U.S. Plans:  MDA Will Test Missile Defense Systems at Night

The U.S. Missile Defense Agency is planning to conduct a nighttime intercept test with its Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, Aerospace Daily reported today (see GSN, May 16).

Missile defense officials do not believe that testing the system at night will present serious challenges, but they say they want to test it nonetheless.

“I would think that at the least, you’d want to know that the system could work at night,” said Philip Coyle, former Defense Department director of operational test and evaluation, who pushed for the nighttime test along with several experts, according to Aerospace Daily (Marc Selinger, Aerospace Daily, May 19).

Officials also said that money and staffing shortages forced the agency to suspend a planned June 2004 missile intercept test and instead test a radar component of the system.  The agency is still deciding whether the intercept test will be conducted at all, according to System Executive Officer Patricia Sanders.  The Senate Armed Services Committee added $100 million to the fiscal 2004 budget to pay for the test, Bloomberg.com reported (Tony Capaccio, Bloomberg.com, May 19).

Boosters Tested Soon

Agency officials have also decided on more specific timeframes to test its prospective boosters.  The agency plans to test the Orbital Sciences booster in late July and the Lockheed Martin booster in late August at California’s Vandenberg Air Force Base.  Full flight tests of the boosters with a variety of sensors involved are scheduled to take place between September and November (Selinger, Aerospace Daily).

Back to top

U.S. Plans I:  Former Official Raises Test Concerns; Congress Compromises

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Defense Department’s former top testing official yesterday expressed concern that the Pentagon’s key national missile defense system will be insufficiently tested prior to its scheduled first deployment in September 2004.

Meanwhile, Congress appears ready to approve the initial deployment, as House Democrats have negotiated an agreement with Republican colleagues to require full testing after the initial deployment and before any subsequent deployments.

Philip Coyle, the Pentagon’s assistant secretary of defense and director of operational test and evaluation from October 1994 to January 2001, said failed, repeated and cancelled tests have set back development of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, the most advanced U.S. system designed to shoot down long-range enemy missiles.

While the system has undergone 10 integrated flight tests (IFTs) so far, “We’re still really back at about IFT-6” in terms of goals achieved, said Coyle, who now serves as a senior adviser for the Center for Defense Information.

Eight of those tests were intercept tests, and five successfully destroyed mock enemy warheads in space.  The most recent test in December failed, however, and the Pentagon has since disclosed canceling four tests that were planned to take place before the interceptors are scheduled to be fielded in Alaska and California (see GSN, April 18).

Specific Concerns

Coyle voiced concern that the GMD system has not accomplished a successful test at night.  The first attempt to do so was the unsuccessful intercept test last December, and he said it is not clear that there will be another nighttime test before the system is deployed.

“I would think at least you would want to know the system would work at night,” he said, explaining that a darkened target is more difficult to identify by the infrared sensor on the interceptor.

Coyle also said he is worried that the system will not have attempted the more difficult challenge of intercepting a warhead in a geographic location farther from the interceptor launch site at Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific.  Integrated Flight Test-16, which was scheduled to occur weeks before the scheduled deployment but has been cancelled, would have been the first such test.

Coyle also expressed concern that the interceptor might not be tested against a target that is tumbling or one that does not contain a locator beacon.  In addition, he said the interceptor should be tested without receiving certain prior information about the mock warhead target.

“So far, all of the flight intercept tests have been conducted in such a way that the interceptor gets information on the target before it is even launched,” he said.

Fly Before You Buy, After You Buy

The White House announced in December that President George W. Bush had ordered the military to deploy an initial missile defense capability by September 2004 (see GSN, Dec. 17, 2002).  The Pentagon has indicated that Bush’s request will involve operating six missiles at Ft. Greely, Alaska, and four at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.  Ten more will be based at Ft. Greely in fiscal 2005.

Congress is in the process of authorizing funding for the deployment, which would be unusual because major weapons systems traditionally have not been deployed until they have been proven operationally effective through testing.

Two senior Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee — which on Wednesday approved funding for the deployment as part of $9.1 billion in missile defense funding in the 2004 defense authorization bill — offered an explanation for the approval. 

In a statement, Representatives John Spratt (D-S.C.) and Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas) said that, through a compromise with Republicans, the defense bill would require the Pentagon to conduct full operational testing of the GMD system after its initial deployment and before any further deployment.

The House bill, they said, makes clear “that after the initial deployment of 20 ground-based interceptors and up to 20 sea-based interceptors, the Pentagon will rigorously test BMD [ballistic missile defense] systems and comply with initial test and operational evaluation requirements prior to further BMD deployments.”

It “re-establishes a bipartisan consensus on ‘fly before you buy.’  If we are going to spend $9.1 billion per year on BMD, the American people deserve to know whether the systems being deployed will work or not,” they wrote.

Back to top

U.S. Plans II:  Increased Patriot Production Could Cause Problems

By David McGlinchey
Global Security Newswire

A U.S. Defense Department request to increase Patriot Advanced Capability 3 missile production could cause problems with the contractor, according to a General Accounting Office report released yesterday (see GSN, May 8).

Four PAC-3 missiles were fired during the invasion of Iraq, according to Missile Defense Agency Director Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish, who said Patriot missiles, including the less-capable PAC-2 version, downed nine Iraqi missiles, although it is unclear how many Iraqi missiles were actually hit by PAC-3s (see GSN, April 16).

The Pentagon decided last October to buy 208 PAC-3 missiles over the next two years, according to the GAO report, Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Major Weapons Programs.  The new order was placed while the Pentagon’s war preparations with Iraq were still in the early stages.

“Because production was not expected to be accelerated to this level this early in production, the contractor must expeditiously find and train qualified personnel,” the report says.

Raytheon is the prime contractor for the PAC-3, while Lockheed Martin is the contractor for the missile segment of the program.  GAO said the new production goals represent “challenges” for the contractors.

According to the report, the increased procurement will require a boost of $239 million in funding for the PAC-3 program.  Patriot missile program officials said the contractors are capable of producing a “consistent and quality product,” the report says.

Flight Tests

The report also noted that none of the four PAC-3 operational tests in 2002 was completely successful.

“According to program officials, there were several anomalies caused by manufacturing practices, software and test hardware.  However, they believe there are no systemic issues and the anomalies have been corrected,” the report says.

A PAC-3 flight test is scheduled this spring to confirm the officials’ assertions.

Airborne Laser

In reviewing other missile defense programs, the GAO also faulted the Airborne Laser program for being underdeveloped.  The program is designed to mount a laser, powered by chemical modules, on an airplane to patrol the skies and shoot down enemy missiles shortly after they are launched (see GSN, March 7).

“Only one of the ABL’s five critical subsystem’s — the aircraft itself — represents mature technology,” the report says.

The other subsystems are the laser itself, a fire control system to direct the laser, a battle management subsystem and a ground control subsystem.  Some components of the guidance system have been tested in simulated environments, but the other three are “low-fidelity” prototypes that have been tested only in a laboratory, the report says.

The Missile Defense Agency now plans to field block upgrades to the airborne laser program in 2004 and 2008 to demonstrate the technologies.  If either of the blocks shows operational utility it may be pressed into service, GAO said.  The technology has so far only provided trouble, according to the report.

“Problems associated with maturing technology have consistently been a source of cost and schedule growth throughout the life of the program,” the report noted.

Back to top

European Plans:  Russia, NATO Agree on Missile Defense Cooperation

Russian and NATO officials agreed Tuesday to cooperate on the first phase of a theater missile defense system, ITAR-Tass reported (see GSN, April 11).

The missile defense effort is a “pilot project,” according to NATO Secretary General George Robertson.  Officials agreed to the program during a meeting of the Russia-NATO Council in Moscow, according to ITAR-Tass.

All 20 countries at the meeting said they would provide financial support for the program, Robertson said (ITAR-Tass, May 13 in FBIS-SOV, May 13).

Russia should participate in the missile defense system on an equal footing with NATO countries, according to Konstantin Kosachyov, deputy chairman of the Duma International Affairs Committee.

“Russia should do its best to obtain the status of an equal partner in the development of the new missile defense system in cooperation with NATO in order to avoid unpleasant surprises in the future,” Kosachyov said.  “Now it is necessary to agree who and how will take part in the project in the respect of technologies and financing,” he added (ITAR-Tass II, May 13 in FBIS-SOV, May 13).

Back to top

Canada:  Decision Delayed on U.S. Missile Defense Negotiations

Canadian leaders yesterday delayed a decision on opening missile defense discussions with the United States, Reuters reported (see GSN, May 5).

The majority of Canadian cabinet ministers support the idea of cooperating with Washington’s national missile defense system.  A number of ruling Liberal Party parliamentarians oppose the idea, however, and have asked for further briefings from the defense and foreign ministers, according to Reuters.

Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien said the decision was delayed “because we are having a discussion inside caucus … there are differing opinions inside caucus.  That’s normal.”

The decision was originally scheduled for late Tuesday.

“We talked a bit about it today.  The ministers of foreign affairs and defense are discussing it at this time with the members of the caucus … so we decided to wait for these discussions to terminate,” Chretien said yesterday (David Ljunggren, Reuters, May 13).

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP