Aegis Triumphant … Hussein Still Wants To “Cut Spending On Unproven Missile Defense Systems” - With Videos
God! I do love progress … especially our military’s progress!
by James Dunnigan - (Strategy Page)
The U.S. Navy, capitalizing on the success of its SM3 anti-missile missile, wants to equip more ships with it. So far, the seagoing Aegis radar system has used SM-3s to knock down nearly 90 percent of the test missiles fired towards it. This includes shooting down a low flying space satellite. There are 18 U.S. Navy ships equipped with SM-3, and the navy would like enough money to equip all of its Aegis equipped ships (90) with the SM-3. This is expensive, as it costs a few million bucks to upgrade the Aegis radar and install the new software. And then there are the SM-3 missiles, which cost three million dollars each. The navy won’t say how many SM-3 missiles are on each ship equipped to handle them, but it’s probably something like at least a dozen. So to equip over 80 additional Aegis ships with SM-3 would cost over three billion dollars.
The Aegis anti-missile system consists of a modified version of the Standard anti-aircraft missile and the Aegis radar system, modified to track incoming ballistic missiles. The RIM-161A, also known as the Standard Missile 3 (or SM-3), has a range of over 500 kilometers and max altitude of over 160 kilometers. The Standard 3 is based on the failed anti-missile version of the Standard 2.
The Standard 3 has four stages. The first two stages boost the interceptor out of the atmosphere. The third stage fires twice to boost the interceptor farther beyond the earth’s atmosphere. Prior to each motor firing it takes a GPS reading to correct course for approaching the target. The fourth stage is the 20 pound LEAP kill vehicle, which uses infrared sensors to close on the target and ram it. The Aegis system was designed to operate aboard warships (cruisers and destroyers that have been equipped with the special software that enables the AEGIS radar system to detect and track incoming ballistic missiles).
By the end of the year, the U.S. Navy will have completed equipping 18 ships with the Aegis anti-missile system. One reason the navy recently cancelled its expensive new DDG-1000 class of destroyers was because these were built to support amphibious and coastal operations, and did not have a radar that could easily be converted to use SM-3 missiles. The DDG-1000 also cost 2-3 times as much as current Aegis destroyers. With missile defense seen as a higher priority than providing new coastal combat capability, the DDG-1000 was killed, and money saved could be used to build more Aegis destroyers, and convert more current destroyers and cruisers to use SM-3.
Japan also has four Aegis warships being equipped with this anti-missile capability. Other nations are equipping some of their ships with Aegis. Currently, five navies operate 108 Aegis equipped ships, and are thus able to upgrade to SM-3. Israel also wants to buy a land based Aegis, which would cost about $50 million, plus the costs of the SM-3 missiles. This is not a problem, as the original development version of Aegis was built on land, and still serves for continuing testing and development.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
That video is almost every reason why i hate obama.
August 17th, 2008 at 9:23 pmArticle - “…So to equip over 80 additional Aegis ships with SM-3 would cost over three billion dollars”.
______________________________________
Three Billion dollars to cause Putin to shit his pants…
My tax dollars well spent.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:19 pm3 billions dollars. Doesn’t that work out to something like $10 per citizen? Seems pretty cheap when you factor in how much security it’d bring.
August 18th, 2008 at 2:46 amThis guy is truly brainwashed with the One-World Globalist agenda that makes the US a weak handmaiden of the United Nations.
May God preserve us from him and open the eyes of every American voter (especially the conservatives) to the danger he represents.
August 18th, 2008 at 2:54 amThere once was a boy named Obama,
August 18th, 2008 at 5:28 amWho had a commie for a mama,
She told him, “Hussein,
What’s in a name?
They’ll never know you root for Osama.”
He going to “negotiate” with Russia to take OUR ICBM’s off hair trigger alert?
I’m sure they won’t mind
August 18th, 2008 at 11:15 am