Author Topic: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted  (Read 12703 times)

Offline Torlek

  • Member
  • Posts: 20
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #20 on: 10/07/2011 11:22 PM »
Well inside the nuke there is some active material - plutonium? Will it burn or will salt the ground bellow?
burn up on re-entry.
These intercepts are not re-entry tests, just ballistic.   Also, the interceptors do not appear large enough to reach the altitude before re-entry.
THAAD is capable of exo-atmospheric intercepts and we have conducted them in the past. Don't know if I can say whether this one was or not.

Interesting. The THAADs appear to have been launched from the same truck, at least
10 s apart (but probably much more as there was an edit in the video).
Presumably the two targets were launched from two different platforms? They have been using the ship launch (MLP) and the C-17 air launch platform, AFAIK
they only have one of each and I don't know if the MLP can do two launches at once.
I don't think they have any land based pads they can use except at Kauai itself
which would be a bit *too* short-range :-).

edit: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-05/lockheed-s-thaad-missile-defense-hits-two-targets-in-test.html reports indeed that the first target was air-launched and the second one sea-launched. No reports I can see of how close together the launches were.

The launches were a few minutes apart. The air-dropped target was longer range than the one launched from the MLP.

I watched this one from the airstrip at PMRF. We were able to see both intercepts from the ground which surprised all of us. We were figuring they would be too faint to be visible. It was awesome to finally see hardware performance that validates the simulations I work on. Being paid to go to Kaua'i for a week was also a perk.

Offline ChileVerde

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1176
  • La frontera
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #21 on: 10/09/2011 01:45 PM »

The launches were a few minutes apart. The air-dropped target was longer range than the one launched from the MLP.

So were both interceptors and/or targets in the air at the same time? IOW, was this actually a simultaneous engagement of two targets as you'd have if the attacker were to salvo launch his missiles, or just two closely-spaced individual engagements?

Also, where was the AN/TPY-2 engagement radar?
"I canít tell you which asteroid, but there will be one in 2025," Bolden asserted.

Offline Torlek

  • Member
  • Posts: 20
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #22 on: 10/09/2011 07:49 PM »
It was a salvo engagement. I can't talk about the interceptor spacing beyond the fact it was "simultaneous" though.

TPY-2 is located on the PMRF facility but not co-located with the launcher. Can't get any more specific than that.

Offline ChileVerde

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1176
  • La frontera
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #23 on: 10/10/2011 03:05 PM »
It was a salvo engagement. I can't talk about the interceptor spacing beyond the fact it was "simultaneous" though.

TPY-2 is located on the PMRF facility but not co-located with the launcher. Can't get any more specific than that.

OK, thank you for the reply.
"I canít tell you which asteroid, but there will be one in 2025," Bolden asserted.

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9162
  • Delta-t is the salient metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 610
  • Likes Given: 314
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #24 on: 10/11/2011 01:20 PM »
If you were in a tank hit by a sabot round with a DU penetrator AND you had your head in at the point of penetration AND you deeply inhaled before it took your head off, you would suffer the amount of radiation you get from a radium wristwatch in a year.  ...

Well, that doesn't sound so bad, does it?
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #25 on: 10/11/2011 02:01 PM »
If you were in a tank hit by a sabot round with a DU penetrator AND you had your head in at the point of penetration AND you deeply inhaled before it took your head off, you would suffer the amount of radiation you get from a radium wristwatch in a year.  ...

Well, that doesn't sound so bad, does it?

I don't know how much of that "deep breath" actually gets into your lungs before the shell takes your head off.

I thought they were trying to associate some of the "Gulf War Syndrome" cases to exposure to DU, but I guess I wasn't following it that closely.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1026
  • Likes Given: 235
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #26 on: 10/11/2011 02:57 PM »
Correct me if I am wrong, but the THAAD system is not capable of shooting down an artillery round, talking about a capability it is not designed or used for is off topic?

This isn't the Israeli Iron dome system...
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27023
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6914
  • Likes Given: 4878
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #27 on: 10/11/2011 03:18 PM »
Correct me if I am wrong, but the THAAD system is not capable of shooting down an artillery round, talking about a capability it is not designed or used for is off topic?

This isn't the Israeli Iron dome system...
DU is generally used in small kinetic energy rounds (fired maybe 100 at a time from a Gatling gun), not ever used in the sort of singular, large explosive rounds that an interceptor generally can defeat. Yes, it's completely off-topic.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline iamlucky13

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1660
  • Liked: 102
  • Likes Given: 93
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #28 on: 10/11/2011 06:04 PM »
Correct me if I am wrong, but the THAAD system is not capable of shooting down an artillery round, talking about a capability it is not designed or used for is off topic?

This isn't the Israeli Iron dome system...

It's never been tested for it, but I honestly would not be surprised if the system could track and with some consistency make contact with an artillery round sized target. However, THAAD is probably too long-range to actually hit an artillery round...it would likely reach the target before the booster had burned out and separated and not be able to maneuver.

To reduce the minimum engagement range (while still having a sizable maximum range), THAAD actually flies a corkscrew during the boost phase for some intercepts to use up excess energy. Wikipedia has a picture of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THAAD#Production_and_deployment

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1026
  • Likes Given: 235
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #29 on: 10/11/2011 06:06 PM »
I was actually surprised to not see the corkscrew in the mda video of the Oct 5th test.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Torlek

  • Member
  • Posts: 20
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #30 on: 10/12/2011 02:22 AM »
Correct me if I am wrong, but the THAAD system is not capable of shooting down an artillery round, talking about a capability it is not designed or used for is off topic?

This isn't the Israeli Iron dome system...

It's never been tested for it, but I honestly would not be surprised if the system could track and with some consistency make contact with an artillery round sized target. However, THAAD is probably too long-range to actually hit an artillery round...it would likely reach the target before the booster had burned out and separated and not be able to maneuver.

To reduce the minimum engagement range (while still having a sizable maximum range), THAAD actually flies a corkscrew during the boost phase for some intercepts to use up excess energy. Wikipedia has a picture of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THAAD#Production_and_deployment

The corkscrew maneuver was purely an energy management maneuver to limit the range of the interceptor. They engineered it when we were testing at White Sands and we had to worry about debris landing in populated areas. Now that we're at Barking Sands we shoot over the ocean so there's no need for that maneuver.

And, no, THAAD couldn't engage artillery rounds even if we wanted to. Our sensor isn't configured for it. Our interceptor isn't configured for it. THAAD is supposed to deploy a fair way behind the front lines. It's original name was Theater High Altitude Area Defense. THAAD's not point defense, that's PAC3's job.
« Last Edit: 10/12/2011 02:28 AM by Torlek »

Offline jcm

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2802
  • Jonathan McDowell
  • Somerville, Massachusetts, USA
    • Jonathan's Space Report
  • Liked: 338
  • Likes Given: 293
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #31 on: 10/12/2011 01:30 PM »
Well inside the nuke there is some active material - plutonium? Will it burn or will salt the ground bellow?
burn up on re-entry.
These intercepts are not re-entry tests, just ballistic.   Also, the interceptors do not appear large enough to reach the altitude before re-entry.
THAAD is capable of exo-atmospheric intercepts and we have conducted them in the past. Don't know if I can say whether this one was or not.

Interesting. The THAADs appear to have been launched from the same truck, at least
10 s apart (but probably much more as there was an edit in the video).
Presumably the two targets were launched from two different platforms? They have been using the ship launch (MLP) and the C-17 air launch platform, AFAIK
they only have one of each and I don't know if the MLP can do two launches at once.
I don't think they have any land based pads they can use except at Kauai itself
which would be a bit *too* short-range :-).

edit: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-05/lockheed-s-thaad-missile-defense-hits-two-targets-in-test.html reports indeed that the first target was air-launched and the second one sea-launched. No reports I can see of how close together the launches were.

