Benvenuto Visitatore ( Connettiti | Registrati )


Pagine : (39) [1] 2 3 ... Ultima »  ( Vai al primo messaggio non letto ) Reply to this topicStart new topic

> Missili e Sistemi Missilistici
Enrr
Inviato il: Lunedì, 23-Mar-2009, 09:15
Quote Post





Gruppo: DisegnatoriFD
Messaggi: 2361
Utente Nr.: 3
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



Articolo interessante da defensenews su Aster BMD.

In sunto? Francia sviluppa, Italia e UK alla finestra, ma il conto... blink.gif

QUOTE
French Industry Focuses On Missile Tests

Italy, U.K. Eye Effort To Build Longer-Range Interceptor


PARIS - In season two of the U.S. television series, "The West Wing," the fictitious President Bartlett listens to his chief of staff's fierce support for missile defense and asks the opinion of the eccentric but brilliant British ambassador, who blasts the program for illegality, cost and impracticality.

If Bartlett had asked French industry, he would have found companies eager to build a European anti-ballistic missile capability.

A planned test fire in mid-2010 of an Aster surface-to-air missile carries French industry's hopes of deploying by the end of the next decade a weapon to shoot down medium-range ballistic missiles with a range of 3,000 kilometers, MBDA and Thales executives said.

The firing is a test of the current Aster 30 Block 1 missile, which is being delivered as the Sol Air Moyen Porté/Terrestre (SAMP/T) to the French Air Force and Italian land forces this year. The weapon is designed to blow up aircraft and short-range ballistic missiles with a range of 600 kilometers.

Industry asked for the test, to be held at the Délégation Générale pour l'Armement's (DGA's) Biscrosse missile test range, as part of a strategy to build a Block 2 extended air defense weapon capable of intercepting ballistic missiles with a range of 3,000 kilometers in the exo-atmosphere.

Such a missile killer could provide theater and territorial protection and complement the NATO active layered ballistic missile defense, allowing Europe to compete with Lockheed Martin's Patriot Advanced Capability-3 and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense systems in foreign markets.

Industry looks to the NATO summit on April 3-4 at Strasbourg and Kehl for a political boost when France rejoins the integrated military command and also announces a national contribution of SAMP/T to the alliance's ALTBMD program.

Potential export customers are keen to see the missile's capabilities demonstrated, said Bruno Delacour, Thales vice president for advanced weapon solutions. And a senior Italian defense source said Italy is monitoring development of the Block 2 initiative with interest.

Britain's position is not dissimilar from Italy's. A statement from the Ministry of Defence said the "U.K. currently does not have an endorsed requirement for a TBMD capability but we are monitoring developments in this area."


MBDA executives speaking in London on March 18 confirmed they had "exchanged views on the subject [of ballistic missile defense] with the British customer."

Alongside France and Italy, the British are partners in developing Aster's naval version, known as the Principal Anti-Air Missile System.

The missiles are the main armament of the Royal Navy's new Type 45 destroyers, due to enter service in the next year or so.

Earlier this year, British naval officers admitted that with a few tweaks to the missile and associated radars, the Type 45 could take on the anti-ballistic missile defense role.

Industry Charts Aster Road Map

The Aster evolution is backed by MBDA, Safran and Thales, which are seeking development funding for Block 2 from the French government. MBDA and Thales executives estimate up to 5 billion euros ($6.48 billion) would be needed to deploy an Aster Block 2 from 2020.

Under a cooperation agreement for Aster's evolution, MBDA handles the missile, Safran's Snecma Propulsion Solide the propellant, Sagem an infrared seeker for exo-atmospheric intercept, while Thales works on fire control and the M3R detection and tracking radar.

The target of next year's test fire will replicate a ballistic missile, an MBDA executive said. The intercept would be done in the terminal phase and at an altitude of 15 to 20 kilometers, the executive said.

A Rafael Black Sparrow missile is expected to be the target, fired from an Israel Air Force F-15 brought over for the test, French publication Air & Cosmos has reported.

In parallel, the DGA is funding a two-year feasibility, or definition, study by MBDA and Thales to improve Aster Block 1 performance with a new Thales radar seeker to tackle smaller, faster, longer-range ballistic missiles, Delacour said.

MBDA refers to Aster evolution as an extended air defense system rather than missile defense, which has roots in the strategic Star Wars program and echoes of downing ICBMs with space and airborne lasers.

A demonstrator seeker will be tested this year on a helicopter and mounted on next year's test-fire Aster, Delacour said. The seeker will have wider bandwidth and increased range of detection.

MBDA hopes the test fire will yield a development contract to field the Aster Block 1 evolution, also known as NT (New Technology), around 2014-15, to take out missiles with a range of 1,000 kilometers.

The NT version is an intermediate stage to the Block 2, but funding has not been secured beyond the DGA definition study, never mind the full development to intercept missiles with a range of 3,000 kilometers.

What's There Now

The DGA spokesman said France's national contribution to the NATO layered missile defense would be the SAMP/T battery, the M3R radar and the French SCOA air defense command-and-control system, as well as money for work on the NATO Air Command and Control System.

French government support for SAMP/T included development for the NT version to handle obsolescence, the spokesman said.

The Block 1 is optimized for protecting troops deployed overseas.

"At the present time, it's fortunate that France's operational needs more or less correspond with its financial capacity," said Jean-Pierre Maulny, deputy director of think tank Institut des Relations Internationales et Stratégiques. "The most urgent need is theater defense for deployed troops; that's a capability that is being acquired without too much financial effort."

Territorial defense, however, is another matter. France has a "nonposition" of not opposing American deployment of anti-ballistic missiles for defense of the United States. A classic French diplomatic approach is to negotiate with Iran rather than add to proliferation by putting U.S. missile interceptors and radars into Eastern Europe, he said.

A program that supports France's nuclear deterrence is the Spirale satellite program, which aims to provide an early warning system for missile launch, he said.

France also is committed to developing a very long-range radar by the end of the next decade to detect ballistic missile threats, the DGA spokesman said. Territorial defense raises the question of industrial policy, whether France will fund a technological capability for a medium-range anti-missile weapon, Maulny said.

Research fellow Hélène Masson at think-tank Fondation pour la Récherche Stratégique said that for now, industry is making decisions without a clear political position.

"Companies are working among themselves," she said. "That may lead to policy decisions being made."

Territorial Defense in Sight

The Block 2 missile, given its long range and broad coverage, could be used for territorial defense and complement NATO's active layered theater ballistic missile defense, providing coverage on the Mediterranean southern flank.

New elements of the planned extended version of the Aster include solid fuel propellant and a lateral control system, on which Safran Group's Snecma Propulsion Solide has been working. A technological challenge lies in delivering the lateral control system, business development director Norbert Laurençon at the Snecma business unit said.

The new lateral control would use a solid divert and attitude-control system. This would be "very different from a classical technology" as the missile design calls for a highly sensitive and fast thrust modulation from very low to very high pressure in a few milliseconds, Laurençon said.
PMEmail Poster
Top
Massimo
Inviato il: Lunedì, 23-Mar-2009, 09:52
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 452
Utente Nr.: 10
Iscritto il: 19-Mar-2009



