Preparing for Nuclear War: President Reagan's Program
The Center for Defense Infomliansupports a strong eelens* but opposes e-xces- s~eexpenditures or forces It tetiev~Dial strong social, economic and political structures conifflaute equally w national security and are essential to the strength and welfareof our country
- @ 1982 CENTER FOR DEFENSE INFORMATION-WASHINGTON, D.C. 1.S.S.N. #0195-6450 Volume X, Number 8 PREPARING FOR NUCLEAR WAR: PRESIDENT REAGAN'S PROGRAM
Defense Monitor in Brief President Reagan and his advisors appear to be preparing the United States for nuclear war with the Soviet Union. President Reagan plans to spend $222 Billion in the next six years in an effort to achieve the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war. The U.S. has about 30,000 nuclear weapons today. The U.S. plans to build 17,000 new nuclear weapons in the next decade. Technological advances in the U.S. and U.S.S.R. and changes in nuclear war planning are major factors in the weapons build-up and make nuclear war more likely. Development of new U.S. nuclear weapons like the MX missile create the impression in the U.S., Europe, and the Soviet Union that the U.S.is buildinga nuclear force todestroy the Soviet nuclear arsenal in a preemptive attack. Some of the U.S. weapons being developed may require the abrogation of existing arms control treaties such as the ABM Treaty and Outer Space Treaty, and make any future agreements to restrain the growth of nuclear weapons more difficult to achieve. Nuclear "superiority" loses its meaning when the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. both possess far more nuclear weapons than the number required to destroy one another in all circumstances. 0 This Monitor features a status report on all U.S. nuclear weapons programs, an inven- tory of the U.S. nuclear stockpile, and information on locations of nuclear weapons in the U.S.
President Reagan has announced negotiations. large- order." It is a verv-. expensive his hopes for reaching agreements President Reagan and his advisors and very dangerous order as well. with the Soviet Union on limiting appear to have psychologically de- The Reagan Administration is nuclear weapons in Europe and in clared war on the Soviet Union. Some planning a major expansion of U.S. newly revived negotiations on officials believe the U.S. is in a nuclearforcesover thenext six years. strategic weapons (START talks). "pre-war" situation and that there is Both the United Statesand the a good chance of nuclearwarwith the The programs involve land, sea and Soviet Union have recently stepped Soviets. They want to prepare our air-based missiles, new bombers, up their propaganda campaigns to country to fight and win this ap- space weaponry and missile defense sway public opinion. Whether any proaching nuclear war. systems, among others. The implied practical achievements will flow Thi~dramatic, if not apocalyptic, purpose of this $222 Billion effort is from the war of words remains to be presumption is what underlies the to gain nuclear "superiority" over the seen. What is already clear is that new nuclear weapons program of the Soviet Union. The new nuclear President Reagan has approved the Reagan Administration. It is an at- weapons program, coupled with pro- most ambitious build-up of nuclear tempt to acquire a full-fledged nu- grams already funded and under de- weaponry in U.S. history. The danger clear war-fighting capability. As velopment, will result. in 17,000 new of nuclear war is increasing, despite Frank Carlucci, Deputy Secretary of nuclear weapons over the next dec- attempts to revive confidence in Defense,hasadmitted, "that is a very ade. PAGE 2 CENTER FOR DEFENSE INFORMATION
Contributing to the dangers of de- protracted conflict to an all-out at- ploying thousands of new nuclear tack. A Nuclear Warfighting weapons is an unsettling change of These recent developments in Capability emphasis in U.S. strategic doctrine strategy and doctrine also have seri- "I think we need to have a counter- that may make nuclear war more ous implications for attemptsat arms force capability. Over and above probable in the coming decades. control. So long as our leaders em- that, I think that we need to have a These changes in doctrine gained phasized concepts such as assured warfighting capability." much public attention when an oufr- destruction or sufficiency, fixed Frank Carlucci line of Presidential Directive 59 was criteria could be arrived at for deter- Deputy Secretary first leaked to the press in August mining the size and characteristics of of Defense January 13, 1981 1980. PD-59 codified the strategic U.S. nuclear forces. But war-fighting doctrine known as "countervailing concepts remove all constraints on strategy" which evolved during the the number, variety and complexity Several other features of the Rea- 1970's. In effect, it expands the of new nuclear weapons and their de- gan nuclear weapons programs are capabilities required or demanded of livery systems. particularly troubling. The exemp- U.S. nuclear forces in a nuclear war This new phase of the arms race is tion of strategic programs from and attempts to give the Resident a being pushed along by technological budgetary restraint will cause an wider range of choices. advances, which when added to war- imbalance in our armed forces, de- Emphasis has shifted from con- fighting doctrineandvast numbers of priving much neededfunds from con- ceiving of nuclear weapons as deter- new nuclear weapons, make their use ventional forces. Second, there is no rents to how they can be used as war- more plausible. Advances in the evidence that the Reagan Adminis- fighting weapons. technical sophistication of this new tration has seriously incorporated a The Reagan Administration ap- generation of weapons support war- role for arms control into its national pears to be carrying the countervail- fighting concepts that are becoming security plans. ingstrategy one step further. It plans part of the strategies of the U.S. and In October 1980, candidate Ronald to incorporate both the "limited nu- the U.S.S.R. Reagan stated that there was, in- clear options" of the Carter strategy For example, through advances in deed, an ongoing nuclear arms race, and its own ill-conceived notions of propulsion, guidance, and engineer- but that only the Soviet Union was nuclear superiority into the nuclear ing, our intercontinental ballistic participating. This issimply not true. weapons build-up. missiles (ICBMs) and other nuclear The U.S. is not now nor ever has been No one in the Administration has delivery systems are developing the "strategically inferior" to the Soviet bothered to produce a realistic defini- accuracy to destroy small hardened Union. As the survey below of U.S. tion of nuclear superiority in an age targets such as missile silos and nuclear weapons programs demon- when both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. command bunkers. This accuracy, strates, the enhancement and en- have thousands of nuclear weapons when incorporated into all our