DOCSLIB.ORG

Sustaining America's Precision Strike Advantage

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sustaining America's Precision Strike Advantage SUSTAINING AMERICA’S PRECISION STRIKE ADVANTAGE MARK GUNZINGER BRYAN CLARK SUSTAINING AMERICA’S PRECISION STRIKE ADVANTAGE MARK GUNZINGER BRYAN CLARK 2015 ABOUT THE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND BUDGETARY ASSESSMENTS (CSBA) The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) is an independent, nonpartisan policy research institute established to promote innovative thinking and debate about national security strategy and investment options. CSBA’s analyses focus on key questions related to existing and emerging threats to U.S. national security, and its goal is to enable policymakers to make informed decisions on matters of strategy, security policy, and resource allocation. ©2015 Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. All rights reserved. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Mark Gunzinger is a Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Mr. Gunzinger has served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Forces Transformation and Resources. A retired Air Force Colonel and Command Pilot, he joined the Office of the Secretary of Defense in 2004. Mark was appointed to the Senior Executive Service and served as Principal Director of the Department’s central staff for the 2005–2006 QDR. Following the 2006 QDR, he was appointed Director for Defense Transformation, Force Planning and Resources on the National Security Council staff. Mr. Gunzinger holds a Master of Science degree in National Security Strategy from the National War College, a Master of Airpower Art and Science degree from the School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, a Master of Public Administration from Central Michigan University, and a Bachelor of Science in Chemistry from the United States Air Force Academy (Class of 1977). He is the recipient of the Department of Defense Distinguished Civilian Service Medal, the Secretary of Defense Medal for Outstanding Public Service, the Defense Superior Service Medal, and the Legion of Merit Medal. Bryan Clark is a Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Prior to joining CSBA in 2013, Mr. Clark was special assistant to the Chief of Naval Operations and director of his Commander’s Action Group, where he led development of Navy strategy and implemented new initiatives in electromagnetic spectrum operations, undersea warfare, expeditionary operations, and personnel and readiness management. Mr. Clark served in the Navy headquarters staff from 2004 to 2011, leading studies in the Assessment Division and participating in the 2006 and 2010 Quadrennial Defense Reviews. His areas of emphasis were modeling and simulation, strategic planning, and institutional reform and governance. Prior to retiring from the Navy in 2007, Mr. Clark was an enlisted and officer submariner, serving in afloat and ashore submarine operational and training assignments, including tours as chief engineer and operations officer at the Navy’s nuclear power training unit. Mr. Clark holds an M.S. in national security studies from the National War College and a B.S. in chemistry and philosophy from the University of Idaho. He is the recipient of the Department of the Navy Superior Service Medal and the Legion of Merit. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank the CSBA staff for their assistance with this report. Special thanks go to Jacob Cohn for his research and analysis of the Defense Department’s investments in precision-guided munitions and Kamilla Gunzinger for her production assistance. The analysis and findings presented here are solely the responsibility of the authors. Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . i Report Purpose and Scope ................................................... ii New Operational Concepts ................................................... ii Capability Implications ......................................................iii INTRODUCTION . 