June 25, 2020 | International, Aerospace

Countering missile threats means addressing the present while planning for the future

In 2017, I helped author the CSIS report “Missile Defense 2020,” a broad look at the history, status and future of the U.S. homeland missile defense system known as Ground-based Midcourse Defense. The report argued that the establishment of GMD had put the United States in an advantageous position relative to the North Korean missile threat, but this advantage would be short-lived if the United States failed to improve GMD through incremental milestones and regular testing. GMD has had some notable achievements with this strategy. The Pentagon, however, seems to be moving away from this proven approach to GMD, attempting great leaps rather than manageable steps. This riskier approach could make the United States less secure over the near and long term.

Until recently, GMD had been following a well-defined road map, with good results. After a series of flight-test failures from 2010-2013, the Missile Defense Agency began a rigorous effort to root out anomalies within the system's Ground-Based Interceptors, or GBI. MDA carried out a successful intercept in 2014, followed by intercepting an intercontinental ballistic missile-class target for the first time in 2017. In 2019, GMD engaged an ICBM target with a salvo of two GBIs, marking another first for the system. MDA also expanded the fleet to 44 GBIs and is constructing a new Long Range Discrimination Radar in Alaska to provide the system much-needed sensor support.

These achievements were supposed to be followed by an incremental modernization of the GBIs. The plan was to incorporate a new Redesigned Kill Vehicle around the year 2020. The RKV would be similar in concept to those currently deployed but incorporate new technologies and nearly 20 years of lessons learned.

Another part of the plan was to give the GBIs a new booster, one that gave the war fighter the option of using either two or three stages, thereby providing the system more time and space to engage incoming missiles.

MDA also set its sights on a set of longer-term objectives. These goals included a space-based sensor layer for tracking missile threats, and a GBI equipped with multiple kill vehicles that would greatly expand the capacity of the GBI fleet. While the volume kill concept had great appeal, MDA recognized the need for a developmental step between the current kill vehicles and a more advanced, unproven concept. Historically, U.S. missile defense has done best when pursuing steady, achievable goals. The highly successful Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense program, for example, has consistently adhered to the mantra: “Build a little, test a little, learn a lot.”

The RKV program, however, ran into delays. Yet, rather than continue trying to fix the program, the Pentagon opted to abandon it and skip directly to a more advanced, multi-kill vehicle approach called the Next Generation Interceptor.

NGI is an ambitious, 10-plus year endeavor that carries significant risk. In the near term, it means that the president's goal to add 20 more GBIs to the fleet will go unmet, as those GBIs were supposed to be capped with RKVs. Any expansion to the GBI fleet before 2030 will require the design and construction of a modernized unitary kill vehicle of some kind.

Absent any effort to expand or modernize the GBI fleet, homeland missile defense will likely fall behind the North Korean missile threat while NGI matures over the next 10 years. The decline will increase U.S. vulnerability to coercion by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un at a time when the U.S. military is scrambling to address Chinese and Russian aggression. Furthermore, a major delay of NGI a decade from now (or worse, a failure for NGI to materialize at all) would leave the United States with a fleet of GBIs falling rapidly into obsolescence, squandering decades of resources and effort.

To be clear, the United States should continue developing NGI. Missile threats to the U.S. homeland continue to grow at an alarming pace, in quantity and complexity. But the Pentagon and Congress should support these longer-term efforts while still investing in nearer-term options that keep U.S. homeland defenses current to North Korean missile capabilities, hedge against NGI failure and preserve U.S. investments in the GMD system.

A potential path forward may lie in the Senate's version of the fiscal 2021 National Defense Authorization Act, which contains draft language that would require the deployment of 20 additional GBIs equipped with an interim, unitary kill vehicle by 2026.

