RIM-161 SM-3
A RIM-161 Standard Missile (SM-3) is launched from the Aegis cruiser USS Lake Erie
TypeKinetic surface-to-air missile (Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System)
Place of originUnited States, Japan (Block IIA)
Service history
In service2014–present (Block IB)[1]
Used byUnited States Navy
Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force
Republic of Korea Navy
Production history
ManufacturerRaytheon, Aerojet, (Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Block IIA)
Unit cost
  • US$9–25 million[2] (2011)
  • US$18.4m(FY2018)[3]
  • US$11.83m(FY2021)
Mass1.5 t
Length6.55 m (21 ft 6 in)
Diameter34.3 cm (13.5 in) for Block I missiles
53.3 cm (21 in) for Block II
Wingspan1.57 m (62 in)
WarheadLightweight Exo-Atmospheric Projectile (LEAP) kinetic warhead

PropellantStage 1: MK 72 Booster, solid-fuel, Aerojet
Stage 2: MK 104 Dual Thrust Rocket Motor (DTRM), solid-fuel, Aerojet
Stage 3: MK 136 Third Stage Rocket Motor (TSRM), solid-fuel, ATK
Stage 4: Throttleable Divert and Attitude Control System (TDACS), Aerojet
Block IA/B: 900 – 1200 km (560 – 745 miles)
Block IIA: 1,200 km range and flight ceiling 900 – 1,050 km (depending on the type of target)[4][N 1]
Maximum speed 3 km/s (Mach 8.8) Block IA/B
4.5 km/s (Mach 13.2) Block IIA[4]
GPS/INS/semi-active radar homing/passive LWIR infrared homing seeker (KW)

The RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) is a ship-based surface-to-air missile used by the United States Navy to intercept short- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles as a part of Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System.[5] Although primarily designed as an anti-ballistic missile, the SM-3 has also been employed in an anti-satellite capacity against a satellite at the lower end of low Earth orbit.[6] The SM-3 is primarily used and tested by the United States Navy and also operated by the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force.

Motivation and development

The SM-3 evolved from the proven SM-2 Block IV design. The SM-3 uses the same solid rocket booster and dual thrust rocket motor as the Block IV missile for the first and second stages and the same steering control section and midcourse missile guidance for maneuvering in the atmosphere. To support the extended range of an exo-atmospheric intercept, additional missile thrust is provided in a new third stage for the SM-3 missile, containing a dual pulse rocket motor for the early exo-atmospheric phase of flight.[7]

Initial work was done to adapt SM-3 for land deployment ("Aegis ashore") to especially accommodate the Israelis, but they then chose to pursue their own system, the NATO code-name Arrow 3. A group in the Obama administration envisioned a European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) and SM-3 was chosen as the main vector of this effort because the competing U.S. THAAD does not have enough range and would have required too many sites in Europe to provide adequate coverage. Compared to the GMD's Ground-Based Interceptor however, the SM-3 Block I has about 15 to 16 of the range. A significant improvement in this respect, the SM-3 Block II variant widens the missile's diameter from 0.34 m (13.5 in) to 0.53 m (21 in), making it more suitable against intermediate-range ballistic missiles.[8]

The highly modified Block IIA missile shares only the first-stage motor with the Block I. The Block IIA was "designed to allow for Japan to protect against a North Korean attack with fewer deployed ships" but it is also the key element of the EPAA phase 3 deployment in Europe. The Block IIA is being jointly developed by Raytheon and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries; the latter manages "the third-stage rocket motor and nose cone". The U.S. budgeted cost to date is $1.51 billion for the Block IIA.[9]

Operation and performance

The ship's AN/SPY-1 radar finds the ballistic missile target and the Aegis weapon system calculates a solution on the target. The Aerojet MK 72 solid-fuel rocket booster launches the SM-3 out of the ship's Mark 41 Vertical Launching System (VLS). The missile then establishes communication with the launching ship. Once the booster burns out, it detaches, and the Aerojet MK 104 solid-fuel dual thrust rocket motor (DTRM) takes over propulsion through the atmosphere. The missile continues to receive mid-course guidance information from the launching ship and is aided by GPS data. The ATK MK 136 solid-fueled third-stage rocket motor (TSRM) fires after the second stage burns out, and it takes the missile above the atmosphere (if needed). The TSRM is pulse fired and provides propulsion for the SM-3 until 30 seconds to intercept.[10]

