F-35 BMD

This article made me laugh pretty hard. According to a California representative, the F-35 could be used as a boost phase missile defense system,particularly against North Korean missiles. According to Rep Hunter, the aircraft can use their onboard sensors, specifically the AN-AAQ-37, to detect the missile launch, and then fire AIM-120s to destroy it during the boost phase.


If only missile defense was that easy. There is a reason that we still don't have a reliable system that can stop an ICBM, in any phase of flight. You might get one or two missiles this way, but it would be a case of sheer dumb luck more than anything.

www.investors.com...

Can they not incorporate it into the missile defence shield. By using its sensors and computer to 'spot' for the weapons system.

a reply to: Zaphod58

So what about the F 14 Tom Cat Phoenix missile system? Developed 50 years ago, was it only designed for incoming aircraft or could it take missiles, too?

Probably classified anyway.

a reply to: blackbird9393

They can tie into the Aegis system and guide missiles against cruise missiles and air breathing targets, but against ballistic missiles, you either need to hit them in the boost phase, or the coast phase for an ICBM, or high end theater missile. That means a radar with a lot more power than an F-35 could put out.

originally posted by: blackbird9393
Can they not incorporate it into the missile defence shield. By using its sensors and computer to 'spot' for the weapons system.

Problem with missiles and f35, missiles have to be small enough to be stored internally or stealth is compromised. Same when they open the bay doors to launch a missile, the radar return goes up.

a reply to: intrptr

Other than the fact that all the US copies have been destroyed or put into museums, by the time they got close the outbound missile would simply outrun it. It worked against cruise missiles and antiship missiles.

a reply to: intrptr

Like Zaph said, they would need to stay in the atmosphere for the Phoenix missile to guide its way to the intercept. Also, while the Tomcat could see a long, long way off, it can't see North Korea from California..

originally posted by: Zaphod58
This article made me laugh pretty hard. According to a California representative, the F-35 could be used as a boost phase missile defense system,particularly against North Korean missiles.

Dont know what the problem is. F-35s are known to be invisible. Just flood the North Korean air space with them and shoot at everything they launch.
It'll be great i'm telling you. It'll be huuuuge.

On a more serious note, if you are in the right place at the right time, there's no reason it wouldnt work. Easier said than done though. And of course arsenal bomber aircraft hauling ERAMs would be more suited to the role than fighter jets...

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: intrptr

Other than the fact that all the US copies have been destroyed or put into museums, by the time they got close the outbound missile would simply outrun it. It worked against cruise missiles and antiship missiles.

The F 14 onboard fire control system could track up to 16 targets, engaging six simultaneously, reflected in the video . Fire and forget capability of six individual targets, not bad for fifty year old tech.

My point was such advanced tech existed back then, whats so funny about the F35?

originally posted by: cosmania
a reply to: intrptr

Like Zaph said, they would need to stay in the atmosphere for the Phoenix missile to guide its way to the intercept. Also, while the Tomcat could see a long, long way off, it can't see North Korea from California..

Lol, maybe the senator wasn't talking about ICBMs, maybe he was talking about sub launched cruise missiles?

BTW the Phoenix missiles were fire and forget, terminal homing, hundred plus mile range. IOW, 'over the horizon' tech already exited back then.

a reply to: intrptr

Because you're not going to hit an ICBM with an air to air missile unless you're within about 20 miles at the exact moment it launches, you see it, recognize what's happening, and fire immediately. You might be able to do that once or twice with a silo based missile field, but not with mobile launchers.

a reply to: intrptr

He specifically mentioned North Korea for one. They don't have any known sub launched cruise missiles. Even if they did, it wouldn't matter what phase they were in.

But Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said last month that it's possible for the F-35 to shoot down nuclear missiles from North Korea or Iran with its Raytheon (RTN) AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAMs) just seconds after takeoff.

"It's like an act of God," Hunter said. "You have F-35s, you have AMRAAMs, and you can shoot these things down as they go up."

From the OP source article.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I didn't see him specifically mention ICBMs, cruise missiles have a 'boost phase' too.

If the meant ICBMs then he let the cat out of the bag... dinn he

Patriots are 'mobile', intercept incoming warheads as demonstrated in desert storm.

a reply to: intrptr

And, again, with cruise missiles it doesn't matter what phase they are in. We have missile defenses that can stop them in any phase. The only missiles that matter about them being in the boost phase are ballistic missiles.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: intrptr

And, again, with cruise missiles it doesn't matter what phase they are in. We have missile defenses that can stop them in any phase. The only missiles that matter about them being in the boost phase are ballistic missiles.

So then the F 35 deploying to the Korea region won't be able to interdict a Korean ICBM during boost phase.

So certain are you?

a reply to: Zaphod58

He specifically mentioned North Korea for one. They don't have any known sub launched cruise missiles. Even if they did, it wouldn't matter what phase they were in.

They have subs, 19 of them. But you been on board all of them.

I wouldn't even bother launching anything, just sneak up and leave a mine or worst case, pull an extremist act.

Nvm. I bow to your obviously superior knowledge and abilities.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Seems that you would need a persistent stratospheric drone or airship for surveillance and launch.

a reply to: mbkennel

That's one of the big drawbacks. If they did do the upgrade (which would be a three year upgrade minimum) they'd have to keep at least one aircraft on station 24/7/365.

Pew Pew Pew