Back to news

September 25, 2020 | International, C4ISR, Security, Other Defence

Two steps President Trump could take now to secure missile defense improvements

Trey Obering and Rebeccah Heinrichs

In his acceptance speech for the Republican presidential nomination, President Donald Trump said that in a second term, “We will win the race to 5G, and build the world's best cyber and missile defense.”

On the last issue — missile defense — there are actions President Trump can and should take now, with only a few weeks left until election day, to make necessary improvements.

First, reverse the Pentagon's decision to give more authority over the Missile Defense Agency to the office of cost assessment and program evaluation (CAPE) while creating more bureaucratic oversight. These moves will create more obstacles to thwart the President's agenda and will drastically slow MDA's ability to develop and field missile defense capabilities to meet rapidly emerging threats.

We understand fully the intent to reduce risk in acquisitions, but the purpose of the MDA is to conduct research and development and deliver new and ever-evolving effective defensive systems for the protection of the American people. We must prioritize speed over risk-aversion.

Secondly, the President can announce that the United States is moving forward with site preparation for at least one additional homeland interceptor site. The Trump Administration's 2019 Missile Defense Review stated that such a site would protect against future Iranian threats; since the Pentagon released this policy document Iran has only improved its missile program.

Especially concerning was the successful satellite launch conducted by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in April of this year. Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John Hyten said the launch vehicle had traveled, “a very long way, which means it has the ability once again to threaten their neighbors, their allies, and we want to make sure they can never threaten the United States.”

These developments put more pressure on the United States to make moves in the near term to bolster full coverage of the U.S. homeland.

Environmental Impact Studies have already been concluded and military installations in New York, Ohio, and Michigan have been chosen as potential hosts for a third homeland missile defense site. Any of those sites would offer a “shoot-look-shoot” capability when considering the geometry of a potential missile attack from Iran. It might also make sense to pick two sites, perhaps putting a few interceptors in Ohio and in Michigan.

If President Trump does decide to move forward with site preparation for an additional homeland interceptor site or sites, he would not need to decide immediately about the kind of interceptor to emplace, whether Next Generation Interceptors (NGIs) or Ground-Based Interceptors.

Site preparation can take several years to complete and should not take away investments from development of the NGI, which promises to add significant capability to homeland defense. Either interceptor could be emplaced at the new site. If NGI matures and is ready for deployment by the Pentagon's stated goal of 2027, then the additional location could be home to a few of the interceptors.

The threat from Iranian missiles are not the only ones putting pressure on the homeland defense systems.

The Trump administration has used a combination of economic pressure, military threats, and talks to pressure North Korea into ending its missile program, but North Korea has not made the decision to forgo its nuclear missile program. Although Kim Jong-un has responded by holding off on further long-range missile tests, he has resumed shorter-range tests, and there is reason to believe Kim has not slowed down his efforts to improve his longer-range missile program.

Moreover, North Korea remains a serious missile and illicit arms proliferator and a senior U.S. official recently expressed concern about cooperation between North Korea and Iran on long-range missile development. It would be a mistake to slow down homeland missile defense because the North Korean leader has promised to disarm while showing no real signs of doing so.

The Pentagon is wrapping up its budget submission for the next fiscal year, and whoever wins in November will determine the budget's final form. Regardless, the United States must carefully ensure that even as we push ahead to evolve the system, we cannot neglect the defense of the American people against the threats that are here today.

If the United States is going to have an effective, cutting edge missile defense architecture to balance near and evolving threats and to adapt as the threats dictate, the MDA must remain agile, and it must have the funding to improve and sustain current programs while investing in advanced technologies to stay ahead of the evolving threat.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/09/24/two-steps-president-trump-could-take-now-to-secure-missile-defense-improvements/

