Developments in the area of USPACOM, Pacific Theatre

[Smitty-48]

The Aegis BMD Project has been around for a while.

Aegis BMD with mid-course intercept as a component of the US Missile Defense Agency, is new, that's not "from the 1960's", the Missile Defense Agency did not come about until George W. Bush withdrew from the ABM treaty in 2001, since then, the MDA has become a major entrenched interest at the Pentagon, Aegis BMD is the Navy's component, in 2009 Obama scrapped the land based BMD in Europe in favour of sea based for EUCOM, but the DF-21D ASBM is the Navy's PACOM bogey, bear in mind, this is an ongoing program which has not yet been fielded on all Aegis warships, only a handful have been equipped so far, so they definitley need to keep justifying their budget, and just as importantly, sell the product to allies, particualrly Aegis operators like Japan, Korea, and Australia.

A2/AD is the major selling point to Congress for Lockheed Martin/Raytheon and the MDA, and Aegis BMD sets it apart from the competitors, particularly the Europeam MBDA Sea Viper which is not BMD capable. The MDA wants all Aegis ships to be BMD, and Lockheed Martin/Raytheon want to sell it to all Aegis worldwide.

So whenever you see clickbait about the DF-21D being ten feet tall, that's Lockheed Martin/Raytheon and the MDA putting that out there, it's a marketing campaign for Missile Defense.The MSM is part of the MIC, the role of the MSM is to fabricate ten foot tall bogeys for the MIC to shoot at.

That being said, even if the DF-21D was ten feet tall, the Chinese can't start shooting them at the US Navy, without starting World War Three, so all Ten Foot Tall Communist Bogey's are still just Red Scare hysteria to justify the MIC, that part is nothing new.

[The Conservative]

You know, if there is such an issue with the islands, why don't wee just "remove" them from the equation?

[Smitty-48]

The issue for the USA & Co is not the islands, the Islands are all just part of the Chinese trying to claim the China Seas as being internal waters to China, which is ridiculous, but that's what the Chinese are trying to assert, the issue for the USA & Co is simply counter asserting that they are not internal waters to China, but rather international waters with freedom of navigation therein, and how the USA & Co do that, is simply by sailing through those waters and defying the Chinese to do anything about it, the Islands not really being central to American freedom of navigation.

The issue for the United States is not keeping China off of a handful of tiny islands, the issue for the United States is defending its critical interest on the Sea Line of Communication through the China Seas, second busiest sea lane in the world, critical to the American global maritime commercial trading empire.

The question is simply; is China really in a position to fight and win a war to deny America freedom of navigation in the China Seas, a war which, if they started firing DF-21D's at US carrier strike groups, would immediately escalate to World War Three? Is that actually a realistic threat?

About as realistic as the Russians invading Western Europe that is, and so, not very realisitic at all quite frankly, more of a Cold War 2.0 Red Scare.

The Chinese are simply not in a position to fight and win a war on the high seas against the USA & Co, not even close, the Chinese would get their asses handed to them, and then what are they going to do? Incite a launch on warning scenario with a massed ballistic missile raid against PACOM?

Let's get real here, that would be commiting national suicide, because in the event of World War Three, the United States would annihilate China, right down to the bones.

The Chinese are dickheads, and they're stupid, but they're not crazy. They are proving that they are stupid enough to turn everyone against them by actiing like dickheads, but that don't mean that they are suicidal, and they're not so stupid to think that if they went to war against the USA & Co on the high seas, that they could away with that, without having their entire navy sunk within a week.

They're rattling sabers, but realistically, it's for Chinese domestic consumption, they don't really think they can fight and win a war here, it's just a PLA dog n' pony show, trying to act tough for the home crowd, but the cold calculating reality of the situation is; Paper Tiger.

