SM-3 Block IIA Missile Excels in First Ever ICBM Intercept Test
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2024
- The U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA), and U.S. Navy sailors aboard an Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) System-equipped destroyer intercepted and destroyed a threat-representative Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) target with a Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IIA missile during a flight test demonstration in the broad ocean area northeast of Hawaii, Nov. 16.
Read more: www.navalnews....
U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA) video.
=====================
For new videos every week, subscribe here! www.youtube.com...
Follow us on Twitter: / navalnewscom
Follow us on LinkedIn: / navalnews
Like us on Facebook: navalnewscom
Check out our daily naval defense news coverage at: www.navalnews....
NAVAL NEWS is fully focused on naval topics. We cover the latest naval defense shows & events. We also report on naval technology from all over the world. Navalnews.com is updated daily with in-depth features, industry, and naval forces news round-ups, event coverage, video reports and more. Our top of the line site is responsive across all mobile and desktop devices.
This video shows the US Navy CGI animation of the Intercept. On the US Navy UA-cam channel there is a video showing the launch of the ICBM from Kwajalein, The launch of the SM-3 interceptor from the USS John Finn, and using a missile tracking camera(HALO-IV) the impact of the ICBM warhead hitting the Kinetic Kill Warhead of the SM-3. Note that the warhead of the SM-3 does not explode rather it positions itself in the path of the ICBM warhead and allows both to be destroyed by the energy of the impact.
Link???
@@logicbomb5511 It has a few too many different views of the launch of the SM-3 ua-cam.com/video/4yCmHLdCp1w/v-deo.html&ab_channel=U.S.Navy
A lot of people always say the USA is 'behind' Russia and China for hypersonic missiles. Many decades ago in the 70's, our Sprint missile was an ABM Interceptor capable of launch to Mach 10 in just 5 seconds. Videos are on youtube. SM-3 Block IIA averages Mach 16 - Mach18 terminal speed. Very much hypersonic.
@MorPlays Mach 18 is the speed of the bull---- that flies out of your mouth, actually.
Someone is in denial and refuses to look up specs for the SM-3 themselves because it's easier to make things up and pretend. Yes, the USA's SM-3 has a terminal speed of Mach 16-18. Use your eyes and hands and look it up.
Then you can look up operation Burning Frost. An SM-3 missile was launched from the cruiser USS Lake Erie in February 2008 on an intercept course with an old and disabled American reconnaissance satellite. Successful intercept of a satellite.
The fact that the world is aware of is that the USA was testing hypersonics before the rest of the world. We stopped because there wasn't a point at that time to continue pursuing hypersonics. No adversaries had them. We kept the research data that we had obtained and we simply resumed where we left off in hypersonic research.
What a funny day for you to reply on, too. Have a look at the news lately? Literally today: *U.S. successfully flight tests Raytheon hypersonic weapon - Pentagon*
www.yahoo.com/news/u-successfully-flight-tests-raytheon-180251221.html
That's a scramjet hypersonic missile, not a cheap little solid or liquid fuel. The US has a number of hypersonic missile projects in the works at the current time. The hypersonic glide body designs that Russia and China tout aren't very maneuverable. The US is testing it's own version of a hypersonic glide body, but we do so knowing ahead of time that it has it's limitations. It's like going 300mph in a jet car on a straight track and trying to make a sharp turn onto another road. The centrifugal forces will send it into a flip dozens of times and destroy it. Even if materials could be designed to withstand the forces of Mach 20+ on a hypersonic glider, calling something a 'turn' is ridiculous. It is the equivalent of a car making a 'turn' in a football stadium. By the time you completed that 'turn' at Mach 20+, you'd be thousands of miles off course.
Russia and China both have a history of lying about their weapons capabilities. The Soviet Union, which was far stronger than modern-day Russia, went bankrupt trying to keep up with the USA in an arms race.
those people are propaganda people :)
Correct, The U.S. is not “behind”. There was just not the need. Now that the need is developing, the US will take back the lead. By some accounts it already has.
We had a hypersonic test plane in the fucking 1960s. China is doing things now we did in the 50s and 60s. Crewed missions to space, crewed space station, hypersonic jets, and are now getting aircraft carriers that are equal to Russia and UK carriers. If they start doing things we have done recently, then we should be afraid, but they aren't set to do anything close to us until the mid 30s.