On the same subject

  • The US Navy is planning for its new frigate to be a workhorse

    January 31, 2019 | International, Naval

    The US Navy is planning for its new frigate to be a workhorse

    WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy is looking to get a lot of underway time out of its new frigate and is eyeing a crewing model that swaps out teams of sailors to maximize the operational time for each hull. The so-called blue-gold crewing model effectively creates two crews for each ship of the class. The blue crew and gold crew switch out to keep the ships at sea for as long as possible without breaking the sailors and their families. It's the model the Navy has used for years on the ballistic missile submarines and is employing on the littoral combat ships, but now the model is likely to extend to the LCS successor, said Rear Adm. Ron Boxall, the Chief of Naval Operations' surface warfare director. “We're looking at the blue-gold construct on FFG(X). We're planning on it, which gives us a larger operational availability – it should double it,” Boxall told Defense News in an interview late last year. The use of blue-gold crewing hints at how the Navy is viewing its new frigate: as a ship that can carry out a a broad range of tasks that have consumed the operational time of larger combatants. That includes exercises with allies and freedom of navigation operations to counter-piracy and routine presence missions that don't require an Arleigh Burke destroyer to be successful but are time-intensive. The Navy has bemoaned the lack of a small surface combatant that can hold down low-end missions but still contribute in a high-end fight, which has been the impetus behind the whole FFG(X) program. Even though the crews will catch a break in the blue-gold construct, off-hull crews won't be kicking back during their shore rotation, Boxall said. The surface force has been investing in higher-end training facilities in fleet concentration areas in an effort to increase the proficiency of its watch teams. Crews on shore will be going through those trainers, he said. “So, these ships are going to be out there half the time while the [off-hull] crews are back training in higher-fidelity training environments,” Boxall explained. “And what [commanding officers] will tell you is that as we get to higher and higher fidelity training, time to train becomes equally as valuable. “So, in an increasingly complex environment, it's just intuitive that that you have to have time to train. We think Blue-Gold makes sense for those reasons on the frigate.” Lessons from LCS Getting more simulator time for surface sailors has been an initiative championed by the Navy's top surface warfare officer Vice Adm. Rich Brown. It's an off-shoot from lessons-learned from FFG(X)'s predecessor, the LCS, which has extremely high-fidelity simulator trainers for its crews before they take over their assigned hulls. One thing the surface force has been intrigued to see has been the high quality of the officers that come up through the LCS program, something the Navy in part attributes to the trainers, Boxall said, and the SWOs want to replicate that for the FFG(X). “One really interesting side-note with LCS has been the quality of the training,” Boxall said. “As we went back and looked at the lessons learned from McCain and Fitzgerald, we're trying to apply some of the good things about LCS to that. “Those officers, because they are smaller ships they get a lot more water under the keel. And they're faster ships so they are getting that water under the keel in a faster-moving environment. So we're creating a generation of officers who are getting tougher navigation environments thrown at them more quickly, and we're also getting the quality and fidelity of their trainers.” This has meant that LCS officers more-than stack up to their peers from larger, more advanced ships, he added. “What we're seeing is they are doing very, very well against their contemporaries coming off the bigger ships,” Boxall said. “Why is that happening? It's fairly logical: More stick time, better fidelity trainers and more time in the trainers.” Ownership The littoral combat ship adopted the Blue-Gold crewing model after a series of high-profile breakdowns, some caused by crew errors. The original model was to have three crews for two hulls, a rotational model that the Navy worried was taking away from the sense of ownership for a single, specific hull that permanently attached crews might have to a greater degree. The program was reorganized to a Blue-Gold model, which required hundreds of new billets for the LCS program, under then-head of Naval Surface Forces Pacific, Rear Adm. Thomas Rowden. Expanding Blue-Gold to the FFG(X) would further spread the model inside the surface warfare community. Both minesweepers and patrol craft, two other workhorse platforms in the surface community, operate under a Blue-Gold crewing model as well. However, it may not be a model that the Navy will pursue on the large surface combatant now in development. That ship may be better with a lower operational tempo, Boxall said. “We'll look and see if that makes sense on the large surface combatant or not,” he said. “Maybe those are better ships to keep as a surge force, maybe they're fine operating on a lower rotational model.” https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/01/30/the-us-navy-is-planning-for-its-new-frigate-to-be-a-workhorse/

  • Contracts for June 8, 2021

    June 9, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Contracts for June 8, 2021

    Today

  • Italy signs nearly $1 billion deal to upgrade Ariete tanks

    August 7, 2023 | International, Land

    Italy signs nearly $1 billion deal to upgrade Ariete tanks

    The government also inked a contract with Leonardo and Italian shipyard Fincantieri for the purchase of three offshore patrol vessels.

All news