# Patriot PAC-3 Successfully Intercept a Cruise Missile



## Major Shaitan Singh

*Patriot PAC-3 Assisted by JLENS, Successfully Intercept a Cruise Missile Target*

Lockheed Martins PAC-3 Missile successfully intercepted and destroyed a cruise missile target yesterday at the Utah Test and Training Range, in an unprecedented interoperability demonstration utilizing the Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor (JLENS) and the PATRIOT system.

The test demonstrated a new capability recently introduced with the PAC-3 Missile Segments unique ability to detect, track, engage and destroy a cruise missile target at extended range in an integrated air and missile defense architecture that joins netted sensors and missile defense systems to provide greater capability for the warfighter.

PAC-3 has already demonstrated the ability to defeat cruise missile in 2004, as a single Lockheed Martin PAC-3 Missile was fired at a low-flying MQM-107D cruise missile target. The main challenge in defeating the cruise missile target is the detection and tracking of such low-flying targets. Back then the PAC-3 relied on ground-based sensors to spot the targets. However, often in realistic scenarios, an intercept of a cruise missile under these conditions would be considered merely as a lucky shot. JLENS turns the table in favor of the defender.







the JLENS system developed by Raytheon consists of two tethered 74-meter aerostats. One aerostat elevates a surveillance radar to 10,000 feet, providing 360-degree coverage out for hundreds of miles over land and sea. The other aerostat elevates a fire-control radar. Each of the aerostat platforms has the capability to integrate other communications and sensor systems.

JLENS provides a look down sensor that can better monitor large areas, even over contoured or mountainous terrain, providing the PAC-3 with the data for reliable target acquisition. The system completed the first demonstration test (DT1) in February, successfully proving its ability to track targets and integrate with fire control and tactical data link systems. At the time, Mark Rose, program director for JLENS with Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems explained: In addition to detecting and tracking targets, the system demonstrated its ability to communicate targeting data over command and control systems, such as Link-16, and interface with combat identification support systems, such as IFF (Identify Friend or Foe), to discriminate between friendly and hostile aircraft and missiles. these capabilities were essential to the success of the recent intercept.






The PAC-3 Missile continues to be successful against todays modern threats, and is ready for tomorrows modern plug-and-fight air and missile defense architectures, said Richard McDaniel, vice president of PAC-3 programs at Lockheed Martins Missiles and Fire Control business. This effort moves us closer towards achieving the U.S. Armys vision of a truly integrated Air and Missile Defense System.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

*The PAC-3 upgrade carried with it a new missile design, nominally known as MIM-104F[citation needed] and called PAC-3 by the Army. The PAC-3 missile evolved from the Strategic Defense Initiative's ERINT missile, and so it is dedicated almost entirely to the anti-ballistic missile mission. Due to miniaturization, a single canister can hold four PAC-3 missiles (as opposed to one PAC-2 missile per canister). The PAC-3 missile is also more maneuverable than previous variants, due to 180 tiny pulse solid propellant rocket motors mounted in the forebody of the missile (called Attitude Control Motors, or ACMs) which serve to fine align the missile trajectory with its target to achieve hit-to-kill capability. However, the most significant upgrade to the PAC-3 missile is the addition of a Ka band active radar seeker. This allows the missile to drop its uplink to the system and acquire its target itself in the terminal phase of its intercept, which improves the reaction time of the missile against a fast-moving ballistic missile target. The PAC-3 missile is accurate enough to select, target, and home in on the warhead portion of an inbound ballistic missile. The active radar also gives the warhead a "hit-to-kill" capability that completely eliminates the need for a traditional proximity-fused warhead. However, the missile still has a small explosive warhead, called Lethality Enhancer, a directional warhead which launches a stream of low-speed steel fragments in the direction of the target in order to make the missile cross-section greater to enhance the kill probability. This greatly increases the lethality against ballistic missiles of all types.*
*The PAC-3 upgrade has effectively quintupled the "footprint" that a Patriot unit can defend against ballistic missiles of all types, and has considerably increased the system's lethality and effectiveness against ballistic missiles. It has also increased the scope of ballistic missiles that Patriot can engage, which now includes several intermediate range. However, despite its increases in ballistic missile defense capabilities, the PAC-3 missile is a less capable interceptor of atmospheric aircraft and air-to-surface missiles. It is slower, has a shorter range, and has a smaller explosive warhead compared to older Patriot missiles.*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## LeGenD

PAC 3 is a battle-proven system. Probably the best in the world in its class.


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

LeGenD said:


> PAC 3 is a battle-proven system. Probably the best in the world in its class.



Yes, it's a very effective system but it's strictly made as anti-missile system with 70 km range with hitting target missiles in their terminal stage of flight unlike Thaad and S-400 which are better in my opinion.


----------



## LeGenD

BLACKEAGLE said:


> Yes, it's a very effective system but it's strictly made as anti-missile system with 70 km range with hitting target missiles in their terminal stage of flight unlike Thaad and S-400 which are better in my opinion.


I am talking about 'class' here.

And PAC 3 can also down aircrafts. All ABM systems can.


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

LeGenD said:


> I am talking about 'class' here.
> 
> And PAC 3 can also down aircrafts. All ABM systems can.



the missile still has a small explosive warhead, called Lethality Enhancer, a directional warhead which launches a stream of low-speed steel fragments in the direction of the target in order to make the missile cross-section greater to enhance the kill probability. This greatly increases the lethality against ballistic missiles of all types. *However, despite its increases in ballistic missile defense capabilities, the PAC-3 missile is a less capable interceptor of atmospheric aircraft and air-to-surface missiles. It is slower, has a shorter range, and has a smaller explosive warhead compared to older Patriot missiles.*


----------



## LeGenD

BLACKEAGLE said:


> the missile still has a small explosive warhead, called Lethality Enhancer, a directional warhead which launches a stream of low-speed steel fragments in the direction of the target in order to make the missile cross-section greater to enhance the kill probability. This greatly increases the lethality against ballistic missiles of all types. *However, despite its increases in ballistic missile defense capabilities, the PAC-3 missile is a less capable interceptor of atmospheric aircraft and air-to-surface missiles. It is slower, has a shorter range, and has a smaller explosive warhead compared to older Patriot missiles.*


1. Ballistic Missiles move faster then Aircraft, which PAC 3 can intercept.

2. PAC 3 missiles might be smaller then those of its ancestors but they are highly accurate. 

3. Even birds can be lethal to Jets and we are talking about missiles here.


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

LeGenD said:


> 1. Ballistic Missiles move faster then Aircraft, which PAC 3 can intercept.
> 
> 2. PAC 3 missiles might be smaller then those of its ancestors but they are highly accurate.
> 
> 3. Even birds can be lethal to Jets and we are talking about missiles here.



Yes they can intercept jets, but they were made solely for intercepting missiles. It's more of a kinetic with a very small explosive head unlike Pac-2. Therefore, jets could get hit but not shot down.


----------



## LeGenD

BLACKEAGLE said:


> Yes they can intercept jets, but they were made solely for intercepting missiles. It's more of a kinetic with a very small explosive head unlike Pac-2. Therefore, jets could get hit but not shot down.


I find this hard to believe, given the vulnerability of Jets to collisions in the air and resulting damages.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mercenary

I thought the Arrow was the best in the world


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

Mercenary said:


> I thought the Arrow was the best in the world



I don't it's better than Thaad or S-400. But it's better than Patriot pac 3 since Israel already had it but turned to develop Arow system though. It has greater range as well as height ceiling.


----------



## Mercenary

BLACKEAGLE said:


> I don't it's better than Thaad or S-400. But it's better than Patriot pac 3 since Israel already had it but turned to develop Arow system though. It has greater range as well as height ceiling.



Isn't Arrow is a missile interceptor system and S-400 and Thaad are attack systems.


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

*Arrow (missile)
*Operational
range	90 km (56 mi)  148 km (92 mi)
Flight ceiling	50 km (31 mi)  60 km (37 mi)
Speed	Mach 9, means 2.5 km/s (1.6 mi/s)
Guidance
system	Dual mode: passive infrared seeker and active radar seeker
Steering
system	Thrust vectoring and four aerodynamic control moving fins
Accuracy	Within 4 m (13 ft) of the target





*Terminal High Altitude Area Defense
*Operational
range	>200 km
Speed 2.8 km/s





S-400 (SAM)
Operational
range	400 km (40N6 missile)
250 km (48N6 missile)
120km (9M96 missile)
Flight ceiling	185 km
Boost time	cold launch ejection system
Speed	Mach 12.0
Guidance
system	inertial guidance with radio command corrections

