1. The Army's Program Executive Office for Missile Defense (PEO-MD) has made a proposal that would take advantage of the significant investment that BMDO has made in ground-based missile defense technology. Planning includes an evolutio nary deployment for defense against long range ballistic missiles , initially focusing on unsophisticated intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). The approach is to provide a cost and operationally effective single-site system as the f irst step in system deployment. This initial system will provide defense of all 50 states against an unsophisticated ICBM attack.
2. The Army PEO's NMD approach is to take advantage of the infrastructure at Grand Forks, North Dakota and deploy an initial NMD system and then grow this system in response to changes in the quantity and quality of the threat and in accordance with th e modifications negotiated in the treaty over time. The initial capability can be expanded by adding additional interceptors and by adding more sites. Space-based sensors (Space and Missile Tracking System (SMTS)) could be added to provide increas ed battle space and dual phenomenology tracking and discrimination to enhance defense effectiveness against more advanced threats.
3. The Army PEO has shown that the initial NMD system can provide effective defense of the 48 continental United States against limited threats (a few RVs with simple penetration aids and/or jammers). Analysis indicates that, with certain enhancements, th e initial system can also provide an effective defense for all states. These enhancements include the following:
a. Improved quality of Early Warning Radar (EWR) data including additional advanced radars at Shemya (in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska), in Hawaii, and on the east coast.
b. Increased interceptor booster velocity.
c. Onboard target selection capability of the kill vehicle.
4. Each of these improvements is discussed below:
a. Improved EWR data is necessary to provide tracking information of sufficient quality for the NMD battle management/command, control, and communications (BM/C3) system functions. The concept of using EWR data is not different from the CONUS defense c oncept; however, to extend this capability to Alaska and Hawaii requires upgrades to the EWRs, adding advanced EWRs at Shemya, in Hawaii, and on the east coast. The upgraded EWRs and additional EWRs would provide early acquisition of the ballistic miss ile threat and allow the interceptors sufficient time to intercept these targets. The advanced EWRs would be based on the technology the Army has developed with BMDO sponsorship.
b. Another important change is an increase in the interceptor velocity to reduce the fly-out time and increase coverage. For CONUS defense, a velocity of about 6.5 km/sec is sufficient; however, defending Alaska and Hawaii from a single interceptor sit e at Grand Forks, North Dakota, requires a velocity greater than 7.2 km/sec. The Army NMD Program Office has identified commercial booster motors that will provide a velocity greater than 8 km/sec and plans to utilize this capability in the ground-based i nterceptor.
c. The third characteristic required is the onboard capability of the kill vehicle to select the lethal object from a cluster of objects. The Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV) was specifically designed to achieve this capability. This capability allows the system to commit the interceptor against a cluster of objects, designate, and intercept the lethal object in a target complex.
5. The Army PEO has proposed an accelerated, evolutionary NMD development program which will meet requirements if funded at the appropriate level. The proposed NMD Program will develop a system for deployment that will provide an effective defense of t he entire United States against a limited threat. The proposal begins with an initial deployment of an NMD system of ground-based interceptors (GBI), a ground-based radar (GBR), upgraded and advanced EWRs (U/AEWR), and associated BM/C3. The proposal would initially deploy about 20 Developmental or User Operational Evaluation System (UOES) GBIs, an X-band NMD GBR, and associated BM/C3 in the Grand Forks, North Dakota, vicinity. This system would be supported by existing space-based sensors. A/UEWRs, and up graded command and control (C2) to support USCINCSPACE in the centralized control of the NMD mission. This initial capability would be fully utilized in the continued evolutionary development of the objective system.
6. This proposed system could provide effective protection of the entire United States in the 2000 time frame from a limited ICBM attack of a few RVs for an acquisition cost of about $5B. The initial NMD system could be augmented through negotiations t o deploy additional GBIs, additional ground-based sites, a space-based sensor system (SMTS), and/or a space-based weapon system as required and permitted by treaty obligations to address a larger and/or more sophisticated threat.
7. In summary, the initial system, using additional EWRs, can provide costs and operationally effective defense of all 50 states against ballistic missile threats limited to a few RVs and simple penetration aids. The ground-based radar being de veloped will provide high quality track and discrimination. On threats that require early commit of the interceptor, the kill vehicle will have the capability to receive in-flight updates including target object map data. The kill vehicle will also have onboard target selection and designation capability. By combi ning these capabilities and allowing for multiple interceptor shots at each threatening object, a very high probability of kill can be achieved. Additional interceptor sites would provide increased defense robustness as threat quantity and quality increas e. Space-based sensors would increase defense confidence against larger and more stressing threats.
8. This evolutionary deployment approach is a prudent, affordable, and effective means of providing protection for all 50 states against a limited ballistic missile attack. It must be noted, however, that current budgetary constraints preclude the Army and BMDO from substantially accelerating NMD. This evolutionary program is executable only with strong continued congressional support at the $1B per year level, which must not come at the expense of other critical Army or BMDO programs.
[from the Congressional Record, December 19, 1995]