The updated missile defense system will be tested in the United States this year.

Until the end of 2016, the US military plans to test the elements of the updated missile defense system against an intercontinental missile, reports RIA News report by the Head of the Missile Defense Agency, James Siring.

According to him, "the test will be conducted against an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that has an electronic suppression system."

“Later this year, for the first time, we will conduct a flight test aimed at such an ICBM,” added Siring.

"Of course, this is due to the scenarios relating to the DPRK and Iran," he said.

Comments

[Ami du peuple]

“Of course, this is due to scenarios regarding the DPRK and Iran.”

Of course, this system is exclusively sharpened against the DPRK and Iran! Not against Russia, really? Russian “Yars” do not pose a threat at all, unlike the pinnacle of technical thought - the latest North Korean “Tekhhodons” and Iranian “Emads” (even if the latter are without nuclear warheads).
Sarcasm, if Che.

[vlad66]

“Of course, this is due to scenarios relating to the DPRK and Iran

Of course, we will pretend that whether they believed in this nonsense.

[Haettenschweiler]

“It is much more interesting how the new missile defense system will prove to be when working on targets that have electronic suppression.” It is even more interesting how long the Americans will produce and replace the old ones with these complexes (unless, of course, the tests are successful), and will the nuclear war begin much earlier?

[Mera joota]

Quote: Ami du peuple

Sarcasm, if Che.

Well, then you write correctly. The US missile defense system is useless against our ICBMs. But it will master the interception of single BR Iranian or Korean. Not 100% of course, but rather with a high probability.

[Ami du peuple]

Quote: Mera Joota

US missile defense system is useless against our ICBMs

In the accelerating section of the trajectory, even the most modern ICBMs are vulnerable. A purely American global missile defense system does not exist (that is, one that would be located in the United States). We are talking about the Euro-ABM system, which is being formed directly near our land and sea borders.

[LvKiller]

And the heads of the “Boreas” are they going to catch these lights of democracy? By Washington?

[Falcon]

Quote: LvKiller

And the heads of the “Boreas” are they going to catch these lights of democracy? By Washington?

Not only.

Another example is GBI, or THAAD at the end site.

There is also an X-band radar towed to the alleged (very conditional) area of ​​the submarine’s presence with ICBMs, for early detection by the SM-3 interceptor from Berkov at the acceleration site (Berkov missile defense of the order of 30 units already).

[theodore rasp]

Butterfly net.

[voyaka uh]

No ground interceptor has time to intercept
at the booster stage of the ICBM, which starts from the depths
the territory of Russia. Even if the interceptor starts second-to-second with ICBMs.
Just do not have time to catch up.
Only if they put the ICBM launchers at the westernmost border,
interception will be possible. But there are no such fools.

Perhaps only from the stratosphere can be in time (with a laser, for example)
to bang the first stage of the ICBM. But for this you need to have time to go down
from space exactly at the time of launch.

[Falcon]

Quote: voyaka uh

No ground interceptor has time to intercept
at the booster stage of the ICBM, which starts from the depths
the territory of Russia. Even if the interceptor starts second-to-second with ICBMs.
Just do not have time to catch up.
Only if they put the ICBM launchers at the westernmost border,
interception will be possible. But there are no such fools.

You are a little mistaken. No one talks about the acceleration section. Sm-3 Euro missile defense should not catch up with the ICBMs - its trajectory CROSSES the trajectory of ICBMs.
The theory is precisely in interception on cross-paths

[voyaka uh]

for Falcon:
"No one talks about the launch site. Sm-3 Euro missile defense should not catch up with ICBMs
- her trajectory CROSSES the trajectory of ICBMs. "///

You are absolutely right. I just commented on Ami du peuple's post about
takeoff opportunities on takeoff.
Alaska missile defense is trying to intercept the ICBMs in the middle of the trajectory.
With approximately 50% success rate. Those. while one ICBM is needed
launch 2-3 missile defense.

[Inok10]

Quote: Falcon

You are a little mistaken. No one talks about the acceleration section. Sm-3 Euro missile defense should not catch up with the ICBMs - its trajectory CROSSES the trajectory of ICBMs.
The theory is precisely in interception on cross-paths

.. beautiful picture .. .. but only if .. if Topol M starts from the Teykovo positional area and the route passes through the shortest distance through Norway and Iceland - 7400 km. to the East coast of the USA .. and then, provided that the carrier SM-3 block IIA (not lower) is located in the area of ​​the Norwegian port of Trondheim .. the SM-3 block IA simply does not have corny energy to intercept .. the result of mathematical modeling proves this (screen applied) .. about the Polish Redzikovo in general, you can simply forget until the appearance of the SM-3 block IIB .. and so for a possible interception, I emphasize again .. for possible interception .. the following prerequisites must be met:
1. Start from the position district Teykovo Topol M
2. Shortest ballistic trace 7400 km to US East Coast
3. The location of the interceptor carrier exactly under the Topol M route
4. Interceptor version not lower than SM-3 block IIА
.. there are already too many inexorable conditions, even lowered the probability that the start will be detected not in 0,00 s ..

[Falcon]

Quote: Inok10

SM-3 block IA simply doesn’t have enough corny energy to intercept .. the result of mathematical modeling proves this (screen is attached) ..

No one claims that everything is ready. To 2020 SM-3 IIB is planned.
In other matters, the Euro missile defense system itself is not ready yet ...

Quote: Inok10

1. Start from the position district Teykovo Topol M
2. Shortest ballistic trace 7400 km to US East Coast
3. The location of the interceptor carrier exactly under the Topol M route

Not at all necessary. Euro missile defense is only one of the possible levels of overlap. In other areas, they use Burke.

[Inok10]

.. and I will continue .. but if at least one of the conditions is not met? .. for example, everyone knows the Topol M range is 11 km. .. from TTX it is known that it has three march stages plus a stage for breeding warheads, the developers indicate that the Topol M ICBM was able to have limited maneuver in the active section of the trajectory, which can significantly reduce the likelihood of its destruction in the most vulnerable, initial, flight section. According to the developers, the active flight section (launch, operation stage of marching stages, and the breeding ground for military equipment) of the Topol-M ICBM is reduced by 000-10 times compared to liquid ICBMs, for which it is about 3 minutes.
Poplar M is supplied with a new set of missile defense breakthrough equipment (KSP PRO). KSP PRO consists of passive and active false targets (LC) and means of distorting the characteristics of the head part. LCs are indistinguishable from warheads in all ranges of electromagnetic radiation (optical, laser, infrared, radar); they allow simulating the characteristics of warheads in almost all breeding attributes on the extra-atmospheric, transitional, and a significant part of the atmospheric section of the descending branch of the flight path of missile warheads; the damaging factors of a nuclear explosion and the radiation of a super-powerful nuclear-pumped laser, etc. For the first time, LCs capable of withstanding ultra-resolution radars were designed. Means of distorting the characteristics of the head part consist of a radio-absorbing (combined with heat-shielding) coating of HF, generators of active radio interference, aerosol sources of infrared radiation, etc. PCB missile defense is designed to significantly increase the time required by a prospective missile defense of a potential adversary to detect warheads among many false targets and interference, thereby significantly reducing the likelihood of intercepting warheads. Well, given the possibility of maneuvering all the Topol steps throughout the flight .. imagine a similar trace (on the screen) .. while the range reserve is another 2500 km. .. so, that it even seems very early to talk about even the possibility of intercepting ICBMs with existing US missile defense systems and the conversation was about Teykovo and Topol M .. they did not even mention Novosibirsk and other ICBMs ..

[Falcon]

Quote: Inok10

.. and I will continue ..

You know, I have a manual on 52 pages using the THAAD system. It can also be translated and inserted into koment. In general terms, it will be said how he bypasses all electronic warfare, as he sees LC and other chips. Nothing changes from this.

At the moment, the US missile defense is certainly not able to completely overcome the threat. Nevertheless, the truth is that it is not able to shoot down our ICBMs just as much as that it can shoot down all ICBMs.

[voyaka uh]

"Topol M starts from the Teykovo positional area and the tracing goes
the shortest distance through Norway and Iceland - 7400 km. "////

That's right. Trajectories through the north, the north pole in general
not intercepted.
Americans focused on a simpler and more realistic task:
interception of single ICBMs fired across the Pacific
from the Far East to California.
A battery in Alaska has time to launch several interceptors on such a missile.

Apparently, until they increase the probability of defeat to an acceptable 70-80%,
they will not begin missile defense to cover other areas.
And the marine Aegis is focused on intercepting the infantry brigade.

[Falcon]

Quote: Mera Joota

Well, then you write correctly. The US missile defense system is useless against our ICBMs.

Quote: hydrox

Well, they will intercept something like Scud, because Yars cannot be intercepted by them: there, in addition to false targets, there are also directors of active interference

Are you too self-confident?

SM-3 interceptor of the last batch - can intercept ICBMs at the launch site from Europe.
Not to mention the possibility of placing GBI there

GBI makes it possible to intercept ICBMs at peaks up to 2000km - with a successful alignment before the separation of warheads.

After 2020, GBI will be able to intercept multiple warheads at lower heights thanks to MOKV.

The latest THAAD modifications, according to the manufacturer, can intercept warheads in the last section, including from ICBMs

[gg.na]

Quote: Ami du peuple

Sarcasm, if Che.

Good sarcasm! !!! ++++++++++++ !!!!

[hydrox]

Well, they will intercept something like Scud, because Yars cannot be intercepted by them: in addition to false goals, there are also directors of active interference, should we in vain hold Krasuha and Moscow in Syrian Latakia?

[Mera joota]

Quote: hydrox

because apart from false goals there are also directors of active interference

yes

Quote: hydrox

in vain do we really hold Krasukha and Moscow in Syrian Latakia?

And then what side? Like "in the elderberry garden, but in Kiev the uncle"?

[Alexez]

Interestingly, the Americans to test their updated missile defense will ask our Strategic Missile Forces to launch them a couple of yards? So we are always welcome)))

[Mera joota]

Quote: Alexez

So we are always welcome)))

and in the report Minutman to catch a buzz or something?

