost any orbital inclination

              At the beginning of 1988 work on the ASAT system was discontinued by decision of the US Congress, apparently as a result of an informal agreement with Russia. By this time, three were ready (according to other sources - four modified aircraft F-15 ASAT). In 1992, there were plans for resuscitation of the ASAT missile defense program. The complex was planned to be used to destroy the warheads of ballistic missiles. However, things did not go beyond plans.
              A similar system was created in the USSR. Anti-satellite missiles were launched from the MiG-31D fighter. The MiG-31 fighter, as it turned out, very precisely fits into the requirements for such aircraft. Its maximum take-off weight is under 50 tons, the maximum speed that it develops depending on the load and flight mode reaches almost 3000 km / h, the static ceiling is up to 20 km, and the dynamic ceiling is even greater. In fact, it can take off from an airfield and put satellites into near-Earth orbit anywhere in the world. This is very beneficial, both from a scientific and practical, and from a commercial point of view.

              Now, as far as I know, they are canned!

              Feel the difference America 1988, And I quote the USSR;
              The interceptor satellite, named Polet in Soviet official communications, was created and launched into orbit on November 1, 1963.
              1. postman
                postman 18 September 2012 11: 36
                +1
                Quote: met
                What are the numbers please !!!)))

                Easy:
                Launch launch vehicle cost (only it, without Satellite):

                The cost of one hour of flight F-15 FY0817000 US dollars, and it is "reusable" and will last for 10 years
                About the rocket and satellite (cost) -pot, article.
                The missile lies, is stored at the base with the optimal mode, the shelf life is up to 15 years (if I'm not mistaken). Sputnik- how many days 100?

                Quote: met
                how many turns did the satellite
                , depending on WHEN it is necessary to destroy it!
                Do you know the turnover period? Almost can not maneuver (except for approaching the target), the trajectory is KNOWN, and even lovers of astronomers from the Netherlands

                For F-15: when accepting the BZ- destroy: 21 minutes climb, barrage, GOS captured the target, acceleration (3 minutes), launch, b / w 20-35 minutes the target is hit.

                No turns
                Quote: met
                Now, as far as I know, they are canned!

                ASAT is not destroyed, but why are these numbers? You said that the IS "killer" is the cheapest way to destroy satellites. I said tnet, ASAT is cheaper. You disagreed and bring the MiG-31 right there.

                Quote: met
                Feel the difference America 1988, And I quote the USSR;

                I feel it. "flight" In 1963, he could not intercept anything, since he practically had no opportunity to change the orbit and there was nothing to intercept for the time being.
                And the difference is that back in 1953 the USA tested the Bold Orion (WS-199B).
                (The article is ready, I’ll probably finish today) ...
                Feel the difference?
                1. with
                  with 18 September 2012 19: 29
                  0
                  God will forgive you your illiteracy !!!))
                  Quote: Postman
                  The cost of one hour of flight F-15 FY0817000 US dollars, and it is "reusable" and will last for 10 years

                  You forgot the cost of the F-15 itself, and this is more than 100 million S !!!))) bully
                  Quote: Postman
                  The missile lies, is stored at the base with the optimal mode, the shelf life is up to 15 years (if I'm not mistaken). Sputnik- how many days 100?

                  The life of the satellite is 10-15 years. bully
                  Quote: Postman
                  For F-15: when accepting the BZ- destroy: 21 minutes climb, barrage, GOS captured the target, acceleration (3 minutes), launch, b / w 20-35 minutes the target is hit.

                  In 1984, after the Soviet Union made a unilateral commitment not to launch weapons into space, the Pentagon launched two new-generation anti-satellite missiles from the F-15 fighter twice.
                  It was only on September 13, 1985 that the Srem-Altair rocket hit the target satellite in space. A year flew, also missed twice, opupet (what would have happened to him in real life, and not in a "kon-strike")!))) bully
                  Quote: Postman
                  You didn’t agree and bring Mig-31 right there

                  MiG-31 is practically the only aircraft that is capable of intercepting and destroying cruise missiles flying at extremely low altitudes. (This is for your self-education) bully
                  Quote: Postman
                  I feel it. "flight" In 1963, he could not intercept anything, since he practically had no opportunity to change the orbit and there was nothing to intercept for the time being.

                  Well, here you are refuting yourself, simply because you don’t know what and how (I’ll write about it below), but following your logic, youes in 53 could, have already experienced something or experienced, but the USSR in 1963 couldn’t ??? )))
                  Do not remind when the first satellite flew !!))) bully
                  [
                  1. with
                    with 18 September 2012 19: 30
                    +1
                    Quote: Postman
                    And the difference is that back in 1953 the USA tested the Bold Orion (WS-199B).


                    In the second half of the 1950s. development started in the USA ballistic airborne missiles. In 1958 and the first half of 1959, 47 Bold Orion missiles were launched from the B-11 bomber. With one of the launches, a range of 1600 km was reached.
                    After two unsuccessful attempts, on October 13, 1959, the Bold Orion rocket was launched from a B-47 aircraft over the Atlantic Ocean into outer space in order to test and verify the accuracy of the guidance system for intercepting artificial earth satellites. The satellite "Explorer VI" at this time was at its perigee (about 230 km from the Earth) and had an orbital speed of 28800 km / h. The rocket flew six kilometers from the satellite and fell into the ocean at a distance of 160 kilometers from the launch site.
                    And to you for a long, long memory !!! bully
                    The first defeat of a target in space in the USSR took place ... fifteen years earlier, than in the USA. In August 1970... According to the information received from the Central Research Institute "Kometa", our state had been going to this event for about ten years. The USSR had already destroyed by 1983 up to a dozen satellites. A unique and efficient automated complex was created. At least the American one, the ASAT system, cannot be compared with it.

                    Feel the difference?))) bully
                    1. Generalissimus
                      Generalissimus 18 September 2012 23: 55
                      0
                      Happy 53 year postman. winked Well, this is a rush, of course.
                      1. with
                        with 19 September 2012 00: 16
                        -2
                        Quote: Generalissimus
                        with the 53rd year it is amusing at the postman. winked Well, this is a rush, of course.

                        Bad guy with math !!!))) bully
  10. Owl
    Owl 17 September 2012 18: 56
    0
    The arms race is moving to near-earth space, Reagan's Star Wars on a new, wider circle, in addition to reconnaissance, communications to determine the location of the object (navigation), an unmanned strike X-37B has now appeared, they want to deploy space-based missile defense strike systems. The hope is that Russia will go bankrupt, trying to compete in the space arms race.
    1. patsantre
      patsantre 17 September 2012 19: 39
      0
      Quote: Eagle Owl
      Hope that Russia goes bankrupt

      Is this a blot? Where does such hatred for the fatherland come from?
      1. Owl
        Owl 17 September 2012 21: 19
        0
        This already happened when the USSR spent huge sums of money on the creation of an analogue of the American Shuttle system, instead of developing a "non-symmetrical" response.
  11. taseka
    taseka 17 September 2012 19: 00
    +1
    "So, only the early warning satellites will need 650 pieces worth 300 billion dollars. But to make the missile defense system truly effective, even more and even more satellites will be required - about 2 thousand." - WORLD RULES BABLO !!! By the way, among federal ministries and institutions, the largest average salary in Rosoboronexport is 130 thousand rubles !!!
    1. Windbreak
      Windbreak 17 September 2012 21: 51
      0
      Yes, apparently some kind of error in the translation, it’s painfully not real numbers
  12. Wedmak
    Wedmak 17 September 2012 19: 02
    0
    Trailer,
    This is not humane .. and not democratically! Where are the millions of dollars for development and implementation? Where are the developer cottages on the islands of the Caribbean? Where in the end is the white ribbon ....
  13. Sasha 19871987
    Sasha 19871987 17 September 2012 19: 02
    -1
    they have already gone paranoid ideas ... honestly, it sounds silly to shoot down rockets at the start ....
    1. Butterfly net
      Butterfly net 17 September 2012 19: 36
      +2
      Yes, nothing funny is quite decisive but very expensive. A shuttle-type drone with missile defense on board that hangs over an area with mines. Such news is not to amuse the Russians, but to break the loot in Congress, such as all that we did wrongly spent loot went to shit. everything must be done in a new way.
      1. Generalissimus
        Generalissimus 17 September 2012 19: 47
        0
        There is such a moment - the deployment of weapons in space is prohibited. Until. Meanwhile, orbital combat platforms were developed in the USSR as far back as 60-70. So here we hit a serious one. Also cabbage soup didn’t slurp.
        The launch of the arms race into space is an extraordinary step. I would not want that. I think no one will do it. Otherwise, they will open a little bottle with such shit that it can’t be bogged down.
        1. Butterfly net
          Butterfly net 17 September 2012 20: 02
          0
          ABM has also been banned recently smile 60-70gg are you serious? Here for 90 a little the whole of the military-industrial complex has not been killed; now in the west we are buying radio electronics a little at 0, they have not been ruined. In general, here the main word is, let the loot be remembered during the Reagan precisely because of the exorbitant cost of the SDI
          1. Generalissimus
            Generalissimus 17 September 2012 21: 05
            +3
            60-70gg are you serious?

