CDI Missile Defense Update #8
Sept. 14, 2006
Center for Defense Information
www.cdi.org
NB#1: The Sept. 1, 2006, test of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system included an intercept of a target. CDI Research Analyst Victoria Samson demonstrates that all is not how it seems with “One Small Step for MDA, But Light Years Away from a Reliable System.” In her analysis, she cautions that, due to all the unknowns in the system, “[T]he champagne should be kept to a minimum, as there are many caveats to the test’s ‘success.’” Her piece is available at http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?Do..._page=index.cfm.
NB#2: In “Hackers’ delight,” CDI Research Analyst Victoria Samson reviews a recent report by the Pentagon’s Inspector General’s office which warns about the network security of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system. This network offers such little protection that a draft version of this same report recommended shutting down the system immediately until the problems were fixed. Her piece was published in the September/October 2006 issue of Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and can be accessed at http://www.thebulletin.org/article.php?art_ofn=so06samson.
NB#3: A letter from congressional Democrats dated Aug. 29, 2006, asks Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld when exactly the Pentagon plans to hold a "comprehensive and realistic end-to-end test of the limited missile defense system," the need for which he commented on while visiting an interceptor site in Ft. Greely, Alaska, recently. The letter was signed by Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, Rep. Vic Snyder, D-Ark., Rep. Mark Udall, D-Colo., Rep. John Spratt, D-S.C., and Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif. The letter can be read here: http://www.cdi.org/PDFs/Rumsfeld.NMD.Test.pdf.
NB#4: In an op-ed by CDI Research Analyst Victoria Samson, “North Korea Helps United States Waste Missile Money,” she explains how supporters of missile defense are manipulating fears created by North Korea’s tests of its ballistic missiles in July into support for the missile defense system. She points out, “[T]he current actions by North Korea are dovetailing with the Bush administration's arguments for missile defense, and it has worked out nicely for the bellicose on both sides.” This commentary originally appeared in the Topeka Capital-Journal on Aug. 11, 2006, but is available on CDI’s site at http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?Do..._page=index.cfm.
1. GMD system intercepts a test target
2. SBX still in Hawaii
3. PAC-3 intercepts a test target
4. Missile Defense Agency to deploy THAAD early
5. U.S. Navy to double sea-based missile defense
6. Fylingdales radar system upgrades postponed until 2007
7. High Altitude Airship flight delayed
8. Disputes over third interceptor site
***********
1. GMD system intercepts a test target
The Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system, designed to defend the United States against an extremely limited ICBM attack, made its first intercept in nearly four years. During Flight Test (FT)-2, held on Sept. 1, 2006, an interceptor launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., hit a target launched from Alaska. This was the first intercept for the system since October 2002 and the sixth overall (out of eleven attempts). It also was the first intercept using an operationally-configured interceptor and silo; earlier tests used prototypes. FT-2 was not officially designated an intercept attempt. Rather, its primary objective was data collection, with hopes by program officials that an intercept would occur. While Air Force Lt. Gen. Trey Obering, director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), claimed that “This is about as close as we can come to an end-to-end test of our long-range missile defense system,” perhaps because Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had called for an end-to-end test of the GMD system during the weekend prior to the test, the program is still missing key components. One component missing in this test was the Sea-based X-band radar (SBX), currently being repaired in Hawaii far from its home port of Adak, Alaska. Also absent are the satellite networks needed to guide the system. Finally, FT-2 did not include countermeasures, which any missile launched at the United States would most likely be able to deploy. The next test, FT-3, is planned to be held in December and will be a repeat of FT-2, except that an intercept will be its primary objective; countermeasures are also unlikely to be used in FT-3.
(Washington Post, Sept. 2, 2006; Defense Daily, Sept. 12, 2006)
2. SBX still in Hawaii
The Sea-based X-Band Radar (SBX), needed to track targets for the missile defense system being deployed in Alaska and California, was the subject of a fairly scathing independent report. The Chicago Tribune reported (Aug. 27, 2006) on “SBX-1 Operational Suitability and Viability Assessment,” a document originally provided by the Project on Government Oversight. This report says that the radar lacks the equipment needed to tow it in rough seas, does not have crew trained to handle “heavy weather or cold-weather operations," and does not have basic security itself. This does not bode well for radar that is supposed to be functional in the rough waters off of Alaska and that is a key part of a system that is supposedly vital to U.S. national security. The SBX stopped off in Hawaii en route to its home port of Adak, Alaska, at the beginning of 2006 and has been stuck there undergoing repairs ever since. While it looked at the Sept. 1, 2006, test of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system, the SBX’ data was not used for the intercept or brought into the overall network. As of today, the SBX isn’t scheduled to reach its home port until November. The independent report can be accessed at http://www.pogo.org/m/dp/dp-SBXOVA-06022006.pdf.
3. PAC-3 intercepts a test target
The Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC)-3 system reported a successful intercept during a flight test held on Aug. 31, 2006, at White Sand Missile Range, NM. During this test, two PAC-3 interceptors were ripple-fired at a Patriot-As-A-Target, or a Patriot modified to resemble a theater ballistic missile. According to Defense Daily (Sept. 5, 2006), one of this test’s objectives was to determine “proper operation and interaction of the information coordination central and the fire units in a battalion during the engagement of a TBM [targeted ballistic missile?] under track from multiple fire units,” a capability that was sorely tested (and came up short) during the 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom. Another objective was to verify post-intercept processing, something else that the Patriot had problems with when used in combat in 1991 and 2003.
4. Missile Defense Agency to deploy THAAD early
To field its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system early, and at the behest of combatant commanders, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has hastened development stage and testing stage procedures. According to Army Col. Charles Driessnack, MDA’s project manager, enhanced data collection during development, determining and ruling out ground test methods, and the early purchase of two THAAD fire units will allow parallel system testing and training. Testing and training in tandem is expected to cut two years and $100 million from the program, which is now to be fielded at the end of fiscal year 2009 (FY 09) or at the beginning of FY 10. The Army determined that it was “confident” as to where THAAD would be used – in humid or desert climates – and to how it would be moved (not via railroad, so it no longer needs to be able to fit into a box-car).
THAAD had to abort Flight Test-04 on Sept. 13, 2006, when a problem arose with the Hera target missile. It was to have included a planned intercept attempt of a separating target. The testing schedule had FT-05 (a non-intercept attempt) following shortly after. However, program officials are analyzing the data from yesterday’s test in order to determine whether two more tests can be held at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico before it shuts down in December (due to weather issues which make testing difficult). THAAD’s testing will eventually shift to the Pacific Missile Test Facility in Hawaii.
(Inside the Army, Aug. 21, 2006; Defense Daily, Sept. 14, 2006)
5. U.S. Navy to double sea-based missile defense
In addition to the three existent cruisers capable of intercepting ballistic missiles, the U.S. Navy plans to add three more ships to its sea-based missile defense system, the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system. By the end of December, the destroyers USS Stethem, USS Decatur and USS Curtis Wilber will be upgraded to join the USS Shiloh, USS Lake Erie and the USS Port Royal in using the Aegis radar tracking and SM-3 missiles systems. A spokesman for the Navy, Lt. Tommy Crosby, said the upgrades would not adjust deployment schedules in the Pacific. The six ships will represent one-third of the number the Department of Defense eventually wants to equip with missile defense capabilities.
(United Press International, Aug. 22, 2006)
6. Fylingdales radar system upgrades postponed until 2007
The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has delayed its integrated ground tests and distributed ground tests of the U.K.-based Fylingdales radar system, which is being upgraded so it can be incorporated into the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system. Such tests are needed to verify the radar system’s capabilities. While Fylingdales was originally intended to be brought into the system in spring of 2006, it is now scheduled to do so around February 2007.
(Homeland Defense Watch, Aug. 7, 2006)
7. High Altitude Airship flight delayed
Funding cuts have caused the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to push back its plans for a flight test of the High Altitude Airship (HAA) prototype at least one year, until fiscal year 2010 (FY 10). The HAA is a multi-use persistent surveillance system which would maintain an altitude of roughly 60,000 feet for one month. Lockheed Martin HAA Business Development Director Ron Browning, whose company was awarded a $149.2 million contract to develop the HAA, said the project would augment three missions. The first would be for identification, tracking and missile defense warning. The second would provide hurricane alerts and relief coordination. The third mission would provide an expanded super-horizon communication infrastructure. However, the $200 million which was cut from MDA’s budget in FY 06 preceded a FY 07 congressional recommendation for cutting $25 million, both of which were done because of concerns that too much time and money was being spent on long-lead technologies instead of near-term and more pressing technologies.
(Defense Daily, Aug. 3, 2006; Inside Missile Defense, Aug. 16, 2006)
8. Disputes over third interceptor site
Despite having spent quite an extensive amount of political capital on visiting potential sites in Eastern Europe, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is receiving a less-than-warm welcome from potential hosts of the third interceptor site for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system. Negotiations have dragged on with Poland, who would like a GMD site to be included in an overall defense package (where it would be protected against shorter-range ballistic missiles), while the United States is focusing on using such a site to field interceptors that would defend the United States against ICBMs coming from the Middle East. Meanwhile, the Czech Republic’s new government is undergoing strong domestic opposition to participating in the U.S. missile defense system. While Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek stated that he is "absolutely in favor" of the Czech Republic’s cooperation in the GMD system, a recent poll determined that 51 percent of Czechs thought it "unacceptable" and 61 percent wanted the possibility of their country’s participation to be put to a referendum, and the topic has been picked up with fervor by the Social Democrats. The United States is expected to make a decision about who it will ask to host the third site this fall.
(Rzeczpospolita website, in Polish, Aug. 19, 2006; via BBC Monitoring; Agence France-Presse, Sept. 9, 2006)