Military

US MDA, Raytheon, and Boeing destroy ICBM using double interceptor shot

A dummy target was launched by an ICBM similar to this one before being destroyed by a "two-shot salvo"
A dummy target was launched by an ICBM similar to this one before being destroyed by a "two-shot salvo"
View 1 Image
A dummy target was launched by an ICBM similar to this one before being destroyed by a "two-shot salvo"
1/1
A dummy target was launched by an ICBM similar to this one before being destroyed by a "two-shot salvo"

The US Missile Defence Agency (MDA), Boeing, and Raytheon have pulled off an historic first as a dummy ICBM warhead was intercepted in space over the Pacific Ocean by not one, but two interceptor missiles. The test, called a "two-shot salvo," involved a target launched from Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands, which was destroyed by two Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system kill vehicles fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

Knocking out an ICBM warhead in flight has been compared to hitting a bullet with a bullet, but today's test was more like hitting a bullet with another bullet while a third bullet was flying in for a second tap – all the while assessing the situation and selecting its target.

For the test, two Raytheon Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicles (EKVs) zeroed in on a threat-representative dummy warhead high above the Earth's atmosphere on a suborbital trajectory. While in flight, the first EKV lined up to destroy the target, while the second monitored the impact and relayed the data to mission control before homing in to destroy additional debris that survived the first impact.

According to Raytheon, tracking and targeting data was provided by the company's Sea-Based X-band radar and AN/TPY-2 radar, but the EKVs themselves identified the threat before evading countermeasures and destroying the target. Because both the dummy warhead and the interceptors were flying at hypersonic speeds, no explosives were needed.

Today's test was the 11th GMD program intercept and the second of an ICBM. The GMD interceptors are based at Vandenberg Air Force Base and Alaska's Fort Greely, where their main mission is to protect North America from accidental and rogue-state nuclear attacks by intercepting and destroying missiles far from populated areas.

"The data collected from this test will enhance missile defense for years to come and solidify confidence in the system," says Paul Smith, Boeing vice president and program director, Ground-based Midcourse Defense. "We continue to increase the system's reliability as the US government plans to expand the number of interceptors protecting the country."

Sources: Boeing, Raytheon

5 comments
guzmanchinky
Amazing. Even the rocket science in the 60's was amazing, and they would have been blown away (pun intended) by what we can do today.
Douglas Bennett Rogers
This is the "Star Wars" that was laughed at in the Reagan defense buildup.
Norm.Rhett
Reagan's "Star Wars" fantasy was satellites with what Edward Teller predicted would be desk-sized laser weapons. Multiple ground based interceptors are obviously possible, but so far no comprehensive test against tactics such as evasive maneuvers or multiple decoys has been made public.
Denise8088
What they aren't telling you is that the target used NO decoys - a real missile uses them. What they also are not telling you is that position data of the target was transmitted directly to the two missiles that destroyed it. This was not a real world test and the results cannot be generalized to a real attack with a real missile that would use decoys and not transmit it's position to anyone, and would probably carry multiple warheads. These test problems have been present for years. The real purpose of these tests is to keep the money flowing.
ljaques
First off, ground-based comm could be interrupted/jammed, while on-missile radar might continue to function and perform its job. Delays to unjammed ground comm might be long enough to cause a miss. It seems like leaving off an explosive could be short-sighted, although I don't see hypervelocity ICBMs doing much evasion due to their size/speed/weight. Was Paul Smith rubbing his hands together when he said "We continue to increase the system's reliability as the US government plans to expand the number of interceptors protecting the country." That gave away the farm, sir. What if feels like to me is "You keep carting truckloads of cash to us and we'll divvy out small reliability bumps to you." The picture is the giveaway, though. If the missile in the foreground is the 2nd interceptor, it missed the destroyed ICBM because it's not even enveloped in smoke (10x ICBM diameter?) from the explosion. If the missile in the foreground is the ICBM, the interceptors got each other in the background. It is, though, a pretty picture.