Military Review

United States continues to improve the Aegis system

On November 4, the US Pacific Command, the Missile Defense Agency and the US Navy conducted regular tests of anti-missile systems. This time the task of the military was to intercept several targets. The last tests were carried out with the aim of checking the Aegis Combat Systems ship combat information and control system (CICS) and the missiles of new modifications. The tests are recognized as successful.

United States continues to improve the Aegis system

The destroyer USS John Paul Jones (DDG53) of the Arleigh Burke type was involved in the tests. The ship used the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense 5.0 (Aegis BMD) system to track training targets and fire control. The combat mission for the ship was to detect and intercept three targets. From the Pacific Missile Range Facility (Hawaii), one ballistic missile and two cruise target missiles were launched. With the help of the AN / SPY-1 airborne radar, the destroyer detected and took on all three targets on time.

After entering the target area, the destroyer USS John Paul Jones (DDG53) launched interceptor missiles. To destroy a ballistic missile, anti-missile SM-3 Block IB was used, cruise missiles were attacked by SM-2 Block IIIA missiles. All three anti-missiles successfully reached their goals and destroyed them. Of particular interest is the SM-3 interceptor, which uses a kinetic method of destroying a target. The missile of this model is aimed at the target and collides with it.

The Aegis BMD anti-missile system has been tested since 2002. During this time, 35 tests were conducted. 29 intercepts for target missiles are considered successful. AT stories Modern US missile defense systems were 82-tested and 66-th successful interception of training targets. During the tests, 4 November collected all the necessary data that will allow further fine-tuning of the Aegis BMD system and other anti-missile systems of the American design.

In recent tests, upgraded versions of the combat information management system and antimissiles were used. According to reports, a number of developments and components, including the Aegis BMD 5.0 system, will be used in new ground-based missile defense systems. In addition, in the course of repair and modernization, new equipment will be available to ships already equipped with the Aegis system of previous modifications.

On the basis of the ship system, the land complex Aegis Ashore is being created. Next year, the first such complexes are planned to be deployed in Romania, where they will work within the framework of the Euro-Atlantic missile defense system. This purpose of the current work is a cause for concern. Over the past years, the United States and its European allies have been actively working to build a common missile defense system, which gives rise to claims from Russia.

Officially, the Euro-Atlantic missile defense system is designed to protect Europe from Iranian missiles. Nevertheless, in the time that has passed since the beginning of its discussion and construction, Iran has not been able to create rockets capable of threatening Europe and justifying the existence of anti-missile systems under construction. In this regard, the political and military leadership of Russia sees in the projects being implemented a threat to Russian security.

The fight against Iranian missiles will become an urgent task only in a rather distant future, but already now anti-missiles deployed in Europe can be used to reduce the combat capabilities of the Russian strategic nuclear forces. Washington and European capitals respond to Russian claims with statements that the missile defense system under construction is not directed against Russia. Nevertheless, all these assurances are still verbal in nature and are unlikely to become an official documentary position in the near future.

In the light of statements and disputes around the Euro-Atlantic missile defense system, the promotional materials on the Aegis system and the antimissiles used with it look particularly interesting. According to Rossiyskaya Gazeta, at a recent exhibition Euronaval 2014, held in France, the American defense enterprises showed an interesting poster, which depicted the combat work of the ship with the Aegis BIUS. According to the “plot” of this poster, a certain city was attacked by a Russian submarine, a ship, a MiG-29 fighter, and a container ship with the Club-K missile system, and the ship with the new CICS repelled the attack.

Naturally, any military equipment, including fictional, could be depicted on the poster, but taking into account the events of recent years, such advertising of new ship systems looks at least ambiguous. Nevertheless, advertising is advertising, and on the agenda there are more serious issues related to Euro-Atlantic missile defense and American developments in this area.

Warships with Aegis BIUS and Aegis BMD 5.0 antimissile system, SM-2 and SM-3 missiles of the latest modifications should be the maritime component of the US global anti-missile defense system. The use of Arleigh Burke-type destroyers and Ticonderoga-type cruisers will allow the US military to relatively quickly regroup the naval missile defense component and strengthen the defenses in the right direction almost anywhere in the oceans.

A gradual increase in the characteristics of control systems and antimissiles will increase the potential of the global missile defense, as well as expand its combat capabilities. According to reports, at present, the Aegis BMD 5.0 system and the latest modifications of interceptor missiles make it possible to fight medium-range ballistic missiles. In the future, it is planned to adopt new modifications of the missile defense system capable of intercepting intercontinental ballistic missiles. The emergence of such systems will greatly enhance the capabilities of the entire global US missile defense system.

The ability to concentrate forces in a certain direction, preparing for an enemy nuclear missile strike, significantly increases the potential of the missile defense system, since its components are not tied to a specific base and can be located almost anywhere in the world. Thus, to protect against Chinese missiles, the United States can concentrate ships with the Aegis BMD system in the Pacific, and some areas of the Arctic will be used to repel an attack from the Russian side.

Such capabilities of the sea missile defense component, as well as the deployment of certain facilities in Eastern Europe, once again confirm that the words about protection against Iran or North Korea are only an excuse, and the real target of US missile systems are Russian and Chinese missiles. In order to reduce the risks associated with delivering nuclear missile strikes, Moscow and Beijing need to take various measures aimed at countering the Euro-Atlantic and global US missile defense system.

In recent years, it has become clear that the Russian military and defense industries intend to fight the new threat in the form of the United States missile defense system by using so-called. asymmetric methods. This means that all new missile systems for strategic submarines or the Strategic Missile Forces are equipped with a set of means to overcome missile defense. According to various estimates, the anti-missile defense weapons currently used are highly effective and are capable of overcoming existing anti-missile systems.

The tests carried out in early November will allow American specialists to continue the improvement of the ship’s missile defense systems and the development of similar land-based systems. Next year, the Aegis Ashore systems should be deployed in Romania. Thus, recent tests of anti-missile systems in the very near future may lead to another deterioration of the situation in the international arena and aggravation of the situation in Eastern Europe.

On the materials of the sites:
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Rambiaka
    Rambiaka 12 November 2014 08: 25
    This fact is certainly worthy of attention. However, as are the circumstances of these next American tests: as always known are the launch sites of target missiles, their trajectory and ultimate goal. If you hadn’t hit yet, it would be fun!
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 12 November 2014 08: 50
      Quote: Rambiaka
      as always known are the launch sites of target missiles, their trajectory and ultimate goal.

      It is known because missiles are detected by the radar and the trajectory is calculated, but the ship itself is the final target, not the truck in South Dakota ...
      According to your shooting at our firing ranges, the target environment is something different?
      1. Yarhann
        Yarhann 12 November 2014 21: 53
        the trajectory of launching an intercontinental missile from the depths of the territory of the Russian Federation cannot be calculated since the launch site is unknown. then they simulate a situation which in the real world will not. In real life, they will only be able to detect a missile in the final part of the trajectory and the time for interception will most likely not be in view of the enormous speed of the missile. And perhaps the warhead is already divided and then the detection of warheads is practically impossible; they are very inconspicuous and small. Yes, if they can track the launch site and the initial trajectory of the missile, then they have a chance to intercept it in a timely manner by choosing the interception site and sending the missile to the interception site and correct the interceptor missile trajectory at the entrance to the radar coverage area. Let's say this missile defense system gives a guarantee of protection against missiles old generations that have a ballistic flight path and not a quasi-ballistic one. From missiles that have one all-in-one and from missiles that do not have anti-missile defense systems. The whole problem of intercepting ICBMs is precisely a short period of time of its possible interception from detection at the final site to separation or separation of warheads — with accurate start-up and forecasting the flight path, the probability of an accurate guidance of the interceptor increases - because the missile will go to intercept before the ICBM detects the radar and in a short period of detection, its trajectory will need to be corrected and redirected to hit the target - if the target is divided or will maneuver on the final stretch of the path, then its defeat is practically impossible; that’s all. In short, by and large, from the modern and promising ICBMs of production in the Russian Federation, this system is practically useless. Yes, there is one important point when an ICBM can be intercepted almost guaranteed this is the initial trajectory - immediately after launch the torch’s missile can be seen at 1000 km it is an excellent beacon for an interceptor missile seeker - this is why it is so important for the USA to reduce the missile defense ring around our country as much as they can shoot down missiles on the initial flight path, this is the simplest and most vulnerable part of the path - the closer the missile is to the target, the probability tends to 0. We are building another missile defense system, we detect, using the horizon-by-radar radar, ICBM launches and their trajectories and on the battlefield fall areas, we are fighting the warheads themselves by means of an echeloned air defense system. By and large, we don’t have a missile defense at all and I don’t think it will be unless the system PRO Cupid will cover the capital. Why they do not build a missile defense system in our country, I think that they are well aware of the characteristics of their missiles and therefore understand that the enemy will be able to use something similar now or in the future and that’s why he will not protect anything from practically meaningless garden, especially with a massive missile strike. Considering the moment that strategic hypersonic cruise missiles will be armed with strategic bombers and nuclear submarines in the coming years - the missile launch range will be in the region of 1000 km, such a system will also not be able to repel the strike of such forces = - here the air defense esonation will play a big role. Let’s say, after placing a new PAK DA strategist on combat duty, hypersonic missiles with a range of about 1000 km or conventional cruise missiles built using stealth technology will be carried aboard - although ordinary cruise missiles can easily get out of the same MANPADS in the field of visual contact, therefore rely on it’s stupid to mine — hypersound will decide — all the more hypersonic missiles can be used to fight enemy’s AUGs or troops and navy groups.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 13 November 2014 11: 28
          Aegis does not intercept ICBMs.
          It is imprisoned on medium-range BR and winged
          long-range missiles.
          Against ICBMs there is a division of other missiles in Alaska,
          but also with disabilities - only interception
          single launches ICBMs along a high trajectory across the Pacific.
          Aegis is not threatening Russia's strategic potential.
  2. Imperialkolorad
    Imperialkolorad 12 November 2014 08: 35
    I hope nothing and this tricky opu has its own screw bolt.
    1. kind
      kind 12 November 2014 21: 34
      There is already, called the Khibiny electronic warfare complex!
  3. major071
    major071 12 November 2014 08: 50
    The Americans shot down three targets. Bravo! Three targets, with technical specifications laid down by the Americans. By their technology, not ours. Well, they know the approximate characteristics of our missiles, but only approximate. So that early rejoice. I will not say anything bad about this system, but, as they say, not all is a carnival for a cat ...
  4. RU-Officer
    RU-Officer 12 November 2014 08: 58
    Maybe soon this "Aegis" will be brought to mind (they will finalize with a file wink ), yes, George Washington is with them ... A little dystopia, if you will. hi
    Humanity has gone mad. Gigantic funds are being thrown into the arms race. Bioweapons are already impudent, openly tested "in nature", in natural conditions. They carry tons of drugs! NLP technologies are practically registered in the media and commerce. Is the idea of ​​a "golden billion" destined to win? .. what
  5. Alex19
    Alex19 12 November 2014 09: 04
    In general, how dangerous is this system for Russia's nuclear forces? I just can’t find an article that takes into account the status for 2020, taking into account the implementation of the plans of Russia and the United States. Who will win? Will our missiles, in case of danger, overcome the Aegis system? Do we have something to defend ourselves with?
    1. Kent0001
      Kent0001 12 November 2014 18: 14
      It just needs to be destroyed with a control strike.
  6. qwert
    qwert 12 November 2014 10: 37
    Quote: ImperialKolorad
    I hope nothing and this tricky opu has its own screw bolt.

