Patriot SAM replacement

[bring_it_on]

We would be fine with a system that doesn't take 30-45 minutes to get going from an order to move.

 

[sferrin]

We would be fine with a system that doesn't take 30-45 minutes to get going from an order to move.

I would think the metric would be, "how long would it take an enemy striker to get here". If you're 20 minutes away from a Chinese IRBM. . .

 

[Forest Green]

True, but I thought the question was of a large land SAM that could fire on the move.

"What they really need, looking at Ukraine is a Patriot-like system that can fire whilst moving."

Using the FOO Fighters would evade the need for a ground radar on the move. I think that was my point.

 

[Scott Kenny]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1816207764542116238

View: https://x.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/1816207764542116238

Part of system:

Army taking wide-open approach to high-altitude platforms: SMDC chief - Breaking Defense

"I've always been a fan of balloons that can provide over the horizon support in a missile defense perspective," Lt. Gen. Sean Gainey, head of Army Space and Missile Defense Command, told the Hudson Institute today.

breakingdefense.com

I don't see how a missile of comparable range and altitudes will be much smaller than the SM6. The best they could do is add folding fins so a missile can fit into a ~15" box. And that's roughly THAAD sized.

 

[bring_it_on]

I don't see how a missile of comparable range and altitudes will be much smaller than the SM6. The best they could do is add folding fins so a missile can fit into a ~15" box. And that's roughly THAAD sized.

Comparable range against what target? LTFI is going to be optimized around defeating more complex and longer range TBM's and hypersonic threats and is seeking a missile that extends the BMD envelope over the PAC-3 MSE. Basically bridging the gap between the MSE and Talon and maximizing the capability of the LTAMD sensor. A lower tier interceptor designed around the Talon form factor will be a pretty big bump over MSE and you can still take the THAAD launcher (PLS) approach and field a sizable magazine. The Army has long wanted a new PATRIOT launcher (it was looked at in the AOA but deferred to later) and something like the PLS based THAAD launcher would be great for mobility, reduced manpower and faster reloads.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Comparable range against what target? LTFI is going to be optimized around defeating more complex and longer range TBM's and hypersonic threats and is seeking a missile that extends the BMD envelope over the PAC-3 MSE. Basically bridging the gap between the MSE and Talon and maximizing the capability of the LTAMD sensor. A lower tier interceptor designed around the Talon form factor will be a pretty big bump over MSE and you can still take the THAAD launcher (PLS) approach and field a sizable magazine. The Army has long wanted a new PATRIOT launcher (it was looked at in the AOA but deferred to later) and something like the PLS based THAAD launcher would be great for mobility, reduced manpower and faster reloads.

And I am comparing that to an SM6.

You're not going to get SM6 levels of range or performance out of a missile that is only 7" in diameter and 12' long.

 

[Forest Green]

Is range more important than quantity/cost though?

 

[Scott Kenny]

Is range more important than quantity/cost though?

The Air Power quote certainly makes it sound like the want is for SM6 range.

While what I'm seeing the gap in USArmy missiles is that there's nothing between AIM9s and Patriot.

 

[bring_it_on]

And I am comparing that to an SM6.

You're not going to get SM6 levels of range or performance out of a missile that is only 7" in diameter and 12' long.

I still don't get it. Who is comparing this to a AMRAAM? Talon is 20 feet long and 13 inches in diameter and is HTK. It can defeat way more stressing TBM's than SM-6 and both inside and outside the atmosphere and defend a significantly larger footprint against that threat. But that's besides the point. I, in that tweet, was notionally presenting a PAC-3 MSE replacement in the Talon form factor which should offer significantly improved kinematics and other performance given the larger form factor while still retaining a large magazine if the Army were to standardize its IAMD force around the THAAD and IFPC launchers (THAAD launcher replacing PATRIOT moving forward).

Missile performance and capability also comes into play as opposed to simply looking at the size. I am not talking about long range intercepts of air breathing targets (not a primary requirement of LTFI) but specifically comparing envelope against Medium range ballistic missiles, and more stressing hypersonic threats something against which the LTFI is to be optimized against.

While what I'm seeing the gap in USArmy missiles is that there's nothing between AIM9s and Patriot.

Which is why they have a requirement for a second interceptor for their Enduring IFPC launcher. You are not going to meet that need via a 4 Million dollar missile that fits four on a launcher with only one launcher deployable via C-17.

Army has a genuine unmet need of defeating ballistic missile and hypersonic threats that are currently beyond PAC-3 MSE. It has had a 2028-2030 IOC LTFI programmed for that requirement that has struggled to get the sort of funding needed to meet those timelines. Some of that has been due to the Army lacking an organic sensor that could allow for it but LTAMDS is maturing fast and will be in the Pacific by 2026, and more widely deployed by the end of the decade. THAAD likewise had to also shed its low altitude requirements back in the day so that has created a quite a bit of a gap b/w MSE ceiling and THAAD's min altitude (45-50 km). LTFI is supposed to fill that void.