ya but given the situation now, in the middle east, it would be most likely be fired from a battleship However the SM-3 has very limited range, making it difficult to hit far inland where the silos are. Tomahawk would work better....but against their s-400? Might be a problem.
SM-3 won't be launched at silos but rather at the missiles which will be fired from these silos so I don't see how Russian Air Defence could come into play. Moreover one says that over the last years less than a few dozens of S-400 missiles have been produced. Of course currently SM-3 system is incapable of intercepting an icbm. The situation is going to dramatically change with the introduction of SM-3 block II A/B which will have sufficient energy to accomplish the task.
Useless. America is the one attacking all the time. This is a defensive weapon and Russia and China have long countered this type of missiles. Simple decoys will send this system into confusion. How are you going to detect a missile that flies low and then into space before it reaches the target? And have a manuverable killing vehicle that takes evasive moves? This system is old! Get with the program!
@edwardtang1977 Don't agree with you. Imagine a situation when a civil war starts in Russia and there's a real threat that its nuclear weapons may be acquired by terrorist groups. SM-3 gives us opportunity to attack Russian nuclear silos, airstrips and naval bases with highly precise UGM-133 missiles. If this is done properly no more than a dozen of missiles will be launched in retaliation and then they can be successfully intercepted by Europe-based SM-3 missiles.
@edwardtang1977 There's a project called MKV currently under development which is being designed to defeat MIRVs but it seems to me that it will be much easier if we fire our interceptors in pursuit of enemy ICBMs at their active flight stages rather than try to intercept RVs at cutting angles. When its rocket stage is burning a missile has significant IR-signature which can be tracked by even a very primitive IR-seeker. All we have to do is to place an interceptor close to the icbm launch pad.
@isnmr IR seekers have very short ranges. It would be too late. As I understand both sides got weapons the other can't really stop . For example your minuiteman iii and China's DF 21D based on the Topol M of Russia with manuverable kill vehicle and they all travel mach 20+. Even if you can track and hit it , it would be like hitting a meteor. It would still drop down at the target. Laser can't turn and railguns can't hit a target too far away.
@edwardtang1977 SM-3 is not standing still either. Even without a full-caliber first stage booster it has already achieved speeds of 10 machs which is enough to kill an icbm when it's at the beginning of its flight path. Of course interception of ICBM is by no means an easy task since a lot of things depend on the initial position of the target and the interceptor, its energy characteristics etc but I feel this task can be solved in the near future and USA will finally get firststrike advantage.
@edwardtang1977 I strongly suspect this whole Topol M maneuverable RVs are nothing more than just waffle. I can't believe russkies can make something decent given their current political situation and state of complete breakup in their military industry. Topol M is a bulky massive imprecise and overall inferior analogue of 1970's era LGM-30G. Yep PRC poses a greater threat but their nuclear forces are tiny and can be easily defeated in a first strike so you guys in Taiwan may sleep peacefully.
@isnmr we russians CAN make something decent, but the info about decent stuff we make doesn't spread too wide around the world AND especially to the USA. Comfort yourself thinking about Topols...
The SM-3 missile is very capable against ICBM's that lack advanced features like multiple warheads, decoys and penetration aids and active maneuvering. Pretty much anything that North Korea or Iran are likely to put out should be no problem to shoot down.
However, the newer Russian ICBM's have these features that could allow them to get past the SM-3 and other missile defense measures. With Putin at the helm in Russia, it i critical that we close this gap.
@DrBuzz0 Putin is not suicidal. Further, it is FAR cheaper and easier to modify Missiles and RVs to overcome ABM weapons than is it to design and build the next generation of ABM. I don't at all mind getting a few of these to guard against accidental launches, but spending squillions to deploy enough ABMs to supposedly shield us from Russia is folly.
So the land based SM-3 variant will not be deployed on mobile land platforms? Or is it going to be transported via helicopter? I thought it's going to be deployed on road or tracked mobile land platforms.
This interception idea is pritty much based on assumtion that warhead on its terminal stage wIl be in certan point of its balistic trajectory at given time. So, it seems all you need is just to make small upgrade - attach additional booster to warhead and make it speed-up from time to time unpredictably , that will make it much harder to intercept.
