DOCSLIB.ORG

GAO-19-68, Missile Defense

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
GAO-19-68, Missile Defense United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Committees December 2018 MISSILE DEFENSE Air Force Report to Congress Included Information on the Capabilities, Operational Availability, and Funding Plan for Cobra Dane GAO-19-68 December 2018 MISSILE DEFENSE Air Force Report to Congress Included Information on the Capabilities, Operational Availability, and Funding Highlights of GAO-19-68, a report to Plan for Cobra Dane congressional committees Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found First fielded in 1976 on Shemya Island In its January 2018 report to Congress, the Air Force reported how the Cobra in Alaska, the Cobra Dane radar faces Dane radar and the Long Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR) have shared and growing sustainment challenges that unique capabilities to support ballistic missile defense and space surveillance DOD plans to address through missions. The report noted that the respective locations of both radar systems modernization projects. Anticipating affect their ability to provide those capabilities. The Department of Defense future needs, DOD began investing in (DOD) also has other radar investments—the Pacific Radar and the Space new radar systems that share Fence, which, according to DOD officials, may reduce DOD’s reliance on Cobra capabilities with Cobra Dane to support Dane to provide ballistic missile defense and space surveillance capabilities. ballistic missile defense and space surveillance, including the LRDR The Cobra Dane Radar on Shemya Island, Alaska (Alaska), the Space Fence (Marshall Islands), and the Pacific Radar (location to be determined). The conference report accompanying a bill for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 included a provision that GAO review the Air Force’s report to Congress on the operation and sustainment of Cobra Dane. This report identifies information included in the Air Force’s report and describes additional information that GAO reviewed on (1) the capabilities of the Cobra Dane radar and other planned radars to meet The Air Force’s report to Congress noted that Cobra Dane met its requirement DOD’s mission requirements, (2) for operational availability, which refers to the percentage of time that the radar is Cobra Dane’s operational availability able to meet its missions. GAO found that the Air Force has developed and the plan to mitigate the effect on procedures to mitigate risks when Cobra Dane is not available. For example, those missions when Cobra Dane is U.S. Northern Command and Missile Defense Agency (MDA) officials stated that not available, and (3) DOD’s funding they can mitigate risks when Cobra Dane is not available by using the Sea- plan and project cost estimates for the Based X-band radar to provide support for ballistic missile defense. The Air operation and sustainment of Cobra Force would face some limitations in its ability to conduct space surveillance if Dane and its site at Shemya Island. GAO reviewed the Air Force report and Cobra Dane were not available, as Cobra Dane tracks objects no other radar can related documentation, and track. However, MDA officials noted there are no plans to take Cobra Dane interviewed relevant officials. offline long enough to compromise space surveillance. The Air Force and MDA plan to contribute total funding of $278.6 million for the operation and sustainment of Cobra Dane, according to their fiscal year 2019 budget plans. Specifically, the Air Force and MDA plan to share funding for the operation and maintenance of the Cobra Dane radar and for three modernization projects that make up their sustainment plan for the radar. Further, the Air Force report noted that the Air Force also plans to provide $140 million in funding for the sustainment and maintenance of operational access to Cobra Dane’s site at Shemya Island. In addition, GAO found that the Air Force developed a total cost estimate for one project—known as the transmitter group replacement—but not View GAO-19-68. For more information, for its other two projects. Air Force officials plan to complete cost estimates for contact Joe Kirschbaum at (202) 512-9971 or those two projects in conjunction with their fiscal year 2020 budget submission. [email protected]. United States Government Accountability Office Contents Letter 1 Background 4 Air Force Reported That Cobra Dane and LRDR Can Contribute to Various Missions, and We Found That Additional Radar Investments May Reduce Reliance on Cobra Dane 6 Air Force Reported That Cobra Dane Generally Meets Its Requirements for Operational Availability, and We Found That the Air Force Can Mitigate Radar Downtime for Its Missions 11 Air Force Reported That DOD Has Plans to Fund Cobra Dane and Its Site, and We Found That It Has Developed Cost Estimates for Some Projects 13 Agency Comments 16 Appendix I GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 18 Tables Table 1: Selected Radar Systems that Provide Ballistic Missile Defense or Space Surveillance Capabilities 5 Table 2: Ballistic Missile Defense Capabilities of Cobra Dane and the Long Range Discrimination Radar 7 Table 3: Planned Air Force and Missile Defense Agency (MDA) Funding for the Operation and Maintenance of Cobra Dane (in millions) 13 Table 4: Planned Funding for the Three Projects in Cobra Dane’s Sustainment Plan (in millions) 14 Table 5: Funding Plan for the Operation and Sustainment of Shemya Island (in millions) 15 Figures Figure 1: The Cobra Dane Radar 2 Figure 2: Illustration of Tracking Coverage Overlaps among AN/TPY-2, Cobra Dane, and the Long Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR) 9 Page i GAO-19-68 Missile Defense Abbreviations DOD Department of Defense LRDR Long Range Discrimination Radar MDA Missile Defense Agency This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately. Page ii GAO-19-68 Missile Defense Letter 441 G St. N.W. Washington, DC 20548 December 17, 2018 Congressional Committees The Cobra Dane radar faces growing sustainment challenges that the Department of Defense (DOD) plans to address through modernization projects. The Air Force fielded Cobra Dane in 1976 on Shemya Island, Alaska. In subsequent years, Cobra Dane has undergone upgrades and changes to its mission. From 1977 to 1994, the Air Force used Cobra Dane to support a primary mission of intelligence gathering, and to provide early warning of missile threats and conduct space surveillance (tracking objects in space) as additional missions.1 In 1994, the Air Force stopped using Cobra Dane to support missile warning. The Air Force also ceased using Cobra Dane for space surveillance for 5 years, but continued to operate the radar in a limited capacity to support intelligence gathering. In 2004, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) completed upgrades to Cobra Dane so that it could contribute to a new ballistic missile defense mission. Since MDA completed the upgrades, the Air Force has used Cobra Dane to support ballistic missile defense and space surveillance missions. In anticipating future needs, DOD began investing in new radar systems that will provide varying mission capabilities. However, DOD does not intend for any one of these systems to be a complete replacement for Cobra Dane. Radar investments include the Long Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR) at Clear Air Force Station in Alaska; the Space Fence at Kwajalein Atoll, Marshall Islands; and the Pacific Radar. See figure 1 for a photo of the Cobra Dane radar. 1Specifically, Cobra Dane was constructed to provide intelligence gathering to verify a treaty between the United States and the Soviet Union to limit the quantities of ballistic missiles armed with nuclear warheads. Page 1 GAO-19-68 Missile Defense Figure 1: The Cobra Dane Radar Congress has expressed interest in DOD’s plan to use Cobra Dane to meet various mission requirements and how it would maximize the radar’s reliability and minimize life-cycle costs. Specifically, the conference report accompanying a bill for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (“the Act”) included a provision that the Air Force, in coordination with MDA and U.S. Northern Command, submit a report on the Cobra Dane radar to the congressional defense committees with its fiscal year 2019 budget request.2 The report was to outline the capabilities of Cobra Dane and alternative radars, DOD’s plan for the operation and sustainment of Cobra Dane, and the costs to 2H.R. Rep. No. 115-404, at 1047 (2017) (Conf. Rep.). In addition, House Report 114-537, the House report accompanying a bill for the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2017, also contained a provision for U.S. Strategic Command to report on the Cobra Dane radar. Specifically, it contained a provision that U.S. Strategic Command report on the cost, schedule, and program plans to upgrade DOD’s ballistic missile defense and space surveillance assets to maintain and eventually replace Cobra Dane. U.S. Strategic Command submitted a briefing in May 2017 that asserted DOD would continue to require Cobra Dane until it could be replaced with a system that provided equal or greater capability for ballistic missile defense. Page 2 GAO-19-68 Missile Defense sustain Cobra Dane and its site at Shemya Island. The Air Force submitted the report in January 2018. The conference report accompanying the Act also included a provision that we review the Air Force’s report to Congress.3 This report identifies information included in the Air Force’s report and describes additional information that we reviewed on (1) the capabilities of the Cobra Dane radar and other planned radars to meet DOD’s mission requirements, (2) Cobra Dane’s operational availability and the plan to mitigate the effect on those missions when Cobra Dane is not operationally available, and (3) DOD’s funding plan and project cost estimates related to the operation and sustainment of Cobra Dane and its site at Shemya Island.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hearing National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs Committee on Armed S
    i [H.A.S.C. No. 112–111] HEARING ON NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013 AND OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED PROGRAMS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION SUBCOMMITTEE ON STRATEGIC FORCES HEARING ON FISCAL YEAR 2013 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BUDGET REQUEST FOR MISSILE DEFENSE HEARING HELD MARCH 6, 2012 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 73–437 WASHINGTON : 2012 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202–512–1800, or 866–512–1800 (toll-free). E-mail, [email protected]. SUBCOMMITTEE ON STRATEGIC FORCES MICHAEL TURNER, Ohio, Chairman TRENT FRANKS, Arizona LORETTA SANCHEZ, California DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island MO BROOKS, Alabama RICK LARSEN, Washington MAC THORNBERRY, Texas MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico MIKE ROGERS, Alabama JOHN R. GARAMENDI, California JOHN C. FLEMING, M.D., Louisiana C.A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland SCOTT RIGELL, Virginia BETTY SUTTON, Ohio AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia TIM MORRISON, Professional Staff Member LEONOR TOMERO, Professional Staff Member AARON FALK, Staff Assistant (II) C O N T E N T S CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF HEARINGS 2012 Page HEARING: Tuesday, March 6, 2012, Fiscal Year 2013 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for Missile Defense ................................................................... 1 APPENDIX: Tuesday, March 6, 2012 .......................................................................................... 33 TUESDAY, MARCH 6, 2012 FISCAL YEAR 2013 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BUDGET REQUEST FOR MISSILE DEFENSE STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS Sanchez, Hon. Loretta, a Representative from California, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Strategic Forces .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Shemyaafr,Alaska 1992IRPFIELD INVESTIGATIONREPORT
    EM0-1096 VOL 1 ShemyaAFR,Alaska 1992IRPFIELD INVESTIGATIOREPN ORT Volume 1 of 4 TECHNICAL .., FINAL February1993 preparedfor U.S.Air Force IO ElmendorfAFB,Alaska 11th AirControlWing 1lth CivilEngineeringOperationsSquadron UnderContractDEU-91-06 Preparedby CH2MHILL RC.Box8748 Boise,Idaho83707 For EnvironmentalManagementOperations Undera RelatedServicesAgreement withtheU.S.Departmentof Energy EnvironmentalManagementOperations Richland,Washington99352 j OtSTR|BUTIOPJ 0_:: ii-tIU L_OCuiviENT iL, ',..;;'-,_;;;.,.';,:{:1;" ,. FINAL I i i NOTICE i This report has been prepared for the United States Air Force by CH2M HILL for the purpose of aiding in the implementation of a final remedial action plan under the Air Force Installation Restoration Program (IRP). As the report relates to actual or possible releases of potentially hazardous substances, its release prior to an Air Force final decision on remedial action may be in the public's interest. The limited objectives of this report and the ongoing nature of the IRP, along with the evolving knowledge of site conditions and chemical effects on the environment and health, must be considered when evaluating this report, since subsequent facts may become known which may make this report premature or inaccurate. Acceptance of this report in performance of the contract under which it is prepared does not mean that the Air Force adopts the conclusions, recommendations or other views expressed herein, which are those of the contractor only and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the United States Air Force. Government agencies and their contractors registered with the Defense TechnicalInformationCenter (DTIC) should direct requestsfop copies of.this report to: Defense Technical InformationCenter (DTIC), Cameron Station,Alexandria, VA 22304-6145.
