PAC-2/3 and MEADs. Thats about it unless you want to buy Russian or something REALLY weird like a land based AEGIS battery (SPY-1/3 radar systems, Mk41 VLS and ESSM + SM-2/6 missiles.

The US does not build and has no intention of building long range land based SAMs, period. Everything else in the western world is either short range or dedicated ABM. Stingers, VL-MICAs, SLAMRAAMs, etc are short ranged. The THAAD, GMI and EKV etc are ABM. The only S-400 class long range SAM is the SM-2/6 and they are naval.

what is aus ? australia or austria ?

I've always thought of navalizing Patriot, but not the obverse.  Have to think about landbased Standard. Why not?

Herald

No need for an illuminator system. Just use the SM-6 which is an active seeker. Physically, it's essentially the SM-2 Block IV airframe with the AIM-120D derived guidance package. It may also receive dual band guidance with the addition of a secondary forward staring Imaging IR seeker (ala SM-2 Block IIIB currently in service), but that is unconfirmed.

The "naval" SPS-48 is quite commonly used for land based applications actually. But for a new system, a mechanically traversed SPY-3 VSR combo is quite attractive. This dual band all AESA system covers 120 degrees as opposed to 90 degrees for older ESAs like the SPY-1. You can get 360 coverage if you don't mind a little blind time by mounting the AESAs on a mechanically rotating mount. The SPY-3 itself is also capable of illumination if you want to use older SM-2s and the ESSM missiles.

A Land battery with SPY-3/VSR + ESSM (for close defense), SM-6 for Area Defense and SM-3 for ABM is quite a SAM battery. The Mk41 launching cells are already very modularized. You can probably put 4 or 8 cells on a heavy truck. Each cell will hold one SM-2/3/6 missiles or 4 ESSM missiles.

SM-

Stacking a 20 foot tall missile in its VLS 8 cell on a truck?

Interesting.

Herald

Yeah... something like that. It'll be no worse than the Russian S-300/400 systems really.

http://www.military.cz/russia/sam/s300p/S300PM_FIRE01.JPG">

S-300 (48N6 missile): Length 7.5 m, Diameter 500mm, Weight 1.8 tons
S-400 (40N6 missile): BIGGER & HEAVIER THAN 48N6
SM-2ER/SM-6ER: Length 6.55 m, Diameter 533mm (booster), 340mm (body), Weight 1.47 tons

The SM-2 is quite size and mass efficient really for a 370km long range SAM. Plus, a Terra-Standard system is quite flexible being capable of taking quad-pack ESSMs for 50km point defense and the SM-3 for 600km ABM, in addition to the SM-2/6 anti-aircraft area defense weapons.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/images/mk-41-vls-pc008-053.jpg">

I know I am not directly answering the original question, but I don?t think that I could justify purchasing medium to long range SAMs for the ADF.

Perhaps a land based SM-3 / SPY-1D / SPY-3 / CEA radar installation would make sense for ballistic missile defense, but only if the longer ranged block II version of SM-3 is used, and that is still under development.

Surely a much more relevant air defense requirement for the ADF would be C-RAM, for use in Afghanistan?

Perhaps a combined:
? C-RAM
? Anti UAV
? Cruise missile defense

System would make greater sense for the ADF.

But I see no clear option for this:

1)
A land based Phalanx with software and ammunition changes and integration with an artillery spotting radar would seem to be the best short term option for C-RAM in Afghanistan. Especially as the US, Israel, and I think Canada are working along these lines. And especially as we have some Naval Phalanx mounts already. But Phalanx is quite short ranged and not very capable against anything larger than a mortar or a smaller Katusha.

2)
The various SLAMRAAM / NASAM variants would not be appropriate for these tasks. Or at least not appropriate for C-RAM as the missiles are expensive and the active radar seeker might not lock onto a mortar bomb or Katusha! Although a SLAMRAAM would make a good cruise missile defense system as it is not dependant on line of sight command or illumination.

3)
A GBAD ESSM would probably not be appropriate for these tasks as the terminal semi active radar illumination is line of sight dependant.

4)
The 35mm Skyshield system with AHEAD rounds has been mentioned several times in other threads as a combined C-RAM and Naval CIWS, but the Israelis seemed unimpressed with the C-RAM capability of its tungsten pellets. I think that they went with a Phalanx variant in the short term and are developing their ?Iron Cap? (?) system in the medium term for C-RAM.

5)
One logical solution would seem to be the Swedish BAMSE.

Its pros would be:
? Relatively cheap command guided missiles
? Claimed all target capability, including PGMs, cruise missiles, short range ballistic missiles, and UAVs as well as aircraft
? Its two stage design would give it a much greater altitude coverage and a greater chance of intercepting larger artillery rockets and short range ballistic missiles

But the BAMSE:
? Is line of sight dependant due to its command guided missiles, so it might not be the best for anti UAV or cruise missile defense
? Hasn?t sold outside Sweden at all, and even the Swedish Navy purchased Umkhonto for the Visbys due to the multiple terminal channels of fire benefits of the IIR guided Umkhonto

6)
Perhaps a smaller command guided SAM with terminal IIR homing might make sense. I was thinking here of Umkhonto or VL IRIS-T. These (relatively cheap) missiles could be entirely command guided against C-RAM threats but could use the (non line of sight dependant) IIR homing against UAVs and cruise missiles. And the Umkhonto at least would make a capable Naval SHORADS / CIWS, albeit one that overlaps somewhat with ESSM.

Perhaps a similar affect could be achieved with VL-ASRAAM, as it has thrust vectoring and LOAL/command guidance capabilities?

7)
Perhaps Australian industry could come up with a CEAFAR / CEAMOUNT / ESSM / Phalanx combination. This would be developmental, but could perhaps piggy back on the ANZAC ASMD upgrade?

8)
An ASRADS / Bolide / RBS-70 variant might make some sense, as the relatively cheap laser beam riding missiles might be capable against C-RAM targets and the RBS-70 is already in ADF service. But there has been no mention of a C-RAM ASRADs. And I am not sure which radar could be used. Maybe Saab has done some work integrating Arthur (?) and Giraffe-AMB with RBS-70?

9)
A solid state laser Phalanx might be excellent for C-RAM in dry areas like Iraq or Afghanistan, but this is still under development, and might not be the best for cruise missile defense of ADF forces deployed in a misty Pacific jungle!

10)
An out in left field option might be a variant of the Russian Pantsyr!

Before everyone laughs at this, there is some method to this madness.

I am well aware of how a TEL works. You implied that you would stick a Mark 41 style  8 cell VLS  on  the back of a truck stacked vertically.

You were called on it. This retrograde maneuver is now is what I call BACKPEDALING away from a mistake.

Admit it and drive on. I do.

Herald