Ecco il SAMP/T block 1+ (NT) ed il Block 2, sistemi con caratteristiche decisamente interessanti.
Come ebbi già modo di dire, io non ritengo lugimirante la scelta di essere entrati in due programmi molto simili, SAMP/T per l'EI e MEADS per AM.
Ad oggi essi paiono essere molto simili come caratteristiche. Si, qualcuno potrà obiettare che il MEADS nasce più moderno e con radar più prestanti, ma il vero confronto si dovrebbe fare con il SAMP/T block 1 NT e non la versione base.
Tra l'altro questa penso sarà facilmente upgradabile, essendo un sistema concepito a blocchi, con l'aggiunta del nuovo radar M3R in sviluppo da Thales, nuovo software e l'introduzione della nuova munizione.
Per completare verso l'alto le esigenze nazionali, secondo me bisognava indirizzarsi più verso un sistema come il THAAD.
Quindi avrei visto l'AM acquistare off the shelf qualche batteria THAAD, senza spendere centinaia di milioni di euro per cosviluppare un sistema come il MEADS che rischia di essere un doppione del SAMP/T NT.
D'altronde l'EI con il SAMP/T ha tra i suoi compiti anche quello della difesa aerea delle truppe schierate all'estero, l'AM dovrebbe invece più occuparsi della difesa del suolo patrio in particolare in funzione ATBM, inoltre le caratteristiche conosciute del THAAD in particolare del raggio d'azione (circa 200 km) sarebbero state più adatte a sostituire il vecchio missile a lungo raggio che era in dotazione, cioè il Nike Hercules.
Essendo comunque mancata questa occasione, vedrei di buon occhio, la standardizzazione dei sistemi superficie/aria in ambito nazionale, con conseguente risparmio logistico ed addestrativo.
Mi spiego meglio, doterei l'EI di 5 batterie SAMP/T inizialmente block 1 e poi con il tempo aggiornandole al nuovo standard block 1 NT, mentre l'AM potrebbe acquistarne altrettante da dotare anche con munizione block 2 quando disponibile (raggio d'azione circa 150 km e capacità di abbattere un missile anche a 60 km di altezza).
Non si dimentichi inoltre che già adesso la MM dispone sia di Aster 15 e Aster 30, quest'ultimo molto simile alla munizione in dotazione al SAMP/T block 1 dell'esercito. Ed un domani anche la MM potrebbe essere interessata a dotarsi dell' Aster 30 block2 (in funzione antibalistica) considerato che nascerà compatibile con le celle Sylver50 montate sulle unità navali in dotazione (Doria e Bergamini classes).
PMEmail Poster
Top
Adv
Adv














Top
Von Seeckt
Inviato il: Lunedì, 23-Mar-2009, 17:59
Quote Post





Gruppo: Moderatori
Messaggi: 1738
Utente Nr.: 6
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



La vera differenza fra aster e MEADS risiede nel fatto che aster è un vero missile da difesa aerea, mentre il MEADS, inteso come Patriot PAC3, no. In pratica, il MEADS può operare solo a distanze ridicole, per un missile Antiaereo.

Quanto ad un futuribile Aster blockII, a quel che ne so dovrebbe nascere compatibile con i lanciatori A70, non con gli A50.
PM
Top
Enrr
Inviato il: Lunedì, 23-Mar-2009, 18:06
Quote Post





Gruppo: DisegnatoriFD
Messaggi: 2361
Utente Nr.: 3
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



QUOTE (Von Seeckt @ Lunedì, 23-Mar-2009, 15:29)
Quanto ad un futuribile Aster blockII, a quel che ne so dovrebbe nascere compatibile con i lanciatori A70, non con gli A50.

Al contrario dovrebbe starci proprio nel Sylver A50
PMEmail Poster
Top
Von Seeckt
Inviato il: Lunedì, 23-Mar-2009, 18:24
Quote Post





Gruppo: Moderatori
Messaggi: 1738
Utente Nr.: 6
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



QUOTE (Enrr @ Lunedì, 23-Mar-2009, 16:36)
Al contrario dovrebbe starci proprio nel Sylver A50

Beh, se ricordo male MEGLIO!
PM
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Lunedì, 30-Mar-2009, 16:48
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



Informazioni e foto satellitari del vettore spaziale (o ICBM ?) nord coreano .....

http://www.isis-online.org/publications/dp...26March2009.pdf

http://www.isis-online.org/publications/dp...27March2009.pdf

http://www.isis-online.org/publications/dp...29March2009.pdf

Segue un commento apparso sul blog "Ares" di AW&ST .....

QUOTE
North Korean Booster: Up Close
Posted by Robert Wall at 3/30/2009 2:51 AM CDT 

The Institute for Science and International Security has released a new picture of North Korea’s missile activity in the run-up to the anticipated launch in a few days.

This image:

user posted image

Was  taken by DigitalGlobe at approximately 11:00 a.m. North Korea time on March 29. It’s of the Musudan-ri missile site and clearly shows what North Korea says is a space launcher.

ISIS points out you can also see the shadow from the missile launch gantry.

This is the clearest picture, yet, (publicly available, I should add), of the missile. ISIS suspects that the missile, which was installed around March 24, may previously have been shrouded by the North Koreans, which would explain why earlier images weren’t as clear.

The U.S. plans to have at least two Aegis ships monitoring the launch, although defense secretary Robert Gates told Fox News on Sunday there were no plans to attempt a shoot down.

The folks at the ArmsControlWonk blog have been following the North Korea launcher activity pretty closely and here’s their initial read from the ISIS picture: the first stage takes up about 2/3 of the missile. The third stage appears quite short with a fairly large nosecone fairing.

There will be plenty of interesting things to see once the launch happens. How will the Japanese react, what performance can the booster actually deliver, and will it impact the U.S. missile defense debate. It's likely to provide a boost for advocates of sea-based missile defenses, that's probably clear, regardless of whether North Korea's claims this is a space launcher not a missile  are accurate.





PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Sabato, 04-Apr-2009, 08:50
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



Nuova foto satellitare della rampa di lancio di Musudan-ri .....
Sembra che il miisile sia stato nuovamente coperto .....


http://www.isis-online.org/publications/dp..._2April2009.pdf
PMEmail Poster
Top
Enrr
Inviato il: Sabato, 04-Apr-2009, 10:54
Quote Post





Gruppo: DisegnatoriFD
Messaggi: 2361
Utente Nr.: 3
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



Harpoon silurato... il primo dei tagli del pentagono

da Ares
QUOTE
 
Harpoon Torpedoed ... First of Many Expected Kills to Come


The Navy is expected to kill the Harpoon Block III upgrade program next week owing to poor performance on developing a Rockwell Collins datalink.

That datalink was to be GFE to Boeing, which was to integrate it onto the Harpoon anti-ship missile. Neither company commented, and the Navy said it was "predecisional" and couldn't yet discuss the issue.

The termination is expected to happen Monday or Tuesday.

Navy officials had cited some slippage in the program late last year, but there was no indication the program was doomed until today. The datalink was to provide in-flight targeting updates and allow more effective destruction of shipping targets. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has indicated he will kill programs suffering from poor execution, and it appears Harpoon Block III is the first of many to come.

He is expected to brief the media on the fiscal 2010 budget, and changes to up to 55 defense programs, early next week.

Meanwhile, it is unclear how the datalink termination will impact other weapons efforts.This same datalink is slated for integration onto the Raytheon Joint Standoff Missile C1 and, possibly, Raytheon's Small Diameter Bomb II offering. Raytheon is squaring off against a Boeing/Lockheed Martin team for the SDB II contract, and a winner will be selected in the fall. 
PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Domenica, 05-Apr-2009, 08:36
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



Lo hanno lanciato .....

QUOTE

BBC NEWS
Defiant N Korea launches rocket

North Korea has defied international warnings and gone ahead with a controversial rocket launch.

The rocket blasted off from the Musudan-ri launch site in the north-east of the country at 0230 GMT.

North Korea said it was sending a satellite into orbit, but its neighbours suspect the launch was a cover for a long-range missile test.

They strongly condemned the launch. The US president told Pyongyang to "refrain from further provocative actions".

North Korea had "ignored its international obligations, rejected unequivocal calls for restraint, and further isolated itself from the community of nations", Barack Obama said in a written statement.

Japan called the move "extremely regrettable", while South Korea said it constituted a clear breach of a United Nations resolution.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said North Korea's actions were not conducive to regional stability, as did the European Union. China and Russia both called on all sides to act with restraint.

The UN Security Council has approved a Japanese request for an emergency session later in the day in New York.

No intercept

North Korea announced several weeks ago that it planned to send what it called an "experimental communications satellite" into space.

Its rocket blasted off just before midday local time, within a pre-announced launch window.

It flew over Japan towards the Pacific, with two booster stages dropping into the ocean to the east and west of Japan, Tokyo said.

Japan said it had not tried to intercept the rocket. It had indicated it would do so if the rocket threatened its territory.

North Korea says that the launch is part of what it calls peaceful space development.

An unidentified South Korean official told Yonhap news agency that the rocket did appear to be carrying a satellite. It is not clear whether a satellite was successfully put into space.

If it is confirmed, North Korea will see this as a major propaganda victory, says the BBC's John Sudworth in Seoul.

But of more concern to Pyongyang's neighbours is the potential military use of the launch vehicle, our correspondent says.

They believe the real aim of the launch was to test long-range missile technology; specifically the Taepodong-2.

They believe it could put parts of the US within the communist nation's military reach.

North Korea first tested a Taepodong-2 in July 2006. It failed less than a minute after lift-off.

Three months later, Pyongyang carried out a nuclear test. International talks involving the US, South Korea, Japan, Russia and China on an aid-for-nuclear disarmament deal are currently stalled.








PMEmail Poster
Top
madmike
Inviato il: Domenica, 05-Apr-2009, 09:57
Quote Post





Gruppo: Admin
Messaggi: 10446
Utente Nr.: 13
Iscritto il: 19-Mar-2009



e, come volevasi dimostrare, non e' successo nulla.
PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Domenica, 05-Apr-2009, 10:13
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



Secondo "The New York Times" .....

QUOTE
South Korean officials, after studying the rocket’s trajectory, said it appeared to have been configured to thrust a satellite into orbit, as the North had claimed. North Korea announced that it successfully put its satellite into orbit nine minutes after the rocket’s blastoff.

The North’s Kwangmyongsong-2, or "Lodestar-2," named after the propaganda nickname of its leader, Kim Jong-il, is in an orbit 490 to 1,426 kilometers, 304 to 886 miles, from the Earth and circling once every 104 minutes, said the North’s state-run news agency, KCNA. South Korean officials could not immediately verify the North’s claim.


PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Domenica, 05-Apr-2009, 13:22
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



A quanto pare ..... non è riuscito .....

Dal sito dello U.S. Northern Command .....

QUOTE
NORAD and USNORTHCOM monitor North Korean launch

April 05, 2009

PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. — North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command officials acknowledged today that North Korea launched a Taepo Dong 2 missile at 10:30 p.m. EDT Saturday which passed over the Sea of Japan and the nation of Japan. 

Stage one of the missile fell into the Sea of Japan. The remaining stages along with the payload itself landed in the Pacific Ocean. 

No object entered orbit and no debris fell on Japan. 

NORAD and USNORTHCOM assessed the space launch vehicle as not a threat to North America or Hawaii and took no action in response to this launch.

This is all of the information that will be provided by NORAD and USNORTHCOM pertaining to the launch.


Un comunicato, dunque, alquanto stringato ma, al tempo stesso, categorico .....



PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Domenica, 05-Apr-2009, 16:44
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



Ulteriori conferme .....

QUOTE

BBC News
North Korea space launch 'fails'

North Korea failed in its attempt to get a satellite into space after a rocket launch early on Sunday, US and South Korean officials say.

Two stages of the rocket and its payload landed in the Pacific Ocean, a US military statement said.

Hours earlier North Korea claimed the satellite had successfully been put into orbit and was transmitting data.

The US, EU, Japan and South Korea condemned the launch, thought to be a cover for a long-range missile test.

US President Barack Obama urged Pyongyang to "refrain from further provocative actions".

"North Korea broke the rules once more by testing a rocket that could be used for a long-range missile," Mr Obama told a crowd in the Czech capital, Prague.

"This provocation underscores the need for action - not just this afternoon at the UN Security Council, but in our determination to prevent the spread of these weapons."

Later a joint US-EU statement urged Pyongyang to abandon its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and "policy of threats aimed at its neighbours".

The launch "harms peace and stability in northeast Asia", the statement added.

The Security Council approved a Japanese request for the emergency session.

Washington, Tokyo and Seoul regard the launch as a clear violation of Security Council resolution 1718 adopted in October 2006, which bans North Korea from carrying out ballistic missile activity.

However, both China and Russia have urged restraint in the international response.

'No threat to US'

In a statement on its website, the US Northern Command said North Korea launched a three-stage Taepodong-2 missile at 0230GMT.

"Stage one of the missile fell into the Sea of Japan/East Sea. The remaining stages along with the payload itself landed in the Pacific Ocean."

"No object entered orbit and no debris fell on Japan."

US military authorities "assessed the space launch vehicle as not a threat to North America or Hawaii and took no action in response to this launch," the statement added.

Earlier, state media in North Korea said satellite 'Kwangmyongsong-2' had been placed in orbit.

The satellite was transmitting data and the "Song of General Kim Il-sung" and "Song of General Kim Jong-il" - references to the late founder of North Korea and his son, the current leader - the report claimed.

The BBC's John Sudworth in Seoul says a failure would seriously detract from North Korea's ability to exploit the propaganda value of the launch, although it may never admit it to its own people.

In a previous satellite launch attempt in 1998, North Korea said it was sending up a device that would orbit the world transmitting revolutionary melodies.

It claimed this was also successful but the launch is believed to have been a failure as no trace of the satellite was ever found.

Testing technology?

North Korea gave prior warning of the launch and repeatedly said it was using it as part of the peaceful pursuit of a space programme, as is its right under international law. 

But Pyongyang's neighbours and the US are concerned about the potential military use of the launch vehicle.

They believe the real aim of the launch was to test long-range missile technology, specifically the Taepodong-2.

They believe it could put parts of the US within the communist nation's military reach.

North Korea first tested a Taepodong-2 in July 2006. It failed less than a minute after lift-off.

Three months later, Pyongyang carried out a nuclear test.

International talks involving the US, South Korea, Japan, Russia and China on an aid-for-nuclear disarmament deal are currently stalled.

PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Lunedì, 06-Apr-2009, 14:43
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



Il sito della KCNA (Korean Central News Agency), che IERI stava ancora annunciando il lancio come imminente, ha finalmente dato la "lieta notizia" .....

QUOTE
KCNA on DPRK's Successful Launch of Satellite Kwangmyongsong-2

Pyongyang, April 5 (KCNA) -- Scientists and technicians of the DPRK have succeeded in putting satellite Kwangmyongsong-2, an experimental communications satellite, into orbit by means of carrier rocket Unha-2 under the state long-term plan for the development of outer space.

Unha-2, which was launched at the Tonghae Satellite Launching Ground in Hwadae County, North Hamgyong Province at 11:20 on April 5, Juche 98 (2009), accurately put Kwangmyongsong-2 into its orbit at 11:29:02, nine minutes and two seconds after its launch.

The satellite is going round the earth along its elliptic orbit at the angle of inclination of 40.6 degrees at 490 km perigee and 1,426 km apogee. Its cycle is 104 minutes and 12 seconds.

Mounted on the satellite are necessary measuring devices and communications apparatuses.

The satellite is going round on its routine orbit.

It is sending to the earth the melodies of the immortal revolutionary paeans "Song of General Kim Il Sung" and "Song of General Kim Jong Il" and measured information at 470 MHz. By the use of the satellite the relay communications is now underway by UHF frequency band.

The satellite is of decisive significance in promoting the scientific researches into the peaceful use of outer space and solving scientific and technological problems for the launch of practical satellites in the future.

Carrier rocket Unha-2 has three stages.

The carrier rocket and the satellite developed by the indigenous wisdom and technology are the shining results gained in the efforts to develop the nation's space science and technology on a higher level.

The successful satellite launch symbolic of the leaping advance made in the nation's space science and technology was conducted against the background of the stirring period when a high-pitched drive for bringing about a fresh great revolutionary surge is under way throughout the country to open the gate to a great prosperous and powerful nation without fail by 2012, the centenary of birth of President Kim Il Sung, under the far-reaching plan of General Secretary Kim Jong Il. This is powerfully encouraging the Korean people all out in the general advance.


E c'è pure una notizia riguardante il "Caro Leader" .....

QUOTE
Kim Jong Il Observes Launch of Satellite Kwangmyongsong-2

Pyongyang, April 5 (KCNA) -- General Secretary Kim Jong Il visited the General Satellite Control and Command Centre to watch the process of launching the experimental communications satellite Kwangmyongsong-2 on Sunday.

He acquainted himself with the preparations made for the satellite launch.

After being briefed on the satellite launch, he observed the whole process of the satellite launch at the centre.

