F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2018, 23:44
by spazsinbad
F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief
11 Apr 2018 Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.

"CAPITOL HILL: F-35 Joint Strike Fighters could detect, track, and, possibly, even shoot down ballistic missiles by 2025, the Missile Defense Agency director told Congress this morning. “I’d say six to seven years to essentially work out the Concept of Operations (and) develop the capabilities — (whether) it’s sensor-based or a new fast missile that’s hung on the bottom of an F-35 for the BMDS (Ballistic Missile Defense) mission — integrate those capabilities, test them, and deliver them into a theater of operations,” Lt. Gen. Samuel Greaves told the Senate appropriations subcommittee on defense. “We see that deployed capability as, if not a game changer, then a significant contributor to future ballistic missile defense.”...

...The AMRAAM missile isn’t designed to chase an ICBM into space, so it would have a narrow window to kill one before it escaped the atmosphere. Greaves’s wording suggests using the F-35 to shoot ICBMs might require developing “a new fast missile,” which would take years to develop.

What the F-35 can already do is act as a sensor. Its Distributed Aperture System (DAS) can pick up the infrared emission of a boosting rocket, its computers can pinpoint the threat’s location, and its network connections can transmit tracking data to the rest of the force. What’s more, since the US military is buying a projected 2,443 F-35s — 1,763 for the Air Force alone — there’ll be lots of them in danger zones around the world. Developing a new weapon to turn them into missile killers would be expensive, but tweaking them to make them missile trackers is probably not, and it would add a whole new kind of sensor to the global missile defense system....

...“Our job is to look outside of the classic missile defense system” — Patriot, THAAD, GBI — “and look for sensors and shooters that would be able to contribute when integrated into the BMDS, and we see F-35 as one,” Greaves said. “We’ve been working with the Air Force at least the last few months, and we did a test (with the Navy) a few years ago.”...

...Besides the Air Force, Greaves said the regional Combatant Commanders (COCOMs) would play a vital role, specifically in figuring how to use the F-35 in real-world missions: “The Concept of Operations (CONOPS) is not my area; that is for the combatant commander,” Greaves said.

Greaves didn’t say so explicitly, but the commander in question is almost certainly that of Pacific Command, which confronts North Korea. Unlike Russia or China with their vast territories and massive anti-aircraft defenses, North Korea’s launch sites are relatively close to US airbases and could even be targeted by fighters outside North Korean airspace."

Source: https://breakingdefense.com/2018/04/f-3 ... mda-chief/

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2018, 04:31
by steve2267
I thought we had hashed this all out over in the NORK thread... AIM-120 would have to be no more than ~50nm from the launch site to have a chance. Depending on where the launch sites are located in NORK... that would mean flying a missile CAP over NORK or PRC which we agreed would be very difficult to do.

A new fast shooter? Maybe. I nominate one of the hypersonic jobbies Raytheon or LM Skunkworks is cooking up. Still think you're going to have to be relatively close to the launch site... which to me means the new missile would have to be internal carriage. Now can you fit a Mach 6+ air launched ABM into the F-35 weapons bay? What would that be, about 24" max diameter, and 14-15' max length?

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2018, 06:57
by sunstersun
F-35 + super long range new missile = :D

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2018, 07:11
by Dragon029
F-35 + super quick* new missile = :D

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2018, 09:55
by element1loop
No one said a missile, except the journo chumming.

Is F-35 DIRCM still cued for BkIV? If so, what if it's 30 kilowatts? With growth room. Let's see, flight of 16 x F-35s over central Norkistan:

16 x 30 = 480 kilowatts ... minus high-altitude path losses.

Imagine that focused on yer nozzle.

(presuming it even gets into the air, if the ISR and SA is all it's cracked up to be)

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 13 Apr 2018, 07:03
by hornetfinn
Why not use the currently available AMRAAM-ER missile for this at least initially? It uses ESSM rocket motor which gives much higher speed (Mach 4+ vs. something like Mach 2.5 or so) and range (about twice the range) than AMRAAM from surface launch and I'm sure it would have similarly better range and speed performance from air launch. It has dimensions that should be compatible with F-35 weapon bays and still be able to carry 2 AMRAAMs on bay doors.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 13 Apr 2018, 07:37
by popcorn
hornetfinn wrote:Why not use the currently available AMRAAM-ER missile for this at least initially? It uses ESSM rocket motor which gives much higher speed (Mach 4+ vs. something like Mach 2.5 or so) and range (about twice the range) than AMRAAM from surface launch and I'm sure it would have similarly better range and speed performance from air launch. It has dimensions that should be compatible with F-35 weapon bays and still be able to carry 2 AMRAAMs on bay doors.


Raytheon says "nyet"...

http://alert5.com/2017/11/17/raytheon-n ... amraam-er/

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 13 Apr 2018, 08:48
by hornetfinn
Probably because there has not been any real interest from services for such a weapon. AIM-120C7/D and Meteor are great air-to-air missiles and larger AMRAAM-ER would likely not give any major advantages against normal target set. I just think that it might be a right kind of missile for this particular need. It's fast and long ranged missile with great agility and has a large warhead. It is also about largest sized anti-air missile that can fit inside F-35. At least it could well be a great starting point for specialized anti-ballistic missile.

Of course there might be some technical issues with air-launched AMRAAM-ER and going for something else would be better. For example the rocket motor design might not be optimal for high-altitude launch.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2018, 17:01
by stevedapirate
hornetfinn wrote:I just think that it might be a right kind of missile for this particular need. It's fast and long ranged missile with great agility and has a large warhead. It is also about largest sized anti-air missile that can fit inside F-35. At least it could well be a great starting point for specialized anti-ballistic missile.


I don't know that agility or a large warhead would be priorities if the goal is to hit ascending ballistic missiles. They don't engage in any radical maneuvers on the way up, and could be dispatched easily via a hit-to-kill dart to the boost segment.

Accordingly, I'd think you could save significant weight by eliminating the warhead and high agility requirements and focus on maximizing acceleration and ∆v.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 00:32
by popcorn
What about using Meteor in a lofted launch profile that maximizes range?

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 13:41
by hornetfinn
stevedapirate wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:I just think that it might be a right kind of missile for this particular need. It's fast and long ranged missile with great agility and has a large warhead. It is also about largest sized anti-air missile that can fit inside F-35. At least it could well be a great starting point for specialized anti-ballistic missile.


I don't know that agility or a large warhead would be priorities if the goal is to hit ascending ballistic missiles. They don't engage in any radical maneuvers on the way up, and could be dispatched easily via a hit-to-kill dart to the boost segment.

Accordingly, I'd think you could save significant weight by eliminating the warhead and high agility requirements and focus on maximizing acceleration and ∆v.


HTK works best when it can hit targets head-on to maximize kinetic energy on impact. This would be difficult to do with ascending ballistic missile and likely the hit would need to come from side. Of course it might work as even small amount of damage would likely kill the BM. That kind of new missile would need quite a long development time as that would be totally new kind of missile. I was pointing out a missile that might be good enough and much quicker solution to the problem as the missile actually exists right now. From all current missiles it has the best qualities for interception and there speed, agility and big warhead would be beneficial. Agility is probably the least needed for most BMs, but for example Iskander and Chinese DF-11 can make quite hard maneuvers even when ascending as these are not really ballistic missiles but can fly very different and alterable trajectories.


Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2018, 01:20
by steve2267
As I paper-napkinned some numbers here: viewtopic.php?p=382962#p382962, a liquid-fueled ICBM is going to be out of reach much beyond 60-120sec. By that time, it will be Mach 3+ and accelerating, and be 80,000+ feet in altitude and climbing fast. A solid fueled ICBM will be harder still (higher velocity, acceleration and climb rate). I doubt a Mach 4 missile with lots of range buys you much -- by the time you traverse that extra range, even at Mach 4, the target is too high, too fast. I am guessing you need a Mach 6-8 missile if you want to increase ABM range to significantly more than 50nm, or you need to move to DEW's.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2018, 02:26
by popcorn
There is talk of Japan considering a UAV fleet armed with a new high-speed missile specifically tasked to do the BPI mission. Possible joint venture opportunity.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2018, 13:30
by taog
hornetfinn wrote:Why not use the currently available AMRAAM-ER missile for this at least initially? It uses ESSM rocket motor which gives much higher speed (Mach 4+ vs. something like Mach 2.5 or so) and range (about twice the range) than AMRAAM from surface launch and I'm sure it would have similarly better range and speed performance from air launch. It has dimensions that should be compatible with F-35 weapon bays and still be able to carry 2 AMRAAMs on bay doors.


NCADE : Don't forget me.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2018, 13:41
by taog
steve2267 wrote:As I paper-napkinned some numbers here: viewtopic.php?p=382962#p382962, a liquid-fueled ICBM is going to be out of reach much beyond 60-120sec. By that time, it will be Mach 3+ and accelerating, and be 80,000+ feet in altitude and climbing fast. A solid fueled ICBM will be harder still (higher velocity, acceleration and climb rate). I doubt a Mach 4 missile with lots of range buys you much -- by the time you traverse that extra range, even at Mach 4, the target is too high, too fast. I am guessing you need a Mach 6-8 missile if you want to increase ABM range to significantly more than 50nm, or you need to move to DEW's.


viewtopic.php?f=58&t=53346&p=385176&sid=bbf1a84371e79b3a30780b7e1010556a#p385176

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 09:24
by spazsinbad
Pentagon considers an ICBM-killing weapon for the F-35, but is it affordable? [BEST READ at SOURCE]
17 Jan 2019 Valerie Insinna

"WASHINGTON — Over the next six months, the Defense Department will weigh whether to develop a new weapon for the F-35 fighter jet that will enable it to strike down an intercontinental ballistic missile in the early stages of flight. And it’s the Pentagon’s lead official for developmental technologies who is bullish on the prospect, telling reporters Jan. 17 that a new weapon could be both operationally effective and low cost.

"For certain regional geographies — North Korea comes to mind — we actually think it’s entirely possible and cost-effective to deploy what I will loosely call air-to-air interceptors, although possibly of new design, on advanced aircraft [and] using the aircraft as either sensor or weapons platforms to affect a missile intercept,” said Mike Griffin, under-secretary of defense for research and engineering. "We will, as the report implies, be studying that again, but I've seen recently any number of assessments, several assessments, which indicate that this is something we should be looking at."

The Trump administration’s Missile Defense Review, released Thursday after months of anticipation, carves out an enticing new potential role for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The jet “has a capable sensor system that can detect the infrared signature of a boosting missile and its computers can identify the threatening missile’s location,” the review states. “It can track and destroy adversary cruise missiles today, and, in the future, can be equipped with a new or modified interceptor capable of shooting down adversary ballistic missiles in their boost phase and could be surged rapidly to hot spots to strengthen U.S. active defense capabilities and attack operations.”

The report gives the Air Force and Missile Defense Agency six months to deliver a report on how best to integrate the F-35 into the larger missile defense architecture….

...Throughout the Missile Defense Review, the Pentagon shows interest in developing boost-phase missile defenses, said Kingston Reif of the Arms Control Association. However, he pointed to a 2012 report by the National Academy of Sciences that said such technologies are not practical or feasible. “Long-standing challenges to effective boost-phase defense include the short time ICBMs are in powered flight, the need for the defense platform to be located very near launch sites, and the availability of faster-burning solid-fueled missiles as a countermeasure,” Reif said.

In short, F-35s, equipped with a new interceptor, would have to be located very close to missile launch sites to be within range of an intercept during the boost phase, and “it would be very expensive to keep the planes on extended patrol and take them away from other missions,” he said. “A drone would be a better option than the F-35. And even then there would still be big challenges as the 2012 National Academies report noted.”...

...Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter, citing research he apparently saw from Los Alamos National Laboratories, said the F-35 could use an AMRAAM to take down an ICBM in the boost phase, reported Inside Defense in November 2017. A December 2017 report from Defense One detailed a 2014 experiment conducted by the Missile Defense Agency and Northrop Grumman, which posited whether an F-35 could use its distributed aperture system to monitor and track ICBMs.

At least two F-35s would be needed in range to converge on the exact location of the target, Northrop officials told the news organization.

From there, the F-35s would be able to “[take] data from the sensors, [run] it through algorithms developed by Northrop and MDA’s Enterprise Sensor Lab, [generate] a 3D-moving picture of the missile’s trajectory, and [convey] it over the Link 16 tactical data exchange,” Defense One reported. With that capability, it’s possible the F-35 could be used to collect intelligence about an enemy’s ICBM movements and transmit targeting data to other U.S. systems used to intercept the missiles, such as ballistic missile destroyers or missile defense systems like the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense or Patriot systems."

