Program Element: 0603217C Project Number: 3206
PE Title: Ballistic Missile Defense (U) Budget Activity: 03
Adv Technology Dev (U)
February 1994
A. (U) RESOURCES: ($ in Thousands)
Project Title: System Threat
FY1993 FY1994 FY1995 FY1996 FY1997 FY1998 FY1999 Total
Program Name: Actual Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Program
0603217C RDT&E 9,229 6,890 6,890 6,890 6,890 6,890 6,890 Continuing
B. (U) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF MISSION REQUIREMENT AND SYSTEM CAPABILITIES:
(U) With the changing world situation and the projection of continuing proliferation of ballistic
missiles, it is imperative that an accurate characterization of theater, national, and global threats
be developed. The accurate specification and characterization of ballistic missiles and the
appropriate development and integration of scenarios using these characterizations is critical to:
(1) the analysis of alternative ballistic missile defense architectures; (2) the performance
assessments of potential technology applications; and (3) the operational performance evaluations of
candidate designs. The threat specifications and characterizations must be based on accepted
intelligence community threat projections or realistic estimates of technological/operational innovations; be traceable back to objective and quantifiable analyses; and be supported by the using
organizations. These threat projections, described in engineering terms and parameters, must be used
by all BMDO agencies to ensure that results can be compared and contrasted.
(U) The System Threat development project is an integral part of BMDO's three-part Threat Program.
The System Threat Project uses as a baseline the System Threat Assessment Report (STAR) developed
under the Intelligence Threat Development Project (#3203) and incorporates likely adversary
countermeasures identified in the Countermeasures Integration Project (#3204). The System Threat
Project adds system-specific engineering characterization details described in the form of scenarios
characterizing particular timing, targets, and tactics.
(U) The System Threat Project achieves its objectives through cooperative efforts with the
Intelligence Community, BMD system developers and supporting contractors. Using the expertise
available through these entities, the System Threat Project:
(1) Identifies user needs for threat scenario descriptions.
(2) Identifies analyses needed to fully specify and characterize the threat missile systems, penetration aids, tactics, etc., and ensures the analyses is done.
(3) Provides the analysis results to all interested agencies for review and comment.
(4) Addresses critical threat issues which arise during the analysis process.
(5) Ensures all supporting agencies' views on threat issues are fully aired.
(6) Reviews, approves, produces, and distributes all System Threat Scenario Descriptions.
(7) Produces threat computer tapes and supporting documentation for use by the development and
acquisition communities.
(U) The System Threat Scenario Description Documents are presented to the BMDO System Design Board
(SDB) for endorsement and configuration control.
(U) As a result of the Bottom-Up Review (BUR), the funding for the System Threat scenario generation
effort was reduced by 30% for FY94 and increasing in follow-on years. The 30% reduction primarily
impacts on the timeliness of scenario production versus the need for scenarios to complete COEA and
DAB required analyses.
(U) This project is assigned to the Budget Activity and Program Element codes as identified in this
descriptive summary in accordance with existing Department of Defense policy. Further justification
of the Budget Activity code assigned to each Program Element is contained within the Brief Description
of Element section of each Program Element Summary.
C. PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND PLANS:
(U) FY 1993 Accomplishments:
o Update all scenario descriptions to reflect the latest version of the STAR.
o Develop threat excursions for architecture concept studies.
o Continue upgrade of the threat tape generator, TM93.
o Perform analyses to develop threat system, penaids, and characterization data.
o Support test and experiment activities.
o Preparation of threat documentation to support element milestone decisions.
o Continue operation of the Special Programs Center at the NTB.
o Develop single-event (non-campaign), campaign, and special purpose scenarios as needed by the user community.
o Update work on the START constrained, non-responsive threat systems and scenarios in response to changing treaty interpretation.
o Develop scenarios which reflect possible BMD applications in the context of:
- Exchanges from and to old Soviet Republics
- An amphibious landing scenario
- A defense suppression scenario
- A counterforce scenario.
o Continue to support the Countermeasures Integration Program efforts to define, assess, test, and
evaluate candidate countermeasures, and to conduct Red/Blue interchanges.
(U) FY 1994 Plans:
o Update the BMD Scenario Descriptions to reflect latest intelligence program projections contained in the STAR.
o Develop threat system characterizations, and scenario descriptions in response to the analysis needs of the system/element developers.
o Develop threat scenarios for use in cost, effectiveness and architecture analysis studies.
o Continue to integrate ballistic missile, cruise missile, and aero-dynamic threat systems in campaign-style scenarios.
o Continue to support the System Design Board's need for threat issue briefings and discussions during the requirements definition decision meetings.
o Continue upgrade of the National Test Bed (NTB) threat system modeling capability (TM93).
o Continue to produce threat tapes and supporting documentation through the NTB Special Programs Center.
o Continue to support the Intelligence Office's efforts to update the STAR.
o Support system and element project offices with preparation of required threat documentation in support of acquisition milestones.
o Develop scenarios depicting threat systems employed in theater environments
o Continue to support the inclusion of Electronic Warfare overlays which characterize electronic threat systems in scenario constructs.
o Continue to support the inclusion of Pre-launch Operations studies which characterize signatures
of infrastructure activities in scenario constructs.
(U) FY 1995 Plans: Same as FY 1994 Plans.
(U) Program Plan to Completion: This is a continuing program.
D. (U) WORK PERFORMED BY:
o US Air Force Space and Missile Center, Los Angles, CA
o US Air Force National Aerospace Intelligence Center, Dayton, OH
o Defense Intelligence Agency, Washington, DC
o US Army Missile and Space Intelligence Center, Huntsville, AL
o Navy Maritime Intelligence Center, Suitland, MD
o BMDO Security, Intelligence and Countermeasures Directorate, Pentagon, Washington, DC
o US Army Strategic Defense Command, Huntsville, AL
o Joint Program Office of the National Testbed, Falcon AFB, CO
o Booze-Allen & Hamilton, Arlington, VA
o Riverside Research, Arlington, VA
E. (U) COMPARISON WITH FY 1994 DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY:
1. TECHNICAL CHANGES: None
2. SCHEDULE CHANGES: None
3. COST CHANGES: Funding for the System Threat scenario generation effort was reduced by 30% for
FY94 and increasing in follow-on years. The reduction primarily impacts on the timeliness of
scenario production versus the need for scenarios to complete COEA and DAB required analyses.
Scenarios being generated to support TMD analyses will not be completed on time due to this
reduction. NTF/SPC personnel reduced by 7 individuals. Scenarios to be used by TMD programs
for analysis will have completion delayed by 2-3 months. Aerodynamic threat data integration
into threat scenario magnetic media will be delayed at least 6 months.
F. (U) PROGRAM DOCUMENTATION:
o Design-to-Threat 1Q/FY-89
o 91 STAR 2Q/FY-92
o 91-2 4Q/FY-92
o 92-1 Middle East Scenario 1Q/FY-92
o 92-2 North East Asia Scenario 1Q/FY-93
o 92-3 Middle East Amphibious Scenario 2Q/FY-93
o BMD 93-1 South East Europe Scenario 1Q/FY-94
G. (U) RELATED ACTIVITIES: Work performed under the Intelligence Threat Development Project and the
Countermeasures Threat Project (Projects 3203 and 3204, PE No. 6.3) complement and support this
effort. There is no unnecessary duplication of effort within BMDO or the DoD.
H. (U) OTHER APPROPRIATION FUNDS: None
I. (U) INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS: None
J. (U) MILESTONE SCHEDULE:
o Update Scenario Description Documents
(as required) FY92-97
o TM93 Software Upgrades (Annually) FY92-97
o Threat Tape Production (as required) FY92-97
o Develop Red/Blue Interchange Scenario
(semi-annually) FY93-98
o START Constrained Global Scenario/Tape 2Q/FY-94
o Update all Scenarios vs 94 STAR 4Q/FY-94
o Additional Scenarios Per Users Needs FY94-98
o START II Strategic Scenario 1Q/FY-94
o Southwest Asia North Scenario 2Q/FY-94
o Southwest Asia South Scenario 2Q/FY-94
o PENAID Compendium 1Q/FY-94
o BMDO Scenario Catalogue 1Q/FY-94
o Asia Campaign Scenario 1Q/FY-95