Statement of Lieutenant
General Malcolm R. O'Neill, USA, Director, Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization before the Committee on National Security,
House of Representatives, April 4, 1995
Mr. Chairman, it is my privilege to appear before this hearing
with the Subcommittee on Research and Development today to
testify on the accomplishments of the Ballistic Missile Defense
program. I am delighted that this Committee has taken the
time to hold multiple hearings on the BMD program. However,
I am particularly pleased that today we will address the specific
accomplishments the Department of Defense and industry have
achieved in making ballistic missile defenses a reality.
I believe our investment in the Ballistic Missile Defense
(BMD) program over the past twelve years has been sound and
fruitful. When and where there has been consensus between
the Executive and Legislative branches, our progress has been
especially outstanding. With regard to programs such as Theater
Missile Defense (TMD), for which deployment is authorized,
we are bringing hardware into the field now. With regard to
programs such as National Missile Defense (NMD), for which
deployment is not authorized, technologies are being readied
which will support deployment when and if approved. Overall,
as a Nation, we have done what we set out to do twelve years
ago -- demonstrate that ballistic missiles of all ranges could
be detected, tracked, and destroyed by missile defense weapons.
In my testimony today, I hope to demonstrate that we have
accomplished this mission and are now beginning to field highly
effective missile defenses. Before we discuss the evolution
and accomplishments of BMD technology, I think it is important
for us to review the historical backdrop, during which the
BMD program made its progress.
Historical Context
of BMD
Research and development into ballistic
missile defense dates back to World War II, in response to
German V-2 ballistic missile attacks on London. During the
1950's and 1960's, antiballistic missile interceptor technologies
and system concepts were designed to utilize nuclear warheads
in order to destroy long-range attacking ballistic missiles.
Sensor and guidance technologies were not yet mature enough
to permit kinetic energy, hit-to-kill intercept of ballistic
missile targets. Significant advances, however, in technologies
applicable to ballistic missile defense occurred after the
mid-1970's. By the early 1980's the Army BMD program had advanced
to the point where it was on the verge of revolutionizing
missile defenses by being able to use non-nuclear, hit-to-kill
interceptors as the basis for a new approach to BMD. In 1983
President Reagan challenged the U.S. scientific community
to investigate the feasibility of developing a defensive system
using new technologies to counter ballistic missiles. In response
to this challenge, the Department of Defense conducted an
intensive analysis of these advanced technologies and established
the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) to manage
the research effort.
When SDIO was established, the Nation was already spending
more than a $1 billion annually on missile defense programs
scattered throughout the military Services, defense agencies
and the Department of Energy. The core of the "new" BMD program
was created by drawing together a number of these projects,
with the principal contributions coming from the Defense
Advanced
Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the three military Services
and the Defense Nuclear Agency (DNA). When the organization
was created, its charter clearly outlined SDIO's mission:
SDIO shall manage and direct the conduct of a vigorous research
program, including advanced technologies, that will provide
the basis for an informed decision regarding the feasibility
of eliminating the threat posed by nuclear ballistic missiles
of all ranges, and of increasing the contribution of defensive
systems to U.S. and allied security. Since its inception in
1983, the BMD program has evolved through four distinct phases:
- a broad-based technology exploration and demonstration
program to identify those technologies ready for development
to support an initial multi-layer comprehensive defense
system, and those promising follow-on technologies that
could provide resilience against a full range of responsive
countermeasures (1984-1986);
- a focused development program called Phase One Strategic
Defense System, initiated in 1987, and aimed toward a
significant ground- and space-based, layered defense capability
to augment and strengthen deterrence (1987-1990);
- the refocusing of the program toward a Global Protection
Against Limited Strikes (GPALS) system, which would protect
the U.S., our forces overseas, and friends and allies
against limited ballistic missile strikes (1991-1992);
and
- the reorientation of
the BMD program to focus on acquisition and deployment
of highly effective
Theater Missile Defenses
to protect against the ballistic missile threat that
is "here and now," and to maintain a technology readiness
program for National Missile Defenses, should the ballistic
missile threat to the U.S. emerge (1993-present).
The changes in the program's orientation mirror the changes
in the world. When SDIO was chartered, the threat posed by
Soviet strategic nuclear forces was ominous. The Soviet Union
possessed over 8,000 nuclear warheads on ICBMs and SLBMs.
The concern over the growing likelihood of a Soviet first
strike capability was prevalent. The Phase One Strategic Defense
System was designed to strengthen deterrence -- if the success
of a Soviet first strike could be put in doubt, then Soviet
warplanners, it was reasoned, would not have confidence in
their ability to achieve their objectives.
With the breakup of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold
War, the BMD program was reoriented toward addressing regional
threats caused by proliferation of weapons of mass destruction
and shorter-range ballistic missiles, and the threat posed
by potential accidental or unauthorized limited attack on
the U.S. arising out of the political instability among the
states of the former Soviet Union. The Department's new approach
was embodied in a concept called Global Protection Against
Limited Strikes (GPALS), which integrated theater and strategic
defenses and emphasized global protection of forward deployed
U.S. forces, power projection forces, and other U.S. overseas
interests against theater-class ballistic missiles; and the
U.S. against a long range limited attack.
Today, the BMD program is structured to respond to the "here
and now" theater ballistic missile threat and an uncertain,
but evolving, threat to the United States. The current program
is founded upon the President's endorsement of the 1993 Department
of Defense Bottom Up Review and the Missile Defense Act of
1991, as subsequently amended in Fiscal Year 1993, 1994,
and
1995 National Defense Authorization Acts. The Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization (BMDO), established in May 1993, manages,
directs and executes the BMD program to achieve the following
objectives:
- Enable deployment of an effective and rapidly relocatable
advanced theater missile defense capability to protect
forward-deployed and expeditionary elements of the Armed
Forces of the United States as well as friends and allies
of the United States;
- Develop options for, and deploy when directed, an antiballistic
missile (ABM) system that is capable of providing effective
defense of the U.S. homeland against limited attacks of
ballistic missiles, including accidental, unauthorized
launches or deliberate attacks;
- Demonstrate advanced technologies -- as options for
enhanced initial BMD systems -- such as space-based defenses
and their associated sensors that could provide an overlay
to ground-based interceptors; and
- Continue programs of basic and applied research to develop
follow-on technologies for both near-term and future technology
insertion options and new system options to sustain a
highly effective missile defense capability.
Throughout this time of change -- the decline in the Soviet
threat, the rise in missile proliferation and use among the
Third World, the program's orientation and level of funding
-- SDIO and now BMDO continued to succeed in achieving their
objective of developing and demonstrating the defensive technologies
required to defeat ballistic missiles of all ranges. Today,
BMDO is harnessing these technologies to support deployment
of improved theater missile defense systems for the warfighter.
I am particularly proud that we are making missile defense
a reality today.
Development of BMD
Systems and Entering the Acquisition Process
When technology success meets a valid military
need, the result is often a decision to move a system concept
into the formal acquisition process in order to capitalize
on that technology. System acquisition activities do not make
the headlines as often as spectacular technology breakthroughs,
but it is this disciplined process that results in fielded
military capability. The formal acquisition process is where
we find out if those promising technologies will work as part
of a larger system. It is here where we look at the practicality
of a concept -- can industry produce it in sufficient quantities,
is it supportable under harsh field conditions, and is it
affordable? System acquisition is also where the operator
gets involved -- does the system meet operational needs, will
it perform as advertised and can the average soldier operate
it? To underscore the commitment of the BMD program to the
acquisition of Theater Missile Defense, BMDO has budgeted
80 percent of its Fiscal Year 1996 funds for this purpose.
BMD Hardware in the
Field
Today, we
are making near term improvements to existing air and missile
defense systems
to enhance their
abilities to defend against shorter-range tactical ballistic
missiles. In this sense, we are literally making ballistic
missile defenses a reality as we speak. As part of this
phase
of TMD improvement, we have deployed TALON SHIELD/JTAGS,
U.S. Marine Corps HAWK upgrades, and PATRIOT PAC-2 Quick
Response
Package (QRP). The first of the PATRIOT PAC-2 Guidance Enhanced
Missiles (GEM) are being delivered. We have also deployed
the Extended Air Defense Test Best (EADTB), which serves
as
a critical support tool. Each of these have significantly
improved our Nation's TMD capabilities over those that
existed
during Operation Desert Storm. These upgrades are a direct
result of investment in the BMD program and, in some cases,
are direct benefactors of our past technology development
efforts. I think you will agree when I say we are making
great
strides in putting TMD "rubber on the ramp" for the warfighter.
I would like to provide a quick overview of just a few of
these near term improvements.
Talon Shield/Joint Tactical Ground System (JTAGS): These systems
use Defense Support Program (DSP) satellite data, newly developed
algorithms and upgraded processing hardware -- developed under
the BMD program -- to significantly improve the accuracy and
timeliness of early warning information of ballistic missile
launches to U.S. forces overseas. In October 1994, the U.S.
Air Force activated the first Attack and Launch Early Reporting
to Theater (ALERT) squadron with an operational version of
the BMDO-developed TALON SHIELD system at Falcon Air Force
Base, Colorado. The ALERT squadron just recently achieved
its initial operational capability. JTAGS, also developed
by BMDO, is a complementary tactical mobile DSP ground station
for use in the theater. The U.S. Army has deployed several
prototype units overseas to support the warfighter.
HAWK Air Defense System: The U.S. Marine Corps and BMDO have
jointly funded improvements to the Marine Corps' HAWK system.
The HAWK system has been modified and tested to intercept
short-range ballistic missiles. This will represent the only
organic TMD capability for the Marines and will provide them
with some operational flexibility when Army or Navy TMD assets
at not available. Last September, two LANCE target missiles
were successfully intercepted by the modified HAWK system
in an operational test by Fleet Marine Forces at White Sands
Missile Range, New Mexico. BMDO and the Marine Corps jointly
funded upgrades and modifications to the TPS-59 radar, the
HAWK command and control system, and a communications interface
between the two. Modifications to the TPS-59 radar will result
in tactical ballistic missile target detection at long ranges
and high altitudes. Upgrades to the HAWK missile fuze and
warhead enable the system to provide a credible defense against
tactical ballistic missile targets. Over one-third of the
active Marine Corps HAWK equipment has been modified to provide
this short-range tactical ballistic missile defense for expeditionary
Marine forces. The entire fleet inventory will be modified
with this capability by the end of Fiscal Year 1996.
PATRIOT Quick Response Program (QRP): The PATRIOT QRP was
instituted in 1991-1992 and is already deployed and operational.
This program, designed to identify and quickly field improvements
to address lessons learned from Operation Desert Storm, included
upgrades for rapid, accurate fire unit emplacement; a capability
to remotely launch PATRIOT missiles up to 12 kilometers from
the radar which increases the defended area; and radar enhancements
to improve tactical ballistic missile detection and increase
system survivability. BMDO funded nearly 60 percent of the
QRP program.
PATRIOT Guidance Enhanced Missile: In February of this year,
the U.S. Army took delivery of the first PATRIOT Advanced
Capability-2 Guidance Enhanced Missile (GEM). The GEM incorporates
improvements to the PAC-2 missile receiver to enhance its
effectiveness and lethality against SCUD-class ballistic missiles.
With the GEM improvements, existing PAC-2 missiles will significantly
increase their defended areas and improve their lethality.
We will field about 350 PAC-2 GEM missiles which will provide
the principal improvement to our existing tactical ballistic
missile defense capability until PAC-3 begins deployments
in Fiscal Year 1998. BMDO funded nearly 90 percent of the
GEM program.
Extended Air Defense Test Bed (EADTB): The EADTB provides
a BMDO-developed high fidelity, flexible, user-friendly, computer-based
simulation tool for traditional air defense experiments with
the added complexity of Theater Missile Defense threats. It
is oriented to large scale scenarios for system analysis and
Cost and Operational Effectiveness Analysis (COEA) support.
The system will be capable of analyzing full theater-level
scenarios and will permit evaluation of extended air defense
systems. Initial node installations are complete at SHAPE
Technical Center, the Hague, Netherlands; Advanced Research
Center, Huntsville, AL; and Army Air Defense Center, Fort
Bliss, Texas. In the Hague, representatives from all sixteen
NATO nations can participate, by means of EADTB, in interactive
modeling, simulation, wargaming and virtual prototyping of
TMD systems in order to determine the best TMD solutions for
the alliance.
TMD Systems Currently
in the Acquisition Process
Following
these near-term enhancements, we have established a set
of "core" TMD systems
that are currently in the Department of Defense acquisition
process. The core
includes the PATRIOT Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3), Navy
Standard Missile II Block IVA (Navy Area Defense), and
Theater High
Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) systems. The variety of scenarios
and threat characteristics (maximum/minimum ranges, reentry
vehicles, radar cross sections, reentry vehicle temperatures,
etc.) and the characteristics of the defended area (military
forces, population centers, ports of debarkation, etc.)
require
complementary systems for complete and cost-effective defenses.
Therefore, we are developing a core set of systems which
will
begin deployments by the end of this decade and will greatly
improve our defense against the existing theater ballistic
missile threat. These systems, which are in the acquisition
process today, are benefactors of the technologies we have
developed over the past twelve years.
PAC-3: Last year the Department selected the Extended Range
Interceptor (ERINT) missile to satisfy the PAC-3 requirement
to provide significantly improved capability against theater
missile threats. PAC-3 represents a significant upgrade to
an existing air defense system to specifically handle stressing
theater ballistic missile threats. The selected PAC-3 missile
uses hit-to-kill technology to destroy attacking tactical
ballistic missiles and was selected principally for its lethality
against these missiles, especially those carrying weapons
of mass destruction.
The technology for the ERINT, as well as THAAD, missile has
its roots in the BMD program. The development of hit-to-kill
interceptor technology for TMD systems evolved from the SDIO's
Flexible Lightweight Agile Guidance Experiment (FLAGE) technology
demonstrations in the mid-1980's. This program originally
started in the Army as the small radar homing intercept technology
interceptor (SRHIT). Originally designed to test technologies
for a point defense system to protect ICBM fields from strategic
ballistic missile attack, the proof-of-principle test vehicles
demonstrated small, transportable defenses well suited to
tactical missile defense. SDIO funded a test series which
demonstrated the use of radar seekers and thruster/attitude
control rockets required for hit-to-kill guidance against
tactical ballistic missiles. In June 1986, a FLAGE hit-to-kill
test vehicle intercepted a target that was travelling over
2,100 miles per hour. In May 1987, a FLAGE hit-to-kill test
vehicle destroyed a short-range surface-to-surface LANCE missile.
The intercept occurred at an altitude of 16,000 feet. This
marked an important milestone in the development of hit-to-kill
TMD interceptors because the LANCE missile replicated the
radar signature and performance of a tactical ballistic missile.
Later that year, the ERINT program began as a development
effort to refine the hit-to-kill technology.
In November 1993, ERINT scored the first of three successive
direct hits on its targets. During this flight test ERINT
collided with and destroyed the warhead of a STORM target
vehicle. The warhead contained a cluster of 38 pressurized,
water-filled containers designed to simulate toxic chemical
submunitions. The second flight test in February 1994 pitted
the ERINT against a similar missile carrying a simulated unitary
chemical warhead. Again, the force of the impact destroyed
the target. These intercepts took place six miles down range
and six miles high. The enhanced lethality of ERINT against
tactical ballistic missiles, especially those with submunition
warheads, was a key element in the selection of ERINT as the
missile of choice for PAC-3. Lastly, in June 1994, ERINT completed
its third straight successful test flight when it destroyed
a drone. The purpose of the test was to demonstrate the accuracy
of ERINT's guidance system against a maneuvering air-breathing
target, such as a cruise missile. The success of the ERINT
program, which built upon a foundation of hit-to-kill technology
demonstrations, will bring protection to our warfighters as
we begin to field the PAC-3 system in Fiscal Year 1998.
Other improvements to the PATRIOT system that comprise the
PAC-3 enhancements will result in: increased firepower and
lethality; increased battlespace and range; enhanced battlefield
awareness; and improved discrimination performance in the
face of challenging countermeasures. Many of the PAC-3 system
components are responsible for improving the PATRIOT system
and enable it to achieve a hit-to-kill. I would like to highlight
just few examples. For instance, the PAC-3 inertial measurement
unit (IMU), which serves as the "inner ear" of the missile,
sensing attitude and motions, assists in guiding the missile
from launch point to where the seeker can "lock" on the target.
The ring-laser gyro IMU emerged from the BMD technology program
and was specifically designed to be small, lightweight and
low-cost in order to be used on missiles. We intend to use
this IMU on PAC-3 and THAAD.
Similarly, the PAC-3 attitude control section features 180
small solid rocket motors that provide a much more agile missile
than the PAC-2 missile, which relies solely on tail fins to
maneuver. This agility translates directly into improved accuracy
and lethality of the missile. Again, this specific technology
was borne out of the BMD program.
The new ceramic radome for the PAC-3 missile is lighter and
less expensive than the older radome flown just last year.
Meanwhile, it provides a protective covering for the PAC-3
system which is more transparent to the system's radar seeker.
The ceramic radome is a high temperature, high strength ceramic
composite that has improved performance characteristics in
every critical area. The PATRIOT system's leading edge technology
in electronic components comprise the heart of the PAC-3's
radar upgrades. They accomplish three major improvements:
first, allowing engagements of stealthier targets; secondly,
producing a more lethal intercept and; lastly, improving system
reliability.
Navy Area Defense: Modern Navy doctrine requires contributions
from combatant vessels to achieve and maintain battlefield
dominance "from the sea" for all littoral operations. Sea-basing
of TMD allows our Nation to take advantage of the strength
and presence of our naval forces. Navy vessels that are routinely
deployed world-wide are currently in potential threat areas
or can rapidly be redirected or repositioned. The Navy Area
Defense program, previously referred to as Navy Lower Tier,
represents another cost and operationally effective opportunity
for us to upgrade an existing air defense system (as we did
with PATRIOT) and give it substantial TMD capabilities as
quickly as possible. BMDO and the Navy have been working
together
to develop an enhancement to the AEGIS/STANDARD Missile air
defense system that would provide a tactical ballistic missile
defense capability -- similar to that provided by PAC-3 --
from the sea. The Nation has already invested over $40 billion
in the AEGIS Weapon System found on more than 50 AEGIS cruisers
and destroyers that contain over 5,000 vertical launch system
(VLS) cells. The AEGIS ships that will be equipped for a
TMD
capability will require no additional manning and already
have the complete infrastructure for training, logistics,
and engineering in place and operating. Hence, we are able
to leverage off the Nation's past investment in the AEGIS
fleet and provide a substantial near-term payoff in TMD capability.
The Navy Area TBMD program focuses on developing modifications
to the existing AEGIS Combat System, which includes changes
to the STANDARD Missile, to extend its robust anti-air warfare
capabilities to tactical ballistic missile defense. These
modifications will enable tactical ballistic missile detections,
tracking and engagement with a modified STANDARD Missile II
Block IV. This area defense system will provide AEGIS ships
the ability to conduct lower-tier, or endo-atmospheric, intercepts
of tactical ballistic missiles. Improvements to the STANDARD
Missile, such as development of the infrared seeker, will
incorporate technology from past BMD programs. These include
seeker component improvements in track processing, aimpoint
selection, cooling bottle winding technology, cooling valves
and cooling system. The seeker, along with other modifications,
will allow the STANDARD Missile to engage tactical ballistic
missiles.
Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD): The THAAD system
is the centerpiece of the core TMD program. It is designed
to engage the full spectrum of theater ballistic missile threats
and to expand the footprint of the defended area. The THAAD
system is comprised of an interceptor, the TMD Ground-based
Radar (GBR), and command and control equipment. THAAD will
provide the unique capability for wide area defense against
ballistic missiles at higher altitudes and longer ranges with
a lethal hit-to-kill interceptor. Neither the PAC-3 nor the
Navy Area Defense systems can provide this kind of long-range
defense.
The THAAD missile design utilizes various technologies developed
in past BMD programs to achieve hit-to-kill accuracy and yet
maintain a small configuration well suited to the THAAD operational
requirements. The missile consists of a single-stage solid
propellent rocket booster motor and a kill vehicle which separates
from the booster prior to impact. The booster uses state-of-the-art
composite case construction to minimize weight. Such composite
materials are derived from the BMD materials and structures
program to develop strong, yet lightweight, materials. A deployable
flare at the aft end of the booster provides added stability
in certain flight regimes. A thrust vector control system
is used for attitude control during boost phase. This important
component has lineage in SDIO's High Endoatmospheric Defense
Interceptor (HEDI) and Exoatmospheric Reentry Vehicle Interceptor
System (ERIS) programs. The interstage at the forward end
of the booster contains a separation motor which ensures positive
kill vehicle separation.
The kill vehicle is integrated into a biconic structure which
mates to the booster interstage. During flyout, the seeker
window is protected from the severe flight environment by
a two-piece clamshell shroud. The shroud is ejected just
prior
to seeker acquisition by inflating metal bladders in the
nose cone to impart the required separation velocity. Shroud
technology,
used here in THAAD, has been developed by the U.S. Army under
the auspices of BMDO. The seeker window is a rectangular
sapphire
plate mounted in the forecone. Again, the seeker window technology
is a legacy of the seeker windows developed for the HEDI
program.
The mid-wave infrared seeker is mounted on a 2-axis stabilized
platform to isolate the seeker measurements from vibration
and other disturbances. The seeker design includes an all-reflective
optical system and platinum sillicide staring focal plane
array. This sensitive staring focal plane array, which serves
as the "eyes" for the THAAD interceptor, emerged from BMD
sensor technology efforts over the last ten years. A ring-laser
gyro inertial measurement unit (IMU) is mounted on the platform
to measure and stabilize the platform motion and serve as
a reference for seeker measurements. This IMU -- used in
both
THAAD and PAC-3 -- was originally developed under the SDIO
D-2 hypervelocity projectile program. The IMU is a very low-mass,
highly accurate (low drift rate of 3 degrees per hour) system.
Throughout the D-2 testing the laser ring gyro IMU proved
itself to be very reliable. Aft of the seeker is the bi-propellent
divert and attitude control system. An integrated avionics
package contains four reduced instruction set computers to
provide the processing speed required for hit-to-kill guidance.
The radar element (TMD-GBR) in the THAAD system meets an immediate
requirement for a more capable wide-area defense radar in
the theater. It provides surveillance and fire control support
as an integral part of the THAAD system, and cueing support
to lower-tier systems such as PATRIOT. The TMD-GBR utilizes
state-of-the-art radar technology to accomplish its required
functions of threat attack early warning, threat cueing, and
launch and impact point estimation. In particular, TMD-GBR
will be able to provide a capability to perform threat classification
against tactical ballistic missiles, and kill assessment after
intercept.
The Theater and National Missile Defense Ground-based Radar
programs have evolved using technologies developed by SDIO,
BMDO, and ARPA, as well as from commercial off-the-shelf equipment.
