Closing Velocity

Video: Iran Tests Longest Range Missile, "Leaves North Korea Behind"

Iran continues unimpeded toward perfecting an indigineously designed ICBM:

TEHRAN, Iran — Iran announced Wednesday it successfully test-fired an upgraded version of its longest-range missile, which is capable of hitting Israel and parts of Europe and which it said is now faster and harder to shoot down.

Wednesday's test was for the latest version of Iran's most advanced missile, the Sajjil-2, with a range of about 1,200 miles (1,930 kilometers). That range places Israel, Iran's sworn enemy, well within reach, as well as U.S. bases in the Gulf region and parts of southeastern Europe.

The two-stage Sajjil-2 and is powered entirely by solid-fuel while the older, long-range Shahab-3 missile uses a combination of solid and liquid fuel in its most advanced form.

Reporting on the Sajjil-2 breakthrough last August, former head of Israeli missile defense Uzi Rubin predicted the Iranians would be able to hit London very soon:

"If they push it -- put all the budget, put all the engineers -- three or four years" is all it would take to give Iran's existing ballistic missile a range of 3,900 kilometers (2,438 miles), enough to hit London ... "The predictions (about Iran's growing missile reach) are coming true, perhaps sooner than anyone thought," he added in reply to a question after a presentation. "I think there was an underestimation of Iranian capability."

With today's launch, folks should be listening to Rubin:

First, Iran made a quantum leap forward with its missile technology.  The predecessor to the Sejil was the Shahab missile, which was a liquid-fueled single-stage rocket, copied from the North Korean Nodong missile.  The Sejil shows that Iranian engineers have left North Korea behind and are producing indigenous missile technology.  Rubin says the Iranian missile capability has jumped from the type of missiles the U.S. had in the 50’s to the type the US had in the 60’s.

This test also shows Iran ’s aggressiveness with the missile program. “The advance rate is phenomenal,” says Rubin, noting that Iran has now conducted three missile tests in 13 months. It shows just how high a priority missile technology is for the Shiite regime.  Rubin says, “They need to keep testing to prove their past successes were not spurious.”

Back to the Iranians, their defense minister takes a victory lap (AP story):

Defense Minister Gen. Ahmad Vahidi vowed that the Sajjil-2 would be a "strong deterrent" against any possible foreign attack. He said the new version can be fired more quickly and flies faster than previous ones, though he did not give further details.

"Given its high speed," he said, speaking on state TV, "it is impossible to destroy the missile with anti-missile systems because of its radar-evading ability."

Impossible to destroy? No, not really.

But intercepting the Sajjil-2 is certainly more challenging, especially with a stripped-down European missile defense architecture that focuses exclusively on short- and medium-range missiles. Yesterday's announcement that the US is planning an unprecedented missile defense test against an Iranian ICBM could not be more timely. It will be the first time we've wargamed our longest-range GBI interceptor against an Iranian threat rather than our traditional North Korean scenarios.

And again, one of the two reasons President Obama discarded long-range GBI interceptors in Europe was because of an intelligence assessment claiming the Iranians would not produce ICBMs any time soon. How's that working out for you?

Iranian TV video:

UPDATE: Welcome, HotAir, Ace headlines and No Runny Eggs.

Long-Range Missile Defense To Be Tested Against Iranian Threat

Secretary of Defense Gates inspects a GBI at Ft. Greely, AK

Unlike the recent massive Juniper Cobra missile defense exercise which tested our ballistic missile defense system (BMDS) against short- and medium-range Iranian missile threats, the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) will soon conduct an unprecedented test:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States will test its core missile defenses for the first time in January against a simulated long-range Iranian attack, a top Pentagon official said on Monday, amid tensions with Tehran.

Speaking at the Reuters Aerospace and Defense Summit in Washington, Army Lieutenant General Patrick O'Reilly, the head of the Missile Defense Agency, said the roughly $150 million test was a departure from the more standard scenario of a North Korean attack.

There is a reason that our longest range interceptors, the 3-stage Ground-based Interceptors (GBIs), were first deployed in Alaska and California. Ever since the late 1990s, the North Korean ICBM threat has always been the most immediate one to CONUS. The systems engineering, wargaming, and eventual deployment of GBIs exclusively on the West Coast were specifically executed to counter this growing threat.

Which makes this upcoming test so very remarkable:

It also would be more difficult testing the U.S. Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system against a missile that would be faster and more direct as it races toward the United States than a simulated strike from North Korea.

"Previously, we have been testing the GMD system against a North Korean-type scenario," O'Reilly said.

"This next test ... is more of a head-on shot like you would use defending against an Iranian shot into the United States. So that's the first time that we're now testing in a different scenario."

Now wait one damned minute.

A mere three months ago, President Obama decided to scrap our long-range interceptors in Europe (again, specifically designed to counter Iranian ICBMs bound for the US east coast) because the long-range Iranian threat no longer existed:

The intelligence community now assesses that the threat from Iran's short- and medium-range ballistic missiles, such as the Shahab-3, is developing more rapidly than previously projected.  This poses an increased and more immediate threat to our forces on the European continent, as well as to our allies. On the other hand, our intelligence assessment also now assesses that the threat of potential Iranian intercontinental ballistic missile capabilities has been slower to develop than was estimated in 2006.

If Iraninan ICBMs are no longer a threat, why this test?

Well, the easy answer is we plan these tests years in advance, and this GBI test was laid down long before Obama's pronouncement. That said, there are some disconcerting optics here. Conducting an expensive test against a recently rubbished threat just doesn't look good.

Besides having been on the slate for a while, there's another possible reason for this test.

As I have argued before, Obama's new European BMD architecture may do an adequate job defending Europe from Iranian missile threats, but it does nothing to protect the Eastern United States. Only the long-haul GBIs have the horsepower to engage fast, high-flying ICBMs. While Aegis-based SM-3s and THAADs do an excellent job against short- and medium-range missiles, they simply can't beat the massive GBIs in the ICBM scenario.

Therefore, I'd bet some smarty at MDA doesn't exactly discount the Iranian ICBM threat as readily as the President and the SecDef do. With European-based GBIs now off the table, American-based GBIs must fill the defensive void. Nothing else can do the job, so they damned well better work.

Rather than the standard NK simulation where we fire the target ICBM from Kodiak Island, Alaska and intercept with a GBI from Vandenberg AFB, California, this target will come screaming across the Pacific from Reagan Test Site on Kwajalein Atoll:

The test would fire an interceptor missile from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California at a simulated incoming missile, launched from the Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean. An aide to O'Reilly estimated the cost at about $150 million.

Experts compare the simulation to a bullet hitting another bullet in space. O'Reilly said the goal was to destroy the target over the north central Pacific when the missiles had a combined closing speed of more than 17,000 miles per hour.

"Whenever we have a situation where we're taking on a missile more head on than from the side, that increases the challenges," O'Reilly said.

Stay tuned.

UPDATE (12-16-09): Stay tuned, indeed! --- the Iranians just tested their longest range missile, "leaving North Korea behind." HotAir links.

Biden: SM-3 Interceptors To Be Installed In Poland

Former Redzikowo Airbase, Poland

At the very same shuttered airbase that would have housed the siloed Ground-based Interceptors (GBIs) originally planned:

Biden was presenting a revamped U.S. missile shield replacing a scrapped Bush-era project that would have placed 10 interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar base in the Czech Republic to intercept long-range missiles from Iran. His one-day visit to Bucharest was part of a swing through eastern Europe designed to reassure Poland, Romania and the Czech Republic — all staunch U.S. allies — that America's commitment to the region remains strong.

The Obama plan would include SM-3 anti-ballistic missiles at a former air base in the Polish town of Redzikowo, the same site that was to host U.S. missile interceptors in underground silos under the Bush plan.