    For example, a REP station.
    In general, the IJis system is presented as something that no one else in the world has anymore. Although back in 1987 I served at Baikal. Although he was for land air defense, he performed all the functions of Aegis. Yes, Aegis integrates ships into a single system. But, “Baikal” united a bunch of different-sized divisions. In addition, it had a modular design and, in terms of its dimensions, even a minesweeper could fit perfectly. Then he combined divisions with the S-200, S-300, S-125 and even S-75. Subsequently, he was able to connect with Thor, Buk and Tunguska.
  7. qwert
    qwert 12 November 2014 10: 42
    Quote: Alex19
    Do we have something to defend ourselves with?

    Ballistic missiles with a maneuvering warhead. She was on the Scalpel, Topol, Sinev. Maybe somewhere else ... Again, interference can be applied. The Americans are still conducting exercises in the field conditions. Further, the low-altitude targets were subsonic. To what extent the system can intercept supersonic Granites, Bramos, Mosquitoes. unknown. But, it is known that despite Aegis, in the early 90s, the Americans could not finish off supersonic targets that made their way into the near zone. Aegis saw them, the teams were moving in a timely manner, only the angular guidance rate of Volcano Falanx did not allow tracking the target. Those. I just couldn't keep up with her.
    1. Yarhann
      Yarhann 12 November 2014 21: 20
      the main task of this system is to ensure the country's missile defense against a nuclear strike by long-range ballistic or cruise missiles - in real life there are no samples of hypersonic long-range cruise missiles in the real world for the reflection of anti-ship missiles. subscripted cruise missiles from all countries of the world
  8. saag
    saag 12 November 2014 11: 20
    Quote: qwert
    Ballistic missiles with maneuvering warheads

    you don’t really maneuver at that speed of entry into the atmosphere, the only minus of the SM-3 is a kinetic defeat, can you miss it, did the warheads refuse to reduce weight?
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 12 November 2014 11: 41
      Quote: saag
      Quote: qwert
      Ballistic missiles with maneuvering warheads

      you don’t really maneuver at that speed of entry into the atmosphere, the only minus of the SM-3 is a kinetic defeat, can you miss it, did the warheads refuse to reduce weight?

      Reportedly, the “standard” SM-3 Block IA interception range and intercept height are 600 and 160 km, respectively, the maximum speed is 3-3,5 km / s, which provides the kinetic energy of the interception stage with a target up to 125-130 mJ. In February, 2008, after appropriate preparation, this version of the rocket was used to destroy the USA-247 satellite out of control at 193 altitude. The cost of this shooting was $ 112,4 million.
  9. Sergey Sitnikov
    Sergey Sitnikov 12 November 2014 11: 50
    I remember "SOI", I remember how in the "Vremya" program they showed us cartoons about satellites that shoot down everything that flies past in space, but everything turned out to be crap, but what they Aegis will achieve is putting a hard fusion into orbit, or the exit of the Russian Federation from RIAC to destroy IJIS groups!
  10. 31rus
    31rus 12 November 2014 12: 18
    Little good, the Aegis itself is sharpened as a powerful reconnaissance network with many components, you keep in mind that anti-missiles are like a second echelon, the first is a strike at us, and just to weaken, a retaliatory strike and we need anti-missiles, there are serious arguments and that these missiles can be used before equipping, just for the first strike, here, as you understand, there is little talk, and withdrawal from the INF Treaty will turn into a new threat to us, we have already written about this
    1. Yarhann
      Yarhann 12 November 2014 22: 03
      By the way, what we have at the office is always silent that SAM missiles can be used to destroy objects of ground ships and so on. And this is actually practical and there are short-range hypersonic missiles, replace them with warheads instead of heaps of detection equipment in the same C400 brutal radar, a computer generator, etc. as well as a warhead with striking elements, on a single RP unit or vigorous, you get a hypersonic high-precision sufficiently powerful missile which can break through any missile defense system. Therefore, the installation of such missiles in Poland is very dangerous - it may actually not be a means of defense, but a means of attack, which has a very high speed and is just part of the concept of global instant non-nuclear strike - yes, the range of such missiles is not great 500-600 km, but they guaranteed to pass the pro - our main argument in this case is the Iskander system which will guarantee guaranteed immediate destruction of the launchers of these systems.
  11. _my opinion
    _my opinion 12 November 2014 12: 22
    Something reminded me of Khibina and the American "Donald Cook" with his useless Aegis ...
    "Khibiny vs. Aegis or what scared the Pentagon so much?"
    Americans make a good face in a bad game.
  12. Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 12 November 2014 12: 46
    the "Aegis" system is tied to GPS, the GPS does not work, the "Aegis" does not work, in each rocket, roughly speaking, there is a "navigator", it is a matter of technology to reset the system.
  13. Sonik
    Sonik 12 November 2014 12: 58
    Aegis is the weapon of the FIRST hit ground-to-ground, or water-to-land (on ships), and everything else for the public is a distracting backdrop.
    1. Yarhann
      Yarhann 12 November 2014 22: 05
      I agree, too, it seems to me that this is an attack weapon - that is, those same hypersonic missiles for a global instant non-nuclear strike
  14. qwert
    qwert 12 November 2014 13: 08
    Quote: saag
    you don’t really maneuver at that speed of entry into the atmosphere, the only minus
    A lot is not necessary. I won’t tell you about the rest, but the Scalpel rocket could spin such pretzels throughout the flight that it was impossible to predict it in principle. And with a kinetic defeat, even leaving a fraction of a degree already leads the warhead from the missile defense.
  15. kplayer
    kplayer 12 November 2014 15: 44
    AEGIS / Aegis BIOUS is, first of all, a ship’s air defense and missile defense system, which includes the SAM of the same name, which in turn combines 4 SPY-1 radars with passive headlights, Mk.41 UVPs, and Standard-SM.2 missiles, GPS / NAVSTAR) and SM. 3. Adaptation from ASBU of another URO (RCC, ZAK / ZRAK + optional PLUR and KR) of third-party developers and manufacturers, for example, destroyers of national construction: Japanese type "Congo" (4) and "Atago" (2), Spanish "Alvaro de Bazan "(6), Norwegian" F. Nansen "(5), South Korean KDX III (3 + 3).
  16. bunny killer
    bunny killer 12 November 2014 16: 42
    Quote: Sonik
    Aegis is the weapon of the FIRST hit ground-to-ground, or water-to-land (on ships), and everything else for the public is a distracting backdrop.

    I agree. as far as I understand, there were calculations showing that our air defense system was drowning.
    1. Yarhann
      Yarhann 12 November 2014 22: 07
      our S400 complex can also be used to attack the range and power of the combat unit this will allow. and it’s simply impossible to kill such missiles; they are hypersonic and modern air defense systems aren’t ours not foreign
  17. smith7
    smith7 13 November 2014 00: 27
    "We have SUCH devices, but we won't tell you about them!" © group "Mango-mango" laughing