THAAD Development

bring_it_on said:
Both PAC-3 MSE and THAAD production scaling and increased contract activity will be a good test for what the legacy OEM's have been saying privately and sometime publicly for years which is 'award larger contract / increase production lots and unit cost should dramatically improve'. So far, despite of this, at least on the PAC-3 MSE, unit cost reduction on account of higher production has not really managed to do anything other than keep up with inflation. I expect both to get slightly expensive as suppliers ramp up or new ones are brought online. Much like offensive fires this is an area I'm sure new entrants are exploring approaching with highly vertically integrated solutions (vs current primes that are basically sub contracting out most critical components).
Click to expand...
The overwhelming worldwide demand, the accelerated production schedule, the increased manpower, increased overtime and the amount of supply chain expedite costs are driving cost per missile.
 
missile_man said:
The overwhelming worldwide demand, the accelerated production schedule, the increased manpower, increased overtime and the amount of supply chain expedite costs are driving cost per missile.
Click to expand...
Correct. Which is why the DOD is looking to invest significant amount of resources to create lower cost alternatives across the lower and upper tier space. Lockheed and RTX are not going to be able to deliver lower cost at higher volumes anytime soon.
 
bring_it_on said:
Correct. Which is why the DOD is looking to invest significant amount of resources to create lower cost alternatives across the lower and upper tier space. Lockheed and RTX are not going to be able to deliver lower cost at higher volumes anytime soon.
Click to expand...
100% accurate.

But, we are working on it. It just takes time. In many cases we are starting to use more than a single supplier, but that doesn't happen instantly. New suppliers have onboarding processes to learn, especially if they've never supported a DOD contract before. Lots of suppliers just refuse to contract with defense companies because of the restrictions and requirements like FAIs, etc.

It takes 6-24 months to onboard new suppliers depending on the article. There are also external processes like chemplating/anodizing that are required with limited resources. Things like masking, cure times can't be accelerated.
 
Forest Green said:
I remember 20km.
Click to expand...
Not according to the MDA. 20 km was probably not even the requirement IIRC. Original was closer to 30-40 km range but that needed to be relaxed to keep things affordable and on time. It would be quite a day if the program ever demonstrated an ability to engage well inside the Patriot altitude envelope. The sizable gap that exists between the PAC-3 MSE's upper engagement altitude (classified but widely believed to be higher than the PAC-3) against TBM's, and the THAAD's lower engagement altitude, is where the Army's Lower Tier Future Interceptor (LTFI) is to live thanks to the arrival of LTAMDS that enables an expanded battlespace coverage for Patriot to actually efficiently engage targets at those ranges and altitudes.
 
bring_it_on said:
Not according to the MDA. 20 km was probably not even the requirement IIRC. Original was closer to 30-40 km range but that needed to be relaxed to keep things affordable and on time. It would be quite a day if the program ever demonstrated an ability to engage well inside the Patriot altitude envelope. The sizable gap that exists between the PAC-3 MSE's upper engagement altitude (classified but widely believed to be higher than the PAC-3) against TBM's, and the THAAD's lower engagement altitude, is where the Army's Lower Tier Future Interceptor (LTFI) is to live thanks to the arrival of LTAMDS that enables an expanded battlespace coverage for Patriot to actually efficiently engage targets at those ranges and altitudes.
Click to expand...
I found this, can't verify the integrity of it though.

1787582885072.png
 
Most of these sources are likely pointing to original program docs and requirements from decades ago. And not necessarily MDA demonstrated performance.
 
TomS said:
I believe that's a Ted Postol graphic. Season with a large lump of salt.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you got to take his articles on BMD and related issues with a LOT of scepticism as he appears some sort of grudge, anti-BMD agenda. I remember reading one article he wrote concerning BMD and the US's GBI programme and what disgusted me was his mendacious and selective use of facts to basically argue "BMD bad!", he strikes me as a dishonest debater on these issues.​
 
Thought these would be interesting videos. The first one is centered around the Dallas ( Grand Prairie) site. It's MFC HQ and mostly a commodities shop for mechanical and electrical components. CNC machining, PWBs and harnesses. All of the missile manufacturing and production shown in the video are in Troy and Camden which are extremely well guarded. You don't see many videos of those production floors.

View: https://youtu.be/9v0dnGOS5C8?si=bDU4Ty-mD8GvQDcw


View: https://youtu.be/z7_0woeTp8o?si=dcFRzj4oP44PKXvU
 
missile_man said:
Thought these would be interesting videos. The first one is centered around the Dallas ( Grand Prairie) site. It's MFC HQ and mostly a commodities shop for mechanical and electrical components. CNC machining, PWBs and harnesses. All of the missile manufacturing and production shown in the video are in Troy and Camden which are extremely well guarded. You don't see many videos of those production floors.
Click to expand...
Its mostly standard LM B roll video footage that has been up on their site for a while. Still neat to see it packaged like that.
 
bring_it_on said:
Its mostly standard LM B roll video footage that has been up on their site for a while. Still neat to see it packaged like that.
Click to expand...
The flight tests are stock. The production floor footage is all new. Dan Nimblett was my first program manager and eventual mentor for a little while.
 
missile_man said:
Buzzword or not, developing and implementing AI driven solutions to increase overall production isn't cheap. It requires substantial investment from both the company and the government.

I've worked in defense for almost 15 years, the last 4 on the THAAD Interceptor. If we're going to achieve the rates the US Army wants, we need dedicated AI driven solutions. I don't think you grasp just how difficult these things are to produce, from winding the canister to delivery of an AUR.
Click to expand...

I've heard the MEMS gearing in THAAD's seeker gimbal is so sensitive that a single breath from the machinist can knock a gear out of spec lol.

That one really put it into perspective for me.
 
Kat Tsun said:
I've heard the MEMS gearing in THAAD's seeker gimbal is so sensitive that a single breath from the machinist can knock a gear out of spec lol.

That one really put it into perspective for me.
Click to expand...
Never heard that, but the seeker is outside my wheel house
 
bring_it_on said:
Most of it has been there in their b-rolls for a while now.
Click to expand...
Triumph Aerostructures used to split our Grand Prairie campus in half until their lease ended. We reinvested in that space and just recently opened our new Rapid Fielding Center and additional manufacturing floor space there

Camden's AUR3 building opened just a couple years ago for PAC-3 MSE, allowing AUR1 for for.PAC-3 sustainment and there's more to come.

Troy's expansion is still under construction.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom