US increases spending on missile defense

Provider weapons Pentagon’s 1 No., Lockheed Martin, received a bonus: its contract with the military to develop and support elements of the THAAD PRO system was increased by 830 million dollars.

The change in the terms of the contract was announced last Thursday, when the Ministry of Defense reported that the amount of the agreement increased from $ 1,5 billion to $ 2,3 billion.

Modification of the contract provides for the possibility of additional phased development, a program of flight and ground tests, as well as adaptive support for the requirements of the missile defense system throughout its life cycle.

THAAD is a ground-based mobile missile defense system designed for high-altitude over-atmospheric interception of medium-range missiles. The deployed potential is to intercept ballistic missiles inside or outside the atmosphere at the final stage of flight. The system uses the so-called method. “Kinetic interception”, there is no dedicated warhead in the rocket. It is believed that THAAD is more effective than the Patriot complex in work against a number of past-generation ballistic missiles, such as the P-17.

Each THAAD system consists of five main components: interceptor missiles, launchers, radar, fire control unit and auxiliary equipment. The development of the complex was launched in 1992 year, in October 2018 year, it was announced the release of 300 interceptors.

THAAD is operated by the Missile Defense Agency; Lockheed Martin serves as the main contractor and system integrator.

In 2018, Saudi Arabia announced the acquisition of THAAD 7 batteries for 13,5 billion dollars. Delivery is scheduled for 2023-2026.

Comments

[Well done]

Why are the "partners" bustling about ?! Are zircons bothering you?

[tatarin_ru]

Do zircons bother you?

This is the usual military support fee for the president. In striped only that way. Budgets by the way saw there no worse than ours. It even seems to me that the children of our officials in England and Harvard are learning exactly that.

[Simferopol]

Quote: tatarin_ru

Budgets by the way saw there no worse than ours.

It is in the military sphere that corruption in the Russian Federation is much lower than in the United States. In other areas, yes, corruption is spread much higher here. But in the military commissar, everything is exactly the opposite

[tatarin_ru]

That is why the only thing we sell abroad and produce (other than natural resources) is military products.
I meant more that if the stripes planned to swell money, but there is no need anymore, they swell. This, incidentally, is not the only, useless and expensive thing in American projects. Corruption I don’t think ...

[Egorovich]

It is too late to flutter when the arms and legs are tied and the body is in the water. It is impossible to destroy the "Vanguard" with this TNAAD missile defense system, from the word at all .. Another sawing off of money and blurring the eyes.

[Errr]

If I understand you correctly, has the Pentagon already formed a product for coating the eyes? ;-)

[Simferopol]

Quote: Welldone

Why are the "partners" bustling about ?! Are zircons bothering you? winked

THAAD Useless Against Zircon

[Teberii]

A good shabbok is obtained, with rather dubious results. Let's see what can be fixed and finalized.

[bang bang]

screams that the mattresses are lagging behind Russia in all respects, this is knocking out additional funds ..... compare the World Bank of Russia and the United States, and coupled with their outskirts in the west ...... it turns out my five slingshot slingshot of a small slingshot ( such a slingshot)

[Tuzik]

"The system uses the method of the so-called" kinetic interception ", the missile has no dedicated warhead"
I do not understand, did not have enough money for the warhead? or is ram more effective?

[Stils]

Warhead is the extra weight I think.

[Tuzik]

This is understandable, it is not clear why he is not here.

[Orkraider]

Under ideal conditions, hit-to-kill is good because it allows for the implementation of a smaller missile defense, removing the need for warheads. Less weight - smaller sizes. But personally to me, our school of rocket science is sweeter, which says: the lack of accuracy is compensated by the power and quality of warheads and its striking elements
Well, our accuracy is also growing, as a result, the effectiveness of the guaranteed defeat is higher.

[Tuzik]

So I want to understand their logic, smaller is saving money or increasing some important parameters such as altitude and range. But is that percentage of growth more important than the probability of failure?

[Tusv]

Quote: Tuzik

So I want to understand their logic, smaller is saving money or increasing some important parameters such as altitude and range.

The Americans tried an anti-missile defense with OBCH. It turned out that the power of the explosion and the striking element was not enough to destroy the warhead. Here either YABCH, as in our Cupids, or in the forehead with kinetics

[Tuzik]

And what is the likelihood of knocking them in the forehead with kinetics?

[Tusv]

You won’t believe it. Not one of ours was shot down. Joke. Americans say 100%. They keep silence about the consumption of anti-missiles. And their target missiles are not quasibalistic

[Tuzik]

Oh. Thank you, I caught their logic, letting a dozen easier and cheaper, against one goal.

[AAK]

Everything is simpler, the oncoming sum of the speeds of the warhead and the striking part of the anti-missile is from 7 to 10 km / sec., The mass is at least several tens, or even hundreds of kilograms for each side. Next is physics, the calculation of momentum, as a result, with a collision, so much energy is released that even 100kg. Warhead is a baby laugh on the lawn

[Tuzik]

So what is the accuracy of such a hit?

[AAK]

on training launches (well, in combat use it is implied ..) - head-on

[mvg]

personally to me, our school of rocket science is sweeter, which says: the lack of accuracy is compensated by the power and quality of warheads

Yes, we just could not "burn down" the hit-to-kill anti-missile, well, it didn't work. And they wanted to make it for Vityaz.

[jonht]

A successful direct interception, ours still took place in 1961 or 1963 at the Shary-Sagal training ground in Kazakhstan. But the calculations showed a rather low probability of a successful interception, since there is a need to take into account many different factors. And as a result, we use directional charges with striking elements, which gives a guaranteed defeat of 2 missiles.

[mvg]

use directional charges with striking elements, which gives a guaranteed defeat of 2 missiles

And, as practice in Iraq shows, BRs still fall on their heads, affected or not affected. The United States also has interceptors with warheads, those in Alaska, for example. But a direct hit is more profitable. They (the Americans) used to start developing missile defense, and now they are leaders in this. Not really stupid, admittedly.

gives guaranteed defeat with 2 missiles

There is nothing guaranteed. Moreover, the practice in Syria was supposed to show you this. Well, about the case, with the drowning of MRK Muson in the exercises, more than indicative. And all this in greenhouse conditions and a safety net.
PS: So far, I see that missiles outperform missile defense.

[jonht]

Let's just say that the Americans also conducted all their missile defense tests in greenhouse conditions. And from the same mathematics a chance to miss with a direct hit is more likely. In general, the shape, size of the striking elements and their material are also of great importance.

[Simferopol]

It’s good - the faster the States go bankrupt, the better

[AlexG83]

Quote: Simferopol

It’s good - the faster the States go bankrupt, the better

Go broke? Squeezing money around the world, there’s the last example of Venezuela.

[Simferopol]

Nothing happened in Venezuela. Venezuela will be the last nail in the lid of the coffin of P. Endostan

[flicker]

US increases spending on missile defense

That's right, you need to have time to saw it before the yuan replaces the dollar.
Otherwise, then you will have to ask China for a missile defense ... and this is somehow not comme il faut.

[bmv04636]

They wouldn’t have to develop missile defense, but raise their air defense at least to the Chinese level

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

They wouldn’t have to develop missile defense, but raise their air defense at least to the Chinese level

What for? They are well aware that no one is going to attack them, they are attacking, and therefore they are developing the means of attack.

[bmv04636]

Well, how to say as I would say "officer's daughter" is not so simple.

[Old26]

Quote: Welldone

Why are the "partners" bustling about ?! Are zircons bothering you?

And what is common between the TCAAD system, which begins to work exclusively on ballistics from heights of 50-60 km and above, and a cruise missile with a marching height of 40 km ??? Maybe you need to think first, and then write ???

Quote: Egorovich

It is too late to flutter when the arms and legs are tied and the body is in the water. It is impossible to destroy the "Vanguard" with this TNAAD missile defense system, from the word at all .. Another sawing off of money and blurring the eyes.

Do the Americans have only one opponent? Russia? Or is there someone else who doesn't even have Vanguard? They also sell this missile defense system to their allies ... so this is not sawing and not blurring the eyes. Just under the next round of statements, the Americans have a good reason to knock out the next amount

Quote: Tuzik

This is understandable, it is not clear why he is not here.

Is this the first time you hear such a term - "kinetic interception"? This is a modern direction, which we are also starting to develop. The S-500 is also planned to have a "kinetic interceptor"

[meandr51]

Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan

What for? They are well aware that no one is going to attack them, they are attacking, and therefore they are developing the means of attack.

On this and burn. Sooner or later they will find out that their patent for deceit is expired.