For you guys in the know, is every explosion we see a missile get blown from the sky? What are we looking at?

follow up - when the missile is hit, what sort of damage does the debris usually cause?

Most ballistic missile interceptions are kinetic, I believe all US ones are. If you see a flare or explosion in the sky, it was a hit.

I don't think US ABM attempt to use fragmentation warheads. Not enough of a chance of a kill when you can get a direct hit and a sure kinetic kill.

rononeill said:

---

follow up - when the missile is hit, what sort of damage does the debris usually cause?

---

Damage from intercepts is basically negligible and is so vastly superior to a missile hit that it's not really even considered. However I'm sure part of the reason to stay in bomb shelters because obviously it could kill you for metal to fall on you.

Up to 1-2+ tons of falling metal is still dangerous and in theory you can hit the missile body without necessarily destroying all the warheads if it has mirv or cluster. It knocks it off course though.

rononeill said:

---

follow up - when the missile is hit, what sort of damage does the debris usually cause?

---

Depends on the interceptor.

Older style ABMs like the PAC-2 use a fragment warhead that shoots shrapnel at the incoming missiles. This can essentially disable the missile, but not totally destroy it, so large fragments are still left.

Newer style ABMs like the PAC-3 are kinetic energy (KE) missiles that don't have a "warhead" (although they may have a penetrator to add damage. These use the fact that the KE of the combined missiles impact is YUUUUGE to essentially vaporize a large amount of the target (as well as the ABM).

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Most ballistic missile interceptions are kinetic, I believe all US ones are. If you see a flare or explosion in the sky, it was a hit.

I don't think US ABM attempt to use fragmentation warheads. Not enough of a chance of a kill when you can get a direct hit and a sure kinetic kill.

---

PAC-2 do, PAC-3 don't.

But, PAC-2 was derived from the "Standard" anti aircraft missile...

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Up to 1-2+ tons of falling metal is still dangerous and in theory you can hit the missile body without necessarily destroying all the warheads if it has mirv or cluster. It knocks it off course though.

---

None of these missiles are going to have a MIRV or a cluster.

Back when I used to do missiles (around the time of the first Gulf War), we had a macabre joke about the PAC-2 intercepts on the SCUD missiles that Iraq fired:

Oh look, the PAC-2 made an intercept, now the SCUD won't hit the school...it'll hit the hospital instead...

Some history...

Quote:

---

The most significant Patriot enhancement, however, involved the development of a new interceptor with hit-to-kill technology, which would defeat targets by striking them directly. This weapon would later be known as the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3).7 The Army began concept development for a hit-to-kill weapon in 1983 and from 1984, and in May 21, 1987, flight tested the Flexible Lightweight Agile Guided Experiment (FLAGE), intercepting a Lance ballistic missile.8

A follow-on missile named Extended Range Intercept Technology (ERINT) completed final design review in December 1989 and underwent flight tests from 1992 to 1994.9 This became the basis for the PAC-3 interceptor. The U.S. Army had established a PAC-3 Project Office in 1991, and on May 19, 1994, the Defense Acquisition Board selected ERINT for development as the PAC-3.

---

This was when I did missiles...

THAAD and PAC3 are kenetic, no warhead

Which one can go orbital? SM-2? Does that share anything with PAC or THAAD?

Decay said:

---

Which one can go orbital? SM-2? Does that share anything with PAC or THAAD?

---

No, not SM-2 but SM-3 and now SM-6. PAC and THAAD are land based while standard missile is sea based. All different platforms

jamey said:

---

THAAD and PAC3 are kenetic, no warhead

---

Kinetic. Kind of like this

5MT warhead. It's the only way to be sure.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIM-49_Spartan

Decay said:

---

Which one can go orbital? SM-2? Does that share anything with PAC or THAAD?

---

None of those can.

And the SM-2 is the PAC-2, so it (sort of) shares the same launcher aas the PAC-3.

But the PAC-2 is 4 missiles per launcher and the PAC-3 is four 4 packs of missiles in the same launcher...

That's right I meant SM in general.