Register here

Author Topic: THAAD Development  (Read 46759 times)

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10787
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #15 on: April 06, 2013, 04:51:23 am »
Wouldn't it be easier and less expensive to just add SM-3's to the THAAD battery?  I believe the SM-3 can be cued by the TPY-2 radar and you can develop a common canister.  That would give you a 3-stage missile with a KV for the exoatmospheric segment of the mission.  Think it would take a lot less money than trying to give the THAAD missile SM-3 performance.

No.  Mobile land-based missiles have different requirements than naval missiles.  And it's not so much "make it into an SM-3" as it is "let's make it a bit better than it is". 
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Mark S.

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 67
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #16 on: April 09, 2013, 01:34:20 pm »
Information on the proposed THAAD larger booster and a second stage is on p. 42 of the Aug. 17, 2009 issue  of Aviation Week.  The proposal had a 21 inch diameter booster and a second kick stage.  Gave the missile more divert capability resulting in 3 to 4 times the defended area.  Article mentioned that they were tested on stands in 2006.  The launcher can only carry 5 of the larger variants.
 
Surprised that the SM-3 can't be used as a land mobile missile when it is slated for a land based Aegis Ashore system.  The THAAD battery itself seems to be only road mobile.  The ground clearance of the electronics, cooling and power units seems to be to little for cross-country mobility. 

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10787
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #17 on: April 09, 2013, 01:38:21 pm »
Information on the proposed THAAD larger booster and a second stage is on p. 42 of the Aug. 17, 2009 issue  of Aviation Week.  The proposal had a 21 inch diameter booster and a second kick stage.  Gave the missile more divert capability resulting in 3 to 4 times the defended area.  Article mentioned that they were tested on stands in 2006.  The launcher can only carry 5 of the larger variants.
 
Surprised that the SM-3 can't be used as a land mobile missile when it is slated for a land based Aegis Ashore system.  The THAAD battery itself seems to be only road mobile.  The ground clearance of the electronics, cooling and power units seems to be to little for cross-country mobility.

Thanks.   :)
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8440
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #18 on: September 29, 2014, 04:56:54 pm »

Lockheed Pitches Two-Stage Army Missile Interceptor With 'Modest' Costs


Posted: Sep. 26, 2014

The next version of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense's interceptor could use two motors to improve its velocity and ability to change direction mid-flight, according to Lockheed Martin officials.

A concept baseline is still in development for the THAAD Extended Range interceptor, according to Doug Graham, Lockheed's vice president of advanced programs for strategic and missile defense systems. But it's anticipated that the new interceptor would have two motors -- the current configuration has one -- broadening the area that the missile defense system can cover and giving the interceptor a greater ability to move laterally while flying downrange.

"The idea there is to have a lot more divert capabilities in the endgame so you can address some of the advanced threats that are starting to emerge around the world," Graham said at a Sept. 23 luncheon in Washington.

THAAD is a transportable system that protects against ballistic missiles both inside and outside the atmosphere during their final flight phase, according to the Missile Defense Agency's website. At this point, the "Extended-Range" version is a contractor proposal, not a program of record.

The new interceptor could be integrated onto existing fire units, said Lockheed's vice president for THAAD, Richard McDaniel. He added that it's yet to be determined whether the potential upgrades would be on top of existing interceptor inventory, or replace older ones.

While having two motors would bring some benefits, the Lockheed officials acknowledged that it will also make the interceptors heavier. Since the fire unit is not being altered, the heavier round could result in less missiles being loaded onto each launcher, Graham said.

The upgraded interceptor's ability to integrate into current fire units will result in "a very modest cost increase for a very substantial increase in capability," Graham said. MDA plans on giving Lockheed $22.6 million in fiscal year 2015 base funds for THAAD development, Defense Department budget documents show.

Senate authorizers, however, want to cut $15 million from the department's $300 million request for research, development, test and evaluation FY-15 dollars for THAAD. The committee believes the upgrade concept "is not sufficiently defined" and the requested money is "early to need," according to the Senate Armed Services Committee's report on the FY-15 defense-policy bill.

McDaniel said the company's envisioned upgrade could be compared to the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 Missile Segment Enhanced, an improved version of the Patriot interceptor that also does not necessitate any changes to the overall missile defense system. The Lockheed-made PAC-3 MSE entered low-rate initial production earlier this year.

Like the Patriot interceptor, THAAD's flagship international customer was the United Arab Emirates. The system has recently garnered interest from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, too, according to McDaniel.

Lockheed is currently under contract to provide six THAAD batteries for the U.S. Army. McDaniel said the service has put together plans to procure a seventh battery and is looking into obtaining an eighth and ninth, as well. As InsideDefense.com reported in June, that would be a reversal on the Army's plans to scale back its THAAD buys due to budget constraints. -- Justin Doubleday
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10787
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #19 on: September 29, 2014, 06:38:33 pm »
  Maybe?

"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Mark S.

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 67
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #20 on: October 01, 2014, 05:39:10 pm »
Would the second motor increase the velocity of the missile allowing it to hit longer range targets as well?

Offline Moose

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 833
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #21 on: October 02, 2014, 05:35:25 pm »
From the way Lockheed is talking, greater range and greater capability to engage higher-performance threats definitely seem to be in their sights. The reduction in missiles carried per launcher will not be trivial, though, the model sferrin posted looks to have a much greater diameter booster. I'd not be surprised if the limit of the current launcher is 4 THAAD-ERs, and I wouldn't be shocked to see 2 or 3.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10787
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #22 on: October 02, 2014, 05:36:56 pm »
From the way Lockheed is talking, greater range and greater capability to engage higher-performance threats definitely seem to be in their sights. The reduction in missiles carried per launcher will not be trivial, though, the model sferrin posted looks to have a much greater diameter booster. I'd not be surprised if the limit of the current launcher is 4 THAAD-ERs, and I wouldn't be shocked to see 2 or 3.

I read somewhere (probably AvWeek ages ago) that it would be 5 big missiles in place of 8 standard sized missiles.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Mark S.

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 67
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #23 on: October 02, 2014, 08:26:01 pm »
It may be Lockheed's answer to the Aegis Ashore program especially if the missile has the same or better performance than the SM-3.

Offline pathology_doc

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 789
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #24 on: October 29, 2014, 12:14:33 pm »
At $24m a shot, how many do you have to fire at a rogue state's nuclear-warhead rocket before it stops becoming cost-effective?  :o


The long and the short: what's the dollar-value penalty of a Hiroshima-sized nuke on Tel Aviv or Seoul?

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8440
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #25 on: October 29, 2014, 12:24:40 pm »
At $24m a shot, how many do you have to fire at a rogue state's nuclear-warhead rocket before it stops becoming cost-effective?  :o


The long and the short: what's the dollar-value penalty of a Hiroshima-sized nuke on Tel Aviv or Seoul?

Are you serious? Tangible costs would be in the tens of billions and intangible (oil prices, global stock market collapses, etc) would be in the TRILLIONS!! You could justify spending billions to stop a single nuke detonation over a city.
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8440
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline jjnodice

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 97

Offline bring_it_on

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1682
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #28 on: April 25, 2015, 01:19:31 pm »
Congress Interested In THAAD-ER To Counter Hypersonic Missiles


Quote
Congress has expressed interest in the possibility of knocking out hypersonic missiles with an extended-range version of the Army's Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system as the United States and Russia race to produce air-launched hypersonic cruise missiles.
According to media reports, Russia aims to produce a hypersonic cruise missile before 2020, around the same time the U.S. Air Force expects to transition its scramjet and boost-glide hypersonic missile designs into acquisition programs.
The House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee proposed legislative language this week that would direct the Defense Department to brief Congress on the possibility of using a proposed extended-range THAAD missile system to "confront hypersonic missile threats."
"Although a materiel solution decision has not yet been made, THAAD-ER could be a vital capability improvement for the ballistic missile defense system to defeat evolving and emerging threats, including hypersonic vehicles and anti-ship ballistic missiles," the subcommittee's mark of the fiscal year 2016 defense authorization bill states.
The Air Force Research Laboratory in partnership with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency are spending millions of dollars to mature two types of air-launched, hypersonic missiles -- a boost-glide weapon and one that is rocket boosted, but powered by a scramjet engine.
In an April 17 interview with Inside the Air Force, AFRL Aerospace Systems chief Douglas Ebersole said those two high-speed missiles should transition into acquisition programs in the 2020 time frame or possibly earlier. AFRL's current programs aims to mature hypersonic weapon system components to Technology Readiness Level 6.
Other nations are also developing hypersonic missiles. Boris Obnosov, general director of Russia's Tactical Missile Systems Corporation, said in November that the first Russian hypersonic missile should be ready "before 2020."
The Defense Department is pursuing a number of different hypersonic weapon projects, and the Air Force is leading the development of air-launched missiles and aircraft. Ebersole said the his directorate's hypersonic missile technologies would contribute to the Air Force's Air Dominance 2030 initiative, which aims to produce a new assortment of aircraft and weapons to defeat heavily defended targets in a high-threat environment.
AFRL's latest hypersonics research builds on the success of the scramjet-powered X-51 WaveRider program. Ebersole described the successful fourth flight of the X-51 in 2013 as a "Chuck Yeager moment," in reference to the first manned supersonic flight. While hypersonic flight is nothing new, the Air Force has for years wanted to field a functional flight vehicle capable of routinely going beyond five times the speed of sound, or Mach 5. But Ebersole believes the X-51 flight demonstration over the Pacific Ocean was exactly the breakthrough AFRL and DARPA needed to move their joint hypersonics research program forward.
"It really tipped and demonstrated that this technology is feasible and it's real," he said. "We hope to have a hypersonic weapon in the field prior to 2030 that helps support that air superiority role and strike activity."
Jack Blackhurst, AFRL's director of plans and programs, told ITAF last month that the Air Force and DARPA plan to spend between $800 million and $1 billion to mature and demonstrate emerging hypersonic flight technologies over the next five years. According to a March 31 slide showing AFRL hypersonics roadmap, the laboratory's plan is to first develop a hypersonic weapon capable of "rapid strike from standoff" in the 2020s followed by a tactical surveillance and strike aircraft for "deep strike of high-value targets" in the 2030s. In the 2040 time frame, AFRL hopes to create a penetrating, persistent surveillance and strike aircraft capable of routine operations from a regular runway.
Ebersole explained that the first intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platform would probably be launched from an aircraft, similar to the way the Vietnam War-era Firefly drone was deployed from a C-130. "It would be air-launched off a fairly big platform, and the various modes of recovery are under study right now," he said. One option is for the aircraft to descend like a Space Shuttle and glide onto a flat surface using skids.
"That's not an expendable program; that would be one you recover," Ebersole said. "Then about a decade later in the 2040s, we see a role where you'll have a fully-reusable strike/ISR option or platform where it would take off like a regular, conventional aircraft and execute the mission and come back and land."
The Air Force is keen to develop hypersonic weapons and aircraft that are too fast to be shot down in a contested area of operation, and that are better at destroying fast-moving and heavily defended targets. Ebersole said that advanced materials research is key to unlocking the possibilities of hypersonics, because airframes traveling at those speeds experience extremely high temperatures and shock waves.
DARPA has requested ramped up spending on joint Air Force hypersonic weapon projects in its FY-16 budget request. The agency has requested $40 million in FY-16 to scale up the Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept project, and $20 million for the Tactical Boost Glide program. Air Force investments in hypersonics are spread throughout its budget request. -- James Drew

