Another successful GBI advanced anti-missile test
02.02.2016 of the United States Missile Defense Agency announced the successful flight test of a modernized ground-based anti-missile missile, which was carried out without intercepting the training target.
The purpose of launching an anti-missile missile launched by 28 on January 2016 from Vandenberg Air Force Base (California) was to test the performance of the improved interceptor head shock control engines, as well as troubleshoot the 06 detected in the FTG-2014B test in June.
FTG-06b Ballistic Missile Defense Test. The fifth launch of the LV-2 target missile, test FTG-06B 22 June 2014. This was a test of failed test FTG-06A from 2010.
Note: during the test in 23 of June 2014, non-calculated vibrations of the over-atmospheric EKV interceptor were observed during operation of the shunting control unit
US Ballistic Missile Defense System - Target Launch and Interceptor Launch (2010). FTG-06A failed test
During the test, 2016 also monitored the telemetry of the control system of the shock head, which corrects its flight in height and course, leading to the target. The agency MDA notes that the purpose of the test was the correction of long-standing problems with the shock head of the anti-missile.
As part of a test launch from a C-17 military transport aircraft off the shores of the Hawaiian Islands in the Pacific, a medium-range ballistic missile was launched, the head part of which was equipped with false targets and means to create interference. After the ground-based and sea-based radars in the Hawaiian Islands recorded a rocket flight, a command was given to launch anti-missiles from a silo launcher at Vandenberg airbase. Separated from the carrier, the over-atmospheric shock apparatus EKV then carried out a series of maneuvers to demonstrate the ability to adjust its flight in height and course in space, choosing the main target for destruction.
According to the US authorities, the missile defense agency spent more than $ 2 billion to fix the problems in the control system of the strike head after it failed to intercept the target in space in 2010.
As a result of numerous improvements during the test 2014, the anti-missile successfully hit the target. MDA is constantly improving both the antimissile, the targeting and targeting systems, and the transatmospheric interceptor.
GBI early anti-missile sample launched from the mine (2000-x start)
Modern version of the GB GB OL. Starting weight of 12000 anti-missile kg, launch cost about $ 70 000 000
Some explanations:
Boeing C-17 Globemaster III - American strategic military transport aircraft used by the US Air Force Test Center for launching imitators of medium-range ballistic missiles:
Launch of LV LV medium range simulator with Boeing C-17 Globemaster
Prototype eMRBM Simulator (LV) of medium range ballistic missiles manufactured by Lockheed Martin:
The technical data is classified, but press releases have reported that it ensures that the target meets ballistic missiles with an 3780 launch range of more than a mile.
Types of launches and tests for ground-based PRO:
Bv - verification test booster (accelerator).
CMCM - tests after making critical changes in the performance characteristics, testing countermeasures.
FTG - flight tests ground interceptor.
FTX - flight tests, other purposes.
IFT - integrated flight tests.
GBI tests performed (up to May 2012):
Successful transatmospheric interception of the target simulator (2014 year):
"Exoatmospheric Killer". The principle of hit-to-kill (some "reflections" on the example of the interception of the Topol ICBM warhead: the pros and cons):
Raytheon’s striking anti-missile module is called the Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV). It is known that it has about 140 cm in length and 70 kg of weight, equipped with an engine and guidance system, including an infrared sensor. Destruction of the goal is carried out on the simple principle of hit-to-kill, that is, using the energy of the colliding objects. The task of kinetic interception can be compared with a bullet hit a flying bullet. All the way to the target, the EKV and the accelerating missile receive data from land, sea radars and satellites, which are used to correct the course. The impact force when an EKV hits a target is equivalent to a collision with an 10-ton tractor, which rushes faster than 1000 km / h!
Is it possible to dodge the kinetic impact? The myth that the Topol-M warhead is equipped with engines for maneuver and is able to evade ABM interceptors has infiltrated the media “Russian space”.
The warhead has advanced jamming techniques, false targets and other warhead tricks designed to deceive enemy radars. However, one with the other is incompatible due to the inertia property of the bodies: orbital maneuvers or interference to radar, both will not work together.
If the Topol warhead maneuvers, then it eliminates the missile defense from the problem of self-selection from false targets. CU can only dodge interceptors.
A brief assessment of the prospects of "dodging":
The BB poplar mass is close to 1 t, of which several hundred kg are accounted for by a thermonuclear bomb, a thermally protected and durable body, and also a guidance system. Frequent maneuvers during the flight require several hundred kg of fuel, therefore, the mass of the shunting LRE can be estimated at ~ 100 kg. Or several shunting engines, each ~ 10 kg of weight, which does not change the essence.
Assuming that the ratio of the mass of the engine to the load does not exceed 100, the total thrust during the maneuver is ~ 1 t. Based on such estimates, it could be several tons. In the case of one such LRE, it is obvious that only a small part of the thrust can be directed in the transverse direction, while a few small shunting control systems can only work for transverse thrust.
Thus, it can be said that the monoblock is able to maneuver under the action of shear force in 10 000 N.
