MissileThreat.com

Country:	USA
Basing:	Land
In Service:	2004

Details

The Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system, scheduled for deployment in September 2004, will be the United States’ first operational missile defense program capable of protecting all 50 states. GMD will detect and track long-range ballistic missiles in their boost phase, and destroy them during their midcourse phase, i.e. while the missiles are outside the atmosphere and at their highest trajectory. The Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency is currently installing six interceptor missiles at Fort Greely in Alaska, and four at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. Over 20 interceptors are scheduled for deployment over the next two years.

 

Although MDA developed many of GMD’s technologies during the 1980s and 1990s, the project officially began in 1998 with a $1.6 billion dollar contract to Boeing. Subcontractors include Raytheon, TRW, Lockheed Martin, Orbital Sciences Corporation, Bechtel, and Teledyne Brown Engineering. The project is currently undergoing extensive ground and flight tests.

 

Upon completion, GMD will consist of an complex array of synchronized components: Air Force Defense Support Program (DSP) satellites; Space Based Infrared System-High (SBIRS-High) satellites; the Space Tracking and Surveillance System (STSS); Upgraded Early Warning Radars (UEWRs); a Battle Management, Command, Control and Communications (BMC3) unit; the Sea-Based X-Band Radar (SBX); and Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI) missiles.

 

In a typical combat scenario, DSP and SBIRS-High satellites scan the horizon for hostile ballistic missile launches. Once a threat has been detected, the satellites estimate the missile’s flight path. The Space Tracking and Surveillance System monitors the threat as it makes its way across the globe, while Upgraded Early Warning Radars predict its final destination. This allows GMD to launch its interceptors as early as possible. The BMC3 unit on the ground integrates all surveillance and tracking information.

 

The interceptor missile itself, known as the Ground-Based Interceptor, is located in an underground silo. Once launched, the GBI streaks toward the target’s predicted location, receiving in-flight updates along the way. MDA is currently developing a Sea-Based X-Band Radar, scheduled for completion in 2005, to guide the GBI and allow it to differentiate between warheads and decoys. In the meantime, GMD will use existing radars located on the California coastline and the Alaskan Aleutian Islands.

 

At a predetermined point, the GBI releases its Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV). The EKV is 55 inches long and weighs 140 pounds. It has its own infrared seeker, guidance system, and motor. As it closes in on its target, the EKV integrates data from the XBR with its on-board sensors and locks on to the enemy missile. The EKV continuously adjusts its flight path until it collides with the target (like a bullet hitting a bullet). The hit-to-kill impact causes complete destruction of the warhead, including any nuclear, chemical, or biological agents.

 

Since 1999, MDA has conducted seven GMD hit-to-kill tests. Five have been successful. The most recent test was on October 14, 2002, when a GBI from the Reagan Test Site in the central Pacific Ocean tracked and destroyed a target vehicle launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base at an altitude of 140 miles and a closing speed in excess of 15,000 miles per hour. Since then, MDA has also conducted two successful flight tests of the GBI boost vehicle. MDA plans to perform approximately seventeen more hit-to-kill intercepts over the next several years. MDA is also developing and constructing a Test Bed that will allow it to conduct rigorous EKV tests at angles, speeds, and conditions that closely resemble operational scenarios.

 

Despite these recent successes, several prominent Democrats have criticized MDA’s decision to deploy interceptor missiles at Fort Greely and Vandenberg. During the Democratic primaries, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) voiced his complete opposition to the program. Sen. Tom Daschle (D-SD) echoed his colleague, adding, “There is such a rush to deploy that I think it’s going to be an embarrassment to them—to the country—if we rush to judgment, rush to the commitment of resources.” Sen. John Edwards (D-NC), and Ret. Army Gen. Wesley Clark also expressed their concerns.

 

All the same, GMD has received enthusiastic support from the Bush Administration and the Republican-controlled Congress, and there are no foreseeable delays to its deployment. Over the next year, in fact, MDA will decide whether or not to build a third GMD interceptor site. Europe is a top choice for its location, since it would provide increased defense against missiles launched from the Middle East. MDA acknowledges that this potential third site could be either land-based or sea-based, and could be fielded as early as 2006.