The launches were a few minutes apart. The air-dropped target was longer range than the one launched from the MLP.

I watched this one from the airstrip at PMRF. We were able to see both intercepts from the ground which surprised all of us. We were figuring they would be too faint to be visible. It was awesome to finally see hardware performance that validates the simulations I work on. Being paid to go to Kaua'i for a week was also a perk.


Thanks for sharing what you can.
-----------------------------

Jonathan McDowell
http://planet4589.org

Offline jcm

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2802
  • Jonathan McDowell
  • Somerville, Massachusetts, USA
    • Jonathan's Space Report
  • Liked: 338
  • Likes Given: 293
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #32 on: 10/12/2011 01:32 PM »
Well inside the nuke there is some active material - plutonium? Will it burn or will salt the ground bellow?
burn up on re-entry.
These intercepts are not re-entry tests, just ballistic.   Also, the interceptors do not appear large enough to reach the altitude before re-entry.
THAAD is capable of exo-atmospheric intercepts and we have conducted them in the past. Don't know if I can say whether this one was or not.

Interesting. The THAADs appear to have been launched from the same truck, at least
10 s apart (but probably much more as there was an edit in the video).
Presumably the two targets were launched from two different platforms? They have been using the ship launch (MLP) and the C-17 air launch platform, AFAIK
they only have one of each and I don't know if the MLP can do two launches at once.
I don't think they have any land based pads they can use except at Kauai itself
which would be a bit *too* short-range :-).

edit: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-05/lockheed-s-thaad-missile-defense-hits-two-targets-in-test.html reports indeed that the first target was air-launched and the second one sea-launched. No reports I can see of how close together the launches were.

The launches were a few minutes apart. The air-dropped target was longer range than the one launched from the MLP.

I watched this one from the airstrip at PMRF. We were able to see both intercepts from the ground which surprised all of us. We were figuring they would be too faint to be visible. It was awesome to finally see hardware performance that validates the simulations I work on. Being paid to go to Kaua'i for a week was also a perk.


Thanks for sharing what you can.
As to the question of burnup on reentry, it's not just whether the intercept is
exoatmospheric, but the overall velocity. A lot of these tests would not be going fast enough for the sort of reentry heating you get on a long range missile.
-----------------------------

Jonathan McDowell
http://planet4589.org

Offline catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4652
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 1469
  • Likes Given: 899
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #33 on: 07/12/2017 03:58 AM »
bump....

THAAD System Shoots Down Target Over Alaska In First-of-its Kind Test

AiirSource Military
Published on Jul 11, 2017


The U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA), the Ballistic Missile Defense System Operational Test Agency, and U.S. Army soldiers of the 11th Air Defense Artillery Brigade from Fort Bliss, Texas, conducted an intercept test on July 11, 2017, of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) element of the nationís ballistic missile defense system.

A ballistic missile target was air-launched by a U.S. Air Force C-17 over the Pacific Ocean north of Hawaii. A THAAD weapon system located at PSCA in Kodiak, Alaska, detected, tracked and intercepted the target. The test, Flight Test THAAD-18 (FTT-18), was the first-ever of the THAAD system against an incoming IRBM target, or intermediate-range ballistic missile.

The successful demonstration of THAAD against an IRBM-range missile threat bolsters the countryís defensive capability against developing missile threats in North Korea and other countries around the globe and contributes to the broader strategic deterrence architecture.

AiirSource Military covers events and missions from the United States Armed Forces: Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xqezi-gsKQ?t=001

Tony De La Rosa

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1026
  • Likes Given: 235
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #34 on: 07/17/2017 04:26 PM »
Not to throw us off target, has Orbital released much information on the air launched targets? All I seem to be able to find is a decent video from May,


Just reminds me of the Air Launched Ballistic Missile program from the 1970's.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Online Hog

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1079
  • Woodstock
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 556
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #35 on: 07/22/2017 09:53 AM »
I didn't realize that this system has been deployed for almost a decade.
Here is some Wikipedia info about the system and where its being used.

