US considering using aircraft to launch ABM weapons.

[jetsetter]

Navy and Missile Defense Agency study of missile defense options includes a new, unorthodox alternative with ramifications beyond the Navy -- equipping fighter aircraft with interceptors like the most advanced version of the Patriot. “MDA is investigating launching various missiles off of aircraft, including THAAD and PAC-3,” said an industry source. Those missiles could be assisted by organic fighter radars or the Aegis radar in shooting down ballistic or cruise missiles, according to sources and Navy briefing charts describing the assessment. “In theory,” the source said, “you could put two THAADs on an F-15.”

http://insidedefense.com/

This is interesting. THAAD and PAC-3s being launched from aircraft.

[JoaMei]

Navy and Missile Defense Agency study of missile defense options includes a new, unorthodox alternative with ramifications beyond the Navy -- equipping fighter aircraft with interceptors like the most advanced version of the Patriot. “MDA is investigating launching various missiles off of aircraft, including THAAD and PAC-3,” said an industry source. Those missiles could be assisted by organic fighter radars or the Aegis radar in shooting down ballistic or cruise missiles, according to sources and Navy briefing charts describing the assessment. “In theory,” the source said, “you could put two THAADs on an F-15.”

http://insidedefense.com/

This is interesting. THAAD and PAC-3s being launched from aircraft.

Not only that, a fighter could shoot down enemy planes at 200 km with that. :D

[GazB]

You need to correct the title.

PAC-3 and THAAD are not ABMs, they are ATBMs.

There were similar proposals to mount S-300 missiles on Mig-31s for long range anti AWACS use, but they settled on the R-37M with a range of 400km against an emitting target. (During one test an R-37 flew 300km to hit a target aircraft and the R-37 is the single stage model with shorter range.)

I guess regarding the clip above my main question is why would the US Navy want to fit missiles to F-15s... they don't use the F-15. The F-14 is being withdrawn from service. Could a F-18 carry such a large weapon and would its radar be able to actually find targets at that range... an incoming warhead can be quite small, not to mention its very high trajectory means PAC-3 has a very short range against such weapons anyway. (The Mig-31 has an enormous radar and the chosen target of AWACS aircraft means it can be detected at very long range and identified by the targets emissions... an incoming warhead that is not emitting anything would be a much harder task... especially adding the high speed and steep trajectory problems, compared to a nice high and slow flight profile for an AWACS aircraft.)

[JoaMei]

You need to correct the title.

PAC-3 and THAAD are not ABMs, they are ATBMs.

There were similar proposals to mount S-300 missiles on Mig-31s for long range anti AWACS use, but they settled on the R-37M with a range of 400km against an emitting target. (During one test an R-37 flew 300km to hit a target aircraft and the R-37 is the single stage model with shorter range.)

I guess regarding the clip above my main question is why would the US Navy want to fit missiles to F-15s... they don't use the F-15. The F-14 is being withdrawn from service. Could a F-18 carry such a large weapon and would its radar be able to actually find targets at that range... an incoming warhead can be quite small, not to mention its very high trajectory means PAC-3 has a very short range against such weapons anyway. (The Mig-31 has an enormous radar and the chosen target of AWACS aircraft means it can be detected at very long range and identified by the targets emissions... an incoming warhead that is not emitting anything would be a much harder task... especially adding the high speed and steep trajectory problems, compared to a nice high and slow flight profile for an AWACS aircraft.)

You dont get the point, the Aircrafts are just the Launching platform. Target data is provided by the THAAD Radar.

[jetsetter]

in shooting down ballistic or cruise missiles,