NEW: Follow the Editorial Staff on
StrategyPage Twitter Link


GROUND COMBAT +

AIR COMBAT +

NAVAL OPERATIONS +

SPECIAL OPERATIONS +

HUMAN FACTORS +

SPECIAL WEAPONS +

WARFARE BY THE NUMBERS +

LOGISTICS +

TOOLS +


Visit StrategyPage's US Cavalry Store



Strategic Weapons Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

Aegis All Over

January 12, 2009: The U.S. Navy has completed equipping 18 ships with the Aegis anti-missile system. One reason the navy recently cancelled its expensive new DDG-1000 class of destroyers was because these were built to support amphibious and coastal operations, and did not have a radar that could easily be converted to use SM-3 anti-missile missiles. The DDG-1000 also cost 2-3 times as much as current Aegis destroyers. With missile defense seen as a higher priority than providing new coastal combat capability, the DDG-1000 was killed, and money saved could be used to build more Aegis destroyers, and convert more current destroyers and cruisers to use SM-3.

With that in mind, the navy will convert three more Aegis ships to fire anti-missile missiles. Thus costs about $12 million a ship, mainly for new software and a few new hardware items. This is seen as a safe investment. The Aegis anti-missile system has had a success rate of over 80 percent, in knocking down incoming ballistic missile warheads during test firings. To achieve this, two similar models of the U.S. Navy Standard anti-aircraft missile are used, in addition to a modified version of the Aegis radar system, which can now track incoming ballistic missiles.

The RIM-161A, also known as the Standard Missile 3 (or SM-3), has a range of over 500 kilometers and max altitude of over 160 kilometers. The Standard 3 is based on the anti-missile version of the Standard 2 (SM-2 Block IV). This SM-2 missile turned out to be effective against ballistic missiles ballistic missile warheads that are closer to their target. One test saw a SM-2 Block IV missile destroy a warhead that was only 19 kilometers up. An SM-3 missile can destroy a warhead that is more than 200 kilometers up. But the SM-3 is only good for anti-missile work, while the SM-2 Block IV can be used against both ballistic missiles and aircraft. The SM-2 Block IV also costs less than half what an SM-3 costs.

The Standard 3 has four stages. The first two stages boost the interceptor out of the atmosphere. The third stage fires twice to boost the interceptor farther beyond the earth's atmosphere. Prior to each motor firing it takes a GPS reading to correct course for approaching the target. The fourth stage is the 20 pound LEAP kill vehicle, which uses infrared sensors to close on the target and ram it. The Aegis system was designed to operate aboard warships (cruisers and destroyers that have been equipped with the special software that enables the AEGIS radar system to detect and track incoming ballistic missiles). However, there is also a land based version that Israel is interested in buying.

submit to reddit
Send Link to a Friend
Next Article INDIA-PAKISTAN: Reality Shock


Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

JFKY    A Note   1/12/2009 9:47:16 AM
I have NO connection to this web site, but would recommend "Information Dissemination."  They discuss the cancellation of DDG-1000 and question the basis for cancellation.  It is NOT that the Zumwalt can't utilize the Sm-series, it was never designed to, but the planned product improvement cycle included it.  In short, the site makes the argument that the navy's reasons for canceling Zumwalt make no sense.
 
Go read for yourself and see what you think.
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd    JFKY -- A Note   1/12/2009 5:53:52 PM

Got a link?

 
Quote    Reply

sinoflex       1/12/2009 8:42:55 PM
The DDG-1000 program is a mess and Navy brass are issuing contradictory statements regarding the ship's capabilities.  Here is a comprehensive article on the controversy including the supposed inability of the SPY-3 to direct Standard missiles (although it can do so for ESSM).
 
link
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357       1/12/2009 9:28:00 PM

The DDG-1000 program is a mess and Navy brass are issuing contradictory statements regarding the ship's capabilities.  Here is a comprehensive article on the controversy including the supposed inability of the SPY-3 to direct Standard missiles (although it can do so for ESSM).


 

link target="_blank">link

No surprise here. This is going to get real UGLY when someone finally cleans out the Augean Stable that is PEO. They've just about fouled up everything imaginable in that mismanaged program.

It'll make the USN torpedo farce in BuOrd before the Second World War look like good industrial policy by comparison.
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    DDX, non-BMD?   1/12/2009 11:22:50 PM




The DDG-1000 program is a mess and Navy brass are issuing contradictory statements regarding the ship's capabilities.  Here is a comprehensive article on the controversy including the supposed inability of the SPY-3 to direct Standard missiles (although it can do so for ESSM).






 



link target="_blank">link





No surprise here. This is going to get real UGLY when someone finally cleans out the Augean Stable that is PEO. They've just about fouled up everything imaginable in that mismanaged program.




It'll make the USN torpedo farce in BuOrd before the Second World War look like good industrial policy by comparison.


 


Herald

Why in the hell did they design the DDX with limited surface warfare capability? No SPY radar? No hope of stepping into the Arleigh Burke's shoes (or at least interchangeability with it)?
Allot of money for a bomb truck.
 
Check Six
 
Rocky
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357       1/12/2009 11:59:32 PM


No surprise here. This is going to get real UGLY when someone finally cleans out the Augean Stable that is PEO. They've just about fouled up everything imaginable in that mismanaged program.










It'll make the USN torpedo farce in BuOrd before the Second World War look like good industrial policy by comparison.






 






Herald



Why in the hell did they design the DDX with limited surface warfare capability? No SPY radar? No hope of stepping into the Arleigh Burke's shoes (or at least interchangeability with it)?

Comparing an apple with a banana. The Arleighs are area air defense escorts. The Zumwalt is a......, well I really don't know what the h--- it is, except an expensive replacement for an Iowa.  The Navy piled a lot of experimental tech into it and hoped it would emerge as something logical for what was called littoral warfare.   
 
Well I always wondered why we were bulding a 14,000 tonne littoral warfare ship. The only thing that could justify such a monster would be if it could single handedly reduce the DPRK to a smoking ruin.or blow the local PLAN to glory if the OOD goofed and ordered a particle beam from standby into active mode.  78 megawatts is not something I associate with just rockets and radars.

Allot of money for a bomb truck.
 
The Navy has always said the Zumwalts were the lead ins to the CGX. With the SPY-3 in spiral development I don't know what the misinformed are putting out but that radar system is not as limited as some claim.  The architecture to employ it is DIFFERENT from AEGIS. SARH SAMs need reflected echoes  from illuminators to track in. The rockets that will be mated with SPY 3 will use ATG and telemetry updating. to make the merge. CEC is the way that telemwetry will be imparted to the rockets. Now that meansd the Standards will be steered to their predict points by off ship data link more than by the launching ship, itself..
 
I just feel sorry for the repeater node  It wears a "shoot ne" sign.
 
 

 

Check Six

 

Rocky


Herald
 
Quote    Reply

tactical       3/9/2009 10:57:24 AM
Having served in 22 years in the Navy including during the "Zumwalt" days and I have reason to believe that anything with his name on it is destined to fail.
 
Quote    Reply





New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy