Authored by Kaif Shaikh via Interesting Engineering,
Intercepting a missile sounds straightforward. Launch another missile at it before it reaches its target. In reality, it is one of the most technically demanding challenges of defense.
Here's how modern interceptor missiles protect against aircraft, cruise missiles, and ballistic threats.Getty ImagesUnlike offensive missiles, interceptor missiles must detect, track, calculate, and collide with a target that may be traveling several times the speed of sound, often within a matter of minutes. Some even destroy their targets without carrying an explosive warhead, relying instead on the sheer force of impact. Here's how interceptor missiles work.
It Starts With DetectionAn interceptor missile is only as effective as the network supporting it. Long before an interceptor launches, satellites equipped with infrared sensors detect the intense heat generated by a missile launch. Ground- and sea-based radars then begin tracking the missile's trajectory, calculating where it is likely to travel and, more importantly, where it can be intercepted.
This information is continuously shared across a command-and-control network that decides whether an engagement is necessary, selects the most suitable interceptor, and determines the optimal launch time.
Predicting Where A Missile Will BeOne of the biggest misconceptions is that interceptor missiles simply "chase" incoming threats. Instead, fire-control computers predict the future position of the target based on its speed, altitude, direction, and expected flight path. The interceptor is launched toward that predicted intercept point rather than directly at the missile's current location.
As both missiles continue moving, onboard guidance systems receive updated tracking data and constantly adjust the interceptor's course until it reaches the target. The entire process, from detection to interception, may take only a few minutes for short-range ballistic missiles.
Three Opportunities To InterceptBallistic missiles travel through three distinct flight phases, each offering different interception opportunities. The boost phase begins immediately after launch while the rocket motors are still burning. During this stage, the missile is highly visible due to its intense infrared signature, but interception is extremely difficult because defensive systems must already be positioned near the launch site.
The midcourse phase is the longest portion of flight, when the warhead travels through space after booster separation. Systems such as the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense using SM-3 interceptors and the U.S. Ground-based Midcourse Defense are designed to engage threats during this stage.
Finally comes the terminal phase, when the warhead re-enters the atmosphere and descends toward its target. Systems such as THAAD and Patriot PAC-3 operate in this phase, providing the final opportunity to stop an incoming missile before impact.
Hit-To-Kill Versus Explosive InterceptionNot every interceptor destroys its target in the same way. Many older interceptor missiles use blast-fragmentation warheads, detonating near the incoming missile and destroying it with high-speed metal fragments.
Modern systems increasingly rely on hit-to-kill technology. Rather than exploding nearby, these interceptors collide directly with the incoming missile at extremely high speed. The enormous kinetic energy generated by the impact is sufficient to destroy or disable the target without carrying a large explosive payload. Systems including THAAD, SM-3, and Patriot PAC-3 employ hit-to-kill interception for many ballistic missile defense missions.
Why Is Interception So Difficult?Intercepting a missile is often compared to "hitting a bullet with another bullet," but the reality is even more challenging. Incoming ballistic missiles can travel at several kilometers per second, leaving defenders with only a narrow engagement window. Modern missiles may also deploy decoys, maneuver during flight, or fly at lower altitudes to complicate tracking.
Weather, electronic warfare, radar coverage, and terrain can further reduce the time available to detect and engage a threat. For this reason, countries increasingly rely on layered missile defense, where multiple interceptor systems operate at different ranges and altitudes. If one layer fails, another still has an opportunity to intercept the incoming missile.
Examples Of Interceptor MissilesDifferent interceptor missiles are optimized for different threats. The Patriot PAC-3 focuses on defending military bases and cities against ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and aircraft during the terminal phase.
THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) intercepts short- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles at much higher altitudes, including outside Earth's atmosphere. The naval SM-3 interceptor protects ships and allied territories by engaging ballistic missiles during their midcourse phase, while SM-6 provides additional terminal defense against aircraft, cruise missiles, and some ballistic threats.
Other countries operate systems such as Israel's Arrow-3, David's Sling, and Iron Dome, each designed for different ranges and threat types.
The Future Of Missile InterceptionAs hypersonic glide vehicles and maneuverable ballistic missiles become more common, traditional interception methods are becoming increasingly challenging. Future systems are expected to combine more capable sensors, artificial intelligence-assisted tracking, and new interceptors, such as the Glide Phase Interceptor (GPI), currently under development, to engage hypersonic threats before they begin their final descent.
While no missile defense system offers perfect protection, modern layered architectures have significantly improved the ability to detect, track, and intercept increasingly sophisticated threats. Success ultimately depends not on a single interceptor missile but on the seamless integration of satellites, radars, command networks, and multiple defensive layers that work together within seconds.
Tyler Durden Tue, 07/07/2026 - 22:35A remarkable collection of Revolutionary War artifacts that lay hidden beneath the Savannah River for nearly 240 years is now on public display in Georgia's oldest city as the nation marks America's 250th anniversary, according to Fox News.
The Savannah History Museum officially unveiled 19 cannons recovered from the river as part of its new Loyalists & Liberty: Savannah in the American Revolution exhibit. Historians say the discovery represents the largest cache of 18th-century artillery ever recovered from a single Revolutionary War naval event.
Fox News wrote that the cannons were discovered unexpectedly in 2021 after crews with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers uncovered them while dredging the Savannah River to deepen the shipping channel for larger cargo vessels.
"When they were recovered, the cannons were heavily encrusted with oyster shells and marine growth after centuries underwater," said Nora Fleming Lee, CEO of the Coastal Heritage Society. In addition to the artillery pieces, crews also found smaller artifacts, and several of the cannons still contained cannonballs and their original gunpowder charges.
Following their recovery, most of the cannons were transported to a preservation laboratory at Texas A&M University, where conservators spent several years removing salt from the iron through a specialized electrolysis process before stabilizing and protecting the metal for long-term display.
Seventeen of the cannons underwent full restoration, while two were intentionally left in their original condition so visitors can compare how they looked when first pulled from the river. All 19 are now permanently exhibited at the museum.
Researchers believe the weapons came from British ships that were deliberately scuttled in 1779 to create a blockade across the narrowest section of the Savannah River. The barrier was intended to prevent French naval forces from sailing upriver and helping American troops retake Savannah, which was then under British control.
The ships are believed to have been sunk only weeks before the Battle of Savannah, one of the deadliest engagements of the Revolutionary War, where more than 800 casualties were recorded in less than an hour. The battle took place on the same grounds where the Savannah History Museum stands today.
Museum officials say the exhibit goes beyond showcasing military artifacts. Through the stories of Indigenous people, enslaved and free Black residents, women, children and other overlooked figures, it explores Savannah's role in the American Revolution from multiple perspectives, using the recovered cannons as a centerpiece to tell a broader and more inclusive story of the nation's founding.
Tyler Durden Tue, 07/07/2026 - 22:10Update: Just when you thought the media couldn't try harder to force Graham Platner out of the race for Senator from Maine, WaPo is out with a new one: that 'sneaky' oysterman was secretly shucking his condoms off during sex - or so an ex-girlfriend told the deep state's favorite paper of record.
"He would pull condoms off," claims Lyndsey Fifield, who says she dated Platner from 2013-2015 in Washington DC - and previously accused him of physical abuse. "He would do it in a sneaky way. He wouldn’t tell me."
And just like how the NY Times withheld key details until the dam broke thanks to Politico (read below), WaPo knew about this accusation since June 20.
Fifield initially told The Post about the alleged condom removal during a June 20 interview that was off the record. She said she decided to speak publicly about it Tuesday in part because, she said, she wanted to show that Racicot was not alone in experiencing issues with Platner involving sexual consent. -WaPo
In other words, this was 'off the record' until she 'decided to speak publicly about it Tuesday' in order to support a fellow accuser. WaPo then writes:
"Removing a condom during sex without consent, known as “stealthing,” is classified as a form of sexual assault in several countries, including Britain, Canada and parts of Australia. In the United States, Maine, California and Washington state have laws that address the nonconsensual removal of condoms during sex."
...
She estimated that Platner removed condoms without her consent at least six times when they had sex at both of their residences in D.C. during their two-year, on-and-off relationship. She said she told him that she was upset about it but that he would make light of the situation.
So - he stealthed Fifield an alleged six times - and she continued letting him inside of her vagina after said stealthing was an established maneuver, your honor.
"I confronted him both during and after [sex] because he knew that I was not on birth control and how dangerous that was," she told the Post, which waited until now to tell the world. "He would act like cute about it, like ‘Oh sneaky me.’"
Sneaky indeud. But not sneaky enough to save his 2026 run for Senate a decade later, it would seem.
Platner's campaign has denied Fifield's allegation, calling her claim "categorically false and politically motivated."
A Platner campaign official fires back at @MaineDems, telling NBC News: “The Platner campaign has reached out to the party to try and understand what this process would look like. At no point has the campaign tried to ‘put its finger on the scale.’ Over 150,000 Mainers voted for… https://t.co/l9CbmYkCE6
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) July 8, 2026Now it's over...
Q: How much more gross can P-Hustle get before the end?
A: pic.twitter.com/nt7rrvvYB5
* * * BEFORE YOU GO - If you want amazing meat, pick up some of this BMS 7+ Wagyu from veteran-owned KC Cattle Co. Salt & pepper, pan sear / oven finish, and it needs nothing else. NO stringy meat, each bite is seriously packed with flavor, and the fat just melts as you chew. This happened not 6 days ago at house Durden. And yes the dogs got some too.
Earlier: Graham Platner's Senate campaign is imploding after Politico published a detailed account on Monday from Jenny Racicot, a 41-year-old Democrat from Maine, who accuses the progressive darling of rape. Donors are heading for the exits, Democrats are withdrawing endorsements, and calling for Platner to drop out.
But there's another scandal hiding in plain sight, and it involves the New York Times, which published an exposé last month featuring three women who dated Platner, who had each accused him of domestic abuse.
Racicot also appeared in the New York Times' story on Platner last month. The paper interviewed her and spoke with another anonymous woman as well. Yet when the Times published its June report, it omitted the sexual assault allegations from Racicot and the anonymous Democratic woman who had dated Platner. Instead, the story centered on another accuser, Lyndsey Fifield, a Republican operative whose partisan resume became a central focus of the article.
"After the story went up, I began to ask them... wait, where are the stories from the other women? Where are their accusations of sexual assault? Why am I the focus? Why are there 11 paragraphs dedicated to detailing my work history (more than has been published about Graham's by far)?" Fifield asked after the story was published.
According to Fifield, reporters contacted her in early April and pressured her past her initial refusal. They told her there were other women and they needed to "band together." They also promised to protect her. She eventually relented. "I bucked all advice from my friends (and resisted my conservative bias) and decided to fully trust the Times journalists," she wrote on X, turning down other outlets and sitting quiet through weeks of delays.
Then she handed them everything a reporter could want: five friends who could corroborate her story, former roommates who watched Platner stalk her row house from five doors away, screenshots, landlord emails documenting the lease she broke to escape him, and time-stamped diary entries. Reporters called just the two friends who could confirm the relationship timeline rather than the abuse, and told her they saw no need to contact the ex-fiance she confided in during pre-marital counseling since the diary covered it.
The published story claimed nobody could corroborate her account. "Why does it say 'nobody could corroborate' when I offered them sources that COULD corroborate?" Fifield asked. Friends had confirmed to the Times that she disclosed the abuse years before Platner announced a run for anything. That corroboration never made print.
Three women who had never met, Fifield, Racicot, and the third anonymous accuser, described the same cycle of intimate partner violence, coercive control, and love-bombing. The Times had all of it but gave readers mostly a deep dive on the Republican woman's employment record instead. "It dawned on me that this really was a set up all along," Fifield wrote. "The journalists I trusted who convinced me to share a story I never wanted to tell methodically delayed and twisted this into a gift to the Platner campaign. Violating the trust of his victims. Shattering the trust I placed in them with the most vulnerable story of my life."
I bucked all advice from my friends (and resisted my conservative bias) and decided to fully trust the Times journalists. As they left my home they asked that I not talk to any other outlets and I insisted then and repeatedly over the following weeks that I would keep my word and only share this story with them.
— Lyndsey Fifield (@lyndseyfifield) June 5, 2026Politico's Adam Wren appeared on MSNOW's "Morning Joe" to walk Mika Brzezinski through the vetting of Racicot's story. Brzezinski noted the absence of any police report and asked, "Given the very high standards Politico has before they write something like this and publish it, what aspects of this story brought it to the level of publishable?" Wren explained how Racicot "had confided into a number of people, including her therapist, in almost real time." The corroboration consisted of "email exchanges between she and her therapist" and conversations with people she confided in during the months that followed.
When Brzezinski pressed Wren on what tied Platner to the act itself, he cited an Instagram message Racicot sent the next day, as well as messages to others afterward. Therapist emails and secondhand descriptions of unrecovered messages cleared Politico's bar, but eyewitness roommates, screenshots, landlord emails, timestamped diaries, and friends confirming contemporaneous disclosures fell short at the New York Times, which lied to America by claiming nobody could corroborate Fifield's story, and completely omitting Racicot's claims of sexual assault.
Morning Joe spends 5 minutes grilling Politico's @adamwren for running a story on Platner's ex accusing him of rape. "Given the very high standards Politico has before they write something like this and publish it, what aspects of this story brought it to the level of… pic.twitter.com/JgLW17ZF4y
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) July 7, 2026Platner's campaign will likely die in the coming days, but the New York Times' credibility went first.
Tyler Durden Tue, 07/07/2026 - 22:01