Key Points and Summary on THAAD – The U.S. military’s THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) and Patriot systems are often confused, but they serve distinct, complementary roles in missile defense.
-THAAD is designed for a “wide area” defense mission, using its powerful radar and kinetic-kill interceptors to destroy medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles at very high altitudes (40-150 km).
-The Patriot PAC-3 system, in contrast, provides “point defense” for specific, high-value sites against threats at lower altitudes (below 40 km), including ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and aircraft.
-Together, they form a layered defense against a wide spectrum of aerial threats.
Why We Call It THAAD
The acronym stands for Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD).
It is the missile defense battery that is sometimes confused with or generates inquiries about why or how it differs from Raytheon Technologies’ (RTX) Patriot Air and Missile Defense (AMD) system.
There are some fundamental differences between the two, despite them appearing to have been designed for very similar missions.
One is that THAAD operates at higher altitudes than Patriot and also has a more extended range to intercept than Patriot. THAAD is also designed solely for defense against ballistic missile threats, primarily those with medium and intermediate ranges.
On the other hand, Patriot is equipped with several different interceptor missiles, allowing it to engage a broader mix of threats. These are not only ballistic missiles, but also designated as “air-breathing” threats like large UAVs, cruise missiles, and tactical aircraft or helicopters.
THAAD’s Utility in Regional Scenarios
The two also have differing mission profiles. THAAD is intended to defend a large geographic zone or area – entire regions of a country or entire cities.
For this reason, THAAD was deployed in the Republic of Korea (ROK) in the South to shield as much of the region as possible near the DMZ.
The assumption is that only a real threat would be an attack by missiles that could be launched from the Democratic People’s Republic of [North] Korea.
An attack by the North using either cruise missiles or tactical combat aircraft seems unlikely, given the state of the Korean People’s Army Air Force, so THAAD was the more logical choice. It also has a longer-ranged radar that facilitates earlier detection of a missile launch.
In its current configuration, the Patriot system is typically referred to as the PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) – named after the longest-range and most capable of the interceptor missiles it fires.
The Patriot is employed in situations where point defense of specific population centers or high-priority sites, such as military installations or other critical facilities, is the mission requirement.
Compatibility
THAAD and Patriot are compatible or complementary in that one essentially picks up where the other drops off. Patriot is optimized to engage targets at altitudes of 40 kilometres or below, whereas THAAD is designed to intercept missiles at altitudes of 40-150 kilometres.
According to recent articles on the system, what distinguishes THAAD from Patriot and other similar missile defense system designs is several key characteristics.
One of the primary characteristics of THAAD is its ease of transportation and the flexibility to reposition the system in response to evolving threats.
The Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, often referred to as Aegis Ashore, and the Patriot/PAC-3 are also transportable, but they have shorter ranges and can be more challenging to reposition.
THAAD in 4 Words: Something Russia Can’t Match?
THAAD can also intercept a broader range of threats. It is designed to intercept both exoatmospheric and endoatmospheric threats. Aegis Ashore was designed to intercept largely only exoatmospheric threats, while the Patriot-PAC-3 was designed for only endoatmospheric threats, unless it is firing the MSE missile. The THAAD interceptors rely on kinetic energy to destroy incoming threats, while the Patriot system utilizes a hit-to-kill method or a blast fragmentation warhead.
The THAAD system does have its constraints in comparison to some of the competing systems fielded by other manufacturers, such as the Russian Almaz-Antei S-500. One of its most notable limitations is that it deploys only a single, kinetic-kill class of surface-to-air missile.
With this kind of an engagement envelope, it cannot present a multi-layered defense and engage different types of targets with munitions optimized for the vehicle it is targeting, which is the forte of the Patriot.
Interceptors launched by the THAAD system also carry no warheads and rely on kinetic energy to kill an incoming missile.
This type of missile design limits the THAAD’s capability to engage targets at maximum ranges of approximately 200 kilometres. This means a single THAAD can cover only 11 percent the area of an S-500.
Despite the claims by Russian designers regarding the S-500’s performance and the previously announced plans to deploy 12 batteries by 2025, the system remains officially out of service.
According to Ukraine’s military intelligence service, only “components” of just one battery have been deployed in Crimea, making it an incomplete installation.
A date for the S-500s to be fully operational has not yet been fixed. Russia currently faces numerous challenges in producing sophisticated defense electronics and acquiring high-technology components, which means that, for the immediate future, THAAD remains the best and most capable system of its kind.
About the Author:
Reuben F. Johnson is a survivor of the February 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and is an Expert on Foreign Military Affairs and Director of the Asian Research Centre with the Fundacja im. Kazimierza Pułaskiego in Warsaw. He has been a consultant to the Pentagon, several NATO governments and the Australian government in the fields of defense technology and weapon systems design. Over the past 30 years he has resided in and reported from Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Brazil, the People’s Republic of China and Australia.
More Fighters
China’s J-20 Stealth Fighter Looks Like a Powerhouse
China’s White Emperor Space Fighter Looks Fake
China’s Aircraft Carriers Have Arrived (Just Not Nuclear Carriers)