    [Show full text]
  • LORAN-A Historic Context
    ' . Prepared by Alice Coneybeer U.S. Coast Guard, MLCP (se) Coast Guard Island, Bldg. 540 Alameda, CA 94501-5100 Phone 510.437.5804 Fax 510.437.5753 U.S. Coast Guard- Maintenance & Logistics Command Pacific • • • • • • • • • • LORAN-A Historic Context Alaska (District 17) September 1998 ENCLOSURE(2.} ( LORAN-A Context 1. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. TABLE OF CONTENTS .........•.....................................................•......................•........•..................................•. 1 2. TECHNICAL BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 2 3. IDSTORY OF LORAN-A STATIONS.............................................................................................................. 2 4. LORAN-A IN ALASKA. ..................................................................................................................................... 3 5. LORAN-A DURING THE COLD WAR IN ALASKA (1945-1989) ............................................................... 4 6. NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGffiiLITY EVALUATION .............................................................................. 4 6.1 SIGNIFICANCE OF LORAN-A WITIIIN TilE CONTEXT OF TilE DEVELOPMENT OF AIDS TONAVIGATION ............................................................................................................................... 5 6.2 SIGNIFICANCE OF LORAN-A WITIIIN TilE CONTEXT OF WORLD WAR II IN ALASKA .............. 5 6.3 SIGNIFICANCE OF LORAN-A WITIIIN TilE HISTORIC CONTEXT
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Air Force Historical Literature, 1943 – 1983, 29 August 1983
    Description of document: Guide to Air Force Historical Literature, 1943 – 1983, 29 August 1983 Requested date: 09-April-2008 Released date: 23-July-2008 Posted date: 01-August-2008 Source of document: Department of the Air Force 11 CS/SCSR (MDR) 1000 Air Force Pentagon Washington, DC 20330-1000 Note: Previously released copies of this excellent reference have had some information withheld. This copy is complete. Classified documents described herein are best requested by asking for a Mandatory Declassification Review (MDR) rather than by asking under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however, there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the governmentattic.org web site or in this file. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC 23 July 2008 HAF/IMII (MDR) 1000 Air Force Pentagon Washington, DC 20330-1000 Reference your letter dated, April 9, 2008 requesting a Mandatory Declassification Review (MDR) for the "Guide to Air Force Historical Literature, 1943­ 1983, by Jacob Neufeld, Kenneth Schaffel and Anne E.
    [Show full text]
  • Cold War in Alaska a Resource Guide for Teachers and Students
    U.S. National Park Service Alaska Regional Office National Historic Landmarks Program COLD WAR IN ALASKA A RESOURCE GUIDE FOR TEACHERS AND STUDENTS RB-29 flying past Mt. McKinley, ca. 1948, U.S. Air Force Photo. DANGER Colors, this page left, mirror those used in the first radiation symbol designed by Cyrill Orly in 1945. The three-winged icon with center dot is "Roman violet,"a color used by early Nuclear scientists to denote a very precious item. The "sky blue" background was intended to create an arresting contrast. Original symbol (hand painted on wood) at the Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Radiation_symbol_-_James_V._For- restal_Building_-_IMG_2066.JPG ACTIVE U.S. Army soldiers on skis, Big Delta, Alaska, April 9, 1952, P175-163 Alaska State Library U.S. Army Signal Corps Photo Collection. U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Alaska Regional Office National Historic Landmarks Program First Printing 2014 Introduction Alaska’s frontline role during the Cold War ushered in unprecedented economic, technological, political, and social changes. The state’s strategic value in defending our nation also played a key role in its bid for statehood. Since the end of the Cold War, Alaska’s role and its effects on the state have received increasing focus from historians, veterans, and longtime Alaskans. This resource guide is designed to help students and teachers in researching the Cold War in Alaska, and to provide basic information for anyone who is interested in learning more about this unique history. The guide begins with a map of Cold War military sites in Alaska and a brief summary to help orient the reader.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Defense Authorization for Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2006
    S. HRG. 109–22, PT. 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON S. 1042 TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CON- STRUCTION, AND FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES PART 7 STRATEGIC FORCES MARCH 16, APRIL 4, 7, 2005 ( Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services VerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:32 Jun 14, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6011 Sfmt 6011 C:\DOCS\21108.TXT SARMSER2 PsN: JUNEB DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006—Part 7 STRATEGIC FORCES VerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:32 Jun 14, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6019 Sfmt 6019 C:\DOCS\21108.TXT SARMSER2 PsN: JUNEB S. HRG. 109–22, PT. 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON S. 1042 TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CON- STRUCTION, AND FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES PART 7 STRATEGIC FORCES MARCH 16, APRIL 4, 7, 2005 ( Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Greely, Alaska
    DCN: 9873 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) Fort Greely, Alaska Presented by: Mr. Tom Devanney Deputy Program Director Ground-Based Midcourse Defense 26 April 2004 Draft Deliberative Document For Discussion Purposes Only DO NOT RELEASE Under FOIA FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Mission And Tasks “The Defense Department… Shall Proceed With Plans to Deploy a Set of Initial Missile Defense Capabilities Beginning in 2004.” President George W. Bush NSPD-23, 16 DEC 02 BMDS Mission • Provide Missile Defense Capabilities to COCOMs Tasks • Build, Test, and Verify an Initial Defensive Operations Capability • Place the BMDS on Alert • Execute Concurrent Testing and Defensive Operations • Continue Development to Incrementally Improve Capability BottomBottom Line:Line: FieldField anan InitialInitial MissileMissile DefenseDefense CapabilityCapability TEAMTEAM GMD Forging America’s Shield 7/7/2005 6:35 PM FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY GM-04-01-02106-R27-(TABS Installation Familiar Brief)-(04-26-04)-(U) 2 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY MDA – Fort Greely • Public Law 107-20: (July 24, 2001) – Sec. 1207: The Secretary of Defense may retain all or a portion of Fort Greely, AK as the Secretary deems necessary to meet military operations logistics and personnel support requirements for missile defense. • Memo - SECDEF to Director, BMDO (Now MDA): – Delegates authority to retain portions of Fort Greely, AK to meet Missile Defense Requirements to Director, BMDO • Memo for DASA (I&H) Attn: Mr. Paul Johnson: (10 Aug 01) – BMDO determined that
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of Phased-Array Radar Technology the Development of Phased-Array Radar Technology
    • FENN, TEMME, DELANEY, AND COURTNEY The Development of Phased-Array Radar Technology The Development of Phased-Array Radar Technology Alan J. Fenn, Donald H. Temme, William P. Delaney, and William E. Courtney I Lincoln Laboratory has been involved in the development of phased-array radar technology since the late 1950s. Radar research activities have included theoretical analysis, application studies, hardware design, device fabrication, and system testing. Early phased-array research was centered on improving the national capability in phased-array radars. The Laboratory has developed several test-bed phased arrays, which have been used to demonstrate and evaluate components, beamforming techniques, calibration, and testing methodologies. The Laboratory has also contributed significantly in the area of phased-array antenna radiating elements, phase-shifter technology, solid-state transmit-and- receive modules, and monolithic microwave integrated circuit (MMIC) technology. A number of developmental phased-array radar systems have resulted from this research, as discussed in other articles in this issue. A wide variety of processing techniques and system components have also been developed. This article provides an overview of more than forty years of this phased-array radar research activity. was certainly affordable array radar with thousands of array ele- not new when Lincoln Laboratory’s phased- ments, all working in tightly orchestrated phase co- Tarray radar development began around 1958. herence, would not be built for a very long time. In Early radio transmitters and the early World War II retrospect, both the enthusiasts and the skeptics were radars used multiple radiating elements to achieve de- right. The dream of electronic beam movement was sired antenna radiation patterns.
    [Show full text]
  • Missile Defense for the 21St Century by Gregory H. Canavan
    BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE TECHNICAL STUDIES SERIES MISSILE DEFENSE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY Gregory H. Canavan i Published by The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002–4999 800-544-4843 heritage.org Copyright © 2003 The Heritage Foundation ISBN 0-89195-261-6 Cover design by Mark Hurlburt Layout by Michelle Fulton Smith Charts and Graphs by Russell Martin Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE / VII LIST OF FIGURES / VIII LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS / IX INTRODUCTION / XV TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MISSILE DEFENSE / 1 Early Missile Defense and Offensive Proliferation: Offensive Proliferation / 3 Early Technologies and Systems: NIKE Systems; Sentinel; Safeguard / 5 Uncertainties / 16 Summary of Developments in Nuclear Phases / 19 DEVELOPMENTS DURING THE 1970S / 23 The ABM Treaty / 23 U.S. Army Programs and Hit-to-Kill Technology / 24 Space-Based Laser for Boost-Phase Intercept / 27 Summary of Developments During the Interim Program / 28 DEVELOPMENTS DURING THE 1980S / 29 Strategic Defense Initiative: Exploration Phase / 29 Strategic Defense System Phase I / 32 Brilliant Pebbles / 37 Brilliant Pebbles in Midcourse and Terminal / 42 Summary of Developments During SDI / 45 GLOBAL PROTECTION AGAINST LIMITED STRIKES / 47 Scope / 47 Elements / 48 Development and Testing / 50 Navy Contributions / 53 iii Ballistic Missile Defense Technical Studies
    [Show full text]
  • PE-0603884C-Sensors
    UNCLASSIFIED Date Missile Defense Agency (MDA) Exhibit R-2 RDT&E Budget Item Justification February 2008 APPROPRIATION/BUDGET ACTIVITY R-1 NOMENCLATURE RDT&E, DW/04 Advanced Component Development and Prototypes (ACD&P) 0603884C Ballistic Missile Defense Sensors COST ($ in Thousands) FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Total PE Cost 514,989 586,121 1,076,983 1,116,740 1,099,649 1,077,632 823,583 0811 Ballistic Missile Defense Radars Block 2006 236,290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0911 Ballistic Missile Defense Radars Block 2008 259,351 0 0 0 0 0 0 0011 Ballistic Missile Defense Radars Block 2010 6,638 0 0 0 0 0 0 AX11 Ballistic Missile Defense Radars Block 1.0 0 5,569 5,723 0 0 0 0 BX11 Ballistic Missile Defense Radars Block 2.0 0 28,821 101,879 2,979 0 0 0 CX11 Ballistic Missile Defense Radars Block 3.0 0 97,183 96,191 21,842 18,694 19,814 14,888 DX11 Ballistic Missile Defense Radars Block 4.0 0 100,223 150,505 239,713 137,808 1,220 7,926 EX11 Ballistic Missile Defense Radars Block 5.0 0 15,802 144,042 226,844 193,327 187,228 115,679 WX11 Ballistic Missile Defense Radars Capability Development 0 170,826 257,646 221,330 300,079 427,821 253,664 XX11 Ballistic Missile Defense Radars Sustainment 0 154,568 296,472 360,520 418,280 412,143 406,860 0602 Program-Wide Support 12,710 0 0 0 0 0 0 ZX40 Program-Wide Support 0 13,129 24,525 43,512 31,461 29,406 24,566 Amount Included in PE 0904903D -151,670 -111,212 -120,268 -131,192 Total PE Cost Reflected in R-1 514,989 586,121 1,076,983 965,070 988,437 957,364 692,391 Note: The content previously planned in projects 0811, 0911, and 0011 are now captured in projects AX11, BX11, CX11, DX11, EX11, WX11, and XX11 for FY08-13 in accordance with the MDA revised Block structure.
    [Show full text]
  • History . Variants . Systems . Operators . Missions
    history . variants . systems . operators . missions £5.99 the world ’s greatest 1 1 3 5tanker ... and more ... By kc -135 stratotanker rc-135 rivet joint Over the years, AIR International has established an unrivalled reputation for authoritative reporting across the full spectrum of aviation subjects. With correspondents and top aviation writers from around the world, AIR International brings you the best in modern military and commercial aviation. AIR International features: Latest News Dedicated news reports and factual insider information plus a section of ‘news in pictures’ and military frontline reports. Military Coverage Including worldwide air exercise reports and heightened exposure of UAVs. Exclusive Interviews Providing answers from the people at the forefront of modern aviation. Commercial Coverage Features and profi les on airlines from around the world. Available Monthly from and other leading newsagents Image: Lockheed Martin ALSO AVAILABLE IN DIGITAL FORMAT: DOWNLOAD NOW AVAILABLE FROM: FREE APP PC, Mac & with sample issue Windows 8 IN APP ISSUES £3.99 iTunes AIR INTERNATIONAL SEARCH 263/13 Available on PC, Mac, Blackberry, Windows 8 and kindle fire from Requirements for app: registered iTunes account on Apple iPhone 3G, 3GS, 4S, 5, iPod Touch or iPad 1, 2 or 3. Internet connection required for initial download. Published by Key Publishing Ltd. The entire contents of these titles are © copyright 2014. All rights reserved. App prices subject to change. FOR LATEST SUBSCRIPTION DEALS VISIT: www.airinternational.com 665 ALW JP Fleets.indd 2 20/08/2014 15:31 introduction 1 3 5 lmost 36 years ago to the day, I watched a KC- 29, 1958 and serves with the Kansas Air National 135A Stratotanker take off – and it was a fi rst Guard’s 190th Air Refueling Wing.
    [Show full text]
  • Ballistic Missile Defense Glossary
    BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE GLOSSARY VERSION 3.0 JUNE 1997 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE ORGANIZATION 7100 DEFENSE PENTAGON WASHINGTON, DC 20301-7100 PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS PURPOSE The purpose of this glossary is to facilitate a common language within the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) and the ballistic missile defense community. This glossary supplements other existing Department of Defense (DoD) publications. SCOPE This glossary is not an official DoD publication; it is limited to terminology that relates to ballistic missile defense. A number of computer, software, and engineering terms are included, especially those applicable to BMD. In addition, numerous acquisition terms are included in light of BMDO’s ongoing transition to a more acquisition-oriented agency. Many entries are taken from the DoD 5000-series of directives, the DoD program objective memorandums, the Joint Staff Glossary (Joint Pub 1-02), and the Defense Systems Management College Glossary. A number of outdated or seldom-used terms are also included for historical relevance, though obsolete terms are denoted. WORLD WIDE WEB The BMDO Glossary can be found on the BMDO World Wide Web home page at http://www.acq.osd.mil/bmdo/bmdolink/html/ FORMAT All entries are listed in alphabetical order, including acronyms (which are cross-referenced with their corresponding definition). General terms are defined in a BMD context where appropriate. In cases where a term has more than one BMD-related meaning, multiple definitions are given. Wherever possible, organizational changes occurring since publication of the October 1995 BMDO Glossary are incorporated. Please note that abbreviations and acronyms listed herein are capitalized for ease of reference.
    [Show full text]