 

 

Sources

 

The Boeing Company.
“Boeing-Led Missile Defense Team Scores Another ‘Hit’; Successful System Test Includes Intercept Over Pacific.” Boeing Press Release, 14 October 2002.
“Boeing Wins $1.6 Billion-Dollar Contract From DoD’s Joint Program Office To Act As Lead System Integrator for National Missile Defense Program.” Boeing Press Release, 30 April 1998.
“Boeing-Orbital Team Successfully Launches Booster Vehicle.” Boeing Press Release, 16 August 2003.
“Boeing Conducts Successful GMD Integrated Flight Test,” Boeing Press Release, 26 January 2004.
Breen, Tom. “Missile Defense Agency; Countdown To Historic Deployment.” Armed Forces Journal, 1 April 2004.
Federation of American Scientists, Description of GBI.
Federation of American Scientists, Description of XBR.
Globalsecurity.org.
Missile Defense Agency.
Raytheon Company.
Selinger, Marc. “GMD Successfully Conducts Flight Test With New Booster.” Aerospace Daily, 28 January 2004.
Selinger, Marc. “Sen. Kerry Opposes Upcoming Missile Defense Deployment.” Aerospace Daily, 21 January 2004.
Selinger, Marc. “Third Site For GMD Interceptors Could Be Picked In A Year.” Aerospace Daily & Defense Report, 28 April 2004.

Kennedy on Revised BMD Strategy in Europe

September 21, 2009 :: The Wall Street Journal :: Analysis

Claremont Institute President Brian Kennedy discusses the Obama administration's change of course on missile defense in Europe at Wall Street Journal Asia.

 

Kennedy argues that the abandonment of a 'third site' for ground-based long-range ballistic missile defense in central Europe involves strategic considerations that reach far beyond current revised estimates about Iranian short- and medium-range missile capabilities. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: European Missile Defenses

» Missile system details for: Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI), Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD), Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI)

Final Report on America's Strategic Posture

May 13, 2009 :: Analysis

The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States has released its final report to Congress. It offers some encouraging news and recommendations about the continued development and viability of missile defense in theater, but also leaves much to be desired in its discussion of missile defense deployments, the possibility of an EMP attack, and the desirability of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The "on the one hand, on the other hand" style of the report seems to reflect a division of opinion over the proper approaches to strategic policy.

 

The chapter on missile defense opens by noting that "Missile defenses are an integral part of the strategic posture of the United States after the Cold War." Iran and North Korea are identified as the two "missile threats of most immediate concern." The commission mentions both the deterrent effect of a missile defense system and its potential for shielding and reassuring allies.

 

These capabilities may contribute to deterrence by raising doubts in a potential aggressor's mind about the prospects of success in attempts to coerce or attack others. They may contribute to assurance of allies, by increasing their protection and also reducing the risks that the United States would face in protecting them against a regional aggressor.

 

The commission "strongly supports continued missile defense cooperation with allies" Such as Israel and Japan. This cooperation involves missile defense systems designedto combat short- and medium-range missiles, such as THAAD, PAC 3, and the sea-based Aegis system. Citing current plans to deploy 96 THAAD and 133 sea-based SM-3 interceptors, the commission states that "these numbers should be reviewed if the threat from North Korean or Iranian missiles increases." The gradual expansion of Iranian, Chinese, and North Korean missiles would indeed seem to warrant such a review. Yet these systems may also need to be supplemented by others to form a global and layered defense.

 

The Commission expresses less confidence in the Ground-Based Interceptors (GBIs) currently deployed in California and Alaska, with ten additional interceptors slated for deployment at a third site in Poland.

 

This system has demonstrated some capability against unsophisticated threats and should undergo additional system testing to determine its effectiveness against more complex threats that include technologies intended to help in-coming missiles penetrate the defense (so-called penetration aids). Further development and deployment...should depend on results of these tests and on developments in the ICBM threats facing the United States and its allies.

 

No single system is capable of defending against all threats of course. Yet the Commission misses an opportunity to explore the significant advantages offered by a multi-layered missile defense system.

 

The Commission recommends that missile defense policy should balance the need for national defense with the "legitimate concerns of Russia and China about strategic stability." In other words, a vigorous pursuit of defensive capabilities might lead Russia or China to "take actions that increase the threat to the United States and its allies and friends," such as enhancing their own arsenals or proliferating missile technologies to others.

 

The commission ends its report with a discussion of EMP:

 

Lastly, the United States should take steps to reduce the vulnerability of the nation and the military to attacks with weapons designed to produce electromagnetic pulse (EMP) effects. We make this recommendation although the Commission is divided over how imminent a threat this is. Some commissioners believe it to be a high priority threat, given foreign activities and terrorist intentions. Others see it as a serious potential threat, given the high level of vulnerability.

 

A recommendation for the hardening of America's electrical grid follows. The report leaves unmentioned the potential a multi-layered missile defense system might have in meeting the threat of EMP. (Link) 

» Strategic Posture Report 2009

» More stories on: Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Weapons

» Missile system details for: Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI), Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD), Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3), Aegis Ship-Based BMD, Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI), Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)

Missile Defense Team Completes Flight Test and Intercepts Target Missile

September 28, 2007 :: MDAA :: News

On September 28 the Missile Defense Agency reported the successful test of the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system, including an intercept of a target missile.  The Kodiak Launch Complex in Alaska launched a long range ballistic missile target, traveling southward to resemble the trajectory of a North Korean missile.  The upgraded Early Warning Radar at Beale Air Force Base in California located and tracked the target.  Seventeen minutes later, Vandenberg Air Force Base in California launched an interceptor missile, which released its exoatmospheric kill vehicle, the component that collides directly with the target warhead in space, a "hit to kill" kinetic technology.  The interceptor successfully destroyed the target warhead, marking the seventh successful intercept of the GMD system, and the second time an operationally configured interceptor has been used in the past thirteen months.  The test was described as highly complex, and integrating a number of components, including the Sea-Based X-Band Radar (SBX) located in the northern Pacific and an Aegis ballistic missile defense ship using its onboard SPY-1 radar to track the target warhead. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Testing - American

» Missile system details for: Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD), Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI), Sea-Based X-Band Radar (SBX), Aegis Ship-Based BMD

Malfunction with Target Missile Postpones GBI Intercept Attempt

May 25, 2007 :: The Missile Defense Agency :: News

Technical problems with a target missile derailed a highly anticipated U.S. test of its missile defense system on Friday.  The test missile, a former Polaris submarine launched ballistic missile, was launched at 7:00 PM from Kodiak Island in Alaska, but due to problems with the target missile's flight, the interceptor at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California was never launched to intercept it, and is thus recorded as a "no test" of the Ground Based Interceptor system.  “We were not able to get the target downrange far enough or high enough to present a threat to the system,” said agency Director Lt. Gen. Henry Obering.  “It fell well short of the intended area. The system itself never had a chance to recognize it as a threat, and so did not respond to the target.”  “There is always a risk of this occurrence since we are flying old intercontinental ballistic missile motors in our targets,” Obering said in a Missile Defense Agency press release.  “We have initiated a target modernization program, within our existing budget which should mitigate these risks for the future. … We will attempt to repeat this test this summer.” (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Testing - American

» Missile system details for: Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI), Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD)

NYT Profiles Fort Greely

December 10, 2006 :: New York Times :: News

The New York Times today profiled the ground-based missile defense base at Fort Greely, Alaska. Located about 160 km southeast of Fairbanks, this sub-arctic outpost operated by the 49th Missile Defense Battalion of the Alaska National Guard “is where progress on the long-embattled missile system is perhaps most evident,” according to military officials. Eleven ground-based interceptors are deployed in underground silos at Fort Greely, with a 12th scheduled for installation later this month. This summer, when North Korea signaled that it planned to fire a Taep’o-dong-2 intercontinental ballistic missile, Fort Greely went on alert. After the test either failed or was aborted, “there was a little bit of a letdown” at the base, said Lieutenant Colonel Edward E. Hildreth III, commander of the 49th, “because we were prepared.” Hildreth said was well aware of criticism that missile defense was far from a perfected program. He said Fort Greely operated in a balance between operational mode and construction. “We build a little, test a little,” he said. “It’s fluid.” (Article, Link) 

» Missile system details for: Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD), Fort Greely

Polish Daily: Romania and U.K. Supercede Poland in Missile Defense “Game”

October 11, 2006 :: BBC Worldwide Monitoring :: News

Poland has been superceded by Romania and the United Kingdom in the “game” for a new U.S. missile defense site, writes Eugeniusz Janula in the Polish daily Trybuna. “When one glances at a world atlas,” writes Janula, “there is not the slightest doubt that the most convenient location for an installation of this type is in the region of northern Norway or the U.K.’s Orkney or Shetland Islands.” From these locations, the U.S. could effectively intercept missiles coming in from the Middle East and South Asia, such as from Iran, as well as from the Kola Peninsula where Russia has deployed a considerable portion of its missile arsenal. Yet Norway declined and the U.K. likewise did not show much enthusiasm. So the U.S. began confidential talks with Poland and the Czech Republic. According to Janula, “the Czechs quickly realized that they were not the objective,” since a missile defense base built on their territory would not have “universal application.” In the case of Poland, “the Americans might discuss many things, but they would never consent to any control over such an important base,” and thus “Poland has dropped out of the game.” Janula claims that the U.S. now plans to set up a “small, temporary base with 8-10 semi-stationary launchers” in Romania, which will serve as a purely anti-Iranian installation. More importantly, he writes, the U.K. has revised its stance and will now make the Orkney Islands accessible for a “second base of universal application.” For this, the British will obtain “state-of-the-art nuclear submarine technologies, the naval version of the F-35 plane which will supplant the Harriers on British aircraft carriers, as well as other technological benefits.” (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Russia, Iran, Allies

» Missile system details for: Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD)

Hackett on North Korea, Missile Defense

October 11, 2006 :: Washington Times :: Analysis

The Bush administration is handling North Korea’s nuclear brinksmanship “just right,” argues James Hackett in The Washington Times. It has reacted without histrionics, demanded action by the world community, applied a widening circle of economic sanctions, worked with allies to present a united front, and strengthened missiles defenses. Hackett notes that the North Korean test demonstrates “the folly of those who want to delay deployment of [missile] defenses while conducting interminable flight tests.” He argues that the Bush administration should accelerate deployment of additional ground-based interceptors in Alaska and California, Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) interceptors in Japan and South Korea, and ship-based interceptors on U.S. and Japanese Aegis destroyers in the Pacific and Sea of Japan. “The combination of a united front against Pyongyang and the strengthening of missile defenses around the Pacific can keep North Korea isolated while the united front increases sanctions to push the regime toward collapse,” Hackett writes. “It is important to stay the course and ignore those who call for direct negotiations and other concessions.” (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: South Korea, Nuclear Weapons, North Korea, Japan, Analysis

» Missile system details for: Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD), Aegis Ship-Based BMD

MDA Promotes Head of Ground-Based Midcourse Defense

October 4, 2006 :: MarketWatch :: News

The Missile Defense Agency has recently promoted the head of the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) program to the agency’s number two position. Since mid-2005, Brigadier General Patrick O’Reilly has managed the GMD program as it struggled to get back on track following several test failures in late 2004 and 2005, when interceptor missiles failed to leave their silos. On September 1, 2006, the system successfully intercepted a test-target missile, winning O’Reilly praise from Capitol Hill for his focus and professionalism. He is slated to take up the Missile Defense Agency deputy post in January 2007, but will continue his role as program manager of GMD for the time being. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Policy

» Missile system details for: Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD), Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI)

Congress Secures Additional $200 Million for Missile Defense

September 25, 2006 :: AP :: News

Congress has secured an additional $200 million for the U.S. missile defense system. The funding is in the annual defense spending bill that was approved by a U.S. House-Senate conference committee last week, according to the Senate Appropriations Committee. The additional funds will be spent on “test infrastructure, operations support and additional interceptors for ground-based missile defense.” The final defense spending bill calls for $9.4 billion for all missile defense programs except the Patriot system in the fiscal year beginning October 1. That amount is $110 million above President Bush’s request. Spending on comparable programs was $8.74 billion in the current fiscal year. Of the $9.4 billion for the upcoming fiscal year, $2.8 billion is earmarked for the ground-based system. The defense spending bill now heads to each congressional chamber for final passage. Amendments are not permitted.
        Similar to last year, the Senate Appropriations Committee added language to the defense spending bill expressing dissatisfaction with the Missile Defense Agency’s direction: “The committee is concerned that MDA is investing too much funding in future systems and technology in advance of adequate testing and fielding of currently available technology.” Last year, the Committee’s defense panel, chaired by Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK), addressed the agency in similar terms. “Contrary to repeated Defense Department statements on spiral development and block upgrades for the missile defense program, MDA at best plans only marginal improvements to the capability of the GMD program’s ground-based interceptor,” it said then in its report. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Budget

» Missile system details for: Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI), Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD)

Poland Wants U.S. Pact in Exchange for Missile Silos

September 13, 2006 :: Reuters :: News

Poland wants a bilateral pact and improved air defenses in exchange for becoming the first missile defense site outside the U.S., reports Reuters. According to Polish Defense Minister Radoslaw Sikorski, who spoke today to a forum hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Poland has to be persuaded that the benefits of hosting a U.S. missile defense site outweigh potential risks such as becoming a greater target. “I would need to go in front of parliament and say, well, why overall it’s a good package,” Sikorski said, noting that any such package would have to include a bilateral pact and improved air defenses. The U.S. has favored multilateral defense pacts in recent decades, although it maintains a few bilateral treaties, including with Japan and South Korea. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Allies

» Missile system details for: Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI), Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD)

Total Records: 45	[1] 2 3 4 5 »