It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Navy test intercepts warhead

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2006 @ 09:53 AM
link   
And so it begins...

www.cnn.com...

An interceptor rocket fired from the cruiser USS Shiloh knocked down the warhead from a target missile about 250 miles off Kauai shortly after noon (6 p.m. ET), the Defense Department's missile defense agency reported on Thursday.

The government says it had nothing to do with the NK situation but who beleives the government anyway. It really sends a message if you ask me




posted on Jun, 23 2006 @ 09:56 AM
link   
These tests have been going on for several years already. IIRC this is only the third Aegis ship that is capable of using the system. Up until now the primary ship has been the USS Lake Eerie. They can't do these tests on the spur of the moment and they're planned months in advance.



posted on Jun, 23 2006 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Zap apparently a Japanese Kongo class equipped with ABM capabilities partook in the tracking and targeting of this missile in conjunction with the USS Shiloh. That’s significant news IMO.


A Japanese destroyer performed surveillance and tracking exercises during the test, marking the first time any US ally has taken part in a US missile defense intercept test, the US Missile Defense Agency said.

It said the Japanese destroyer and a US Navy Aegis destroyer performed surveillance and tracking exercises during the test.

A third Aegis destroyer used in the test linked up with a land-based missile defense radar to evaluate the ship's ability to receive and use target cueing data from missile defense command centers.

Link


Although this test was scheduled long before the NK situation I cant help but notice the similarities between the test and the current situation. The target missile was an IRBM, it was launched from 250 miles away, and it was destroyed during the late ascend phase when the warhead separated from the missile. Makes you think...



posted on Jun, 23 2006 @ 10:43 AM
link   
The Japanese have also been responsible for a change in the SM-3 system. The last test they did was a simulated test to see if the new changes would work with the missile.



posted on Jun, 24 2006 @ 02:43 AM
link   
Does anyone know how far along Bush's star wars project is from completion?

I know that the US is investing alot of money into LASER technology for shooting down incoming missiles. Like mounted on the fronts of ships & Boing 747s.

Thats obviously the future but it might be needed sooner concidering the current state of affairs.



posted on Jun, 24 2006 @ 03:07 AM
link   
Quite a good analogy:

If there is a launch by North Korea, the United States is facing three options, officials said: do nothing; fire an interceptor missile to destroy the North Korean missile; fire and miss.

Japan is also publicly warning against the test and has concerns too. That explains why they were performing tracking on the US test.



posted on Jun, 25 2006 @ 12:34 PM
link   
I wonder if this interceptor has a standard artillery proximity fuze.
A doppler radar that causes it to detonate when nice and close instead having to make a direct hit.

ping......................ping...............ping............ping.......ping....ping..ping.BANG.

And is it full of depleted uranium projectiles for maximum destructive force?

Then again, letting of a small nuke in close proximity to the incoming warhead might be a good way to go.

Probably my questions are unanswerable.




posted on Jun, 25 2006 @ 02:47 PM
link   
No, it's a standard explosive warhead. All you have to do is damage the ICBM and when it renters the atmosphere it'll burn up.



posted on Jun, 25 2006 @ 11:37 PM
link   
So far, the Navy seems to be having a lot more success with its TMD program than the NMD program has been able to achieve. Of course it's a lot easier intercepting an SRBM or IRBM than an ICBM - an ICBM is much higher and faster, and thus harder to hit.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join