Quick Wiki
"Sometimes called Kinetic Kill technology, the THAAD missile destroys missiles by colliding with them, using hit-to-kill technology, like the MIM-104 Patriot PAC-3 (although the PAC-3 also contains a small explosive warhead). This is unlike the Patriot PAC-2 which carried only an explosive warhead detonated using a proximity fuse. Although the actual figures are classified, THAAD missiles have an estimated range of 125 miles (200 km), and can reach an altitude of 93 miles (150 km). A THAAD battery consists of at least six launcher vehicles, each equipped with eight missiles, with two mobile tactical operations centers (TOCs) and the AN/TPY-2 ground-based radar (GBR); the U.S. Army plans to field at least six THAAD batteries,at a purchase cost of $800 million per battery. By September 2018 MDA plans to deliver 52 more interceptors to the Army."


Originally South korea said that they would not buy THAAD and that they wanted to develop their own ABM systems.

South Korea requests info abut ABM systems, THAAD and Israeli Arrow-3 systems
On 17 October 2013, the South Korean military asked the Pentagon to provide information on the THAAD system concerning prices and capabilities as part of efforts to strengthen defenses against North Korean ballistic missile. However, South Korea decided it will develop its own indigenous long-range surface-to-air missile instead of buying the THAAD. South Korean Defense Ministry officials previously requested information on the THAAD, as well as other missile interceptors like the Israeli Arrow 3, with the intention of researching systems for domestic technology development rather than for purchase.

China objects
In February 2016, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi expressed concerns that deployment of THAAD in South Korea, despite being directed at North Korea, could jeopardize China's "legitimate national security interests
The major controversy among Chinese officials is that they believe the purpose of the THAAD system, "which detects and intercepts incoming missiles at high altitudes, is actually to track missiles launched from China" not from North Korea Chinese nuclear experts report that China is focused on the positioning of another THAAD radar system, this one on the Korean peninsula, for gleaning details about China's nuclear weapons delivery systems, such as THAAD's ability to distinguish which missiles might be carrying decoy warheads

South Korea agrees that THAAD is required due to North Korea aggression
In July 2016, American and South Korean military officials agreed to deploy the THAAD missile defense system in the country to counter North Korea's growing threats and use of ballistic missile and nuclear tests; each THAAD unit consists of six truck-mounted launchers, 48 interceptors, a fire control and communications unit, and an AN/TPY-2 radar.

Local afraid of Emitter Radiation from THAAD RADAR
Seongju County in North Gyeongsang Province was chosen as the site to base the THAAD, partly because it is out of range of North Korean rocket artillery along the DMZ,which sparked protests from Seongju County residents from fear of the radiation emitted by the AN/TPY-2 radar. On 30 September 2016, the U.S. and South Korea announced that THAAD would be relocated to Lotte Skyhill Seongju Country Club, farther from the town's main residential areas and higher in elevation, to alleviate concerns.

THAAD is airlifted into South Korea, just hours after North Korea launches 4 missiles
On 6 March 2017, two THAAD launcher trucks arrived by air transport at Osan Air Base South Korea, for a deployment. Earlier that day, North Korea had launched 4 missiles. A Reuters article stated that with the THAAD defense system, a North Korean missile barrage would still pose a threat to South Korea, while an article in the International Journal of Space Politics & Policy said that South Korean forces already possess Patriot systems for point defense and Aegis destroyers capable of stopping ballistic missiles that may come from the north in a three-layer antimissile defense for South Korea. On 16 March 2017, a THAAD radar arrived in South Korea. The THAAD system is kept at Osan Air Base until the site where the system is due to be deployed is prepared, with an expected ready date of June 2017.Osan Air Base has blast-hardened command posts with 3 levels of blast doors

