Register here

Author Topic: Air-launched missile defence concept  (Read 18493 times)

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8210
Air-launched missile defence concept
« on: April 02, 2008, 02:14:31 am »
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/ASAT040108.xml

General: AMRAAM Derivative Could Target Sats

Apr 1, 2008

David A. Fulghum/Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
 
The F-22 could be carrying an anti-satellite (ASAT) missile, costing less than $1 million, in a few years if the military and the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) decide to hone the capabilities of a new missile defense weapon from Raytheon.

A derivative of the Aim-120 AMRAAM, the Pentagon’s established long-range air-to-air missile, is once again being tailored for a new mission – this time the interception of Scud-type short and medium-range ballistic missiles.

But a senior U.S. Air Force official confides that the capability is inherently that of a cheap, rapidly-deployed, air-launched weapon for shooting down satellites in low-Earth orbit if the service or Missile Defense Agency were to order its further refinement and development.

Raytheon officials say they haven’t researched the ASAT mission and have no opinion about its feasibility. They do note that the AMRAAM derivative isn’t as large or nearly as energetic as the Raytheon Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) that shot down an errant National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) satellite earlier this year (Aerospace DAILY, Feb. 22). However, they note that if launched at Mach 0.85 at 30,000-40,000 feet, the new, 358-pound missile becomes much more capable against objects at altitudes of 30 kilometers (19 miles) or more.

The Air Force general was much more blunt. “If you put the missile in an F-22 and launch it at Mach 2 and 60,000 feet while in a zoom and at a 45-degree angle, you’ve got an ASAT capability against spacecraft in low-Earth orbit,” he says.

Raytheon officials gave Aviation Week a look at the latest test video of the sensor capability of this new, air-launched, missile-defense weapon they’re developing. The AMRAAM-derivative is called the NCADE, for Network-Centric Airborne Defense Element. For this test, smaller Aim-9 air-to-air missiles were used.

Two F-16s, each carrying an Aim-9 equipped with the NCADE’s highly specialized infrared seeker, attacked a 14-inch diameter target missile over the White Sands Missile Range, N.M. The first missile grazed the target missile’s body and took off two fins. The second came within about a yard of the target missile, which is good enough to validate the system, according to Mike Booen, Raytheon’s vice president of advanced missile defense. Future testing will involve the missile’s divert and attitude control system.

For the present, NCADE is being developed as a boost-phase interceptor with seekers that can distinguish between the rocket plume and hard body from launch. That avoids inaccuracies or last-minute course changes caused by seekers having to shift from the plume’s heat as an aiming point to the much cooler target missile’s body.

Raytheon planners originally looked at unmanned platforms to carry the NCADE for long-endurance missions. Candidates include the Predator B and perhaps an even higher-performance UAV that could offer added speed and altitude. It might even bring the long-envisioned Predator C back to life, a program that was put on the back burner as Predator A production and development of the Predator B accelerated. Another option could be the 2018 future bomber.

However, Booen says Air Force planners are adamant that the missile be on forward deployed, manned fighters like the F-22. They bring up the frustration in the 1991 Gulf War when pilots could see Scuds ascending but had no way to attack them.

“NCADE could make almost any platform multimission,” Booen says. He also contends that 20 missiles could be on the ramp, ready for operations in as little as four years at a cost of less than $1 million each in four years from a given start date. More demonstrations are proposed for 2009 that could lead to a program start in 2010.

 
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9831
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2008, 05:36:14 am »
1234567890
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8210
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2008, 06:04:03 am »
From one of 2007 AFA presentations
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline KJ_Lesnick

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1009
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #3 on: April 02, 2008, 08:39:31 am »
flateric,

