ANALYSIS – Yes, the multibillion-dollar air defense systems designed to protect U.S. Navy ships and other forces are doing spectacularly well against Iranian-supplied, Yemen-based, Houthi terrorist-operated drones and missiles in the Red Sea region.
The question is, can they similarly destroy more sophisticated attacks from major enemies like China?
Referring to the Houthi threat, Kyle Mizokami notes: “American guided-missile destroyers have swatted down numerous drones and missiles using radar and missile systems designed to protect aircraft carriers from sophisticated mass attacks—and the fight isn't even close.”
The 1970s-era Houthi missiles travel at 600 mph, just 30 feet above the waves.
But the U.S. warships have three layers of missile and gun defenses (the primary and two backups), and at least one layer of deception. And based on recent engagements, the missiles, sensors, and combat systems work very well.
The primary air defense system is the Standard SM-2 rocket-powered medium surface-to-air missile “capable of engaging a wide spectrum of aerial threats, from low and slow cruise missiles to fast and high-flying fighter jets.”
Flying three times the speed of sound (Mach 3) they destroy their targets at up to 30 miles (maximum detection range) with a proximity fuze, high-explosive warhead.
And the SM-2s are very good.
As a matter of fact, Mizokami adds that: “A U.S. guided-missile destroyer is so good at shooting down missiles, that every real-world intercept so far hasn't needed to resort to either of the back-up air-defense systems.”
The back-up systems include the Phalanx system.
But as one reader (YoloFett) commented in response to Mizokami's article:
Impressive against 1970's Houthi missiles, but how would it fare against a more sophisticated swarm of say 150 missiles and 300 drones? Throw a couple hypersonics in there. Lasers should eventually help, but at some point, sheer numbers will overwhelm any system.
And that scenario likely describes just one of many expected waves of attacks the Navy can expect when going to war against China in the Western Pacific. It could even describe a direct Iranian attack.
I would also add that major attacks could include considerable enemy electronic warfare (EW) and maybe satellite communication disruption.
However, despite all that, America's warships then have even more defensive layers.
So if the SM-2s were to fail, our ships would then engage the enemy targets with the second line of defense: Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (ESSM), a short-range missile derived from the Sparrow air-to-air missile.
The smaller Mach 4 ESSMs are packed four missiles per silo and are fired in pairs.
Simultaneously the ship would also engage in deception. It would fire Nulka anti-missile decoys developed jointly by the U.S. and Australia. Once launched, PoP Mech notes: “Nulka hovers in the air, presenting an alternative, decoy radar signature for an incoming missile.”
If all that fails, the ship still has its third , and last line of defense: the Phalanx close-in weapon system CIWS) – also known as the ‘Sea-wiz.' This consists of a six-barrel 20mm Gatling gun that fires short bursts of tungsten penetrators.
The gun is linked to both search and tracking radars that can intercept and destroy missiles at just over two miles. It also has been affectionately called R2D2 due to its similarity to the small, domed droid in Star Wars.
So, how well would the Navy fare against much larger and more sophisticated threats?
It's hard to tell. But the air defense system appears to be working. And I'm sure the Navy is applying lessons learned from the ongoing firefights in the Red Sea to future applications and more serious threats.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.