@@aauwhatitdo1582 yep, it makes me laugh when they take on good faith isolated quotes from our general's reports without thinking or researching even 1 second just to shame on USA
Australia & Japan are in negotiations to acquire this system.
Japan developed it with the US....
@@mikotokoro9136 Yeah.
SM-3 SM-6 For crushing the Red China Dongfeng missiles from the sky
But not for China's hypersonic missiles. 👍
the dongfengs are the hypersonics, and they have no counter to the sm3 or 6@@peekaboopeekaboo1165
@@expertbrody9914BS the SM3 and even the RIM 116 could shoot those missiles out of the sky what's they have their firing solution they will simply intercept.
Thats what I was saying China has no missile capable of getting around an SM3
@@Coinz8
In Japan, it was reported that it was developed in collaboration with Japanese company Mitsubishi, is that true?
Yes. Japan joined this BMD project in 2006.
Thank you for teaching me.
Thank you to all Americans for co-developing with Japan. I want you to deploy it in Five Eyes country as well.
@@tmt3739 this may have some interesting consequnces
Yep, it sure was Japanese and US and UK best of Friends always, oh yeah S. Korea and Taiwan, Australia and now India!
Yes. It is apart of the Ground Aegis that Japan wants to deploy next to the THAAD and Patriot systems. It creates an amazing additional layer of defense. The Japanese defense plan is to have the Standard Missile Aegis system to intercept targets headed towards Japan, any targets that get through the Aegis layers will be picked of by the Patriot and THAAD system to minimize their risk of being overwhelmed.
Thank you !!! 🇯🇵🇺🇸
Lol Lol Lol
@@samji7854 Bark more wumao 🙂
This missile can shoot down a satellite
US ஜ ♥ Simply the best !
In missile defense, yes. In ICBM technology? Not even remotely close.
@@aerodynamic1440 Pffffffffffffffffffffffff .
@@aerodynamic1440 WTF you talking about? ICBMs can only be so good. If it gets nukes on target, they are good as they can get. NOTHING is as good as the Trident Submarine Launched ICBM though.
@@aerodynamic1440 then what id
@@aerodynamic1440 but in SLBM? Trident ii is the very best
I can you put something on UA-cam. there is no sound
Came here after Putin put his nukes on increased readiness. This helped make me feel better, thanks!
comeon man im in zimbabwe and i know about the sm6 THAAD patriot block 3 those are all your missile defense systems and frankly they are the best in the world battle tested enjoy yourself 😊😊😊
@@isaacmoyo2313 Answer to If Russia announced it was nuking Europe and America tomorrow at noon, would you be scared?
by Kent Gladden
No.
There’s an old acronym. FEAR. “Fantasized Expectations Appearing Real”. You fight that Ignorance w/ well-vetted, well-sourced Information. Facts.
Like the Fact that, at this moment, there are 12 US guided missile Destroyers & Cruisers in the Mediterranean Carrying 1,256 missiles. They were just sent there 10 weeks ago, to join up w/ the US 6th Fleet & Carrier Strike Group-8. These 12 ships carry SM-3 Interceptor missiles, which shoot down Russian ICBMs. In Space. Before stage-3 burn is completed. Before MIRVs & decoys can separate to deploy.
America only has to hit the ICBM missile. The MIRVs & decoys do not individually carry the fuel needed to transit the Orbit phase (aka Exo-atmospheric, or Midcourse) independently of the delivery system ICBM. The Russian R-36 or R-28 (SS-18). Nothing falls back to earth. No radiation is released in earth’s air. Nuclear warheads do not arm themselves until they’re already in the Re-Entry phase in earth’s atmosphere. No nuclear explosions. No EMPs. No NOTHING.
Russia has had equipment failing left & right in Ukraine. 2018, Putin announced Russia was cutting their military budget 20%. Apparently, from Maintenance. And Quality Control. Heavy Transport trucks blowing out tire sidewalls ‘cuz they were left outside in the Russian Winter. Not even moved for over a year. So, Russian vehicle tires got brittle. Hit the Ukrainian MUD, and… POP! goes the tires. And nowhere goes your convoys.
Except now we’re finding out this neglect extends to their 2 Russian Navy Flagships. The Admiral Kuznetsov & the Moskva. Both completely out of the fight now, the Kuznetsov sunk itself in dry dock & the Moskva currently sitting at the bottom of the Black Sea.
Legitimately, this raises the very serious question of Russian nukes stability/maintenance. These things need re-certification every so often, IF you expect them to work when it matters. All indicators show this hasn’t been happening. It may actually be that it’s a 50-50 chance Putin’s nukes just don't function well enough to be used in war.
Russia also has ~4,500 nuclear warheads max (useable). Which
@@isaacmoyo2313 в каком еще бою?
This system is not designed to defend against an all out launch from Russia (currently) it's more along the lines to defend against an Iran, North Korea or other theater ballistic missles.
This system is designed to shut down many ballistic missiles from Russia and all over the world at the same time
@@liquorking1030 if a country like USA or Russia launches their entire arsenal at once, currently no defence system would help
@@anntakamaki1960 However, the SM-3 would complicate an attack. More warheads would have to be assigned to critical targets, helping to deplete your post-attack nuclear missile reserves. Maybe Russia would feel that such a depleted reserve would be in adequate against China, or some other enemy. That's a deterrent in and of itself.
@@anntakamaki1960 true
@@777Outrigger well see,you forget that sam icbm have fake warheads
Have they done any BMD testing with USS Jack Lucas (SPY 6) yet? I imagine they're testing everyhting else as we speak...
Standard missle is a awesome platform so much for all the nonsensense hype that a sm3 can't mitigate a icbm.
I don't think people realize exactly how big of a accomplishment actually happened here. It wasn't long ago that ICBM's were considered unblockable, even heard people say it was impossible to intercept a ICBM. I was still impressed from the successful 2017 ground to air interception using the new GMD. Even though it's close to a half billion dollars per missile, it's well worth it if it successfully intercepts a ICBM nuclear payload that's headed directly for a major US city. I remember Putin being pissed off at the results of that test. Then less than three years later which is the blink-of-an-eye when it comes to missile research and development, especially for ICBM's and ICBM interceptors. They achieve a even greater accomplishment by intercepting 2 land launched ICBM's with much smaller missiles launched from a damn Navy Ship, using missiles that cost almost 15 times less then the GMD. But the thing I'm most shocked and even pissed off about is how the media brushes over it like it was nothing big. Meanwhile they're non stop bragging about Russia's and China's Hypersonic Missiles that hit their target at 7 times the speed of sound making it undetectable and unblockable which increases their missile capabilities Way Beyond that of the United States. Meanwhile they're completely oblivious to the fact that neither Russia or China has never proven that they have the capability to intercept a ICBM which means our nuclear missiles that could travel between 6000 and 15000 miles are unblockable to them. Yet they seem to think that that Russia's and China's interceptors can intercept them with ease because "they're much faster". They believe that the Minuteman 3 ICBM that Russia's Mach 7 missile is supposedly faster than will simply be chased down and intercepted at "7 times the speed of sound". Being once again completely oblivious to the FACT that the "much slower US missile" will in reality make it's trip to the other side of the globe completely unmolested by enemy missiles thanks to the protection of space and it's oxygen free existence. At this point it wouldn't even shock me if not even a single one of the journalist actively spreading the information about the topic knows that the reason why interceptor missiles don't work the same in space as they do on Earth is due to the fact that missiles can't ignite their propellants because it needs 🔥 to ignite the , but it's impossible to ignite 🔥 without oxygen. But anyways the final fact that they're completely oblivious to is that even when the ICBM reaches space above the target and the warhead pod seperates from the last stage of the rocket followed by the pod releasing 1-3 nuclear warheads that use burst of ignited fuel stored in a sealed compartment to spiral the warheads at rapid speeds as thet re-enter the atmosphere. At which point this super slow missile warhead will be intercepted at seven times the speed of sound, unless of course you live in reality. Because in reality the Minuteman 3. Nuclear warheads go spiraling down through the atmosphere closing the distance to the targets at 23 times the speed of sound. I bet it would blow their damn Minds if somebody were to tell them that the Minuteman 3 closes the distance to the Target over three times faster than the Russian Hypersonic missile, and was demonstrated on videos recorded from multiple angles over 12 years ago now. The only place they have the advantage is close to mid-range Warfare, but that will come to an end very soon once we get lasers from our 4 different laser programs mass produced, as well as the 8 fifferent Hypersonic missile programs fielded...
