2016-02-02, the US Missile Defense Agency announced a successful flight test of the modernized ground-based anti-missile missile, which was carried out without intercepting the training target.
The purpose of the launch of the interceptor missile, carried out on January 28, 2016 from Vandenberg Air Force Base (California), was to test the operation of the improved steering engines for controlling the interceptor strike warhead, as well as to eliminate malfunctions identified during the FTG-06B test in June 2014.
FTG-06b Ballistic Missile Defense Test. Fifth launch on LV-2 target missile, FTG-06B test on June 22, 2014 This was a retest of the failed FTG-06A tests from 2010.
Note: during the test on June 23, 2014, non-design vibrations of the EKV transatmospheric interceptor were observed during the operation of the shunting propulsion systems
U. S. Ballistic Missile Defense System - Target Launch and Interceptor Launch (2010). Failed FTG-06A test
During the test in 2016, the telemetry of the operation of the strike warhead control system was also monitored, which corrects its flight in height and heading, bringing it to the target. The MDA agency notes that the goal of the test was to correct long-standing problems with the anti-missile warhead.
As part of a test launch from the C-17 military transport aircraft off the coast of the Hawaiian Islands in the Pacific Ocean, a training medium-range ballistic missile was launched, the warhead of which was equipped with decoys and means of jamming. After ground-based and sea-based radars in the Hawaiian Islands recorded the missile's flight, an order was given to launch the anti-missile from a silo launcher at Vandenberg Air Base. After separating from the carrier, the EKV transatmospheric striker then carried out a series of maneuvers to demonstrate the ability to adjust its flight in altitude and course in space, choosing the main target for defeat.
According to US officials, the missile defense agency spent more than $ 2 billion to fix problems in the control system of the strike warhead after the missile was unable to intercept a target in space in 2010.
As a result of numerous improvements during the 2014 test, the anti-missile missile successfully hit the target. MDA is constantly improving both the anti-missile itself, the guidance and target designation systems, and the transatmospheric interceptor.
Early example of a GBI anti-missile missile launched from a mine (early 2000s)
The modern version of the PR GBI. The launch weight of the anti-missile is 12,000 kg, the launch cost is about $ 70,000,000
Some clarifications:
The Boeing C-17 Globemaster III is an American strategic military transport aircraft used by the US Air Force Test Center to launch simulators of medium-range ballistic missiles:
Launch of LV medium-range ballistic missile simulator with Boeing C-17 Globemaster
An eMRBM prototype medium-range ballistic missile simulator (LV) manufactured by Lockheed Martin:
The technical data is classified, but press releases said that it ensures that the target is compatible with ballistic missiles with a launch range of 3,780 miles or more.
Types of launches and tests for ground-based missile defense:
BV - Booster (Accelerator) Verification Test.
CMCM - tests after making critical changes in performance characteristics, working out countermeasures.
FTG - flight tests of a ground interceptor.
FTX - flight tests, other purposes.
IFT - Integrated Flight Testing.
Performed GBI tests (up to May 2012):
Successful transatmospheric target simulator intercept (2014):
"Exoatmospheric Killer". The hit-to-kill principle (some "reflections" on the example of intercepting a Topol ICBM warhead: "pros and cons"):
The striking anti-missile module developed by Raytheon is called the EKV (Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle). It is known to be about 140 cm long and 70 kg in weight, equipped with an engine and guidance system, including an infrared sensor. Destruction of the target is carried out according to the unpretentious principle of hit-to-kill, i.e., using the energy of colliding objects. The task of kinetic interception can be compared to a bullet hitting a flying bullet. All the way to the target, the EKV and the booster rocket receive data from ground, marine radars and satellites, which are used to correct course. The force of impact when the EKV hits the target is equivalent to a collision with a 10-ton tractor, which is speeding faster than 1000 km / h!
Can't you dodge a kinetic blow? The media "Russian space" has infiltrated the myth that the Topol-M warhead is equipped with engines for maneuvering and is capable of evading missile defense interceptors.
The warhead has developed means of jamming, decoys and other warhead tricks designed to deceive the enemy's radars. However, one is incompatible with the other due to the properties of inertia in bodies: orbital maneuvers or interference for radars, both of which will not work together.
If the Topol warhead maneuvers, then it saves the missile defense from the problem of selecting itself from false targets. The warhead can only dodge the interceptors.
A brief assessment of the prospects for "dodging":
The mass of the Poplar BB is close to 1 ton, of which several hundred kg falls on a thermonuclear bomb, a thermally protected and durable body, and a guidance system. For frequent maneuvers during the flight, several hundred kg of fuel are required, so the mass of a shunting rocket engine can be estimated at ~ 100 kg. Or several shunting engines, each ~ 10 kg of weight, which does not change the essence.
Assuming that the ratio of the engine mass to the thrust does not exceed 100, the total thrust during the maneuver is ~ 1 ton. Based on such estimates, it could be equal to several tons. In the case of one such liquid-propellant engine, it is obvious that only a small part of the thrust can be directed in the transverse direction, while several small shunting propulsion systems can operate only for transverse thrust.
Thus, we can say that the monoblock is capable of maneuvering under the influence of a lateral force of 10,000 N.
Let the lateral acceleration be g. In 10 seconds, the EKV approaches the target by 100 km. Obviously, in 10 seconds of the "stationary" maneuver, the EKV will have time to correct the course and hit the target. Therefore, it is necessary to change the direction of movement of the BB more often. Presumably, the estimated time of the maneuver should be ~ 1 sec. Then the lateral displacement of the monoblock will be several meters. It's enough to dodge an interceptor … In this case, at a speed of about 7.5 km / s, the angular deviation of the warhead from the given trajectory will be of the order of 0.001 rad. This is acceptable considering the task of destroying a large city. With such a deviation, the miss will be several kilometers, even if the direction of movement of the warhead changes several thousand kilometers from the target.
The specific impulse of the rocket fuel (UDMG + AT) is assumed to be 3,000 m / sec, then 3.33 kg of fuel will be consumed in 1 second of thrust of 10,000 N. Frequent maneuvers require a substantial supply of fuel.
It can be assumed that the monoblock is capable of performing ~ 100 maneuvers - yawing from side to side, each with a duration of ~ 1 sec, and still get into the city doomed to death. Performing such maneuvers continuously or periodically in ~ 1 sec, he will extremely complicate the task with the EKV aimed at him. During this time ~ 2,000 km to the target will be covered and ~ 300 kg of fuel will be consumed. This is a lot.
Output: it is impossible to dodge interceptors throughout the entire trajectory.
When should you start dodging? When does the CU "know" that the EKV has been attacked? Radar on an ICBM warhead? Command control from the starting position?
Using the radar, the warhead must wait until the distance to the attacking interceptor decreases to ~ 10 km. From that moment on, she will have ~ 1 second in reserve to dodge the blow. The warhead turns on the engine at full thrust and makes a jerk with acceleration g in the direction where its axis is directed. By the time it approaches the interceptor, the engine will run for ~ 1 sec and the warhead will move several meters, which is quite enough for a miss. In my opinion, this is unrealizable …
Probably, proceeding from these estimates, it can be assumed that our ICBM warheads implement the "random yaw of warheads" algorithm, from a certain height (where interception is possible) practically making it difficult to destroy with a kinetic strike.
On the other hand, if the reaction time of the EKV to a change in the target's trajectory turns out to be significantly less than 1 second (which is what the Americans are trying to achieve), in principle it will not be possible to dodge.
MDA Prediction of Interceptor Flight Trajectory Compared to Russian ICBMs
GBI anti-missiles. Missile defense position area in Alaska:
Transportation by DOP:
Unloading from the conveyor:
GBI at MIK Boeing before being sent to the positioning area:
The SBX (Sea-Based X-Band) radar is the primary sensor for ICBM tracking and interaction in the GBI system. The design is an AFAR 22 meters in diameter with 45 056 PPM. Image before installation on a floating platform):
Transatmospheric missile defense interceptors:
Video of the first ground tests of remote control maneuvering and correction.
Exoatomospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV). The interceptor currently used in the GBI system.
Redesigned Kill Vehicle (RKV). The project is a promising interceptor.
The U. S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA), together with Raytheon, have completed the stage of drafting the terms of reference for MIRVs.
Separating kinetic interceptors (literary translation of the name of the warhead of the US missile defense missile). The real name is "Multi-Object Kill Vehicle" (MOKV).
Multi-Object Kill Vehicle (MOKV) after head fairing reset.
Selection of documents on GMD (in English):
Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD)
Statement - Missile Defense Agency
Missile Defense Agency Successfully Completes Ground Test
Conclusion
The persistence (I would say, "stubbornness") of the Americans in missile defense tests against medium-range ballistic missiles is not entirely clear. After all, the RMSD agreement is still valid. There are no ballistic missile launch sites next to the "best country on the planet"; countries with such missiles are now also absent in the Western Hemisphere and are not expected even in the distant future. Monroe Doctrin ("America for Americans") has been performing with a bang for as soon as 200 years. Russian (or even mythical Iraqi, Korean) medium-range ballistic missiles by no means reach the other hemisphere, and the GBI ICBM is not yet capable of intercepting.
"On the thief and the hat is on fire"?
The United States does not rule out the introduction of sanctions against Russia due to the INF Treaty
Photos, videos and materials used:
