Shield
In vital future steps, the Navy intends to broaden the scope of its successful Aegis missile defense system
By OTTO KREISHER, Special Correspondent
North Korea’s Oct. 9 detonation of a nuclear device, which followed its July 4 test firing of seven ballistic missiles, has fostered a sense of urgency on the part of the United States, which is at last enjoying consistent successes in its six-decade effort to construct an effective missile defense system.
The first line of defense against some of Pyongyang’s missiles likely would be the Navy’s sea-based missile defense system, which in recent years has compiled a nearly perfect test record. In June, for example, the guided-missile cruiser USS Shiloh, intercepted a dummy warhead more than 100 miles above the Pacific, chalking up the seventh success in eight tries for the Navy’s system.
Based on improved versions of Raytheon’s Standard Missile and Lockheed Martin’s Aegis combat system of phased-array radars and command-and-control networks, the Navy’s defensive system also would be useful against other possible threats in the Pacific region.
It is designed to counter short- and mid-range hostile missiles at midcourse in their trajectory toward the United States. In crucial steps planned for the future, the Navy intends to broaden the scope of its defensive system by enabling it to counter a greater range of threats such as faster, higher-flying missiles and simultaneous attacks by an array of weapons.
Even with those adaptations, it is not envisioned as the complete answer to the range of missiles that may pose a threat to the United States.
The Navy’s effort is part of the larger Ballistic Missile Defense System, a multilayered network of weapons and sensors being designed to counter the full array of short-, medium- and long-range missiles that potentially could be targeted at the United States, fly at different altitudes and ranges, and deploy countermeasures, such as decoys, designed to vex U.S. defenses. U.S. officials anticipate that an attack with ballistic missiles would be part of a broader effort encompassing other types of weapons.
All ballistic missiles follow a basic trajectory that comprises three phases: boost, midcourse and terminal. Boost phase begins immediately after launch and lasts one to five minutes as the missile gains sufficient acceleration to reach the edge of outer space or exit Earth’s atmosphere, according to the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency (MDA). The midcourse phase lasts about 20 minutes as the missile reaches the apex of its trajectory, sheds its rocket motors and begins the descent toward its target. The terminal phase of 30-60 seconds occurs as the missile re-enters Earth’s atmosphere and speeds toward its target at up to 15,000 miles per hour, propelled by its momentum and the force of gravity.
MDA is devising sensors and weapons to counter attacking missiles in each phase of their trajectory. For example, attackers in the boost phase would be countered by laser systems and kinetic energy interceptors, now being developed. Hostile missiles in the terminal phase of attack would be left to two antimissile systems, the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system.
In the relatively long midcourse phase — the most viable opportunity for defenders — short- to medium-range missiles would be dealt with by the Navy’s Aegis missile defense system, while long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) would countered by the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense System (GMD), with initial units fielded at Fort Greely, Alaska, and Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif.
While acknowledging the superior test record of the Aegis, which in Greek mythology referred to the shield of Zeus or Athena, some experts question whether the Navy system is ready for combat.
John Pike, founder of the GlobalSecurity.org website, said the naval system could “quite possibly” defend Japan from something like North Korea’s large number of short-range Scud missiles. But against a longer-range missile, such as North Korea’s Nodong, “maybe it would, maybe it wouldn’t,” he said.
Phillip Coyle, a former director of the Pentagon’s operational test office, also did not think the sea-based system was operationally ready “in the sense of being able to do real-world engagements.”
Now a consultant with the Center for Defense Information, Coyle praised the Navy for conducting tests more realistic than those for the GMD, but said “the engagements are still quite scripted. … All the pieces are in the right places so the engagement can occur. They have to do it that way because the interceptors are not fast enough to do what I would call real-world engagements.”
Rear. Adm. Alan B. Hicks, director of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense program, countered that the target missiles are selected by the Navy’s operational test and evaluation force “to emulate the types of ballistic missiles that the enemies are currently designing.”
But Hicks and other senior military officials note that vital pieces are missing from the larger U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense System.
Adm. William J. Fallon, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, told reporters recently that “we have an emerging defense capability” against North Korea’s missiles. “It’s not all there yet.”
Fallon said North Korea has demonstrated its ability to use short- and medium-range missiles, including the six successful July 4 launches. But, he noted, a three-stage Taepodong 2 missile, which might have intercontinental range, failed shortly after launch that day and had failed a previous test.
In 1998, however, North Korea successfully tested a two-stage Taepodong 1 that might be able to reach Hawaii or Alaska.
The GMD achieved six successes in 11 trials prior to 2002. In September, however, a GMD interceptor launched from Vandenberg tracked and hit a dummy missile re-entry vehicle fired into space by an intercontinental-range rocket. Most observers agree the higher, faster ICBMs are a much more difficult target.