Sorry about the long ass rant it was just nice to see a comment from someone that wasn't a self hating American who always seems to be wishing for the downfall of our country and who is convinced that our missile capabilities are a joke compared to Russia and China and many years behind theirs. When in actuality we have the most sophisticated smart missiles in the World the only thing they have the advantage in is the speed at which the close and mid-range missiles are carried towards their target at. But as I said that's soon to change. Hats off to you.
@@-NOCAP- I agree with you the level of innovation and forward thinking is a good thing.my dad was a radar tech on the old nike hurceles from 67 to 70 and even then the accuracy and speed of that system was impressive,one can only imagine what they can do now!
@@-NOCAP-
Your explanation is incorrect. Indeed, Hypersonic Missiles are generally slower than ICBMs. But, GMD and SM3 cannot sufficiently intercept. GMD and SM3 are missiles for intercepting in "outer space". Since Hypersonic Missiles fly and glide at altitudes between "outer space" and "atmosphere," interceptor missiles for outer space cannot demonstrate 100% of their capabilities.
As a result, the missiles that can be reliably used for interception are THAAD and PAC3, which have a short range. The risk increases as enemy missiles cannot be adequately intercepted until they are close to your country.
@@HananoKobeya Hypersonic Gliders produce lift by creating shit tons of drag. The Union of Concerned Scientists, Scientists within Washington Defense Think Tanks, and the ISW have shown that they produce enough drag to go back to subsonic speeds once they are with a few dozen kms of the target. That can be easily destroyed by a SM-1 and SM-2. Hypersonic Scramjet powered missiles are a bit scarier as they hit targets at mach 3-4, but we already have defenses against that due to the large solid fuel ASM that Russia used to launch from Tu bombers.
Shooting down a theater, ballistic missile, or just a ballistic missile in general, is different than shooting down an intercontinental ballistic. Missile? No, I'm not saying the SM3 or the SM6. Can't shoot it down, I'm just saying.
They weren't meant to shoot down. ICB m's, I don't think so.
Never understood why Russia cries over these tests. It's not like these are made to intercept saturation ICBM attacks. Not to mention they don't comply with treaties anyway lol
Still impossible to shoot down real icbms , real icbm don't have direct flight paths, they have dozens of decoy warheads and jamming technology. Impossible to shoot down an enemy icbm
1 year later russia is threatening to nuke the world, thats why they cried over this
If you want to know why they cried over these tests then read this :
Answer to If Russia announced it was nuking Europe and America tomorrow at noon, would you be scared?
by Kent Gladden
No.
There’s an old acronym. FEAR. “Fantasized Expectations Appearing Real”. You fight that Ignorance w/ well-vetted, well-sourced Information. Facts.
Like the Fact that, at this moment, there are 12 US guided missile Destroyers & Cruisers in the Mediterranean Carrying 1,256 missiles. They were just sent there 10 weeks ago, to join up w/ the US 6th Fleet & Carrier Strike Group-8. These 12 ships carry SM-3 Interceptor missiles, which shoot down Russian ICBMs. In Space. Before stage-3 burn is completed. Before MIRVs & decoys can separate to deploy.
America only has to hit the ICBM missile. The MIRVs & decoys do not individually carry the fuel needed to transit the Orbit phase (aka Exo-atmospheric, or Midcourse) independently of the delivery system ICBM. The Russian R-36 or R-28 (SS-18). Nothing falls back to earth. No radiation is released in earth’s air. Nuclear warheads do not arm themselves until they’re already in the Re-Entry phase in earth’s atmosphere. No nuclear explosions. No EMPs. No NOTHING.
Russia has had equipment failing left & right in Ukraine. In 2018, Putin announced Russia was cutting their military budget 20%. Apparently, from Maintenance. And Quality Control. Heavy Transport trucks blowing out tire sidewalls ‘cuz they were left outside in the Russian Winter. Not even moved for over a year. So, Russian vehicle tires got brittle. Hit the Ukrainian MUD, and… POP! goes the tires. And nowhere goes your convoys.