*120km (9M96 missile)
*Description: The 9M96 is a family of advanced Surface-to-Air Missiles (SAMs) designed to engage a wide range of aerodynamic and ballistic targets in the most severe clutter and jamming environments with unprecedented effectiveness. The new missile is able to intercept targets at a maximum speed of Mach 15 (4,800-5000 m/s) and at a maximum altitude of 35,000 meters. The 9M96 missile family was developed for integration on the Russian Triumf next generation air defense system. The Russian Air Force seeks to field a 9M96 derivative designed to perform long range air-to-air engagements. The Fakel Design Bureau (MKV Fakel), a part of Almaz-Antey Concern, is responsible for the 9M96 missile family.

The 9M96 missile features an active radar homing head backed by target updates provided by the launch unit's radar system as well as an Inertial Navigation System (INS) for midcourse guidance. Its cold launch consists of the missile being ejected 30 meters above its canister and thereafter the rocket motor ignites. A Thrust Vectoring Control (TVC) system based on gas flow provides an impressive maneuverability over other current anti-aircraft missiles. So far, the two existing missile variants have a maximum range varying from 40 kilometers to 120 kilometers.

The 9M96E missile variant can hit airborne targets at ranges of up to 40 kilometers and flying at 20,000 meters of altitude. Its blast fragmentation warhead weighs 24 kg and utilizes a radiofrequency fuze. Stored in its sealed canister has a service life of 15 years that can be extended. Both 9M96E and 9M96E2 missiles share many components and are similar in terms of weight and dimensions with the 9M96E being equipped with a less powerful rocket engine.







Mercenary said:


> Isn't Arrow is a missile interceptor system and S-400 and Thaad are attack systems.



No!
Thaad and Arrow as well as Patriot Pac-3 are anti-missile systems. But S-400 have both anti-missiles and anti-air missiles. Plz, read this post.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

S-400




9M96E and 9M96E2 (Almaz-Antey). (Medium-Range Missile)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 500

BLACKEAGLE said:


> I don't it's better than Thaad or S-400. But it's better than Patriot pac 3 since Israel already had it but turned to develop Arow system though. It has greater range as well as height ceiling.


These are different class systems:

Pac-3 - 20 km altitude
S-400 - 30 km altitude
Arrow-2 - 50-60 km altitude
THAAD - 150 km altitude

Israel is developing now David's Sling missile which will be the analogue of Pac-3 and Arrow-3 which will be the analogue of THAAD. This will make 4 layer defence:

Iron Dome
David's Sling
Arrow-2
Arrow-3

Patriot PAC-3 missile test - YouTube

Arrow-2 ASIP Intercepts a Ballistic Missile Target - YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR6pglLGJMg

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

500 said:


> These are different class systems:
> 
> Pac-3 - 20 km altitude
> S-400 - 30 km altitude
> Arrow-2 - 50-60 km altitude
> THAAD - 150 km altitude
> 
> Israel is developing now David's Sling missile which will be the analogue of Pac-3 and Arrow-3 which will be the analogue of THAAD. This will make 4 layer defence:
> 
> Iron Dome
> David's Sling
> Arrow-2
> Arrow-3



Actually Thaad and Patriot pac-3 are complementary to eachother, in which Patriot pac-3 intercepts a missile in it's terminal stage of flight (in atmospher), while Thaad intercepts a missile while it is in Stratosphere. So, if Thaad fails in intercepting it P Pac-3 would do that. I admire UAE for acquiring Patriot pac-3, Patriot pac-2, Thaad and Pantzir-s1 which makes it's airspace fully protected.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Thomas

The SM-6 is also a great missile agianst both cruise missile and aircraft. Though slower at around Mach 3.5 its classified range is said to be much greater then the SM-2 of about 90mi, 144km.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Wright

wow looks awesome.


----------



## yyetttt

ABM's are useless... If a nuclear missile is coming at you and the ABM took it down, where would all the nuclear fallout go? That's right.


----------



## gambit

jellodragon said:


> ABM's are useless... If a nuclear missile is coming at you and the ABM took it down, where would all the nuclear fallout go? That's right.


Wow...Would someone please inform the world's militaries of this shocking information.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Wright

jellodragon said:


> ABM's are useless... If a nuclear missile is coming at you and the ABM took it down, where would all the nuclear fallout go? That's right.



The ABM could fire back with a stronger nuclear missle.


----------



## LeGenD

@ BLACKEAGLE

My assertion is right. PAC-3 can destroy aircraft. This has happened in Iraq in 2003; PAC-3 destroyed an F-18 on April 2.

Unfortunately, as lethal PAC-3 is to enemy missiles; it is also as much lethal to friendly aircraft. Naughty system.


----------



## warpig

the only thing that iam consernd about is the fact
that can they take down a fleet of missiles comming at you?
imean can they call for backup from other arabian countries that are close to them?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LeGenD

warpig said:


> the only thing that iam consernd about is the fact
> that can they take down a fleet of missiles comming at you?
> imean can they call for backup from other arabian countries that are close to them?


US ABM systems are capable of tracking many targets simultaneously. The remaining depends upon number of launchers and interceptors deployed.

Against Iraq; PAC systems downed several missiles on various occasions in 2003.

Currently, a single launcher of PAC-3 carries 16 missiles (interceptors).

Only military installations are expected to be heavily protected IMO.


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

LeGenD said:


> @ BLACKEAGLE
> 
> My assertion is right. PAC-3 can destroy aircraft. This has happened in Iraq in 2003; PAC-3 destroyed an F-18 on April 2.
> 
> Unfortunately, as lethal PAC-3 is to enemy missiles; it is also as much lethal to friendly aircraft. Naughty system.



Review my posts. And for the other part, You should pass this breakthrough and stunning fact to scientists and military specialists in USA.


----------



## warpig

LeGenD said:


> US ABM systems are capable of tracking many targets simultaneously. The remaining depends upon number of launchers and interceptors deployed.
> 
> Against Iraq; PAC systems downed several missiles on various occasions in 2003.
> 
> A single launcher of PAC-3 carries 16 missiles.
> 
> Only military installations are expected to be heavily protected.


as you know about it ! my persian fellows allways say that iran would launch 100 of missiles to enemy
and no anti missile shield cant help our enemy and stuff like that ! 
i wanna know can that be possible?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LeGenD

BLACKEAGLE said:


> Review my posts. And for the other part, You should pass this breakthrough and stunning fact to scientists and military specialists in USA.


You think that I am joking?

_A PAC-3 missile shot down a US Navy F/A-18 fighter aircraft killing a pilot._

Source: NATO PA - 169 STCMT 04 E - MISSILE DEFENCES AND WEAPONS IN SPACE

US military specialists do not necessarily reveal all details about their weapons on press.


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

warpig said:


> the only thing that iam consernd about is the fact
> that can they take down a fleet of missiles comming at you?
> imean can they call for backup from other arabian countries that are close to them?



Yea, they can be shot down, GCC have three layers of anti-missile defense, Arab countries will participate in defending GCC for sure.



LeGenD said:


> You think that I am joking?
> 
> _A PAC-3 missile shot down a US Navy F/A-18 fighter aircraft killing a pilot._
> 
> Source: NATO PA - 169 STCMT 04 E - MISSILE DEFENCES AND WEAPONS IN SPACE
> 
> US military specialists do not necessarily reveal all details about their weapons on press.


No offence, but your lack of understanding my input in previous posts really irritates me now. I called you to review them again and you will find the answer. Anyway, that was in 2003 and several US aircraft got shot by friendly fire. I don't know whats your point here? that Patriot pac-3 is a failed system?


----------



## LeGenD

warpig said:


> as you know about it ! my persian fellows allways say that iran would launch 100 of missiles to enemy
> and no anti missile shield cant help our enemy and stuff like that !
> i wanna know can that be possible?


Damaging a military base with overwhelming firepower is possible. Point is that how US will act is open only to speculation. US has history of fooling opponents with _deception_ and _psyops_ techniques. Study Iraq war in detail and you will understand this. We do not know if F22 would be even stationed so close to Iran, in case of hostilities. Most probably not.

War is a very complex business. USAF will be all over Iranian airspace employing various jamming techniques and conducting precision strike missions. Simultaneously, their will be heavy barrage of cruise missiles on vital Iranian targets to destroy command and control systems in place. Without co-ordination, Iran will be blinded and its resistance capability will be minimized. 