At 11:20 a.m. the satellite Kwangmyongsong-2, a shining product of self-reliance, soared into space by carrier rocket Unha-2. It was smoothly and accurately put into its orbit 9 minutes and 2 seconds after being completely separated from the carrier rocket.

Expressing great satisfaction over the fact that scientists and technicians of the DPRK successfully launched the satellite with their own wisdom and technology, he highly appreciated their feats and extended thanks to them.

It is a striking demonstration of the might of our Juche-oriented science and technology that our scientists and technicians developed both the multistage carrier rocket and the satellite with their own wisdom and technology 100 percent and accurately put the satellite into orbit at one go, he noted, repeatedly praising the patriotic devotion of the scientists and technicians who are playing a vanguard role in the drive to open the gate to a great prosperous and powerful nation.

Stressing the need to bring about a new turn in conquering outer space and making a peaceful use of it on the basis of the successful launch of the satellite Kwangmyongsong-2, he set forth the important tasks to be fulfilled to do so.

He met with the scientists and technicians who have contributed to the satellite launch by devoting all their wisdom and enthusiasm with ardent patriotism and warmly encouraged them before having a photograph taken with them.

He was accompanied by Secretary Jon Pyong Ho and First Vice-Department Director Ju Kyu Chang of the WPK Central Committee.


user posted image


user posted image



PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Martedì, 07-Apr-2009, 18:47
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



Si muovono i politici .....

QUOTE
N. Korean Missile Launch Condemned

Apr 7, 2009
By John M. Doyle
(dal dito di AW&ST)

Republicans in Congress are calling for beefed-up missile defense spending and economic sanctions against North Korea for its weekend missile launch, which was ostensibly to send a satellite into orbit but is suspected of being a covert intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) test.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, the senior Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said April 5 she soon will introduce legislation requiring economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation to remain in place "until North Korea abandons its illegal nuclear, missile, and weapons programs."

According to U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) and North American Aerospace Command (NORAD), North Korea launched a Taepo Dong II missile April 4 Eastern Standard Time. The first stage of the three-stage missile fell into the Sea of Japan. The remaining stages flew over Japan and apparently fell into the sea without deploying the payload into space.

But President Barack Obama, calling the launch "a provocative act," noted that any missile launch violated United Nations Security Council Resolution 1718, "which expressly prohibits North Korea from conducting ballistic missile-related activities of any kind."

The Democratic and Republican leadership of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) condemned the missile launch, but Republicans also called on Obama to continue spending on "a strong, layered missile defense system."

While the test appeared unsuccessful "at first glance," said Rep. John McHugh (R-N.Y.), senior Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, "North Korea seems to have made significant progress in its long-range ballistic missile technology, and will view it as a success simply because the international community allowed it to happen."

Because of its past nuclear testing and proliferation efforts, North Korea "must not be allowed to sell" long range missile technology to Iran and others, McHugh said.

In a joint statement, HASC Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) and Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.), chair of the strategic forces subcommittee, said the committee had "worked for many years to ensure" fully-funded near-term missile defense systems including the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system, the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system and the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system. Democrats in the House and Senate have been critical of the money spent on the GMD system, claiming that all segments of it have not been fully tested.





PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Martedì, 07-Apr-2009, 18:54
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



Intanto ..... in Israele .....

QUOTE
Arrow Scores In Latest Test
Posted by David Eshel at 4/7/2009 11:05 AM CDT
(dal blog "Ares" di AW&ST)

Israel has announced a successful test of the Arrow 2 ballistic missile defense system. The test took place in southern Israel on Tuesday morning, April 7, using a target missile simulating an advanced Iranian Shahab 3.

user posted image

The interceptor missile was launched around 11 a.m. local time from the army's Palmahim base near Ashdod. The target was a Blue Sparrow missile, developed by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and launched by an IAF F-15, which mimics an Iranian Shahab 3 solid-fueled ballistic missile, carrying a split warhead and with advanced radar-evading capabilities.

It was the 18th test of the Arrow, and the first in which the latest Arrow 2 configuration was tested in its entirety, including a new version of the Green Pine radar system, manufactured by the Elta division of Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI). The test was conducted jointly by the IAF and the US Missile Defense Agency. (The Arrow has been developed in cooperation by IAI and Boeing.)

user posted image

Today's test included the joint Arrow System Improvement Program (ASIP), developed in order to enhance the Arrow's ability to defeat longer-range ballistic missile threats emerging in the Middle East. Previous launches have been testing the system to improve its performance at high altitudes and against multiple incoming missiles. Israel is also working on the Arrow 3 ballistic defense system, aimed at defeating even more advanced threats.


PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Venerdì, 10-Apr-2009, 18:44
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



Qualche nuova informazione sull'armamento missilistico del MiG-31 .....

QUOTE
Defense

Russian Air Force Details MiG-31BM AAMs

Aviation Week & Space Technology Apr 13 , 2009 , p. 36
Douglas Barrie  (London)

Moscow reveals AAM inventory for Foxhound upgrade, unveils revised Amos
Printed headline: Russian Icon


The Russian air force is—for the first time—detailing the air-to-air weapons capability of the MiG-31BM variant of the Foxhound, and showing the actual configuration of the R-33S long-range missile.

A MiG-31BM was on display at Kubinka air base for the visit of President Dmitry Medvedev at the end of March, as was an array of weaponry for the aircraft. Medvedev was shown the latest additions to the air force inventory and upgraded aircraft types; he also was given a flight in a Sukhoi Su-34 Fullback.

The appearance of the MiG-31BM, and its weaponry, underscores the aircraft’s continuing importance—and prestige—to the air force. The Foxhound remains the service’s primary long-range air defense platform, designed from the outset to engage strike aircraft as well as cruise missiles.

The MiG-31BM is an upgrade to in-service aircraft, but draws on systems and weapons originally intended for the canceled MiG-31M mid-life upgrade. The aircraft’s passive phased array radar is believed to be boosted to the Zaslon AM standard.

Displayed at Kubinka alongside two Vympel (now part of Tactical Missile Corp.) R-33 (AA-9 Amos) missiles were two R-33Ss (AA-9Bs). The latter variant has only been partially seen in photographs taken in 1994 at the air force flight test center at Ahktubinsk.

user posted image

The R-33S (top image two center missiles) differs from the basic R-33 in having modified aerodynamic surfaces as well as internal upgrades. The weapon was displayed near a MiG-31BM at Kubinka.  Credit: SERGEI KUZNETSOV PHOTOS

user posted image

The R-33Ss in the 1994 photos were mounted in the two center semi-recessed stations of the MiG-31M. That aircraft was designed to carry up to six long-range air-to-air missiles semi-recessed under the fuselage, while earlier versions of the Foxhound could only carry four. The R-33S displayed did have the four fixed destabilizers to the rear of the radome; it did not have its main wing surfaces fitted.

The two R-33Ss at Kubinka indicate an alteration to the wing configuration; the trailing edge now ends considerably short of the four rear-control surfaces.

Development of the R-33S stretches back to the 1980s, and its service status has long remained in question publicly, though test rounds, at least, may have been produced as far back as the early 1990s. The development of an improved variant of the basic Amos reputedly stemmed in part from some specifications being compromised by Adolf Tolkachev, a lead engineer at a major design bureau, who passed classified information to the U.S., including on the Foxhound and its weapons. This is believed to have spurred development of the MiG-31B/BS, with the modified Amos as part of the effort.

Aerodynamically, the R-33S offers improved maneuverability over the basic weapon. The R-33 was not designed to engage a maneuvering target; however, the introduction of destabilizers along with the redesigned wing offers some increase in performance in this area. The Amos has a published maximum engagement range of about 120 km. (64 naut. mi.) against a non-maneuvering target at high altitude; the range is reduced for low-altitude engagements to around 35 km. Semi-active radar-guidance is used for the terminal phase of the engagement.

Vympel officials have also suggested that the design included changes to the solid-rocket motor. The basic R-33 weighs 490 kg. (1,080 lb.) and is carried on the MiG-31 by the AKU-410 pylon. A pylon variant, the AKU-410-1, however, was described by Vympel as capable of carrying a 530-kg. weapon. The weight increase could indicate the weapon has a greater overall kinematic capability than the original R-33.

A display board at Kubinka indicated that the aircraft would be capable of carrying K-77-1s and K-37Ms—designations for further developments of the R-77 (AA-12 Adder) and K-37 (AA-X-13), respectively, both designed by Vympel.

The K-77-1 is the first element in a staged upgrade program of the basic R-77, which has not entered Russian air force inventory in significant numbers. Flight testing of the K-77-1 may well have been underway by 2007. A more extensive upgrade of the R-77 (known as RVV-AE for export) is the K-77M.

The K-37M is a further development of the K-37 program intended for the MiG-31M. Test firings of the K-37 were carried out in the mid-1990s, well in excess of the maximum engagement of the R-33. A firing in 1994 included hitting a large target at a range of 260 km. The original K-37 may have employed a dual-mode semi-active/active-radar seeker combination, though the K-37M might use only the active-radar guidance.



















PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Venerdì, 10-Apr-2009, 23:21
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



Qualche ulteriore dettaglio (di fonte americana) sul lancio del missile nord-coreano .....

QUOTE
North Korean Missile Threat May Bolster Arguments Against U.S. Misdef Cuts

Aviation Week & Space Technology Apr 13 , 2009 , p. 27

John M. Doyle
Washington

Robert Wall
Paris

U.S. misdef advocates use North Korean launch to bolster argument against budget cuts
Printed headline:  Failure and Fallout


Missile defense backers are seizing on North Korea’s launch of another ballistic missile to stave off a Pentagon plan to massively overhaul the multibillion-dollar misdef program.

Despite the fact that the Taepodong-2 launch on Apr. 5 failed in flight, missile defense proponents on and off Capitol Hill are rallying to fight the Pentagon’s proposal (unveiled less than 48 hr. after the test shot) to reduce misdef spending by $1.4 billion and kill several programs. But the campaign is expected to be an uphill battle against a president and defense secretary intent on finding ways to cut overall defense spending (AW&ST Mar. 16, p. 24).

At a Pentagon press briefing last week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced his recommendations to President Barack Obama for revamping the Fiscal 2010 defense budget. Included were restructuring the misdef program “to focus on the rogue state and theater missile threat.”

Technical details aside, pro-missile defense lawmakers continue to make an emotional appeal in the wake of the North Korean incident. Gates did not suggest cutting the bulk of misdef spending, which has been hovering around $10 billion in recent years, and the programs that were cut were still in the development stage.

Despite Gates’s request to put aside parochial interests, opposition from lawmakers was swift; largely from those whose states have an economic interest either in missile manufacture, like Arizona, or deployment, like Alaska. Republican Rep. Todd Akin (Mo.) said, “Democrats in Congress, and perhaps, the administration” sought the cuts for partisan reasons, including offsetting domestic program increases.

Six U.S. senators, two Democrats, three Republicans and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), urged Obama to countermand Gates’s deep cuts to misdef programs “that are critically important to protecting our homeland and our allies.” However, Gates suggests he can assuage their fears, noting that “we just need to sit down and work through the analysis with them.” He added: “If we can show them what we are sustaining with the ground-based interceptors for midcourse and the research and development that we have continued with respect to the boost phase, perhaps we can persuade them that all is not as bad as they seem to think.”

user posted image

North Korea has yet to successfully complete a test of its Taepodong-2 ballistic missile, but that does not reassure opponents of U.S. missile defense cuts.  Credit: AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

To that end, Gates announced plans to increase spending on the Army’s Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (Thaad) system and the Navy’s SM-3 missile by $700 million. He also plans to add $200 million to fund the conversion of six additional Aegis Navy ships to provide ballistic missile defense capabilities.

A Thaad battery in Hawaii was on alert for the North Korean missile show, Gates says. It was the first time Thaad was put on alert. It also signals that Thaad is increasingly regarded as an adjunct for safeguarding the U.S., even though it was initially conceived mainly for protection of deployed forces.

But the Taepodong-2 failed long before coming into Thaad range. The Defense Dept. says the first stage fell into the Sea of Japan. The remaining stages arced over Japan but failed to stage; both the second and upper stages fell into the Pacific. The missile flew around 3,200 km.

Meanwhile, technical analysts are starting to draw conclusions about what the missile’s configuration says about North Korea’s engineering skills and potential association with other countries, in particular Iran.

An initial assessment of photos and video from the Taepodong-2 launch—or Unha-2, the North Korean moniker for what it says was a space launcher—indicates the missile was about 30 meters long, with a 2.5-meter-dia. first stage, about half the rocket’s length, says Robert Schmucker, a German missile expert and adviser to its defense ministry. The first stage is likely to have featured a cluster of four engines of Nodong or Shabab design, he notes. The upper stage had a diameter of around 1.25 meters and was about 2 meters high. Schmucker says it shows similarities to Iran’s Safir program, intimating a continued close working relationship between the countries.

The analysis suggests North Korea has made progress in refining the Taepodong-2 configuration, which failed 40 sec. into flight in a July 5, 2006, attempt. The latest configuration was shorter than the 35-meter version fired three years ago, and does not feature fins. Geoffrey Forden, a Research Associate at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, suggests the engine cluster uses a single turbopump. That implies an important weight reduction and increasing sophistication on the North Korean side, he says.

Several lawmakers, such as Rep. John McHugh (N.Y.), the senior Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, cited the connection between North Korea and Iran. Based on past nuclear testing and proliferation efforts, McHugh said, North Korea “must not be allowed to sell” long-range missile technology.

Bruce Bechtol, Jr., a professor of international relations at the Marine Corps Command and Staff College in Quantico, Va., said he would be “very, very surprised” if Iranians were not in attendance considering that officials of both countries have been present at each other’s past tests. Whatever political and diplomatic mileage North Korea got from the launch were ancillary to the technological knowledge it gleaned, Bechtol told an American Enterprise Institute gathering. “North Korea had and has a great deal to gain from proliferation to Iran,” he added.

Israel also is working on a higher-end interceptor to be able to stop longer-range Iranian ballistic missiles.

Meanwhile, in restructuring misdef spending plans, Gates says he is taking $1.4 billion out of the program, which received $8.6 billion in Fiscal 2009. The Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV) program, in which Lockheed Martin and Raytheon are developing competing designs, is being terminated. Plans to buy a second Boeing Airborne Laser prototype are also scratched. The 747-400F equipped with a chemical laser will be given a chance to prove it can shoot down a ballistic missile in flight—slated for this year—but Gates says its “proposed operational role is highly questionable.”

The budget for the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI), a Northrop Grumman/Raytheon/ATK mobile, land-based, high-speed booster meant to attack missiles in the boost-phase, was not cut. In addition to being competition for ABL, KEI has been touted as a replacement for ground-based interceptors (GBIs) in Alaska.

The MDA budget overhaul would limit Alaska-based GBIs to 26, with another four at Vandenberg AFB, Calif. Plans originally called for 40 of the Orbital Sciences Corp. interceptors in Alaska.



PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Venerdì, 10-Apr-2009, 23:45
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



E ..... gli Americani ringraziano .....

QUOTE
Thank You, Dear Leader

Posted by John M. Doyle at 4/10/2009 3:07 PM CDT
(dal Blog "Ares" di AW&ST) 

In the weeks before Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced his revisions to the Pentagon’s Fiscal 2010 budget request – and rumors about which programs would be killed or wounded circled the Beltway -- most of the major missile defense contractors were making the rounds in Washington, explaining to lawmakers, reporters and think tanks why their program was crucial to the new flexible defense strategy.

Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright, the vice chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says the ongoing economic downturn has the Obama administration looking for ways to save money -- and if he has to count pennies, they’ll be going to sensors and command and control technology that could adapt to future threats – even unforeseen ones.

The Boeing-led team developing the Airborne Laser (ABL) said the chemical laser-equipped Boeing 747 was already flexible and adaptable. Northrop Grumman, heading the team developing the Kinetic Energy Interceptor – a high speed, hit-to-kill weapon which has yet to fly – said KEI could be the cheaper, more flexible missile defense system the Pentagon is looking for. Both ABL and KEI are designed to knock out a missile shortly after launch, during the boost stage when it is most vulnerable.

Concern about just how much Gates would cut from missile defense was mounting when a “gift” of sorts fell out of the sky – literally. North Korea, in defiance of a U.N. Security Council resolution launched another Taepodong2 ICBM. Like its predecessors, the missile wound up in the sea prematurely.

But it still gave missile defense advocates in Congress the issue they needed to complain about cuts to the program while -- take your pick -- a nuclear-armed North Korea gets closer and closer to achieving a working ICBM that could reach U.S. territory … a wannabe-nuclear-armed-Iran jumps ahead of North Korea in long-range missile capability … Democrats in the White House and Congress spend ka-billions on bank, insurance and auto industry bailouts.

Gates announced plans to cut $1.4 billion from the Missile Defense Agency, which got $8.6 billion in Fiscal 2009. He also eliminated the Multiple Kill Vehicle program, for which Lockheed Martin and Raytheon were developing competing designs. ABL was trimmed back to one aircraft and Gates said he was capping the number of ground-based interceptors to be based in Alaska and California at 30, instead of the planned 44.

Most of the initial negative reaction from lawmakers did not cite a specific cut, just that overall, it was a bad idea in light of North Korea’s test, which many called a “wake up call.” Gates, however, in announcing the defense budget revision, said missile defense strategy was shifting to “focus on the rogue state and theater missile threat.” He added that the U.S. will continue “robust” research and development funding “to improve the capability we already have to defend against long-range rogue missile threats, a threat North Korea's missile launch this past weekend reminds us is real.”

The question is: will lawmakers’ arguments hold up? Especially since Gates intends to spend $900 million on the Army’s Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, the Navy’s SM-3 missile and the conversion of six additional Aegis Navy ships to provide ballistic missile defense?

Gates is also expected to re-assess the readiness of boost phase programs -- including ABL and KEI -- under the Quadrennial Defense Review later this year. By then, the early April launch will be history and Congress may have a lot else to mull over.




PMEmail Poster
Top
Sabre Dog
Inviato il: Giovedì, 23-Apr-2009, 20:53
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 1574
Utente Nr.: 39
Iscritto il: 24-Mar-2009



Importante accordo nel settore missilistico fra India e Israele .....
(dal blog "Ares" di AW&ST)

QUOTE
India, Israel to Jointly Develop Medium-Range Air Defense Missile
Posted by David Eshel at 4/23/2009 12:15 PM CDT 

In its biggest ever defense deal with India, Israel will provide a new air defence system at a whopping sum of $1.4 billion. India and Israel agreed to jointly develop a new long range, land-based air defense system to replace the aging Pechora (SA-3 GOA) missiles currently in service with the Indian Air Force. Covering a range of 70 km, the new missile will extend the 60km range of the vertically launched Barak-8 shipborne missile (also known as Barak NG) currently being developed for the Indian and Israeli Navies under a US$480 million five year program launched in early 2006. The medium range surface-to-air missile (MR-SAM) project will include the deployment of up to nine air defense squadrons. Each Unit will include two batteries comprising a multi-mission radar system performing target acquisition and guidance, command-and-control and three container-launchers each mounting eight missiles.

user posted image          user posted image

Prime contractor for the program will be the Indian Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), with Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) missile and space group acting as leading subcontractor, IAI's Elta Systems providing the radar and Israel's RAFAEL producing the interceptor missile.

India and RAFAEL Advanced Defense Systems Ltd are considering further derivatives of the systems to replace the Army's current aging air defenses, such as Tungushka and OSA-AK (SA-8). India has also expressed interest in acquiring the Israeli Arrow-II missile defense system, developed under an US-Israeli cooperation. India has already acquired the system's Green-Pine radar, developed exclusively with Israeli funding and, therefore, was unrestricted by US export approval.

India is currently Israel's largest arms buyer. India's growing unease over the serious situation developing in neighboring Pakistan could accelerate these projects.


PMEmail Poster
Top
madmike
Inviato il: Martedì, 28-Apr-2009, 16:56
Quote Post





Gruppo: Admin
Messaggi: 10446
Utente Nr.: 13
Iscritto il: 19-Mar-2009



A PROPOSITO DI SOLDI SPESI BENE...

l'Ultimo numero di RID riporta un interessante articolo sullo AGM-88E aargm, il nuovo missile SEAD in sviluppo per sostituire lo HARM. Si parla della partecipazione italiana, e fin qui tutto bene.

Pero' (c'e' sempre un però..) la vera notizia e' questa: ne prevediamo di acquistare 250 entro il 2016, per equipaggiare i 15 TORNADO ECR. Fantastico, direte voi, fatto salvo che lo AARGM NON entra nella stiva dell'F35, che quindi se vorra' portarlo dovra' caricarselo sui piloni subalari (e la stealthness va a farsi benedire).

Quindi:
- 158 mil. di euro spesi per 250 missili,
- utilizzabili solo da Tornado
- poi penseremo all'antiradar per l'F35. Il cui programma, ricordo, dovrebbe concludersi nel 2026, epoca per la quale anche gli ECR dovrebbero essere radiati, o esserci molto vicino (giusto per non avere gli aerei da attacco stealth e gli antiradar no...), quindi giusto giusto 10 anni di vita dei missili....

mah.
PMEmail Poster
Top
michele
Inviato il: Martedì, 28-Apr-2009, 17:29
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 145
Utente Nr.: 48
Iscritto il: 27-Mar-2009



Ma nella stiva dell'F22 ci entra?..altrimenti lo stesso problema lo avranno pure gli americani ohmy.gif
PMEmail Poster
Top
madmike
Inviato il: Martedì, 28-Apr-2009, 17:44
Quote Post





Gruppo: Admin
Messaggi: 10446
Utente Nr.: 13
Iscritto il: 19-Mar-2009



l'F22 NON deve fare attacco antiradar, come missione primaria. hanno il Growler e tutta la panoplia di altri aerei.

E comunque LORO come spendono i soldi non mi riguarda.... i miei si.
PMEmail Poster
Top
ChinoMar
Inviato il: Martedì, 28-Apr-2009, 17:55
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 274
Utente Nr.: 27
Iscritto il: 19-Mar-2009



Chiedo venia per una precisazione:

ipotesi 1: F35 senza missili esterni non viene visto dai radar
- può colpire i radar con bombe a guida laser laser
- può ignorarli e portare a termine la propria missione indisturbato

ipotesi 2: F35 senza missili esterni viene visto comuque dai radar
- tanto vale tenere gli aargm sotto le ali

ipotesi 3: F35 'ECR'
- viene creato l'equivalente ECR dell' F35 che se ne va a fare SEAD fregandosene della stealthness, poi seguiranno vari attacchi di altri F35 pieni di bombe sotto le ali
- Gli obbiettivi più sensibili sono stati fatti fuori prima con l'ipotesi 1

ipotesi 4: F35 non è mai stealth
- suicide.gif
PMEmail Poster
Top
AndreaV
Inviato il: Martedì, 28-Apr-2009, 18:50
Quote Post





Gruppo: Moderatori
Messaggi: 5574
Utente Nr.: 5
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



gli ECR andranno avanti fino al 2025, questo significa che gli AARGM saranno operativi per 10 anni, a me pare sensata come cosa, in 10 anni di cose ne possono succedere e di conflitti ne possono scoppiare eccome
PMEmail Poster
Top
Enrr
Inviato il: Martedì, 28-Apr-2009, 18:51
Quote Post





Gruppo: DisegnatoriFD
Messaggi: 2361
Utente Nr.: 3
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



Ragazzi ci dimentichiamo di un piccolissimo dettaglio, l'AARGM essendo un'arma in forza alla US Navy ne è garantita la compatibilità con l'F-35, il problema è che non ci sta nelle baie ma sotto le ali non ci sono problemi...beh pazienza per la stealthness asd.gif

In cosiderazione di questo piccolo detagliuzzo stanno pensando di trapiantare il seeker dell'AARGM nell'AMRAAM che nelle baie ci sta wink.gif
PMEmail Poster
Top
Von Seeckt
Inviato il: Martedì, 28-Apr-2009, 19:12
Quote Post





Gruppo: Moderatori
Messaggi: 1738
Utente Nr.: 6
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



QUOTE (ChinoMar @ Martedì, 28-Apr-2009, 16:55)
Chiedo venia per una precisazione:

ipotesi 1: F35 senza missili esterni non viene visto dai radar
- può colpire i radar con bombe a guida laser laser
- può ignorarli e portare a termine la propria missione indisturbato

ipotesi 2: F35 senza missili esterni viene visto comuque dai radar
- tanto vale tenere gli aargm sotto le ali

ipotesi 3: F35 'ECR'
- viene creato l'equivalente ECR dell' F35 che se ne va a fare SEAD fregandosene della stealthness, poi seguiranno vari attacchi di altri F35 pieni di bombe sotto le ali
- Gli obbiettivi più sensibili sono stati fatti fuori prima con l'ipotesi 1

ipotesi 4: F35 non è mai stealth
- suicide.gif

Esiste anche un'altra ipotesi, la più probabile...

F35 in configurazione pulita viene visto dal radar "cattivone 1XL" a 50 km.
F35 in configurazione "sporca" viene visto dallo stesso radar a 150 km.
L'AARGM ha tiro utile circa 100 km.
Una bomba a guida laser ha tiro utile pochi km.

Come la mettiamo???

Troppo spesso si dimentica che "stealthness" non sta per invisibilità, ma per bassa osservabilità, ed è una caratteristica che degrada, in alcuni casi più in altri meno, le caratteristiche della rete di avvitamento nemica, non la azzera.
C'era un bel disegno delle difese aeree iraniane da qualche parte, ed era volto a dimostrare che velivoli "legacy" non avrebbero speranze mentre velivoli Stealth li farebbero a pezzi (nnnoooo, non è di parte, nnnooo... ma comunque...); quel che mi preme far risaltare è che PERFINO quel disegno palesemente assurdo NON azzera le capacità dei radar iraniani di fronte ad F35 ed F22, semplicemente ne rimpicciolisce il raggio di scoperta, lasciando così "aperti" ampi varchi in cui "infilare" i velivoli stealth... A patto che abbiano armi adatte a colpire, però.
PM
Top
madmike
Inviato il: Martedì, 28-Apr-2009, 19:20
Quote Post





Gruppo: Admin
Messaggi: 10446
Utente Nr.: 13
Iscritto il: 19-Mar-2009



si, letto del fatto che la testa si possa 'trapiantare' su altri missili (cosa poi non così facile), resta un piccolo particolare: spendiamo un iradiddio per un aereo stealth che fa di questo, e dell'essere networkcentrico, la sua principale ragione di essere, e ci montiamo un sistema d'arma che ne azzera la sua principale caratteristica, ovvero e' forse peggio di un Tornado Ecr? boh, non capisco.
PMEmail Poster
Top
ChinoMar
Inviato il: Martedì, 28-Apr-2009, 20:43
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 274
Utente Nr.: 27
Iscritto il: 19-Mar-2009



QUOTE (Von Seeckt @ Martedì, 28-Apr-2009, 18:12)
Esiste anche un'altra ipotesi, la più probabile...

F35 in configurazione pulita viene visto dal radar "cattivone 1XL" a 50 km.
F35 in configurazione "sporca" viene visto dallo stesso radar a 150 km.
L'AARGM ha tiro utile circa 100 km.
Una bomba a guida laser ha tiro utile pochi km.

Come la mettiamo???

La mettiamo che ha ragione huh.gif
grazie per la spiegazione molto chiara rolleyes.gif
PMEmail Poster
Top
Veltro71
Inviato il: Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 12:28
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 4035
Utente Nr.: 8
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



Piccolo chiarimento sulle tattiche "Wild Weasel":

L'aereo, se fa Wild Weasel e non semplicemente auto difesa, non vuole essere invisibile ma il contrario. Ovverosia, vuole provocare la reazione del sistema di difesa avversario, analizzarlo e, successivamente, distruggerlo o ingannarlo.

Quindi la novità e semplice: mentre con AGM88C si effettuavano queste operazioni e dopo si sperava di poter scampare alla reazione avversaria, adesso, con l'AARGM si puo provocare la reazione avversaria fare fuoco e, anche se il radar di turno cessa le emissioni o le fa funzionare a scatto nella speranza di far perdere la traccia al missile, il centro è assicurato dal sistema GPS, MW e inerziale mentre l'aereo lanciatore ritorna nello spazio aereo sicuro.

In conclusionenon servirà che l'F 35 versione ECR rimanga "stealth". L'importante e che lo rimangano quelli con missioni di attacco convenzionale.

Inoltre è in studio il suo successore che invece nelle stive ci entra e dovrebbe essere pronto nel 2016 (ci credete??).

Cordiali saluti


--------------------
"Meglio essere violenti, se c'è violenza nel nostro cuore, che indossare il manto della non-violenza per coprire l'impotenza" (Gandhi)
PMEmail Poster
Top
Veltro71
Inviato il: Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 12:34
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 4035
Utente Nr.: 8
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



Quando un sistema è buono...


Laser Maverick Missiles

Evidentemente si sono accorti che le LGB sono un po carucce per sprecarle contro bersagli puntiformi.

Cordiali saluti


--------------------
"Meglio essere violenti, se c'è violenza nel nostro cuore, che indossare il manto della non-violenza per coprire l'impotenza" (Gandhi)
PMEmail Poster
Top
madmike
Inviato il: Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 12:52
Quote Post





Gruppo: Admin
Messaggi: 10446
Utente Nr.: 13
Iscritto il: 19-Mar-2009



sono assolutament CERTO che un maverick a guida laser costi MOLTO più che una LGB....
PMEmail Poster
Top
Alias
Inviato il: Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 12:56
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 984
Utente Nr.: 56
Iscritto il: 31-Mar-2009



SEAD non dev'essere per forza sinonimo di Wild Weasel, anche perché quest'ultima attività poteva essere accettabile quando gli F-105 potevano sperare di evitare gli intercettori pilotati (un po' meno i SAM) dandoci dentro con la manetta.
Se oggi un Tornado ECR si facesse notare per attirare l'attenzione dei radar da attaccare, potrebbe altresì attirare l'attenzione di un Su-27 armato di R-77.
Ma il Tornado ECR non ha pretese "stealth", se non nel senso di penetrazione rasoterra. L'F-35 invece punta molto sulla bassa osservabilità a quote medio-alte, dove gli intercettori meno scalcinati se lo papperebbero facilmente (o si pretende che faccia contemporaneamente SEAD & A2A?)
L'idea di un F-35 "Wild Weasel poco stealth" porta a domandarmi chi e come provvederebbe alla scorta, ammesso e non concesso che aerei SEAD con la scorta al seguito siano la migliore delle soluzioni.
PM
Top
Veltro71
Inviato il: Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 13:44
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 4035
Utente Nr.: 8
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



QUOTE (Alias @ Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 11:56)
SEAD non dev'essere per forza sinonimo di Wild Weasel, anche perché quest'ultima attività poteva essere accettabile quando gli F-105 potevano sperare di evitare gli intercettori pilotati (un po' meno i SAM) dandoci dentro con la manetta.
Se oggi un Tornado ECR si facesse notare per attirare l'attenzione dei radar da attaccare, potrebbe altresì attirare l'attenzione di un Su-27 armato di R-77.
Ma il Tornado ECR non ha pretese "stealth", se non nel senso di penetrazione rasoterra. L'F-35 invece punta molto sulla bassa osservabilità a quote medio-alte, dove gli intercettori meno scalcinati se lo papperebbero facilmente (o si pretende che faccia contemporaneamente SEAD & A2A?)
L'idea di un F-35 "Wild Weasel poco stealth" porta a domandarmi chi e come provvederebbe alla scorta, ammesso e non concesso che aerei SEAD con la scorta al seguito siano la migliore delle soluzioni.

Anche i Tornado ECR usano questa tattica. L'AGM88, in qualsiasi versione, deve essere lanciato da quote medio alte altrimenti non può intercettare il segnale del radar avversario.

