Almaz-Antey S-400 Triumph / SA-21 Growler TABM/SAM
- Thread starter Woody
- Start date
- Joined
- 11 February 2010
- Messages
- 1,542
- Reaction score
- 2,309
Seems like the 40N6 is of the same size as the 48N6 family.
http://alert5.com/2018/08/24/40n6-3d-image-revealed/
40N6E. 380 km range.
the "E" suffix, guess it's available for export eh.
http://alert5.com/2018/08/24/40n6-3d-image-revealed/
40N6E. 380 km range.
the "E" suffix, guess it's available for export eh.
Attachments
Might be wrong, but it seems that it IS 48N6 on pic. 48N6E3 to be precise. At the very least it seems to have "E3" after 6, and it's hard to tell 48 from 40 with that resolution. But it looks similar to identical to known 48N6 appearance.
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,871
- Reaction score
- 10,919
Advanced Long-Range Missile for S-400 System Accepted for Service In Russia
"MOSCOW --- The 40N6 long-range surface-to-air missile of the S-400 Triumf system has been accepted for service in the Russian Army, a source in the domestic defense industry told TASS on Thursday.
"The 40N6 long-range missile [the 40N6E as its export version] has been accepted for service. All the necessary documents were signed in September, after which the Defense Ministry started the purchases of these missiles," the source said.
"Overall, more than a thousand of 40N6 missiles are planned to be purchased under the state armament program through 2027 to provide newly formed and rearm existing S400 regiments of the Aerospace Force with them," the source added, noting that a total of 56 S-400 battalions were planned to be established in the Aerospace Force under this program."
. . .
"According to official data, the missile’s destruction range is up to 380 km for aerodynamic targets and up to 15km for ballistic weapons at an altitude ranging from 10 m to 35 km. The average flight speed is 1,190 m/s. Thanks to its new homing head, the missile can destroy aircraft beyond the boundaries of the radio visibility of ground-based radars."
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/196867/russia-claims-380km-range-for-new-s_400-missile.html
"MOSCOW --- The 40N6 long-range surface-to-air missile of the S-400 Triumf system has been accepted for service in the Russian Army, a source in the domestic defense industry told TASS on Thursday.
"The 40N6 long-range missile [the 40N6E as its export version] has been accepted for service. All the necessary documents were signed in September, after which the Defense Ministry started the purchases of these missiles," the source said.
"Overall, more than a thousand of 40N6 missiles are planned to be purchased under the state armament program through 2027 to provide newly formed and rearm existing S400 regiments of the Aerospace Force with them," the source added, noting that a total of 56 S-400 battalions were planned to be established in the Aerospace Force under this program."
. . .
"According to official data, the missile’s destruction range is up to 380 km for aerodynamic targets and up to 15km for ballistic weapons at an altitude ranging from 10 m to 35 km. The average flight speed is 1,190 m/s. Thanks to its new homing head, the missile can destroy aircraft beyond the boundaries of the radio visibility of ground-based radars."
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/196867/russia-claims-380km-range-for-new-s_400-missile.html
panzerfeist1
ACCESS: Secret
I think the most comparable missile right now to the SM-6 is right here.
Ancile
“The 48N6E3 is an improved version of the 48N6E2 long-range, surface-to-air missile (SAM) featuring more range and enhanced anti-ballistic missile (ABM) capabilities. The new missile retains the 48N6E2 capabilities against aircraft, cruise missiles and UAVs increasing the range by 50 kilometers. The 48N6E3 missile is intended to engage intermediate-range ballistic missiles typically with a maximum range of 3,500 kilometers and speeds of up to 4,800 meters per second (Mach 15). This missile, along its predecessor, is the primary weapon for the Russian Army's S-400 extended-range air defense system.
The 48N6E3 missile features solid fuel engine, advanced avionics with semi-active homing head, and resistance against intense clutter and jamming. With a maximum range of 250 kilometers it can shoot down airborne targets flying at 10 to 30,000 meters of altitude and ballistic targets at distances between 7 to 60 kilometers.”
[/URL]The 48N6E3 missile features solid fuel engine, advanced avionics with semi-active homing head, and resistance against intense clutter and jamming. With a maximum range of 250 kilometers it can shoot down airborne targets flying at 10 to 30,000 meters of altitude and ballistic targets at distances between 7 to 60 kilometers.”
The US Navy is seeking to adapt the Standard 6 (SM-6) missile for use against ships. If this modification is successful, the range of the SM-6 will be increased from 250 km to 370 km. This is a new anti-ship mode that can shoot down airborne threats, and now the same missile can attack and destroy a ship at long range. The Navy wanted to spend $2.9 billion over the five years FY17-FY22on the modified SM-6 as part of its “distributed lethality” initiative. This new anti-ship mode makes the SM-6 highly lethal due to its speed and agility and nearly overnight doubles the purpose of every such missile used across our fleet of Aegis destroyers. Boeing’s (BA) Harpoon anti-ship missile has a range of about 67 nautical miles, less than 130 km.
Both stand at a 250km designed to engage different kinds of aerial targets while the SM-6 can improve its range with those same capabilities we will see later what kind of targets the S-500 missiles can engage. 40n6 is limited to non-maneuverable targets.
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,586
The standard missile sub section of this forum is a great resource. I would highly recommend going through it first (and other places) before posting stuff that is pretty easy to clear up or refute. Your comparison has two factual errors
1. Range of the Standard Missile 6 (baseline) is off
2. Comparing a Semi-Active homing head missile system to one that has a Dual-Mode Seeker (Active and Semi-Active)
I (or someone else) may have posted this before elsewhere but just posting a snippet here to refresh -
I have also read "in excess of 200 n miles" used by other publications but needless to say, the SM-6 as it exists now is a 350-400 km ranged weapon provided it gets OTH targeting and utilizes the Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air architecture. The Extended Range SM-6 (SM-6 Block IB) promises to improve that by quite a bit provided it retains its multi-mission role.
Last edited:
Forest Green
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 11 June 2019
- Messages
- 7,749
- Reaction score
- 13,021
Are '7825x1000mm' the dimensions of the missile or the launch tube?
- Joined
- 11 February 2010
- Messages
- 1,542
- Reaction score
- 2,309
It should be the launch tube.
Forest Green
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 11 June 2019
- Messages
- 7,749
- Reaction score
- 13,021
I guess the missile must be less than 7.8m then.
- Joined
- 11 February 2010
- Messages
- 1,542
- Reaction score
- 2,309
In fact it might be no bigger than standard 48N6. Only that it might have new motor and new systems to accommodate extremely high apogee for long range shot. Here i attached a file, it's from SOC which might interest you on S-300/400 system missile development.
- Joined
- 11 February 2010
- Messages
- 1,542
- Reaction score
- 2,309
I miss the old day he sending those beautiful digest in my mailbox. ;-;
panzerfeist1
ACCESS: Secret
I will provide both these sources and I sort of think I got the idea what's going on with the SM-6. https://news.usni.org/2016/02/04/se...nic-anti-ship-missile-for-cruisers-destroyers
Secretary of Defense Ash Carter confirmed the Navy was developing a modification to the Raytheon Standard Missile 6 that will give the service a supersonic anti-ship weapon to reach a target more than 200 nautical miles away.
“We are going to create a brand-new capability,” Carter told reporters in San Diego on Wednesday. “We’re modifying the SM-6 so that in addition to missile defense, it can also target enemy ships at sea at very long ranges.”
The Navy's Getting a New Supersonic Ship Killer
The long-range SM-6 will now target surface naval vessels in addition to aircraft.
"How much more? Raytheon won't provide more details, but assuming Carter's statement that the SM-6 in development would be capable of reaching a target "over 200 miles away" is conservative, and recognizing that the official published SM-6 range is 150 miles, it wouldn't be outlandish to expect that an anti-ship SM-6 would quadruple the range of the Harpoon."
Well these sources tell me 2 things. The Block 1A is 150 miles, and the "in development" Carter is talking about back in 2016 is the 1B with the over 200 miles statement. I believe I solved the puzzle here.
Forest Green
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 11 June 2019
- Messages
- 7,749
- Reaction score
- 13,021
It must be wider though surely. I always assumed it looked like this Chinese SAM.
New Missiles Unveiled at Airshow China 2018 - Defense Update:
An illustrated report reflecting on of some of the new missiles displayed this week at the Airshow China in Zhuhai.
defense-update.com
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,586
This is not keypublishing where members keep going back and forth when things are pretty obvious and all the relevant information is already available on the forum, so this would be my last post on the matter. There is plenty of evidence out there that shows that the baseline SM-6 is a 200 nm ranged interceptor. And no, pointing to an Ash Carter statement made well before the 1B showed up ( he was out of office when the program was started) does not point to anything. The SM-6 shares the airframe with the SM-2 Block IV ER which is a 200 nm ranged weapon. Your links are again not pointing to anything your post attributes them to. Ashton Carter was the Secretary of Defense during the Obama Presidency. A decision was made by the US Navy, and the DOD, to add a surface strike mode to the baseline SM-6 (Dual capability). It is this missile/capability that Ash Carter refers to in the two articles you've shared in your post. . The mode did not alter any aerodynamic or kinematic properties of the missile. It was considered mostly a software driven upgrade. A follow on SM-6 Block I with guidance upgrades to better counter more "advanced threats", retaining the dual capability, was designated as Standard Missile 6 Block IA.