I also read in some books that US currently have a system which can track movement of almost every vehicle in a country simultaneously. US used this system in Iraq when US forces approached Karbala. At this time, Iraqi divisions decided to stop US military advances in the open through co-ordination but they were destroyed so fast that Iraqi commanders were baffled.

And Iranian missile strikes in GCC nations, will give them the initiative to help US and Israel openly.

Also, cruise missile is a much better choice for a military target then a ballistic missile because of its much greater accuracy and less chance of veering off-track.



BLACKEAGLE said:


> No offence, but your lack of understanding my input in previous posts really irritates me now. I called you to review them again and you will find the answer. Anyway, that was in 2003 and several US aircraft got shot by friendly fire. I don't know whats your point here? that Patriot pac-3 is a failed system?


Am I writing Pashtun?

My point from the begining is that PAC-3 has capability to shoot down aircraft. You challenged this assertion in the first place.


----------



## warpig

can ballastic missiles use stealth tec ?
like what we got in iran ?


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

warpig said:


> can ballastic missiles use stealth tec ?
> like what we got in iran ?



There is nothing so called "stealth" ballistic missile. USA and Russia haven't claimed to have such thing. Iranian officials who claim such silly things don't even believe themselves. They know no one believe them but they direct such fictional "breakthroughs" to Iranian people. I am afraid they would know the harsh reality in the hard way.


----------



## warpig

BLACKEAGLE said:


> There is nothing so called "stealth" ballistic missile. USA and Russia haven't claimed to have such thing. Iranian officials who claim such silly things don't even believe themselves. They know no one believe them but they direct such fictional "breakthroughs" to Iranian people. I am afraid they would know the harsh reality in the hard way.


iam not saying that we got them nor denying it
because there is allways a first time and the worst mistake is to think low of your enemy
isnt it right?


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

warpig said:


> iam not saying that we got them nor denying it
> because there is allways a first time and the worst mistake is to think low of your enemy
> isnt it right?



I don't underestimate my enemy but my enemy OVER exaggerates his capabilities to an extremely ridiculous extent. I wouldn't be surprised if one of those officials claims they are going to conquire other galaxies.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## warpig

yea i know 
we are overestimating our capabilities 
i felt that one too but underestimating 
is a mistake , dont forget that we do got the 
RQ170 so its prove for somthing isnt it?


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

warpig said:


> yea i know
> we are overestimating our capabilities
> i felt that one too but underestimating
> is a mistake , dont forget that we do got the
> *RQ170 so its prove for somthing isnt it*?



That needs time to explain. But, it's just one drone among tens of others that didn't get down, tech is not immune to errors. If Iran shot down more than one drone I will admit it but it still one for now.


----------



## warpig

BLACKEAGLE said:


> That needs time to explain. But, it's just one drone among tens of others that didn't get down, tech is not immune to errors. If Iran shot down more than one drone I will admit it but it still one for now.


no it was hacked 
but iran did shot down some predator,s and other kind 
as well but this is the first to be hacked and landed according
to what iran revelutionary gaurd says


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

500 said:


> These are different class systems:
> 
> Pac-3 - 20 km altitude
> *S-400 - 30 km altitude*
> Arrow-2 - 50-60 km altitude
> THAAD - 150 km altitude
> 
> Israel is developing now David's Sling missile which will be the analogue of Pac-3 and Arrow-3 which will be the analogue of THAAD. This will make 4 layer defence:
> 
> Iron Dome
> David's Sling
> Arrow-2
> Arrow-3


120km (9M96 missile)
*Flight ceiling	185 km*
Boost time	cold launch ejection system
Speed	Mach 12.0
Guidance
system	inertial guidance with radio command corrections


----------



## anonymus

warpig said:


> can ballastic missiles use stealth tec ?
> like what we got in iran ?


 

No,

Ballistic missiles cannot use stealth tech.

They cannot use sharp edges because it would make a missile aerodynamically unstable.Thus a Ballistic missile can be tracked by radar.

Apart from Radar,US also has military satellites in orbit which can pick up the telltale sign of IR flash that accompanies launch of ballistic missile.In 1980's(i am forgetting the year) a blasting meteor in stratosphere was picked up by 6 military satellites which mistook it for ICBM launch.

Also in a terminal phase the warhead heats up to such an extent that even rudimentary Infrared sensors would pick it up.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------

