Skunk Works Mailing List
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 07:38:22 -0700 From: patrickSubject: RE: skunk-works-digest V8 #66 (THAAD Test) At 04:22 AM 6/21/99 GMT, I wrote: >> >> If they wanted to keep the missile within a box (the airspace over WSMR) >> and they knew the fuel to be superfluous why not load it with a "test" load >> rather than the full amount and the TEMS system to burn it off after >> ignition? >> >Art chipped in: > > Because then the missile would not perform as a "regular" missile would. It >would be non-representative in performance. It would be like using the >performance of the 1970s Streak Eagle as a basis for planning regular F-15 >tactics. > > Having the target coming in on a known course is not an invalid measure. For >BMD to work, it is assumed that there is a good track on the incoming prior to >interceptor launch. To stage a full-blown, no holds barred test of the system >would require doing it out of CONUS. It would be hideously expensive, would >require systems that have not yet been finalized and at this stage of the game >would be premature. I would agree, though, that such a test should be conducted >before full-scale production would be authorized. > =-=-==-=-=-=-=--=- My point is this was an attenuated flight test. I believe THAAD is required to protect from a missile with a range of 800 miles. This was a test of an interecept done at far less than that, under 100 miles. Since this is nowhere near real time then to not test on a full scale range seems foolish. Despite the costs involved. It seems we should be able to place the THAAD on Kawajelin Island and fire the HERA from a ship or submarine modified for this purpose. On the other hand the test team "needed" this kill to keep their spirits and momentum up! patrick
|
Created: Mon Jun 21 10:50:13 EDT 1999