Would this be a new launch-booster or the modification of an existing in production design?
It wouldn't be Aster as the 15's booster is 1.6m long, or VL-SeaWolfs. Presumably it would be a new design.
The papers authors were from Bayern Chemie and MBDA. Presumably they chose that total length (roughly 4.8m for Missile and Booster) for a specific application. Germany was looking at MEADS at the time, but the interceptor was the PAC-3 MSE (along with IRIS-T SL). Were they studying Meteor as a potential missile alongside PAC-3? But PAC-3 wis 5.2-5.3m long, so why would they not use that additional space for a longer booster? Or is m.1.6 the ideal speed for handover to the integral booster to get it to m2.5 and ramjet function?
I suspect that M=1.6 was the ideal speed for handover.The papers authors were from Bayern Chemie and MBDA. Presumably they chose that total length (roughly 4.8m for Missile and Booster) for a specific application. Germany was looking at MEADS at the time, but the interceptor was the PAC-3 MSE (along with IRIS-T SL). Were they studying Meteor as a potential missile alongside PAC-3? But PAC-3 wis 5.2-5.3m long, so why would they not use that additional space for a longer booster? Or is m.1.6 the ideal speed for handover to the integral booster to get it to m2.5 and ramjet function?