"Andrew Chaplin" wrote in message
...
"Yeff" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 18:49:43 -0500, Andrew Chaplin wrote:

Why the loss of performance?

It doesn't start off with the speed of a launching aircraft.

That's what I thought it would be. So one needs something like a boost
stage if one is to have anything like the same envelope?

Why bother? The Army is looking for a lightweight SHORAD system here, not a
near-competitor against the Patriot. I'd guess that the range envelope
unboosted is plenty big enough to take advantage of the available radar
track, which being groundbound like the missile launcher will in most cases
not have the advantage of tremendous line-of-sight ranges like what an
airborne platform has, especially when opposing the threats that the system
is supposed to be focusing on (UAV's, helos, cruise missiles). Note that
this is not the first AIM-120 based SAM system; Norway already bought
NASAMS, and the USMC is well on the way to fielding CLAWS, IIRC. And
somebody has already been operating one of the above here in the US--there
were photos in the media last year showing what looked like CLAWS or NASAMS
sitting near one of the high value targets around Washington, DC, which the
DoD folks were rather tight-lipped about when asked.

Brooks

--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)