At that point the third stage separates, and the Lightweight Exo-Atmospheric Projectile (LEAP) kinetic warhead (KW) begins to search for the target using pointing data from the launching ship. The Aerojet throttleable divert and attitude control system (TDACS) allows the warhead to maneuver in the final phase of the engagement. The KW's sensors identify the target, attempt to identify the most lethal part of the target and steers to that point. If the KW intercepts the target, it provides 130 megajoules (96,000,000 ft⋅lbf; 31 kilograms of TNT) of kinetic energy at the point of impact.[10]

Independent studies by some physics experts have raised some significant questions about the missile's success rate in hitting targets.[11][12][13] In a published response, the Defense Department claimed that these findings were invalid, as the analysts used some early launches as their data, when those launches were not significant to the overall program.[14] The DoD stated:

... the first tests [used] prototype interceptors; expensive mock warheads weren't used in the tests since specific lethality capability wasn't a test objective—the objective was to hit the target missile. Contrary to the assertions of Postol and Lewis, all three tests resulted in successful target hits with the unitary ballistic missile target destroyed. This provided empirical evidence that ballistic missile intercepts could in fact be accomplished at sea using interceptors launched from Aegis ships.

After successful completion of these early developmental tests, the test program progressed from just "hitting the target" to one of determining lethality and proving the operationally configured Aegis SM-3 Block I and SM-3 Block 1A system. These tests were the MDA's most comprehensive and realistic test series, resulting in the Operational Test and Evaluation Force's October 2008 evaluation report stating that Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Block 04 3.6 System was operationally effective and suitable for transition to the Navy.

Since 2002, a total of 19 SM-3 missiles have been fired in 16 different test events resulting in 16 intercepts against threat-representative full-size and more challenging subscale unitary and full-size targets with separating warheads. In addition, a modified Aegis BMD/SM-3 system successfully destroyed a malfunctioning U.S. satellite by hitting the satellite in the right spot to negate the hazardous fuel tank at the highest closure rate of any ballistic missile defense technology ever attempted.

The authors of the SM-3 study cited only tests involving unitary targets, and chose not to cite the five successful intercepts in six attempts against separating targets, which, because of their increased speed and small size, pose a much more challenging target for the SM-3 than a much larger unitary target missile. They also did not mention the fact the system is successfully intercepting targets much smaller than probable threat missiles on a routine basis, and have attained test scores that many other Defense Department programs aspire to attain.[14]

In an October 25, 2012, test, a SM-3 Block IA failed to intercept a SRBM.[15] In May 2013 however a SM-3 Block IB was successful against a "complex, separating short-range ballistic missile target with a sophisticated separating mock warhead", making it "the third straight successful test of Raytheon's SM-3 Block IB, after a target was missed on its first intercept attempt in September 2011."[16]

On 4 October 2013, an SM-3 Block IB eliminated the medium-range ballistic missile target at the highest altitude of any test to date. The test was the 26th successful intercept for the SM-3 program and the fifth back-to-back successful test of the SM-3 Block IB missile. Post-mission data showed that the intercept was slightly lower than anticipated, but the systems adjusted to ensure the missile intercepted the target. The SM-3 Block IB is expected to be delivered for service in 2015.[17]

On 6 June 2015, an SM-3 Block IIA was successfully tested. The test evaluated the performance of the missile's nosecone, steering control, and the separation of its booster, and second and third stages. No intercept was planned, and no target missile was launched.[18] In October 2016, Russian officials claimed research simulations of U.S. ballistic missile defense systems showed the SM-3 Block IIA was capable of intercepting missiles not only at the middle stage of their flight path, but earlier in the initial acceleration stage before the separation of their warheads.[19]

On 3 February 2017, USS John Paul Jones, using its onboard Aegis Missile Defense System and a Standard Missile-3 Block IIA interceptor, destroyed a medium-range ballistic missile.[20]

On 21 June 2017,[21] the second test of USS John Paul Jones, using its onboard Aegis Missile Defense System and launching a Standard Missile-3 Block IIA interceptor, did not intercept its target, after a sailor, acting as tactical datalink controller, mistakenly designated that target as friendly, which caused the SM-3 interceptor to self-destruct, as designed.[22]

On 31 January 2018,[23] an SM-3 Block IIA missile interceptor launched from a test site in Hawaii missed its target.[24] On 26 October 2018, USS John Paul Jones detected and tracked a medium-range ballistic missile target with its Aegis Missile Defense System, launched an SM-3 Block IIA interceptor, and destroyed its target, which was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility at Kauai, Hawaii.[25]

On 16 November 2020, an SM-3 Block IIA successfully intercepted a simulated intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) target for the first time; the test was congressionally mandated and originally scheduled for May 2020 but was delayed due to COVID-19 restrictions. An ICBM-T2 threat-representative target was launched from the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site on Kwajalein Atoll toward the ocean area northeast of Hawaii. The USS John Finn (DDG-113) used off-board sensors through the Command and Control Battle Management Communications (C2BMC) network to track it and then launch an interceptor to destroy the threat. The test demonstrated the SM-3's ability to counter ICBMs and, because of the Aegis radar's limited detection and tracking range relative to the interceptor, showed how the C2BMC network can increase the area that could be defended using engage-on-remote capabilities.[26][27][28][29]


SM-3 evolution

The SM-3 block IA version provides an incremental upgrade to improve reliability and maintainability at a reduced cost.[citation needed]

The SM-3 block IB, due in 2010, offers upgrades which include an advanced two-color infrared seeker, and a 10-thruster solid throttling divert and attitude control system (TDACS/SDACS) on the kill vehicle to give it improved capability against maneuvering ballistic missiles or warheads. Solid TDACS is a joint Raytheon/Aerojet project, but Boeing supplies some components of the kinetic warhead. With block IB and associated ship-based upgrades, the Navy gains the ability to defend against medium range missiles and some Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles.[citation needed]

SM-3 block II will widen the missile body to 21 in (530 mm) and decrease the size of the maneuvering fins. It will still fit in Mk41 vertical launch systems, and the missile will be faster and have longer range.[citation needed]

The SM-3 block IIA is a joint Raytheon/Mitsubishi Heavy Industries project, block IIA will add a larger diameter kill vehicle that is more maneuverable, and carries another sensor/ discrimination upgrade. It was scheduled to debut around 2015, whereupon the Navy will have a weapon that can engage some intercontinental ballistic missiles.[30]

Designation Block Notes
RIM-161A SM-3 block I Development version. The SM-3 block I uses the basic SM-2ER block IVA airframe and propulsion
  • Third-stage rocket motor (Advanced Solid Axial Stage, ASAS, by Alliant Techsystems)
  • GPS/INS guidance section (GAINS, GPS-Aided Inertial Navigation System)
  • LEAP (Lightweight Exo-Atmospheric Projectile) kinetic warhead (i.e., a non-explosive hit-to-kill warhead)
RIM-161B SM-3 block IA
  • 1-color seeker
  • Solid divert attitude control system (SDACS)
RIM-161C SM-3 block IB Passed critical design review on 13 July 2009.
  • 2-color IIR seeker
  • Throttleable divert attitude control system (TDACS)
  • All-reflective optics
  • Advanced signal processor
RIM-161D SM-3 block II
  • High-velocity kinetic warhead
  • 21-inch-diameter (530 mm) first-stage rocket propulsion
None to date SM-3 block IIA
  • High-divert kinetic warhead
  • Advanced discrimination seeker

Table sources, reference material:[31][32][33]

A further SM-3 block IIB was "conceived for fielding in Europe around 2022".[34] In March 2013, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel announced that the development program of the SM-3 block IIB, also known as the "next generation AEGIS missile" (NGAM), was undergoing restructuring. Under Secretary James N. Miller was quoted saying that "We no longer intend to add them [SM-3 block IIB] to the mix, but we'll continue to have the same number of deployed interceptors in Poland that will provide coverage for all of NATO in Europe", explaining that Poland is scheduled instead for the deployment of "about 24 SM-3 IIA interceptors – same timeline, same footprint of U.S. forces to support that."[35] A US defense official was quoted saying that "The SM3 IIB phase four interceptors that we are now not going to pursue never existed other than on Power Points; it was a design objective."[36] Daniel Nexon connected the backpedaling of the administration on the block IIB development with pre-election promises made by Obama to Dmitry Medvedev.[37] Pentagon spokesman George E. Little denied however that Russian objections played any part in the decision.[38]

Operational history

United States

Missile defense

In September 2009, President Obama announced plans to scrap plans for missile defense sites in East Europe, in favor of missile defense systems located on US Navy warships.[39] On 18 September 2009, Russian Prime Minister Putin welcomed Obama's plans for missile defense which may include stationing American Aegis armed warships in the Black Sea.[40][41] This deployment began to occur that same month, with the deployment of Aegis-equipped warships with the RIM-161 SM-3 missile system, which complements the Patriot systems already deployed by American units.[42][43]

In February 2013, a SM-3 intercepted a test IRBM target using tracking data from a satellite for the first time.[44][45] On 23 April 2014, Raytheon announced that the U.S. Navy and the Missile Defense Agency had started to deploy the SM-3 Block 1B missile operationally. The deployment starts the second phase of the Phased Adaptive Approach (PAA) adopted in 2009 to protect Europe from Iranian ballistic missile threats.[46] In the Far East the US Navy and Japan plan to deploy increased numbers of the next generation SM-3 Block IIA weapons on their ships.[47][48]

The first use of the SM-3 in combat occurred during the 2024 Iranian strikes in Israel. USS Carney and USS Arleigh Burke used four to seven missiles[49] to shoot down at least six Iranian ballistic missiles.[50]


Further information: Operation Burnt Frost

An SM-3 launched to destroy the failed USA-193 satellite

On February 14, 2008, U.S. officials announced plans to use a modified SM-3 missile launched from a group of three ships in the North Pacific to destroy the failed American satellite USA-193 at an altitude of 130 nautical miles (240 kilometers) shortly before atmospheric reentry. Officials publicly stated that the intention was to "reduce the danger to human beings" due to the release of toxic hydrazine fuel carried on board,[51][52] but in secret dispatches, US officials indicated that the strike was, in fact, military in nature.[53] A spokesperson stated that software associated with the SM-3 had been modified to enhance the chances of the missile's sensors recognizing that the satellite was its target, since the missile was not designed for ASAT operations.[citation needed]

On February 21, 2008 at 03:26 UTC, the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Lake Erie fired a single SM-3 missile, hit and successfully destroyed the satellite, with a closing velocity of about 22,783 mph (36,667 km/h) while the satellite was 247 kilometers (133 nautical miles) above the Pacific Ocean.[54][55] USS Decatur, USS Russell as well as other land, air, sea and space-based sensors were involved in the operation.[56][57]


In December 2007, Japan conducted a successful test of an SM-3 block IA aboard JS Kongō against a ballistic missile. This was the first time a JMSDF vessel was employed to launch the interceptor missile during a test of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. In previous tests the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force had provided tracking and communications.[58][59]

In November 2008 a second Japanese-American joint test was performed from JS Chōkai which was unsuccessful. Following a failure review board, JFTM-3 occurred launching from JS Myōkō resulting in a successful intercept in October 2009.[60] October 28, 2010 a successful test was performed from JDS Kirishima. The U.S. Navy's Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai launched the ballistic missile target. The crew of Kirishima, operating off the coast of Kauai, detected and tracked the target before firing a SM-3 Block IA missile.[61][62]

The Japanese Defense Ministry is considering allocating money in the fiscal 2015 state budget for research on introducing the ground-based SM-3. Japanese ballistic missile defense strategy involves ship-based SM-3s to intercept missiles in space, while land-based Patriot PAC-3 missiles shoot down missiles SM-3s fail to intercept. Due to concern that PAC-3s could not respond to massive numbers of missiles fired simultaneously, and that the Maritime Self-Defense Force needs Aegis destroyers for other missions, basing SM-3s on land would be able to intercept more missiles earlier. With a coverage radius of 500 km (310 mi), three missile posts could defend all of Japan; launch pads can be disassembled, moved to other locations, and rebuilt in 5–10 days. Ground-basing of the SM-3 is dubbed "Aegis Ashore."[63] By October 2016, Japan was considering procuring either Aegis Ashore or THAAD to add a new missile defense layer.[64]

