Posted on 04/06/2007 8:55:11 AM PDT by RDTF
Lieutenant General Henry “Trey” Obering, Missile Defense Agency director, announced today the completion of a successful intercept test for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) ballistic missile defense element at the Pacific Missile Range Facility off the island of Kauai in Hawaii. This test involved the successful intercept of a “mid endo-atmospheric” (inside earth’s atmosphere) unitary (non-separating) target representing a “SCUD”-type ballistic missile launched from a mobile platform positioned off Kauai in the Pacific Ocean. The interceptor was launched from the THAAD launch complex at the Pacific Missile Range Facility. This was the 26th successful “hit to kill” intercept for elements of the Ballistic Missile Defense System since 2001, and the third successful THAAD intercept in the current program phase. The target missile was launched at approximately 8:42 p.m. Hawaii Time, April 5 (2:42 a.m. EDT April 6). Approximately three minutes later the THAAD interceptor missile was launched and approximately two minutes later the intercept occurred over the Pacific Ocean. Soldiers of the U.S. Army’s 6th Air Defense Artillery Brigade stationed at Fort Bliss, Texas operated all THAAD equipment during the test, conducting operations of the launcher, fire control and communications and radar. Their interaction with the complete THAAD system provided valuable test and operations experience for the soldiers and enhanced the operational realism of the test. This was the first THAAD interceptor mission that was considered a Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) test, meaning that more than one element of the BMDS participated in the test. One of the objectives of this test was demonstrating successful beyond-line-of-sight communications with a radar aboard a U.S. Navy Aegis ship, as well as communications links with the Command, Control, Battle Management and Communications (C2BMC) system and the U.S. Air Force Space-Based Infrared Sensors (SBIRS) system.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at mda.mil ...
Shhhh! You might disturb the smug complacency of the Libs about how SDI can’t work!!
How strange their silence, isn't it?
article says it is the 26th successful ‘hit to kill’ since 2001.
Somewhere Ronald Reagan is smiling.
“course now that NORADs favorite mountain is to be mothballed......
Who will hear that wonderful “(warble warble warble) Launch warning Launch Warning” going to the ever exciting “Launch confirmed, launch confirmed” Maybe we'll get lucky and get a THADD unit here.
Well Honolulu defined does mean “sheltered harbor” looks like that is living up to its meaning.
Keep in mind that this is an ongoing program that has come a long way since the 1980’s and still has some ways to go. This latest test appears to be not so much a test of the interceptor technology (which is already known to work) but rather a test of the militray’s communication, command and control of the situation. An Army team in Texas, using real time data from a Navy ship in the Pacific, launched a missile from Hawaii that destroyed another incoming missile. That interceptor launch site could have easily been in Greece, Japan or Alaska.
The thing is,, we need enough of these to shoot down waves of thousands of missiles. Whenever a representation of an attack is shown, it is always of a few missiles. What would happen should they lob hundreds hour after hour. I never bought into this “first strike” thing. We need millions of these interceptors all over our nation.
Actually, they don’t WANT it to work -
because it would be “unfair” for America to have this advantage over her enemies.
The Wright bros didn’t try to load a couple of hundred people for a trans-Atlantic flight while they were testing their powered glider either.
Since Reagan’s build-up in the mid-80’s, the newer weapon systems generally do work, do work well, and are rapidly implemented sometimes directly from civilian ideas right to the troops in only a few months.
By the way, when I worked on the THAAD missile radar and THEL lasers in 3D CAD systems, it was the Theater High Altitude Air Defense. Not sure where the “Terminal” abbreviation came from in this article.
Not really true: IF (big IF) Russia were shooting thousands of missiles at us, yes we would need (incoming missiles + 1) counter missiles.
But, North Korea has only a handful of long range missiles, and none are successfully tested. Yet. Only 2-6 nuclear weapons - and they would come from a very limited area under most reasonable circumstances.
So only one counter battery CAN remove most of the threat. Which is better than the democrats tactic: Surrender immediately because WE can’t be trusted with NAY defensive weapon, while THEY can be trusted NOT to develop ANY offensive weapon.
ONE counter battery means that NK needs
Engagements were redifined as “boost”, “mid-course”, or “terminal”.
good news.
but I do worry about losing it all to Chinense espionage. Our government’s lax attitude seems like a technology giveaway program to me.
The AIM-9 Sidewinder had most of the MiG kills in Vietnam; the AIM-7 Sparrow -- which was Radar homing -- had only about 2 kills in over a couple of hundred shots. There were very few gun kills in Vietnam. Even the USN's vaunted F8U Crusader (known as the last of the 'gunfighters') scored the vast majority of it's kills with the Sidewinder.
You're right, though. Test percentages need to be heavily discounted. A missile with a 90% reliability in test may only have a 20-25% kill rate in combat (and I think I'm being overly generous with that estimate).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.