How does this exact same geographic deployment of missile interceptors not irritate the Russians? Easy:

Moscow perceives the new plan as less threatening because it would not initially involve interceptors capable of shooting down Russia's intercontinental ballistic missiles, experts say.

Sounds nice, but two things jump out:

1.  While these initial SM-3's can't down Russian ICBMs, ummmm, they also can't down Iranian ICBMs. McKittrick's broken record time: the original Euro BMD plan was designed to defend the eastern seaboard of the US against ICBMs launched from the Middle East. Obama's new plan does not have this capability. But... but... it will, assert the new plan backers, those next generation SM-3's will be able to defend the US against ICBMs! Really? Interesting, because

2.  Which do you think the Russians would be more concerned about, ten (ten!) highly-visible, immobile & siloed GBI's in Poland or several hundred SM-3 Block IIB interceptors parked in mobile launchers on land and at sea in and around Europe? Interceptors specifically tasked with countering massive raid size ICBM attacks?

Don't get me wrong --- I look forward to the new SM-3's, and the more the better. But I don't agree with the wisdom to scrap the GBIs. Our missile defense doctrine has always been to have a layered defense with multiple platforms able to engage threats at all the different phases of ballistic flight. Stripping out GBIs from this layered approach is a mistake.

Mobile Ground-Based Interceptors & Land-Based SM-3 Introduced At Conference

Mobile 2-Stage GBI Model (photo credit)

Facing cuts at its US Ground-based Interceptor (GBI) field at Ft. Greely, Alaska and political uncertainty surrounding the planned GBI deployment in Poland, Boeing sees the writing on the wall and moves to secure its spot as the go-to midcourse missile defender. Introducing the mobile, 2-stage GBI:

Boeing, which manages the hub of a layered U.S. anti-missile shield deployed in 2004, is eyeing a 47,500-pound interceptor that could be flown to NATO bases as needed on Boeing-built C-17 cargo planes, erected quickly on a 60-foot trailer stand and taken home when judged safe to do so.

"If a fixed site is going to be just too hard to get implemented politically or otherwise, we didn't want people to think that the only way you needed to use a GBI was in a fixed silo," Greg Hyslop, Boeing's vice president and general manager for missile defense, told Reuters at a U.S. Army-sponsored missile-defense conference in Huntsville, Alabama.

A scale model showed a two-stage interceptor designed to be globally deployable within 24 hours at designated launch sites that would provide coverage for the United States and Europe.

Ironically, this announcement comes on the one year anniversary of the US-Poland agreement to silo GBIs in Poland. But since the election of President Obama, this agreement between NATO allies has been gathering dust as his new Pentagon re-evaluates the whole concept of European-based missile defense.

As long-time readers here already know, the primary mission of European-based GBIs is to better protect the eastern seaboard of the United States against ICBMs coming out of the Middle East which must overfly Europe on the way to their American targets. As a bonus, these Polish-based GBIs would also protect Europe. While extraordinarily successful, other missile defense assets such as THAAD and Aegis simply cannot perform this specific mission.

Unfortunately, the volatile combination of resurgent Russian nationalism and a concilliatory Obama Administration has seriously compromised this orginal European GBI plan.

So, assuming the Polish silos will never be filled, Boeing is front-running the issue with this introduction of the mobile GBI concept. Not only would they bypass the (unfounded) Russian complaints of interceptors permanently stationed on their doorstep, these mobile GBIs may also be stationed in the eastern US:

Once developed, a mobile GBI could also be deployed in the United States or elsewhere against threats posed by Iran and North Korea. As the White House reviews its options, one that has surfaced is basing GBIs mobile or fixed sites at Ft. Drum, N.Y. This would require the three-stage variant and would protect the U.S. homeland, but not Europe.

The dirty little secret of US missile defense is our lack of an east coast GBI base, hence the original plan to put one in Europe. It's quite encouraging to see the Pentagon publicly addressing this gap. And while NIMBY forces may keep us from digging silos in the east, the mobile GBI concept elegantly gets around that obstacle as well.

In other news from the Space & Missile Defense Conference here in Huntsville, building on the wild success of its naval ballistic missile interceptor, the Standard Missile 3 (SM-3), Raytheon is also preparing for a scrapping of Polish GBI silos:

Raytheon is also actively proposing an alternative. It says a land-based SM-3 could achieve initial operational capability in 2013; $50 million for this program is included in the Missile Defense Agency’s Fiscal 2010 budget request. MDA is also planning to establish a land-based SM-3 program office at Redstone Arsenal, Ala., where the agency has many of its program offices, according to Raytheon.

The land-based SM-3 would be fired from a vertical launch system optimized for ship operation outfitted for use on the ground. And, it would operate with the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (Thaad) systems AN/TPY-2 radar and fire control system, says Pete Franklin, Raytheon’s vice president of national and theater security programs. These are being procured by MDA already as part of the Thaad program.

Again, a welcome addition to our layered defense, but until larger SM-3s and THAADs are developed, GBIs will remain the only interceptors that can reach ICBMs in the midcourse phase of flight.

Vandenberg Completes Second Ground-Based Interceptor Silo

Second GBI silo being installed at Vandenberg AFB, CA

Good news:

Because a silo needs to be refurbished after its hot-burning interceptor is fired, having two underground test silos will allow one to support testing while the other is being refurbished, Boeing said. It said the new silo can be configured for testing or tactical operations. Vandenberg's first test silo has been used in tests since 2006.

.

Unanimous Senate: Any Missile Defense In Europe Must Also Protect The US

Via The Corner, a very interesting display of political jujitsu:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senator Joseph I. Lieberman (ID-CT) lauded the unanimous adoption of his amendment, put forward with Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), urging that any U.S. missile defense systems deployed to Europe must be capable of protecting both Europe and the United States.

 

“This unanimous vote by the Senate sends the clear message that it is imperative that we have an effective missile defense program given the threats to America and our allies.  Just one year after the United States signed an agreement to deploy the Ground-Based Midcourse defense system to Poland and the Czech Republic, the Obama administration says that it considers the GMD system just one of several options—some of which cannot protect the U.S homeland,” Lieberman said.  “The Senate today made clear that we will only support alternatives to the current plan that can defend both the United States and our European allies.”

This is a crucial distinction.

 

President Obama and people in his Adminstration like SecDef Gates and Undersecretary of State Ellen Tauscher have been methodically laying the groundwork to completely abandon Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) in Poland. Instead, they're hoping to get by with mobile batteries of THAAD and tactical Aegis BMD ship deployments on Europe's periphery. 

 

Unfortunately, while protecting Europe itself, Euro-based THAAD and Aegis assets have no ability to intercept a long-range ICBM launched from the Middle East towards the Eastern Seaboard of the United States. GMD is the only missile defense asset that can perform that mission --- and Poland is the best place to deploy it:

 

As I've said before, an Iranian ICBM bound for the US must overfly Europe on the way there. That's just the way it is. Blame Sir Isaac Newton.

 

By the time it's over Europe, an ICBM is well beyond the reach of the relatively shorter range THAAD and Aegis shooters. Their smaller interceptors simply cannot reach the ICBM in space over Europe, but GMD's large, silo-based interceptors are designed to do just that. Instead of waiting to the last minute to fire the 3-stage GMD interceptors from Alaska or California --- and have them hauling ass all the way across the continental United States, dropping spent booster stages on hapless Americans below as they streak eastward --- 2-stage GMD interceptors in Poland would allow us a much earlier intercept opportunity.

 

So, back to this Lieberman-Sessions amendment to the defense authorization --- essentially it forces Obama to use GMD in Poland or nothing. Since this is perfectly aligned with why we're putting GMD in Europe in the first place (defense of the US has always been the priority; Euro defense is gravy), it allows no wiggle room. Obama can't say "we'll protect Europe with these other systems," scrap the Polish GMD site, and earn some brownie points with the Russians on START nuclear talks.

