Erik Prince on Sunday Morning Futures: The US has “No Means” to Shoot Down Russia’s Mach 9 Hypersonic Ballistic Missiles that Were Just Fired on Ukrai

[Mushroom]

The AIM-54's motor burned out during its boost phase.

Are you sure you mean the AIM-54 PHOENIX, with a range of over 100 miles?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Yes. But those "fast-moving claster bombs", launched , say, from Cuba, can hit US Minuteman III silos before POTUS is even reported about the launch. Its a gun pointed directly into your right arm (and, may be, even left arm either).

How? The launch would be detected the instant it happened. Russia will not be able to put these missiles in Cuba. You might as well just launch from Russia because they can't hit anything except within a zip code. High speed means lack of control.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Are you sure you mean the AIM-54 PHOENIX, with a range of over 100 miles?

The shipboard Standard RIM-66 was ballistic in its flight path. Most missiles achieve a superposition on their targets and attack from above.

 

[Zavulon]

How? The launch would be detected the instant it happened.

Not that instant. It is at least one minute for decection and at least seven minutes for launch under attack procedure.

Russia will not be able to put these missiles in Cuba.

Russia was able to covertly put them (almost all of them) previous time, when Cuba was different and CIA was different. It will be much easier in 2025.

You might as well just launch from Russia because they can't hit anything except within a zip code.

High speed means lack of control.

High speed meant lack of control. Now, with new materials we (not you) can have both.

 

[Mushroom]

The shipboard Standard RIM-66 was ballistic in its flight path. Most missiles achieve a superposition on their targets and attack from above.

It could and would operate like that at the maximum range. But were not intended to be operated at those ranges, they simply could be.

 

[martybegan]

Are you sure you mean the AIM-54 PHOENIX, with a range of over 100 miles?

Yep, that missile. fired off the Tomcat.

 

[Mushroom]

Yep, that missile. fired off the Tomcat.

And was that the only way it was intended to be used?



Do not confuse that being one way it could be used, with that being the only way it was used. Because it is clearly visible in the above videos (and many more I can produce) that it was still under power when it hit the target. Because that is often not the case in military weapons. While a NATO 60mm mortar is intended to be fired from a tripod in a fixed position, it can also be fired by a single individual on the move from a kneeling position.



The PHOENIX was a great weapon for the era, as it had both a long range stand-off capability, as well as an in-close highly lethal capability. And even though the US had only 3 uses and 3 failures in 1999, in the early 1980s Iran had some amazing results with it. Shooting down a claimed 78 Iraqi aircraft, and even Exocet and Silkworm missiles.

 

[martybegan]

And was that the only way it was intended to be used?



Do not confuse that being one way it could be used, with that being the only way it was used. Because it is clearly visible in the above videos (and many more I can produce) that it was still under power when it hit the target. Because that is often not the case in military weapons. While a NATO 60mm mortar is intended to be fired from a tripod in a fixed position, it can also be fired by a single individual on the move from a kneeling position.



The PHOENIX was a great weapon for the era, as it had both a long range stand-off capability, as well as an in-close highly lethal capability. And even though the US had only 3 uses and 3 failures in 1999, in the early 1980s Iran had some amazing results with it. Shooting down a claimed 78 Iraqi aircraft, and even Exocet and Silkworm missiles.

Used at it's maximum range as designed, it used up it's fuel in the boost phase. It's why it HAD a 100 mile range.

 

[Mushroom]

Used at it's maximum range as designed, it used up it's fuel in the boost phase. It's why it HAD a 100 mile range.

Which I never denied. But that is only when used at maximum range, in which it rarely was. It was almost entirely used as much closer ranges where it was still under power when it intercepted the target.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It could and would operate like that at the maximum range. But were not intended to be operated at those ranges, they simply could be.

Actually, it always attacks from above even if still under powered flight.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Actually, it always attacks from above even if still under powered flight.

Phoenix was always intended to be used at maximum range against raids by Bears or Backfires as part of the USN’s layered defense against Soviet missile swarm attacks on its carriers.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Phoenix was always intended to be used at maximum range against raids by Bears or Backfires as part of the USN’s layered defense against Soviet missile swarm attacks on its carriers.

Using the Phoenix at anything less than maximum range just wastes resources. You had other weapons for closer-in engagements.

 

[Mushroom]

Actually, it always attacks from above even if still under powered flight.

But that does not make it a "ballistic trajectory".

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

But that does not make it a "ballistic trajectory".

True. The powered portion of the flight is very short.

 

[martybegan]

Which I never denied. But that is only when used at maximum range, in which it rarely was. It was almost entirely used as much closer ranges where it was still under power when it intercepted the target.

Agreed. The reason it was never used at max range is that is was never used for its intended target, large soviet bombers in regiment strength firing 300 mi range missiles at a carrier battle group.

 

[Mushroom]

True. The powered portion of the flight is very short.

That is not what makes it a "ballistic trajectory".

The "powered portion" of a bullet or artillery round is even shorter, yet they follow ballistic trajectories.

 

[Mushroom]

The reason it was never used at max range is that is was never used for its intended target, large soviet bombers in regiment strength firing 300 mi range missiles at a carrier battle group.

Oh, it was designed as a long range missile for air superiority purposes, and was only used on the F-14 Tomcat. Which is why only the US and Iran ever used it.

It was one of three air to air missiles commonly carried on Tomcats. The Sparrow and Sidewinder for short range, the AMRAAM for medium range, and the Phoenix for long range. The US simply never used it because other than a couple of times, we simply never got into shooting wars with the Tomcat. But Iran was in a decade long shooting war with Iraq, and it performed admirably there.

And the only real "dogfight" they had was the Gulf of Sidra incident, where it engaged with Sidewinders. And in the Gulf War, the coalition mandate that they use visual identification of all targets to prevent friendly fire incidents prevented them from being used more than a couple of times. But they were not "only" for bombers, they were simply the longest range missile the F-14 carried. And the US with it rarely had engagements at other than short range.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

That is not what makes it a "ballistic trajectory".

The "powered portion" of a bullet or artillery round is even shorter, yet they follow ballistic trajectories.

We agree.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Oh, it was designed as a long range missile for air superiority purposes, and was only used on the F-14 Tomcat. Which is why only the US and Iran ever used it.

It was one of three air to air missiles commonly carried on Tomcats. The Sparrow and Sidewinder for short range, the AMRAAM for medium range, and the Phoenix for long range. The US simply never used it because other than a couple of times, we simply never got into shooting wars with the Tomcat. But Iran was in a decade long shooting war with Iraq, and it performed admirably there.

And the only real "dogfight" they had was the Gulf of Sidra incident, where it engaged with Sidewinders. And in the Gulf War, the coalition mandate that they use visual identification of all targets to prevent friendly fire incidents prevented them from being used more than a couple of times. But they were not "only" for bombers, they were simply the longest range missile the F-14 carried. And the US with it rarely had engagements at other than short range.

You got it wrong. The Tomcat carried Sidewinders for short range, Sparrows for medium range and Phoenix for long range. As far as I know the Tomcat never carried the Amraam since the Tomcat was retired the same year the Amraam entered service.

 

[Mushroom]

You got it wrong. The Tomcat carried Sidewinders for short range, Sparrows for medium range and Phoenix for long range. As far as I know the Tomcat never carried the Amraam since the Tomcat was retired the same year the Amraam entered service.

What?

The AIM-120 entered service in 1991. The F-14 was not retired until 2006.