deliv- largement of U.S. nuclear forces has and the ability to effectively destroy ery systems (cruise missiles, SLBMs, continued unabated throughout the one another. However, it appears ICBMs, etc.) will give the U.S. a 1970's and will be accelerated in the that a major component of such a counterforce capability that could 1980's. drive for superiority will be the abil- soon threaten Soviet nuclear forces. The Reagan Administration's ef- ity to wage "limited" nuclear war. Our leadership, both civilian and fort to prepare to fight a nuclear war Through tremendous expenditures military, have consistently empha- is a dangerous and futile objective for both new nuclear weapons and sized that we seek only a nuclear that must be reconsidered. The rec- the systems to deliver them, the Ad- force capable of deterring our oppo- ord of the arms race shows that each ministration intends to build the ca- nents. Yet, when first strike advance will be met by the other side, pacity to Fight nuclear wars that capabilities and threats are weighed probably sooner than later, and that range from limited use through a what really matters is how the other neither nation can gain a significant side views our intentions. advantage. U.S. nuclear forces long ago sur- Nuclear weapons should serve only U.S. Seeks to "Prevail" passed the criteria of "minimum de- one purpoae, to deter war. The only in Nuclear War terrence" or "assured destruction." true test for the sufficiency of our nu- The U.S. public is being mistakenly clear forces is that they be able to 'We set out to . . . achieve im- led to believe that the continued ex- proved capabilities to enhance deter- meet any Soviet attack in a way that rence and U.S. capabilitiesto prevail pansion of our nuclear forces en- denies the Soviets an advantage for should deterrence fail." hances deterrence. In fact, if it con- having made the attack. Our present Defense Secretary tributes to Soviet insecurities about capability to deliver over 12,000 nu- Caspar Weinberger the safety of their own nuclear re- clear weapons on the Soviet Union November 3,1981 taliatory forces it may be doing just more than meets this test of suffi- the opposite. ciency. THE CENTER-FOR DEFENSE INFORMATION PAGE 3 THE STATUS OF U.S. NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAMS Land-based Missiles to include three missile squadrons at Maneuverable Reentry Vehicles Grand Forks Air Force Base, North Missile Experimental (MX). The (MARVJ. The Air Force's Advanced Reagan Administration has decided Dakota, and one at Malmstrom Air Ballistic Reentry System (ABRES) Force Base, Montana, is scheduled tocancel the Carter Administration's program develops reentry technology for initial operation in 1984 and com- multiple shelter basing plan but in support of existingand future mis- move ahead with the missile itself. pletion by 1985. sile systems. ABRES provides the The Reagan plan calls for placing Mark 12A Retrofit-Three hundred funding for development of the Ad- some portion of 100 MX missiles in MM 111 missiles are being retrofitted vanced Maneuvering Reentry Vehi- existing Minuteman silos beginning with the Mark 12A reentry vehicle cle (AMARV). AMARV was ostensi- in 1986 and hardening them. The (RV). Each of these 900 Mark 12A hly designed as a hedge against any problem of how to base MX continues RVs (three weapons per missile) will future Soviet anti-ballistic missile to plague the Reagan Administra- have twice the accuracy and double (ABM) threat. But AMARV's ability tion. They state hardened silos are an the explosive power (335 kilotons- to correct its trajectory during the reentry and terminal phases of flight interim or temporary solution while kt.) of the weapons on other MM Ills. further study is done on three, more This will give each retrofitted MM 111 will give it nearly 100 percent accu- permanent basing options, one or ten times the lethality of a MM 11. racy. Such accuracy, when combined more of which will be decided upon in The retrofitting has been completed with a large number of missiles- perhaps the MX and Minuteman 1984. The three are: MX deployed on about 150 missiles at Minot Air aboard continuous airborne alert air- Force Base and Grand Forks Air Ill-could pose a potent first strike craft, deep underground missile ba* Force Base, North Dakota. The threatagainst theSoviet ICBM force. ing (DUMB);and a Ballistic Missile Minot program will he completed in Additionally, the Navy is developing its own maneuvering RV, the Mark Defense (BMD) system to protect the fall of 1982, Grand Forks in early fixed silos. These decisions have 1983. 500 "Evader," for possible use on the Trident I1 missile. neither quelled the controversies Launch control systems-Improve- ~urroundingMX nor answered basic ments in communications for 300 Advanced Ballistic Reentry Vehicle questions about the strategic re- MM I1 silos have been completed at (AERV). Recently, ABRES has fo- quirements for MX or its contribu- Malmstrom Air Force Base, Mon- cused on other innovations in missile tion to our national defense. tana, and Whiteman Air Force Base, technology, including penetration The most important question Missouri. aids (decoys, chaff, etc.) for Pershing about MX, hut the least discussed, is 11, Trident, and MX and demonstra- whether the U.S. needs a hard Other Recent Improvements. The tion of an Advanced Ballistic Reentry target-killing missile. If we are pre- Command Data Buffer System, com- Vehicle (ABRV). There are reports paring to fight and win a nuclear war pleted in 1977 on BOO Minuteman 111 that the Pentagon has tentatively by initiating a preemptive disabling missiles, allows remote retargeting decided to use the ABRV instead of strike on Soviet nuclear forces, the of each missile in 25 minutes and the the MK12A on the MX ICBM. Each answer is yes. Otherwise, we do not entire force in ten hours, a process ABRV may have almost double the need it, for there are very few hard which used to take weeks. A silo up explosive power (about 600 kt) of the targets other thanmissile silos which grade program for Minuteman silos, MK12A and will be more accurate. require the power and accuracy of an completed in January 1980, provided MX system. all Minuteman wings with a sub- Long-RangeBombers stantial increase in hardening Minuteman Improvements. There against nuclear effects, resulting in a B-52 Modifications. The United are 550 Minuteman I11 (MM 111) significant improvement in surviva- States presently has 347 B-52s and ICBMs and 450 Minuteman I1 bility for Minuteman. Minuteman 62 FB-111s as active parts of the ICBMs. The former carry three nu- Ground Launch Centers are being clear weapons each and the latter upgraded by connecting them to the carry one. The Drive for Air Force Satellite Communications Superiority Airborne Lauwh Control System System (AFSATCOM), the 616A I iALCS)-Under the third phase of survivable Low Frequency Com- "We will build toward a sustained this program, a communications sys- munications System, and the SAC defense expenditure sufficient to close the gap with the Soviets, and tern will be installed on 200 MM I11 Digital Information Network (SAC- ultimately reach the position of mili- missiles and EC-135 aircraft. This DIN). These systems will reduce the tary superiority that the American will give commanders the ability to processing time for emergency mes- people demand." re-target and launch missiles from sages as well as missile crew work- Republican National Platform the air, if ground launch centers are load during crises. Scheduled com- 1980 Campaign destroyed in an attack. This system, pletion is Fiscal Year iFY) 1985. PAGE 4 CENTER FOR DEFENSE INFORMATION strategic bomber force. Twenty years costs $300-400 million per copy for ago our bombers carried 97 percent of conventional and theater missions is Overspending on our nuclear weapons. Because of the questionable strategy. Nuclear Weapons shift of emphasis to ICBMs and sub- The B-1B will be similar in design 'It is naive to assume that the de- marines, the bomber force now car- to the four prototypes Rockwell built fense budget is open ended. If we at- ries approximately 23 percent of our in the 1970's (at a total development locate so much of our defense budget nuclear weapons but still half the cost of $6 Billion). It will also incor- to strategic programs that we allow megatonnage. porate advances in avionics, cruise ow conventional posture to suffer, While the Air Force has been the missile carriage, air defense penetra- we will inadvertently decrease our options in protecting our vital inter- strongest proponent for a replace- tion, and radar cross-section reduc- eats without resorting to the use of ment to our "aging" B-52s they have tion which are currently available. nuclear weapons." also actively sought and received a The Reagan Administrationclaims a Senator Sam Nunn wide variety of programs to moder- squadron of 15 B-lBs will be opera- Senate Armed nize them as well. These programs tional in 1986. It is estimated that Services Committee include electronic countermeasures, the force of 100 B-1B aircraft will cost December 3,1981 sensors, communications systems via between $30-40 Billion. satellite, warning radar receivers, Advanced Technology Bomber Congressional critics claim that the jammers and terrain guidance sys- ("Stealth"). "Stealth" technology in- Administration is downplaying tems, and hardening against the ef- corporates improvements in design Stealth SO that it can pay for the fects of electromagnetic pulse gener- and countermeasures to reduce an B-1B. Actual cost figures for Stealth ated by nuclear explosions, among airplane's radar cross-section mak- are classified but estimates range others. Additionally, B-52Gs have ing it nearly "invisible" to radar and from $22 to $56 Billion depending on begun carrying air-launched cruise able to etude current Soviet air de- the number of aircraft. The Air Force missiles (ALCM). Former Secretary fenses. These innovations include: has recommended production of 110 of Defense Harold Brown concluded improvements in propulsion; reduced Stealth bombers. The Pentagon has that these improvements would en- aircraft weight; non-metallic and estimated the total cost of the B-lB, sure that "the B-52 force can remain radar absorbing materials; fewer en- Stealth and ALCM programs until effective into the 1990's." gines; refined avionics; improved de- theendofthe 1990sto be $115 Billion B-1BBomber. Despite the extensive fensive countermeasures; modifica- in FY 1981 dollars. The Administra- cruise missile program and the tions of air intakes; reduced engine tion has allocated $78 Billion for FB-111 and B-52 modifications pro- exhaust temperatures; and treat- 1982-87 for all bomber programs. grams, the Air Force has been trying ment of fuels to lower infra-red sig- to revive the B-1 long-range pene- natures- Submarines trating bomber since Carter's 1977 The Reagan Administration says it decision to terminate the program will accelerate research and de- Trident I Backfit Program. The and accelerate cruise missile de- velopment of the Stealth bomber air- program to backfit Trident I (C-4) velopment. President Reagan re- craft, and predicts that it will become missiles on 12 Lafayette and Beqja- cently decided to build a force of 100 available in the early 1990s. Some min F'ranklin Class Poseidon sub- B-1 variant aircraft (B-1B) as a suc- cessor to the B-52. The Reagan budget for FY 1982 includes $2.4 Bil- lion for procurement and research and development for the B-1B. The B-1had been designed primar- ily aa a manned penetrating bomber to carry nuclear bombs to targets in- side the Soviet Union. Its ability to carry out this mission against early- 1990s Soviet air defenses is doubted by many military experts. The Reagan Administration now claims the B-1B will also perform other missions, including: cruise missile carriage; conventional bomb- ins and theater support, both con- ventional and nuclear. While the B-1B may have such add-on capabilities, to risk an aircraft which THE CENTERFOR DEFENSE INFORMATION PAGE 5 marines continues. Seven retrofit- tings have been completed and the Reagan's $222 Billion Program entire program is scheduled to be 1 1 finished in FY 1982. Trident I 1 Bombers/Cruise missiles $78 Billion Sea-based weapons weapons are two and one half times $51 Billion ICBMs $42 Billion more powerful than Poseidon (C-3) Nuclear defense $29 Billion weapons and have a range of over (air defense, avil defense, etc,) 4,000 miles as opposed to 2,500 for Command-Control-Commnicationi? $22 Billion the Poseidon. The greater range in- 1 TOTAL $222 Billion for 3 982-87 creases the patrol area of these subs I by factor of 10, allowing them to Note: Additional expenditures on nuclear weapons in the Department ofhergy budget a will add$30-35 Billion. Does not include tactical nuclear weapons. operate in much largerregions of the Pacific and the Atlantic, thereby hedging against the possibility of The first ten Trident submarines explosive power and/or number of major Soviet anti-submarine ad- will be based in Bangor, Washington weapons than the Trident I. vances. and subsequent ones at Kings Bay, Advances in guidance will give the The estimated cost for producing Georgia. The total cost estimate for Trident I1 missile accuracy compara- Trident I missiles for 12 Poseidon building the Bangor base is $700.7 ble to a cruise missile or MX. The submarines is $4.5 Billion and for 15 million. The total cost estimate for weapon chosen could be the W-78, Trident submarines is now $11.3 Bil- building the Kings Bay facility is which in combination with the mis- lion. $1.25 Billion. While the Trident sile's high accuracy would give the One Poseidon squadron which will submarine construction program at Trident I1 a substantial hard target carry the Trident missiles was relo- Electric Boat in Groton, Connecticut kill capability. The missile is being cated in July 1979 from Rota, Spain has been plagued with problems- specifically designed to give our to Kings Bay, Georgia. Other cost over-runs, design changes, de- sea-based forces the ability to destroy Poseidon squadrons are located in lays, faulty workmanship and failure the Soviet land-baaed missiles in Holy Loch, Scotland and Charleston, to meet design specifications-the their silos, a capability that the other South Carolina. Eight Polaris sub- first Trident sub, USS Ohio, was two legs of our triad will have soon. marines have been redesignated at- commissioned on November 11, As noted previously, the MK500 tack submarines and have been 1981. It will begin active patrol in "Evader" maneuvering reentry vehi- withdrawn from the strategic force. 