• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Raytheon Skyceptor Hit to Kill Interceptor

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,042
Reaction score
208
http://www.raytheon.com/news/feature/skyceptor.html
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,212
Reaction score
397
"The SkyCeptor interceptor is based on the Stunner hit-to-kill missile"

"based on"? What's different, the color of paint?
 

totoro

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
276
Reaction score
8
Website
www.youtube.com
So skyceptor is substantially cheaper missile than pac3 mse ? Or is US unwilling to export mse to Poland? Otherwise, i don't see the point of using skyceptors over mse...
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,955
Reaction score
37
totoro said:
So skyceptor is substantially cheaper missile than pac3 mse ? Or is US unwilling to export mse to Poland? Otherwise, i don't see the point of using skyceptors over mse...
It is cheaper but not a comparable system as in you can't replace the need for an MSE with the skyceptor. The MSE is capable of dealing with longer ranged ballistic missiles and it also has a small warhead which the stunner completely lacks. I've seen reports stating that the stunner has been designed to counter ballistic missiles with ranges up to 300km which would include only a fraction of the threats the MSE can handle. For many threats however the stunner is probably just as good but comes in supposedly at a fraction of the cost.

The two systems are intended to create a double-tiered missile defence capability. Iron Dome is intended to counter short-range rockets and 155 mm artillery shells, threats of ranges of up to 70 km range, while David's Sling will be used against medium and long-range rockets, short-range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, dealing with ballistic threats with ranges from 40 km up to 300 km ~ Jane's Defence Weekly
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,330
Reaction score
77
totoro said:
So skyceptor is substantially cheaper missile than pac3 mse ? Or is US unwilling to export mse to Poland? Otherwise, i don't see the point of using skyceptors over mse...

I think Raytheon is just trying to distinguish its value proposition from MEADS which is offering amongst other things:

  • PAC-3 missile co-production
  • Production and testing of an active radar homing seeker for short-range missiles
  • Production of a medium-range low-cost interceptor for the Wisła system and future use in the MEADS system.
 

JakobS

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
Does PAAC-4/Stunner use an active seeker or semi-active seeker? The combined IR-seeker is a good concept IMO when focus is going so much towards reduced radar signatures.

For me it seems:
Ballistic missile: PAC-3
Aircraft/fighter jet: PAC-2
Low flying cruise missile: PAAC-4

In other words, a perfect patriot battery would consist of all three missiles.
 
Top