Again, if you want to learn about the range of the various standard missile variants, go to the relevant sub section, read or ask the many other well informed posters here. Posting irrelevant data that in no way supports your claim is no way to go about it.There are three variants of the SM-6. Block I which is just an interceptor, the Block 1A, which is the same missile as block 1 but with software modifications to allow for surface attack and other guidance upgrades, and the in development block 1 b which upgrades the airframe to 21“
The extended range SM 6 many here refer to is a 21” missile that will likely increase the range of the weapon by at least 50% against the air breathing threats ( so closer to 300 nautical miles). the missile program (1B) was started in FY19 and is being accelerated through development for fielding in the near term.
Again, instead of rehashing old articles, just read the sub section dedicated to the family. It will avoid confusion and having others come in and state the obvious.
Attachments
Last edited:
panzerfeist1
ACCESS: Secret
So according to the attached file where are you getting the 200nm range again when it clearly shows that the SM-2 Block IV ER is at 150nm as you said both share the same airframe? Ashton Carters statement was 3 years ago of a over 200nm version(which is likely the block 1B) and at that timeframe we had the block 1A version already out so using deductive reasoning Carter is referring to block 1Bs development.
So from the looks of it.
1. The SM-2 Block IV ER has a 150nm range and you said it currently shares the same airframe as the SM-6.
2. The SM-6 Block 1A well according to some sources say 150 nautical miles.
3. Ashton Carter made the statement in 2016 of a newer missile in development of a over 200nm claim. Now I don't think it would make sense to make this claim if you already supposedly have a 200nm interceptor missile right?
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,586
For gods sake please visit the official us navy website to pull the range data. The SM2 block IV ER is listed as having a maximum range of 200 nm. Ashton carter was talking about a surface strike capability. I think at this point I would have to assume you are simply trolling.
panzerfeist1
ACCESS: Secret
I cant find it even looking here. https://www.public.navy.mil/surfor/swmag/Pages/SM-6-Test-Displays-Range-and-Versatility.aspx
Is there a good reason why you are not providing sources with estimated ranges while I am the only one doing it here for some reason?
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,586
I am not going to do your homework for you (especially with something that takes less than 10 seconds of google) when you have not shown the simply courtesy of even reading your own posted links and quoted text -
It does not take a whole lot of insight to figure out that the then Secretary of Defense was talking about a yet to be fielded variant (at the time) of the SM-6 that would turn the block I missile into a DUAL ROLE Surface-Air and Surface-Surface weapon which is essentially what the Block 1A does (besides other guidance enhancements) relative to the baseline block I weapon. You can even go back to the 2016 discussions on this very forum and read all about it. This was one of the first instances of the DOD announcing plans to add a surface attack capability to the SM-6.
The SM-6 Block IB on the other hand was something that was not even in the FY19 President (Trump's) budget. The US Navy requested it as an unfunded priority which got added into the enacted budget. That weapon is a radical shift on the SM-6, and adds a completely new mid section, likely borrowed from the SM-3 Block IIA. In 2016, Ashton Carter did not magically reveal an SM-6 variant that did not even exist until 3 years later (when he was no longer in office) but revealed that the DOD was working on a surface-attack capability enhancement to the SM-6 that has since been fielded.
As I've repeatedly asked you to do, browse this forum and the relevant sections and you can read up all about it since we've been discussing this since 2016 and the first announcement of this dual role capability addition. If you do that, you will learn a lot more than copy pasting screenshots (from god knows where) and engaging in aimless trolling.
Last edited:
panzerfeist1
ACCESS: Secret
Sorry its just that it takes a little more than saying its 200nm, its 200nm, its 200nm to convince people with credibility while another person(that being me) is throwing around sources that show what the current ranges are than accusing that person of trolling.
Navy To Supersize Its Ultra Versatile SM-6 Missile For Even Longer Range And Higher Speed
The SM-6 is getting a way bigger rocket motor that will allow it to reach even farther than before and enemy ships may be its primary target.
www.thedrive.com
"The Navy's SM-6 missile has become an
all-star of multi-role capability
and a shining example of how repackaging existing systems with some new tech can garner grand results. The missile can shoot down air-breathing threats like aircraft and cruise missiles, it can swat incoming ballistic missiles in the terminal phases of flight, it can attack sea targets, and it even has a latent land attack potential. It is also network enabled and can engage targets well beyond the sensor reach of its launch platform using telemetry data-linked from a third-party platform, like a jet fighter. It does all this over long ranges, reaching out over 150 miles from its vertical launch cell aboard American destroyers and cruisers. Now, according to 2020 budget request documents, this versatile missile is set to get upsized for considerably more range and speed, and that is a very big deal. "
Christ even to this day for example 5 months ago a source suggests over 150 miles. And in your own words the SM-6 as of now has the same range as the SM-2 Block 4 extended range missile, while having the same size and I already provided a graph from a source of that point to 150 miles. The SM-6 block 1B has a bigger rocket motor than the block 1A.
https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2200&tid=1200&ct=2 I believe this is what you are referring to correct? "Range:
100-200 nautical miles (115-230 statute miles)."
You are assuming its 200nm while that website also lists can be as low as 100 nautical miles or 185kms. Yet sources from before and even sources recently now ballpark the missile at over 150 miles or 150nm give or take and this falls between the 100-200nm reference. I can officially say this is my final post as I also do not want to have this thread focus on another topic than the current topic here at hand.
- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,551
- Reaction score
- 7,153
For a non-missile scientist like myself for a missile like this that can attack ballistic missiles or be a ballistic missile itself how exactly is range determined based on each mission?
I’m assuming if it can hit an aircraft at 40k feet 150km from the launch platform that missile on a ballistic trajectory would travel much further?
I’m assuming if it can hit an aircraft at 40k feet 150km from the launch platform that missile on a ballistic trajectory would travel much further?
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,586
Different target sets mean different ranges, hence the mention of 100-200 nm. SM-2 IV ER is designed to cover an envelope beyond that of the SM-2 variants that came before it. Those extend up to 90 nautical miles of range (up to 90 nm is also missile and target dependent. It does not mean all targets and all missions) and the IV ER covers the 100-200 nm depending upon the type of target it is aimed at (this is true for all missiles as there is no such thing as a static maximum range figure). The Navy didn't publish the range requirement so that you could average the range and derive an aproximation. They've stated the range variability which is dependent upon the type of targets it is defending. Similarly, your Russian missile example does not come with a static 250 km range irrespective of target types.
The upper end range of the SM-2 IV ER is around 200 nm, the same as that of the SM-6 Block 1 and Block 1A. Assuming that the SM-6 IB retains the dual-role capability, it should easily IMO squeeze out another 80-100 miles from the maximum range of the SM-6 I/IA so you are looking at a missile capable of reaching out up to 300 nautical miles within the NIFC-CA architecture (which is the only way you are going to get meaningful intercepts of air breathing targets at those ranges - for both the SM-6 I/IA and IB).
That is not a source. That is a link to a blog post that has thrown out a number without pointing to the source or stating whether any attempt has been made to verify it or how the author obtained it.
Here's another one that has actually done an effort to go back and see what ranges exist for similar missiles and used that and the comments from DOD officials on the matter -
tucson.com
One of the reasons to go for an Active and Semi-Active Dual Mode seeker on the SM-6 (besides just a more modern option) was to allow for OTH targeting. The Missile is designed to hold targets at risk that are much farther than the ability of the SM-2 IV ER via the active seeker. Missiles are not always kinematically limited as far as range is concerned.
Here is an Australian assesment of the missile. They have been interested in it from the start and the missile...
You are free to compare any SM-6 sub variant to the said Russian missile that even uses a different form of guidance. Why be generous and give it credit for 150 nm. Why not 90nm?
Just don't expect anyone to take your word for it. Most with any reasonable level of knowledge on the system treat it in the 200 nm class for a specific target type. That is what it is designed for - Unless you think the Navy is foolish enough to seek an OTH weapon that can't even match the range of its predecessor..
The upper end range of the SM-2 IV ER is around 200 nm, the same as that of the SM-6 Block 1 and Block 1A. Assuming that the SM-6 IB retains the dual-role capability, it should easily IMO squeeze out another 80-100 miles from the maximum range of the SM-6 I/IA so you are looking at a missile capable of reaching out up to 300 nautical miles within the NIFC-CA architecture (which is the only way you are going to get meaningful intercepts of air breathing targets at those ranges - for both the SM-6 I/IA and IB).
That is not a source. That is a link to a blog post that has thrown out a number without pointing to the source or stating whether any attempt has been made to verify it or how the author obtained it.
Here's another one that has actually done an effort to go back and see what ranges exist for similar missiles and used that and the comments from DOD officials on the matter -
Raytheon's latest missile-killer hits distance record
The recent intercept by a Standard Missile-6 fired from a Navy cruiser is the longest in naval history, according to Raytheon.
tucson.com
Revealed: Anti-Aircraft Missile Sinks US Navy Ship in Test
An anti-aircraft missile has sunk a target ship in a test of the U.S. Navy’s new “distributed lethality” concept.
thediplomat.com
One of the reasons to go for an Active and Semi-Active Dual Mode seeker on the SM-6 (besides just a more modern option) was to allow for OTH targeting. The Missile is designed to hold targets at risk that are much farther than the ability of the SM-2 IV ER via the active seeker. Missiles are not always kinematically limited as far as range is concerned.
Here is an Australian assesment of the missile. They have been interested in it from the start and the missile...
You are free to compare any SM-6 sub variant to the said Russian missile that even uses a different form of guidance. Why be generous and give it credit for 150 nm. Why not 90nm?
Just don't expect anyone to take your word for it. Most with any reasonable level of knowledge on the system treat it in the 200 nm class for a specific target type. That is what it is designed for - Unless you think the Navy is foolish enough to seek an OTH weapon that can't even match the range of its predecessor..
Last edited:
- Joined
- 11 February 2010
- Messages
- 1,542
- Reaction score
- 2,309
This determined by large amount of fire testing. and to some part simulation.
Rearding your question tho.. this will largely dependent on the missile kinematics. For that missile to fly in ballistic trajectory.. say we have 48N6E2. It set on "self defense" mode to hit ground target (Soviet and Russian SAM's do have this mode). The missile have velocity of Mach 6 (2040 m/s or 2 km/s). A good rule of thumb based on informative Alternate Wars would provide you with following range :
R=(V/0.09)^2
R=(2.04/0.09)^2
R=513.8 Km.
So yeah it will go much further.
- Joined
- 24 January 2006
- Messages
- 1,296
- Reaction score
- 373
I think the most interesting thing I've learned in a while about the 40N6 is that the 40N6E was exported to the PRC. Still haven't seen the actual missile, but I suspect it might be a modified 48N6. A test 48N6 was shot to 400 km in the 80s or 90s by adjusting the flight profile and providing locking control surfaces. It's never been missile performance that's held things back.
- Joined
- 11 February 2010
- Messages
- 1,542
- Reaction score
- 2,309
Do you have anything new on the radar suites for the S-400 ?
Reading the brochure i noticed some interesting things compared to the earlier generation of S-300P's.
The first is bandwidth which i assume the frequency bandwidth. The frequency bandwidth of a phased array can be determined by its feed design and later its beamwidth. The space feed bandwidth is about a beamwidth for CW transmission and 2x in Pulse. The earlier S-300P have a beamwidth of 1 Degree, which translate to frequency bandwidth of about 1-2%.
The S-400's 92N6 in other hand have 5% which indicate that the beamwidth is somewhat wider, 2.5-5 Degrees. This impacts angular resolution BUT it could also mean lower sidelobe (the array is weighted or there is weighting algorithm employed during operations), meaning it would be more resistant to clutter and sidelobe jamming as well as even more difficult to detect unless being directly painted by it, plus if used to search it could in theory cover the search area faster. The baseline 30N6 or 5N63's sidelobe in other hand could be approximated with a rules of thumb of unweighted array (which in practice used to make full use of antenna aperture) 1/number of elements where the radar has about 16000. So 1/16000 is about 0.0001 or -40 dB, which i consider quite low and hard to be detected. The S-400 with its larger beamwidth might have even lower level of sidelobe maybe a figure of -50 dB would be reasonable.
The second is of course general increase of targets that can be tracked.. older S-300P variants can only track six while this S-400 can track up to 40 and engage 10 plus controlling 20 missiles, more than earlier 30N6/5N63. Increase in computing capacity self explanatory. The rest is as you pointed out long time ago the minimum target speed is 0 which means it can somehow track into doppler notch. It may then also engage very slow moving target if necessary. With the only limit being the pulsewidth.
Maybe you could add more on this interesting radar ?
Their range can be the same but I think 48N6E2 and 40N6E are much faster than SM-6
Forest Green
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 11 June 2019
- Messages
- 7,749
- Reaction score
- 13,021
Don't be so sure, an SM-3 has the same booster and reaches 3km/s, which is about Mach 10 at altitude.
panzerfeist1
ACCESS: Secret
SM-3 is for midcourse interceptions and ballistic missiles only. I think Ronny is referring to the missiles designed to engage different targets in the terminal phase. 40n6 is mach 12. Also if I am reading your statement correctly are you saying the SM-3 has the same booster as the SM-6? Are you sure? The size difference in length and diameter is pretty big between the 2.
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,586
The SM-6 is capable of intercepting Medium Ranged Ballistic Missiles in their terminal stage and is the only SBT interceptor with the US Navy (Army has MSE and THAAD for example). Though the exact speed at any flight regime is not provided it can be used to ballpark some possible values. There will obviously be some difference since the SM-6 is a Naval SAM that is designed to slot in between the SM-2 and SM-2 ER at the lower end and the SM-3 missile family at the upper end. 40N6 is a ground launched SAM built to support a different system. The SM-3 and SM-6 share the same booster (MK72). It is possible that the SM-6 Block 1B adopts the SM-3 IIA's Dual Thrust Rocket Motor as well which should increase its envelope considerably as long as it stays a multi-role weapon.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,871
- Reaction score
- 10,919
Did you mean IB here? SM-6 does not yet have a 21" stack. SM-6 does have the 13.5" boost/sustain grain of the SM-2/SM-3.
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,586
No the larger diameter SM-6 that is being fast-tracked through development.
Attachments
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,871
- Reaction score
- 10,919
Okay. Even without it though SM-6 will have SERIOUS velocity. One of the early SM-3 tests had a dummy 3rd stage. After booster and 2nd stage burnout they let the 3rd stage/KKV/nose portion continue on ballistically. They were calling out altitude, and even though it was tumbling, it passed through 103km (340,000ft) altitude with a Mach 3 vertical component. (Meaning it's actual speed was higher, as it wasn't a vertical shot.)
Forest Green
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 11 June 2019
- Messages
- 7,749
- Reaction score
- 13,021
What size difference? Block SM-6 Blk IB and SM-3 Blk I are roughly the same size.
RIM-174 Standard ERAM - Wikipedia
RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 - Wikipedia
Also, where did you get the Mach 12? I can't find any reputable sources. A more reliable source gives an average speed of 1,190m/s, which is around Mach 3.5 at sea level or Mach 4 at altitude. The peak is more likely about 2x that.
Advanced long-range missile for S-400 system accepted for service in Russia
A source says the 40N6 long-range surface-to-air missile of the S-400 Triumf system has been accepted for service in the Russian Army
tass.com
panzerfeist1
ACCESS: Secret
What size difference? Block SM-6 Blk IB and SM-3 Blk I are roughly the same size.
RIM-174 Standard ERAM - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 - Wikipedia
Also, where did you get the Mach 12? I can't find any reputable sources. A more reliable source gives an average speed of 1,190m/s, which is around Mach 3.5 at sea level or Mach 4 at altitude. The peak is more likely about 2x that.
Advanced long-range missile for S-400 system accepted for service in Russia
A source says the 40N6 long-range surface-to-air missile of the S-400 Triumf system has been accepted for service in the Russian Army
my apologies for mixing up the other SM block missiles also sorry again for mixing it up with the target velocity.
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,871
- Reaction score
- 10,919
"On February 21, 03:26 GMT an SM-3 missile was fired from the Ticonderoga-class missile cruiser USS Lake Erie and intercepted USA-193 about 133 nautical miles (247 kilometers)[25] above the Pacific Ocean. The satellite was traveling with a velocity of about 17,500 mph (around 28,000 km/h, or 7.8 km/s). The velocity of the impact was about 22,000 mph. "
Flight time was 166 seconds. That gives an AVERAGE vertical velocity component of about Mach 5. The missile contributed 4,500 mph to the combined impact velocity. As it wasn't a nose-to-nose impact the missiles speed at impact was likely much higher.
Last edited:
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,586
What size difference? Block SM-6 Blk IB and SM-3 Blk I are roughly the same size.
RIM-174 Standard ERAM - Wikipedia
RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 - Wikipedia
SM-6 IB refers to the 21" upgrade to the SM-6 ERAM. SM-6 Block 1 and SM-6 Block 1A share the same size of rocket motors. SM-6 Block 1B will be substantially larger. Hopefully, this is the last time this comes up.