1982. The second Trident, USS cle is also being considered as an op- The USS Theodore Roosevelt and Michigan, will follow one year later tion on both the Trident 1 and 11. USS Abraham Lincoln have been with subsequent subs scheduled to be In 1980 the cost ofthe research and dismantled. delivered every 8-10 months. How development effort alone was esti- many Trident subs the Navy will buy mated to be $8 Billion. Total cost of Trident Submarine Program. The in all depends on many factors still to the Trident I1 missile program is es- first nine Trident submarines have be resolved, but will probably be at timated at $20 Billion. been authorized and are all sched- least twenty. Thecost of each Trident uled to be completed by 1987. Ad- sub (without nuclear reactor and Cruise Missiles vance funding for the tenth, eleventh missiles) now exceeds $1.2 Billion. and twelfth was recently approved by The cost of the total Trident sub- Cruise missiles are pilotless, jet- Congress. The Trident is the largest marine program is more than $30 powered, subsonic, miniature submarine the US. has ever built Billion. airplanes which carry nuclear or and a most formidable weapon. It conventional warheads. The German displaces almost 19,000 tons (a Trident 11. President Reagan has V-1 "buzz bomb" was an early, but Poseidon submarine is about 8,000) decided to step up development of a crude and inaccurate example of a and is 560 feetlong. Each Trident sub larger,more accurate Trident I1 (D-5) crui3e missile. Technological ad- willcarry 24 missiles compared to 16 missile for deployment on Trident vances have made American cruise missiles on Poseidon and Polaris. Its submarines to replace Trident I mis- 168-192 warheads will give each siles beginning in 1989. In its ad- submarine a total destructive power vanced development program, the "A Pre-War World" of 15-20 megatons. Forcomparison, it Navy has already begun working on "We areliving in a pre-war and not has been estimated that all the U.S. a number of options, though more a post-war world." bombs dropped on Europe and Japan testing will be necessary before cer- Eugene Rostow during World War I1 totalled about tain design criteria are established. Currently Director. U.S.Arms Control two megatons in explosive power. Whatever type of Trident I1 is de- and Disarmarnenl Agency Each Trident submarine can cover cided upon, it will have some combi- June 1,1976 more targets than ten Polaris subs. nation of greater accuracy, range, PAGE 6 THE CENTER FOR DEFENSE INFORMATION missiles into formidable weapons. able to change direction and altitude in flight. U.S. cruise missiles use the TERCOM guidance system to com- pare terrain features enroute with information stored on an on-board computer. With regularly updated guidance the cruise missile is able to follow an evasivecourse, hugging the ground below radar coverage, and strike within 200 feet of its target. Its small jet engine propels it at SO0 miles per hour with ranges of up to 1,500 miles. Three nuclear ver- sions, each of which have the explo- sive power of 200 kilotons, are planned to be deployed in the near future. The total cost for all cruise missile programs is $15 Billion. While its size, mobility, penetrabil- ity, and accuracy make it popular with some, those same factors pose Ground-Launched Cruise Missile serious arms control problems. in the United Kingdom is RAF In mid-1982 the anti-ship version Air-Launched Cruise Missiles Molesworth. The Italian site was (250 mile-range) launched from (ALCM). Boeing recently began publicly announced in August 1981 submarines will be deployed and a full-scale production ofthe AGM-86B and will be at Gnmiso in southern year later they will be put on surface air-launched cruise missile. One Sicily. It is planned to be operational ships for land-attack and anti-ship bomber is now equipped with in 1984. The total cost for the GLCM missions. Hundreds of nuclear tipped ALCMs. A squadron of 6-52G's at program is estimated to be $3.2 Bil- SLCMs with a range of 1500 miles Griffiss Air Force Base, Rome, New lion. The program remains highly will he deployed on surface ships and York will be the first one armed to controversial in all the countries attack submarines beginning in carry 12 external ALCMs, beginning scheduled for deployment. The ulti- mid-1984. Admiral Hayward, Chief in December 1982. By FY 1990 all mate fate of GLCMs in Europe may of Naval Operations, has said, the in- 172 B-52G's will beequipped to carry be determined during the current troduction of these missiles!'will play 20 ALCMs each, with 151 opera- negotiations between the U.S. and [a} pivotal role in changing the na- tionat at any one time. The total cost the Soviet Union on nuclear weapons tare of naval warfare in the future." for 3,418 missiles is estimated to be in Europe. $6 Billion. The Reagan Adininistra- Sea-Launched Cruise Missiles Other Theater tion has decided to deploy ALCMs on (SLCiWl. Over the next decade the Nuclear Weapons 100 B-1B bombers and 96 B-52Hs as Navy plans to build up to 4000 sea- Pershing 11. With the introduction well. This could mean the addition of launched cruise missiles for a large of the Perahing 11, the U.S. Army will hundreds or thousands more ALCMs number of submarines and surface join the Navy and the Air Force in beyond the 3,418 now planned. ships. Some will carry nuclear weapons. Initial plans call for SLCMs having a long-range ballistic missile Ground-Launched Cruise Mis- system. Restricted to short- and to be put on thirty surface ships and siles (GLCM). On December 12. medium-range nuclear missiles in seventy-four attack submarines. 1979, NATO Defense and Foreign the past, the 1979 NATO decision to There are three versions of sea- Ministers agreed to deploy 464 replace 108 Pershing IA laun- launched cruise missiles: a con- U.S. GLCMs in Europe: 160 in the United chers in West Germany with the ventional anti-ship, a conventional Kingdom; 112 in Italy; 96 in Ger- same number of Pershing I1 launch- many and 48 each in Belgium and land-attack, and a nuclear land- attack missile. ers will give the Army the ability The Netherlands. Decisions have to strike deep into Soviet territory. been made and announced on the In January 1982 Los Angeles-class sites for cruise missile bases in the nuclear-powered attack submarines The range of Pershing I1 is 1,000 United Kingdom and Italy. The first will begin to carry conventionally- miles as compared to 100-450 miles operational site will be at Greenham armed, land-attack cruise missiles for the Pershing IA. A potential ex- Common and isscheduled to be ready with a range of 700 miles. Each sub- tended range version could increase in December 1983. Theother location marine will have twelve launchers. (ccntinued on pose 141 CENTER FOR DEFENSE INFORMATION PAGE 7 Nuclear Weapons Locations in the United States Details conceniing the exact number and location of nuiiear weapons Mim, N.D.-Mind AFB intheUnitf^Statesareclassified information. From unclassified sources Tacoma. Wash.-McChord AFB it is possible toestimate where they are and in some caws how many. Hampton, Va.-Langley AFB Nuclear weapons are deployed or stored in about 34 states and three Alert territories at approximately 100ofthe almost 1000military installations Limestone, Maine-Loring AFB and properties in the US and in US temtories. SprinKlield. Fla.-Tvixiall AFB There are nuclear weapons present at twenty Strategic Air Com- Tucson, Ariz.-Davis-Monthan AFB mand (SAC) air bases,ail six Mimiteman(MM) and threeTitanD missile Klameth, Ore.-Kingsley Field fields and in the vicinity of the fleet ballistic missile submarine bases in Charleston, S.C.-Charleston AFB the United States. The locations are listed in sections I. 11, and 1U. Oneactive F-4 squadron is at. ElmendorfAFB, Anchorage. Alaska 1 Skateeic Air Command bomber bases-For an averaee sized and issent to alert bases al: Galena Airport,Galena, Alaska; King squadron of B-52s (15) there will be an average of approximately Salmon Airport, Naknek, Alaska; and Eielson AFB, Nonb Pole, 150 weapons at each base. The first eight bases listed below are Alaska. scheduled to receive the air-launched cruise missile (ALCMI. One Air Defense units with F-106and F-4C/D aircraft are deployed at B-52 squadron is also at Andersen Air ForceBase (AFB)in Guam. fourteen Air National Guard locations and ma: carry Genie mis- Biytheville, Ark.-Blytheville AFB siles. Because ofstringent safety requirements, it is doubtful that Bmssier City. La.-Barkadale AFB these unite maintain nuclear qualifications routinely. Fort Worth,Texas-Camell AFB [double squadron) Callahan, Fla.-Jacksonville International Airport IF-106) Grand Forks, N.D.-Grand FoAe AFB Falmouth, Muss.-Otis AFB IF-1061 Oscoda, Midi.-Wurtmith AFB Fargo, N.D.-Hector Field IF-4) Rapid City, S.D.-Ellsworth AFB (double çi)iladrnn Fresno, Calif-Fmno Air Terminal (F-106) Rome, New York-Griffw ATE Goldeboro, N.C.-Seymour Johnwn AFB (F-4. alert) Spokane, W&.-Fairchild AFB Great Falls, Mom.-Great Falls International Airport lF-106) Abilene, Texas-Dress AFB Honolulu. Hawaii-Hickham AFB (F-4) Ccldfiboro, NC.-Seymour JohllMD AFB Houston, Texas-Ellington AFB (F-4) Gwinn, Mich.-K. I. Sawyer ATB Klameth, Ore.-Kingslev Fieid IF-4, alert) Limestone, Mmi~e-L~ringAFB Mt. Clement, Mich.-Selfridre Air National Guard Base (F-4) Warn Robins, Ga.-Robins AFB Niagara Falls, NY -Niagara Falls International Airport Merced, Calif.-Castle AFB (FA.. ., Minot, N.D.-Minot AFB Plca~ntvillf,N.1.. Atlar.tirCity AiqiortIF106) Riverside. Calif.-March AFB I'onland, Ore.-Ponland International Airport a F-4 Sacrmninto, Calif.-Mather AFB Vnlorville, Calif - C*nrgc AFB IF-Kl6, PlattAurgb, N.Y.-Plattthwgh ATB (FB-111) Portsmouth, N.H,-Pm AFB (FB-111) B. Taclieal Air Commnnd-Three kinds maircraft 1ha1 have strike and inwdn-lion missions, which would inrlude t1.e uw nf U. htemmtinmtnl BaUuUc Missile (ICBM) locations-1052 nuclear weapons, are st the following bases 11 is unclear "whether ICBMs are deployed in missile silos in ten states spread over nuclear weapons would be carried with the aircraft across the approximately 80,000 square miles (the size of Minnesota). oceans or whether they are stored elsewhere in the US or abroad. Cheyenne, Wyo.-F. E. Wan-en Are-600 weapons on 200 Clovis, N.M.-Cannon AFB (P-IllD) MMm spread over 15,000 sq. mi. The majority of the Goldsboro, N.C.-Seymour Johnson AFB IF-4E) weapons are in Colorado and Nebraska. Homestead. FLa.-Homestead AFB (F-4E) Grand Forks, N.D.-Grand Forks, AFB-450 weapons on 150 Mountain Home, Idaho-Mountain Home AFB IF-] 11AI MMUi spread over 8500 sq. mi. Ogdcn. Utah-Hill AFB (F-16) Great Falls, Mont.-Malmtrom AFB-300 weapons on 150 Tampa, ?la.-MacDill AFB (F-4DIE1 MMU and 50 MMII spread over 23,000 sfl. mi. ValdoBta, GB.-Moody AFB 1F-4E) Knob Noeter, Mo.-Whiteman AD-150 weapons on 150 MMH spread over 10,000 sq. mi. C. Air Force Logistics-Five Air Logistic Centers providetup Mmot,N.D.-Minot ArB-450weapnson l50MMlD 6pread port for the Air Force's weapons systems in the form of procure over 4500 eq. mi. mat, supply, maintenance and transport. Three appear to have RapidCity,S,D.-Ellsworth AFB-150 weaponson 150MUffll nuclear weapons support, responsibilities. spread over 6600 sq. mi. Ogden, Utah-Hill AFB Jackwnville, Ark.-Little Rock AFB-17 weapone on I7 Oklahoma City, 0kla.-Tinker AFB Titan D miwilee spread over 2700 sq. mi. San Antonio, Texas-Kay AFB Tucson, Ariz.-DavisMonthan AFB-ISweapons on 18Titan Il missiles spread over 2700 eq. mi. Three probable nuclear weapons storage sites are at: Wichita, Kan.-McConnell AFB-17 weapm on 17 Titan Il Albuquerque, NM.-Kirtland AFB missilea spread over 7500 sq. mi. Bossier City, La.-Barksdale AFB Las Veps, Nev.-Nellie AFB HI. Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarine Bases-Poseidon sub- marines are based at Charleston,S.C. and Kine Bay, Ga. (also in D. Military Airlift-The most common aircraft used to transport Holy Loch, Scotland). The first ten Trident submarines will be nuclear weanons is the C-141. Five Militan Airlift C~tmmand based in Bangor, Washington. PAGE 9 ...... f' /'" (> ,,/' . . is Locations ,. ,, (--.d . A.. .. ,. ,' 1 , d States ...... Key: + Air Force ICBM Missile Base and Field Nuclear Weapons @ Design and Production ID~PI.ol tneroç Map prepared by Center for Defense Information -- . .-- - PAGE 10. CENTER FOR DEFENSE INFORMATION V. Navy VII. Department of Energy Ficilities A Naval Warship Bases-Most US naval warships are The Department of Energy Is responsible for overseeing the prod- eqnipped with nuclear-capable systems and carry various types of uction of nuclear weamns and nuclear material. An extensive nuclear weapons whenat sea on operations. In addition, auxiliary nationwide complex of nuclear wenpons laborattirie.-*:iml prodnc- shim such as submarine and destroyer tenders and ammunition imfacilities, employing 45,000 people,dei'p and manufacture ships routinely carry nuclear weapons as floatingdepots for other the hiimlredi) of rmnpdtit-nia of a nuclear we~poii. ships. Nuclear weapons will he on board nuclear-capable ships and:or in an appropriate storage depot in or near their bases ae: A. Laboratories Alameda. Calif.-Alametlfl Naval Air Station Los Alamw, N M. - lmAlamoa Labnawy Charleston, S.C.-Charleston Naval Base Livermore, Calif.-Lawrence Livemore Laboratory Groton. Ct.-New London Submarine Base Albiinnemue.-.... M M.-Sandia L~bnra¥n Long Beach, Calif.-Long Beach Station Owned by the ~ep&nt of Energy but operated by the Mavport. Fla.-Mayport Naval Station Univwsitv.~~~~~~ ,~ (if California.- the Lea-~~. Al~inrw~~ ~.and Livermore ~ lab-~ -~ Norfolk, Va.