WE Branch Fanatic
8th Aug 2009, 16:06
Not so long ago, Flight International had a very interesting article:
Lockheed proposes funding plan for air-launched Patriot missile (http://http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/04/07/324842/lockheed-proposes-funding-plan-for-air-launched-patriot.html)
Lockheed Martin has proposed a $137 million plan to develop and integrate an air-launched version of the MIM-104 Patriot advanced capability-3 (PAC-3) missile on the US Air Force's Boeing F-15C fighter fleet. The plan could come to fruition within 29 to 33 months.
The US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) began funding an air-launched PAC-3 development in 2007 to prosecute ballistic missiles in their boost and terminal phases, although the interceptor could also be capable of shooting down cruise missiles.
Yesterday this article appeared: Air-launch interceptors back in play for US missile defence (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/08/07/330664/air-launch-interceptors-back-in-play-for-us-missile.html)
I remember watching the TV news back in early 1991 and seeing the Scuds coming in to Riyadh or Tel Aviv, and seeing the Patriots being launched to intercept them (yes I know they missed). It looked as if the US had the ability to take out incoming Scuds and similar, we did not. We had the same level of capability against them we had when the V2s were hitting London in 1944. That is - none.
The Royal Navy's new Type 45 will have a potential TBMD capability with Sea Viper - as discussed here (http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/365087-evolution-paams-sea-viper.html). Unfortunately, instead of a class of twelve we will get six. It doesn't matter how capable they are, they can only be in one place at a time. Typhoon numbers have also been cut, but not by anything near 50%.
Nobody can predict the future. I can't be the only person here thinks the UK should be doing more about emerging ballistic missile threats. Not only are deployed UK forces at risk, but also civil populations. Some seem to prefer to forget that the US Navy fired a captured V2 from the deck of USS Midway not long after World War Two. There is nothing to stop a hostile nation putting a few Scuds aboard an innocent looking merchant vessel, as this writer notes (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5438/is_200510/ai_n21380982/). These sort of attacks wouldn't be particularly accurate, but would they need to be? Perhaps the Government's crystal ball says we need not worry about the unexpected?
Isn't countering ballistic missile threats a natural extension of the RAF core roles?
Lockheed proposes funding plan for air-launched Patriot missile (http://http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/04/07/324842/lockheed-proposes-funding-plan-for-air-launched-patriot.html)
Lockheed Martin has proposed a $137 million plan to develop and integrate an air-launched version of the MIM-104 Patriot advanced capability-3 (PAC-3) missile on the US Air Force's Boeing F-15C fighter fleet. The plan could come to fruition within 29 to 33 months.
The US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) began funding an air-launched PAC-3 development in 2007 to prosecute ballistic missiles in their boost and terminal phases, although the interceptor could also be capable of shooting down cruise missiles.
Yesterday this article appeared: Air-launch interceptors back in play for US missile defence (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/08/07/330664/air-launch-interceptors-back-in-play-for-us-missile.html)
I remember watching the TV news back in early 1991 and seeing the Scuds coming in to Riyadh or Tel Aviv, and seeing the Patriots being launched to intercept them (yes I know they missed). It looked as if the US had the ability to take out incoming Scuds and similar, we did not. We had the same level of capability against them we had when the V2s were hitting London in 1944. That is - none.
The Royal Navy's new Type 45 will have a potential TBMD capability with Sea Viper - as discussed here (http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/365087-evolution-paams-sea-viper.html). Unfortunately, instead of a class of twelve we will get six. It doesn't matter how capable they are, they can only be in one place at a time. Typhoon numbers have also been cut, but not by anything near 50%.
Nobody can predict the future. I can't be the only person here thinks the UK should be doing more about emerging ballistic missile threats. Not only are deployed UK forces at risk, but also civil populations. Some seem to prefer to forget that the US Navy fired a captured V2 from the deck of USS Midway not long after World War Two. There is nothing to stop a hostile nation putting a few Scuds aboard an innocent looking merchant vessel, as this writer notes (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5438/is_200510/ai_n21380982/). These sort of attacks wouldn't be particularly accurate, but would they need to be? Perhaps the Government's crystal ball says we need not worry about the unexpected?
Isn't countering ballistic missile threats a natural extension of the RAF core roles?