On August 31, 2022, the Japan Ministry of Defense announced that JMSDF will operate two "Aegis system equipped ships" (イージス・システム搭載艦 in Japanese) to replace the earlier plan of Aegis Ashore installations, commissioning one by the end of fiscal year 2027, and the other by the end of FY2028. The budget for design and other related expenses are to be submitted in the form of “item requests”, without specific amounts, and the initial procurement of the lead items are expected to clear legislation by FY2023. Construction is to begin in the following year of FY2024. At 20,000 tons each, both vessels will be the largest surface combatant warships operated by the JMSDF, and according to Popular Mechanics, they will "arguably [be] the largest deployable surface warships in the world.".[65][66][67][68]

On 16 November 2022, the guided-missile destroyer Maya fired an SM-3 Block IIA missile, successfully intercepting the target outside the atmosphere in the first launch of the missile from a Japanese warship. On 18 November 2022, the Haguro likewise fired an SM-3 Block IB missile with a successful hit outside the atmosphere. Both test firings were conducted at the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai Island, Hawaii, in cooperation with the U.S. Navy and U.S. Missile Defense Agency. This was the first time the two ships conducted SM-3 firings in the same time period, and the tests validated the ballistic missile defense capabilities of Japan’s newest Maya-class destroyers.[69]

NATO host countries

See also: NATO missile defence system and Aegis Ashore


On July 3, 2010, Poland and the United States signed an amended agreement for missile defense under whose terms land-based SM-3 systems would be installed in Poland at Redzikowo. This configuration was accepted as a tested and available alternative to missile interceptors that were proposed during the Bush administration but which are still under development. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, present at the signing in Kraków along with Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski, stressed that the missile defense program was aimed at deterring threats from Iran, and posed no challenge to Russia.[70] As of March 2013, Poland is scheduled to host "about 24 SM3 IIA interceptors"[35] in 2018.[citation needed] This deployment is part of phase 3 of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA).[71]


In 2010/2011 the US government announced plans to station land-based SM-3s (Block IB) in Romania at Deveselu starting in 2015,[72][73] part of phase 2 of EPAA.[71] There are some tentative plans to upgrade them to Block IIA interceptors around 2018 as well (EPAA phase 3). In March 2013, a US defense official was quoted saying "The Romanian cycle will start out in 2015 with the SM-3 IB; that system is in flight testing now and doing quite well. We are very confident it is on track and on budget, with very good test results. We are fully confident the missile we are co-developing with Japan, the SM-3 IIA, will have proved in flight testing, once we get to that phase. Assuming success in that flight testing, then we will have ready the option of upgrading the Romanian site to the SM-3 IIA, either all of the interceptor tubes or we'll have a mix. We have to make that decision. But both options will be there."[36]

The SM-3 Block IIB (currently in development for EPAA phase 4[71]) was considered for deployment to Romania as well (around 2022[34]), but a GAO report released Feb. 11, 2013 found that "SM-3 Block 2B interceptors launched from Romania would have difficulty engaging Iranian ICBMs launched at the United States because it lacks the range. Turkey is a better option, but only if the interceptors can be launched within 100 miles of the launch site and early enough to hit targets in their boost phase, an engagement scenario that presents a whole new set of challenges. The best basing option is in the North Sea, but making the SM-3 Block 2B ship compatible could add significantly to its cost".[74] The troubles of the Block IIB program however do not affect the planned Block IB deployments in Romania.[36][75]


