backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 172 comment(s) - last by mars777.. on Jan 6 at 4:30 AM


Missile Interceptor Fired from Japanese Destroyer  (Source: Reuters)
Japanese destroyer shoots down incoming ballistic missile

Since the Reagan era, the United States has wanted to develop a system that could defeat ballistic missiles in the air before they were able to impact their targets. This concept was part of what was dubbed the “Star Wars” program during Reagan’s tenure.

It has taken many years and lots of effort, but the system Reagan envisioned is now becoming reality. The main difference is that rather than using lasers to intercept ballistic missiles in-flight, other missiles are more commonly used.

Japanese and U.S. officials announced a successful test where a Japanese destroyer, the Kongo, used the Aegis shipboard radar and tracking system and Standard Missile-3 interceptors to destroy an incoming ballistic missile.

Reuters reports that this is the first successful test of a ballistic missile shield by a U.S. ally. This missile detection and defense system will be used to protect Japan and Taiwan from missiles with nuclear, biological or chemical warheads. The system is needed in the area due to the missile tests being performed by North Korea and the growing ballistic missile threat from China.

The test was a joint operation between Japanese and American forces. The simulated ballistic missile was launched from an American missile range in Kauai, Hawaii. The missile fired in the test was of similar size and speed to the missiles known to be in the North Korean arsenal. The interception of the ballistic missile by the SM-3 interceptor missile was made about three minutes after the ballistic missile was fired from the U.S. range at an altitude of about 100 miles above the Pacific Ocean.

Japan’s Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba told Reuters, “We are taking one step at a time. Just because it worked [the missile interception] this time doesn't mean we can rely on it 100 percent.”

American armed forces recently outfitted C130 aircraft with high-energy lasers for destroying targets both in the air and on the ground. This laser system in aircraft could be used to defeat ballistic missiles in flight as well when perfected, providing additional support for the land and sea based missile shield.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I'm still skeptical
By smitty3268 on 1/2/2008 3:07:55 AM , Rating: 2
that this technology can really work.

OK, so we shot down 1 easy to hit missile that we knew was coming on a specific flight path. Can we shoot down something we don't know is coming? Especially if it launches 15 decoys - the last I heard we had no clue about how to handle that situation, we were just trying to hit something first.




RE: I'm still skeptical
By SlyNine on 1/2/2008 4:30:38 AM , Rating: 4
"one step at a time"


RE: I'm still skeptical
By lompocus on 1/2/08, Rating: -1
RE: I'm still skeptical
By smitty3268 on 1/2/2008 5:02:16 AM , Rating: 1
Actually I know that it hasn't been tested - at least that's what has been said publically, and given that they've been trumpeting even the smallest steps I think it's likely they aren't secretly way ahead of what they've been saying.

Still, the other poster is right - one step at a time. It's just that there are a lot of steps to go.


RE: I'm still skeptical
By SlyNine on 1/2/2008 8:03:14 AM , Rating: 2
I dont know the extent of the testing on different missle defense systems. But their are 3 or is it 4 layers of protection ( not really active yet). Patriot, Thad( somthing like that). Then Ages. They shot a howitzer shell down with a laser. Witch is pretty impressive, and they have those jets with the lasers in them.

I dont think this stuff is to far away from working. But as in anything their will always be a counter. Just as long as we stay one step ahead we will be allright.


RE: I'm still skeptical
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/2/2008 11:05:40 AM , Rating: 4
Aegis is the ship based system on most of our cruisers and destroyers. It is completemented by the large intercept radar that just came on line in Alaska, another of which is being built in Europe. There will eventually be spaced based radar also put online in the next few years.

On the interception end we have the Kinetic Hit to Kill missiles based on the west coast of the U.S. as well as several ships in the U.S. (and now Japanese) Navy. There will be interceptor missiles deployed to several European countries as well. Lasers are advancing rapidly and are going to supplement the interceptor missiles we already have. Mounted on 747 Jets, AC-130's, and eventually on Naval ships and/or ground based surface batteries the future is bright indeed for the Star Wars project.


RE: I'm still skeptical
By SlyNine on 1/2/2008 5:42:49 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the info. With the laser systems, I wonder if its generating the energy required or is it the materials available holding us back. I've wondered if they were able to do multiple shots in succession with the lasers yet.


RE: I'm still skeptical
By bodar on 1/3/2008 1:25:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
the future is bright indeed for the Star Wars project.


Sweet, let me know when we've got Mon Calamari cruisers and freighters that do .5 past light speed.


RE: I'm still skeptical
By chick0n on 1/2/08, Rating: -1
RE: I'm still skeptical
By mdogs444 on 1/2/2008 9:12:02 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
#1 in what? stupidity ?

GDP, Military Technology, need I go on?
quote:
I guess you've been watching too many Fox news.

As opposed to what? Michael Moore documentaries? BBC?
quote:
Russians already have the technology to take down ANY Defense system. it was a major blow to the US, but of course you dont see the information on your TV, consider how *controlling* US media systems are.

LOL - No it doesn't you idiot. No one has the capability to take down ANY DEFENSE SYSTEM. Russia has several versions of surface to air missle defense systems that are targeted towards short range missles. The reports on them are that there is much left to be desired in terms of effectiveness. The US is developing the most advanced defense system to date based on intercontinental ballistic missles - from surface to air, and attached to ships & submarines.
quote:
US still trying to be #1 ? did they all fail history or something? which empire can last forever ? morons just never learned

That would infer that the US is still not the #1 superpower in the world. If you really think otherwise, you are no more than a looney hater who really needs to get his facts straight instead of making swinging statements that are blatently false.
quote:
Welcome to the real world my friend.

Once you make it to the real world, I will say the same thing to you - but we obviously cannot plan on that anytime soon.


RE: I'm still skeptical
By daniyarm on 1/2/08, Rating: 0
RE: I'm still skeptical
By masher2 (blog) on 1/2/2008 11:13:52 AM , Rating: 4
> "That's the advantage, you don't need 10 different systems for 10 different targets"

If you're trying to suggest in any way that Russian ABM systems are even close to as advanced as US technology, you're seriously mistaken.

> "You can never be the best in everything. "

Tell that to the Romans, circa 100 AD.


RE: I'm still skeptical
By chick0n on 1/2/08, Rating: -1
RE: I'm still skeptical
By TomZ on 1/2/2008 1:06:59 PM , Rating: 2
First, Michael isn't employed by DT, AFAIK.

Second, why do you pursue this childish argument? Seriously, arguing about whether the USA is inferior or superior is pointless. Each person will have their own opinion about that.


RE: I'm still skeptical
By masher2 (blog) on 1/2/2008 1:24:00 PM , Rating: 4
Considering I attended graduate school in Russia, your argument seems rather foolish. If you want to convince anyone that Russian ABM technology is superior to the US, you'll need more than this rather weak poisoning the well argument.


RE: I'm still skeptical
By Ringold on 1/2/2008 3:20:35 PM , Rating: 1
I was just recently out of the US for a couple weeks.

Thank god I'm back. Poverty, social immobility, government corruption, a whole myriad of social injustices, indignities and suffering that are virtually unknown to the average American. Not to mention even for the local "middle class" a quality of life that doesn't begin to even tickle the quality of life available to Americans living in "poverty".

Of course, that wasn't exactly Western Europe, but that is how a little less than half the population outside the US lives. If an American would like Europe or not depends on a) how much arrogance annoys them and b) if they're big-government or small government types, so that's a wash.

As for Eastern Europe or Russia, sorry, rather not visit and thereby condone a state that has journalists executed, or has party-sponsored youth summer camps, as the United Russia party does, that sends tens of thousands of teens off to have fun while being fully indoctrinated with party rhetoric. But hey, it's not under "USA control"!


RE: I'm still skeptical
By NT78stonewobble on 1/3/2008 3:04:58 AM , Rating: 2
Ah so you will be making a push in the US to get those christian indoctrination summercamps banned too?


RE: I'm still skeptical
By masher2 (blog) on 1/3/2008 10:15:16 AM , Rating: 2
In the US, those summer indoctrination camps aren't funded by the federal government.


RE: I'm still skeptical
By mars777 on 1/6/2008 4:30:30 AM