1 Report Approach ...........................................................2 Report Roadmap ..........................................................3 ADVANTAGES OF PRECISION-GUIDED MUNITIONS . 5 The March to Precision . 5 U.S. Direct Attack and Standoff Attack PGMs .....................................6 Advantages of Precision .....................................................7 Summary ...............................................................11 AN EMERGING SALVO COMPETITION . 13 Illustrating the Challenge of Precision Defenses. 15 Summary ...............................................................19 CHALLENGES OF PRECISION PLUS MASS . 21 More Direct Attack Munitions?. .21 More Very Long-Range Standoff Attack PGMs? ...................................24 Summary ...............................................................26 NEW OPERATIONAL CONCEPTS FOR LARGER PGM SALVOS . 29 Leveraging America’s Range Advantage . 30 Dispersing Fighter Bases ...................................................31 Shifting to Short-Range Standoff Strike . 35 Increasing PGM Salvo Survivability .............................................37 Increasing Maritime Strike Capacity. .39 Summary ...............................................................40 CREATING NEW PRECISION STRIKE ADVANTAGES . 43 Improving the Capabilities of PGMs ............................................44 Improving PGM Probability of Arrival. .48 More Targets per Salvo .....................................................52 Increasing PGM Lethality Against Hardened or Deeply Buried Targets ....................55 Summary ..............................................................56 POTENTIAL BARRIERS TO CHANGE . 59 Summary ..............................................................62 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .. 63 APPENDIX 1: GROSS WEAPON SYSTEM UNIT COSTS FOR PGMS IN PRODUCTION FOR THE U .S . MILITARY . 67 LIST OF ACRONYMS . 70 FIGURES FIGURE 1. FROM SORTIES PER TARGET TO TARGETS PER SORTIE ....................... 8 FIGURE 2. COUNTERING THE U.S. MILITARY’S PRECISION STRIKE KILL CHAIN ............. 13 FIGURE 3. ILLUSTRATIVE DEGRADED PGM PROBABILITY OF ARRIVAL .................... 16 FIGURE 4. WEAPONS AND SORTIES NEEDED FOR AN OIF-SIZED STRIKE CAMPAIGN WITH DEGRADED PGM PROBABILITY OF ARRIVAL .................................. 17 FIGURE 5. PGMS BY CATEGORY PROCURED BY DOD FROM 2001 THROUGH 2014 .......... 18 FIGURE 6. USING PRECISION PLUS MASS TO COMPENSATE FOR ENEMY DEFENSES ......... 19 FIGURE 7. COMPOSITION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE’S CURRENT COMBAT AIRCRAFT ....................................................... 22 FIGURE 8. PENETRATING BOMBERS NEEDED TO SUPPORT A 30-DAY STRIKE CAMPAIGN ...... 23 FIGURE 9. TOTAL DOD PGM PROCUREMENT SINCE 2001 ............................ 24 FIGURE 10. AIRCRAFT NEEDED TO SUPPORT A 30-DAY STANDOFF STRIKE CAMPAIGN ........ 26 FIGURE 11. OPERATING CONCEPT FOR LONG-RANGE STRIKE .......................... 31 FIGURE 12. EMERGING CONCEPT FOR DISTRIBUTED STOVL OPERATIONS ................ 32 FIGURE 13. POTENTIAL WESTERN PACIFIC AIRFIELDS FOR STOVL AIRCRAFT ............... 33 FIGURE 14. EMERGING CONCEPT FOR CLUSTER BASING ............................ 34 FIGURE 15. SHIFT TOWARD STANDOFF ATTACK IN CONTESTED ENVIRONMENTS ........... 35 FIGURE 16. WEIGHT VS. RANGE, OR WEIGHT VS. PAYLOAD FOR DOD STRIKE WEAPONS ........................................................ 36 FIGURE 17. OPERATIONAL CONCEPT FOR “TUNNELING” ............................. 38 FIGURE 18. COLLABORATIVE PRECISION-GUIDED MUNITIONS TO HIT 100 AIMPOINTS ....... 39 FIGURE 19. COST VS. RANGE, OR COST VS. PAYLOAD FOR DOD STANDOFF PGMS .......... 45 FIGURE 20. POTENTIAL AREA COVERED BY FUTURE COUNTER-SWARM WEAPONS ........... 54 FIGURE 21. SHIFTING THE PRECISION STRIKE EFFECTIVENESS CURVE .................. 57 FIGURE 22. PGM PROCUREMENT AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE’S TOTAL BUDGET . 