news

https://archive.ph/SUfBy

New U.S. Anti-Ballistic Interceptor Must Cost Under $750,000 — Is It Even Possible?

The Pentagon is seeking new ways to cheapen the missile defense against modern threats like Iskander or Zircon with a new competition announced the other day. The U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has announced a competition to develop a low-cost interceptor for cruise, ballistic, and hypersonic missiles, with a target unit price not exceeding $750,000. The goal is highly ambitious, but potentially very helpful, considering that a single Patriot PAC-3 MSE interceptor costs an average of $4.97 million — and typically two are fired per target. To cut costs, the MDA intends to rely on existing commercial and military components, along with cheap manufacturing practices.

The interceptor must also be designed with modularity and open architecture in mind, enabling easier modernization and sensor integration in the future. The minimum technical requirements include exo- and endoatmospheric interception of ballistic and hypersonic threats — such as russia's Kalibr, Iskander, and Kinzhal missiles. The interceptor should reach speeds of at least Mach 5, have a range of 200 km, and use a high-explosive fragmentation warhead with terminal homing guidance. The interceptor also must support in-flight target updates and trajectory corrections to engage maneuvering hypersonic gliders. At the same time, the system has to fit inside both Patriot launchers and naval vertical launch systems (VLS).

To summarize, the program seeks a unified, budget-friendly interceptor designed to counter the kind of massive mixed salvos of missiles seen in Ukraine — one that doesn't cost all the money in the world. This reflects an adequate understanding of today's priorities, especially against the known shortage of interceptors in NATO countries. However, achieving 200 km range and ballistic missile interception for under $750,000 per unit seems highly optimistic. Perhaps, some innovative design or its manufacturing technique could make it possible, but meeting both performance and cost requirements is surely a difficult task. Submissions to the competition are accepted by the end of September. After that, there will be a six-month preparation phase, followed by a year of prototype development and testing. For now, the objective is limited to "prototype demonstrations," with the full program expected to take two to five years.

Well, I guess finally a tacit admission by the Americans that their air defense equipment costs way too fucking much - note that this is coming on the heels of a whole lot of such munitions being expended defending Israel, plus all the stuff that's been eaten up over several years in Ukraine, so replacement of all that is likely on people's minds. But somehow going down from nearly 5 million to 750k doesn't seem particularly likely. Even eliminating the MIC graft factor, there's just a degree of inherent complexity to such a missile, it's going to end up costing a decent bit even if you are very efficient.