[The Conservative]

The issue for the USA & Co is not the islands, the Islands are all just part of the Chinese trying to claim the China Seas as being internal waters to China, which is ridiculous, but that's what the Chinese are trying to assert, the issue for the USA & Co is simply counter asserting that they are not internal waters to China, but rather international waters with freedom of navigation therein, and how the USA & Co do that, is simply by sailing through those waters and defying the Chinese to do anything about it, the Islands not really being central to American freedom of navigation.

The issue for the United States is not keeping China off of a handful of tiny islands, the issue for the United States is defending its critical interest on the Sea Line of Communication through the China Seas, second busiest sea lane in the world, critical to the American global maritime commercial trading empire.

The question is simply; is China really in a position to fight and win a war to deny America freedom of navigation in the China Seas, a war which, if they started firing DF-21D's at US carrier strike groups, would immediately escalate to World War Three? Is that actually a realistic threat?

About as realistic as the Russians invading Western Europe that is, and so, not very realisitic at all quite frankly, more of a Cold War 2.0 Red Scare.

The Chinese are simply not in a position to fight and win a war on the high seas against the USA & Co, not even close, the Chinese would get their asses handed to them, and then what are they going to do? Incite a launch on warning scenario with a massed ballistic missile raid against PACOM?

Let's get real here, that would be commiting national suicide, because in the event of World War Three, the United States would annihilate China, right down to the bones.

The Chinese are dickheads, and they're stupid, but they're not crazy. They are proving that they are stupid enough to turn everyone against them by actiing like dickheads, but that don't mean that they are suicidal, and they're not so stupid to think that if they went to war against the USA & Co on the high seas, that they could away with that, without having their entire navy sunk within a week.

They're rattling sabers, but realistically, it's for Chinese domestic consumption, they don't really think they can fight and win a war here, it's just a PLA dog n' pony show, trying to act tough for the home crowd, but the cold calculating reality of the situation is; Paper Tiger.

Then you have three paper tigers, the US, the UN and China... we will just need to see which one goes up in flames first.

[Smitty-48]

The UN is not even a Tiger never mind Paper, but the US is not a Paper Tiger on the high seas, if the likes of China start firing broadsides accross the bows of the US Navy asserting freedom of navigation, the US Navy would hand them their asses, any which way the Chinese wanted to play it, symmetrical, assymetrical, whatever, the Chinese A2/AD threat is vastly overhyped, by the American MIC more than anybody.

That's not to say that the US shouldn't go on a shipbuilding spree, MAGA should ramp up the Navy, no doubt, and none of this LCS crap, DDG-51 Flight III and SSN-774 Block IV, and don't let the fallacious liberal media concern trolls talk you out of it, they'll complain no matter what you do, cause it's all about clickbait for them, but just ignore them, they're not real "reformers", they're just a bunch of ceaselessly hyperventilating hacks who attack all military programs reflexively, not to fix the military, just to sell soap.

F-35A/B/C, DDG-51 Flight III with Aegis BMD, and SSN-774 Block IV, is all America needs, to deal with Chinese A2/AD; problem solved.

America is a Mahanian Eternal Seapower, so long as America maintains her seapower, the likes of China will never dare take a shot at you on the high seas, because they well know that they would get their asses handed to them, right quick.

[ssu]

The Aegis BMD Project has been around for a while.

Aegis BMD with mid-course intercept as a component of the US Missile Defense Agency, is new, that's not "from the 1960's", the Missile Defense Agency did not come about until George W. Bush withdrew from the ABM treaty in 2001

Nope, wrong (or again you are referring to something else). The Project has been around for quite some time. Remember it well from the 1990's, as I read articles about it back then. To modify the Navy's SAMs into the missile defence role was started far earlier. That it was the Standard missile looks like having been a good choice, actually, as you don't have to have totally new VLS launchers.

The current effort to deploy Aegis ballistic missile defense (ABMD) was begun during the mid-1980s as part of President Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). The SDI plan was initially for a space-based railgun system. However, due to technological constraints, the system was transformed into a surface-based system known as the Lightweight Exo-atmospheric Projectile (LEAP). The original testing of the LEAP was done as part of the Army LEAP program.

Later, SDIO worked with the Navy to test the LEAP on the Terrier missile. The Terrier LEAP demonstration program lasted from 1991 into 1995 and consisted of four flight tests. Two of these were intercept tests in early 1995; both failed to intercept—the first had a software error in the second-stage booster, the second had a squib (pyrotechnic switch to connect power) in the kinetic kill vehicle that was mounted backwards and failed to fire.

During the late 1990s, the U.S. Navy was tasked to provide a weapon system for exploratory testing of LEAP. This phase was designated the Aegis LEAP Intercept (ALI) program. The program was for two successful intercepts in five attempts. On June 13, 2002, the second successful ALI intercept occurred during the FM-3 flight test mission. Initial Aegis BMD success may have contributed to President George W. Bush's decision to deploy an emergency ballistic missile capability by late 2004. Upon the completion of the ALI program, Aegis BMD was transitioned to the production phase. The first Block I production SM-3 was delivered in October 2004, and the Aegis 3.0 update was delivered in 2005.

Now as hitting such a small and fast incoming target as an reentry vehicle, naturally the Project has been long and difficult. It looks like that on average, they tend to hit their targets, but not with 100% kills but 83% accuracy, which is rather good. What should be noticed is that the system is capable of shooting down satellites, which in the occasion of a conflict would be one of the primary things to do (as without any targetting info, no cruise missiles or ballistic missiles can be launched). Here's from a briefing to the Congress (from October 2016) of the test firings of the Aegis BMD system:

since January 2002, the Aegis BMD system has achieved 28 successful exo-atmospheric intercepts in 35 attempts using the SM-3 missile (including 3 successful intercepts in 4 attempts by Japanese Aegis ships, and one successful intercept in one attempt using the Aegis Ashore system), and 5 successful endo-atmospheric intercepts in 5 attempts using the SM-2 Block IV missile and the SM-6 Dual I missile, making for a combined total of 33 successful intercepts in 40 attempts. In addition, on February 20, 2008, a BMD-capable Aegis cruiser operating northwest of Hawaii used a modified version of the Aegis BMD system to shoot down an inoperable U.S. surveillance satellite that was in a deteriorating orbit. Including this intercept in the count increases the totals to 29 successful exo-atmospheric intercepts in 36 attempts using the SM-3 missile, and 34 successful exo- and endo-atmospheric intercepts in 41 attempts using both SM-3 and SM-2 Block IV missiles.

see Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress

Btw. If you read carefully, I was referring to the old Patriot system deployed in the Desert Shield/Desert Storm, which indeed is a 60's Project (perhaps rough drawings were started in the 50's). The Pac-3 Patriot is quite different. These are long projects.

Americans trying to defend Israel. A Patriot launch in an Israeli city:

[Smitty-48]

The origin of Aegis BMD is the Aegis LEAP, but that system wasn't successfully tested until 2002, further development and deployment was hindered by ABM 72' restrictions, which is why George W. Bush withdrew from ABM 72', to deploy the Aegis LEAP, now Aegis BMD, as America's "emergency missile defense system", as part of the new Missile Defense Agency, a capability which was and could only be created by the United States withdrawing from the treaty, which incindentally, is also what set the Russians off for this Cold War 2.0 arms race we are now entering, with Aegis BMD as America's best performing BMD system, which is now planned to go land based as well, as the Aegis BMD Ashore program.

Patriot wasn't actually an ABM system, it was just air defense system, Patriot was supplanted by a follow-on development with hit-to-kill ABM capablity, called THAAD, but though developed because of the SCUD threat, THAAD wasn't actually deployed by the US until 2008, originally, the US was going to deploy THAAD to Poland and the Czech Republic, but the Russian reaction to that caused President Obama to cancel that plan in favour of Aegis BMD at sea.

ABM systems were indeed initially developed in the 60's, which lead to the ABM treaty in 1972, but they never really worked before, the technology did not become mature until 2002, but in order for the US to deploy widespead mid-course intercept BMD, the US had to withdraw from ABM 72', which is what they did and why they did it.

[ssu]

The origin of Aegis BMD is the Aegis LEAP (Lightweight Exo-Atmospheric Projectile) Initiative (ALI), wasn't successfully tested until 2002,

To get that success did take some time, hence the Project has taken a long time.

Patriot wasn't actually an ABM system, it was just air defense system,

You are totally correct here. Very capable of hitting aircraft, but not ballistic missiles as it wasn't intended for that kind of thing. The Israeli's started to have a problem when using Patriots during the Gulf War. At worst both the Scud and the Patriot intending to hit the Scud were hitting some buildings. Hitting the small warhead is the difficulty, hitting some part of the incoming debris of the missile is far easier.

Patriot was supplanted by a follow-on development with hit-to-kill ABM capablity, called THAAD, but though developed because of the SCUD threat, THAAD wasn't actually deployed by the US until 2008, originally, the US was going to deploy THAAD to Poland and the Czech Republic, but the Russian reaction to that caused President Obama to cancel that plan in favour of Aegis BMD at sea.

I think a lot of the agreements signed are totally dead. Nearly every treaty isn't followed anymore. And some S-500 Prometheus is surely made for the ABM role. Hence you have both sides making their ABM systems. And here the US does of course have the advantage of spending lavishly.

Yet the whole idea of shooting down ballistic missiles is something that is fantastically expensive. Not only do you have to have the system, but also a huge complicated integrated system to pick up, target and finally kill incoming missiles. And for an old AAA officer like me one thing comes to mind that the whole system is extremely fragile and simply lacks combat survivability. Those huge fixed arrays are an easy target, and the whole system has to be operating well from start to finish.

As a fixed installation, this is a big target.


Is simple only in a drawing:


Makes me wonder how much costs the ABM system compared to the ballistic missile system. And if the reentry vehicles or missiles can start making dramatic turns in space altering their trajectories, how valid is the system? Or then have a systems that can go into orbit and basically come from anywhere...

[Smitty-48]

Well, first of all, the missile that you have been referring to, the Aegis LEAP/ SM3, is the "mid-course" interceptor "exo-atmospheric", so that's shooting down targets in space, this is why it would be ABM 72' non-compliant, also bear in mind, that makes it an ASAT as well.

But as to the MRASBM, the DF-21D as a complete platform of systems, is not cheap at all, the missile is nothing, the hard part is tracking the US carrier over the horizon, which requires a massive infrastructure of sensor platforms and secure commications which are far more expensive than the American Aegis BMD, the only way the PLA can actually target the carrier, is by launching dedicated sattelites to find it.

This is where SM LEAP can actually neutralize the missile without having to shoot down the missile itself, rather, the Americans could simply shoot down the derpressed trajectory sattelites that were looking for the carrier, the idea that it is cheap and easy and unstoppable, to target a US carrier over the horizon with a ballistic missile, is not correct, it is in fact far more complex and expensive than defending the carrier by a combination of means, of which an exo/endo atmospheric hard kill intercept would only be the last layers of.

Due to the massive and complex infrastructure required, the ASBM actually strikes me as a kind of Rube Goldberg Device, not even worth the expense, more of a propoganda weapon than an efficient way to kill US carriers, again, Red Scare as opposed to real world. In a real world shooting war with the Americans, the infrastructure for the Rube Golberg Device would all be rubble bounced twice, before the Chicoms could even get a shot off.

The Americans woud be coming at them as a system of systems combined, offensive and defensive at the same time, the Americans are not going to sit back and let the Chinese take pot shots at them, to sow the wind against the Americans for a real world shooting war, would be to reap the whirlwind, when the Eagle with thunderbolts in talons grasped, took the gloves off, a totally fucked up China's shit, without stopping to ask for permission nor directions, as it blew by their second rate Soviet style defenses when it did.

DF-21D? Associated sattelites and launchers, over the horizon radars, and directing command posts; boom and buh-bye.

[TheReal_ND]