Source: https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/01 ... afford-it/

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 10:40
by garrya
It will be pretty cool if they design something similar to NCADE for F-35

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 13:42
by knowan
Best I can think to achieve that design goal is some sort of big honking missile carried externally, like an air lauched SM-3 or SM-6.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 17:24
by hythelday
knowan wrote:Best I can think to achieve that design goal is some sort of big honking missile carried externally, like an air lauched SM-3 or SM-6.


There was also an Air Launched Hit To Kill (PAC-3) once:


Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 18:38
by spazsinbad
MORE on story but less about F-35 because: AvWEAK: Missile Defense Review Directs Numerous Studies 17 Jan 2019

http://aviationweek.com/defense/missile ... us-studies

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 19:02
by spazsinbad
Good re-iteration of OLD NEWS in this article but similar story otherwise, I'll quote from OLD NEWS again....
Trump's Missile Defense Review Calls for Space Sensors, Drone Lasers
17 Jan 2019 Oriana Pawlyk

"...The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter:
The Pentagon wants to equip its latest and most advanced stealth fighter "with a new or modified interceptor capable of shooting down adversary ballistic missiles in their boost phase," the report states. While the idea has drawn skepticism, Northrop Grumman conducted an experiment with the Missile Defense Agency in 2014, saying the plane could be retrofitted to track intercontinental ballistic missile launches...." [quote link below]

OLD NEWS: 06 Dec 2017 "...The F-35 sensors aren’t meant to replace the infrared satellites that detect launches, or the sea-based X-Band Radar that can feed targeting data about missile launches to destroyers . Rather, Northrop officials said, the DAS data would help the other missile-defense gear get a targeting track on a missile more quickly, improving the odds of nailing the shot. (You also need two of them in the air for triangulation.)

“That information can go straight to the Patriot [missile system], THAAD, or anywhere else, who has communication with that platform,” John “Bama” Montgomery, a business development manager at Northrop’s ISR & Targeting Division, said on Tuesday. “You can give that information to a shooter. That shooter now has information to go and put his information in the right place. Thus the radar doesn’t have to search. It goes, ‘I know where it is; it’s right there.’”

The end result is a “tactically significant” improvement in targeting, Montgomery said. Just how significant? It took several years to figure that out, and that’s one reason why the news is only being released now. “We wanted to get our understanding of how this could change the battlefield. We’ve since done a series of modeling and [simulation] events and teamed with other governmental partners and industry.” Those numbers, he said, are classified. But: “I can tell you right now that this system, as depicted here, really does help the ballistic missile environment.” https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2 ... ms/144365/


Source: https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2019/0 ... asers.html

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 20:34
by usnvo
A F-35 ABM capability is valuable as long as it doesn't take too much money away from other requirements.

I would expect that it would be fairly straightforward to program a F-35 to be able to identify and engage a climbing ICBM/IRBM with a AIM-120 while it is in the atmosphere and not going much beyond Mach 2. It should just be a matter of programming your data fusion engine to identify a ICBM (or similiar missile) launch, project the trajectory to the intercept point (this is actually pretty hard since you can't use the missiles actual course and speed at anytime or you get in a tail chase as the target is both climbing and accelerating at the same time), and program your AIM-120 to get ahead and above the target for intercept. You might also need some changes on the AIM-120 intercept and fuzing algorithms. Having said that, it will give you a fairly short ranged intercept capability. It is also inexpensive, being purely software, and easy to test, just try to track and/or shoot down a Minuteman III or Trident D-5 OT launch.

There are probably two conditions that you would need to plan for;
- The US is at war with the side possessing said ballistic missiles
- The US is in a state of heightened tension with the side possessing said ballistic missiles.

In either case, the ability to detect and track the target has utility. With the proper connectivity, the F-35 can effectively contribute to the early detection and tracking of the missile even if they can't do anything about it. Additionally, they are not vulnerable like a E-3, RC-135, or other large aircraft is.

In the first, wartime case, even a limited engagement range, say 20nm from the launch site, can give you a tactically significant capability. F-35s will be hunting the silos, missiles, and TELs, so they should be nearby to the launch site, there should be a lot of them, they are carrying AIM-120s anyway, and they have weapons free allowing for a very rapid decision loop. I mean, missiles are pretty distinctive and it is not as if the other side is launching space tourists or anything. And being stealth assets, the other side can not just wait until they leave since they can't be sure if they are detecting them or not.

In the second case, the capability to engage is probably limited without a new missile, which is where big bucks start to come into the picture. However, even with a limited capability, you have a strong psychological deterrent. Much like a submarine that the enemy can't find, a stealth fighter forces the enemy to assume it is potentially overhead. So it can act as a deterrent even if it is not there at all.

The real question is how much is it going to cost.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 20:53
by marsavian
hythelday wrote:
knowan wrote:Best I can think to achieve that design goal is some sort of big honking missile carried externally, like an air lauched SM-3 or SM-6.


There was also an Air Launched Hit To Kill (PAC-3) once:



That could be a simple external solution but the F-35 will not really be stealthy lumping those around. Internally a solution could be marriying this to the eventual AMRAAM replacement and would ultimately dictate a multi stage rocket missile which would benefit in both altitude/speed performance against BMs and range/maneuverability performance against aircraft/missiles. Seems like it could be another requirement to put into the replacement specification. You could get serious hypersonic speeds out of a multi-stage rocket missile so would be useful too against hypersonic missiles. Now you just have to fit it into an F-22/F-35 missile bay which would imply going wide rather than long like a Phoenix.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 21:54
by spazsinbad
US Air Force looks at using F-35 as ballistic missile interceptor
17 Jan 2019 Garrett Reim

"The US Air Force and Missile Defense Agency (MDA) are examining integrating the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II into the US ballistic missile defense system....

...The Missile Defense Review also noted the potential uses of airborne lasers as a counter ballistic missile weapon.

“Intercepting offensive missiles in their boostphase (before the re-entry vehicle separates from the booster) using kinetic interceptors and/or directed energy would increase the likelihood of successfully countering the threat,” says the report. That would “complicate an aggressor’s attack calculus by reducing its confidence in its missile attack planning, and reduce the number of midcourse or terminal active defense interceptors needed to destroy the adversary’s remaining offensive missiles.”

Using the F-35 as a platform for shooting lasers at launching ballistic missiles was not mentioned in the review, though the MDA’s Low-Power Laser Demonstrator programme was noted. In September, as part of that programme the agency awarded nearly $70 million in contracts to Lockheed Martin, Boeing and General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems to further develop airborne anti-ballistic missile lasers."

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... il-455100/

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 19 Jan 2019, 01:47
by steve2267
I've been tossing this around my head today... for a first cut, I'd look at having Raytheon chop an SM3-IIA down to 161" length. My swag is you could get to Mach 10, and maybe 100-200nm range. Rather than a tail chase, which I see as not possible... I think the thing to do is to get a good track, then try to hang the kinetic kill vehicle in space in front of the boosting missile. That is... try to get on a reverse ballistic path. Not sure that is even doable. A tail chase you are going to lose. With something a LOT larger than AIM-120, I am guestimating you have 2, 3 minutes tops to make the intercept. The good news, from a side intercept angle, is that the boosting missile is NOT going to be able to maneuver. From (hopefully prior) intelligence of test missile shots, you should have a good idea of time vs altitude vs Mach, so that gives you a decent idea how to extrapolate the boost trajectory and figure where you have to have your interceptor by when.

The problem of a "chopped" SM-IIA is lessened to some extent in that you don't need a booster to get you from SL to 50,000ft... assuming you can CAP the enema missile launch fields at around 50K.

An SM-6 appears to max out around 3.5 Mach, so I don't think that booster will work.

However, if you can't get high enough, fast enough with the "chopped" SM3-IIA to deploy the KKV, and you have to keep a payload fairing at the front from an aero standpoint, then switching in the 13" dia SM6 AIM-120 seeker section + guidance might be an option. But that is a YUGE swag.

The Lightning's weps bays appears wide enough, but would be sure nice if they were about 7.5' longer if you wanted to tuck in a hypersonic AGM / AAM or ABM.

FWIW.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 19 Jan 2019, 01:56
by steve2267
Something like a B21, perhaps unmanned, probably has the weapons bay size to fit several such ABM's based off an SM-3 IIA/B weapon. Let it go hang up around 60K 4-500nm down range flying racetracks...

Or put a platform with the F-35 sensor suite up there just as a "radar / EOTS" picket plane.

OR... if you do use F-35s as a BM CAP / picket... once tracks are established and broadcast to the net... loose the Panthers on the missile launch fields and all other goodies in that area.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 19 Jan 2019, 02:57
by usnvo
steve2267 wrote:OR... if you do use F-35s as a BM CAP / picket... once tracks are established and broadcast to the net... loose the Panthers on the missile launch fields and all other goodies in that area.


I would think you could combine TEL hunting with ABM missions. Load up your F-35s with SDBIIs and have them operate in pairs, one at 50kft on ABM mission, one lower hunting TELs in their designated boxes. Or, if the threat requires, have them operate in fours in their boxes. Once the TEL hunter is winchester, rotate positions. Ideally you catch the missile before launch but if not, you have an F-35, possibly two, that can fire two AIM-120s at it and another F-35 that can pounce on the TEL.

You couldn't guarantee success, but you could attrite the launchers and reduce the number of missiles to be intercepted later, and not just ICBMs, you would also be in position to take out anything from SRBMs to IRBMs.

Even with each box being 40nm x 40nm, you could probably cover all of the likely launch areas in NK with 12 aircraft.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 21 Jan 2019, 21:28
by spazsinbad
Pentagon Unveils Missile Defense Review, Urging Investment in New System
17 Jan 2019 Brian Everstine

"...The report highlights the Air Force and the North American Aerospace Defense Command’s effort to upgrade the aircraft that monitor the US airspace with new sensors that can track and target offensive air threats. Additionally, the military needs to progress the F-35’s capability to track and target offensive missile threats, the review states.

Michael Griffin, the undersecretary of defense for research and engineering, told reporters the F-35 could be used in certain geographies—“North Korea comes to mind” —as a cost-effective way to employ what he “loosely calls air-to-air interceptors.” The F-35 has sensors that could be effective, though new weapons systems would need to be studied to allow the aircraft to target ballistic missiles. “We’re looking at possibly newly developed missiles, I don’t think an AMRAAM from an F-35 is likely to do the job,” Griffin said. “But that doesn’t mean that no missile launched from an airplane could ever do the job.”

USAF Lt. Gen. Samuel Greaves, the director of the Missile Defense Agency, told reporters that MDA and the Pentagon will soon integrate F-35s into missile tests to assess their capability. Because of the total number of jets the military will field, along with its sensor capability and integration into multi-domain command and control, it could be a “very powerful” capability to add to the missile defense system. "We will test it to verify if it works, if it comes with limitations, or if it doesn’t work,” Greaves said.

The Air Force has six months to study and present a report on how it could integrate its F-35s into missile defense, both for homeland defense and to defend regional partners, the review states...."

Graphic: "The Defense Department's Missile Defense Review, unveiled Thursday, outlines a planned schedule for new missile defense systems. This includes the demonstration of laser systems on remotely piloted aircraft, space-based sensors, and defenses from hypersonic glide vehicles. Defense Department graphic" http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pub ... DR.jpg.png


Source: http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pag ... ystem.aspx

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2019, 21:40
by spazsinbad
The 'RAVIN' MAVIN' has a go for the thread - best read at source. Kris Osborn now writes for the LEXINGTON INSTITUTE.
Pentagon Developing F-35s to Kill ICBMs
25 Feb 2019 Kris Osborn - Warrior Maven

"...The F-35, officials explain, could use a “kinetic” solution wherein it fires upon and destroys a launching ICBM -- or a “sensor” solution where it “cues missile defense systems,” locating or stopping attacks earlier than might otherwise be possible. ”We are now looking at how we could close the kill chain on that process,” officials familiar with the ongoing exploration told Warrior Maven.

One senior DoD official explained that the prospect of F-35 missile defense would likely hinge upon key intelligence information; should there be an indication or concern regarding a possible enemy launch, F-35C-armed carriers or other F-35s in the vicinity could use speed, stealth and sensor technology to find, ID and destroy an ICBM.

The prospect of using an F-35 for this purpose introduces a range of defensive possibilities not yet part of the Pentagon’s missile defense arsenal.