The AMRAAM's a two-staged missile?  I thought it was a single stager 

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8210
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #4 on: April 02, 2008, 09:32:27 am »
KJ, who was talking that there's an AMRAAM on the picture? This is AMRAAM derivative ASAT missile.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2008, 09:34:18 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9831
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #5 on: April 02, 2008, 10:29:31 am »
To be more accurate it's designed for boost phase intercept of SRBMs (though I imagine it would work against ANY ballistic missile in boost phase) with ONE general claiming it would have ASAT capability if launched from high speed and altitude from an F-22.  He could be uninformed however.  There's no reason the SM-3 sans booster couldn't do so if modified for air-carriage/launch HOWEVER it has a much more capable upper stage/KKV.  I tend to think the general is over stating things in this case.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8210
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #6 on: April 02, 2008, 10:51:03 am »
Sferrin, you are absolutely correct.
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline CammNut

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 296
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #7 on: September 18, 2008, 12:12:49 pm »
Cool picture of Lockheed Martin's concept for an air-launched boost-phase ballictic missile interceptor based on the improved MSE version of the PAC-3 missile developed for the Patriot air-defence system.

It was on the cover of the latest Aviation Week. You can read Amy Butler's story on the MSE here:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/aw091508p1.xml&headline=New%20PAC-3%20Missile%20Faces%20First%20Intercept%20Test%20in%202009

The relevant bit of the story says:

Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin is designing MSE variants for an air-launch boost-phase interceptor and a sea-based hit-to-kill terminal defense system. The air-launched MSE would be pitted against Raytheon's modified advanced medium-range air-to-air missile (Amraam), the Network-Centric Airborne Defense Element (NCADE). The MDA is considering a competition for the capability. Funding is expected in the Fiscal 2010 budget request.

The air-launched MSE would be housed inside a pod under the wing of an aircraft. Upon launch, a clamshell door on the pod would open, the weapon would drop and ignite, engaging the target. The mission set includes homeland defense against a boosting target; in one scenario, a cruise or ballistic missile would be launched from a ship offshore.

Intercepting a boosting ballistic missile is generally easier because the target is traveling in a straighter trajectory and is slower than in the terminal phase. Lockheed Martin is working with Boeing in its design lab to begin integrating the air-launched MSE onto the F-15C, which is used for combat air patrols in North America. The company is also beginning to explore integration onto the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and F-22.


You can watch a video (no sound) of the "Air-Launched Hit-to-Kill" concept at:

http://www.aviationweek.com/media/video/ALHTK.MPG

Offline XP67_Moonbat

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2103
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #8 on: September 18, 2008, 12:55:01 pm »
Outstanding!  ;D
In God we trust, all others we monitor. :-p

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 7679
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #9 on: September 03, 2010, 05:42:42 pm »
Air-Launched BMD Enjoys Renewed Popularity

Sep 3, 2010
 
By David A. Fulghum

An air-launched, missile defense system is being advocated by two veterans of the Pentagon’s Star Wars era and a 1990s program to mate unmanned aircraft and long-range air-to-air weapons.

Len Caveny, former director of science and technology, and Dale Tietz, a retired U.S. Air Force officer who focused on unmanned aircraft, were part of the Pentagon’s ballistic missile defense organization. They are offering a new concept — backed up with a couple of decades of research — to kill ballistic missiles soon after launch when they are slow, bright targets.

Its basic idea is to use Global Hawk (with its 60,000 ft. operational altitude) as a dedicated sensor aircraft and the turbo-prop powered Predator B/Reaper or jet-powered Predator C (flying at 40,000 ft. and capable of carrying more interceptor missiles) as the flying components of a restructured boost-phase intercept (BPI) system.

The U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is already looking for an unmanned aircraft that can detect boosting missiles and has focused on a sensor pod that can fly on a number of existing platforms (Aerospace DAILY, Aug. 20). A Reaper carrying a Raytheon MTS-B electro-optical/IR/full-motion video sensor was able to detect and track a boosting missile from greater than 1,000 km. (621 mi.), says MDA’s director, Army Lt. Gen. Patrick O’Reilly. One of the mods has been a part of each major MDA flight test since December.

They also are pushing rocket-motor firms and missile designers to come up with more powerful boosters and repackage them as missiles that are small and light enough to be carried internally. They have to be fast enough — 2.5-5 km./sec. (6,000-11,000 mph.) or faster — to catch heavy ballistic missiles during boost and ascent at ranges of 300 km. or greater. The longer the range, the faster and more heavy the interceptor becomes.

“In the 1990s, under the Raptor/Talon program, the [plan] was to use a custom-designed, high-altitude [more than 20 km.], long-endurance [more than 24-hr.] unmanned aerial system carrying ultra-lightweight sensors and weapons based on Brilliant Pebbles technology,” Tietz says. “The UASs would fly very close or sometimes over enemy territory hunting for Scuds as a networked wolf pack. The concept was designed to push the enemy back and destroy his [theater ballistic missiles] within two minutes.”

From 65,000 ft., sensors can see a missile launch plume at a range of about 480 km. That would make the defense of South Korea and Japan relatively easy. Iran is far more complicated because of the country’s size, which demands a technology penalty.

“Korea can be defended with a 3-3.5 kilometer per second interceptor,” Caveny says. “For Iran you would need about 5 kilometers per second. The kill vehicle technology is pretty advanced. What we don’t have is the low-mass, two-stage solid rocket that is more aggressive than Raytheon’s Network-Centric Air Defense Element. We need NCADE on steroids. It also is going to require a very agile missile because you need short time-to-target at standoff ranges up to 300 miles.”

Even with that kind of missile performance, in times of heightened tension, the missile-carrying UASs would have to move into Iranian air space, which in turn would require it to carry additional weapons to protect itself against surface-to-air missiles.

“The show-stopper right now is the size of rocket motors,” Caveny says. He sees three key methods to compensate: using small kill vehicles, taking inert mass out of the system or using higher-energy propellants.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Interesting story. What I am intrigued with is the high energy propellants able to accelerate a missile to 5 km/sec. sferrin what were some of the fly out speeds of Spartan and Sprint and some of the other early BMD interceptor iterations?
“I judge civilization by simple tests What is the degree of freedom possessed by citizen or subject Can he think speak & act freely under well established well known laws? Judging by these standards Great Britain & the United States can claim to be in the forefront of civilized communities Churchill

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 7679
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #10 on: September 04, 2010, 10:53:09 am »
If my calculations are correct the Aerojet Super Roadrunner (current sled rocket speed record holder) traveled at around 9500 ft/sec or 3km/sec. So 5 km/sec is 15,800 ft/sec. Does anyone know of any system that has traveled this fast (obviously boosting not a re-entry system)  ???

It is curious in the article that it doesn't include any caveats that this speed is a problem just what sized booster/warhead you would need. Doesn't "detcord" travel at around 15,000 ft/sec?
“I judge civilization by simple tests What is the degree of freedom possessed by citizen or subject Can he think speak & act freely under well established well known laws? Judging by these standards Great Britain & the United States can claim to be in the forefront of civilized communities Churchill

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 7679
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #11 on: September 23, 2010, 02:50:38 pm »
Missile-Killing Interceptors Eyed By Israel, U.S.
Sep 23, 2010
 
By David A. Fulghum
Tel Aviv and Washington

Killing tactical ballistic missiles so that explosive, biological or radioactive debris fall near a foe’s launch sites is a key problem for those mapping out defenses in an era of proliferating, short-range missiles and long-range rockets.

New concepts are taking two forms—striking enemy missiles while they are still in space, or destroying them in the first minute or two after launch. And it is becoming glaringly apparent that the solutions are different if the foe is nearby or far away.

Israel, for example, does not have a weapon that can be launched from an aircraft to catch enemy missiles when they are most vulnerable as slow and very bright targets during the first few minutes of flight.

The Israelis flirted with air-launched boost-phase intercept (BPI) in their MOAB UAV/missile program of the 1990s, and the U.S. had a parallel Raptor/Talon project. But both projects were shelved to await technology advances, including more energetic rocket motors, satellite-based battle management and smaller, lighter missile designs.

However, operational introduction into the Israeli arsenal of the advanced Arrow 3 interceptor missile and the Stunner interceptor for the David’s Sling system may open the door to a period of rapid development for air-launched weapons that can be carried by unmanned aircraft.

The Stunner interceptor, designed and built by Rafael in a cooperative program with Raytheon, is a low-cost design that targets threats such as cruise missiles, medium- and long-range artillery rockets and short-range ballistic missiles. It has two stages: The first is a solid-fuel, rocket motor booster; the second is a curious asymmetrical kill vehicle with advanced steering for increased agility. A three-pulse motor provides additional thrust at critical moments of flight. A multi-mode sensor package—electro-optical and millimeter wave, electronically scanned array radar—provides all-weather performance against small, maneuvering targets. The Stunner is larger than Raytheon’s AIM-120 medium-range air-to-air missile but smaller than the Arrow 3 interceptor.

As for Israel Aerospace Industries’ (IAI) Arrow 3, it now forms the longest-range, highest-altitude (exoatmos­pheric) layer of Israel’s ballistic missile defenses. It is “half the size of Arrow 2 and 21 in. in diameter, [and] no other interceptor has the same kinetic capability or agility,” says a senior Israeli official with insight into the Arrow program. While Arrow 3 is a big step toward developing BPI, Israeli planners say they still need better unmanned aerial systems and much smaller, longer-range interceptor missiles.

“It could be used from aircraft, ships and submarines, but the obstacles are not small,” he says. “The main challenge is time-of-flight [from the orbiting aircraft to the boosting missile],” the official says. “It has to be faster and more agile so that it can divert to another target or change the interception point. Iran is 2,000 km. away. How fast can you predict its path? BPI is not that realistic right now.”

The rest of the story http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/awst/2010/09/20/AW_09_20_2010_p71-253575.xml&headline=Missile-Killing%20Interceptors%20Eyed%20By%20Israel,%20U.S.
“I judge civilization by simple tests What is the degree of freedom possessed by citizen or subject Can he think speak & act freely under well established well known laws? Judging by these standards Great Britain & the United States can claim to be in the forefront of civilized communities Churchill

Offline RanulfC

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 418
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #12 on: September 28, 2010, 11:19:07 am »
If my calculations are correct the Aerojet Super Roadrunner (current sled rocket speed record holder) traveled at around 9500 ft/sec or 3km/sec. So 5 km/sec is 15,800 ft/sec. Does anyone know of any system that has traveled this fast (obviously boosting not a re-entry system)  ???

It is curious in the article that it doesn't include any caveats that this speed is a problem just what sized booster/warhead you would need. Doesn't "detcord" travel at around 15,000 ft/sec?
Sprint?

Randy

Offline Sea Skimmer

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 394
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #13 on: September 29, 2010, 07:21:41 pm »
Sprint burned out at about 3.1km/s but it was also at a very low altitude as its burn time was only four seconds. THAAD has a similar burnout speed but at a much higher altitude, which is why it leaves the launcher so much slower in comparison. Burnout isn’t everything. A bigger 21in booster THAAD is entering production as of Block 2010, I don’t know how much that will increase performance but it’s going to be very considerable.

GBI burn’s out somewhere around 8km/s, though I’ve heard people claim that on paper you could have a lightweight kill vehicle release from a GBI size booster and get it going as fast as 15km/s. At that point you could engage a target outside of earth’s gravitation pull. More realistically you could turn some of that velocity into divert velocity to hit a maneuvering target like a hypersonic glider.

 KEI was aiming for 7km/s before it got canceled. SM-3 Block II+ seems to be estimated at anywhere from 4.5-6km/s depending on how heavy its new kill vehicle will be. SM-3 Block IIB is now being bid on as an all new missile so its performance is an unknown but certain the be superior to any previous variant.

Air launching THAAD or SM-3 would work very well for boost phased defense; the military just doesn’t want to take the easy road like that because those missiles cost over 10 million USD each.

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 7679
Re: Air-launched missile defence concept
« Reply #14 on: September 29, 2010, 11:56:29 pm »
Thanks Sea Skimmer good information. 
“I judge civilization by simple tests What is the degree of freedom possessed by citizen or subject Can he think speak & act freely under well established well known laws? Judging by these standards Great Britain & the United States can claim to be in the forefront of civilized communities Churchill