http://insidedefense.com/node/169009

The company has been spending its own money on the THAAD-ER concept for some six to seven years. The hypersonic threat has been under serious study for the last 12-18 months.
"We know exactly what we need to do to the [THAAD] missile to extend its range," said Trotsky. "We are essentially adding a two-stage booster system where we have a larger than current THAAD initial booster stage, and then a second stage, what we call a kick stage. So the first stage gets you out longer and higher against modern threats, and the kick stage is responsible for narrowing the distance between the target and the interceptor, so you can turn it over to the kill vehicle - the same kill vehicle that exists on THAAD today," he added.
"We've done some initial work on the booster stages to characterise them and to do some additional testing and to prove the viability.... We continue to work on the booster stack and some of the system engineering that has to be done to definitise the design. I think what you'll see from MDA is an acceleration of that engineering work in the next few years because of the kind of threats that we're seeing being developed by our adversaries."
Some of this work has been done with funding from the MDA (either via the current THAAD Advanced Capability Development (ACD) contract, or from other THAAD contracts) and some using company money. Work on the new booster and kick motor is being handled by Aerojet.

Asked to explain how a THAAD ER missile would engage a hypersonic glide missile, Trotsky pointed out that the US ballistic missile defence system (BMDS) uses both terrestrial and space- based sensors. "So we have a number of sensors that are communicating with C2BMC, and tell us that we have a launch and that we have a ballistic target that is flying essentially at the seam of the atmosphere. We know how fast it is flying and where it is flying, so we can characterise it as a hypersonic fairly well."
By using the THAAD ER version, a launch will be possible much earlier than with a standard THAAD. "You can attack that threat before he can try to do some evasive manoeuvres. The ER has some specific capability that would be good to intercept that kind of target.... But even the current THAAD has capability against that threat," he added.

« Last Edit: April 25, 2015, 02:52:35 pm by bring_it_on »
Old radar types never die; they just phased array - Unknown

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10787
Re: THAAD Development
« Reply #29 on: April 25, 2015, 01:28:44 pm »
It may be Lockheed's answer to the Aegis Ashore program especially if the missile has the same or better performance than the SM-3.

They fill different niches.  Aegis ashore will eventually get SM-3 Block IIA and operates out of fixed sites.  THAAD is air-mobile and can be deployed anywhere you can land a C-17 and drive from.  Also SM-3 out performs THAAD but can't go after endoatomospheric targets.

It's a crying shame we never pursued this:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,17791.msg179365.html#msg179365

"I ran across this site while looking for a particular picture of the Upstage in flight. It showed a vapor trail making a 90 degree right turn followed by a 90 degree left turn. Some of the engineers had this picture in their offices. If this picture can be found it depicts what a remarkable accomplishment it was." - ENM42
« Last Edit: April 25, 2015, 01:31:29 pm by sferrin »
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.