Three years ago, we titled our study of GMD “Missile Defense 2020” because we believed that this year would be the start of a new chapter in U.S. homeland missile defense. Obviously, much has changed with the cancellation of RKV. Yet, despite all its challenges, this year may still provide the opportunity to make the kind of decisions that will strengthen our national security in the near and long term.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/06/24/countering-missile-threats-means-addressing-the-present-while-planning-for-the-future/

On the same subject

February 5, 2021 | International, Naval

Northrop Grumman and Ultra Demonstrate Unmanned Anti-submarine Warfare Capability
Northrop Grumman Corporation and UK-based Ultra Maritime equipped a modified, manned Bell 407 (acting as an MQ-8C Fire Scout surrogate) platform with Ultra sonobuoys, receiver and processor to complete an unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capability demonstration. This successful demonstration of the UAS ASW mission on October 29 was the first time a vertical takeoff surrogate unmanned aerial system (VTUAS) had been used to conduct a large area multistatic acoustic search. The mission payload and effects were controlled from the ground with the resultant ASW picture disseminated to locations across the globe. “Adding an ASW capability to Fire Scout's existing multi-mission capabilities would further enhance this highly-versatile platform,” said Dan Redman, Fire Scout maritime mission expansion lead, Northrop Grumman. “This ASW capability would offer commanders flexibility to employ not only UAS systems in this particular ASW role, but also utilize the increased availability of crewed aircraft more incisively against an expanded mission set. This would increase the total available effect of the manned/unmanned teamed force mix.” By jointly developing and demonstrating UAS ASW capabilities, initially on an MQ-8C Fire Scout manned surrogate as part of an industry-led initiative, the two companies are combining their world-leading expertise and experience with the aim of bringing unique ASW solutions to global customers. While the U.S. Navy has not yet identified a clear requirement for UAS ASW capability, it has shown interest in the development and continues to support and monitor progress. “Operating prototype hardware in a high-pressure real-world environment can be challenging,” said Thomas Link, president of Ultra Maritime. “Our partnership will bring an innovative and leading ASW capability into operation, combining both manned and unmanned ASW systems that will help defend our warfighters and provide increased capability to our forces.” The MQ-8C Fire Scout can fly missions in excess of 12 hours, providing commanders an unrivaled level of layered multi-source/sensor intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR) and command and control/comms relay capabilities over land and sea. When operating in a manned-unmanned teaming concept, Fire Scout enables commanders to employ manned assets in a more focused manner, allowing them to exploit hybrid manned/unmanned teaming opportunities. https://www.uasvision.com/2021/02/04/northrop-grumman-and-ultra-demonstrate-unmanned-anti-submarine-warfare-capability/
July 18, 2018 | International, Aerospace

Boeing Gets $3.9 Billion Contract for New Air Force One
By Anthony Capaccio Capping off a contentious contracting tussle with President Donald Trump, Boeing Co. received a $3.9 billion contract to continue development, modification and testing of two new aircraft to serve as Air Force One, according to two people familiar with the decision. The planes, Boeing 747-8s, would be delivered by December 2024. That would be Trump's last full year in office if he wins a second term. Congressional committees were informed of the decision on Tuesday. Trump reached an informal deal in late February with Chicago-based Boeing for the fixed-price contract that a White House spokesman said at the time would save taxpayers $1.4 billion from an earlier projection for buying and outfitting two presidential jets. But public estimates suggest the savings would be far less -- perhaps a few hundred million dollars. Trump shook the defense industry -- and put all large U.S. companies with government contracts on notice -- when he began criticizing the Air Force One contract more than a month before he took office in January 2017. On Dec. 6, 2016 he wrote on Twitter that “Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!” That surprising statement was followed by talks with Boeing Chief Executive Officer Dennis Muilenburg. After a visit to Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort in January, Muilenburg said, “We're going to get it done for less than that, and we're committed to working together to make sure that happens.” Announcement of the contract came the same day Trump said in an interview with CBS that the new aircraft will be painted “be red, white and blue, which I think is appropriate,'' instead of its traditional white, blue and light-blue color scheme. The Air Force said last year that it saved some money when the president reached a preliminary deal with Boeing for two 747 jumbo jets to serve as Air Force One, taking advantage of an unusual limited-time discount on planes once bound for Russia. Much of the costs for the presidential plane come from pricey and complex modifications required to turn Boeing's iconic hump-backed jets into the flying fortresses that ferry U.S. presidents around the world. The jets would be outfitted with dual auxiliary power units, rather than the one electrical power system standard for commercial jets, along with a complex communications system, work and rest quarters for the first family, elevators to ease boarding, self-defense capabilities and other features, according to Air Force budget documents. The Air Force decided in 2015 to award Boeing a sole-source deal to build the Air Force One replacements without competition while insisting that subcontractors be allowed to bid on its specialized equipment. The service determined then that Boeing's aircraft was the only one manufactured in the U.S. “that when fully missionized meets the necessary critically important capabilities” that the president needs. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-17/boeing-said-to-get-3-9-billion-contract-for-new-air-force-one
June 19, 2019 | International, Aerospace

European Nations Are Teaming Up to Make a 6th-Gen Fighter. Can the US Keep Up?
By Oriana Pawlyk SALON DU BOURGET, PARIS -- France made a splash at this year's Paris Air Show, unveiling a sixth-generation fighter design, the Future Combat Air System. The Dassault-made aircraft, which is set to be made in collaboration with Airbus and acquired by Spain and Germany as well as France, represents a renaissance in European aviation, French President Emmanuel Macron said. The unveiling comes just a year after BAE Systems debuted a concept model for a future British 6th-generation fighter, the Tempest. Is Europe now on a trajectory to beat the U.S. to acquisition of 6th-generation fighter technology? "I would have to say no," Acting Air Force Secretary Matt Donovan said here Monday during the airshow. Donovan and Dr. Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology and logistics, both noted last year upon the unveiling of the Tempest fighter in the U.K. that, while competition is "a good thing," any fighter NATO partners and allies aim to produce in the future should be complementary to U.S. capabilities. They stressed the same message after France unveiled the Future Combat Air System. "We're putting a lot of focus into our next-generation programs right now to make sure we're going to lead the way to sixth-generation systems," Roper said. Roper and Donovan said they have yet to have a full briefing about what Europe's latest fighters, including the United Kingdom's Tempest jet, look like beneath the surface design. "We would just like to cooperate and collaborate ... as well as to share technology, [which is] absolutely important for future interoperability if we're going to go to war as coalitions, which we always do, so that's really important," Donovan said. Roper said it's not just about what a fighter can do, but also how it's made. Discussions are ongoing within the Air Force about the need for a sixth-gen fighter, he said. Leveraging the use of "digital engineering," which sometimes allows the service to bypass the regular manufacturing process for parts, will give developers the ability to design and change blueprints with more flexibility, Roper said. The Air Force is currently using digital engineering for A-10 Warthogs, as well as the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent program, which is set to replace the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile system. "We [believe the] production technology may be the most game-changing component if it allows us to move into a different paradigm of doing rapid design spirals and updates," Roper told reporters here, adding that technology growth paired with digital engineering will allow for faster production of future aircraft. Roper said the Defense Department is used to outdated acquisition practices, out of step with what the pilot may need to outpace adversaries. "In addition to looking at a lot of classified capabilities we want to give future warfighters, we also want to give manufacturers a different way of making that cutting-edge technology. Expect [that] for what we bring to the table for sixth-gen," he said. "We're here to also ... connect with the future," Roper added. "Aviation is a booming business right now in Europe, so we're interested in seeing who the new movers and shakers are, engaging with some of the companies here in France, but also showing that some of the systems that we bring to bear from the U.S. are the best in the world, and we see a future where we maintain that edge far past our successors." https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/06/18/european-nations-are-teaming-make-6th-gen-fighter-can-us-keep.html

All news