Let the lateral acceleration be g. Over 10 seconds, the EKV approaches the target on 100 km. It is obvious that in 10 seconds, the “stationary” maneuver of the EKV will have time to adjust the course and hit the target. Therefore, it is necessary to frequently change the direction of movement of the BB. Presumably the estimated maneuver time should be ~ 1 seconds. Then the transverse displacement of the monoblock will be several meters. Enough to dodge the interceptor. In this case, at a speed of about 7,5 km / s, the angular deviation of the warhead from the desired path will be of the order of 0,001 happy. This is acceptable, bearing in mind the task of destroying a large city. With such a deviation, the miss will be several kilometers, even if the direction of the warhead movement changes several thousand kilometers from the target.
The specific impulse of rocket fuel (UDMG + AT) is assumed to be 3 000 m / s, then 1 a second thrust in 10 000 N will be spent 3,33 kg of fuel. For frequent maneuvers need a substantial supply of fuel.
It can be assumed that the monoblock is able to perform ~ 100 maneuvers - yaws from side to side, each lasting ~ 1 seconds, and still get into the doomed city. Performing such maneuvers continuously or periodically in ~ 1 seconds, he will extremely complicate the task with the EKV aimed at him. During this time ~ 2 000 km will be covered to the target and ~ 300 kg of fuel will be spent. This is a lot.
Conclusion: it is impossible to dodge interceptors on the whole trajectory.
And when do you need to start dodging? When does the CU "know" that it has been attacked by an EKV? Radar on the combat part of the ICBM? Command control from the starting position?
Using radar, the warhead must wait until the distance to the attacking interceptor decreases to ~ 10 km. From this point on, she will have in stock ~ 1 seconds to dodge the blow. The CU turns on the engine at full thrust and makes a jerk with acceleration g in the direction to which its axis is directed. By the time of approach with the interceptor, the engine will work ~ 1 seconds and the warhead will move a few meters, which is quite enough for a miss. In my opinion, this is unrealizable ...
Computer animation of Minuteman-3 flight (due to the lack of a similar for the Topol-M ICBM). On video, the active site appears long, although it is measured in hundreds of kilometers. It can be seen that the warhead rotates before entering the atmosphere in order to enter at the correct angle and not stray from the course under the action of aerodynamic drag.
Probably, on the basis of these estimates, we can assume that the "random yawning of the warhead" algorithm is implemented in our warheads of ICBMs, from a certain height (where interception is possible), which makes it difficult to defeat with a kinetic strike.
On the other hand, if the response time of the EKV to a change in the target's trajectory turns out to be significantly shorter than 1 seconds (which is what the Americans are trying to achieve), in principle, it will not be possible to dodge.
MDA-prediction of the interceptors flight trajectory compared to Russian ICBMs
GBI anti-missiles. Missile defense position area in Alaska:
Transportation by OTH:
Unloading from the conveyor:
GBI in MIC Boeing before sending to the position area:
SBX radar (sea-based, X-band) is the main sensor for tracking ICBMs and interaction in the GBI system. The design is an AFAR with a diameter of 22 meter with 45 056 MRP. Image before mounting on a floating platform):
Over-atmospheric interceptors of the missile defense system:
Video of the first ground tests of the remote control maneuvering and correction.
Exoatomospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV). Interceptor currently used in the GBI system.
Redesigned Kill Vehicle (RKV). The project is a promising interceptor.
The United States Missile Defense Agency (MDA), together with Raytheon, has completed the drafting of a technical assignment for multiple atmospheric kinetic interceptors (MOKV).
Splitting kinetic interceptors (literary translation of the name of US missile warhead warheads). The real name is "Multi-Object Kill Vehicle" (MOKV).
Multi-Object Kill Vehicle (MOKV) after resetting the head fairing.
Selection of documents on GMD (in English):
Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD)
Statement - Missile Defense Agency
Missile Defense Agency Successfully Completes Ground Test
Conclusion
The perseverance (I would say, "uproarness") of Americans in their tests of missile defense against medium-range ballistic missiles is not entirely clear. After all, the contract is still valid. Next to the "best country on the planet" there are no launch sites for ballistic missiles, countries with such missiles are now also missing in the western hemisphere and even in the distant future are not expected. Monroe Doctrin (“America for Americans”) is running out with a bang soon as 200 years. Russian (or even the mythical Iraqi, Korean) medium-range ballistic missiles by no means reach the other hemisphere, and the GBI ICBM is not yet able to intercept.
"On the thief and the cap is burning"?
The US does not rule out the introduction of sanctions against Russia because of the INF Treaty
Used photos, videos and materials:
http://www.mda.mil; http://media.al.com; http://photos.al.com; http://novosti-dny.com; https://www.flickr.com; http://extremal-mechanics.org; http://www.travis.af.mil; http://www.indiedb.com; http://www.reuters.com; http://cdn.fishki.net; http://www.smdc.army.mil; http://www.heritage.org; https://en.wikipedia.org; http://www.jeffhead.com; http://www.ausairpower.net; www.lockheedmartin.com; https://www.youtube.com; http://www.madeinalabama.com; http://missiledefenseadvocacy.org; https://mostlymissiledefense.com; http://www.designation-systems.net; ghttp://www.northropgrumman.com; http://www.defense-aerospace.com; http://abyss.uoregon.edu; http://businessinsider.com
Information