The common core software processing programs resident in the
TMD and NMD radars were developed in the SDIO program. The
Terminal Imaging Radar (TIR) program, initiated under SDIO,
developed imaging and discrimination techniques, and the radar
scheduler functions. These are some of the most complex functions
a BMD radar system must perform. In addition, SDIO and BMDO
have funded several radar component technologies used in our
ground-based radar systems. These include advanced X-band
Solid-State Transmit/Receive (T/R) modules and waveform generators,
and the Lexington Discrimination System used by MIT/Lincoln
Labs to validate real-time imaging and processing algorithms.
Our technology program also has been the cornerstone of radar
survivability initiatives in the area of anti-radiation missile
countermeasures and camouflage, concealment and deception
technologies for TMD-GBR. BMDO has also invested in the 10
watt and 20 watt T/R module program that evolved out of advances
made under the ARPA Gallium Arsenide Monolithic Microwave
Integrated Circuit program.
The NMD and TMD GBR programs also make maximum use of commercial
off-the-shelf equipment. The prime power unit is composed
of commercial generators and alternators. The electronic equipment
unit uses commercial computers and the massively parallel
processor systems for signal and data processing, and commercial
high speed data recorders.
Battle Management/Command, Control, Communications & Intelligence:
Establishment of effective BM/C3I for TMD is one of the most
important functions of the BMDO and is essential to fully
exploit the full capabilities of the core TMD weapons systems.
Successful BM/C3I increases the time available to engage hostile
missiles, increases the effective allocation of interceptors,
and reduces the potential for "leakers" -- attacking missiles
that penetrate our defense. It is truly the element which
most solidifies the jointness of theater missile defense.
Within the context of putting BM/C3 "rubber on the ramp," we
have successfully demonstrated the timely digital dissemination
of launch warning into theaters, established message standards
critical for the development of the Joint Data Net, and demonstrated
prototype command and control centers for TMD. This Fiscal
Year we will see significantly increased activity in BM/C3I
as we extend the early warning demonstrations into fully
operational
systems, implement message standards in developing Command
and Control (C2) host platforms, and support integration
of
JTIDS terminals into TMD C2 centers and C2 systems, such
as the Air Force Contingency Tactical Air Planning System
(CTAPS)
and the Navy Joint Marine Command Information System (JMCIS).
As always, BMDO will seek to minimize costs by taking advantage
of planned theater air defense BM/C3I improvements and encouraging
joint solutions for joint requirements wherever possible.
Advanced Theater Missile
Defense Capabilities
BMDO is also developing advanced TMD capabilities.
This includes the Navy Theater Wide Defense (Navy Upper Tier);
Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) -- which you will
recall as Corps SAM; and Boost-Phase Intercept (BPI). These
systems are currently in the concept exploration phase and
a decision to proceed with further development will be based
on a rigorous acquisition decision process. For the purpose
o f today's hearing, I would like to just briefly discuss
how these programs take advantage of past BMD technology developments
in order to provide improved TMD capabilities by addressing
specific military requirements.
Navy Theater Wide Defense: The Navy Theater-Wide Defense program
will provide an upper-tier Navy tactical ballistic missile
defense capability. The Navy Theater-Wide system, which could
be among the first deployed missile defense systems in a regional
crisis, could provide extensive areas of protection. Specifically,
Navy Theater- Wide could provide critical wide area defenses
early in a conflict -- allowing U.S. and/or coalition forces
to fight their way into a theater of operations while under
the protective cover of missile defenses. This program is
the second evolutionary stage of the joint BMDO-Navy TMD program
and will build on the baseline Navy Area Defense (lower-tier)
system. The Navy Theater-Wide system will use an interceptor
with exoatmospheric capability, such as the BMD technology
program-developed Lightweight Exoatmospheric Projectile (LEAP),
or a marinized version of the THAAD interceptor missile.
BMDO and the Navy have demonstrated the integration of BMD-developed
technologies into existing missiles. The LEAP and Advanced
Solid Axial Stage (ASAS), both developed under the SDIO and
BMDO programs, were recently flown aboard modified TERRIER
missiles during tests at sea.
The LEAP is a miniaturized kinetic kill vehicle that, once
delivered on a path towards the ballistic missile target,
detects, acquires, and homes in on that target. LEAP destroys
the target missile by force of impact. Efforts to pursue
advanced,
lightweight, low-cost components for space-based and ground-based
ballistic missile defense interceptors have generated significant
progress in the LEAP program over the past few years. The
LEAP program has succeeded in developing several miniature
kill vehicles all weighing under 20 kilograms. These LEAP
vehicles have undergone a series of hover tests to demonstrate
their abilities to "fly" and, using optical seekers, acquire
and track ballistic missile targets. (LEAP technology development
is discussed in further detail in the Advanced Technology
section.)
The ASAS is a state-of-the-art space rocket motor that provides
the LEAP with its final axial boost towards the target. The
ASAS program was initiated in the late 1980's to support the
Space-based Interceptor program with a robust, storable solid
axial propulsion system. The focus of the ASAS program was
to minimize weight and cost, while maximizing performance.
By 1992, technology development was completed and all that
remained was integrated stage testing. Due to funding constraints,
the program was temporarily stopped. However, the LEAP program
resumed program funding since the ASAS technology provided
an upper stage capability suitable for the Navy LEAP experiments.
The combination of the Navy's STANDARD Missile and the ASAS
provides sufficient propulsion to boost the LEAP kill vehicle
beyond the atmosphere to intercept longer-range theater-class
ballistic missiles far from their intended targets.
A cost and operational effectiveness analysis (COEA) is in
progress to assess interceptor alternatives. The Theater-Wide
Defense interceptor will be integrated into the existing AEGIS
Weapon System that will be modified for the Navy Area Defense
(lower tier) program.
Boost-Phase Interceptor: Ballistic missiles, regardless of
their range, are best targeted and countered during their
boost-phase. The ability to intercept a missile while boosting
provides a deterrent to launch or, in the event of a launch,
will destroy a target while still over enemy territory potentially
allowing the debris to fall back on the aggressor. BMDO and
the Air Force, supported by the Army and Navy, are currently
executing a kinetic energy boost-phase interceptor program
to demonstrate the concept.
Critical to the BPI program is the development of the advanced
kill vehicle in the BMDO Atmospheric Interceptor Technology
(AIT) program. The AIT program has its roots in the successful
HEDI program which demonstrated the principle of hypersonic
target acquisition and tracking in the atmosphere. Leveraging
off past investments in cooled window technology, lightweight
thermally protected structures, strapdown seekers, miniaturized
electronics, and lightweight gel propellant divert and attitude
control systems provide a lightweight kill vehicle with the
capability of performing hypersonic, hit-to-kill intercepts
of ballistic missile targets in the endoatmosphere. Combining
this kill vehicle with the ASAS rocket motor technology from
the LEAP program could permit the high velocity flight at
low altitudes necessary for the BPI system.
Benefits From Participation in the ARROW Program: The United
States is continuing a cooperative BMD program with Israel
through the Arrow Continuation Experiments (ACES) Program.
As demonstrated graphically during the Gulf War, Israel is
highly vulnerable to attack from tactical ballistic missiles
due to its close proximity to potential aggressor states in
the Middle East. Consequently, the development of highly capable
missile defenses is a priority for Israel, and is embodied
in the Arrow missile program. The U.S. has been a partner
in the development of the Arrow missile because it is in our
national interest that Israel acquire a robust missile defense
capability.
As the Arrow System moves toward deployment, the U.S. has
continued to invest in the program because of the valuable
technical input that the Arrow program is making to our own
developing TMD systems. Some examples of important technology
infusion from Arrow include: lethality data applicable to
the Navy Area Defense (lower-tier) program on the effectiveness
of blast fragmentation warheads against chemical bulk and
submunition weapons; development of optical window technology
applicable to both THAAD and Navy Area Defense programs; hypersonic
test data that helps validate U.S. computational fluid dynamics
codes being used by the THAAD and Navy Area Defense programs;
data from stage separation at high velocities and dynamic
pressures that benefits the THAAD program; and interoperability
development that will allow synergistic operations of Arrow
with U.S. TMD systems, if required in future contingencies.
National Missile Defense
Programs
The major technology breakthroughs
of the first four years of the BMD program proved the feasibility
of strategic National Missile Defense and led to a decision
to move specific systems into the Department's acquisition
process in June 1987. The first system architectures consisted
of boost, midcourse and terminal sensors, space- and ground-based
interceptors, and battle management/command, control, and
communications (BM/C3). It relied on kinetic energy weapons
and was known as Phase I. Phase II and subsequent phases
would
draw from continuing technology advances, particularly in
directed energy. The primary objective of Phase I was to
enhance
deterrence by denying Soviet planners confidence that they
could execute any successful war plan based on attacking
the
United States with ballistic missiles. Phase I was well into
the demonstration/validation phase of acquisition as the
decade
drew to a close. But the threat started to change -- the
Soviet Union was in the process of dissolving and theater
ballistic
missiles were proliferating. This led to a new architectural
concept known as Global Protection against Limited Strikes,
or GPALS. GPALS focused on achieving worldwide defensive
capability
against attacks of limited scope. It retained most of the
elements of the Phase I architecture, and moved several
theater
systems and the space-based weapon, known as Brilliant Pebbles,
into acquisition. Reassessment of the threat as part of
the
Administration's Bottom-Up Review led to a decision to transition
all ground-based NMD systems from formal acquisition to
a
technology readiness program (TRP). The objective of the
TRP is to mature the system elements and maintain a readiness
posture to respond to future strategic threats against
the
United States. NMD system elements include the Ground-based
Interceptor, Ground-based Radar, the Space and Missile
Tracking
System (SMTS) midcourse sensor, and BM/C3. I would like to
summarize the progress we have made in each of these programs
and in developing and maturing their ability to deliver
future
military capability. I will also describe a major investment
we have made for the testing of the NMD system.
NMD Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI): Our Ground-based Interceptor
program is developing, demonstrating, and validating the technology
and components for a state-of-the-art, cost effective, lightweight,
non-nuclear, hit-to-kill missile to intercept and destroy
ICBM reentry vehicles targeted against the United States.
This program consists of two efforts: the Exoatmospheric Kill
Vehicle (EKV) and the Payload Launch Vehicle (PLV).
Our EKV efforts concentrate on the difficult technical issues
of the interceptor front end. Early system objectives for
research and development are to expand the engagement envelope
through improvements to on-board sensor acquisition range,
target selection capability, and divert velocity. These improvements
will require iterating design, fabrication, and testing over
the next three to four years.
Our PLV efforts take advantage of readily available and proven
booster stacks (decommissioned Minuteman II second and third
stages) for EKV flight testing at the U.S. Army Kwajalein
Atoll missile range (USAKA) in the Republic of the Marshall
Islands. This low cost approach allows us delay development
of an optimized GBI booster, and focus our efforts and investments
on the kill vehicle's development.
The GBI program has considerable historical legacy from over
20 years of technical efforts on non-nuclear exoatmospheric
hit-to-kill interceptors. The U.S. Army's Homing Overlay Experiment
(HOE) first demonstrated the concept of exoatmospheric hit-to-kill.
The program, which spanned the period of Fiscal Years 1978
to 1984 consisted of four flights tests and demonstrated the
principle of hit-to-kill using a very capable, albeit expensive,
heavy and sophisticated kill vehicle. A successful intercept
was demonstrated in June 1984.
The Exoatmospheric Reentry-vehicle Interceptor Sub-system
(ERIS) program followed the successful HOE test series. The
ERIS program demonstrated the feasibility of using low-cost,
high-performance, supportable components. The program culminated
in 2 flight tests. The first in January 1991 met all test
requirements including a successful hit-to-kill intercept.
The second in March 1992 was partially successful. Overall,
the ERIS program was considered successful and achieved its
objective of demonstrating our ability to intercept strategic
ballistic missile targets with non-nuclear interceptors. However,
during such technology demonstrations, while we strive to
meet our test objectives of successful intercepts, it is important
to realize that we learn much from our failures. Detailed
analysis of telemetry data and test results teach us how to
improve our technology, system integration and test operations.
In addition to the direct legacy of the successful HOE and
ERIS demonstration programs, the GBI program has also benefitted
from technologies and lessons learned resulting from the
HEDI,
Brilliant Pebbles and LEAP programs. In addition, component
technology developments from the BMD technology program have "fed" the
GBI program. Guidance and control technology development
efforts, such as the Interferometric Fiber Optic Gyroscope
(IFOG) Inertial Measurement Unit, have resulted in lighter-weight,
lower-cost guidance and control units while improving overall
performance characteristics. High performance, radiation
hardened
electronics have been developed which demonstrate high throughput,
low power consumption, and fault tolerance characteristics
necessary for GBI applications. Focal plane array technologies,
such as PET and SHIELD, have demonstrated our ability to
produce
long wave, and very long wave (LWIR and VLWIR) detectors
for use in GBI sensors. Materials and structures technology
development,
such as Beryllium mirrors, has resulted in the development
of improved structural components to reduce GBI kill vehicle
weight and improve performance.
Another example of direct component legacy from BMD is the
Signal Processing Packaging Design (SPPD). It was initiated
to address the requirement for the Space-based Interceptor
(SBI) program, which needed a lightweight, compact, high throughput
signal/data processor. The SPPD program was designed to provide
a very high throughput (300 to 400 MOPS), very low mass (75
grams), high density processor. The program was completed
in Fiscal Year 1992, on schedule, with delivery and testing
of two prototypes for approximately $6 million. This technology
has subsequently been incorporated into one contractor's concept
for the Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle for the NMD Ground-based
Interceptor.
Without the investments we made in these programs, and the
critical knowledge gleaned from these efforts, our current
GBI efforts would be much further from fruition. For instance,
interceptor technology developments over the past ten years
have allowed a size reduction from 2500 kilograms (HOE) to
160 kilograms (ERIS) to 45 kilograms (EKV) in order to perform
similar hit-to-kill intercept missions. Since weight and cost
for a complete weapon system are directly proportional, BMD
interceptor costs have become manageable.
NMD Ground Based Radar (GBR): The NMD Radar Technology Demonstrator
(NMD RTD) provides the NMD System with a prototype element
test article for use during integrated flight testing. The
NMD RTD is a scaled version of a deployable NMD GBR. This
Radar Technology Demonstrator design converts the TMD-GBR
demonstration/validation radar hardware to a larger, limited
field-of-view radar which will have sufficient range to support
NMD requirements. It will provide surveillance and fire control
support during integrated flight testing of the EKV with in-line
BM/C3 processing and control.
The NMD RTD directly leverages progress from the TMD-GBR program.
The RTD utilizes state-of-the-art radar technology such as
solid state transmit and receive modules, data processing
hardware, beam control and tasking software, and discrimination
and kill assessment algorithms and software developed under
the TMD-GBR program. This program structure, by leveraging
from TMD developments, provides a cost-effective method for
resolving the NMD-GBR critical issues and allows us both flexibility
and limited liability as this program evolves.
Over the last 10 years the NMD Ground Based Radar (GBR) program
has evolved significantly. Our efforts began with an X-band,
phased array radar development program in the mid-1980's.
This program, the Terminal Imaging Radar (TIR) program, began
developing software operations and applications processing
and radar imaging techniques for NMD radar. However, a testbed
radar was needed and the GBR-X program was started in the
late 1980's. The GBR-X provided for the functional demonstration
and validation of the midcourse radar requirements, and formed
the basis for growth and technology infusion to a deployable
system. The program completed its Critical Design Review,
40 percent of its software built, and procured several long
lead items before it was canceled in 1990.
The software techniques developed under the TIR and GBR-X
programs now make up the common core of application and operations
processing software used in the current "Family of Radars" program.
In 1991, the program was restructured into the Family of
Radars program which developed radars for both the NMD
and TMD, based on common software and hardware. In 1992,
the Family of Radars demonstration/validation contract was
awarded
which included the NMD-GBR demonstration/validation (termed
the GBR-T) at USAKA. In 1993, the GBR-T completed its Preliminary
Design Review, and 60 percent of its software built, before
the program was terminated following the guidance of the
Bottom-Up
Review. However, the guidance provided for continued technology
development to resolve the long pole issues associated with
deploying an NMD-GBR.
In 1994, the technology development program was expanded into
the National Missile Defense Radar Technology Demonstrator
(NMD-RTD) program. This program continues to resolve the long
poles associated with deploying an NMD-GBR which includes
algorithm development, real-time software and hardware-in-the-loop
simulations, and finally a radar technology demonstration
at USAKA. The radar technology demonstration, upon completion
of the TMD-GBR demonstration/validation program, takes existing
TMD-GBR demonstration/ validation hardware and refurbishes
it into a larger, limited-field-of-view radar with sufficient
ranges to support NMD requirements. The NMD-RTD is a Solid
State, X-band, phased array, single face/circular field-of-view
radar with a 2,000 kilometer-plus range.
In January 1995, the NMD-RTD completed its Systems Requirement
Review. To date approximately 80 percent of its software has
been developed. The TMD-GBR demonstration/validation system
is assembled and currently undergoing near field testing at
the contractor's facility. This is the same hardware and software
being utilized by the NMD-RTD program. In addition, site preparation
at USAKA has begun for future NMD-RTD testing.
Battle Management, Command, Control and Communications (BMC3):
BM/C3, as it applies to the National Missile Defense, consists
of three distinct activities: battle management software development;
Command Center design and tools for the user to exercise human-in-control;
and Communications support to provide essential and timely
information.
Investment in NMD BM/C3 has produced functionally and technically
correct software code for ballistic missile defense battle
management. The code has been used for demonstrations of missile
defense using real data and operating at geographically distributed
locations under very dynamic field conditions. This code supports
the resolution of technical issues, such as sensor data fusion,
discrimination, and communication management. The investment
in software serves as the basis for the TMD battle management,
as well as for the development of operational software for
NMD. This approach has also supported the resolution of critical
technology issues such as software reuse. Investments in command
and control have produced designs and prototypes for command
decision aids that allow the users of our NMD systems (USCINCSPACE
and other regional commanders) to manage the effective engagement
of hostile ballistic missiles. The BM/C3 demonstrator at the
National Test Facility (NTF) has been used to refine the NMD
Concept of Operations (CONOPS). In the area of communications,
we have focused on identifying all potential commercial sources
of communications support, and in the production of a working
prototype of a NMD communication suite. The effort has been
highly successful in that we have identified a communications
architecture that will depend on only a limited amount of
unique development.
National Test Facility: From its earliest beginnings, SDIO
recognized the challenges inherent in testing a system that
would defend against nuclear missiles. Live fire tests, the "proof of the pudding" for most acquisition programs, were
just not "in the cards" for strategic missile defense systems.
A first-class modeling and simulation facility - the NTF
-
has been established near Colorado Springs, Colorado, to
address this need. The NTF is the hub of the National Test
Bed, a
distributed network of computers and models which can run
the most complicated simulations of national and theater
defense
systems. One of the major nodes of the test bed that many
of you may be familiar with is the Advanced Research Center
in Huntsville, Alabama. These distributed facilities can
integrate
actual hardware in what we call hardware-in-the-loop testing.
We have also developed the capability to run very sophisticated
wargames at the NTF. It is here that USCINCSPACE and his
staff
can explore their information and decision aid needs for
managing the BMD battle. The NTF is a magnificent facility
with tremendous
capabilities for BMDO and other DoD customers. Past BMD investments
in this area have made it so.
Space and Missile Tracking System (SMTS): The Space and Missile
Tracking System (SMTS) -- previously known as Brilliant Eyes,
and now the Low Earth Orbit (LEO) component of the Air ForceÕs
Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) -- is a passive sensor
element designed to perform ballistic missile boost and post-boost
phase acquisition and tracking and midcourse phase tracking
and discrimination in the NMD and TMD Systems. It is derived
from earlier SDIO development efforts of the Space Surveillance
& Tracking System (SSTS). In addition to capitalizing on
SSTS technology, it also takes advantage of past BMD programs,
such as Brilliant Pebbles and Ground Based Surveillance and
Tracking System (GSTS) technology investments, to optimize
system performance for the numerically reduced threat we
currently
face.
The BMD program has been working on space-based infrared
tracking for many years. We have focused on technology development,
phenomenology data collection, and experiments supporting
system development. In 1984, development of the Boost Surveillance
and Tracking System (BSTS) was started as part of BMD. BSTS
was to serve as a replacement for the current missile early
warning system, the Defense Support Program (DSP), which
had
been providing space-based infrared data since the early
1970Õs.
BSTS was also to serve as the first surveillance tier of
a BMD system. The second surveillance tier was to be the
SSTS,
more recently referred to as Brilliant Eyes and now as the
Space and Missile Tracking System, which would provide midcourse
tracking and target discrimination. SDIO moved out quickly
with these programs, progressing the designs and performing
ground tests and demonstrations. However, changes in threats
and ballistic missile defense architectures, as well as increased
interest in developing for the U.S. Air Force a replacement
for DSP, resulted in the transfer of the BSTS program to
the
Air Force as the Follow-on Early Warning System (FEWS). FEWS
evolved into the Alert, Locate and Report Missiles (ALARM)
program, which was then incorporated as the high component
of the current SBIRS program. The SSTS program evolved into
the Brilliant Eyes program, recently renamed the SMTS, with
scaled down performance requirements but very similar sensor
designs.
In addition, SDIO pursued through the U.S. Army a ground launched
probe, called the Ground-based Surveillance and Tracking System,
which used passive infrared sensors and served as a gap filler
for SSTS in the face of a massive ICBM attack. This program
was terminated due to changes in the threat and the system
architecture. But the passive sensor development progress
that GSTS demonstrated greatly facilitated SMTS development.
For example, the light-weighted beryllium optics fabricated
and tested under the GSTS program are very similar in size
and optical prescription to what the SMTS will use. These
state-of-the-art optics demonstrated the producibility of
advanced beryllium optics necessary for SMTS. Another example
is the sophisticated tracking and discrimination algorithms
and testbed development. The GSTS sensor contractor, Hughes,
is one of the SMTS sensor subcontractors and the tracking
and discrimination expertise in the Army and MIT/Lincoln Laboratory
continued to be utilized by the SMTS program office.
The SMTS program has also utilized previous technology miniaturization
developments from the Space-based Interceptors program. Processors
and cryocoolers developed under the Brilliant Pebbles program
are baselined by one of the SMTS contractors in their objective
system. Other experiment and testbed developments, which add
to the general advancement of passive infrared sensor development,
include the Airborne Surveillance Testbed, Midcourse Space
Experiment, Spatial Infrared Imaging Telescope (SPIRIT) series,
and others which provide integration lessons learned and data
to help steer future programs.
The NMD program elements are currently postured to be able
to reenter the formal DoD acquisition process, if the ballistic
missile threat to the U.S. emerges. The engineers and scientists
who have analyzed, developed, built, and tested hardware
and
software under these previous programs bring along essential
knowledge and "know how" to attack our current issues and
solve our problems for the NMD program. These people and
knowledge
are vested in our military, civilian, and industrial team.
Based on our combined technology and systems developments,
I am confident that we can deliver a significant military
capability by the early part of the next decade if a decision
to deploy is made. This defensive capability is only possible
because of our steady investment in ballistic missile defense
technologies and systems.
