請問這是美帝GBI之後另一款KEI攔截彈嗎

看起来好单纯

反正不是GBI...

容子文 发表于 2009-5-5 04:44
.....................................

不要把GBI、GMD、KEI这些概念搞混了，KEI的总承包商是诺斯罗普-格鲁门，顶图就是KEI的助推器，可见诺格的官网，GMD是第一代NMD。GBI则是第二代，GBI又有两级和三级两个版本，KEI也是两级的。GBI
的特点是理论上也可以部署在欧洲，而且可以选用最新的多弹拦截器MKV。由于拍摄角度的问题，顶图的KEI好像尺寸很大，实际上相比GBI仍然要小很多，后者比侏儒机动洲际导弹还要大。KEI和GBI的差别可见整流罩，另外GBI的喷管是外露的。

dark_knight 发表于 2009-5-5 10:14

这么说靠谱吗？GMD是不是Ground-based Midcourse Defense？怎么和Ground-based Interceptor并列在一起划分代数？

The initial concept for the booster vehicle came from Boeing, and was called the COTS (Commercial Off-the-Shelf) booster, because it used developed and commercially available rocket stages. It was a three-stage design with an ATK GEM-40VN first stage and two Pratt & Whitney (UTC) Orbus-1A upper stages. However, the development didn't proceed as smoothly as expected, and the first test flight (designated BV-2; BV-1 was a pure ground test) only occurred on 31 August 2001 (18 months behind schedule). During this test a first stage anomaly occured, which could have prevented success in an actual intercept attempt. On the second BV flight test (BV-3) on 13 December 2001, the vehicle veered off course and had to be destroyed. Further flight testing of Boeing's BV was cancelled afterwards.
Photo: Boeing
Boeing COTS booster vehicle




In March 2002, the GBI booster development program was restructured. Boeing's COTS vehicle was transferred to Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company, which developed an improved version known as BV-Plus. Additionally, Orbital Sciences Corp. (OSC) was awarded a contract to build an alternative booster (called OBV - Orbital Booster Vehicle) for the GBI. OSC's three-stage vehicle had its first successful test flight on 6 February 2003, followed by another one (test BV-6) on 16 August 2003. In these tests the vehicle reached altitudes above 1770 km (1100 miles) and ranges of more than 5300 km (3300 miles). The OBV is based on the upper three stages of the company's Taurus XL commercial launch vehicle.                
Image, Photo: Orbital Sciences
OSC booster vehicle




Flight testing and production of Lockheed Martin's BV-Plus has been delayed because of manufacturing problems with the solid rocket propellant for the second and third stages. The first flight of the BV-Plus (numbered BV-5) finally occured on 9 January 2004, but all near-term intercept tests, which were originally planned to test both the BV-Plus and the OSC booster, will only use the latter design (see also section on integrated flight tests).

OSC currently has contracts to build 34 OBVs, while Lockheed Martin will build 8 BV-Plus vehicles. Additional BVs will be contracted exclusively to OSC.

The initial concept for the booster vehicle came from Boeing, and was called the COTS (Commercial Off-the-Shelf) booster, because it used developed and commercially available rocket stages. It was a three-stage design with an ATK GEM-40VN first stage and two Pratt & Whitney (UTC) Orbus-1A upper stages. However, the development didn't proceed as smoothly as expected, and the first test flight (designated BV-2; BV-1 was a pure ground test) only occurred on 31 August 2001 (18 months behind schedule). During this test a first stage anomaly occured, which could have prevented success in an actual intercept attempt. On the second BV flight test (BV-3) on 13 December 2001, the vehicle veered off course and had to be destroyed. Further flight testing of Boeing's BV was cancelled afterwards.
Photo: Boeing
Boeing COTS booster vehicle




In March 2002, the GBI booster development program was restructured. Boeing's COTS vehicle was transferred to Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company, which developed an improved version known as BV-Plus. Additionally, Orbital Sciences Corp. (OSC) was awarded a contract to build an alternative booster (called OBV - Orbital Booster Vehicle) for the GBI. OSC's three-stage vehicle had its first successful test flight on 6 February 2003, followed by another one (test BV-6) on 16 August 2003. In these tests the vehicle reached altitudes above 1770 km (1100 miles) and ranges of more than 5300 km (3300 miles). The OBV is based on the upper three stages of the company's Taurus XL commercial launch vehicle.                
Image, Photo: Orbital Sciences
OSC booster vehicle




Flight testing and production of Lockheed Martin's BV-Plus has been delayed because of manufacturing problems with the solid rocket propellant for the second and third stages. The first flight of the BV-Plus (numbered BV-5) finally occured on 9 January 2004, but all near-term intercept tests, which were originally planned to test both the BV-Plus and the OSC booster, will only use the latter design (see also section on integrated flight tests).

OSC currently has contracts to build 34 OBVs, while Lockheed Martin will build 8 BV-Plus vehicles. Additional BVs will be contracted exclusively to OSC.

在2002年之前我们所说的NMD就是现在的GMD，里面包括了GBI，但是助推器却并不相同。而未来的GBI还要进一步升级的，所以我拆开来讲了，早期试验的助推器和现在以及未来的助推器不一样。

这么说靠谱吗？GMD是不是Ground-based Midcourse Defense？怎么和Ground-based Interceptor并列在一起划分代数？
我立于高山之巅 发表于 2009-5-5 11:19

在2002年之前我们所说的NMD就是现在的GMD，里面包括了GBI，但是助推器却并不相同。而未来的GBI还要进一步升级的，所以我拆开来讲了，早期试验的助推器和现在以及未来的助推器不一样。

当然，更加准确的说法是GMD是一个完整的系统，GBI是其中的组成部分，波音的COTS助推器是Beta版，而轨道科技的OBV助推器是正式版，以后还会有带MKV的升级版

dark_knight 发表于 2009-5-5 12:42

根据我所知道的，GMD是系统概念，乃是NMD的传承，而GBI是拦截弹，是GMD的组成部分。实际上中段动能防御拦截的概念早于GMD名称正式取代NMD，其所使用的Interceptor技术大致经历了HOE试验、ERIS系统和现在的GBI三个阶段，所以真的要把GBI作为拦截弹拿出来划分代数，分入第二代并不严谨。

dark_knight 发表于 2009-5-5 12:53

COTS只有Non-Intercept test的BV1、2、3吧，IFT-1A虽然是测试Boeing的Interceptor，不过那个应该是KV而不是Booster Vehicle。BV1可是“a ground test to certify the procedures that lead to an actual flight test, including all ground and safety checks as well as launch and safety steps”，完全没有发射，这句算是对7楼的一个补充。

另外，手头上拿到的GBI尺寸和重量数据彼此间有些抵牾。早期资料显示：OSC的OBV采用Orion的发动机，其尺寸和重量均高于当前所通行的GBI数据说法，居然攀升到18.5米长，22吨重的数字；LM的BV+亦然。反观当前流行的说法，长度和直径分别为16.5-16.8米，直径1.27米，但重量则分歧较大。你前面援引的资料估计是designation上面的，http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/gbi.html 给出重量仅28000lbs。 而不少资料则给出22吨，估计是沿用了早期OBV的数据。这双方的争议分歧且不提，半路又杀出一张图。从MGM-134Midgetman看，只有14米长，1.17米的直径，尚且达到了13600公斤，长度和直径均高出甚多的GBI要想比它轻，概率基本为0。不过22吨也是偏大了，SS-27的尺寸远大于GBI，也才47.2吨。最后看看，倒是这张图上的30000lbs显得更加可靠一些。

另外，手头上拿到的GBI尺寸和重量数据彼此间有些抵牾。早期资料显示：OSC的OBV采用Orion的发动机，其尺寸和重量均高于当前所通行的GBI数据说法，居然攀升到18.5米长，22吨重的数字；LM的BV+亦然。反观当前流行的说法，长度和直径分别为16.5-16.8米，直径1.27米，但重量则分歧较大。你前面援引的资料估计是designation上面的，http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/gbi.html 给出重量仅28000lbs。 而不少资料则给出22吨，估计是沿用了早期OBV的数据。这双方的争议分歧且不提，半路又杀出一张图。从MGM-134Midgetman看，只有14米长，1.17米的直径，尚且达到了13600公斤，长度和直径均高出甚多的GBI要想比它轻，概率基本为0。不过22吨也是偏大了，SS-27的尺寸远大于GBI，也才47.2吨。最后看看，倒是这张图上的30000lbs显得更加可靠一些。

我立于高山之巅 发表于 2009-5-5 14:36
洛克希德据说至少搞了六个不同的GBI助推器方案，这为米帝展开数据迷惑战提供了非常有利的条件

dark_knight 发表于 2009-5-5 14:45

不说数据真假，尺寸和重量的匹配难以自圆其说。即使是下面那张图，在高手群里也有人怀疑，虽然三级多出的stage较短，但如果说只有50lbs，似乎有些古怪。

我立于高山之巅 发表于 2009-5-5 14:49
那张图是MIT的人做的，但2008年2月研究报告中，一群工作人员站在GBI下合影的照片却是真的

dark_knight 发表于 2009-5-5 14:52

尺寸没什么可怀疑的，就是重量，三级的比二级的仅仅多50磅，而长度上几乎要多出一个人了。

GBI的三级构型重量20吨以上不离谱。

多谢科普

难得看到容容发一个帖子不惨遭围观的啊 :D

我立于高山之巅 发表于 2009-5-5 14:36

根据当初MDA的www.mda.mil/mdalink/pdf/peisvol2.pdf的数据，推进剂是20.5吨

dark_knight 发表于 2009-5-5 10:14

顶图是KEI模型图，不是只有助推器。这个模型包括了源自SM-3的MK-136 TSRM部分，是完整的模型

我有问题：

CGNX如果能携带三位数的KEI的话。
那么他可不可以携带袖珍洲际弹道导弹呢？
哦，当我没说，袖珍洲际弹道导弹的任务未来将由快鹰来担当。。。
[:a9:]

KEI被砍了！以上的讨论都是过去时了。

solo1981 发表于 2009-6-27 19:20
我有问题：

CGNX如果能携带三位数的KEI的话。
三位数的KEI，你有CGX的想象图吗，哪得多大啊

豆豆911 发表于 2013-5-12 19:45
三位数的KEI，你有CGX的想象图吗，哪得多大啊
CGNX可能只是个概念，有说二万几千吨的，也有说四万几千吨的。
而且任务单一（纯粹就是中段拦截弹的海基移动平台），
生存能力差（几万吨的大船生存能力好不了）
，价格昂贵（单价不会少于五十亿刀勒）。
不能靠近前沿。估计一般就是在阿留申或者百慕大附近活动。
最后可能被认为是烧包的举动所以就被砍掉了。

豆豆911 发表于 2013-5-12 19:45
三位数的KEI，你有CGX的想象图吗，哪得多大啊
CGNX可能只是个概念，有说二万几千吨的，也有说四万几千吨的。
而且任务单一（纯粹就是中段拦截弹的海基移动平台），
生存能力差（几万吨的大船生存能力好不了）
，价格昂贵（单价不会少于五十亿刀勒）。
不能靠近前沿。估计一般就是在阿留申或者百慕大附近活动。
最后可能被认为是烧包的举动所以就被砍掉了。

当时的计划好像是两万五到三万吨，但好像没有核动力，KEI比DF-21还小很多呢，带三位数还是很有可能的。当然那成本和一艘航母也差不多了。

solo1981 发表于 2013-5-13 09:32
CGNX可能只是个概念，有说二万几千吨的，也有说四万几千吨的。
而且任务单一（纯粹就是中段拦截弹的海基 ...

当时的计划好像是两万五到三万吨，但好像没有核动力，KEI比DF-21还小很多呢，带三位数还是很有可能的。当然那成本和一艘航母也差不多了。

南极冰 发表于 2013-5-13 09:37
当时的计划好像是两万五到三万吨，但好像没有核动力，KEI比DF-21还小很多呢，带三位数还是很有可能的。 ...
那是算上KEI导弹后的价格吧