THAAD is operational

[GGTharos]

I was actually not aware of this - and it's a huge development in terms of SAM systems for NATO in general.

 

This SAM system is specifically geared towards shooting down short and medium range ballistic missiles, and it can do so at much longer ranges than PATRIOT.

 

Currently, line units are being fielded.

[mvsgas]

I saw this when I was station in New Mexico, that missile can reach very high.

Note the maneuver done during launch, to spend energy and prevent the missile form leaving the missile range

 

There was also a Satellite Shootdown show with the Standard SM3 missile but I can find it now.

Edited May 5, 2010 by mvsgas

[159th_Viper]

'Hit to Kill' is interesting......To rely on a Kinetic Energy Kill - Impressive Indeed!

[GGTharos]

Yep .. shoot down and bullet with a bullet. IIRC, some of that (in particular for SM-6 and PAC-3) comes from AMRAAM seeker technology (this is not to say AMRAAM can do this. Different purpose, different way of maneuvering on target, etc). Other interceptors use IR sensors.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gcy-sKQncbY ... 4:45.

[topol-m]

A strange choice of destroying a missile. Why did they chose to shoot at a sparrow with solid slug instead of small shot? The flight tests conducted so far look promising though.

[MoGas]

Yep .. shoot down and bullet with a bullet. IIRC, some of that (in particular for SM-6 and PAC-3) comes from AMRAAM seeker technology (this is not to say AMRAAM can do this. Different purpose, different way of maneuvering on target, etc). Other interceptors use IR sensors.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gcy-sKQncbY ... 4:45.

 

Those SLAMRAAM's are a nightmare LOL

[GGTharos]

topol: To ensure destruction of warhead/payload. It isn't said (That I know of) but if you look at some of the later SM-3 videos, you'll see the warhead being targeted.

 

The reason for this is that you can shoot the missile, but ballistic flight path will land it near its target anyway. If it's some sort of area weapon (nuclear, chemical) it can still land close enough to cause significant problems - if not for its intended target, maybe for one of your defensive/offensive positions.

 

This was the big deal with Patriot and the first gulf war: The missiles would hit the SCUDs, but the shrapnel from the warhead detonation failed to prevent those SCUDs from landing on or near their targets.

 

As a result, PATRIOT was upgraded with better suited fuze and guidance for this purpose, with the ultimate short-range interceptor being the PAC-3.

 

The THAAD is the ... I guess medium range interceptor.

 

Also, hit-to-kill means you simplify a very complex missile in some ways: Decoys can't blow your fuze, you can put in more fuel or tracking electronics since you have some space and weight savings by not having a warhead, etc etc.

[SFJackBauer]

A strange choice of destroying a missile. Why did they chose to shoot at a sparrow with solid slug instead of small shot? The flight tests conducted so far look promising though.

 

Probably because a solid slug can ensure the complete destruction of the target, while a proximity-fused explosion could leave some margin for survival.

 

EDIT: GG'ed :D

[topol-m]

 

Also, hit-to-kill means you simplify a very complex missile in some ways: Decoys can't blow your fuze, you can put in more fuel or tracking electronics since you have some space and weight savings by not having a warhead, etc etc.

 

 

Ok but isn`t this mode of attacking more succeptible to target maneuvering? I mean with a fuse you can allow yourself several meters of guidance mistake cause the explosion will destroy or at least severely damage the target, which by the way with the speed we are talking about will be enough for the target to break into pieces, but with direct hit strategy you can`t allow even cm close miss.

[GGTharos]

TBH I don't know. I'm fairly certain those weapons can hit maneuvering targets - up to a limit, I suppose. They use reaction thrust steering which makes them pretty accurate. The target probably can't maneuver with as much g, not with any intelligence (random maneuver only) nor can it know a weapon has been launched at it. Its maneuver fuel will also be limited, so the trick now is - how and when do you maneuver to avoid an incoming interceptor?

 

I know Russia has a maneuvering MRBM/SRBM, but I couldn't really venture to guess as to the capability of those interceptors against it. The defense is layered though ... at the end you have big PAC-2's and the smaller PAC-3 with warheads, and pretty much everything will be launched against those BM's in Salvos.

[topol-m]

I know Russia has a maneuvering MRBM/SRBM, but I couldn't really venture to guess as to the capability of those interceptors against it.

 

That`s what I had in mind.

 

The defense is layered though ... at the end you have big PAC-2's and the smaller PAC-3 with warheads, and pretty much everything will be launched against those BM's in Salvos.

 

Well that`s the way to do it it will be shotgun shots with solid slugs, then it will be a matter of how big the sparrow flock is :D Beautiful picture... "Fireworks in the skyyy..."

[GGTharos]

I don't know... even with a fuze, the closures are so huge that it just might not make a difference. NIKE used to use command-detonation in front of its target, but that was against aircraft, and the closure speed was half or 1/3rd of that which you have with a missile ...

Of course, back then CEP against incoming ballistic missile was 1km, so they put nuclear warheads on the interceptors :D

[Sov13t]

Let's hope it doesn't come to finding out if a Bulava missile can be successfully or unsuccessfully intercepted by one of these... won't be the brightest moment in mankind's history by far.

[Pilotasso]

Totaly pointless to start a speculation. These systems we are talking about are only usefull against 1 or very few ICBM launches from rogue states who cannot offord a top of the line ICBM anyway much less several. There is no technology in existence capable of defeating a wave of them. For current systems there are delays of response in communications, units have to be deployed in the right place in advance, slow response typical of rockets, etc etc.

 

Only way to efectively react to such a threat is to have someting in orbit totaly automated and capable of storing or generate enough juice to zap multiple targets in seconds. Not going to happen anytime soon. :)

Edited May 6, 2010 by Pilotasso

[ClearDark]

An American staffed THAAD station has been fully operational in Israel since October 2008.

 

It is linked in conjunction with the Arrow missile defense system. Just thought I'd give you heads up since this is somewhat old news :)

[GGTharos]

Yeah, obviously I have not kept up with the whole SAM thing :P