Advanced BMD Technology
Programs
The BMD technology program has served us
well over the past twelve years. We have witnessed rapid development
of critical component technologies. As you have seen today,
many of these technologies are now infused in our current
acquisition programs. During the past twelve years, we have
invested in sensors and detectors; guidance and control; computers
and signal processors; communications; power; propulsion;
and materials and structures technologies. All of these areas
have witnessed tremendous technical advancements based on
our collective investment in BMD. We have also focused our
efforts on developing advanced technology concepts which could
provide clear technology answers to tomorrow's threat developments.
LEAP Technology: The goal of the LEAP program, as originally
conceived and begun in 1986, was to develop and integrate
the world's first advanced, miniature kinetic energy interceptors
and associated technologies; and then to demonstrate their
capabilities through extensive ground testing. The technologies
were intended to enable development of ground-and space-based
systems in support of the then-proposed Strategic Defense
System architecture. Although aggressive design objectives
were established, the original design goals did not necessarily
evolve from stringent system requirements. Instead, near-term
vehicles were developed to demonstrate the validity of fully
integrated miniature interceptors and to represent a step
on the path towards an operational KKV system. Because of
this flexible development approach, even though the missile
defense architecture has changed in response to the changing
global environment, the LEAP program has been able to maintain
a robust, supporting technology focus.
Over the past ten years, the LEAP program has achieved dramatic
successes in the development of advanced interceptor technologies
and in the reduction of interceptor size and weight. During
the course of the program, BMDO demonstrated important, new
manufacturing techniques for LEAP. Tremendous advances have
been made in the process of welding small, high-pressure-tolerant
tubing and tanks; precise fabrication and machining of 3-D
carbon-carbon thrust chambers and complex metallic/composite
components; the creation of fast-response, miniature valves
and nozzles; and the manufacturing of compact, high-density
electronics.
The LEAP program has progressed from a series of highly successful
hover tests at BMDO's National Hover Testing Facility at Edwards
Air Force Base, California. These hover tests allowed the
completely integrated LEAP vehicle to lift itself off of a
test stand and hover autonomously in free flight using its
divert and attitude control system propulsion systems. While
in unencumbered free flight, the LEAP acquired and tracked
a scaled infrared target and performed a series of maneuvers
as dictated by the particular objectives of specific tests.
Following the successful hover test series and initial integration
flight experiments with modified U.S. Navy TERRIER missiles,
the LEAP program has become a candidate for the Navy Theater-Wide
Defense program, which was discussed earlier.
Advanced Interceptor Technology: Patterned after the LEAP
development strategy, the AIT program was initiated four years
ago to address the kill vehicle design requirements of operating
within the atmosphere (below 70 kilometers) at high velocities.
This strategy has resulted in a robust kill vehicle technology
development program that will support future TMD requirements
to counter the potential evolution of the threat to enhance
performance. AIT kill vehicles expand on the legacy of lightweight
integrated vehicle technologies developed in the LEAP program
and hypersonic atmospheric ballistic missile target acquisition
and tracking technologies developed in the HEDI program. These
kill vehicles incorporate cooled windows, strapdown seekers,
miniaturized electronics, thermally protected structures,
and lightweight gel propellant divert and attitude control
systems to provide the capability to perform hypersonic hit-to-kill
intercepts of ballistic missiles in all phases of their flight
trajectories in both the exo- and endoatmosphere. The program
has completed cooled window development and fabrication, window
aero-thermal testing based on component technology investments
in 1990. Seeker detailed designs have been completed and prototype
seeker fabrication has been initiated.
Directed Energy: The BMD program has demonstrated most of
the key building blocks needed to build a deployable space-based
laser (SBL), which represents one of the most mature of our
advanced technology concepts. The space-based chemical laser
program was initiated by DARPA in the late 1970's and was
transferred to SDIO in 1984. Each of the SBL subsystems has
been successfully demonstrated with hardware that is traceable
and scalable to an operational system. The high-energy beam
generator, named Alpha, has demonstrated megawatt-class lasing
in numerous tests beginning in 1991 and currently performs
at near-weapons class efficiency. Beam control and telescope
technologies were demonstrated in the Large Optics Demonstration
Experiment (LODE) in 1987 and in the four meter diameter Large
Advanced Mirror Program (LAMP) in 1989. Since then, improved
mirrors and optics have been tested. The high-energy beam
LAMP mirror is the largest mirror built for use in space --
the previous record is Hubble's 2.4 meter mirror. The LODE
program has developed a beam control system for maintaining
the brightness and stability of the high power beam. High
performance components for the Acquisition, Tracking, Pointing
and Fire Control (ATP-FC) system have been fabricated and
successfully tested.
A space experiment named Relay Mirror Experiment (RME), launched
in February 1990, successfully demonstrated critical pointing
and tracking technologies for both space-based and ground-based
elements of Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) concepts. Over the
course of months, in consistently successful relay experiments,
sensors aboard the orbiting RME spacecraft simultaneously
tracked two independent ground beacons, and the orientation
of a 60 centimeter diameter flat mirror was controlled to
reflect a laser beam transmitted from one beacon site to a
remotely located target board at the other beacon site. This
demonstrated high pointing accuracy, laser beam stability,
and long-duration beam relays. The RME experiment provided
a significant contribution to gaining confidence from the
design of target acquisition subsystems for DEWs.
Building on past accomplishments and investments, BMDO's Directed
Energy program continues the process of integrating high-power
chemical laser components and technologies developed over
the past ten years specifically for accomplishing the boost-phase
intercept mission from space. In the Alpha Lamp Integration
(ALI) experiment, the existing megawatt class Alpha laser,
the 4 meter LAMP primary mirror, and beam alignment and control
technologies are being integrated for a ground demonstration
of a complete high energy laser beam train. While not a fully
operational system configuration, ALI will demonstrate the
integrated performance of near full scale SBL subsystems.
ALI subsystems are, in fact, fully scalable and traceable
to those required to destroy ballistic missiles during their
vulnerable boost phase, prior to their ability to maneuver,
release decoys, or deploy multiple chemical, biological, or
nuclear munitions. The ATP-FC program will, due to funding
reductions in the Fiscal Year 1995 Defense Authorization Bill,
close out in Fiscal Year 1995. Component technology efforts
are currently focused on demonstrating the high precision,
inertial reference unit and the laser illuminator needed for
ATP. Together, ALI and ATP successes would have led to a start
on an operationally configured, fully integrated ground demonstration
of a high energy laser system.
Throughout the BMD program significant advances have been
made in the state-of-the-art for Free Electron Laser (FEL)
and Neutral Particle Beam (NPB) technologies. These efforts
have been terminated, however, as their military applications
have sharply decreased with the changed world environment
and the diminished strategic nuclear t hreat.
Added Benefits from
BMD Technology Investments
I would
like to take a moment to describe our accomplishments in
an area where
SDIO and BMDO have perhaps
the best record in the Federal government. This is our success
in "spinning off" many of the fruits of our excellent research
programs into commercial, civilian, and other military
applications.
We have had an aggressive technology transfer program for
over eight years now, and our record of success is well
documented
in our report to Congress.
SDIO and BMDO have pushed the state-of-the-art during the
last 10 years in sensors, navigation and guidance, propulsion,
electrical power, and communications. These advances have
resulted in more than order-of-magnitude improvements in performance,
weight, volume, and efficiency for these systems. These successes
have not gone unnoticed by the Services and other Defense
Agencies. The Air Force and the Airborne Reconnaissance Office
have shown great interest in the BMDO-developed laser satellite
communications system. The Army has leveraged our investment
in electric guns of various types for their electric armaments
program. New infrared detectors using novel materials, like
indium antimonide and gallium arsenide quantum wells, promise
to reduce the cost of infrared sensors by more than an order
of magnitude over today's cameras, reshaping the entire military
sensor and seeker market. We have shrunk the size and weight
of inertial measurement units for navigation to less than
a tenth of the 1983 state-of-the-art, meanwhile improving
their performance. We invested in revolutionary technologies
like wide bandgap semiconductors, multi-chip modules, artificial
diamond films, and all-optical communications networks using
wavelength division multiplexing years before ARPA started
major programs in these areas.
