This article first appeared in AviationWeek.com.
Japan is considering adding the U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system as a third layer to its ballistic-missile defenses, according to an official leak evidently prompted by North Korea’s July 4 tests of R-17 and Rodong rockets.
Three or four installations of the Lockheed Martin THAAD system could cover all of Japan, says the Mainichi newspaper in an unattributed report presumed to be based on government-leaked information.
THAAD’s range is secret, but the Mainichi’s sources say it can reach “more than 100 kilometers (60 miles),” compared with about 20 km for the Lockheed Martin PAC-3 system that Japan currently uses as the second of its two defense layers. The first is based on Raytheon SM-3 missiles loaded on four Kongou-class destroyers fitted with the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system promulgated in the U.S. Navy.
North Korea tried a longer-ranged version of the old Soviet-era R-17 (Scud) missile on July 4, according to a South Korean report. The so-called Scud ER has a range of 1,000 km, enough to reach much of Japan, says the Chosun Ilbo newspaper, also close to government officials. That range is notably longer than the 750–800 km previously attributed to the Scud ER.
Three of the seven rockets that North Korea launched were Scud ERs, two were other R-17s and three were Rodongs, which are larger and longer-ranged than R-17s.
The importance of the 1,000-km range attributed to the Scud ER may be that such a rocket would be a much smaller and cheaper weapon with which to menace Japan than the Rodong would be. Most North Korean ballistic missiles are R-17 derivatives, reflecting their cheapness and the country’s familiarity with making them.
The launches violated U.N. Security Council resolutions.
They also showed greater accuracy, according to the South Korean defense ministry. “We are aware that accuracy has been improved,” says the ministry.
Previous launches had shown large errors, but “much improvement has been made this time in that regard,” the ministry says.
Read the rest of this story, see how the Air Force is getting better eyes in space, see if the Pentagon’s buying problems are ever going to get fixed and see if Brit engineering is all it’s cracked up to be from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.
– Christian
can it hit chinese bases in east-turkestan? if not its strategicaly and tacticaly useless weapon.
“can it hit chinese bases in east-turkestan? if not its strategicaly and tacticaly useless weapon.“
–Huh? I think they’re more worried about the North Koreans.
I think there kinda worried about both the chinese and japanese still dont realy get along. Especialy sence the chinese fund and shelter north korea.
fart, That was just a stupid comment you helped nothing.
No its usesless i mean who cares if those missiles can save millions of lives. That comment makes little sence.
Tell you what every man in theater should quit wearing body armor or helmets after all defense is useless.
Attention, everybody: “Valcan” wants only super-serene posters today.
Can U blame them when the NORKS fire missiles at your country every now & then.
I dont Blame them
Id send in some ABLs too.
Make a Japan the First All Missile Defense Nation.
Be a Real Test case for ABM & SDI
Mr. Flying fart,
Apparently, you have inhaled too much of your own gas.
A missile defense system is a defensive weapons platform, not an offensive one. Therefore, it will not be flying from Japan to east Turkestan. Instead, it will only be used to defend a particular area.
I really wish you guys would learn how to use spell check soon. I thought you had to at least receive a high school education to join the military?
@rnacquisitionq
@Valcan
i think you are the same trol.. aside i usualy do never read your comments.
@stephen russell
like i said if this defense cant reach and destroy the chinese bases (nuclear weapon and first-strike forces bases) in Tibet and East Turkestan it is useless unless… unless, you are japanese or american politican, who will make the career by ignoring the danger and using such “can defend everythig” laser/rocket/starwars-satellites/air-defense fantasy stories for excuse of own ignorance and waste of tax blillions.. see the Maginot line story.
“official leak” ? We call that a press conference.
Posted by: flying fart proudly joned at July 8, 2009 09:45 PM
No you have defensive and offensive weapons. WTF is the point of wining if you just say “ah F“it we dont need to protect our own shores.“
Plus these would be more for the norks not japanese. So while they arent talking about stopping a chinese mass attack they can at least stop a few missles from korea.
No you have defensive and offensive weapons.–
aaand?
–WTF is the point of wining if you just say “ah F“it we dont need to protect our own shores.”—
bullshit i never said that i said that this defense should be capable to strike back inclusive the last corner of the enemys friend and spender. so i said that japanese are to much conserned about the defense of own shore instead to instal the multi-areal and international defense networks together with S-koreans and others. so whats your point again?
To the poster “rnacquisitionq”:
You wrote: “A missile defense system is a defensive weapons platform, not an offensive one.“
On the 21st of February of 2008, a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) destroyed a defunct U.S. American espionage satellite. What was that, a test of the SM-3’s defensive capabilites (since the SM-3 is originally a Ballistic Missile “Defense” system, just like the T.H.A.A.D. too) or of its… offensive, anti-satellite capabilites?
As range (and that includes service ceiling) grows, where is the clear dividing line between the two capabilities?
If the Russians built a very very small diesel-electric submarine but that could travel several times around the Equator, would it still be a coastal “defense” submarine?
Mr. FF
Tu sulstus es
Fart,
As far as the Maginote Line is conserned yes i get the point fixed defense such for lack of a better word in many ways however. If they were to attack japane with a underwater nuke this would then be a huge AND I MEAN HUGE international incident. I mean kill a few people with bombs ok. Destroy cities OK. But dude your hurting mother gaia i mean come on.
But no realy as for the regional defense its like this. Say you have a person come into power in south korea who wants to make his name and end the threat from the north. Well the norks say that they want to see evidence of this change of heart so they say dismantle your defnese and well do the same to our nukes.
However the norks offer no such treaty to japan or japan doesnt believe them and want to keep theres.
Its all a matter of national security how can you make sure you wont get screwed by the person you depend on to help you? Same reason i dont like the idea of the US buying weapons overseas not to mention that it hurts our economy.
In my mind japan needs to get back to what they did undeniably well. Build up a powerful navy based around missile defense ships and maybe a few carriers hell we could build them for them.
Maybe work together on a missile defense crusier or a new destroyer.
If they were to attack japane with a underwater nuke this would then be a huge AND I MEAN HUGE international incident.–
well.. just in case but N-Koreans and others in this Area are a long, a very long time over this line. So noone cares about international incidents wich can be fixed by UN representatives there. its about the defense in a real war..
Build up a powerful navy based around missile defense ships and maybe a few carriers hell we could build them for them.–
ok.. let get my point right. i see the armed forces of the coutry being defensive and ofensive. defensive can be active and passive. that what japanese want to instal there will be no passive neither active defense. i will be the line where n-koreans and chinese will ask only how to smart it out. just like the a same with a same expensive maginot line and the idea behind.
i think japanese should start the “defense organisation” like NATO together with other countries inside of east asia (passive defense policy) and instal a system wich can not only get down n-koreans rockets but be usualy against chinese nuclear and strategical treath by striking in their homeland.
secoind point you completly misunderstand the japanese fleet development.
first of all japanese the second best fleet in the world. about carriers.. well, today cariers are shot time out of actualy sea warfare. today the multifunctional multi role and multimodular ships are the answer. and there japanese are leading at momment. (see their new helicopter destroyer)
Japan may deploy troops near disputed islands
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gzVZzik4iRCi8oGUaVGhU1ip3dzQ