Current operators

Potential operators


See also


  1. ^ Range and ceiling figures based on absolute 700s capability shown for Block IIA missile in Figure 4 at linked source—"Breaking Defense".[4] Intercept capability against an SS-19 Stiletto launched from Kaliningrad against New York is shown as approximately 1,200 km range and 900 km ceiling for a North Sea intercept. Range and ceiling against a hypothetical Iranian ICBM launched against the same target is shown as approximately 1,200 km and 1,050 km respectively in Figure 3 of the same source for an intercept coming from Redzikowo, Poland.
  1. ^ "Raytheon: SM-3 Interceptor". Raytheon. Retrieved 3 May 2019.
  2. ^ O'Rourke, Ronald (2011-04-19). "Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress" (PDF). Federation of American Scientists. Retrieved 2011-05-29. ((cite journal)): Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  3. ^ "United States Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Request – Program Acquisition Cost By Weapon System" (PDF). Office of the U.S. Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller). pp. 1–7. Retrieved 31 July 2018.
  4. ^ a b c "Why Russia Keeps Moving the Football on European Missile Defense". Breaking Defense. October 17, 2013. Retrieved 2013-10-19.
  5. ^ Raytheon Completes SM-3 Test Flight Against Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile Archived 2011-11-22 at the Wayback Machine, Raytheon Company, Retrieved 6 September 2011
  6. ^ Pentagon news briefing of February 14, 2008 (video, transcript): although no name for the satellite is given, the launch date of December 14, 2006 is stated
  7. ^ "RIM-161 SM-3 Upgrades". 2008. Retrieved 2009-11-10.
  8. ^ "SM-3 BMD, in from the Sea: EPAA & Aegis Ashore". Defenseindustrydaily.com. 2013-03-15. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  9. ^ Amy Butler, Aerospace Daily, Defence Report (7 Aug 2012). "MDA Still Sees 2018 Deployment in Restructured SM-3 IIA Plan". aviationweek.com. Retrieved 4 April 2018.((cite web)): CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  10. ^ a b "Raytheon's SM-3 fact sheet" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on May 22, 2008.
  11. ^ William J. Broad and David E. Sanger, "Review Cites Flaws in U.S. Antimissile Program", New York Times, May 17, 2010.
  12. ^ Clay Dillow, "Obama's 'Proven' SM-3 Missile Interceptor May Only Succeed 20 Percent of the Time, Say Physicists", Popular Science, May 18, 2010.
  13. ^ George N. Lewis and Theodore A. Postol, "A Flawed and Dangerous U.S. Missile Defense Plan", May 5, 2010, Arms Control Association.
  14. ^ a b Lehner, Richard (May 18, 2010). "Missile Defense Agency Responds to New York Times Article". DoD Live. Archived from the original on July 18, 2011. Retrieved October 13, 2012.
  15. ^ defensetech (2012-12-19). "MDA lays out 2013 testing plans". Defense Tech. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  16. ^ Wichner, David (2013-05-17). "Raytheon missile passes an important test flight". Arizona Daily Star. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  17. ^ Raytheon's newest SM-3 intercepts medium-range ballistic missile target at highest altitude to date. Navyrecognition.com. 4 October 2013.
  18. ^ Shalal, Andrea (7 June 2015). "US, Japan say first test of Raytheon's new SM-3 missile a success". reuters.com. Retrieved 4 April 2018.
  19. ^ US SM-3 interceptors can take down ballistic missiles at initial flight stage – Navyrecognition.com, 15 October 2016
  20. ^ Lendon, Brad (6 February 2017). "US, Japan conduct successful missile intercept". CNN. Retrieved 2017-02-06.
  21. ^ "17-NEWS-0006 (June 21, 2017) Aegis Missile Defense Test Conducted". mda.mil. Retrieved 4 April 2018.
  22. ^ Larter, David B. (July 24, 2017). "Sailor error led to failed US Navy ballistic missile intercept test". Defense News.
  23. ^ Trevithick, Joseph (January 31, 2018). "US Missile Defense Test Fails As N. Korea Plans Parade With Hundreds of Ballistic Missiles". The Drive.