59 TABLES TABLE 1. MUNITIONS USED IN MAJOR U.S. POST-COLD WAR AIR CAMPAIGNS. 9 www.csbaonline.org i Executive Summary The U.S. military has enjoyed an overwhelming advantage in precision strike since the end of the Cold War. The highly publicized use of laser-guided bombs and cruise missiles during Operation Desert Storm in 1991 heralded the potential for advanced precision-guided muni- tions to “dramatically increase the effectiveness of a fighting force.”1 Following Desert Storm, the Department of Defense (DoD) adopted a force planning construct developed during its “bottom-up” strategic review that prioritized the need to organize, train, and equip U.S. forces to deter, and if necessary defeat, conventional forces invading two U.S. allies or part- ner states nearly simultaneously.2 This two-war planning construct assumed that future U.S. power projection forces would be able use large numbers of PGMs launched by aircraft, ships, submarines, and ground batteries to attack target sets with near impunity, much as they had during Desert Storm. DoD’s subsequent strategic reviews have reaffirmed the need for the U.S. military to prepare for fighting two major conflicts in separate theaters. The Pentagon’s latest strategic assess- ment, the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), concluded the nation should maintain a military that “could defeat a regional adversary in a large-scale multi-phased campaign” while deterring or spoiling the offensive of a second opportunistic aggressor.3 The 2014 QDR shared another characteristic with most of DoD’s post-Cold War strategic reviews: it focused primar- ily on the size of its force and major force modernization programs, and it excluded a serious assessment of the numbers and kinds of PGMs needed to conduct future operations.4 1 Office of the Secretary
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Downloaded April 22, 2006
    SIX DECADES OF GUIDED MUNITIONS AND BATTLE NETWORKS: PROGRESS AND PROSPECTS Barry D. Watts Thinking Center for Strategic Smarter and Budgetary Assessments About Defense www.csbaonline.org Six Decades of Guided Munitions and Battle Networks: Progress and Prospects by Barry D. Watts Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments March 2007 ABOUT THE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND BUDGETARY ASSESSMENTS The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) is an independent, nonprofit, public policy research institute established to make clear the inextricable link between near-term and long- range military planning and defense investment strategies. CSBA is directed by Dr. Andrew F. Krepinevich and funded by foundations, corporations, government, and individual grants and contributions. This report is one in a series of CSBA analyses on the emerging military revolution. Previous reports in this series include The Military-Technical Revolution: A Preliminary Assessment (2002), Meeting the Anti-Access and Area-Denial Challenge (2003), and The Revolution in War (2004). The first of these, on the military-technical revolution, reproduces the 1992 Pentagon assessment that precipitated the 1990s debate in the United States and abroad over revolutions in military affairs. Many friends and professional colleagues, both within CSBA and outside the Center, have contributed to this report. Those who made the most substantial improvements to the final manuscript are acknowledged below. However, the analysis and findings are solely the responsibility of the author and CSBA. 1667 K Street, NW, Suite 900 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 331-7990 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEGEMENTS .................................................. v SUMMARY ............................................................... ix GLOSSARY ………………………………………………………xix I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................... 1 Guided Munitions: Origins in the 1940s............. 3 Cold War Developments and Prospects ............
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 239/Friday, December 11, 2020/Notices
    80062 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Notices maintenance support; U.S. absorbing this equipment and support provides a high capacity, low latency Government and contractor into its armed forces. internet Protocol (IP) based waveform engineering, technical, and logistics The proposed sale of this equipment that can quickly transmit large amounts support services; and other related and support will not alter the basic of data. Advanced algorithms allow elements of logistical and program military balance in the region. cooperative detection and engagement support. The principal U.S. contractor will be of a wider array of targets, improving (iv) Military Department: Navy (RO– Raytheon Missile and Defense, Tucson, fused track accuracy and increasing P–SAE) AZ. There are no known offset lethality/survivability through (v) Prior Related Cases, if any: None agreements proposed in connection Situational Awareness. (vi) Sales Commission, Fee, etc., Paid, with this potential sale. Implementation of the proposed sale 3. The highest level of classification of Offered, or Agreed to be Paid: None defense articles, components, and (vii) Sensitivity of Technology will require U.S. Government and contractor personnel to visit Romania services included in this potential sale Contained in the Defense Article or is SECRET. Defense Services Proposed to be Sold: on a temporary basis in conjunction See Attached Annex with program technical oversight and 4. If a technologically advanced (viii) Date Report Delivered to support requirements, including adversary were to obtain knowledge of Congress: October 16, 2020 program and technical reviews, as well the specific hardware and software * As defined in Section 47(6) of the as to provide training and maintenance elements, the information could be used Arms Export Control Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Usafalmanac ■ Gallery of USAF Weapons
    USAFAlmanac ■ Gallery of USAF Weapons By Susan H.H. Young fans; each 17,300 lb thrust. Accommodation: two, mission commander and pilot, Bombers on zero/zero ejection seats. B-1 Lancer Dimensions: span 172 ft, length 69 ft, height 17 ft. Brief: A long-range multirole bomber capable of flying Weight: empty 150,000–160,000 lb, gross 350,000 lb. missions over intercontinental range without refueling, then Performance: minimum approach speed 161 mph, penetrating enemy defenses with a heavy load of ordnance. ceiling 50,000 ft, typical estimated unrefueled range for a Function: Long-range conventional bomber. hi-lo-hi mission with 16 B61 nuclear free-fall bombs 5,000 Operator: ACC, ANG. miles, with one aerial refueling more than 10,000 miles. First Flight: Dec. 23, 1974 (B-1A); October 1984 (B-1B). Armament: in a nuclear role: up to 16 nuclear weapons Delivered: June 1985–May 1988. (B-61, B-61 Mod II, B-83). In a conventional role: 16 Mk 84 2,000-lb bombs, up to 16 2,000-lb GBU-36/B (GAM), or up IOC: Oct. 1, 1986, Dyess AFB, Texas (B-1B). B-1B Lancer (Ted Carlson) Production: 104. to eight 4,700-lb GBU-37 (GAM-113) near–precision guided Inventory: 94 (B-1B). weapons. Various other conventional weapons, incl the Mk Ceiling: over 30,000 ft. Unit Location: Active: Dyess AFB, Texas, Ellsworth AFB, S.D., and Mountain Home AFB, Idaho. ANG: McConnell AFB, Kan., and Robins AFB, Ga. Contractor: Boeing North American; AIL Systems; General Electric. Power Plant: four General Electric F101-GE-102 turbo- fans; each 30,780 lb thrust.
    [Show full text]
  • Lrso) Cruise Missile and Its Role in Future Nuclear Forces
    THE LONG-RANGE STANDOFF (LRSO) CRUISE MISSILE AND ITS ROLE IN FUTURE NUCLEAR FORCES National SecurityResearch Perspective Note Dennis Evans | Jonathan Schwalbe NSP_11x17_LRSO_v6.indd 1 7/26/17 1:47 PM THE LONG-RANGE STANDOFF (LRSO) CRUISE MISSILE AND ITS ROLE IN FUTURE NUCLEAR FORCES Dennis Evans Jonathan Schwalbe Copyright © 2017 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory LLC. All Rights Reserved. This National Security Perspective contains the best opinion of the author(s) at time of issue. It does not necessarily represent the opinion of JHU/APL sponsors. JHU/APL has conducted classified analyses that are relevant to discussions on the need for LRSO and/or ICBMs in the future. Other such analyses deal with nonstrategic nuclear weapons. Requests for such briefings can be made by contacting Dennis Evans ([email protected] or 240-228-6916) or Jonathan Schwalbe ([email protected] or 240-228-6439) or by contacting JHU/APL management at david.underhill@ jhuapl.edu, [email protected], or [email protected]. NSAD-R-17-051 THE LONG-RANGE STANDOFF (LRSO) CRUISE MISSILE AND ITS ROLE IN FUTURE NUCLEAR FORCES iii Contents Figures and Tables .......................................................................................................................................................................... v Summary .........................................................................................................................................................................................vii
    [Show full text]
  • Gallery of USAF Weapons
    Almanac USAF■ Gallery of USAF Weapons By Susan H.H. Young Note: Inventory numbers are Total Active Inventory figures as of Sept. 30, 1999. B-1B’s list of weapons, with fleet completion in FY02. The B-1B’s capability is being significantly enhanced by the ongoing Conventional Mission Upgrade Pro- gram (CMUP). This gives the B-1B greater lethality and survivability through the integration of precision and standoff weapons and a robust ECM suite. CMUP includes GPS receivers, a MIL-STD-1760 weapon in- terface, secure radios, and improved computers to support precision weapons, initially the JDAM, fol- lowed by the Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW) and the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM). The Defensive System Upgrade Program will improve air- crew situational awareness and jamming capability. B-2 Spirit Brief: Stealthy, long-range, multirole bomber that can deliver conventional and nuclear munitions any- where on the globe by flying through previously impen- etrable defenses. Function: Long-range heavy bomber. Operator: ACC. First Flight: July 17, 1989. Delivered: Dec. 17, 1993–present. B-1B Lancer (Ted Carlson) IOC: April 1997, Whiteman AFB, Mo. Production: 21. Inventory: 21. Unit Location: Whiteman AFB, Mo. Contractor: Northrop Grumman, with Boeing, LTV, and General Electric as principal subcontractors. Bombers Power Plant: four General Electric F118-GE-100 turbofans, each 17,300 lb thrust. B-1 Lancer Accommodation: two, mission commander and pi- Brief: A long-range multirole bomber capable of lot, on zero/zero ejection seats. flying missions over intercontinental range without re- Dimensions: span 172 ft, length 69 ft, height 17 ft.
    [Show full text]
  • SVI Foresight Strategic Vision Institute Islamabad
    SVI Foresight Volume 6, Number 10 OCTOBER 2020 Compiled & Edited by: Haris Bilal Malik Strategic Vision Institute Islamabad SVI Foresight Volume 6, Number 10 OCTOBER 2020 Compiled & Edited by: Haris Bilal Malik Strategic Vision Institute (SVI) Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this edition are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Strategic Vision Institute. Strategic Vision Institute (SVI) Strategic Vision Institute (SVI) is an autonomous, multidisciplinary, and non-partisan institution, established in January 2013. It is a non-governmental and non-commercial organization, administered by a Board of Governors (General Body) supervised under a Chairperson and administered by a Management Committee headed by a President/Executive Director. SVI aims to project strategic foresight on issues of national and international import through dispassionate, impartial, and independent research, analyses, and studies. The current spotlight of the SVI is on national security, regional and international peace and stability, strategic studies, nuclear non- proliferation, arms control, and strategic stability, nuclear safety, and security and energy studies. SVI Foresight SVI Foresight is a monthly electronic journal. It has a multi-disciplinary perspective highlighting contemporary strategic and security studies. The Journal is envisioned to be a collection of policy-oriented articles written by its Research Associates, Visiting Faculty, and professional experts. The objective is to provide the readership with a concise all-round and real-time policy-oriented discourse on contemporary strategic regional and international developments, highlighting their relevance to Pakistan. Contents Editor’s Note ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Imran Khan’s Address at UNGA 75th Session: Exposing India’s Fascist Ideology ........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cruise Missile Proliferation: Trends, Strategic Implications, and Counterproliferation
    Cruise missile proliferation: Trends, strategic implications, and counterproliferation GLOBAL SECURITY REPORT Fabian Hoffmann March 2021 The European Leadership Network (ELN) is an independent, non- partisan, pan-European network of nearly 200 past, present and future European leaders working to provide practical real-world solutions to political and security challenges. About the author Fabian Hoffmann is a graduate student at King’s College London where he is currently completing his Master’s degree in War Studies. In addition, he works as a Policy Intern at the British American Security Information Council (BASIC) where he supports the Nuclear Responsibilities program and is a Master Thesis Student with MBDA Germany. His research focuses on the proliferation and strategic implications of long-range precision-strike capabilities, cross-domain deterrence, and strategic stability. He can be found on Twitter at @FRHoffmann1 Acknowledgements The author is grateful for conversations with and/or commentary on earlier drafts of this report by Alan Cummings, Elisabeth Suh, Dr. Jürgen Altmann, Dr. Marcel Dickow, Maren Vieluf, Michael Limmer, Andreas Seitz, Elmar Wallner, Anna Książczaková, and Dr. Maximilian Hoell. Special thanks are due to Dr. Karl-Josef Dahlem for his continuous support throughout this research. All remaining mistakes and inaccuracies are the author’s alone. Published by the European Leadership Network, March 2021 European Leadership Network (ELN) 8 St James’s Square London, UK, SE1Y 4JU @theELN europeanleadershipnetwork.org Published under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 © The ELN 2021 The opinions articulated in this report represent the views of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the position of the European Leadership Network or any of its members.
    [Show full text]
  • Armaments Non-Proliferation: the Case of Cruise Missiles
    Artigo recebido em fevereiro de 2014 e aceite para publicação em maio de 2014 ARMAMENTS NON-PROLIFERATION: THE CASE OF CRUISE MISSILES NÃO-PROLIFERAÇÃO DE ARMAMENTOS: O CASO DOS MÍSSEIS DE CRUZEIRO José Carlos Cardoso Mira Coronel Técnico de Manutenção de Armamento e Equipamento da Força Aérea Chefe do Gabinete de Planeamento e Programação Instituto de Estudos Superiores Militares Lisboa, Portugal [email protected] Abstract This article is intended to present an overview of cruise missiles produced by several States and their vertical and horizontal proliferation, especially in what concerns Land Attack Cruise Missiles (LACM), using publicly-available information only. The analysis was limited to LACM capable of delivering a payload of at least 500 kilograms (kg) to a range of at least 300 kilometers (km), or non-conventional weapons. NÃO-PROLIFERAÇÃO DE ARMAMENTOS: O CASO DOS MÍSSEIS CRUZEIRO A characterization of those missiles will be made and a brief historical overview presented, as well as an analysis of the technologies involved, a description of world cruise missile programs and of non-proliferation issues (detailing two multilateral mechanisms in use). The Portuguese aspects of non-proliferation will be addressed, including some proposals for a better addressing of this issue in the appropriate Portuguese fora. We conclude that the issue of cruise missile proliferation involves multiple technological, political, military and commercial aspects, being an issue of concern for several actors of the International System. Keywords: Cruise Missiles, Military Technologies, Non-proliferation. Resumo Com o presente artigo pretende apresentar-se uma panorâmica sobre os mísseis de cruzeiro produzidos por diversos Estados do mundo e respetiva proliferação horizontal e vertical, especialmente no respeitante aos Land Attack Cruise Missiles (LACM), utilizando essencialmente informação pública.
    [Show full text]
  • Science, Technology and Procurement
    Science, Technology and Procurement In this issue of Science, Technology and Procurement the news items have been divided in the following sections: 1. Industry 2. Manufacturing 3. Policy and Standards 4. Systems 5. New Technology 6. Contracts All information has been gathered from open source websites and links to the original information is included with each item. For the first time we have added a section on Industry related news and a section on Policy and Standards, where there are news items of interest we will look to maintain this distinction between systems related news items. Following the last publication there has been better success for the Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) and the US continues to test and develop the Multi Mission Launcher capability. The Cased Telescopic cannon system has now commenced its testing and integration phase on the new UK AJAX platform. MLRS continues to evolve as a weapon system with 2 separate announcements on new missiles for the system. Martin Pope & Dr Michael Sharp, MSIAC Munitions Systems Specialist and PM INDUSTRY Orbital ATK Marks Its One-Year Anniversary - Record New Orders and Important Operational Successes Achieved in All Business Groups Over Last 12 Months. Dulles, Virginia 10 February 2016 – Orbital ATK, Inc. (NYSE: OA), a global leader in aerospace and defense technologies, today marks its first full year of combined operations following the completion of the merger between Orbital Sciences Corporation and Alliant Techsystems, Inc. in February 2015. The merger brought into existence a new $4.5 billion space, defense and aviation systems manufacturer that employs approximately 12,000 people in 18 states across the U.S.
    [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]
  • Missiles for Standoff Attack: Air-Launched Air- To-Surface Munitions Programs
    Order Code RL30552 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Missiles for Standoff Attack: Air-Launched Air- to-Surface Munitions Programs Updated October 17, 2000 (name redacted) Analyst in National Defense Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Missiles for Standoff Attack: Air-Launched Air-to-Surface Munitions Programs Summary Increasing the standoff range of air-delivered munitions and improving their accuracy and lethality have become matters of major emphasis in U.S. defense plans since the 1991 Gulf War. The 1999 conflict in Kosovo especially highlighted the value of air-to-surface munitions that could be launched from safe standoff ranges and guided to their targets with precision. Since cancellation in late 1994 of the Tri-Service Standoff Attack Missile (TSSAM) program, various alternatives have been proposed, including development of a new missile or a derivative of currently operational missiles. This report focuses six air-to-surface munition programs: the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) the Standoff Land Attack Missile Expanded Response (SLAM-ER), the Joint Stand-Off Weapon (JSOW), the Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile (CALCM), and the AGM-142 and AGM-130 missiles. All of these weapons are launched from aircraft, in contrast ships and ground-based missile launchers. The Defense Department’s FY2001 budget included requests of $122.3 million for JASSM and $27.9 million for SLAM-ER as well as requests for other standoff munition programs such as JSOW ($284.7 million) and AGM-130 (about $100 thousand). Appropriations conferees recommended funding SLAM-ER as requested, reduced the JASSM request by $4 million and increased the JSOW request by $6.4 million.
    [Show full text]
  • A Mixed Methods Examination of Cruise Missile Possession and the Initiation of Military Force Dennis Crawford University of Nebraska - Lincoln
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Political Science Department -- Theses, Political Science, Department of Dissertations, and Student Scholarship 8-2019 Cruising Into Conflict: A Mixed Methods Examination of Cruise Missile Possession and the Initiation of Military Force Dennis Crawford University of Nebraska - Lincoln Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/poliscitheses Part of the Comparative Politics Commons, and the International Relations Commons Crawford, Dennis, "Cruising Into Conflict: A Mixed Methods Examination of Cruise Missile Possession and the Initiation of Military Force" (2019). Political Science Department -- Theses, Dissertations, and Student Scholarship. 53. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/poliscitheses/53 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Political Science, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Political Science Department -- Theses, Dissertations, and Student Scholarship by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. CRUISING INTO CONFLICT: A MIXED METHODS EXAMINATION OF CRUISE MISSILE POSSESSION AND THE INITIATION OF MILITARY FORCE by Dennis P. Crawford A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Major: Political Science Under the Supervision of Professor Ross A. Miller Lincoln, Nebraska August, 2019 CRUISING INTO CONFLICT: A MIXED METHODS EXAMINATION OF CRUISE MISSILE POSSESSION AND THE INITIATION OF MILITARY FORCE Dennis P. Crawford, Ph.D. University of Nebraska, 2019 Advisor: Ross A. Miller This research examines the effect of cruise missile possession on state behavior. Specifically, it seeks to determine if countries who possess cruise missiles are more likely to initiate a military threat, display, or use of force than countries who do not possess cruise missiles.
    [Show full text]