U.S. Plans:  Activist Group Provides More Details on Decoys Used in Intercept Test

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The Union of Concerned Scientists provided more details on the decoys used during a recent missile defense intercept test, saying they did not reflect actual combat conditions, in a report released last week (see GSN, Oct. 15).

The report, written by David Wright, co-director of the UCS Global Security Program, details the decoys probably used during a successful missile interceptor test conducted Oct. 14.  The test was the fifth hit in seven intercept tests of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system.  In May, the Bush administration announced that information on the target sets used in future missile defense tests would be classified (see GSN, May 17).  UCS said the information in its report was based on public statements and technical analyses of previous missile defense test.

The Oct. 14 test probably involved five targets — a mock warhead, a large balloon decoy, two small balloon decoys and the final stage of the target missile, a modified Minuteman ICBM, called the Multi-Service Launch System, which releases the decoys, according to the report.   The three balloon decoys and the MSLS were reportedly identical to those used in a March intercept test, the report says (see GSN, March 18).

The UCS report says the large balloon decoy and the MSLS would give off an infrared signature about three times larger than that of the mock warhead.  The two small balloon decoys would give off an infrared signature about twice as large as that of the mock warhead, the report says.   These larger infrared signatures make it easier for the missile interceptor to distinguish between the mock warhead and the decoys.

“While using such decoys may be appropriate for early stages of testing, the Pentagon should make clear that these tests do not provide a meaningful test of discrimination that is relevant to real-world situations,” the report says.  “While adding decoys of this type makes the tests somewhat more complex, it does not create a more demanding discrimination task.”

As in previous missile defense tests, the Oct. 14 test required that the missile defense system know in advance how the target warhead and decoys will appear to the interceptor’s sensors, according to the report.  This is necessary because the interceptor compares the infrared signatures it detects to pre-programmed information on the expected appearance of object, the report says.

“Discrimination will rely on the defense having detailed prior knowledge about how all the objects will appear to the defense sensors — an assumption that is highly unrealistic,” the report says.

The Oct. 14 test also did not use a tumbling warhead, even though missile defense test plans created under the Clinton administration called for its use in an intercept test by this time, the report says.  It would be more difficult for an interceptor to detect a tumbling warhead since the motion would create fluctuations in its infrared signature, it says.  While such a fluctuating infrared signature would be easy to detect when compare to the relatively uniform signatures of the decoys, previous tests have involved decoys that emitted signatures similar to that of a tumbling warhead, according to the report.

For further information, see:

MDA Basics of Missile Defense

MDA Missile Defense System

MDA Midcourse Defense Segment

Back to top

U.S. Plans I:  Interceptor Test Scores Fifth Successful Hit

The U.S. Defense Department yesterday successfully tested a missile interceptor designed to be a component of a U.S. missile defense system.  It was the fifth hit in seven intercept tests of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system (see GSN, Oct. 10).

More than 140 miles above the Earth, the missile interceptor, launched from the Kwajalein test range in the Marshall Islands, hit a modified Minuteman ICBM launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.  The interceptor traveled for six minutes before hitting the target, according to the Missile Defense Agency.  The USS John Paul Jones Navy Aegis destroyer also participated in the test.

During the test, operators successfully integrated ground-based sensors and command and control systems to track the launch of the target, and they used a prototype X-band radar to provide information to the interceptor (U.S. Defense Department release, Oct. 14).

“What these tests do is they greatly improve our knowledge of missile defense technology for our development of a missile defense system against long-range ballistic missiles,” said Lt. Col. Rick Lehner, a spokesman for the Missile Defense Agency (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo.com, Oct. 15).

Meanwhile, the Union of Concerned Scientists Friday released a report containing previously withheld information on the decoys used in Pentagon missile defense tests (see GSN, May 17).  Yesterday’s test was too artificial and did not reflect actual conditions, the group said.

“Our research shows that the upcoming test will not assess the ability of the defense to distinguish between decoys and warheads,” David Wright, co-director and senior scientist of the organization’s Global Security Program, said in a press statement (see GSN, March 4).  “Showing that the interceptor can discriminate between a warhead and a decoy is absolutely key to developing a missile defense system” (Union of Concerned Scientists release, Oct. 11).

For further information, see:

MDA Basics of Missile Defense

MDA Missile Defense System

MDA Midcourse Defense Segment

Back to top

U.S. Plans II:  Congressional Negotiators Approve $7.4 Billion for Missile Defenses

A U.S. House and Senate conference committee last week agreed to fiscal 2003 Pentagon appropriations, including $7.4 billion for missile defense.  The House later passed the bill (see GSN, Sept 11).

The missile defense appropriation is $43 million less than President George W. Bush’s request, but fully funds such programs as the Ground-based Midcourse Defense, the Pacific Test Bed and the Airborne Laser, Defense Week reported (see GSN, Sept. 9).

The Senate will probably vote on the $355 billion bill this week, according to Defense Week (Defense Week, Oct. 15).

Meanwhile, despite an overall rise in the military budget, spending on missile defense and the military’s push to modernize its forces is causing a budget crunch at the Pentagon, the Wall Street Journal reported today.  As top Pentagon officials prepare the 2004 budget request, they are reviewing a suggestions for cutbacks in a report prepared by Stephen Cambone, a top assistant to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Cambone recommended cuts to many Army programs, including the Comanche helicopter and Stryker wheeled armed vehicle, which are both currently in development.  The Future Combat System, designed to provide the Army with a more agile force by 2010, might face delays, according to the Journal.  Cambone also recommended the Navy cancel or delay its newest aircraft carrier, and the Air Force might see smaller production on its latest fighter jet, the F-22 Raptor, the Journal reported (Squeo/Jaffe, Wall Street Journal, Oct. 15).

Back to top

United States:  Improved Technology Makes Iraqi Scuds Easier to Find

The U.S. Defense Department has significantly improved its ability to find Iraq’s mobile Scud missile launchers since the 1991 Gulf War, but the vehicles might still prove elusive, the Wall Street Journal reported today (see GSN, Oct. 11).

U.S.-led coalition forces did not destroy any mobile Scud launchers during the Gulf War, but Pentagon officials have said they would be better prepared if the United States were to go to war with Iraq again.

“With Scuds you have got to pounce very quickly,” said Rear Adm. Mark Fitzgerald, the Navy’s director of air warfare.

U.S. officials said that 10 years of patrolling no-fly zones in northern and southern Iraq have improved knowledge of the terrain and of Iraqi tactics.  Improved communications, sensors and more accurate, all-weather precision munitions allow forces to strike a target within 10 minutes of identifying it, Air Force officials said.  Unmanned aerial aircraft now allow the U.S. military to monitor an area continuously.

“We have the ability to stare at a particular piece of ground instead of just taking snapshots of it,” retired Vice Adm. Dennis McGinn said.

Some military personnel, however, warned that the task of finding and attacking Scuds would still be difficult.  The process of relaying information to headquarters can significantly slow the process — a lesson learned in Afghanistan — officials said.

When the target information is relayed to command centers in Saudi Arabia or the United States, “the clog starts to happen,” Fitzgerald said.

Air Force officials said they are addressing that problem (Greg Jaffe, Wall Street Journal, Oct. 15).

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP