Very good news as I see it. AEGIS ashore is a great thing... Might be the only way to shut up the NORK fat boy.

VADM Syring (current head of MDA) is a good one, brillant and focussed. Used to drink beers with him back in the day (at USNA).


Homeland Missile Defense System Successfully Intercepts ICBM Target
17-NEWS-0003
May 30, 2017
The U.S. Missile Defense Agency, in cooperation with the U.S. Air Force 30th Space Wing, the Joint Functional Component Command for Integrated Missile Defense and U.S. Northern Command, today successfully intercepted an intercontinental ballistic missile target during a test of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) element of the nation's ballistic missile defense system.

This was the first live-fire test event against an ICBM-class target for GMD and the U.S. ballistic missile defense system.

During the test, an ICBM-class target was launched from the Reagan Test Site on Kwajalein Atoll in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. Multiple sensors provided target acquisition and tracking data to the Command, Control, Battle Management and Communication (C2BMC) system. The Sea-Based X-band radar, positioned in the Pacific Ocean, also acquired and tracked the target. The GMD system received the target tracking data and developed a fire control solution to intercept the target.

A ground-based interceptor was launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, and its exo-atmospheric kill vehicle intercepted and destroyed the target in a direct collision.

"The intercept of a complex, threat-representative ICBM target is an incredible accomplishment for the GMD system and a critical milestone for
this program," said MDA Director Vice Adm. Jim Syring. "This system is vitally important to the defense of our homeland, and this test demonstrates that we have a capable, credible deterrent against a very real threat. I am incredibly proud of the warfighters who executed this test and who operate this system every day."

Initial indications are that the test met its primary objective, but program officials will continue to evaluate system performance based upon telemetry and other data obtained during the test.

The test, designated Flight Test Ground-Based Interceptor (FTG)-15, will provide the data necessary to assess the performance of the GMD system and provide enhanced homeland defense capabilities.

The GMD element of the ballistic missile defense system provides combatant commanders the capability to engage and destroy intermediate and long-range ballistic missile threats to protect the U.S. The mission of the Missile Defense Agency is to develop and deploy a layered ballistic missile defense system to defend the United States, its deployed forces, allies and friends from limited ballistic missile attacks of all ranges in all phases of flight.

Additional information about all elements of the ballistic missile defense system can be found at www.mda.mil.

Please direct all media related queries to Chris Johnson, MDA Director of Public Affairs, at 571-363-8491(external link opens in new window) or christopher.johnson@mda.mil.

Please note that imagery is still being processed. Once available -- likely late this evening -- it will be available at www.mda.mil.

Additional information about all elements of the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense System can be found here: https://www.mda.mil/system/system.html


https://www.mda.mil/news/17news0003.html

Really, really awesome. Are you watching lil Kim?

I hope he's not eating too closely. This system seems to work less than half the time.

That could be a problem if you live on the Left Coast.

What was a little disconcerting was how close we came to nuclear war in 1979.

Nothing like advertising our capabilities

quote:

Originally posted by olfuzzy:
Nothing like advertising our capabilities

What makes you think we are?

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
That could be a problem if you live on the Left Coast.

What was a little disconcerting was how close we came to nuclear war in 1979.

What was 1979?

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/...20170210-guaaf7.html

Other article I read said 1979, but this is another story on the matter.

Here is another reference:
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb371/

Today was a great day. I've worked on both the ICBM side and the interceptor side of the FTG-15 mission. I look forward to receiving my mission patches.

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:
Very good news as I see it. AEGIS ashore is a great thing... Might be the only way to shut up the NORK fat boy.

Correct me if I'm wrong as I'm still trying to wrap my head around which system handles what part of the overall BMD, but, I don't think this portion of the test was using Aegis Ashore.
Which ever system that was involved, congratulations to all involved, continued progress on this highly complex task.

quote:

Originally posted by tanksoldier:

quote:

Originally posted by olfuzzy:
Nothing like advertising our capabilities

What makes you think we are?

We most certainly are. We may not be giving out all the technical details, but we definitely want our opponents to know we have the capability and its viable. Notice that this statement hit the press right after the North Koreans reported a successful missile test.
This was also a message for the Russians and Chinese. ABM has been a major deal in European US\Russian relations.

It's not a deterrent if no one knows about it.

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:
Very good news as I see it. AEGIS ashore is a great thing... Might be the only way to shut up the NORK fat boy.

Correct me if I'm wrong as I'm still trying to wrap my head around which system handles what part of the overall BMD, but, I don't think this portion of the test was using Aegis Ashore.
Which ever system that was involved, congratulations to all involved, continued progress on this highly complex task.

Sorry for the misdirect. Aegis Ashore was not involved in this ICBM intercept test, but is another option for ballistic missile defense. I mentioned it because I like the vision involved in re-purpose get the highly successful sea-based Aegis system.

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:
Very good news as I see it. AEGIS ashore is a great thing... Might be the only way to shut up the NORK fat boy.

Correct me if I'm wrong as I'm still trying to wrap my head around which system handles what part of the overall BMD, but, I don't think this portion of the test was using Aegis Ashore.
Which ever system that was involved, congratulations to all involved, continued progress on this highly complex task.

Sorry for the misdirect. Aegis Ashore was not involved in this ICBM intercept test, but is another option for ballistic missile defense. I mentioned it because I like the vision involved in re-purpose get the highly successful sea-based Aegis system.

If you go to the MDA's website they discuss Aegis ashore as part of the combined BMD system. I may or may not be protected by an Aegis ashore system as I type this :-).

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
I hope he's not eating too closely. This system seems to work less than half the time.

I don’t know what your comment refers to, but if it’s about the effectiveness of the intercept system, working half the time is a much higher percentage than the never that a nonexistent system works. People opposed to national defense measures of this sort have been saying that such systems will never work at all at least since the Reagan administration. The road has obviously been difficult with slow progress—or no progress at all when research was stopped—but when I hear of some objection I’m always reminded of something Charles Darwin pointed out a long time ago in the book The Descent of Man:

“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge; it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.”

Countless problems that someone confidently announced would never be solved have been indeed been solved by science.

And yes, our missile defense efforts have been a very big deal in our dealings with enemies such as the Soviet Union. The book Reagan at Reykjavik: Forty-Eight Hours That Ended the Cold War by Ken Adelman is just one that discusses the issue at length.

quote:

Originally posted by CD228:

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:
Very good news as I see it. AEGIS ashore is a great thing... Might be the only way to shut up the NORK fat boy.

Correct me if I'm wrong as I'm still trying to wrap my head around which system handles what part of the overall BMD, but, I don't think this portion of the test was using Aegis Ashore.
Which ever system that was involved, congratulations to all involved, continued progress on this highly complex task.

Sorry for the misdirect. Aegis Ashore was not involved in this ICBM intercept test, but is another option for ballistic missile defense. I mentioned it because I like the vision involved in re-purpose get the highly successful sea-based Aegis system.

If you go to the MDA's website they discuss Aegis ashore as part of the combined BMD system. I may or may not be protected by an Aegis ashore system as I type this :-).

Overall BMD is a highly complex system requiring a vast array of sensor platforms which need to be integrated to work, not to mention protected from sabotage or, preemptive strike. Aegis at-sea and ashore have been the most successful portion of all the intercept packages, however as I understand it, their ICBM intercept envelope is very narrow and this test was of the problematic Ground Based Interceptors , which again correct me if I'm wrong, is designed to intercept a ICBM BEFORE it's MIRV's separate at the apex of it's flight path.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
I hope he's not eating too closely. This system seems to work less than half the time.

They get better with each test. That's the purpose of testing.

This should have the Russians puckering a bit too.

Anyone else notice in the slow motion video of the actual intercept that there was a small red dot (presumably the interceptor) on the right side of the screen, an explosion, and then the missile flies into the explosion from the left side of the screen "Missile Command" style?

Yes, but if he (well they - his missile apparatus) know it's only about fifty percent effective, they can scale their attack force to overwhelm it. Once they have the capability, this wouldn't be that difficult, especially when the add in decoys.

There's a reason that ballistic missile defense has been played with, but not definitive implemented, for decades. It's really never worked well enough to provide enough protection against nuclear missles, where even a relatively small percentage getting though will create utter devastation.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
I hope he's not eating too closely. This system seems to work less than half the time.

I don’t know what your comment refers to, but if it’s about the effectiveness of the intercept system, working half the time is a much higher percentage than the never that a nonexistent system works. People opposed to national defense measures of this sort have been saying that such systems will never work at all at least since the Reagan administration. The road has obviously been difficult with slow progress—or no progress at all when research was stopped—but when I hear of some objection I’m always reminded of something Charles Darwin pointed out a long time ago in the book The Descent of Man:

“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge; it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.”

Countless problems that someone confidently announced would never be solved have been indeed been solved by science.

And yes, our missile defense efforts have been a very big deal in our dealings with enemies such as the Soviet Union. The book Reagan at Reykjavik: Forty-Eight Hours That Ended the Cold War by Ken Adelman is just one that discusses the issue at length.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
Yes, but if he (well they - his missile apparatus) know it's only about fifty percent effective, they can scale their attack force to overwhelm it. Once they have the capability, this wouldn't be that difficult, especially when the add it decoys.

There's a reason that ballistic missile defense has been played with, but not definitive implemented, for decades. It's really never worked well enough to provide enough protection against nuclear missles, where even a relatively small percentage getting though will create utter devastation.

This test was a single kill vehicle interceptor. Next test will involve the multiple kill vehicle interceptor (MKV) that was designed to defeat MIRVs and decoys.