-Norfolk Naval Base ratories compete to design new nuclear weapons and to modify Pearl Harbor. Hawaii-Pearl Harbor Submarine and nld imps. Tlir Sandin Laboratory at Kirtland AFR n ioptti-nrwl Naval Base by the Weatern KIcctric Company, a subsidiary of American San Diego, Calif.-San Diego Naval Base Telegraph andTelt>ph.~neIt also hasa laboratory at Lawrence Livennore. Its responsibilities include making sure that nu- clear ".capons meet manufacturing apwificatiorifl and deAinn- are B. Storage Depots- At least seven locations main storage ing "on-nucli?ar enrnp 165-mm Nuclear Artillerv Shell PAGE 12 CENTER FOR DEFENSE INFORMATION UNITED STATES NUCI oepl. Of Energy Weapon Explosive Weapon Systema Designation Powerb Service Numberc Remarks Bomber-carried w-mi- ZOOM Ajr Fme 3.418 are planned iOT 151 B-5%~. These, or morn dl1bà Ail-Launched CriilK deptwod on B-S2Ha and/or &I&.The ALCM waiqte Miiaile (ALCM) (1981) 3.300 Ibe. Land-based w-7r 335hi Air POTO 900 wi) be tfcowed On 300 MMIII t>v eaily 1983. Minuteman In ICBM 1,083 MK 12A RVs arm bong produced. MK-124 MIRV x 3 (1979) Submarinebased W-75- 1Wkt Nw For seven ?&don submarines retrofit to date and ore Trident I SLBM Trident submarine. For olhir lire Poseidon subs 560-aOO MK4 MIRV x 7-10 (1979) mcr~to be compwed in IW f'tim 15 TrMitsuhnarnes are built. 2520-3500 TtidenI ISLBM wa-. &nbr.camed W.68 imkt Air Force Sunwsonic alr-Wrd missite. 1020 dectovad lo Short Range Attack B-SaW t-HBBS and 120 to FB-111A bases. SRAM Missile (SRAM) (1972) wBiahs. 2.2W lbs. Subame-bed W68t 40M Naro AV&W 145 weapons for each d 24 submarine After Poseidon SLBM Trident Iretrofitting nineteen P&n submarines will MK-3 MIRV x 3-10 (1971) retain Poseidon SLBM&. AsPolaris submarines have been retired (tie nunber of warheadson Poseidon SLW5 has beçnselectivelymcraased Land-based W-62t 170kt Air Porn 250 MMIII dl1 rctan the MK-12BVaRer may 1983. Minutem HI ICBM MK-12 MIRV x 3 (1970) W-st am Nan EmPolarissubmarlnes nan been (edesionaled aiack subs and wttidrawn from ne strategic force Tivo other Poiaria subs have Men diamanfed. The 460 Potans wewona *II m robred. Land-based w-S6 1-mt Air Force One each on 450 MMtl. Save MMiI may be replaoM Minutonan II ICBM Mtti MM111. MK.11 (1968) Lanebaseti W-S3t 5-9rnt Air Force 52 Titan 11 msailes presently operational. All or part to be Titan I1 ICSM retrod. MK-6 11963) Land-warfare w-79' sub* Amy, Marine The neutron weapon. 800 are planned to be produced and 8-mh Anillw Fred 2kt Calp. U.S.. mill be mdqAlBd in the U.S. Atomic PWleIAFAP) (1981) Europe Larewarfare w-70 (Mod 3 *ad Amy, US: 360 Mods 1 and 2 are preaanlly deployed in Europe and Lance Mobile Short-flange 1.2.w options Europe elsewhere. Mod 3 is the enhanced radiation version (neu- Surface-To-Surface Ballisfc lict-IOCM tron weapon) now in productior. About 300 are planned. Missile (1972; Naval-warfare w-55 Several Nmç On 68 of AS nudeac-pow attack submarines. Each sub SUBROC SJbnOTns-Laundied kt can cany4-6. WHh a rangedover30 miles, Sutuoccm be Anti-Submarine Nurfaar targeted ¥ hi land. Missile (1965) Land-warfare w-54 .Olkl-lkt Aroiy. Marine Uan-podabta (SQVs Ibs.) land mines deployed in Europe SwdAtomic Demolifon COW. u.s.- and elseMwe. Munition (SAOM) (1964) bropa Land-warfare w-50 3 vette Army, U.S: For 100U.S and 72 West Gennm launchers Parking la Mobile Land. 60,200 bropB Assumes55reloads. 40CM Land-warfare w.48 Sub hi- Ami, Marine EighltyneEolillKiearcapable <5mmartl4stygunsavailable. 15% ArTillery Fired 2kt m,U.S.. The mostixmmon is fhe M-109. Tie W-82 is planned to Atomic Pmiectlk... IAPAPl replace fie W4. (1963) Land-warfare w.45.3 1-15 kt AUTO. MOTTO Land mines ttopkvod in Europe and Bisewheie. Medium Atomic Defnotition Cmps, U.S.. Munition (MADM) (1964) Gnxx Nwal-wadare W-45-I+ I'd Naw The RIM-20 vraion is nuclear Tamer is dedon 31 Terriw Surf-To-Air Ai* a cruisers and destroyers. Assumes 10 per amp. aircraft Missile (19%) w-44 NaÈ Gamed on 78 Destroyen, 27 c"sets, and 65 Maata, :robw Assumes five warheads par atvp. Land-marfare w-33t Sub kl- Amy, Marine Being reftaaad by W-79. Three types of nuclear capable 3-inch Artlhy-Fired 10kt Cop, U.S.. 8 inch artilw guns available IM-55. U-110, M-1151. Atomic Projectile {AFAP) Europe Approximately 1000 waitieads in Europe. (19581 THE CENTERTOR DEFENSE INFORMATION PAGE 13 WEAPON STOCKPILE Dent. of Energy Weapon Explnsive Weapon System- Designation Powero Sewice Numberc Remarks LaraKiartaTe 3yÇil0 HoKKI John avaide 1000 Honest John weapons withdrawn from Europe during Short-Range SurfflCe'To- 1.m 1960.200 remainin Greece and Turkey. Warhead wilt Suite Missile (7856) remain in the inventory pas1 1992. USKHuwl 3 yielas Will be phased out and replaced by the Patriot missile. Nike Hercules available Surface-To-Ali Suite) 1-2ohl Wile(19561 Air-warfare a taw Air Force Deployed with approximately 300 &ran (01 air de*erise Genie All-Tl>Air Missile mns missions. (1957) LightWeigM SfxIMic 4 yield Air Force. Nv, Mod 1 is ihe strategic version È weighs 718 tot md Tactical Nudnr ophns Maine Corps, ~oo0 was fim oeoiovm in 1968. uoa 1 in 1969. Mod 2 Bomb 119661 1DO-50ffla U.S.-Europe n 1975. Hoc 3 anc 4 ir 1976 and MM 5 in 197 Li!,M-Weigh! Nlldwr 4YW Air Force. For anti-submarine warfare aircraft and helioapters and Depth Charge or Kuckli options ~avy,Mgrine tactical aircraft. Boirt. 119841 Sub M- Corps, US.- 20kt Europe proliBMY Air Force Only carried on 8.52s. Weigh 8350 Ibs. mt at least Air FOTO. Can be carried on most nuclear-capabte strategic and five yields MafInt Corps, tactical aircraft. Nay, US- Europe vmus Air Force, Can be assembled in five different mnliquratkins. YW Marine Corps, Weighs 2540 ibi. Navy NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN ADVANCED RESEARCH (DOE Phases 3 and 4) penhim n and-Motile w-85 ¥ivsi For each of the 106 lawwhers Long'Ftttifle SuifÈw-To Surface MMte nutdm (19831 Air Force 560 For 116 launchers in ¥Europe Planned Four missiles per launcher. Medium Weight High various ~i FOW, pmbatly Weigte 2.408 to. Wil Ieplaw ¥> 8-20 and H3. ndd Nuclear nomb yiwI& Marine Corps, several I19831 Navy, U.S.. Ihounnd Europe Army, Marine probably To replace W-48. No plans as yçto produce an enhanced Corps, U-S: several radiation verso". Europe thousand Navy probably FW egis anti-aircraft systems Will replace Ternei several RIM-20. hundred Km 384 Initial plans to date can tor 194 for submarines and 190 for surface ships. Many more may be produced Noses: Bol it to 2.400 miles. The Pershing [[ will damage" (damage to property, build- ministration plans to spend $22 Bil- be the most accurate ballisticmissile ings, etc.1 while killing enemy sol- lion over the nest six years for this in the world. Its reentry vehicle will diem through massive doses of radia- purpose. be terminally guided by anon-board tion. Thus, they assert, it is the per- Present improvements in our C31 radar system to strike within about fect deterrent to a mass Soviet tank syatem are deaigned to provide re- 100 feet of its target, as against 1300 attack in Western Europe-it would dundancy to the network, so that feet for the Pershing [A, Because of kill tank crews but leave villages in- should part of it be destroyed in a this precise guidance, the explosive tact. nuclear war our commanders could power of the new W-85 warhead has These assertions fail to consider; control the course of a nuclear war been reduced to 10-20 kt from the that NATO already has excellent from the execution of "limited nu- 60-400 kt yield of the Pershing [A. anti-tank capabilities; that the dear options" through a full-scale Present plans do not include produc- weapon would still cause vast nuclear attack. tion of the W-86 earth penetrator amounts of blast and thermal dam- While redundancy of communica- warhead. Other features of the age, especially if large numbers were tions and close control over nuclear Pershing [I will be its four-to-six used against a mass attack; and that weapons is a desirable end, certain minute flight time to the Soviet Soviet tank crews might not be im- improvements in C31 could also de- Union from West Germany and its mediately incapacitated and could lude military and civilian leaders high state of readiness. fight on for several hours. But its into believing that a nuclear war is Seventy-two additional Pershing most dangerous effect will be to lower controllable, fightable and winnable. IA launchers are deployed with the the nuclear threshold and make nu- While it is essential to maintain the West German Air Force. There are no clear war in Europe more likely. credibility of our nuclear retaliatory present plans to replace these with Further, it is probable that the threat, some measures for improving Pershing 11s. The first Pershing I18 Soviets will now build a neutron this credibility have the added effect are scheduled to be in place in De- bomb of their own. of both inducing our leaders to con- cember 1983 with all inplace by the template limited nuclear war- end of 1985. However, deployment Command, Control, fighting and persuading the Rus- could be delayed due to political con- Communications, and sians that we are trying to achieve siderations or cancelled as a result of just such a capability. the negotiations on nuclear weapons Intelligence (C31)Programs It will be extremely difficult to de- in Europe. An extensive global network gives sign a C*I system that is more sur- command and control centerssuch as vivable than the strategic force it is Enhanced Radiation Weapons the White House, the Pentagon, and intended to support. The uncertain- (Neutron "Bomb"). The Reagan Ad- SAC headquarters the ability to ties that would inevitably remain ministration has decided to move communicate with all elements of concerning command and control forward on production of enhanced U.S. strategic forces. Command, con- make the use of nuclear weapons for radiation warheads or "neutron trol, communications, and intelli- controlled escalation a very difficult bombs" for use with Lance short- genre (C31) systems are designed to problem. range surface-to-surface ballistic warn command authorities of immi- missiles and eight-inch artillery nent nuclear attack, assess the at- - - and Some Current and Projected shells. The estimated production is tack possible responses, send out Improvementsin PI 380 waheads for the Lance and 800 orders to our strategic nuclear forces, E-4B Advanced Airborne National Com- for the eight-inch shell. For the time and evaluate the damage to both lnand Port (AABNCPI-(A modified 747 air- being, at least, the neutron warheads sides from a nuclear exchange. These craft. Enables President to command U.S. nu- will be stored in the United States, systems include satellites, com- clear forces from the air during a nuclear mm) ready for rapid deployment to puters, underground antenna grids, Strategic Air Command Digital Network Europe. special aircraft, ground-based (SACDIN)-(SiiTvivable communications be- Enhanced radiation weapons are radars, space-based sensors, and, tween SAC H.Q.and miasil&mbers)  MTLSTAK EHF Communicatimis Satel- designed to permit the release of the soon, even lasers. llte high-energy "fast" neutrons pro- With the implementation of a nu- Ground-baaedElectro OptidDeepspace duced in thermonuclear (fusion) clear war-fighting strategy comes Surveillance System (GEODSSI-(Satellite monitoring) reactions so that a higher percentage the need for a C31 network that can Two Additional PAVE PAWS Bites- of the energy released will be in the continue to operate throughout the (Early warning of SLBM launches) form of prompt radiation, with blast course of a nuclear war. Step;; are Air Force Satellite Communications (AFSATCOM'J-[A~~OW~President and mili- and thermal damage somewhat re- now underway to make our C31 sys- taiq mmmandem to communicate with ad duced, in comparison to battlefield tems more survivable, jam-resistant send out onctera to U.S. nuclear forces) fission weapons. and secure so that our nuclear forces Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) System-(Communications with submadma) Its proponents claim that the neut- can conduct a protracted nuclear war Satellite mivability enhancement ron weapon will reduce "collateral at any level of escalation. The Ad- THE CENTER FOR DEFENSE INFORMATION PAGE 15 Anti-satellite warfare (ASAT). Haig: "U.S. Very, Very Strong" The United States is now accelerat- I ing development of weapons de- "In a contemporary senee, the United States is very, very strong and very, signed to destroy enemy satellites. very capable, especially in the strategic area. Our systems are both more Anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons are sophisticated and reliable and more technologically sound." attractive to the military because de- Secretary of State Alexander Haig struction of enemy satellites would September 1 I, 1981 eliminate important military capabilities of the adversary. Other Programs tons yield. Each LoADS unit would The .most important near-term probably contain three interceptors U.S.effort is the Miniature Homing Air Defense, The Reagan Adminis- teach about half the size of the old Intercept Vehicle, a small device that tration will undertake a large and Sprint missile of the Safeguard pro- would home in on theinfra-red radia- expensive effort toupgrade continen- gram), a small radar, and a com- tion of a target satellite and collide tal United States (CONUS) air de- puter. A LOADS unit would have to with it at high speed. Initially, this fense. The CONUS system is primar- locate incoming missiles, discrimi- vehicle will be tested on a small, ily responsible for detecting and nate between weapons and decoy de- two-stage rocket launched from an shooting down enemy bombers which vices or other electronic countermea- F-15 jet fighter. Testing will begin in attempt to strike the United States. sures, and then destroy theattacking early 1983. If the testing proves suc- The Soviet Union presently has weapon, in less than ten seconds-a cessful, this ASAT weapon would be about 150 aging long-range bombers. formidable task. capable of being launched from vir- Five squadrons of