Except now we’re finding out this neglect extends to their 2 Russian Navy Flagships. The Admiral Kuznetsov & the Moskva. Both completely out of the fight now, the Kuznetsov sunk itself in dry dock & the Moskva currently sitting at the bottom of the Black Sea.
Legitimately, this raises the very serious question of Russian nukes stability/maintenance. These things need re-certification every so often, IF you expect them to work when it matters. All indicators show this hasn’t been happening. It may actually be that it’s a 50-50 chance Putin’s nukes just don't function well enough to be used in war.
Russia also has ~4,500 nuclear warheads max (useable). Which
actually it was trump that didn't comply.
As far as we know the Navy may have used some other highly classified technology
100% they won’t show us the real stuff lol
Agreed
What an amazing simulation, thank you for sharing.
And this is why Russia protests whenever a US destroyer with Aegis missiles enters the meatatarian sea:)
Because we are now in the 'Age of Aegis'. While Aircraft Carriers will always be necessary, they are rendered less critical by the long range of our airframes. The Aegis is, as Zoolander would say, 'So hot right now'.
Wow
Fool ya'selves thinking the U.S , JUST figured out how to do this. Thats what we WANT you to think. To be honest, we've had this technology now for decades. Sleep easy citizens . We've got your back....front...sides..over and under.
I cant agree with u more sir, just like a good poker player u dont lay all ur aces on the table, the US military just want us to see what they want us to see, what they dont want us to see is for us to speculate, but for sure they have plenty of surprises to offer against their percieved adversary...
the us literally landed on the moon in 1969. Past presidents have probably met with real aliens lmao
Would it know if one is a decoy?
yes
@@Desrtfox71 how?
@@ChoongaLoonga It looks at the weight of each object, shape of them, reflectivity, and flight dynamics, and based on that conclusive determines what each object is.
It intercepts at orbital phase, way before decoys/MIRVs are deployed.
What's about all the Hypersonic-Missile comments? Yes, the US has them, everybody has them, even the Nazi V2 rocket was technically hypersonic.But it's about the ability to manuever at those speeds to avoid interception and flying at continuous speeds at low altitudes that makes hypersonic (cruise) missiles special and hard to develop.
We're are all the flat lander's? They all say moon landing was fake. Must be real when it comes to saving their ass!
99% of people saying the earth is flat are joking
@@ThePoshPrince I wish that were true.
Mark INDIA what does that mean.. is it some sort of challenge or reply to Indian testing of killing satellite ?
Easy when the ship crew known when and from where the missile is launched. Next time they have to do a surprise launch.
It wouldn't make a sliver of a difference. Tracking data is immediately sent to the ship and alerts the system. It's practically autonomous. The PEOPLE might know when the launch is, but the SYSTEM doesn't, and is just as surprised as anyone else (if it could feel, which it practically can at this point)
US has early warning satellites all over East Asia and Europe and huge radars on the U. S. COASTAL AREA! They can detect a launch as soon as it heats up and then figure the Ballistic engagement done by Aegis and satellites. They have what 38 Aegis destroyers and 9 Cruisers able to engage threats in the ocean!
How do ya them APPLES!
Why does it look like CGI?
Anos
One of the few channels who state this was a #TEST and not an attempted #Attack!
There a real video of this just search it
Reality: boom
Bros what if they are lying and actually shot down a real ICBM. I mean it's possible
10 times sound of speed imposible t o stop it...
It's 13.2 mach
Difficult not impossible, what you need to do is put a small object exactly in the path of the very fast object and let the speed of the reentry vehicle cause its own destruction. That is why the International space station has to have its orbit slightly changed every so often to avoid space debris.
MARK INDIA?
They talking in military language, like NATO phonetic one!! Nothing about the country India.
Missile Intercept
@@PPPOOOFJJD Why not Mike India?
@@Ballistikraft sorry, the thought wasnt complete. Mark was for mark meaning end something like that, India is for intercept, the missile intercept. Mark India is Mark intercept. Time mark
the best one god bless,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Animashon 🤔😴👎
❤️🤘👍🔥🔥🔥
Sm2,Sm3,Sm6 are capable of intercepting supersonic ,hypersonic missile threats,😛😛contrary to what Chinese and Russian trolls claimed that they are not.😛😆😆🤭🤭😝😝
Sounds good and all but the warhead it intercepted didn't have decoys or jamming technology on it, still impossible to shoot down real icbm
ICBMs are not hard to shoot down dude. Modern scanners are hardened and strengthened to defend against countermeasures and have powerful radars and imaging that can discriminate between Chaff, Debris, Asteroids/Meteoroids, Decoys, and Warheads with near perfect accuracy.
