Anti-air missile systems : able to cope with an increasingly sophisticated threat? / Keith Jacobs
Material type:
TextPublication details: 2006Subject(s):
In:
Naval Forces Vol 27 No 5, 2006, pp.66-73 (41)Summary: Anti-ship missiles are becoming more sophisticated, are faster (Mach 3 or more) and have reduced radar signatures. Countering such a threat requires a variety of responses - a single system is unlikely to be adequate. Explains the US approach of integrating air and sea borne radar to identify and locate threats, then looks at close in weapons such as PHALANX, and close-in counter missiles such as SEA SPARROW and discusses their limitations (especially time given that an incoming missile traveling at 3000 feet per second) and multiple incoming missiles on the same track. Concludes with a look at likely future counter missile systems such as directed energy weapons.
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Date due | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal Article | Mindef Library & Info Centre Journals | NAVAL WEAPONS (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Not for loan | 22893-1001 |
Browsing Mindef Library & Info Centre shelves, Shelving location: Journals Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
| NAVAL WARFARE Why 1914 still matters / | NAVAL WARFARE SATCOM: Evolutionary changes for naval warfare/ | NAVAL WARFARE Satellite systems for naval warfare/ | NAVAL WEAPONS Anti-air missile systems : able to cope with an increasingly sophisticated threat? / | NAVAL WEAPONS Technology survey : surface naval expendables and launchers / | NAVAL WEAPONS Elctro-optical solution offer a far-sighted view / | NAVAL WEAPONS Time again for the "good old" gun?/ |
Anti-ship missiles are becoming more sophisticated, are faster (Mach 3 or more) and have reduced radar signatures. Countering such a threat requires a variety of responses - a single system is unlikely to be adequate. Explains the US approach of integrating air and sea borne radar to identify and locate threats, then looks at close in weapons such as PHALANX, and close-in counter missiles such as SEA SPARROW and discusses their limitations (especially time given that an incoming missile traveling at 3000 feet per second) and multiple incoming missiles on the same track. Concludes with a look at likely future counter missile systems such as directed energy weapons.
ENERGY
There are no comments on this title.