Очень похоже на блеф и дезинформацию - технически подобное пока нельзя осуществить.
Однако, в наши ракеты встроены системы, позволяющие преодолеть почти все перспективные системы ПРО, и если эта ПРО действительно не миф - наши ракеты её преодолеют.
SM-3(ABM) idea came about right after 9/11 by a Navy Vet to SECDEF Rumsfeld. The idea was to use the SM-2 missile (modified booster) as a interim range ABM like patriot but further range with better guidance and land based as well as ship.
Using the proven Navy air-search radars and AEGIS it became a reality over night. So in fact SM-3 was the SM-2 block 5 and 6 before the change.
Arrow has also gone under several versions since its inception but SM-3 is SM-2 Block 5/6V reconfigured.
Bucket with nuts.
TheMikheineken 2 months ago
'
what is wrong with ussr russia missile SCUD,,,
why ussr russia do that
bestamerica 4 months ago
I would send a suicide-bomber and save my money and all these hassle
Salahuddin2009a 5 months ago
чётки нннада?
german123440 8 months ago
ya but given the situation now, in the middle east, it would be most likely be fired from a battleship However the SM-3 has very limited range, making it difficult to hit far inland where the silos are. Tomahawk would work better....but against their s-400? Might be a problem.
edwardtang1977 10 months ago
@edwardtang1977
SM-3 won't be launched at silos but rather at the missiles which will be fired from these silos so I don't see how Russian Air Defence could come into play. Moreover one says that over the last years less than a few dozens of S-400 missiles have been produced. Of course currently SM-3 system is incapable of intercepting an icbm. The situation is going to dramatically change with the introduction of SM-3 block II A/B which will have sufficient energy to accomplish the task.
isnmr 10 months ago
Useless. America is the one attacking all the time. This is a defensive weapon and Russia and China have long countered this type of missiles. Simple decoys will send this system into confusion. How are you going to detect a missile that flies low and then into space before it reaches the target? And have a manuverable killing vehicle that takes evasive moves? This system is old! Get with the program!
edwardtang1977 10 months ago
@edwardtang1977 Don't agree with you. Imagine a situation when a civil war starts in Russia and there's a real threat that its nuclear weapons may be acquired by terrorist groups. SM-3 gives us opportunity to attack Russian nuclear silos, airstrips and naval bases with highly precise UGM-133 missiles. If this is done properly no more than a dozen of missiles will be launched in retaliation and then they can be successfully intercepted by Europe-based SM-3 missiles.
isnmr 10 months ago
@isnmr what countermeasures have the US developed agains Chinese , Russian warhead decoys may I ask? the SM-3 don't seem to have any, am I right?
edwardtang1977 10 months ago
@edwardtang1977 There's a project called MKV currently under development which is being designed to defeat MIRVs but it seems to me that it will be much easier if we fire our interceptors in pursuit of enemy ICBMs at their active flight stages rather than try to intercept RVs at cutting angles. When its rocket stage is burning a missile has significant IR-signature which can be tracked by even a very primitive IR-seeker. All we have to do is to place an interceptor close to the icbm launch pad.
isnmr 10 months ago
@isnmr IR seekers have very short ranges. It would be too late. As I understand both sides got weapons the other can't really stop . For example your minuiteman iii and China's DF 21D based on the Topol M of Russia with manuverable kill vehicle and they all travel mach 20+. Even if you can track and hit it , it would be like hitting a meteor. It would still drop down at the target. Laser can't turn and railguns can't hit a target too far away.
edwardtang1977 10 months ago
@edwardtang1977 SM-3 is not standing still either. Even without a full-caliber first stage booster it has already achieved speeds of 10 machs which is enough to kill an icbm when it's at the beginning of its flight path. Of course interception of ICBM is by no means an easy task since a lot of things depend on the initial position of the target and the interceptor, its energy characteristics etc but I feel this task can be solved in the near future and USA will finally get firststrike advantage.
isnmr 10 months ago
@edwardtang1977 I strongly suspect this whole Topol M maneuverable RVs are nothing more than just waffle. I can't believe russkies can make something decent given their current political situation and state of complete breakup in their military industry. Topol M is a bulky massive imprecise and overall inferior analogue of 1970's era LGM-30G. Yep PRC poses a greater threat but their nuclear forces are tiny and can be easily defeated in a first strike so you guys in Taiwan may sleep peacefully.
isnmr 10 months ago
@isnmr we russians CAN make something decent, but the info about decent stuff we make doesn't spread too wide around the world AND especially to the USA. Comfort yourself thinking about Topols...