[LvKiller]

"and in response to catch the minuteman"? Will it fly?

[corporal]

Quote: LvKiller

Will it fly?

Have no doubt.

[rotmistr60]

Of course, this is due to scenarios concerning the DPRK and Iran.

It is time to finish hanging noodles on the ears of your own and the European citizen. Missiles from Iran, and especially North Korea, are of little interest to you, because it is too virtual to be true. Those who are friends with a head perfectly understand against whom it is created.

[LvKiller]

Yes it is useless. A bunch of warheads, which are already enough, are generally outside the borders of the Russian Federation.

[Woodman]

"Of course, this is due to the scenarios relating to the DPRK and Iran," he said.

Only they will post it in Europe ...

[ProtectRusOrDie]

Quote: Ami du peuple

“Of course, this is due to scenarios regarding the DPRK and Iran.”

Of course, this system is exclusively sharpened against the DPRK and Iran. Not against Russia, indeed.

Yeah - especially in the part "the test will be conducted against an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) with an electronic suppression system."

Kakbe EW is "not our crown at all." Oh well.

All right, ppp ... artners.

Ppppp .... artner defense, subject to successful tests, innovations, etc. - It will work effectively only in one case - if they can force us to stop improving the ICBMs for 20 years)))

I have the honor.

[red_october]

The updated missile defense system will be tested in the United States this year.

"iskanders" and "calibers" ...

[Brutal]

"... an updated missile defense system ..."
And, again, they will start to steam naive and gullible losers from NATO countries ?!

[Loner_53]

According to him, "the test will be conducted against an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that has an electronic suppression system."

Well, what ??? For complacency or for self-deception?

[Dam]

Of course, we will not make missile defense targets the primary targets for our Iskanders

[Panabebis]

Of course, we will not make missile defense targets the primary targets for our Iskanders

With gauges you can gut, and we’ll save the Iskander for Ukrainians ...

[igorka357]

And not fatty iskander on Ukrainians ...))? Khokhlov, you can throw old points!

[Alex ..]

PRO ??? We are happy for you ...

[Leeder]

Quote: Lesovik

"Of course, this is due to the scenarios relating to the DPRK and Iran," he said.

Only they will post it in Europe ...

Well, the average Amer with geography is not very, and Iran and North Korea, it is somewhere near Europe. :)

[evge-malyshev]

Quote: LeeDer

Iran and North Korea, it is somewhere near Europe. :)

North Korea is very close - just some
(7 - 8) thousand km.

[Nikolay71]

So you’ll think after that who needs North Korea - the USA or China?

[sa-ag]

Quote: Mera Joota

US missile defense system is useless against our ICBMs

Quote: hydrox

Yars they can not intercept

And if a missile with a tactical nuclear charge goes towards them?

[LvKiller]

But what if, before launching ICBMs, the European war suddenly finds 300-400 non-nuclear targets? How many times "sh * t" will they have time to mumble before their terrible end? Do you really think that the suppression of missile defense is not envisaged if it is impatient to apply "strategists" to the probable enemy? It’s not necessary to consider military idiots ... And yes, one nuance negates the whole point of this "missile defense" as missile defense: not all warheads are located inside the borders of the Russian Federation ...

[Mikhail Krapivin]

I’m sure that the Americans, like ours, are well aware that in the event of a global bad boom, it’s not their missile defense, not our S-400, that will burn everything and burn it all. Well, maybe the cockroaches will stay. And several tens of thousands of people in bunkers, which then still take a break from unsanitary conditions, radiation and the lack of paid medicine :) But nonetheless, the Americans regularly spend big money on their missile defense, and ours create a deeply echeloned defense of Moscow from missiles. Optimism is an integral feature of humanity :)

[Old26]

Quote: Ami du peuple

In the accelerating section of the trajectory, even the most modern ICBMs are vulnerable. A purely American global missile defense system does not exist (that is, one that would be located in the United States). We are talking about the Euro-ABM system, which is being formed directly near our land and sea borders.

A global never existed and does not exist. What we call the global American missile defense is not. There is only the US national missile defense, the positional areas of which are in California and Alaska. There is a Euro-segment PRO or EuroPro. But it is joint with the NATO countries and this includes the American, French, and Italian-French-British segments.
In order to shoot down ICBMs in the accelerating section, one must have at least in complexes of the THAAD or Aegis type in the firing plane, and within reach, of course. But this is simply physically impossible to obtain. so you can forget about the defeat in the upper stage. And in all other cases, the American system in Europe is capable of intercepting only the ballistic missile systems, which are oppressed by Russia. In the region where the base is only Israeli and Iranian.

Quote: Falcon

Interceptor SM-3 of the last batch - can intercept ICBMs at the launch site from Europe. Not to mention the possibility of placing GBI there

Even the “Block 2B,” which is planned after 20, will not have speeds sufficient to intercept ICBMs. Only being under the trajectory is it theoretically possible to hit the ICBMs, since the energy of this interceptor will be higher than that of previous modifications. When launching an interceptor from Poland, ICBMs could only hit GBI, but this project ordered them to live long in the middle of the last decade. As with the TCAAD, speeds are insufficient to intercept ICBMs