Le missioni SEAD, da quando sono state inventate, vengono eseguite a quella quota e non certo con ventre a terra e nel tentativo di sfuggire all'intercettazione (quello lo fanno per il bombardametno convenzionale)


Cordiali saluti


--------------------
"Meglio essere violenti, se c'è violenza nel nostro cuore, che indossare il manto della non-violenza per coprire l'impotenza" (Gandhi)
PMEmail Poster
Top
Veltro71
Inviato il: Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 14:15
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 4035
Utente Nr.: 8
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



Intanto il sistema SAMP/T ha perso ...

Finland Selects Kongsberg/Raytheon Air Defence System

Saluti


--------------------
"Meglio essere violenti, se c'è violenza nel nostro cuore, che indossare il manto della non-violenza per coprire l'impotenza" (Gandhi)
PMEmail Poster
Top
Alias
Inviato il: Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 14:25
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 984
Utente Nr.: 56
Iscritto il: 31-Mar-2009



Ma va?!
QUOTE (me stesso)
Ma il Tornado ECR non ha pretese "stealth"

Nota la differenza con l'F-35?
PM
Top
Veltro71
Inviato il: Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 14:35
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 4035
Utente Nr.: 8
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



QUOTE (Alias @ Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 13:25)
Ma va?!
QUOTE (me stesso)
Ma il Tornado ECR non ha pretese "stealth"

Nota la differenza con l'F-35?

Infatti usare un aereo Stealth per una missione SEAD mi sembra un nosense..


--------------------
"Meglio essere violenti, se c'è violenza nel nostro cuore, che indossare il manto della non-violenza per coprire l'impotenza" (Gandhi)
PMEmail Poster
Top
LittleBird
Inviato il: Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 14:37
Quote Post





Gruppo: DisegnatoriFD
Messaggi: 2952
Utente Nr.: 1
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



Il sistema della Raytheon è un sistema più modesto e quindi sicuramente più economico del franco-italiano Samp/T, probabilmente ai finlandesi serviva quello e non altro.


--------------------
Ricordati: un solo colpo. Il cervo non ha un fucile, e tu devi sparare un solo colpo. Questà è lealtà!
PMEmail Poster
Top
Alias
Inviato il: Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 14:41
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 984
Utente Nr.: 56
Iscritto il: 31-Mar-2009



QUOTE (Veltro71 @ Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 14:35)
Infatti usare un aereo Stealth per una missione SEAD mi sembra un nosense..

Perché identifica il SEAD con le vecchie missioni Wild Weasel (non senza ragioni).
Oggi l'USAF ha idee un po' diverse. Vedremo, se le metterà in pratica, quanto siano valide.
PM
Top
Veltro71
Inviato il: Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 14:45
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 4035
Utente Nr.: 8
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



QUOTE (Alias @ Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 13:41)
QUOTE (Veltro71 @ Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 14:35)
Infatti usare un aereo Stealth per una missione SEAD mi sembra un nosense..

Perché identifica il SEAD con le vecchie missioni Wild Weasel (non senza ragioni).
Oggi l'USAF ha idee un po' diverse. Vedremo, se le metterà in pratica, quanto siano valide.

Su questo ha ragione.

Decisamente se la formula "stealth" dei caccia a disposizione degli Stati Uniti si rivelasse vincente il concetto stesso di "SEAD" verrebbe meno. Ma siccome la tecnologia avanza e già ai tempi degli F117 i francesi erano in grado di vedereli sullo schermo radar (ma non di passare dal tracciamento all'inseguimento) mi sembra che una dottrina impostata unicamente sulleo "Stealthness" sia un tantino pericolosa.

Cordiali saluti


--------------------
"Meglio essere violenti, se c'è violenza nel nostro cuore, che indossare il manto della non-violenza per coprire l'impotenza" (Gandhi)
PMEmail Poster
Top
Veltro71
Inviato il: Venerdì, 01-Mag-2009, 11:14
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 4035
Utente Nr.: 8
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



QUOTE (madmike @ Giovedì, 30-Apr-2009, 11:52)
sono assolutament CERTO che un maverick a guida laser costi MOLTO più che una LGB....

Neanche tanto di piu.

Inoltre Contro bersagli puntiformi è molto più efficace della serie GBU/JDAM a causa del CEP molto ridotto (1 metro contro 10/13), velocità decisamente superiore, testata (eventualmente) ridotta per evitare danni collaterali, ampia gamma di utilizzo (si và dalle poche decine di metri ai 15/20km) e peso/dimensioni ridotte (135 kg max./72 cm) per cui utilizzabile da elicotteri ad aerei leggeri fino ai caccia.

Quindi, specialmente in caso di CAS urbani oppure con truppe amiche al ridosso del fronte e in presenza di bersagli mobili o marittimi ad alta velocità si dimostra notevolmente più efficace delle serie GBU/JDAM permettendone un minore spreco.

Cordiali saluti






--------------------
"Meglio essere violenti, se c'è violenza nel nostro cuore, che indossare il manto della non-violenza per coprire l'impotenza" (Gandhi)
PMEmail Poster
Top
Alias
Inviato il: Venerdì, 01-Mag-2009, 12:53
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 984
Utente Nr.: 56
Iscritto il: 31-Mar-2009



Ci siamo già dimenticati di quel vecchiume delle LGB?
Anche se non la ricordo tra le GBU numerate, secondo la ditta si può avere una Paveway II con corpo bomba Mk 81.
Inoltre esistono gli ATGM.
PM
Top
Veltro71
Inviato il: Venerdì, 01-Mag-2009, 15:50
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 4035
Utente Nr.: 8
Iscritto il: 18-Mar-2009



QUOTE (Alias @ Venerdì, 01-Mag-2009, 11:53)
Ci siamo già dimenticati di quel vecchiume delle LGB?
Anche se non la ricordo tra le GBU numerate, secondo la ditta si può avere una Paveway II con corpo bomba Mk 81.
Inoltre esistono gli ATGM.

Veramente, tra le GBU, sono incluse anche le LGB.

LGB/GBU/JDAM

Ah,, Dimenticavo di dire che al contrario di un AGM con motore a razzo, le LGB/GBU/JDAM hanno bisogno di una quota minima di sgancio per poter essere efficaci nel manovrare sul bersaglio.

Saluti


--------------------
"Meglio essere violenti, se c'è violenza nel nostro cuore, che indossare il manto della non-violenza per coprire l'impotenza" (Gandhi)
PMEmail Poster
Top
Alias
Inviato il: Venerdì, 01-Mag-2009, 16:00
Quote Post





Gruppo: Members
Messaggi: 984
Utente Nr.: 56
Iscritto il: 31-Mar-2009



Ma che numero ha, se ce l'ha, la Paveway da 250 libbre?
E da quando vogliamo che i nostri preziosissimi cacciabombardieri volino a quote così basse da non poterne sganciare?
Poi non è che ce l'abbia con il Maverick, solo che il discorso era sulla convenienza economica di un missile rispetto ad una bomba, o di un grosso missile rispetto ad uno più piccolo, per fare un "lavoro piccolo".
PM
Top
madmike
Inviato il: Venerdì, 01-Mag-2009, 16:01
Quote Post





Gruppo: Admin
Messaggi: 10446
Utente Nr.: 13
Iscritto il: 19-Mar-2009



QUOTE
Neanche tanto di piu.



oddio... sulla opporunita' di usare l'uno anziche' l'altro non possiamo discutere (ed infatti sono in servizio entrambi...) per i prezzi si:

AGM-65D AGM-65E
Acquisition unit cost $129,322 $158,688

La GBU 24 che peraltro e' anche la versione perforante, e più costosa, ha un costo di produzione (leggermente inferiore a quello di aquisizione) di 55600 dollari.

Se vogliamo dire che un rapporto di 1\2,5-3 non e' 'tanto' di più...

PMEmail Poster
Top
Utenti totali che stanno leggendo la discussione: 1 (1 Visitatori e 0 Utenti Anonimi)
Gli utenti registrati sono 0 :

Topic Options Pagine : (39) [1] 2 3 ... Ultima » Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



[ Script Execution time: 4.1747 ]   [ 20 queries used ]   [ GZIP Abilitato ]