|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
U.S. Plans: Sea-Based System Was Close When Canceled, Contractor Says The contractor behind the Navy Area Wide missile defense system believes the program was about to prove its ability when the Bush administration killed it last year, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Jan. 4). The program suffered numerous delays and was over budget, but the problems had more to do with small obstacles — such as moving the location of personnel for program contractor Raytheon — than with technical difficulties, the system’s proponents said. “We felt that the major technological problems had been solved, that all the risk was behind us,” said Jeff McKeel, a Raytheon executive. Missile Defense Agency Director Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish had proposed to conduct flight tests in February with the understanding that the program would be canceled if the tests failed, but Defense Undersecretary for Acquisition Pete Aldridge canceled the program in December. Some Navy officials said the tests would have proved the program would work. Over Budget … Aldridge and opponents of the program, known as Navy Area Wide, say the program was 32 percent over budget. The Nunn-McCurdy Act requires that if any weapons system exceeds its budget by 25 percent the Pentagon must certify it is vital to national security. The Pentagon did not so certify the Navy program. Officials did not take the threat to the program seriously, Aldridge said. Navy officials said the MDA prefers land-based programs and has allowed two Army missile defense programs to continue despite being more over budget than Navy Area Wide. Observers have said canceling the program put other troubled programs on notice that the Bush administration is serious about cutting missile defense systems that fail. “Now let me tell you, the message is out,” Aldridge said. MDA officials expressed frustration with the program and said the Navy oversold its abilities. “They seemed to expect we would pay any price and showed a sense of entitlement instead of urgency,” a senior official said. … And Failed Technically Navy Area Wide was also not working technically, Pentagon officials said. Part of the program’s advantage was the idea that some Navy ships with Aegis radar, which can track and target multiple aircraft and cruise missiles, could be converted to launch anti-missile interceptors as well, the Post reported. Opponents, however, have that incorporating two different technologies — an infrared sensor to target ballistic missiles and a radio frequency seeker to engage traditional targets — did not work, according to the Post. “There was no indication that they were ever going to solve the problem in any reasonable period of time,” Aldridge said (see GSN, Dec. 17, 2001). A Need Remains Some top Pentagon and Navy officials have said there is an urgent need for a sea-based system to hit short-range ballistic missiles — the goal for Navy Area Wide. “The requirement is urgent — there’s no doubt about that,” said a senior official. Without Navy Area Wide, the Pentagon has no prospect for such a system in the near future, according to the Post. “I certainly hope we can put that program back together,” said Adm. Dennis Blair, in Senate Armed Services Committee testimony this month. Alternative Systems? Aldridge has called for a study on alternatives to Navy Area Wide by May, and the new study will focus on developing a system only designed to hit ballistic missiles, rather than incorporating different technologies, officials said (see GSN, Jan. 18). The Pentagon is also working on a sea-based system to target medium-range missiles (see GSN, Jan. 28), and its first flight test in January was successful (Bradley Graham, Washington Post, March 28).
| ||||||||||
Back to top