ICBMs are not perfect weapons.
@@aauwhatitdo1582 on reentry they are nearly impossible to destroy especially moving at hypersonic speeds. We don't even have enough interceptor missles to entercept a fraction of the missiles Russia would launch,
@@TravelAlongAdventures They aren't intercepted at reentry, but even with that, reentry doesn't make it any more difficult. On the point that we can't intercept them all, that doesn't matter, because the argument is about whether or not we can down an ICBM, which we can.
In fact, we have about 300 deployed SM-3s for exothermic kills, SM-6 can intercept at early terminal phase, we have about 500 of those. SM-2 is capable of late terminal kills, and we have 400-500 of these. We have 6 THAAD missile batteries capable of launching 48 each so about 300 THAADs. We have 1100 active patriot launchers capable of 8-16 launches each for about 13200 launches that are good for terminal launches. We lastly have 44 GBI interceptors deployed as of 2017.
Because of the development of Aegis Ashore and its deployment, allowing any missiles not deployed at sea to be deployed ashore.
44 Midcourse intercept attempts from the GBI. 600 reentry intercepts from SM-3 and THAAD. 13700 terminal interceptions from PAC-3 and SM-2.
Russia has 1500 missiles and 6000 warheads, 4 MIRVs per missile.
GBI has 56% chance of intercept prior to MIRV separation so that is 25 missiles and 100 warheads destroyed.
SM-3 success rate against ICBM and IRBM targets have been 85% so that's 260 downed MIRVs and THAAD is about 50% so that is 150 MIRVs downed.
Of the remaining 5490 warheads, PAC, SM6, and SM2 have about 20% success rate if they are close enough to the target that's 2740 MIRVs down.
Grand total is 3250 of 6000 warheads downed in moderate predictions. Rumors of the new Patriot upgrades could increase that number even more. 54.2% success rate for warhead intercepts. I'd say that's quite a bit higher than a "fraction."
21 februrary 2008. sm3 intercepted sattelite at 247 km altitude and 7,580 m/s velocity. so think twice
Война мультиков. Россия vs США
это как раз таки реальная противоракета , тут просто принцеп работы
🇲🇭😂😂
Dream? Only 3D animation!
@Godzilla Eat sushi
A small pencil d..k! 😃😀😄😆🤣
Why are Americans not announcing to the world that they do have hypersonic missiles? Yet, this isnt the case? This RIM 161 travels well above hypersonic speed. It is still slower than the Russian Zircon hypersonic anti ship missile and the Chinese YJ 21 Hypersonic anti ship missiles though. But, America is now a Hypersonic member Nation now. Although, there arent many excitement about it. Why is the RIM 174 ERAM less than hypersonic and yet it is a later Standard Missile?
because everyone realize US hs missiles are not as great. it is not about the speed.
Russia one can menavor so rapidly in sky
@@Khalid_Looby This is an opinion based on nothing substantial.
because the missiles that the US has which are capable of hypersonic speed are for defense or ICBMs; what the US does not have which Russia and China does, is non-ballistic/strategic weapons that can reach hypersonic speed, such as tactical missiles, anti-ship missiles etc. These are what the US is testing and failing at.
@@Internetbutthurt The U.S. failed only at the ARRW AGM-183A. Before, it was the HTV-1/2
@@Internetbutthurtthe u.s didn't fail at anything, the u.s simply didn't see a need for a hypersonic anti ship missile when sub sonic or super sonic sea skimming missiles were far better and harder to detect and defend against.
Nice ANIMATION, if you know what I mean 😄😄
you would need another rocket, just with camera to see real intercept. they also see intrecept only on radars. what did you expect? STAR WARS?
@@jefftukangjeff
No, US maybe ahead on many weapons but not in missile
Russia, China and Iran already developed and successfully tested their hypersonic missile and here US are, making animation about how to stop a 1970 missile with less than a mach speed
@@mohammadsohrabi1723 you can load again nukes into NIKE-X and intercept everything with them...smh. And again: they will itnercept before reentry, before hypersonic phase even starta. oh... and they will even shoot back to destroy all launch sites.