Through our outreach efforts, we have also established working
relationships with many non-DoD government departments who
wish to exploit our advanced technology for other applications.
For example, we work with the Department of Health and Human
Services using our image processing expertise for improving
digital mammograms. We are presently talking with the Department
of Transportation about highway safety and traffic monitoring
using our sensors and laser radar technology. We have a long-standing
technology transfer relationship with NASA, as was recently
highlighted by the successful transition of our revolutionary
CLEMENTINE deep space satellite technology to their small
satellite program. Recently, we have agreed to a demonstration
of our advances in multi-level computer security for the Small
Business Administration.
Most of our efforts in technology transfer, however, are focused
directly on the private sector, predominantly the small business
entrepreneur. Since our technology transfer program began
in 1985, SDIO and BMDO technology have contributed to 187
new products commercially available today, 34 new companies
which have spun off to bring new products to the market, 289
patents granted with 195 more pending, and 356 new ventures
of various types -- for example, strategic alliances, licensing
agreements, partnerships, or cooperative agreements -- have
formed. As best as we can track, these companies have raised
over $200 million in matching private capital. Seven of these
companies have gone public with a market valuation today of
$400 million.
This level of achievement is possible because we consider
the potential market as a factor in our selection of what
missile defense technology to sponsor. Why is this important
to BMDO? It will take about five to ten years for many of
these new innovations to be adopted by military systems --
far too long for most companies to wait to become profitable.
If we want our successful inventors and engineers and their
technology to be around when we need them most, they must
become commercially viable to other customers. Commercial
success today ensures defense technology availability tomorrow.
In addition, the job creation and taxpayer return on investment
in missile defense technology resulting from our technology
transfer program represents an added bonus for BMDO and the
Nation.
The costs for BMDO to support such an aggressive technology
transfer program is surprisingly modest -- we spend less than
a tenth of one percent (0.1%) of our annual budget on this
effort. We have fine-tuned the process of successful technology
transfer without diverting substantial funds from our prime
mission, developing effective and affordable missile defenses
for the country. At this point, I would like to present three
specific examples of successes that small companies have had
in the marketplace based on missile defense research sponsored
by SDIO and BMDO.
SatCon Technology Corporation, of Cambridge, Massachusetts,
received BMDO funds to develop vibration control technology
to improve the precision of BMDO tracking and pointing systems.
They then combined this vibration control with magnetically
levitated bearing technology to eliminate vibration and reduce
friction in flywheel energy storage devices, compressors,
and other rotating machinery. SatCon aggressively pursued
commercial markets with their military technology through
several joint ventures. It entered a joint venture with Advanced
Medical Systems, Incorporated, to develop, manufacture, and
market an advanced heart pumping system used for cardiovascular
circulatory support and hemodialysis. SatCon also teamed
with
Chrysler Corporation to develop an innovative drive train
and advanced power steering systems using its bearing and
vibration control technology. These systems will be tested
in Chrysler's high-performance race cars soon. SatCon also
joined with Mainstream Engineering Corporation, another small
business, to develop a high-speed compressor with a motor
that rides on frictionless magnetic bearings. This compressor
could be run directly off an automobile's electrical system,
removing mechanical drag from the main engine and substantially
improving mileage, while eliminating the need for chloro-fluorocarbons
in the auto's air conditioning. Starting with six employees
in 1986, SatCon has grown to 120 today. The company went
public
in 1993, raising $8.8 million in an Initial Public Offering
and an additional $14 million since. Annual revenues are
now
over $20 million.
In response to a BMDO need to view missiles, decoys, and
battlefield deployments in three dimensions, Reveo, Incorporated,
of Hawthorne,
New York, devised a monitor for producing 3-D visual displays.
Known as Multi-Mode Stereoscopic Imaging, this technique
produces
high-quality color stereo pictures for electronic video,
computer graphics and other display formats at a competitive
price.
The technology produces hard-copy, display, or projected
images of both still and moving pictures, yet can be viewed
from
any angle with special glasses or at a given position without
glasses. Reveo spun-off a subsidiary, VRex, Incorporated
to
commercialize its 3-D technology for entertainment, advertising,
training and simulation, medical diagnostics, and computer-aided
design. At the 1993 COMDEX show, VRex introduced the world's
only 3-D notebook computer, winning the "Best of COMDEX 93" award
from BYTE magazine. VRex is adding other 3-D stereoscopic
devices to its product line and plans to develop a family
of stereo films and film processing products. Reveo holds
five patents with several more pending. It has grown from
six employees in 1991 to 40 today, and anticipates $5 million
in commercial sales in 1995.
BMDO funded electromagnetic high-force actuators, or HFA's,
at Aura Systems, of El Segundo, California, to test our rocket
thrusters on LEAP projectiles. Aura has exploited this technology
to construct the InteractorTM, a vest used in virtual reality
systems to provide physical sensations corresponding to what
is happening on the video screen, adding another dimension
to existing visual and auditory stimuli. The Interactor received
an "Innovation 94" Design and Engineering Award from the
Electronics Industry Association. Aura is applying HFA technology
to electromagnetic
valve actuators to replace cam shafts, rocker arms, and push
rods to open and close engine valves. This will result in
an engine which produces more horsepower, uses less fuel,
and produces lower levels of pollutants than today's engines.
Finally, Aura has entered into a joint venture to manufacture
HFA-driven audio speakers which produce 6 times less harmonic
distortion and no perceptible magnetic interference at 2/3
the weight of speakers today. Aura Systems was founded in
1987, and now employs over 200 people. It has 34 U.S. patents
in hand or pending in electromagnetic technology.
I think our success in technology transfer -- to other military
programs, other Federal agencies and the commercial sector
-- is something in which we should all be proud.
The Legacy of SDI/BMD:
Making Ballistic Missile Defenses a Reality
Our investment in missile defense programs
for the past twelve years has paid significant dividends.
The BMD program has advanced the state-of-the-art of a wide
range of technologies that are essential to missile defense
and important to other segments of defense and to industries
in the commercial sector. Investment in BMD has enabled the
program to accomplish what it was chartered to do: demonstrate
that ballistic missiles could be detected, tracked, and destroyed
by missile defense weapons. This accomplishment has been achieved
by a focused and sustained effort to identify the concepts
and technologies required to defend against ballistic missiles,
rigorous testing of those technologies, integration of technologies
into defensive systems, and refinement of those systems to
make them affordable and practical. We are now at the point
in time where we can field that which we have proved. Our
investment in missile defenses has seeded a systems development
program that is already putting real, improved hardware into
the hands of the warfighter. As my Air Force colleagues like
to say, today we are putting "rubber on the ramp" for missile
defense systems.
Taking the long view, yesterday's investments in BMD have
made these developments possible. Today's reoriented missile
defense program is tailored to the future defense needs of
our country. Building upon a strong foundation of earlier
accomplishments, BMDO is clearly on the path to providing
protection for our forces deployed overseas, our friends and
allies, and our families here at home. Mr. Chairman, that
concludes my prepared testimony. I look forward to answering
your questions.
In the Summer of 1993, HOE became the center of controversy
when the New York Times charged that the test had been "rigged" to
deceive the Soviet Union and in the process also deceived
the U.S. Congress. An investigation, conducted under the
direction
of Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, concluded that although
a seperate deception program was indeed in place in the Department
of Defense, the SDIO and Army test had not been rigged to
distort the results achieved in the HOE test. These findings
were later confirmed by an independent review completed by
the GAO. (see: United States General Accounting Office, Ballistic
Missile Defense: Records Indicate Deception Program Did Not
Affect 1984 Test Results, 7/94, GAO/NSIAD-94-219.