THAAD Development

April 2021 GAO report GAO-21-314 / MISSILE DEFENSE,

Some info on THAAD
THAAD Has Generally Fallen Short of Planned Interceptor Deliveries Since Fiscal Year 2015

Year- Contracted- Actual

2015- 44- 2
2016- 48- 21
2017- 61- 41
2018- 52- 58
2019- 60- 45
2020- 85- 42

"THAAD delivered 42 of 85, or 49 percent, of planned interceptors for fiscal year 2020 and halted further deliveries June through September while awaiting a qualified replacement for a part that is no longer available // THAAD received full-rate production approval from the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment in October 2020."

Homeland Defense Underlay to GMD missile

With a variant of the SM-3 IIA and "THAAD program officials are taking steps in preparation for an effort now known as THAAD Layered Homeland Defense (LHLD), to include developing the requisite plans and contracts." GAO expressed skepticism over this plan as it would in effect require a new Command, Control, Battle Management, And Communications (C2BMC) system to integrate SM-3 IIA and THAAD with GMD.

MDA" secured $350 million in funding for fiscal years 2021 through 2023. However, there are a number of significant upgrades and steps to address obsolescence that would be needed to enhance THAAD’s performance and make it capable of performing such a mission."
Maybe wrong but would have thought $350 million would be on the low side to develop the THAAD-ER with its longer range to make it mission capable for the LHLD.

 
Have any details of the THAAD-ER's booster stage been released? While flight tests haven't been conducted IIRC several ground test-firings have.
 
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cz72RcwVUFY

The 1st demonstration/validation test of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, which took place on 21 April 1995 at White Sands Missile Range. In this test, a THAAD missile was launched and terminated following the shroud deployment and booster separation.
Click to expand...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-M2xN7BlTk

The 5th demonstration/validation test of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, which took place on 22 March 1996 at White Sands Missile Range. In this test, a THAAD missile was used to intercept a Hera target missile. The corkscrew maneuver seen in the video is a planned part of the interceptor's flight path.
Click to expand...
 
sferrin said:
And there aren't enough of the bigger, Mk57 cells, to justify a larger missile.
Click to expand...

A decade later, a penny just dropped.

Mk 57's 26-inch missile capacity (28-inch canister dimension) is the same diameter as the "six-pack" Mk 41 replacement that was being looked at about the same time for enhanced Navy Theater-Wide performance. You can fit six 28-inch canisters in the same footprint as the eight 25-inch canisters in Mk 41 by relocating the exhaust plenums. So the Mk 57 didn't have to be a total unicorn, if the Navy had proceeded with the six-pack Mk 41 as well.
 
With the proposed THAAD-ER is there any indication testing will go beyond the ground tests of the 21" booster and 14.5" kick stages? I mean it shouldn't be hard to have a few flight-tests of the proposed two-stage booster assembly (The THAAD-ER would use the same unmodified kill vehicle as the THAAD)?
 
donnage99 said:
Can someone explain to me how a defensive weapon deployed by one nation can threaten the national security of another? I've seen this argument used by different countries but never fully understood the logic (not meant to be sarcastic but a real question)
Click to expand...
Combined reply:
Rickshaw said:
The view is that a defensive system will often allow it's user to protect their forces while they aggressively attack other nation/forces. A good example is the SDI system, which would have allowed the US to prevent the fUSSR from being able to attack it, while the US was able to attack the fUSSR with impunity (of course that assumes that SDI would be 100% effective).
Click to expand...
Pretty much this.

Your ABMs allow you to ignore the threat from your enemy's missiles while your missiles are unopposed.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Your ABMs allow you to ignore the threat from your enemy's missiles while your missiles are unopposed.
Click to expand...
Nah. No system is 100%, and attacking missiles are always cheaper than defending.

And missiles are hardly the only way to send canned hatred to the other guy.
 
Iron Dome is known to be quite effective, and that didn't stop Current Events. Of course, the effectiveness of Iron Dome didn't mean that the operators of Iron Dome felt free to just launch a war out of the blue. It was the other guys.

Iron Dome didn't cause destabilization. Unstable minds did.

So missile defense? Go for it. Anyone telling you that the best way to defend yourself is to disarm yourself is trying to sell you something. Something your *really* don't want to buy.
 
Forest Green said:
Could be argued that a lack of air and missile defences is more destabilising.
Click to expand...
Yes, because it makes you more vulnerable to attacks.



Orionblamblam said:
So missile defense? Go for it. Anyone telling you that the best way to defend yourself is to disarm yourself is trying to sell you something. Something your *really* don't want to buy.
Click to expand...
Yeah, they're trying to buy you into being a victim.
 
I came across this missile in document from The U.S. Army Space & Missile Defense Command/ Army "A Chronological Review of 60 Years". Anyone know what it is? It was pictured alongside HEDI, Storm I, and an early THAAD test (shown in the second pic)
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240211_185343_ReadEra.jpg
    Screenshot_20240211_185343_ReadEra.jpg
    362.8 KB · Views: 21
  • Screenshot_20240211_195000_ReadEra.jpg
    Screenshot_20240211_195000_ReadEra.jpg
    606.2 KB · Views: 23
NASA said:
I came across this missile in document from The U.S. Army Space & Missile Defense Command/ Army "A Chronological Review of 60 Years". Anyone know what it is? It was pictured alongside HEDI, Storm I, and an early THAAD test (shown in the second pic)
Click to expand...
TCMP-2 Missile defense target.

space.skyrocket.de

Castor-4B

Gunter's Space Page - Information on Launch vehicles, Satellites, Space Shuttle and Astronautics
space.skyrocket.de space.skyrocket.de
 
sferrin said:
I've always thought it looked like an S-300V.
Click to expand...

It does have a passing resemblance to an SA-12.

As for the Arrow 1 from recollection from the early 1990s in AW&ST articles IIRC (Maybe Flight International too) the Arrow 1 based on the Sprint short-range ABM interceptor missile (IIRC there were some missile test in the late 1980s that parts from decommissioned Sprint missiles by the SDI).
 
NMaude said:
It does have a passing resemblance to an SA-12.

As for the Arrow 1 from recollection from the early 1990s in AW&ST articles IIRC (Maybe Flight International too) the Arrow 1 based on the Sprint short-range ABM interceptor missile (IIRC there were some missile test in the late 1980s that parts from decommissioned Sprint missiles by the SDI).
Click to expand...
Nope. You're probably thinking of HEDI, which used surplus Sprint motors.

Arrow 1 on the left. Sprint on the right.

arrow_i1 2000kg.jpg sprint-missile-launched-from-kwajalein-62359-768x972.jpg
 
sferrin said:
Nope. You're probably thinking of HEDI, which used surplus Sprint motors.
Click to expand...

It has been a LONG time since I looked at those articles but you are correct anyway Israel went with the Arrow 2 as it was more compact.

HEDI was also related to the ERIS programme and the interesting thing about ERIS is that its' tech was used in the THAAD when it was being developed.
 
sferrin said:
Arrow 1 on the left. Sprint on the right.
Click to expand...
This Arrow 1?
en.wikipedia.org

Arrow (missile family) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

The Arrow 1 was reportedly a two-stage solid propellant missile, with an overall length of 7.5 m (25 ft), a body diameter of 1,200 mm (47 in), and a launch weight of around 2,000 kg (4,400 lb). It was estimated that the second stage had a length of 2.5 m (8.2 ft), and that it had inertial and command update mid-course guidance, with a terminal infrared focal plane array. The missile was described as being relatively high-speed and maneuverable, with thrust vectoring in both stages. The range capability has been described as around 50 km (31 mi).[8]
Click to expand...
 
NMaude said:
It has been a LONG time since I looked at those articles but you are correct anyway Israel went with the Arrow 2 as it was more compact.

HEDI was also related to the ERIS programme and the interesting thing about ERIS is that its' tech was used in the THAAD when it was being developed.
Click to expand...
You sure? I thought it was the KITE portion of HEDI KITE and AIT (Atmospheric Interceptor Technology). ERIS was a precursor to GBI (exoatmospheric)

KITE KKV.jpg
 
I think HEDI was tested with a conventional warhead before the HEDI KITE (KKV) test. KITE was probably similar to the KKV on ERIS.

NMaude said:
According to the wikipedia article ERIS was a precursor for both the THAAD and GBI interceptors.
Click to expand...
The general KKV technology tested with KITE and ERIS was probably a precursor to US KKVs in general regardless of missile range. That would include THAAD, SM-3 IA/IB/IIA and GBI.
 
Forest Green said:
I think HEDI was tested with a conventional warhead before the HEDI KITE (KKV) test.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Israelis had access to the test data from this version of HEDI and applied it to their Arrow programme.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom