Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Afghan Update
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Around the Globe
Av Week Extra
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Body Armor Blues
Bomb Squad
Brownshoes in Action
Bubbleheads, etc.
Cammo Green
Catch the "Buzz"
Chem-Bio
Civilian Apps
Cloak and Dagger
Commandos
Comms
Contingency Ops
Cops and Robbers
Cyber-warfare
Data Diving
Defense Tech Poll
Dissent Tech
Door Kickers
Drones
DT Administrivia
Eat DT's Dust
Extra! Extra!
Eye on China
Fast Movers
FCS Watch
Fire for Effect
FOS Files
Friday Funnies
Gadgets and Gear
Going Green
Grand Ole Osprey
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
In the Weeds with Eric
Info War
Iraq Diary
Jarhead Jazz
JSF Watch
Just War Theories
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
M4 Monopoly
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Most Wanted
MRAP Edge
Net-Centric
Nukes
Old Skool
Our Shrinking Planet
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Politricks
Polmar's Perspective
Popular Mechanics
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Robots
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Snipertech
Space
Special Ops
Star Wars
Strategery
Stray Trons
Tactical Development
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
The Defense Biz
The Peoples' Site
The Sunday Paper
The Tanker Tango
The View from Av Week
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
Trimble on the Case
Video Lounge
War Update
Ward'z Wonderz
You can run...

See all Archives
Newsletters

Edited by Christian Lowe | Contact

Getting testy

Intercept1_T.jpgBack in the mid-1990s, the Clinton Pentagon pursued a missile defense strategy that emphasized short-range or "theater" defensive systems much more than the national shield commonly known as "Star Wars." Theater systems, like the Patriot, are used to defend troops on the battlefield, cities and other targets. The much-debated performance of the Patriot system in the first Iraq war led to a push for more robust technologies like the Theater High Altitude Area Defense system, which began a series of flight tests beginning in 1995.

I covered missile defense pretty closely in those days, and I was often able to get THAAD test results before they were announced. My colleagues would eagerly await the news, but because the results were usually the same, I'd try to spice up the delivery: I'd ask one fellow scribe to pick up a pen and throw it in my direction; then I'd throw my pen at his. And, naturally, I'd miss. (Try it sometime; it's fun.)

THAAD had a lot of high-profile misses back then -- enough to put the program in serious jeopardy. It also became a kind of touchstone for general criticism of missile defense.

But after a couple of hits in 1999, the Pentagon essentially declared victory and put the program into its next phase, where the missile was basically redesigned. Not much has been heard since.

Now, though, THAAD -- renamed the "Terminal" High Altitude Area Defense system -- is on the cusp of returning to the test range for real-live intercept attempts.

This week, the Missile Defense Agency released a statement touting the success of a recent test involving only the THAAD radar and two target missiles -- no actual THAAD missile, no intercept attempt. (The test itself was held back in June -- MDA is not usually forthcoming about its test results, even when they're good.) MDA called it a "confidence-building milestone" on the way to intercept tests later this year.

The more interesting THAAD development in recent months, however, was the revelation (reported in May by Jason Sherman and yours truly of InsideDefense.com) that the Pentagon was mulling the use of advanced Patriot missiles, or THAADs, on fighter aircraft.

A Navy and Missile Defense Agency study of missile defense options includes a new, unorthodox alternative with ramifications beyond the Navy -- equipping fighter aircraft with interceptors like the most advanced version of the Patriot. “MDA is investigating launching various missiles off of aircraft, including THAAD and PAC-3,” said an industry source. Those missiles could be assisted by organic fighter radars or the Aegis radar in shooting down ballistic or cruise missiles, according to sources and Navy briefing charts describing the assessment. “In theory,” the source said, “you could put two THAADs on an F-15.”

THERE'S MORE: The AP broke some news on the status of the national missile defense testing program this week.

-- posted by Dan Dupont

Comments

My question is...what aren't they trying to mount on AWACS or Tankers? Communication nodes, missile defense, UAV controls, Airborne lasers...and the list goes on...(coffee service?)

By the time they figure out how many ornaments they want to hang on that platform, the platform will be out of service...

Posted by: Kat at July 13, 2005 08:04 AM


One thought. Why don't we mount the new AWACS (E-10) radar on a stretched cargo second deck 747. The second deck would house the operators.

The lower deck would house a couple 10 megawatt power modules & fuel. The aircraft would have a front turret mounted solid state laser with an final strenth in the single megawatt range.

In addition the lower cargo bay could house two Standard missile Pac 3 missle bays. 10 missiles per bay for a total 20 missiles.

The Stardard missile Pac3 already can be guided by the AWACS radar.

Posted by: James at July 13, 2005 02:18 AM


Post a comment




Remember Me?


Please enter the code as seen in the image below to post your comment.