The Standard Missile

Well, this is now totally off topic. I thought this thread dealt with the Standard Missile. But I will interject one thing. If the U.S. military wanted to destroy land targets, there are far better and more efficient ways to do it than with a PAC-2 (if even possible). But the Patriots have proven very effective as a SAM. Even with a couple of problems most PAC shots have been spot on.

Now back to the topic. I've heard the Standard Missile family will also include a Land attack variant in the near future. Therefore Standards will be able to kill aircraft, missiles, ships, and land-targets in a very effective manner.

I will post this once and for all. PAC2 that were used against the Scuds in operation desert storm were really ineffective. It was widely reported that they destroyed the scuds, but in fact they didn't. The wikipedia link just carries on that myth. Check Ted Koppel's report on Patriot's performance against the scuds. A documentary was shown recently. It was quite an eye opener for me personally. If you don't believe me, just remember what was shown on TV during those days:
1. Israel getting hit by the Scuds like there was no tomorrow
2. The software failure that caused the majority of American death in ODS
3. Watching TV, seeing how the American commander Norman Schwartz were saying patriot missiles destroyed Scud here, here and here, but Scud kept on going anyways.

In Operation Iraqi freedom, a couple of things stuck to me:
1. A RAF plane getting shot down by PAC3
2. An american plane destroying a patriot missile battery because it sensed that a SAM battery locked onto it.

Sea Dog said:

Well, this is now totally off topic. I thought this thread dealt with the Standard Missile. But I will interject one thing. If the U.S. military wanted to destroy land targets, there are far better and more efficient ways to do it than with a PAC-2 (if even possible). But the Patriots have proven very effective as a SAM. Even with a couple of problems most PAC shots have been spot on.

Now back to the topic. I've heard the Standard Missile family will also include a Land attack variant in the near future. Therefore Standards will be able to kill aircraft, missiles, ships, and land-targets in a very effective manner.

Click to expand...

well, its a bout time. the russians have had a progrm like that for a while.
well, wht troiubles me is, why did japnese pac threes not shoot down the missle fired from nk?

swimmerXC said:

yep, the warhead is too small to do major damage to an DDG or even a FFG.... i guess they can use the SM's on targets that aren't worth sinking with a harpoon, like FACs, patrol boats, patrol corvette....

Click to expand...

In some cases the warhead doesn't need to explode to kill or mission-kill a ship. In the Falklands war the Argentine scored a hit on the HMS Sheffield with an Exocet missile. The missile warhead did not explode, but the fuel from the missile splattered allover the ship and caused a fire that burned it to a hulk.

swimmerXC said:

yep, the warhead is too small to do major damage to an DDG or even a FFG.... i guess they can use the SM's on targets that aren't worth sinking with a harpoon, like FACs, patrol boats, patrol corvette....

Click to expand...

its called the main gun. and it even has a longer range than the pac-2 in surface attack mode.

MIGleader said:

well, its a bout time. the russians have had a progrm like that for a while.
well, wht troiubles me is, why did japnese pac threes not shoot down the missle fired from nk?

Click to expand...

What is the Russian program? Sounds interesting. About the PAC-3's. From what I understand, the major problems have been worked out. And there are block enhancements coming.

I forgot to add, with the SM-3's, the Standards are also able to destroy ballistic missiles.