Following the September test, Air Force Lt. Gen. Henry “Trey” Obering, the MDA director, said, “I have a lot of confidence in the ability of the sea-based system to be able to execute an operational mission,” but conceded the GMD “is a little bit less mature than that.”
Undeterred, the Navy is taking several steps to fill some of the existing gaps in the nation’s missile defenses. In concert with Japan’s defense forces, for example, the U.S. Navy is developing a larger Standard Missile capable of higher altitudes and faster speeds than the current version, enabling it to counter ICBMs. Tests of that capability are planned for 2014, with possible operational status in 2015, Hicks said.
The Navy will take on a different challenge Dec. 6, when the guided-missile cruiser USS Lake Erie will confront a simultaneous trial “attack” by ballistic and cruise missiles, which will test the multimission capabilities of the 3.6 Aegis software. It enables ships to perform missile defense roles as well as the standard array of Aegis ship defenses ranging from anti-air to antisubmarine warfare.
An earlier 3.0 version of the software, specially developed for the missile defense role, curtailed the ship’s other defensive capabilities.
In its June test, the guided-missile cruiser Shiloh took on ballistic and cruise missiles in serial fashion rather than simultaneously.
Meanwhile, the Navy is moving forward with plans to increase the number of ships able to counter short- and mid-range hostile missiles. Soon after its June test, the Navy moved Shiloh from San Diego to a new homeport at Yokosuka, Japan, to bolster regional defenses against North Korean missiles. At that time, Shiloh and Lake Erie were the only U.S. warships capable of defending against ballistic missiles.
By late 2006, the Navy will have four additional Aegis-equipped ships capable of shooting down certain types of ballistic missiles: The guided-missile cruiser Port Royal and the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers Stethem, Curtis Wilbur and Decatur. In addition, 10 more ships will be upgraded, enabling them to detect and track ballistic missiles, Hicks said.
By 2009, the Navy expects to provide the 3.6 Aegis software to 12 more Burke-class ships, including John S. McCain, Fitzgerald and Russell.
In addition, three of Japan’s Aegis-equipped destroyers will have detection and tracking capabilities. One of them, the Kirishima, participated in the June trial.
Today’s Ballistic Missile Defense System is the latest evolution of late President Ronald Reagan’s dream of breaking away from the concept of mutually assured destruction that had been a keystone of U.S. national security policy for almost four decades.
In a March 1983 televised speech, Reagan broached the plan, later known as the Strategic Defense Initiative, reinvigorating an effort to devise some form of missile defense that dated back to 1946 and saw the deployment of several limited systems over the following decades.
During subsequent administrations, the initiative went through cycles of robust funding and benign neglect, consuming more than $60 billion. In 1999, Congress declared it was U.S. policy “to deploy a national missile defense system as soon as technologically possible.”
In 2002, President Bush set a deadline for deployment by the end of 2004.
In meeting that goal, Obering called GMD an “emergency” capability.
In congressional testimony this spring, a defense official called it a “rudimentary” missile defense.
“The system is still aimed primarily at development and testing but the capability does exist,” Peter Flory, assistant secretary of defense for international security policy, told a Senate Armed Services subcommittee.
Boeing is the prime contractor for GMD. Bechtel, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon are major subcontractors. In addition to the launch centers at Fort Greely and Vandenberg, the GMD will comprise fire-control centers at Greely and Colorado Springs, Colo., and tracking radars at Shemya, Alaska, and Beale Air Force Base, Calif.
A sea-based X-Band radar is to be on station off the coast of Alaska by year’s end and additional radars are planned at Fylingdales in the United Kingdom, and Thule, Greenland. The system also depends on space-based sensors, including the Defense Support System satellites, for early warning and is linked together by a fiber-optic network.
The system also depends on space-based sensors, including the Defense Support System satellites, for early warning and is linked together by a fiber-optic network.
North Korea’s nuclear test, and the reported nuclear weapons programs of other countries, such as Iran, has spurred new interest in intensifying U.S. missile defense efforts.
After North Korea’s test, House Armed Services Committee chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., urged Bush to “take immediate steps to develop and deploy systems that are capable of addressing the full range of North Korean missile-based threats to the United States, our deployed forces and our allies.”
In a letter to Bush, Hunter noted that the 2007 Defense Authorization Act contains $9.4 billion for missile defense, including $100 million that was added by budget conferees for Standard Missile-3 procurement and Aegis ballistic missile defense development.
“That is a start,” Hunter said, “but we need to accelerate further the schedule for fielding Aegis ballistic missile defense capabilities.”
