Raytheon SM-3 Could Replace Arrow-3 Anti Missile Program

Discussion in 'Americas' started by LETHALFORCE, Apr 12, 2009.

  1. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,536
    Likes Received:
    6,537
    http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Raytheon_SM-3_Could_Replace_Arrow-3_Anti_Missile_Program_999.html

    Raytheon SM-3 Could Replace Arrow-3 Anti Missile Program

    Israel's Arrow-3 anti-ballistic missile may be one of the first victims of U.S. President Barack Obama's defense spending cuts.

    Ynet, the Web site of the respected Tel Aviv daily Yediot Aharonot, reported Monday that U.S. funding for the Arrow-3 program is likely to be eliminated.

    However, in compensation, the Obama administration is prepared to help Israel buy the U.S. Navy's Standard Missile 3 anti-ballistic missile system instead, the report said. The SM-3 is built by Raytheon as its primary contractor.

    Ynet said the U.S. Congress is expected to take up the issue soon, possibly as early as its next session.

    Offering the SM-3 makes a lot of sense and could prove a wiser course of action for Israel than pushing ahead with the Arrow-3. The SM-3 is far more expensive per unit at $10 million to $12 million each, compared with the individual projected cost of the Arrow-3 at only $1.5 million to $2 million each. But the SM-3 is a mature technology whose costs will not rise unexpectedly. The Arrow-3 is still in the developmental stage, and no one knows how high its real costs will reach as opposed to the optimistic projections made for it.

    Far more important from Israel's point of view, SM-3s can be sold and deployed quickly, while the Arrow-3 is still at least three years away from operational deployment by the most optimistic assessment. But Iran already has a formidable intermediate-range ballistic missile arsenal and is now developing a far higher and faster intercontinental ballistic missile capability as well.

    The SM-3 showed last year when it shot down a plunging U.S. satellite on Feb. 21, 2008, that it has the capability to destroy targets following the ballistic flight paths and with the speed and acceleration of an incoming ICBM. Ynet noted that the USS Lake Erie, a Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser, destroyed the satellite by firing only a single SM-3, even though the target was plunging to Earth with a combined closing velocity of 22,780 mph at an altitude of 133 nautical miles above the Pacific Ocean.

    Also, as we have noted in our analyses of the problems with Israel's Iron Dome very-short-range anti-ballistic missile defense system, the Jewish state, with a land area comparable to New Jersey and a population of only around 6 million, is world-class at upgrading existing military technologies, but it does not have the resources to develop many new systems of its own.

    This problem may be less in the case of the Arrow-3, which is planned as an exoatmospheric interceptor that can hit and destroy intermediate-range ballistic missiles 60 miles above the surface of Earth. But the Raytheon SM-3 is already an established, reliable technology with a long record of successful IRBM interceptions under its belt.

    The threat Israel faces from a potentially nuclear-armed Iran became imminent in February when Tehran successfully launched its first communications satellite on its own multistage ballistic missile. In effect, as we have often noted, any nation with the capability to launch a satellite into orbit on its own multistage booster already has the intercontinental ballistic missile capability to send a nuclear weapon, not just to Israel, but also 9,000 miles to the Eastern Seaboard cities of the United States.

    Ending U.S. funding for the Arrow-3 would be consistent with President Obama's well-documented skepticism about ballistic missile defenses. Defense Secretary Robert Gates proposed Monday a slashing of funding for the U.S. Missile Defense Agency's Kinetic Energy Interceptor and Airborne Laser programs -- moves that would in effect kill both of them.

    However, Ynet suggested that Raytheon may have applied pressure as well to try to kill the Arrow-3.

    Ynet reported that Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, a strong enthusiast for the Arrow-3 program, recently met with a delegation of visiting U.S. senators and congressmen; following that meeting, he briefed a private meeting of his Labor Party, in which he warned of the pressures to kill the Arrow-3.
     
  2.  
  3. SATISH

    SATISH DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    228
    Well I think we can get involved in the Arrow 3 programme. It will be faster to make it operational.
     
  4. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,536
    Likes Received:
    6,537
    this is a good opportunity fo India.
     
  5. vijaytripoli

    vijaytripoli Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    26
    the point here comes is that will USA give permission to Israel to have a joint collabration with India as ARROW system contain american input also>?
    And what about our own BMD project?( wont DRDo will oppose the ARROw program?)

    chau
     
  6. Pintu

    Pintu New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2009
    Messages:
    12,076
    Likes Received:
    327
    I think Vijay is right , before , joining Israel on Arrow - 3 we should think about our own successful BMD.
     
  7. pyromaniac

    pyromaniac Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    Exactly what I was thinking...India can use the arrow-3 for its phase two or better yet, as an intermediate between phase one and two. If nothing else, it will give us tonnes of experience and some cutting edge technology.
     
  8. Soham

    Soham DFI TEAM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,972
    Likes Received:
    70
    They wouldn't.
     
  9. VayuSena1

    VayuSena1 Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    200
    Likes Received:
    13
    I believe by joining Israel in the middle India could integrate the PAD-AAD combination with the Arrow-3.
     
  10. manoj.joshi26

    manoj.joshi26 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    India should be join in arrow 3 program thats help Indian missile defense research
     
  11. bhramos

    bhramos Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2009
    Messages:
    13,206
    Likes Received:
    6,638
    Location:
    Telangana/India/Bharat
    This Project is similar to What we did did in PAKFA , just Funding.
    we can full TOT, Source Codes , and of course the best of the around.
    by this things we can put all the things into our Indigenous programs and make them best of World
     
  12. bhramos

    bhramos Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2009
    Messages:
    13,206
    Likes Received:
    6,638
    Location:
    Telangana/India/Bharat
    This Project is similar to What we did did in PAKFA , just Funding.
    we can full TOT, Source Codes , and of course the best of the around.
    by this things we can put all the things into our Indigenous programs and make them best of World
     
  13. Vladimir79

    Vladimir79 Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    65
    This is a good opportunity for Russia. With the death of Arrow-3, S-400 will be all the easier to sell. Israel doesn't own the critical technologies needed for Arrow so they can't give you ToT without US approval.
     
  14. bhramos

    bhramos Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2009
    Messages:
    13,206
    Likes Received:
    6,638
    Location:
    Telangana/India/Bharat
    S-400 has range of 400Km, and at its best can trace the Stealth aircraft too,
    but Russia is a signatory of MCTR act, which should not sell a Missile above the range of 300Km,
    as S-400 can also be converted to S-S weapon, its more Lethal then any thing in the World.
     
  15. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,536
    Likes Received:
    6,537
    Vladimir you mentioned awhile back a possible collaboration by Russia and India in making the future S-500 do you know if anything has been talked about regarding this?? Would there be any MCTR restrictions?
     
  16. bhramos

    bhramos Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2009
    Messages:
    13,206
    Likes Received:
    6,638
    Location:
    Telangana/India/Bharat
    Definatly its a MCTR Violation.

    Though India had wanted the BrahMos to be based on a mid range cruise missile, namely P-700 Granit, instead Russia opted for the shorter range sister of the missile, P-800 Oniks, in order to comply with MTCR restrictions, to which Russia is a signatory. Its propulsion is based on the Russian missile, and guidance has been developed by BrahMos Corp.

    BrahMos - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    so only the Range is only 300Km for Brahmos or else it would have been 700km
     
  17. Vladimir79

    Vladimir79 Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    65
    S-400 isn't a ballistic missile so MTCR doesn't apply. If it did, we couldn't offer it for export, ie Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
     
  18. bhramos

    bhramos Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2009
    Messages:
    13,206
    Likes Received:
    6,638
    Location:
    Telangana/India/Bharat
    as you Said MCTR only accepted to Ballistic Missiles.
    Then why did Russia Didnt accept Brahmos Cruise Missile Program.

    In India-Pak relations, Every Ballistic Missile Test should be notified to Pak in advance .
    so only the Indian Govt kept secret of Every K-15 Missile test Secret to even Media.
     
  19. Vladimir79

    Vladimir79 Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    65
    Because Brahmos is a cruise missile, also covered under MTCR, where range is limited to 300km. Of course, S-400 isn't a cruise missile either.
     

Share This Page