After several failed test shots and a seven-year flight hiatus, the Army’s Terminal High-Altitude Air Defense missile system (THAAD) hit a Hera target this morning over the White Sands range in New Mexico.
A Lockheed Martin press release expounds:
Specific test objectives included demonstrating the integration of the radar, launcher, fire control and communications and interceptor operations; demonstrating kill vehicle control in response to in-flight uplinks; and target acquisition and tracking by the interceptors seeker.
The entire THAAD team has been focused on proving THAADs ability to detect, track and engage a live target, said Tom McGrath, program manager and vice president for THAAD at Lockheed Martin.
This is the third successful THAAD developmental flight test conducted since flight testing resumed for the program in November 2005. A successful controlled flight test was conducted last year, followed by a successful integrated test of the entire THAAD system in May of 2006.
THAAD is expected to complement the PAC-3 (Patriot) interceptor in providing terminal-phase defense against short– and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. In other words, it might take out Scuds and maybe even Taepodongs, but don’t expect to knock down ICBMs. THAAD has a longer range and more energy than PAC-3, meaning it can hit targets much higher.
But don’t get too excited. Today’s test included just one non-maneuvering target with no decoys and no debris. So this was about as easy as a test can get. Now the $10-billion THAAD moves to a missile range off of Hawaii for several more test flights at longer and shorter ranges. Hopefully some of these tests will be more realistic.
If all goes well, THAAD will be operational in “a few years”, according to McGrath.
Read more at Military.com.
–David Axe
UPDATE 4:37 PM: “MDA’s accomplishment today is a real one,” adds Victoria Samson, the resident missile guru at the Center for Defense Information — and a frequent critic of the missile defense program.
THAAD was the first missile defense system to be called a “rush to failure” (but apparently not the last one to earn that moniker). THAAD has been reorganized, revamped, and basically renewed. However, today’s test intercept is just one step among many — THAAD has a long way to go before it has proven itself to be reliable and worthy of ramping up production and deployment.
Also, note that an intercept was officially not the primary objective — seeker characterization of the target was. This could be seen as MDA trying to walk before it can run — a good thing. Or it can be what we’re seeing in the GMD program: an attempt to downplay expectations so that any news is good news.
Good Morning David,
You forgot to mention David, did the Hera target missile have it’s usual homing devive in it?
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
It’s just a matter of time before any accurate information about these test results will be unobtainable. Would you want the enemy knowing the limits of your homeleand defense mechanism? Who knows, the cover-ups may have already begun. Not that I have a problem with that…as long as money for that project is being spent on THAT project.
Byron, those homing devices were utilized because there was no radar integrated with the system. This test involved radar, so there was no homing device.
“THAAD is expected to complement the PAC-3 (Patriot) interceptor in providing terminal-phase defense against short– and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. In other words, it might take out Scuds and maybe even Taepodongs, but don’t expect to knock down ICBMs.“
WHAT? The THAAD has been designed to knock down ICBMs, the only reason shorter range missile are discussed is that the MILITARY requirement for missile defense is against these short/medium range missiles and not ICBMs. Defense against ICBMs is a more controversial political subject.
I would like to know how an ICBM is somehow so different a target than a medium range ballistic missile? They both do the same things, once just goes farther. The THAAD was never designed to stop an all-out cold war style nuclear attack, it was designed to provide missile defense against the “rouge nations”, the nations who are only capable of firing a limited number of single warhead missiles.
I am glad that THAAD was not killed in its crib as many so-called “experts” have wanted. Same with the Osprey. Yet time and time again the so-called (anti) defense experts are proven wrong.
“I would like to know how an ICBM is somehow so different a target than a medium range ballistic missile? They both do the same things, once just goes farther.“
And higher. Higher = greater reentry speed. In the order of 6 km/s (Mach 17) for ICBMs. Add full scale decoys, chaff, multiple warheads, etc. and it’s like trying to hit a needle in a haystack with another needle while the haystack is speeding towards you at 17 times the speed of sound.
The movie “Spys like us” deals with the real Star Wars. So big deal, if North Korea launches a few large missiles at Japan as long as no Americans are hurt so what? We still owe Japan for our WW2 POWs and for Unit 731 in China and the Bataan Death March and my TV/VCR Combo that went bad in less then a year! Saki it up Tokyo, kind of feels like Pearl Harbor don’t it? You no likey huh?
if THADD is acousin to Patriot we all might as well dig our holes a littel deeper. Patriot could not get out the tube consistely,or go where it was to go. why should we trust THADD?
Oh, and regarding “finally”: THAAD hit twice back in 1998, after which they decided to move on to the objective system design.
Correction: THAAD hit twice in 1999. Odd that I should have forgotten, given that I observed the second one.
Wrong again people! “The Patriot Act” is the best ABM defense there is. I have been living under it for years and no Missiles have hit me yet!True story!
Defence contracts — nice work if you can get it!