            Absolutely seriously. It was then that the question arose for the first time about the inadmissibility of an arms race in space. US demanded. Our ignored. Then ours demanded the same thing after certain successes of the USA by somewhat different means.

            About 90 is another story. How EBN with his mongers ruined everything and everything - I saw it with my own eyes. And only for this it needs to be dug up and the aspen stake driven. But this does not mean that we do not or cannot. Even if in spite of everything that is happening.
            But, of course, the release of weapons into space is not in our interests. But if this happens, there is a reserve. I’m talking about this.
  14. bamboo
    bamboo 17 September 2012 19: 22
    +1
    there are more or less reliable systems like Aegis with the SM-3 rocket
    in fact, complete power over the entire Earth.

    SMILE !!!!!!!!!! YES LAUGHING))))))))
    I’d like to add straight, Ile Beck))) laughing
  15. Kochetkov.serzh
    Kochetkov.serzh 17 September 2012 19: 30
    0
    let them come up with anything .... but they behave arrogantly, of course, they seem to have forgotten about "Kuzkin's mother"
  16. uizik
    uizik 17 September 2012 19: 34
    0
    Another project to get the dough. They know how to powder brains. It doesn’t work out, they come up with a horror story. And the loot has already been received and spent. Everyone is happy with both the military-industrial complex and the generals and the natives with the Russians scared.
  17. Rossmk
    Rossmk 17 September 2012 19: 43
    -1
    Reevaluate your capabilities. They only want and give out desire for an almost achieved result
  18. dmitrich
    dmitrich 17 September 2012 19: 49
    0
    and to hell with you, we also have them on the caterpillar track.
  19. sxn278619
    sxn278619 17 September 2012 19: 59
    0
    Obviously, in the next 50 years it is not possible to create a missile defense against the first nuclear strike.
    US missile defense is created against retaliation.
    The most effective echelon is space.
    Conclusion - you need to start creating means of suppressing it.
    Since all information and shock (kinetic, laser) means will be located on satellites, anti-satellite systems are necessary. The US is testing them, China is testing, it’s time for us to shoot down all the satellites after unsuccessful launches, and use them as a target.
    1. Gregazov
      Gregazov 17 September 2012 20: 46
      0
      So already tried and with pretty good results back in the 70s. We have such weapons, so let them spend money
    2. wax
      wax 17 September 2012 23: 33
      +1
      We have a saying: since such a booze has gone, cut the last cucumber. So, at least the first, at least a retaliatory strike will be delivered directly to space-based surveillance and communications equipment, i.e. on all nano and other satellites, both strangers and their own will get. To do this, you need only a few missiles with thermonuclear warheads, and they do not need to fly far. And then, as in the song: space maps are loaded into tablets ... missiles will fly according to the laid programs, gyroscopes will not fail. And the aggressor and the defender, alas, will receive in full. It is hard to imagine such mutual annihilation according to common sense. so the game of nerves and technology continues. The US goal - total power over the world does not fit into the scenario of a full-blown nuclear war. And why would the winner have a completely destroyed country, where it would be more difficult to live than on the moon.
      1. Karish
        Karish 17 September 2012 23: 50
        +1
        Quote: Wax
        So, at least the first, at least a retaliatory strike will be delivered directly to space-based surveillance and communications equipment, i.e. on all nano and other satellites, both strangers and their own will get. To do this, you need only a few missiles with thermonuclear warheads, and they do not need to fly far

