buwaya:
"But that system is not adequate to intercept anti-ship ballistic missiles even as point-defense.
If it were that easy the anti-missile problem would have been solved long ago." Various articles don't give a speed for David's Sling, but it will replace the US Patriot anti-missile which Wikipedia says is Mach 5.
Israel also has the Arrow 3, a longer range anti-missile equivalent to the US RIM 161 which Wikipedia says hits high hypersonic speeds (Mach 10?).
The US today has nearly 100 anti-missile ships, each of which can carry nearly 100 anti-missile missiles, equal to or better than those of Israel.
So we're looking at the potential to deploy 10,000 anti-missiles on ships, to protect our carriers & other assets.
That's why I don't know where this idea comes from, that our guys can't defend themselves.
David's Sling anti-missile, equivalent to US Patriot:
Israeli Arrow 3 anti-missile, equivalent to US RIM 174:
Good point.
I would like some sort of analysis of where we stand vs SRBM’s with the Standard missile system variants. One hears of this being deployed in small numbers or maybe, possibly, sometime in the future, but I don’t have any idea of where it stands now. Is it on some ships, all ships (those with Aegis and VLS) or what ?
The Israelis are more forthcoming with their progress on this stuff.
This missile looks like it was meant for portable deployment on vehicles. This suggests that it can be navalized with a box launcher and with a radar system add-on. The Standard missile/Aegis system basically requires that a ship be built around it. Thats fine if there are enough properly equipped escorts in a carrier group, but I can see where it may prove inadequate to a saturation attack.