TheDaniel366 6 months ago
watch?v=lUgkMNkQYAE&feature=related
cicoriy 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How do you like our American friends?
cicoriy 6 months ago
The 'Nosecone Eject' part had me going "wat".
AllTheKimchi 11 months ago
Against Russian missiles useless
den19902 1 year ago
@den19902 useless huh, Then why is russia so scared and intimidated when Poland and Romania are going to install SM 3 systems?
The RIM-161 and Arrow missile are the best space based anti ballistic missiles today.
Stridus7 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Stridus7 they are useless
den19902 10 months ago
The SM-3 missile is very capable against ICBM's that lack advanced features like multiple warheads, decoys and penetration aids and active maneuvering. Pretty much anything that North Korea or Iran are likely to put out should be no problem to shoot down.
However, the newer Russian ICBM's have these features that could allow them to get past the SM-3 and other missile defense measures. With Putin at the helm in Russia, it i critical that we close this gap.
DrBuzz0 1 year ago
@DrBuzz0 Putin is not suicidal. Further, it is FAR cheaper and easier to modify Missiles and RVs to overcome ABM weapons than is it to design and build the next generation of ABM. I don't at all mind getting a few of these to guard against accidental launches, but spending squillions to deploy enough ABMs to supposedly shield us from Russia is folly.
geonerd 1 year ago
'
that is good american missile kill the ussr russia missile,,,
what is ussr russia sicko problem,,,
why russia make waste waste mssile for
bestamerica 1 year ago
So the land based SM-3 variant will not be deployed on mobile land platforms? Or is it going to be transported via helicopter? I thought it's going to be deployed on road or tracked mobile land platforms.
StiviGun1 1 year ago
Дорого и ненадежно
Долгое время развертывания
Привет от России
Expensively and unreliably
Long time of expansion
Greetings from Russia
Zuev4anin 1 year ago
This interception idea is pritty much based on assumtion that warhead on its terminal stage wIl be in certan point of its balistic trajectory at given time. So, it seems all you need is just to make small upgrade - attach additional booster to warhead and make it speed-up from time to time unpredictably , that will make it much harder to intercept.
I
davyd780 1 year ago
Hey wait! Who constructed that little bridge? That's the biggest accomplishment ever considering what NYC bridges and roads look like!
Taimak77 1 year ago
so is this video about the thaad or sm3?
erewhile 1 year ago
Очень похоже на блеф и дезинформацию - технически подобное пока нельзя осуществить.
Однако, в наши ракеты встроены системы, позволяющие преодолеть почти все перспективные системы ПРО, и если эта ПРО действительно не миф - наши ракеты её преодолеют.
pbpreg 1 year ago
Fairy tales can come true - it can happen to you - if you're young at heart.
DarwinsFriend 1 year ago
SM-3(ABM) idea came about right after 9/11 by a Navy Vet to SECDEF Rumsfeld. The idea was to use the SM-2 missile (modified booster) as a interim range ABM like patriot but further range with better guidance and land based as well as ship.
Using the proven Navy air-search radars and AEGIS it became a reality over night. So in fact SM-3 was the SM-2 block 5 and 6 before the change.
Arrow has also gone under several versions since its inception but SM-3 is SM-2 Block 5/6V reconfigured.
barrenpaladin 2 years ago
No way, SM-3 is much more advanced that arrow
LokiG36 2 years ago
nice but the arrow is more proven and mature tech
yaronzeev1 2 years ago
@yaronzeev1 then why are the Israelis buying land based SM-3
shackvan 1 year ago