F-106intercep- LoADS was being considered most tually any modificdF-15 andperhaps tors will be replaced with F-150.At immediately for application in con- other aircraft. It could also be least six additional AWACS airborne junction with the MX in a mobile bas- launched from a land-based rocket. surveillance aircraft will be pur- ing scheme, but it is also being de- Plans now call for this first genera- chased to supplement the 17AWACS signed to defend fixed silos. tion ASAT weapon In he ready for now assigned to CONUS. AWACS Research is also being conducted operation by 1985. provide sea and air surveillance and on other BMD systems, including The ASAT program will also pur- control interceptors in wartime, long-range, non-nuclear ones, for sue methods for attacking satellites Also, a combination of new over- parallel use with LOADS in a in high and geosynchronous orbits of the-horizon backscatter (OTH-B) "layered defense." Further long-term about 22,300 miles, where many im- radars and improved versions of BMD research involves the use of portant military satellites are present ground radars will be built. space-based lasers and other mecha- stationed. nisms with potential BMD applica- Some backers of a large U.S.ASAT Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD). tion. program imply that we can move Though the Anti-Ballistic Missile As now envisioned, the deploy- armed conflicts into outer spate and (ABM) Treaty of 1972 andits protocol ment of BMD would be prohibitively prevent mass destruction on earth. severely limited testing and deploy- expensive (some experts suggest a However, at least.for the near future, ment of ballistic missile defense sys- minimum of $11 Billion for a space-based weapons are being de- terns, research and development baseline LoADS system alone), signed to contribute to fighting on have continued under a vigorous would probably violate the ABM earth, not replace it. Space may be a program directed by the Department Treaty, would prompt the Soviets to place where ware will start, but it ofthe Army. Possible deployment of a build their own BMD system, and will not make war safe for mankind. BMD system for defense of MX, Min- would have many serious operational What the extension of military com- uteman, or other sites is currently problems. LoADS intercept would petition into space does is add to the receiving a great deal of attention. occur at such low altitudes that only complexity and cost of the arms race The Reagan Administration is pur- one shot would be possible, leaving and further complicate arms control suing missile defense as one of its no margin for error. The Soviets measures. three possible options for long-term could develop countermeasures, such Laser and Particle-Beam Weap- basing of MX. as a maneuvering reentry vehicle ons. Research is also being con- LOADS (Low Altitude Defense Sys- (MARV), to evade LOADS intercep- ducted on longer-term, more exotic tem) is the BMD system now under tors and they could simply put more ASAT weapons such as high-energy development which could be de- weapons on their missiles to over- lasers and charged particle beam ployed the most rapidly. It is de- whelm the system. weapons. These programs are largely signed to attack incoming weapons at The Reagan Administration's re- under the auspices of the Defense altitudes below 50,000 feet with an quest for funding of a total BMD pro- Advanced Research Projects Agency interceptor missile which would gram for FY 1982 is about $600 mil- (DARPA). carry a nuclear warhead ofa'few kilo- lion. Lasers are intense beams of light PAGE 16 THE CENTER FOR DEFENSE INFORMATION thatcan be narrowly focused at great space weapons and may have longer $2.6 Billion on civil defense, from a distances. There are many problems range in the atmosphere if the prob- low of $26 millionin 1951 to a high of to be solved before lasers could be lem of beam scattering can be over- $207 million in 1962. The Reagan used as long-range weapons, but hoth come. Administration requested $132.8 the U.S. and U .S.S.R.are engaged in Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW). million for FY 1962 for civil defense, this research. In the past decade, the U.S.has spent a 13 per cent increase over the FY Lasers based on satellite battle substantial funds in an intense effort 1981 funding level. The Reagan Ad- stations are being contemplated as a to develop an effective anti- ministration has emphasized civil way to attack other satellites, such as submarine warfare capability. A sig- defense as a significant part of its warning and communications satel- nificant breakthrough fbv either nuclear weapons package. lites. This could increase fear of sur- - . ~. side) in ASW might prove to be prise attack on hoth sides, adding to highly destabilizing in a field of war- instability. fare where the U.S. now maintains a Very Expensive Further, the overlap in the appli- clear lead over the Soviet Union. Al- cation of exotic technologies to hoth Nuclear Weapons though U.S. ASW capabilities are ASAT and BMD ia an important as- El Bomber $40 Billion principally structured to preserve pect that has received little atten- Trident Submarine + $30 Billion sea lines of communication and pro- tion. Space-based lasers might also MX Missile S3O Billion tect carrier battle groups, major im- Stealth Born ber $22-56 Billion he used as an anti-ballistic missile provements in ASW might create a Trident I1 Missile SM Billion system. Laser BMD systems could I serious threat to the Soviets'ballistic Air-Launched stimulate a new round in the arms Cruise Missile $6 Billion missile submarines. At present, de- race, as each side attempted to cancel Ground-Launched spite some advances in detecting out the other's BMD capability. Cruise Missile S3.2 Billion still has Pershing I1 Missile $1.8 Billion Particle beams are another form of Soviet submarines, the U.S. no real protection against missile at- directed energy which are concen- Note: These estimtedprogram mats& no1 tack from the sea. trated beams of sub-atomic charged include costs of nuclear weapons in the De- partment of Energy budget or the casts of particles. Particle beams may have Civil Defense. Over the past thirty operating those iveapws, several advantages over lasers as years the United States has spent ofthin by.wudS1.00, lOor ~uitvcopiM,.Weach. CD1 reoeivefi ~mfundafrom government or from military ctintractom ThpCenter is financed ulçl vduniiy taiddurttble mtritArtioqBiailed to fund for Pcaw. 303 Capital Galley West, 600 Maryland Avenue. S W.. Wnshl-, 0 C. 20074 Atmioo. Aawirnll~Bmn.,* THESTAFF Dinwinf- Rear Adlnirri GemR LaRocqut U.S Nan IBM.1 Deputy Director: Rew Admire] Eufiene J. Carroll Jr. U.S. Navy 1ReU Awwune Director- M or &tienil winam TF~irfanurn u^.M.c. Research Interns. TTiorna? Grecnberp Steven Hirsch IKentuckyI Mary Holland IHarvardl Joshua Hi-iraick lU c S c , Sandy Scott (Yak) "'Pnncpi Analysts This Issue A PMUECT OFTHE FUND FOR PEACE Center forOefense Information 303 Ca~ilalGallery West 600 ~arylandAV~& sw Washington, D.C. 20024 (202) 484-9490