  24. ^ Helene Cooper, Eric Schmitt The New York Times p.A10 (1 February 2018) US test of a missile interceptor fails off the coast of Hawaii, officials say
  25. ^ Rogers, James (October 26, 2018). "US warship shoots down missile in space in spectacular interceptor test". Fox News.
  26. ^ U.S. Successfully Conducts SM-3 Block IIA Intercept Test Against an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Target. United States Department of Defense press release. 17 November 2020.
  27. ^ US conducts long-awaited missile intercept test. International Institute for Strategic Studies. 20 November 2020.
  28. ^ The Navy Has Finally Proven It Can Shoot Down An Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. The Drive/The War Zone. 17 November 2020.
  29. ^ U.S. Conducts Successful ICBM Intercept Test. Arms Control Association. 31 December 2020.
  30. ^ "Land-Based SM-3s for Israel – and Others?". Defense Industry Daily. 2009. Retrieved 2009-11-10.
  31. ^ "Raytheon RIM-161 Standard SM-3". Designation-systems.net. Retrieved 2013-10-25.
  32. ^ "RIM-161 SM-3 (AEGIS Ballistic Missile Defense)". 2008. Retrieved 2008-02-22.
  33. ^ Pike, John. "Raytheon Standard Missile-3 Block IB Completes Major Development Milestone". www.globalsecurity.org. Retrieved 4 April 2018.
  34. ^ a b Oswald, Rachel. "U.S. Looking "Very Hard" at Future of Missile Interceptor: Pentagon | Global Security Newswire". NTI. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  35. ^ a b Eshel, Tamir (March 16, 2013). "Alaska's Ground Based Interceptors to Pivot US Defenses Against North Korea". Defense Update. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  36. ^ a b c "US defence official: The Deveselu base will be equipped with SM-3 IB interceptors by 2015, later on to be upgraded | ACTMedia". Actmedia.eu. 2013-03-25. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  37. ^ Nexon, Daniel (2013-03-17). "Washington "Cancels" Fourth Stage of European Phased Adaptive Approach – Duck of Minerva". Whiteoliphaunt.com. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  38. ^ Herszenhorn, David M.; Gordon, Michael R. (16 March 2013). "U.S. Cancels Part of Missile Defense That Russia Opposed". New York Times. Retrieved 2014-01-07.
  39. ^ Peter Baker, "White House Scraps Bush's Approach to Missile Shield" New York Times, 9/18/09.
  40. ^ "Russia's Putin praises Obama's missile defense decision", Los Angeles Times, 9/19/09.
  41. ^ Tom Ricks, "No missile defense in Eastern Europe" Archived 2013-11-03 at the Wayback Machine, Foreign Policy, 9/17/09.
  42. ^ William H. McMichael, "Obama sharply alters missile defense plans" Navy Times, Sep 19, 2009.
  43. ^ Article on Sm-3 missile system, strategypage.com, 10/4/09.
  44. ^ "Navy Uses Raytheon SM-3 and Space Sensor to Destroy Missile Target". raytheon.com. Retrieved 4 April 2018.
  45. ^ "Release". www.defense.gov.
  46. ^ U.S. Deploys First SM-3 Block IB Missile – News.USNI.org, 23 April 2014
  47. ^ Missile Defense Project, "Standard Missile-3 (SM-3)," Missile Threat, Center for Strategic and International Studies, June 14, 2016, last modified July 15, 2021, CSIS website Retrieved 9 February 2022.
  48. ^ Staff. (23 June 2021). "Washington actively building up Pacific segment of US missile shield — Russian top brass". Tass website Retrieved 9 February 2022.
  49. ^ Lagrone, Sam (2024-04-15). "SM-3 Ballistic Missile Interceptor Used for First Time in Combat, Officials Confirm". USNI News. Retrieved 2024-04-16.
  50. ^ Klippenstein, Ken; Boguslaw, Daniel (2024-04-15). "U.S., Not Israel, Shot Down Most Iran Drones and Missiles". The Intercept. Retrieved 2024-04-16.
  51. ^ Baldor, Lolita C. (2008-02-15). "US to Try to Shoot Down Spy Satellite". Washington Post. Associated Press.[dead link]
  52. ^ "DefenseLink News Transcript: DoD News Briefing with Deputy National Security Advisor Jeffrey, Gen. Cartwright and NASA Administrator Griffin". 2008. Retrieved 2008-02-22.
  53. ^ "WikiLeaks: US and China in military standoff over space missiles". The Telegraph. Archived from the original on 2022-01-12.
  54. ^ "Satellite Shoot Down: How It Will Work". Space.com. February 19, 2008. Retrieved 2008-02-21.
  55. ^ "Navy Hits Satellite With Heat-Seeking Missile". Space.com. February 21, 2008. Retrieved 2008-02-21.
  56. ^ "DoD Succeeds In Intercepting Non-Functioning Satellite (Release No. 0139-08)" (Press release). U.S. Department of Defense. February 20, 2008. Retrieved 2008-02-20.
  57. ^ "Navy Succeeds In Intercepting Non-Functioning Satellite (Release NNS080220-19)" (Press release). U.S. Navy. February 20, 2008. Retrieved 2008-02-20.
  58. ^ "AFP: Japan shoots down test missile in space: defence minister". 2008. Archived from the original on 2007-06-09. Retrieved 2008-02-22.
  59. ^ MDA press release Archived 2008-04-11 at the Wayback Machine. 17 December 2007.
  60. ^ JFTM-2 & 3 dates Archived 2013-09-11 at the Wayback Machine
  61. ^ "Japan Achieves Third Ballistic Missile Intercept". Spacedaily.com. November 4, 2010. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  62. ^ "Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Media Gallery". Mda.mil. Archived from the original on 2013-09-15. Retrieved 2013-09-17.
  63. ^ Defense ministry mulls introducing ground-based SM-3 interceptor missiles Archived 2014-08-12 at the Wayback Machine – Mainichi.jp, 12 August 2014
  64. ^ Japan may accelerate missile defense upgrades in wake of North Korean tests: sources – Reuters.com, 17 October 2016
  65. ^ Lia Wong (1 September 2022). "Japanese Defense Budget Expansion Includes Two 20,000 Ton Cruisers". Overt Defense. Retrieved 7 September 2022.
  66. ^ Dzirhan Mahadzir (6 September 2022). "Japan to Build Two 20,000-ton Missile Defense Warships, Indian Carrier Commissions". USNI News Blog. Retrieved 7 September 2022.
  67. ^ Yoshihiro Inaba (1 September 2022). "Japan's New "Aegis Equipped Ships": What We Know So Fars". NavalNews. Retrieved 7 September 2022.
  68. ^ Kyle Mizokami (12 September 2022). "Japan Defense Ministry plans new Aegis destroyers in place of Aegis Ashore". Popular Mechanics. Archived from the original on 12 September 2022. Retrieved 13 September 2022.((cite web)): CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  69. ^ Mahadzir, Dzirhan (November 21, 2022). "Two Japanese Destroyers Score in Ballistic Missile Defense Test off Hawaii". News Blog. United States Naval Institute. Retrieved November 22, 2022.
  70. ^ US, Poland Sign Revised Missile Defense Accord http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/library/news/2010/space-100703-voa01.htm
  71. ^ a b c "Ballistic Missile Defense". Eucom.mil. 2009-09-17. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  72. ^ Romania Agrees to Host Ballistic Missile Interceptor "Romania Agrees to Host Ballistic Missile Interceptor". Archived from the original on 2010-02-10. Retrieved 2012-08-23.
  73. ^ "Joint Press Availability With Romanian Foreign Minister Teodor Baconschi". State.gov. 2011-09-13. Archived from the original on 2011-09-29. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  74. ^ "Editorial | Rethink the SM-3 Block 2B". SpaceNews.com. 2013-02-25. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  75. ^ de Andrei Luca POPESCU (2013-05-06). "EXCLUSIV. Frank Rose, negociatorul scutului de la Deveselu: "Schimbările din programul american de apărare antirachetă au fost determinate de ameninţarea Coreei de Nord " – Gandul". Gandul.info. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  76. ^ Jeong, Jeff (12 October 2018). "South Korea to buy ship-based interceptors to counter ballistic missile threats". Seoul. Archived from the original on 12 October 2018. Retrieved 12 October 2018.
  77. ^ "Lockheed Martin remains sole bidder for new frigates". TR Defence. 2012-05-21. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  78. ^ "Raytheon and HAVELSAN Partner for FFG 7 Fleet Modernization With GENESIS Program". Raytheon.mediaroom.com. 2009-04-28. Retrieved 2013-06-13.
  79. ^ "Cookies op AD.nl – AD.nl". www.ad.nl. Retrieved 4 April 2018.