Synopsis of the 2004-2005 Deployment
By Matt Martin
President Bush has announced that the United States will deploy an array of missile defense systems between 2004 and 2005. This declaration fulfills a campaign promise. However, the reality is that the three systems being rolled out all suffer from technological difficulties, cost overruns, and politics. The following is an overview of the systems being deployed in 2004-2005:
Patriot PAC-3
The most mature missile defense system, the PAC-3 (Patriot Advanced Capability-3, the latest generation of Patriot missiles), designed to intercept short- and medium-range ballistic missiles, has been put forward as a model of missile defense deployment by administration officials. Having finished its developmental testing (in cooperation with earlier generation PAC-2s) with an intercept record of 85%, it went on to have difficulties with the more advanced operational testing, scoring only a 40% intercept rate (again, in cooperation with PAC-2s). Despite this mediocre track record, the impending war against Iraq convinced US officials to move quickly to deploy Patriot batteries in the region. While it is still to early to tell definitively, the Defense Department claims that Patriots made nine intercepts during the latest Iraq war, four with the newest PAC-3s. However, since all indications are that Iraq fired no Scud missiles, these intercepts were against slower and easier to hit targets. Moreover, Patriot systems are under investigation for destroying two Allied aircraft and targeting a third.
Ground-based Midcourse “Testbed”
The Pentagon has said the goal of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) segment is to place “20 ground-based interceptors capable of intercepting and destroying intercontinental ballistic missiles during the midcourse phase of flight located at Ft. Greely, Alaska (16 interceptors) and Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. (4 interceptors)” including “a new sea-based X-band radar.”
There are several technical problems with this plan:
* The 20 interceptor rockets do not exist. The Defense Department has been conducting developmental testing for this system using old Minuteman missiles as surrogate rockets, while they attempt to build a new rocket, which must be faster and lighter than the Minutemen. Problems with the construction of these rockets have forced the Defense Department to bring on a second contractor to “compete” with the first rocket contractor. The first shootdown with a new booster is not planned until this fall, thus there is no way to determine yet if the rockets work.
* The interceptor (the part that sits atop the rocket and actually intercepts the oncoming enemy missile) has reportedly been having some problems of its own. General Ronald Kadish, director of the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency, said earlier this year that the latest intercept test last December failed because of a broken chip on a circuit board in the interceptor. It is not yet known whether this problem has been fixed.
* The sea-based x-band radar—an essential piece of the system—does not currently exist and is not expected to be integrated into the “test-bed” until 2005 at the earliest. The x-band radar is necessary to identify, discriminate, and track an incoming missile as it comes over the horizon and nears the interceptor. Without this component, the system will rely on older-generation radars that do not have the same capacities.
Even when deployed, critics, including Senator Ted Stevens, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, have questioned the utility of positioning a 120-foot-tall radar platform out in open waters, where it will be vulnerable to swells and ocean waves.
* Another key component, a new satellite system designed for early detection of an enemy missile launch, will not be in place for many years. The first test satellite is currently planned for 2006, with a second following in 2007. A full constellation of perhaps a dozen satellites will not be in place until 2010 or later. This program has undergone several significant setbacks, but is seen as crucial, and no substitute exists. Again, without this component, any system will rely on older satellites without the same capabilities, and in this case, ones which have already begun to outlive their expected lifespan.
Given these shortcomings, perhaps it is not surprising that the first intercept test is not planned for this “test-bed” until at least 2005. As a result, it is difficult to consider any deployment announcement little more than political posturing.
Sea-Based Aegis Cruisers
The third system set to be deployed in the 2004-2005 timeframe is the short- to medium-range, sea-based Aegis cruiser platform, utilizing SM-3 (Standard Missile-3) missiles for interceptors. This system is one of the newest missile defense systems, and has only recently begun any testing. While the initial tests have been successful, they have been carefully orchestrated and simplified. This is justified for a new, developmental system, but success in these tests does not indicate a readiness for deployment. The latest test last fall was the first of six tests planned to test the Aegis system for the “test-bed” deployment, with the next test expected this spring or summer. The Aegis platform is still early in the developmental testing stage, with many more developmental and then operational tests to go. With the current configuration, the Aegis plaform can only ever be used against short-medium range targets. For a long-range capability, a new, faster missile—and likely a new launching platform—will need to be developed.