        More precisely, it is not necessary, please tell me which particular factor of defeat in space has precisely thermonuclear weapons?
        Quote: Wax
        missiles will fly according to the established programs, gyroscopes will not fail

        Gyroscopes rule, you probably changed your companions, only the inertial guidance system remains - tablets are not needed - gyrocompasses are needed !!!
        Quote: Wax
        The US goal - total power over the world does not fit into the scenario of a full-blown nuclear war. And why would the winner have a completely destroyed country, where it would be more difficult to live than on the moon.

        Is it easy on the moon?
  20. bubla5
    bubla5 17 September 2012 20: 38
    0
    The next round of knocking out the dough for both the Yanks and us, when they are satisfied, will gather at the round table again and will reduce what was created, it all went through.
  21. scutum
    scutum 17 September 2012 20: 58
    0
    it is necessary to "resurrect" the BZHRK - there was the RS-23 missile system Well done ...
    so let them intercept him "at the initial section" ...
  22. Dimon Lviv
    Dimon Lviv 17 September 2012 21: 00
    0
    Maybe they want to shoot down our missiles at the start, but who will give them? Launchers are also covered by echeloned air defense, which at hour "X" will not clap a mitten, but will shoot down everything that flies in our direction within its reach.
    Unless they will place anti-missiles in space, over the territory of Russia.
  23. Nechai
    Nechai 17 September 2012 21: 23
    +1
    Quote: Net
    There is one option for current, to intercept a rocket at launch in the Urals or somewhere in the Chinese outback is possible only from orbit.

    It is possible from the surface of the Earth. Just that, or in advance, abandoned at the appropriate point, an RDG with a pair of three snipers with 12,7mm (14,5mm) rifles. (Did the o-ring on one of the Shuttle accelerators definitely burn out by itself? On time, however .... And the lag, while they were being raked, ours managed to catch up and get ahead of them.)
    Our still placed in the starting areas of the United States ICBM nuclear compact ammunition equipped with appropriate sensors. Everything was done quietly and well in advance. Significantly limited the life of a given charge, the power source of the tracking system. The United States found out about such an operation already after the collapse of the Union, by dumping information from the top.
  24. with
    with 17 September 2012 22: 02
    +5
    So far, US military experts have said that it is very difficult to shoot down a ballistic missile in the initial phase of dispersal. The time window for a reliable defeat is too narrow - 3-4 minutes

    It seems amers are at an impasse !!!))) bully
    Shoot down the divided warheads is a utopia, especially on a downward path, and at the start it’s fantastic at all !!!
    We are waiting for the next series of American programs called "Cut the US budget"!!
    Announcement of a new US film ...)) bully
    1. Ascetic
      Ascetic 18 September 2012 01: 46
      +5
      Quote: met
      Announcement of a new US film ...))


      Announcement of the second and final part of the film
  25. VadimSt
    VadimSt 17 September 2012 22: 49
    0
    Quote: taseka
    "So, only the early warning satellites will need 650 pieces worth 300 billion dollars. But to make the missile defense system truly effective, even more and even more satellites will be required - about 2 thousand." - BABLO RULES THE WORLD !!!