THAAD arrives at operational site, and goes operation in South Korea
By 25 April 2017, six trailers carrying the THAAD radar, interceptor launchers, communications, and support equipment entered the Seongju site. On 30 April 2017, it was reported that South Korea would bear the cost of the land and facilities for THAAD, while the US will pay for operating it. On 2 May 2017, Moon Sang-gyun, with the South Korean Defense Ministry and Col. Robert Manning III, a spokesman for the U.S. military announced that the THAAD system in Seongju is operational and "has the ability to intercept North Korean missiles and defend South Korea.
 It was reported that the system will not reach its full operational potential until later this year when additional elements of the system are onsite.In June 2017 South Korea decided to halt further deployment. The 35th Air Defense Artillery Brigade (United States) has integrated THAAD into its layered defense on the Korean Peninsula.

July 11th Test, Operators exposed to Simulated Combat Conditions
Even in the face of a North Korean ICBM test on 4 July 2017, which newly threatens Alaska, a Kodiak, Alaska-based THAAD interceptor test (FTT-18) against a simulated attack by an Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile had long been planned.FTT-18 was successfully completed by Battery A-2 THAAD (Battery A, 2nd Air Defense Artillery Regiment, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense)of the 11th Air Defense Artillery Brigade (United States) on 11 July 2017. The soldiers used the procedures of an actual combat scenario and were not aware of the IRBM's launch time.

Paul

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1026
  • Likes Given: 235
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #36 on: 07/24/2017 12:10 AM »
Just to tamp it down a little, the latest test is the first to actually intercept an IRBM class target. All other tests have been against shorter range targets. That said, THAAD is a bit of overkill for South Korea since North Korea would use shorter range missiles against it. Something the Patriot missiles are better suited for. A THAAD in Japan would make sense since the distance requires IRBM's.

Also worth noting that this spring is the first time the GDI system in Alaska and Vandenberg was tested a representitive ICBM class target. Again all previous tests had been against shorter range missiles.

Now for both to be truly effective the entire kill chain from launch detection to interceptmust be finished.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline RotoSequence

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 761
  • Liked: 561
  • Likes Given: 776
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #37 on: 07/24/2017 12:18 AM »
Just to tamp it down a little, the latest test is the first to actually intercept an IRBM class target. All other tests have been against shorter range targets. That said, THAAD is a bit of overkill for South Korea since North Korea would use shorter range missiles against it. Something the Patriot missiles are better suited for. A THAAD in Japan would make sense since the distance requires IRBM's.

Also worth noting that this spring is the first time the GDI system in Alaska and Vandenberg was tested a representitive ICBM class target. Again all previous tests had been against shorter range missiles.

Now for both to be truly effective the entire kill chain from launch detection to interceptmust be finished.

North Korea's long range ballistic missiles used in highly lofted trajectories are far more difficult to intercept with Patriots; that's the trajectory profile that THAAD was designed to counter, and the reason why it was deployed.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1026
  • Likes Given: 235
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #38 on: 07/24/2017 02:25 AM »
My problem with that, is why would North Korea use long range missiles against South Korea. They have plenty of short range missiles. To me, THAAD in Japan would make sense, but it just seems overkill and more to send a message.
« Last Edit: 07/24/2017 02:26 AM by kevin-rf »
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Online spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2150
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: THAAD Initial Operational Test and Evaluation Conducted
« Reply #39 on: 07/24/2017 11:45 AM »
Probably a bargaining chip.  We remove the THAAD system (to Japan) and N. Korea stops missile testing with pressure from China and Russia.  N. Korea would fail completely if not for trade with China.  China could force a government change in N. Korea if they wanted to.  I think China knows N. Korea is a thorn in the side of the westernized countries, and uses that as leverage.  THAAD could be put in Japan, Alaska, Wake Island, or Guam, even the west coast. 

Tags: