Green Light Ahead For Missile Defense Program

American Forces Press Service

Green Light Ahead for Missile Defense Program

By Linda D. Kozaryn
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 22, 2002 -- The U.S. Missile Defense Agency and Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty constraints part company June 14, freeing the agency to do what President Bush decides about deployment, a senior defense official said here today.

Bush announced in mid-December that the United States was withdrawing from the 1972 ABM Treaty with Russia. He said the treaty hindered America's ability to develop ways to defend against terrorist or rogue-state missile attacks.

Pete Aldridge, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, said DoD had prepared a test program that included using a series of silos in Alaska. He told reporters at a Pentagon roundtable the silos could "be used as an emergency missile defense capability" once ABM restrictions are off. However, he stressed, no deployment decisions have been made.

In January, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld approved an organizational change for missile defense that is now being implemented. "We're streamlining the process to give Gen. Kadish an ability to make very tough decisions in what we call "a 'system of systems' approach to missile defense," Aldridge said.

Air Force Lt. Gen. Ronald T. Kadish is the director of the Missile Defense Agency, formerly the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.

The agency is chartered by the president and mandated by Congress to acquire highly effective ballistic missile defense systems for forward-deployed and expeditionary elements of the U.S. armed forces. The agency was also tasked to develop and, if directed, to acquire systems for ballistic missile defense of the United States.

Rather than have the Missile Defense Agency go through the comprehensive review process currently required in the defense acquisition process, Aldridge said, officials are combining the various missile defense weapon systems. These include various intercept stages -- boost phase, mid-course and terminal; various ranges of rockets -- short-, medium- and long-range; and ground-, sea- and space-based technologies.

All those are weapon systems in their own right, Aldridge said. "What we've done is ... (combine) all those into essentially 'a system of systems.' This gives Kadish more authority and will speed up the overall acquisition process. The Missile Defense Support Group formed to provide oversight of the agency, Aldridge noted, will review the general's decisions.

The group includes 13 persons representing the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff and the military departments. They are supported by 26 analysts who will handle day-to-day details. The support group will be given access to all the data on missile defense and will have the ability to do independent analyses.

"They report to me," Aldridge said, "and they provide advice to the director of the Missile Defense Agency and to the Senior Executive Council." Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz chairs the council, which serves as the Missile Defense Agency's board of directors, he added, and will make major decisions regarding deployment.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2002/n03222002_200203224.html

I would like to see the Defense Department focus on destroying the missiles as they are being launched. rather than waiting for them to be in full flight. Why not build 20 or so Space Shuttles capable of sustained flight with all the spying capabilities that our satellites currently have and arm them with guided missiles so they can intercept and destroy an ICBM before it gets in orbit. This would raise the stakes for any Nation who might consider launching a nuke, If the ICBM was destroyed shortly after the launch it would place that Nation in danger of having their own missile spread radiation over it's own land.

The system would have to react within one minute of the detection of a launch to be effective, I just don't know if it's possible to pull it off. If the Space shuttle orbits the earth 150 miles up at a speed of 17,000 mph I would imagine that the guidence system would have to be quite a task, But I do think it's a better idea to focus on destroying an incoming missile before it gets into orbit. Those Knetic weapons are quite fast and considering they are not carrying an explosive warhead, just a high speed needle on the front of a rocket, it seems to me that 150 up and whatever distance in front, the intercept could be done very quickly, I'm not a math expert but a rocket launched from an orbiting vehicle at 17,000 mph from only 150 miles up, it should get to the target very fast. I don't know how many space shuttle's in orbit it would take to effeciently patrol the Planet, but I think we could do it.

"Why not build 20 or so Space Shuttles capable of sustained flight with all the spying capabilities that our satellites currently have and arm them with guided missiles so they can intercept and destroy an ICBM before it gets in orbit."

Why must they be Space Shuttles? And why must they be manned?

There have been numerous studies of space-based elements of ballistic missile defense. For example, the SBL (Space-Based Laser). You might also recall ideas like "Brilliant Pebbles" and others.

See: this:

Nearly $500 Million Cut From Bush Missile Defense Request

Wade Boese

Congress trimmed roughly $500 million from President George W. Bush’s nearly $8.3 billion request for U.S. missile defense efforts in the fiscal year 2002 defense appropriations act, which it passed overwhelmingly December 20. Bush signed the bill January 10, appropriating $317 billion for the Pentagon, excluding emergency supplemental funding.

Congress allocated $100 million for terminating the Navy Area Theater Ballistic Missile Defense program (see p. 32) and parceled out the rest of the administration’s requested $388 million for the system to other programs. The Pentagon’s other sea-based program, Navy Theater Wide, now known as the sea-based midcourse segment, saw its requested $596 million budget reduced by $120 million.

The Pentagon’s funding requests for two laser programs aimed at intercepting missiles shortly after their launch shared different fates. Congress added $73.5 million to the Airborne Laser, raising its funding to $483.5 million, but cut $120 million from the Space Based Laser, leaving it with $50 million.

Congress also treated differently the Pentagon’s proposed budgets for two ground-based systems designed to intercept short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. The Theater High-Altitude Area Defense had its funding request shaved by $50 million to $872 million, while the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) system received an additional $105 million, increasing its total to $866 million for procurement and research and development.

The Space-Based Infrared System-low (SBIRS-low), a planned system of about 24 satellites for tracking ballistic missile flights, barely escaped cancellation. Of the Pentagon’s $385 million request, Congress did not explicitly allocate any funds for the system, but it approved $250 million for satellite sensor technologies and gave the secretary of defense the discretion to use it for SBIRS-low. Last November, the House Committee on Appropriations recommended completely denying the program funding, saying it has “markedly negative trends in cost, schedule, and performance estimates.”

Pentagon plans call for SBIRS-low to be complemented by another system called SBIRS-high, which will feature four satellites that provide early warning of ballistic missile launches. Congress also found fault with this system, cutting nearly $94 million dedicated for program procurement activities but adding $40 million to a $405 million request for research and development.

Congress left intact more than $3.2 billion in requested funding for the strategic ground-based midcourse defense, including development of a new missile defense “test bed,” which the Pentagon will build by adding a new test site in Alaska. (See ACT, July/August 2001.) The Pentagon aims to have the test bed ready for testing as early as 2004.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.