Military Review

The Pentagon has tested ground-based Aegis SAM systems

18
The United States carried out the first tests of its Aegis air defense system (Aegis, from English. "Aegis" - the mythical shield of Zeus and Athens) land-based. During the recent tests, the complex was able to detect and then destroy a target that simulated a ballistic missile. It is worth noting that the Pentagon for the first time in stories conducted flight tests of multi-purpose ground-based Aegis SAM systems. This information was published by the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency. Tests were held at the site, located in the Pacific Ocean, and ended successfully, according to representatives of the US military.


According to the specified information, during the tests, the complex managed to detect a ballistic target, after which it performed its accompaniment, and then conditionally hit it. In order to hit a missile target from a vertical launcher (PU), an interceptor training missile with the designation SM-3 Block IB was launched. During the flight of the interceptor missile, the military worked out a number of functions to capture the target and control the fire, representatives of the ABM Agency said. According to their data, the launch of a real target in the framework of this stage of flight tests was not planned.

According to the information voiced by the ABM Agency, the main task of the tests was to confirm the effectiveness of this air defense system when launching a ground-based SM-3 missile. At the same time, the configuration of the ground-based Aegis air defense system almost completely repeats the one that is currently widely installed on destroyers and cruisers of the American fleet, representatives of the Pentagon say. The tests held in the Pacific were supposed to support the development of ground-based Aegis air defense capabilities as part of the 2nd stage of the program to deploy elements of the American missile defense system in Europe. It is planned that this part of the US missile defense system in Europe will be located in Romania in 2015. The second country where this complex is planned to be deployed is Poland, this will happen in 2018.


Meanwhile, in April 2014, the American Audit Chamber published a report in which it reported that the authorities would have to invest additional funds in the development of the missile defense system, since its main components were failing during the test series in 2013. For example, the malfunctions of a new guided missile complex developed by Raytheon were identified, it was planned to equip this rocket with Aegis, as well as land-based missile defense systems, which Boeing Corporation is working on. In this regard, the US Accounting Chamber has made recommendations for additional testing of elements of both systems.

Since 2002, the US administration has managed to spend billions of dollars on the development of its own 98 missile defense system. At the same time, according to existing forecasts, up to 2018, the missile defense system will need about 38 billion dollars more. Earlier it was reported that the Americans suspended consultations with the Russian Federation on this issue in connection with the situation that is unfolding in Ukraine. According to Deputy Assistant US Secretary of Defense Elaine Bann, the US defense department is going to re-examine future contacts with Russia on missile defense to make sure that they are in the interests of American national security, as well as the security of their allies.

Recall that NATO and Russia agreed to cooperate on a project to build EuroMD within the framework of the 2010 Summit of the year held in Lisbon, but these negotiations were stalled because the United States refused to provide legal guarantees that the deployment of the missile defense system was not against the Russian deterrent forces . In response to the idea of ​​deploying a missile defense system in Europe, Russia is going to take a series of diplomatic and military-technical measures.


Tests conducted on the Pacific test site are of great importance to the United States, since next year it is planned to deploy a ground version of the Aegis air defense system in Romania. The missile defense system put on combat duty will not be able to neutralize the Russian nuclear triad, but it’s not for nothing that the Russian Defense Ministry irritates the deployment of such systems in Europe. Since 2002, more than 30 flight tests of the Aegis system were carried out in America, of which 25 was completed by intercepting a target. In total, over the past 12 years, more than 70 various tests were carried out as part of the US missile defense program, in which 59 conditional targets were successfully intercepted using interceptor missiles.

At the same time, Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems Konstantin Sivkov, in an interview with the Russian edition of Vzglyad, noted that the use of rocket weapons in terrestrial conditions much easier than in the sea. According to him, the firing range of the Aegis SAM system does not exceed 150 km. The main American missile defense system is designed to fight medium-range and short-range ballistic missiles and aerodynamic targets. It can also successfully solve the problem of dealing with low-flying satellites in the event that they are in the zone of its defeat. The expert reminded reporters that 2 a year ago, using an anti-missile SM-3 based on the Aegis control system, shot down an American satellite that fell into the sea.

The American missile defense system is primarily designed to protect against the blows of our tactical missile systems "Iskander", as well as shock aviation. With the help of SM-3 interceptor missiles, medium- or short-range missiles can be shot down. At the same time, Sivkov believes that the SM-3 is simply not able to shoot down a long-range missile that flies at a very decent speed. It is impossible to neutralize the nuclear triad of the Russian Federation with the help of the Aegis air defense system, the expert emphasized.


Vadim Kozyulin, who holds the post of director of the program of the Center for Political Studies of Russia on conventional weapons, agrees with him. However, this missile defense system can reduce its effectiveness, and under certain circumstances (for example, in combination with a UAV) create a situation where the Russian Federation will not be able to retaliate a nuclear strike, or create the illusion of this for the Russian leadership. According to Kozyulin, this will give the American side a reason to plan a strike on Russia with the possibility of subsequent interception of a retaliatory strike. If such a plan is actually worked out, then American politicians may be tempted once to put it into practice.

Although Washington does not confirm that this missile defense system is being deployed against the Russian nuclear forces, but all experts understand that it is designed specifically for this. Vadim Kozyulin emphasizes that any weapon placed on the borders, especially such modern ones, carries a certain threat, and this must be taken seriously. Construction of a US missile defense base in Europe has been underway in Romania since October 2013. The Aegis ground-based missiles will be on duty in 2015 year.

According to the original plans of the administration of US President Barack Obama, the US missile defense system architecture in Europe was planned to be built in the 4 phase. At the first stage - during the 2011 year - American ships equipped with Aegis complexes and SM-3 (Standard-3) interceptor missiles were deployed in the Mediterranean area, and a missile defense system radar was also deployed in Turkey. At the second stage - by the year 2015 - in Europe it is planned to deploy mobile batteries with anti-missiles SM-3, they are planned to be placed in Romania. Further, by the year 2018, such mobile complexes should appear in Poland. And by 2020, all deployed missiles are planned to be replaced by more advanced ones that will be able to protect the entire territory of the NATO member states. New missiles will have to provide protection not only against ballistic missiles of short and medium range, but also against full-fledged intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Information sources:
http://itar-tass.com/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/1203240
http://www.stoletie.ru/lenta/ssha_uspeshno_ispytali_pro_idzhis_473.htm
http://www.vz.ru/society/2014/5/22/688000.html
Author:
18 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. afire
    afire 30 May 2014 08: 27
    +2
    well - for every tricky one ...
    The purpose of the tests is to show the reliability of the system, they will never have to carry out full functional testing, because this requires a real new rocket of ours.
    So now they need to enlist the support of their allies, as well as prove to them the "performance" of the system.
    With all this, we need to assume that their system will catch our missiles with 100% certainty and look for moves and solutions to neutralize this danger.
    1. Su24
      Su24 30 May 2014 16: 00
      +5
      According to him, the firing range of the Aegis air defense system does not exceed 150 km. Mostly the US missile defense system is designed to combat medium and short-range ballistic missiles and aerodynamic targets. She can also successfully solve the problem of combating low-flying satellites in the event that they are in the zone of her defeat. The expert reminded reporters that 2 years ago, with the help of the SM-3 anti-missile based on the Aegis control system, an American satellite crashed into the sea.


      In fact, the downed satellite was at an altitude of 243 km and flew at a speed of 7,2 km / s. So it’s not clear what 150 km of distance Sivkov says. SM-3 was created specifically for intercepting ICBMs, and not just OTR. Which is indirectly confirmed by the fact that the leadership recognizes the threat by deploying missile defense.
    2. Matroskin 18
      Matroskin 18 28 June 2014 22: 08
      0
      And where is the guarantee that the target rocket flies like a real Iskander or Voivode?
      And how can they know exactly how these Governors and Iskanders will fly in reality?
      Interference systems and electronic warfare systems are constantly improving ...
      Conclusion: not everything is the sun that glitters !!!
  2. Letun
    Letun 30 May 2014 08: 27
    +5
    As soon as the "empire of good" is convinced that it is impossible to receive a retaliatory nuclear strike, it will immediately strike Russia with nuclear weapons, naturally for the development of democracy and the observance of human rights. I hope the Kremlin understands this. Diplomacy is no longer needed here, it will not solve anything, which we have seen for many years, we need an appropriate response in technical terms.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 30 May 2014 08: 28
      +1
      Quote: Letun
      As soon as the "empire of good" is sure of the impossibility of receiving a retaliatory nuclear strike, it will immediately strike Russia with nuclear weapons

      Answer a simple question, WHY?
      1. afire
        afire 30 May 2014 08: 31
        +5
        Quote: Nayhas
        Answer a simple question, WHY?

        ... resources
        1. Apollo
          Apollo 30 May 2014 09: 04
          +2
          No comment.


          quote-Using interceptor missiles SM-3 You can shoot down medium or short range missiles. At the same time, Sivkov believes that the SM-3 is simply not able to shoot down a long-range missile that flies at a very decent speed. It is impossible to neutralize the nuclear triad of the Russian Federation with the help of the Aegis air defense system, the expert emphasized.
          1. Ascetic
            Ascetic 30 May 2014 13: 53
            +4
            Quote: Apollon
            At the same time, Sivkov believes that the SM-3 is simply not able to shoot down a long-range missile that flies at a very decent speed. It is impossible to neutralize the nuclear triad of the Russian Federation with the help of the Aegis air defense system, the expert emphasized.


            the Americans have never tested SM-3s against ICBMs and do not plan to test them. They simulate an interception option based on tests against medium and short-range missiles. The main condition here is "a given probability of intercepting a single block". The fact is that one of the key parameters that limits the interceptor's capabilities is not the firing range of the intercepted target, not its speed, but the speed of approach of the interceptor with the target. if the approach speed is small, the interceptor control loop operates in comfortable conditions - the onboard sensors manage to track the target, the on-board computer generates control actions and transmit them to the controls, the controls - turn or control the nozzles and change the direction of the interceptor's flight. If the approach speed exceeds a certain value, then the controls do not have time to work out the control signal, and the interceptor, due to inertia, react. A miss occurs. Therefore, the interceptor missiles currently in service for ICBMs are not dangerous, firstly, there is not enough energy to intercept, it cannot yet "reach" the ICBM trajectory even in the ascending segment, and secondly, the rendezvous speed for prolongation even with the help of external target designation from STSS allows interception of modern ICBM units with a given probability.

            But the SM-3 block IIA rocket, thanks to its increased energy, will be able to reach the trajectory of our ICBMs located in the European part. The picture clearly shows that it is "thicker" than the previous samples.


            The likely possibility of an interception will look like this

            In principle, if the Americans are able to achieve a solution to the three basic conditions for the interception of BB ICBMs and on energy missile defense, and on information support and on the temporary balance then interception will be possible by 2020 when it goes into service.
            But again, for "confident interception", a number of complex tasks still have to be solved, such as information interaction of detection means, target designation and an anti-missile defense strike system, the possibility of intercepting the maneuvering stage of reconnaissance, target selection when using the KSP, the peculiarities of anti-ballistic missiles on SLBMs, and a number of others. and we are not standing still, solving the problem of overcoming missile defense in various directions. So the eternal struggle between the shield and the sword continues.
        2. Nayhas
          Nayhas 30 May 2014 09: 44
          +2
          Quote: afire
          ... resources

          Mmmmm .... Russia does not sell resources and therefore it is necessary to destroy it along with these resources? As far as I know, we sell everything that the West wants and not only. And at the expense of resources ... For example, the US has spent sooooo much money on Iraq, thousands of US citizens have given their lives and health ... but China uses the results, if the USA needed Iraq’s resources, then what does China have to do with it?
        3. gregor6549
          gregor6549 30 May 2014 20: 58
          0
          What resources are we talking about? States are concerned about markets and not resources. And then, who needs resources in the afterlife. After all, everyone understands that the first exchange of nuclear strikes will be the last and no Aegis, C500, etc. will save anyone. All these pieces of iron are suitable only for a very limited conflict with a knowingly weak enemy.
      2. Kolya
        Kolya 30 May 2014 10: 46
        +1
        Quote: Nayhas
        Answer a simple question, WHY?

        You pose this question from the perspective of a Russian person, with an inherent sense of justice and selflessness. Not all peoples in the world share your views, but from the views on the lives of some, your hair would stand on end. Russian people need to learn to understand that people are driven not only by good goals. Personally, I see this as the fundamental cause of Russian liberalism.
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 30 May 2014 11: 06
          +2
          Quote: Kohl
          You pose this question from the perspective of a Russian person, with an inherent sense of justice and selflessness. Not all peoples in the world share your views, but from the views on the lives of some, your hair would stand on end. Russian people need to learn to understand that people are driven not only by good goals. Personally, I see this as the fundamental cause of Russian liberalism.

          Well, let's say the United States sleeps and sees how to squeeze the last Russian from the light. Let's say.
          What prevented this from being done in the 50s, when the United States surpassed the USSR many times over in the number of atomic charges and their delivery vehicles? The USSR could not answer with anything.
          Suppose now they make a super-super missile defense system capable of guaranteed to intercept all b / h ballistic missiles of the Russian Federation. They will deliver an unrequited nuclear missile strike at the Strategic Missile Forces bases. What's next? Explain to the whole world and contaminated with radioactive fallout Europe, Japan and China?
          1. patsantre
            patsantre 30 May 2014 20: 13
            +2
            Quote: Nayhas
            What prevented this from being done in the 50s, when the United States surpassed the USSR many times over in the number of atomic charges and their delivery vehicles? The USSR could not answer with anything.

            There was a plan. A well-known. The USSR was in the balance. If their nuclear weapons would continue to develop, and we would not have received our nuclear weapons, I am almost sure that they would do that.
            1. Igool
              Igool 31 May 2014 03: 17
              +1
              Answer more precisely: there was a plan and not one.
              P A L N N A P A D E N I Y N A T O N a S O V E T S K I Y S O U Z

              1. JUNE 1946 a plan called “Pincher” - “TONGS”.
              Drop 50 nuclear bombs on 20 cities of the USSR.

              2. MARCH 1948 - “BROILER” - (HOT DAY). 34 cores bombs on 24 cities of the USSR.

              3. DECEMBER 1948.- “SIZZL” - “HISS.” .133 nuclear bombs on 70 cities of the USSR.

              4. OCTOBER 1949 “SHAKEYDOWN” - “SHAKE” 220 nuclear bombs on 104 cities of the USSR.

              5. The end of 1949. “SHARP” plan - INSTANT BLOW ”.
              Drop 300 atomic bombs on 200 cities of the USSR within a month, if the USSR does not give up, continue bombardment with conventional charges in the amount of 250 thousand tons, which should lead to the destruction of 85% of Soviet industry.

              Question: why create plans attackif you are not going to use them?
              Response simple to indecent: they were going to use them in all seriousness. The fact that they could not do this did not depend on NATO.
              1. patsantre
                patsantre 31 May 2014 19: 15
                0
                Who then depended on?
      3. fzr1000
        fzr1000 1 June 2014 19: 40
        0
        Answer a simple question, WHY?