Yeah but Russians already have a hypersonic hypermanueverable rocket that far more difficult to hit with a abm
With all due respect sir the americans just wants us to see what they want us to see, they will not lay all their cards on the table, just like the F22 raptor everytime they do a flight demonstration their pilots are reminded always not to show fighter planes real capability, its always better to have few surprises against ur adversary....
You can't be maneuverable and hypersonic. It is impossible. Hypersonic flight causes you to lose at least half of your lifting control, and you are flying so fast, that most hypersonic flight requires 25-35 km for a 5-degree heading change.
@@aauwhatitdo1582 that's what they're claiming, but that's Russia
Hope we have enough of these in case Putin goes mad, unlikely to get all of them but hopefully it will save a couple cities!!!
The Standard Missile system is by far the cheapest system in the world, and the best. The SM system has three parts currently. SM2, SM3, and SM6. SM2 and SM 6 are medium range interceptors capable of intercepting all known and perspective missiles in their terminal phases, including IRBMs, maybe ICBMs, and most Anti-Ship Missiles. The SM2 costs $400,000 and the SM6 costs $4,300,000. The SM3 is only about $12,000,000 each, not much more expensive than ICBMs.
The Ground-Based Interceptor, our current only way to intercept ICBMs in space, costs $74,000,000 and the next generation will call $498,000,000 each. Not sustainable.
Luckily for America and all of our allies, we are buying 341 SM-3s, and will buy more of the block 2, which can more reliably destroy ICBMs. We also have 500 SM-6s and will buy another 1000 later.
@@aauwhatitdo1582 Yeah! be happy! usa can stop 6K nukes! lol, they cant even stop 100. and only 200 nukes is enough to erase USA from exstince.
@@Khalid_LoobyAnd USA don't have nukes as well?
What I see here is only animation 🤫🤫🤣🤣🤣🤣
I read the story on ABC News online.
First FTM-44 search on uTube has real glory to it.
Come on guys. This is against who NK, IRAN? The modern weaponry today render this interceptor obsolete. This cannot even intercept an Iskander.
I suppose it's a step in the right direction....
Yes, it can. There is nothing special about modern missiles that make them invisible. If you can track it, you can kill it.
@@aauwhatitdo1582 IF you can. An Iskander has in flight maneuverability.
@@Xtremedia01 That doesn't matter. Faster missiles cannot maneuver. The Iskander, like all Russian weapons, cannot break laws of physics.
Why are you obsessed with the Iskander? It isn't that great, they have been deployed to both Syria and Ukraine, and there have been numerous intercepts by both Ukrainian missile defense, and the Iron Dome.
People don't realize that at hypersonic speeds, you cannot maneuver at any timely speed, you'd need over 2 minutes of turning to change the velocity vector by just a few degrees. In the process of doing this, you end up going to low supersonic speed.
Interception technology is far more advanced than you care to realize.
@@aauwhatitdo1582 you're clearly a fanboy. Do you understand how interceptors work? You're here in denial. A missile can chart an uneven course to its target. Except the interceptor has that course data designated it could track all it want. A CIWS might stand a better chance.
Nothing that a Poseidon torpedo can’t handle, they won’t even know about it until their city is cooked
The Poseidon has been scientifically debunked.
Poseidon is srussian dream and military propaganda
Cook which city precisely? Ports? Perhaps. The U.S.A. occupies a rather large land mass. Bothersome? Yes. An actual "game changer".... not in the least sonny. Russia also has the economy of a tepid eastern european failed economy so.....
CHEERS ivan!
I do not believe that for one moment I am highly skeptical about these hypocritical lying hypocrites I don't trust them👈 👀👂🤔💭
I wonder that ship fires the rocket ? So it always need to be there ? 😅
Good video for understanding america's missile defense system! I thing the SM-3 missile is state of the art because it is capable of intercepting ICBM, clearly showing why the US is the most powerful nation in the world
RIM-161 Standard MissileBlock IIA flys at speeds up to Mach 13.2. remember hypersonic speeds start about mach 5. The U.S. had the X-15's in the 1960's flying Mach 6.70.
Meanwhile in Canada, we have no air defense for the whole 6 time zones.🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙃🙃🙃🙃🙃🙃
Repent and believe in the gospel! Regret your sins and repent! Pray that the good Lord God will help you! Only Jesus Christ is Savior and Lord! Only Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life! The good Lord God loves you and wants you to achieve eternal life in infinite love...
ABM spartan missile
Top
What would happen to the radiations? Are they dispersed in the space or is it not high enough and thus fall into our atmosphere?
What Radiation? The Nuclear reaction didn't start yet.
@@Sang-ms4xl Yes thanks, I have been explained that! There should be minimal radiation from the uranium only, but nothing else since the reaction would not start by being hit!
Anos
Why mark india successful intercept was written there?
Maybe high altitude weather isn't a problem for this system, Good for Titan dudes too.
that's a US japanese project so who's responsable for what here
Where the sound
I think Australia is working on this tech.
🇲🇭❤🇺🇸
🇺🇸🤝🇯🇵🤝🇮🇳🤝🇦🇺 vs🇨🇳
France weapon is sitting duck compare rusia or turkey deadliest
Can ONLY intercept Ballistic missiles... Can not intercept the new class of hypersonic weapons that don't take ballistic flight paths.
Yeah they can 'turn' over the space of miles maybe a few dozen degrees, much maneuver, very difficult, wow.
Not.
There is a reason high altitude supersonic ASMs went extinct, why people think adding maybe 50% more speed to an even more obvious and even less maneuverable vehicle is somehow some unstoppable revolutionary threat is beyond me. They aren't even new, basically the same ideas were explored in the SIXITES, before being effectively judged as simply "worse ballistic missiles' and discard. Hypersonic weapons are frankly pretty poor ASMs they give a GAINT window of warning of approach, aren't as agile as low altitude missiles and aren't as fast as ballistic missile re-entry vehicles. They're also about as expensive as medium sized ballistic missiles and equally ponderous, no launching this shit from the back of a normal truck or a fighter jet and you aren't going to be able to afford a swarm of dozens or hundreds of them either.
There trajectory is also "non ballistic' in only a vague sense, they have no end stage propulsion they're boost and glide which limits there envelopes. The aerodynamic stress already limit their ability to perform radical maneuvers and these are only further restricted by a lack of active propulsion into the terminal phase. This results in fairly defined approached vectors since they are forced into mathmatically defined course to even reach their targets. They're are hard to intercept mid-course due a combo of high speed and (relatively low altitude), but ICMB are even worse and the existing terminal phase engagement strategies used against the warheads of those are viable against hypersonics.
It just another case of Russia and China blowing hot air about some supposed new unstoppable wunder-weapon and the ill informed public and officials eating that shit up.
This interceptor missile can fly mach 13
But Hypersonic missiles lol?
You'd be surprised...think of how an intercept works. The interceptor can hit the hypersonic head-on, which is an easier strike than a perpendicular hit, which has an additional time and space component.
@@yeoldeyoungin9745 Dude these new Russian missiles and glide vehicles can change direction/trajectory to avoid interception (at a MUCH greater speed) so yes I would be surprised if these interceptors even came close xD
@@yeoldeyoungin9745 The new hypersonic missiles with be nuclear powered which gives it unlimited range and can change directions and travel unlimited.
The New class of hypersonic missiles can bypass the Aegis system and SM3 block IIA
@@jimmyrincon3910 evidence?
These people are always dreaming .. Hahaha
Dutch technology......no American design at all.
Thales I suppose right? Any details you would like to share?
What? SM-3 is a US-Japanese program building on a 70 year old US family of missiles. The Dutch didn't even carry through with their proposed buy of SM-3, much less were a major player in its design.
Hey magical pixie dust Russian S400 !
Top that !!
Russia's Vangard and Sarmat missiles can bypass the SM-3
@@jimmyrincon3910
You do not know that . It’s your opinion . The Avanquad is not operational .
Plus if either is fired at the US ; it’s MAD.
The SM3 is for A very limited strike from NPK or Iran .
@@lastgleeming Авангард не работоспособен? "Кинжал" нормально поджарил ваших генералов штаба на глубине боле 100 метров. Это вы не знаете НИЧЕГО об "Авангарде"