    + 100%. As I already wrote, but I don’t remember the source, the Senate Arms Commission was shocked when it revealed the fact that a conventional hammer, costing 6.5 $, was supplied to the armed forces at a price of 200 $.
    So, with government purchases for the Armed Forces, they are also "doing well", if not better!
  26. genad2
    genad2 17 September 2012 23: 28
    +1
    Sakharov also suggested hiding a 10 mT warhead in the ocean at a depth of 2-3 km and 3-4 thousand km from America. As they forget to blow it) A wave of 300-400 m will wash away a lot of things .... Of course there will be losses.
  27. 16
    16 18 September 2012 00: 10
    0
    and the so-called orange revolution, in the bud !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  28. balamut_x
    balamut_x 18 September 2012 00: 45
    0
    There is a way to make any missile defense system meaningless, and at the same time all means of delivering nuclear charges, which is important for relatively little money, this method is unique in that counterarguments are practically impossible against it wink
  29. Mr.Fox
    Mr.Fox 18 September 2012 03: 03
    0
    A great way to knock out money for a "comfortable old age". Especially now, when the United States does not come up with a worthy enemy who could threaten them, at least in theory. Everyone wants to eat, so the next "Star Wars. A New Threat" is being prepared. The project is long-term, 2000 satellites cannot be built in a year (although they will not be built, but who is interested in this?). In the end, what comes out? The Pentagon is happy, because it will receive the next super-toys (it is not a fact, however, that they are exactly what they would like, and certainly not in such quantities), the scientists are happy - they are working on these super-toys, receive salaries and bonuses), simple the hamburger eaters are also happy, because now they will definitely not be afraid of missiles from Iran and North Korea. Plus, these developments will load the industry well and have a positive effect on the economy in general and the military-industrial complex in particular.
  30. Murman
    Murman 18 September 2012 03: 19
    0
    We don’t need to target anything on the territory of the United States, nature took care of everything. The Yellowstone caldera in the national park can crash at any time, in extreme cases, it can be helped. 100% of the interception will not be provided by any missile defense system.
    Who cares, look on the network about the largest supervolcano.
  31. Dimych from Vanino
    Dimych from Vanino 18 September 2012 06: 30
    +1
    And men and don’t sweat ..... steam train and Co. ..... they will explain to you.
  32. yanus
    yanus 18 September 2012 10: 57
    0
    Hmm, cheerfully sawing loot in the United States.
    If this system works, then it will have a serious vulnerability. This system can only work as a "fast and connected system" and if one of its parts (even an element of one of the parts) fails, then the whole system will go to hell.
  33. gregor6549
    gregor6549 18 September 2012 17: 37
    0
    No jokes, but the idea of ​​shooting down ICBMs at the start of the United States has been implemented for a long time and the current games with missile defense in Europe and the modernization of the Aegis are just part of the idea.
    But the Americans, as people accustomed to dealing with risks, never put all their eggs (including their own) in one basket and their entire missile defense system is built as a multilayer one in which the fight against missile defense and ballistic missiles of a potential enemy is supposed to be conducted on ALL segments of the flight path thereof. Such a multilayer pie is planned to be used not only for the country's missile defense, but also for the missile defense of military bases, AUG and groupings of troops in the theater of operations. The arsenal of means for such missile defense is supposed to be used very different (from improved Patriots and Aegis, to Shuttles, microwave laser and electromagnetic cannons, which are supposed to be installed not by planes, ships and the same Shuttles or other satellites. It is not ruled out that special ammunition can be used to create powerful EMPs to defeat the launchers of missile launchers and ICBMs and the corresponding control and communications infrastructure, up to the use of special forces. The same one who gave Hitler permission to start hostilities against the USSR in June 41. Therefore, one can hardly expect a gentleman's approach in some critical situation like "Hit first, sir! Well, sir, as you can with, only after you ". Both sides have long understood that the chances, albeit weak, can only be in one case, the case of a proactive gift. By the way, it was this approach that was used as the basis for the military doctrines of the United States and the USSR. I don’t think this approach has changed a lot, because only with such a campaign, missile defense systems may be enough to intercept at least a part of the ICBMs and CDs that survived this strike and prevent such a level of damage, after which all retaliatory measures are no longer meaningful.
  34. Rossmk
    Rossmk 23 September 2012 21: 21
    0
    I alone noticed in the picture in the title of the article that the Korean flag was depicted on the rocket?