        Why then is it a missile defense? Answer the question.
  3. Starover_Z
    Starover_Z 30 May 2014 10: 35
    +1
    So in response we need to develop the underwater part of our strategic triad! Which, in principle, is now being done!
  4. Alex_T
    Alex_T 30 May 2014 10: 47
    +3
    American designers have not mastered the mortar launch of the rocket. The Soviet missile school is still overtaking here.
  5. zulusuluz
    zulusuluz 30 May 2014 11: 44
    +1
    I’m wondering how, according to the author, Aegis (a rocket with a ballistic computer) will shoot down Iskander’s missile, which does not fly at ballistics? In one gulp?
    1. Pollang
      Pollang 30 May 2014 12: 06
      +1
      Isknder will not reach AI, and Europe will not jump.
    2. Ascetic
      Ascetic 30 May 2014 15: 31
      +3
      Quote: zulusuluz
      I’m wondering how, according to the author, Aegis (a rocket with a ballistic computer) will shoot down Iskander’s missile, which does not fly at ballistics? In one gulp?

      If we talk about Iskander-M, then it is impossible to shoot down with ballistics, because even with a confident prolongation when using both the GOS and the VTSU, the critical angle of the oncoming maneuver with ideal parameters of the counter missile's oncoming speed is less than the angle of maneuver of the Iskander missile. guidance radar to knock her off course. Yes, and the optical-correlative guidance system in the final section can bring down the intense visual opposition of the enemy, you also need to take into account the weather and time of day at X hour.
      At the same time, low cloudiness, for example, and intense visual masking of the final object, will, to a certain extent, be "on the drum" of a CD with an inertial and optical-correlation system, working out navigation corrections throughout the whole route (similarly to Amer. KR ALCM) ... No masking of the target will help here, - and here you need to ONLY knock down, shoot down on the route or to the extreme as you approach the goal.... This is where a ground-based missile defense system is needed. Therefore, if the target is simultaneously hit with a CD and a high-precision ballistic missile, then the probability of defeat is close to 100%. "Iskander-M" - high-intensity maneuvering of a high-flying hypersonic target, "Iskander-K", - an extremely low flight profile (about 6 m) and following the terrain in an almost "autonomous" mode .. to combat the European missile defense system, it really is the optimal COMBINATION Iskander-M + Iskander-K. The trick is to use these products at the same time, "in one stroke."
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 30 May 2014 16: 48
        +2
        As far as I understand, the ballistic missile defense is approaching approximately the BR target,
        and then the "killer" apparatus is separated with its own engine and the seeker, which repeats everything
        her maneuvers, moving closely parallel. At the right moment, the "killer" turns on
        type "afterburner" and attacks / destroys BR with a direct hit.
        Of course, this is easier to write than to do :). But with medium-range BR
        cope. But with ICBMs and low flying short-range ... So far not so,
        although there are no fundamental obstacles, only technological ones.
  6. rrrd
    rrrd 30 May 2014 14: 00
    0
    I feel sorry for you! intercontact rockets! and then your soon and then your traders will soon rot
  7. lexx2038
    lexx2038 30 May 2014 14: 19
    -1
    Something must be done, not reassured.
  8. kimyth1
    kimyth1 30 May 2014 17: 52
    +2
    Return the construction project BZHRK! Develop EW! And underwater Ya.S. These evil spirits will not calm down until they are washed away by God's righteous anger !!!
  9. The Art of War
    The Art of War 30 May 2014 23: 35
    0
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h20lmgrIy5g
  10. Nitarius
    Nitarius 31 May 2014 21: 26
    0
    TIME AND US IN EUROPE --- ITS OWNS AND PROTECT them from the US HEGEMON!
  11. Michael_59
    Michael_59 4 June 2014 13: 18
    0
    Quote: Nayhas
    Answer a simple question, WHY?


    So that such naive people stop asking such questions once and for all am
  12. stone
    stone 6 June 2014 08: 21
    0
    Quote: Nayhas
    Quote: afire
    ... resources

    Mmmmm .... Russia does not sell resources and therefore it is necessary to destroy it along with these resources? As far as I know, we sell everything that the West wants and not only. And at the expense of resources ... For example, the US has spent sooooo much money on Iraq, thousands of US citizens have given their lives and health ... but China uses the results, if the USA needed Iraq’s resources, then what does China have to do with it?


    And Russia too. Lukoil works in West Courne wink