... a group of F-35s could potentially form some kind of networked “relay system” using the Multi-function Advanced Data Link (MADL) to deliver threat information across a fleet of aircraft in position to warn US missile defense systems. This MADL data link, which enables a group of F-35s to all see the same thing in real-time while conducting a mission, could potentially extend the range of systems able to find or detect an enemy ICBM. It goes without saying that the earlier Combatant Commanders and decision-makers learn of an attacking ICBM, the more time they have to consider and implement countermeasures or launch a counterattack.

ICBM launch points developed by potential adversaries are often deliberately lodged deep inland and heavily defended by air-defenses, making them harder for certain weapons and attack assets to reach.... ...an F-35 might bring an ability to use stealth, speed and maneuverability to operate above heavily defended inland areas to find, chase and destroy mobile launchers....

...Destroying ICBMs is something quite different than tracking or intercepting a short or medium range ballistic missile. The F-35 is already developed in this capacity; the F-35 has been tested as an aerial node for the Navy’s Naval Integrated Fire Control - Counter Air system. This technology, now deployed, uses ship-based Aegis radar, an aerial sensor node and a guided SM-6 missile to knock out attacking missiles from ranges beyond-the-horizon. Since its inception, NIFC-CA used an E-2 Hawkeye surveillance plane as the aerial node. Now, the system can use a far more capable F-35 as the aerial sensor."

Source: https://defensemaven.io/warriormaven/fu ... lAgE2Od0A/

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2019, 21:43
by sferrin
I could see the F-35 feeding info into the "cloud" but there's no missile it could use to fire at ICBMs. A shame they killed NCADE (though, to be fair, it's unlikely it could do the job anyway).

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2019, 21:50
by SpudmanWP
Put the NCADE front-end on an ESSM back-end

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2019, 22:52
by marauder2048
SpudmanWP wrote:Put the NCADE front-end on an ESSM back-end


ESSM's motor probably isn't suited for the temperatures at the
altitudes where NCADE needs to operate.

What hurt NCADE was the liquid upper stage and the Navy's allergy to liquid propellants
aboard ship.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2019, 23:04
by SpudmanWP
Maybe a CUDA frontend (with IR Seeker) and an ESSM backend?

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2019, 23:42
by marauder2048
SpudmanWP wrote:Maybe a CUDA frontend (with IR Seeker) and an ESSM backend?


Given that the Navy did not competitively award the AARGM-ER propulsion stack, I hope
that means that NG's stack is ready-ish.

I suspect CUDA would not have the divert capability at the higher altitudes.

But that doesn't mean you couldn't have two weapons: one for endo and one for exo.
As opposed to NCADE which was a THAAD-style endo/exo interceptor.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 02:42
by crosshairs
I don't have patience to read this thread the whole way through. But the F-35 as a anti ballistic missile platform is going to require 2 things. 1) to be close to the ballistic missile launch position, and 2) a hypersonic weapon.

Item 2 can be engineered. Item 1 depends on being deep inside enemy territory and being near the launching missile. Is an F-35 going to penetrate china and loiter near a missile launch site? No. Maybe a small nation like Iran, but Russia or China, no.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 03:30
by steve2267
crosshairs wrote:I don't have patience to read this thread the whole way through. But the F-35 as a anti ballistic missile platform is going to require 2 things. 1) to be close to the ballistic missile launch position, and 2) a hypersonic weapon.

Item 2 can be engineered. Item 1 depends on being deep inside enemy territory and being near the launching missile. Is an F-35 going to penetrate china and loiter near a missile launch site? No. Maybe a small nation like Iran, but Russia or China, no.


Previous discussion here and possibly in a different thread centered on the context of North Korea. Iran might also be appropos. I do not recall anyone suggesting F-35's capping Russian or Chinese missile fields. There were also some swags on how close an F-35 would have to be to have any chance whatsoever at engaging a climbing ICBM. I seem to recall the numbers were around 50-75nm of the launch site, downrange, and that an AIM-120 would have to engage somewhere in the 40-60,000 ft altitude range. HUGE swags here. Really YUGE. I think the idea was it would only make sense if there was a shooting war going on. Some aircraft might be assigned to try to CAP or OCA the missile fields whilst everyone else went hunting to try to put bombs on silos. FWIW.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 03:35
by steve2267
marauder2048 wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:Maybe a CUDA frontend (with IR Seeker) and an ESSM backend?


Given that the Navy did not competitively award the AARGM-ER propulsion stack, I hope
that means that NG's stack is ready-ish.

I suspect CUDA would not have the divert capability at the higher altitudes.

But that doesn't mean you couldn't have two weapons: one for endo and one for exo.
As opposed to NCADE which was a THAAD-style endo/exo interceptor.


I am confused by your statement I emboldened. How would miniature solid rocket motors firing transversely to the missiles longitudinal axis NOT have "divert capability"? If anything... divert motors maintain, possibly enhance, controllability and maneuverability as the air gets thinner the higher it flies. The aerodynamic effectiveness of fins and cross-body flow decrease with altitude, but divert motors should be good to go. What am I missing?

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 03:37
by marauder2048
crosshairs wrote:I don't have patience to read this thread the whole way through. But the F-35 as a anti ballistic missile platform is going to require 2 things. 1) to be close to the ballistic missile launch position, and 2) a hypersonic weapon.

Item 2 can be engineered. Item 1 depends on being deep inside enemy territory and being near the launching missile. Is an F-35 going to penetrate china and loiter near a missile launch site? No. Maybe a small nation like Iran, but Russia or China, no.



The existence and proliferation of an air-launched boost-phase interceptor might still have a pindown effect on
enemy launchers in Russia and China since they would have to treat any aircraft (say an intermittent contact)
in the vicinity of a launcher as a threat.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 03:45
by steve2267
marauder2048 wrote:The existence and proliferation of an air-launched boost-phase interceptor might still have a pindown effect on
enemy launchers in Russia and China since they would have to treat any aircraft (say an intermittent contact)
in the vicinity of a launcher as a threat.


I might buy what you're selling if and when the B-21 is well into service.

IMO, the problem with your statement is range -- you seem to be suggesting that F-35's could be lurking "near" Russian or Chinese missile fields that have got to be at least a 1000 miles from the nearest border or coastline. If not 1500 miles. F-35 doesn't have the gas to fly that far and orbit. Unless Skonkworks has developed and deployed a super stealth tanker. But then... why not sling the air-launched boost-phase interceptors under said super stealth tanker?

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 05:59
by marauder2048
steve2267 wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:Maybe a CUDA frontend (with IR Seeker) and an ESSM backend?


Given that the Navy did not competitively award the AARGM-ER propulsion stack, I hope
that means that NG's stack is ready-ish.

I suspect CUDA would not have the divert capability at the higher altitudes.

But that doesn't mean you couldn't have two weapons: one for endo and one for exo.
As opposed to NCADE which was a THAAD-style endo/exo interceptor.


I am confused by your statement I emboldened. How would miniature solid rocket motors firing transversely to the missiles longitudinal axis NOT have "divert capability"? If anything... divert motors maintain, possibly enhance, controllability and maneuverability as the air gets thinner the higher it flies. The aerodynamic effectiveness of fins and cross-body flow decrease with altitude, but divert motors should be good to go. What am I missing?


Divert velocity. The ACMs on Cuda aren't intended to achieve that as much as they are
responsiveness early and late in flight but only comparatively low in the atmosphere.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 06:31
by marauder2048
steve2267 wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:The existence and proliferation of an air-launched boost-phase interceptor might still have a pindown effect on
enemy launchers in Russia and China since they would have to treat any aircraft (say an intermittent contact)
in the vicinity of a launcher as a threat.


I might buy what you're selling if and when the B-21 is well into service.

IMO, the problem with your statement is range -- you seem to be suggesting that F-35's could be lurking "near" Russian or Chinese missile fields that have got to be at least a 1000 miles from the nearest border or coastline. If not 1500 miles. F-35 doesn't have the gas to fly that far and orbit. Unless Skonkworks has developed and deployed a super stealth tanker. But then... why not sling the air-launched boost-phase interceptors under said super stealth tanker?


Or the B-2. Or any aircraft (or expendable/deception jammer simulating that aircraft) that's managed to penetrate.
Some of the interceptors that have 5 km/s Vbo and 2 km/s divert are in the 1100 lbs/14 feet length
variety which can be carried on just about anything.

But you need these interceptors to be widely proliferated for the threat to be convincing.

The argument for fast jets for boost phase intercept is that they can quickly maneuver/climb/accelerate
to shoot/and or get an improved sensor read which helps the shot and can defend themselves.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 14:45
by steve2267
marauder2048 wrote:
Or the B-2. Or any aircraft (or expendable/deception jammer simulating that aircraft) that's managed to penetrate.
Some of the interceptors that have 5 km/s Vbo and 2 km/s divert are in the 1100 lbs/14 feet length
variety
which can be carried on just about anything.


I am unfamiliar with any missiles around 14' in length that can do 17 Mach, not including additional divert velocity. Are these in production? Experimental / development stage? Or just on the drawing board?

I have mused about the flight portion (above the booster segment) of an SM-3 Blk IA/IB or Blk IIA fitting into an F-35 weps bay (161" or 13.4'), but think they would still be too long. Or are you writing about a CUDA or something like it atop an ESSM stage?

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 27 Feb 2019, 01:00
by marauder2048
All airborne boost phase interceptors are drawing board albeit with components or critical technologies
tested to varying degrees.

The interceptor I'm describing is from Garwin:

https://fas.org/rlg/refine.pdf

A 2 km/sec divert velocity is believed to be attainable for a KV with the NCADE upper stage
configuration; the axial propulsion velocity seems to be attainable if you hit the KV weight.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 27 Feb 2019, 01:31
by steve2267
marauder2048 wrote:All airborne boost phase interceptors are drawing board albeit with components or critical technologies
tested to varying degrees.

The interceptor I'm describing is from Garwin:

https://fas.org/rlg/refine.pdf

A 2 km/sec divert velocity is believed to be attainable for a KV with the NCADE upper stage
configuration; the axial propulsion velocity seems to be attainable if you hit the KV weight.


Thanks for the link. I've got a bit of reading to do now.

I must admit, I am rather dubious that something like NCADE in an AMRAAM airframe can reach 5km/s. Perhaps the ALHTK, based on a PAC-3, can get close. My ideas I have written about earlier revolved around leveraging the SM-3 Blk IIA/B, and chopping that down so that it might fit inside the F-35 weapons bays. Width-wise, it oughta fit. But even if something like a chopped SM-3 fits in an F-35... an aircraft like the B-21 with much longer weapons bays and much longer loiter times would seem to be a better airborne launch vehicle for defense of ICBM's, such as from North Korea. Then F-35's can be free to roam around and directly attack the launch sites. But even there, one probably requires the range of a B-21 to go missile hunting deep within other nation states. FWIW.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 27 Feb 2019, 09:00
by marauder2048
It's more a JSOW-sized weapon with an NCADE upper stage though I've seen
some wild variations in Vbo even for the "classic" NCADE + AMRAAM booster stack.

I tend to think that fast jets like the F-35 might still be preferred because they are much less
reliant on offboard cues, operate in pairs so stereo ranging is there, can readily position for
a shot and can impart their higher velocity to the interceptor.

We've talked mainly about boost phase intercept but there's no reason the F-35 wouldn't
be very good in the terminal phase as well with a shortened PAC-3 MSE like interceptor.

Corbett and Zarchan have a number of studies out there on these topics; Corbett was the
NCADE program manager at MDA.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 27 Feb 2019, 22:37
by usnvo
marauder2048 wrote:It's more a JSOW-sized weapon with an NCADE upper stage though I've seen
some wild variations in Vbo even for the "classic" NCADE + AMRAAM booster stack.

I tend to think that fast jets like the F-35 might still be preferred because they are much less
reliant on offboard cues, operate in pairs so stereo ranging is there, can readily position for
a shot and can impart their higher velocity to the interceptor.

We've talked mainly about boost phase intercept but there's no reason the F-35 wouldn't
be very good in the terminal phase as well with a shortened PAC-3 MSE like interceptor.

Corbett and Zarchan have a number of studies out there on these topics; Corbett was the
NCADE program manager at MDA.


I think there are two components to using the F-35 in an anti-ballistic missile role.

First is early detection and tracking. As previously demonstrated, the F-35 sensors were able to track boosting missiles from extended ranges. This is not unique to the F-35, but a combination of stealth, DAS/EOTS, sensor fusion, networking, and satellite communications allows for rapid detection, identification, tracking, and reporting of the missiles. This is a valuable capability regardless of the ability to shoot down the missile.

Second is elimination of the missile. As I see it, there are actually three components here.
A. Before launch. The F-35s is the most likely assets to be assigned to do "Scud Hunting". So beyond already being in the most likely places (at least what the US thinks is the most likely location) for detection, it can also attack TELs.
B. Within the atmosphere. Because of A, the F-35 is most likely to be in position to destroy a boosting missile with a slightly modified AAM. While you can't guarantee you will be directly over a missile on launch, you may be close enough. And, since you will probably have simplified ROE (anything launching is hostile), quick OODA loop for launch.
C. Engagement outside the normal weapons envelope. This will require a new missile, but you don't have to have to plan to kill the missile in space. Even if you could just kill the missile while it is boosting and under 250,000ft or so, you still would have an excellent chance to engage, especially given you are in the area and actively looking.

So what kind of load-out would be required?
The first mission doesn't require any weapons, just an expedited reporting capability. Not every F-35 would use the capability, but if you were in the launch area, you would be primed to report (or more likely your sensor fusion engine would do it for you)
The second mission would probably require SDBII, AMRAAM, and something better, which I will call Advanced Boost Phase Interceptor or ABPI. So, a pair of F-35As with 4 SDBII, 2 AMRAAM, and 1-2 ABPI each could probably cover a 40nm x 40nm box with a significant chance of finding the TEL and/or engaging the missile at least once.

At the very least, they could likely detect, identify, start tracking, and report the missile within seconds of launch.

If nothing else, just the ability to claim that the F-35s are overhead and can disrupt the launch will have a deterrent effect on the enemy, much as the threat of mining or fear of the presence of submarines restricts seaborne options. In fact, even without any F-35s so deployed, the possibility they could be there makes for great information warfare.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 27 Feb 2019, 23:44
by sprstdlyscottsmn
A dorsal laser turret firing upward from 40,000ft would have some nice range wouldn't it?

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 03:07
by marauder2048
Given the 100% failure rate achieved by the 1991 Scud Hunt in destroying TELs,
I'm going to suggest that left-of-launch is really hard given that it's easy and relatively cheap
for the opponent to proliferate decoys, employ cover, concealment and terminal defenses.

Also, I'm trying to recall but I think the orthodox Air Force view is that a TEL is only counted as
destroyed if it's flipped on its back or completely disintegrated.

OTOH, there's no convincing decoy for a boosting ballistic missile. There's no cover.
There's no concealment. And no terminal defenses. That leaves evasive maneuvers
and other burn profile games that impose a cost on the ballistic missile in payload, range
and $$ and can probably still be accommodated by the divert capability described above.

IIRC, hardening against lasers with improved materials and or rolling the missile during
boost imposed a much lower penalty than the countermeasures for defeating a
kinetic energy threat.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 04:38
by popcorn
Scud hunting will be very different from days past. Potential battlefields will have been under very Intense scrutiny in the age of Big Data. The F-35 is just the cherry on Top of the sundae.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 16:04
by sferrin
popcorn wrote:Scud hunting will be very different from days past. Potential battlefields will have been under very Intense scrutiny in the age of Big Data. The F-35 is just the cherry on Top of the sundae.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorgon_Stare

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 19:54
by usnvo
Reuters has an article on this subject.

One of the interesting comments.

“You would need to be very close to the launch site, within North Korea itself, said physicist Laura Grego, who studies missile defense at the Union of Concerned Scientists (editorial note here, these are the same "experts" who claimed it would be impossible to hit a ballistic missile in flight). Grego said that even if the air-to-air missile traveled at five times the speed of sound, the F-35 would need to be within about 50 miles of the missile, “probably closer, to be realistic.”

That gives a huge advantage to the stealthy F-35 which could get much closer to a possible launch area than a non-stealth aircraft.

“This is one of the advantages of the F-35,” said retired U.S. general David Deptula. He added that the radar-evading jets “can get in much closer to an adversary launch area than ... a non-stealthy aircraft.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nort ... SKCN1QG0JC

While the Reuters article kind of ignores the second day of the conflict role, that is the one I see as the most important for the F-35, at least in a Kinetic role. Even if you can't stop the first one, you are going to want to suppress any later launches, and that would seem where the F-35 offers a real compelling advantage. And it wouldn't just be ICBMs, it would apply equally to SRBMs, MRBMs, IRBMs, and ICBMs. And the fact you can do it while you are doing a mission you would be assigned anyway with weapons you would be carrying anyway is a real plus.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 20:26
by usnvo
marauder2048 wrote:Given the 100% failure rate achieved by the 1991 Scud Hunt in destroying TELs,
I'm going to suggest that left-of-launch is really hard given that it's easy and relatively cheap
for the opponent to proliferate decoys, employ cover, concealment and terminal defenses.

Also, I'm trying to recall but I think the orthodox Air Force view is that a TEL is only counted as
destroyed if it's flipped on its back or completely disintegrated.

OTOH, there's no convincing decoy for a boosting ballistic missile. There's no cover.
There's no concealment. And no terminal defenses. That leaves evasive maneuvers
and other burn profile games that impose a cost on the ballistic missile in payload, range
and $$ and can probably still be accommodated by the divert capability described above.


Finding TELs will be hard, but there are still going to be aircraft assigned to that mission and those aircraft are most likely going to be stealth aircraft, so F-35s are probably the aircraft used. Additionally, the combination of sensors and the fusion of those sensors available to the F-35 will make it somewhat easier but it will still be hard. But even if you can only find the TEL from the smoke trail, you can fire off a couple of SDBIIs to kill it after you launch on the missile itself.

I doubt there is anything that a boosting missile can do that will materially effect the Pk of a AAM from approaching one. They can't speed up, can't slow down, can't make a high G turn, can't see the missile coming, can't fire decoys, etc. If you are close enough and fire soon enough, it is pretty well dead absent a AAM failure (which is why you fire two!).

marauder2048 wrote:IIRC, hardening against lasers with improved materials and or rolling the missile during
boost imposed a much lower penalty than the countermeasures for defeating a
kinetic energy threat.


I think weather is probably your worst obstacle as well as just developing the laser power. The problem with most counter-measures against lasers is that they have never been developed, let alone tested. So effectively evaluating how well they would work is difficult. For instance, rolling the missile, while possible, would dramatically complicate the guidance as well as being less valuable against a really powerful laser. Given the need for maximum lightness and the forces involved in the launch, it doesn't take much to make one fail.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 21:17
by steve2267
usnvo wrote:
I doubt there is anything that a boosting missile can do that will materially effect the Pk of a AAM from approaching one. They can't speed up, can't slow down, can't make a high G turn, can't see the missile coming, can't fire decoys, etc. If you are close enough and fire soon enough, it is pretty well dead absent a AAM failure (which is why you fire two!).


Actually... they can speed up -- they are accelerating all the time. And climbing, faster and faster.

My swag estimates you have 60 seconds, 120 tops to affect a kill of a climbing ballistic missile before they will be too high, and too fast to intercept with a garden variety air-to-air missile. After that they are either too fast, but most probably too high to intercept. Several factors affect this time window including whether the BM is liquid fueled, or uses solid propellant, and how far the intercepting aircraft is from the launch site.

usnvo wrote:I think weather is probably your worst obstacle as well as just developing the laser power. The problem with most counter-measures against lasers is that they have never been developed, let alone tested. So effectively evaluating how well they would work is difficult. For instance, rolling the missile, while possible, would dramatically complicate the guidance as well as being less valuable against a really powerful laser. Given the need for maximum lightness and the forces involved in the launch, it doesn't take much to make one fail.


Rolling the missile will make life a little harder for the flight controls engineer... but dramatically so? That may be open to some debate. If the missile pitches to its programmed flight path trajectory and flies a 0° alpha trajectory, then rolling is probably not as big a deal. IMO & FWIW.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 21:32
by SpudmanWP
I'm thinking something like NCADE based on a CUDA-like upper with a ESSM-type lower and make both of them Gel propellants.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 21:51
by sferrin
SpudmanWP wrote:I'm thinking something like NCADE based on a CUDA-like upper with a ESSM-type lower and make both of them Gel propellants.


Ahem:

Capture.PNG

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 22:28
by SpudmanWP
Fanart or program? That booster looks too skinny to be ESSM (10 in vs AMRAAM 7in) but it may be a scale thing.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 23:02
by sferrin
SpudmanWP wrote:Fanart or program? That booster looks too skinny to be ESSM (10 in vs AMRAAM 7in) but it may be a scale thing.


Something I threw together. Scale is exact. The strakes give the illusion that it's smaller in diameter. Look at the area between the tail fins and the strakes.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 23:13
by SpudmanWP
Me likey

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 23:32
by sferrin
SpudmanWP wrote:Me likey


PM incoming.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2019, 21:39
by usnvo
steve2267 wrote:Actually... they can speed up -- they are accelerating all the time. And climbing, faster and faster.

My swag estimates you have 60 seconds, 120 tops to affect a kill of a climbing ballistic missile before they will be too high, and too fast to intercept with a garden variety air-to-air missile.


But they speed up in an easily calculated manner. They can't suddenly add 5Gs. Compared to what the AAM can do, sitting duck. I agree on time, although the Reuters article indicated 200 seconds. That just seems way too long. I figure an engagement zone of 20-25nm around the aircraft, probably an additional 10nm if you could reach up to 200kft or so with a purpose built boost phase interceptor.

steve2267 wrote:Rolling the missile will make life a little harder for the flight controls engineer... but dramatically so? That may be open to some debate. If the missile pitches to its programmed flight path trajectory and flies a 0° alpha trajectory, then rolling is probably not as big a deal. IMO & FWIW.


Except no one has ever done it and all of the launches I have seen require continuous angle changes during most of the boost phase. And how fast are you spinning? Even 30RPM seems like it would probably be too slow since all you have to do with the laser is weaken the structural integrity. And you would have to do it all the time because you would never know if you were going to be engaged or not.

Re: F-35 Ready For Missile Defense By 2025: MDA Chief

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2019, 10:25
by doge
This has not been posted yet? 8) I'm wondering where to post it, so I will post here.
https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2019-09 ... assets_all
F-35(sensor) → U-2(HUB) → Station(MD)
...Beautiful relay. 8)
Lockheed Martin Skunk Works®' Project Riot Demonstrates Multi-Domain Operations
Demonstration Further Proves F-35's Role as the Keystone of the Joint Force and U-2's Ability to Rapidly Field Capabilities for the Future
PALMDALE, Calif., Sept. 16, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) Skunk Works®, the Missile Defense Agency and the U.S. Air Force successfully connected an F-35, U-2 and a multi-domain ground station in a ground-breaking test demonstrating multi-domain operations and the secure distribution of sensitive information across multiple platforms.

During the demonstration, called Project Riot, an F-35 detected a long-range missile launch with its onboard sensors and shared the information through the U-2 to the air defense commander on the ground, enabling the commander to quickly make the decision to target the threat. This next-level connectivity reduces the data-to-decision timeline from minutes to seconds, which is critical in fighting today's adversaries and advanced threats.

In partnership with the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center at Hanscom Air Force Base, Massachusetts, and the Missile Defense Agency, Skunk Works' Project Riot builds on a series of open systems architecture demonstrations proving how incremental increases in capability can be rapidly fielded to enable a connected network across air, ground, sea, space and cyber domains.

"This demonstration continues our commitment to provide complete battlespace awareness and seamless interoperability to enable multi-domain operations," said John Clark, vice president of ISR & UAS at Lockheed Martin Skunk Works. "With its long-range standoff sensors, on-board processing and ability to operate in and around contested environments, the U-2 continues to play a critical role in demonstrating new capabilities today, while transforming operations for tomorrow's battlespace."

Leveraging common industry standards to drive down cost and shorten schedules, the team achieved four mission critical data points in less than four months:
    ・Demonstrated the ability to leverage F-35 sensor data for missile defense
    ・Leveraged the modernized U-2's extensive payload capacity, modular design and open architecture to provide beyond line of sight communications between the F-35 and a multi-domain ground station
    ・Established two new data paths to securely transmit 5th generation sensor data at multiple levels of security to the warfighter, enabling a multi-domain network of legacy and 5th generation systems
    ・Disseminated 5th generation data using the Air Force's Universal Command and Control Interface and Open Mission Systems standards for faster capability deployment and seamless connection between systems
"The F-35, with its advanced sensors and connectivity, is able to gather and seamlessly share critical information enabling the joint force to be safer and more effective," said Greg Ulmer, Lockheed Martin vice president and general manager for the F-35 program. "No other fighter jet in the world has this capability – and this test was a critical step on the path to unlocking its full potential for multi-domain operations."

This demonstration builds on successful flight tests completed since 2013 that establish the foundation for a distributed, systems-of-systems architecture in the not-too-distant future.