 

Unless he vetoes the defense authorization (unlikely), Obama must abide by a unanimous Senate and honor our agreements with Poland and the Czech Republic and deploy GMD in Europe. No alternatives.

 

UPDATE: Video of Sen. Sessions speaking about this amendment:

 

.

5 Years Ago Today: First Alaskan Interceptor Installed

First Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI) installed at Fort Greely, AK (2004)

Happy anniversary:

Crews at Fort Greely lowered the 55-foot-long (16.8-meter-long), three-stage interceptor into one of six silos built behind a double perimeter fence reinforced by heavy barbed wire.

“We’re coming to the end of an era where we have not been able to defend our country against long-range ballistic missile attacks,” said Major Gen. John Holly, who heads the ground-based missile defense program for the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency.

Five years ago, we had no capability to protect the United States from a hostile ICBM. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

With Obama gutting this very same ground-based element of our layered defense, our current peace of mind may very well be fleeting.

Stimulus Reality: 1,000 Defense Workers Fired By Obama Today

As President Obama attempts to spin his way out of over-promising the immediate effects of his signature piece of legislation, the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)...

... a thousand defense workers get their pink slips today:

"Our hearts and compassion certainly go out to our employees" and others affected by the layoffs, [Boeing VP Tony Jones] said Thursday.

In a statement, Boeing said layoff notices will be issued to about 250 employees working in GMD [Ground-based Midcourse Defense, i.e. long-range ICBM interceptors]at various locations, including Alabama, Alaska, California and Colorado. They are to receive an official 60-day advance notice today, but Jones said it won't be a surprise.

"We've talked to all of our employees," he said. "We've done a lot of work" to try and minimize the impact, find jobs in other programs for as many as possible and provide other assistance.

The cuts are part of 1,000 jobs Boeing's Integrated Defense Systems said this week it plans to eliminate at various locations because of changes in defense spending.

The defense budget released by President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates earlier this year takes $1.2 billion from the Missile Defense Agency, which has a proposed 2010 budget of about $7.8 billion.

Boeing is not alone. Since the stimulus was enacted in April, several missile defense firms have been forced to swing the axe:

• Lockheed Martin --- stop work order issued on the Multiple Kill Vehicle.

• Northrop Grumman --- stop work order issued on the Kinetic Energy Interceptor.

It's hard to say how many missile defense people have lost their jobs so far. Of course, missile defense is not the only area to suffer Pentagon cuts. However, of all the defense programs, it has borne the largest percetage budget cut --- nearly 15%.

To borrow Obama's favorite rhetorical tic --- "let me be clear" --- these highly skilled, highly paid jobs were eliminated not because of any temporary economic downturn (finance sector) or fickle consumer whims (autos).

Obama and his Democrat legislators pro-actively chose to have these people fired. He chose to throw these folks on to the street and right in the teeth of a rather brutal recession.

All while choosing to make the US less safe. Perfect.

To my now unemployed colleagues in the missile defense industry, I'd offer to help out in any way with similar postions at my own firm, but surprise-surprise: hiring freeze.

What a stimulus...

Fortress Hawaii: THAAD Deployed, SBX Put To Sea, GBIs Ready

  From Left: THAAD, SBX, GBI

What a difference a few months of up tempo ballistic missile and nuclear weapons tests by North Korea makes. When North Korea last threatened to launch its longest range ICBM toward Hawaii earlier this year, the reaction from the Obama Administration varied, from the embarassing gullibility of our Director of National Intelligence:

"I tend to believe that the North Koreans announced that they are going to do a space launch, and I believe that that's what they intend," [DNI Blair] told the Senate Armed Services Committee Tuesday.

To the clumsy diplomacy of Secretary of State Clinton as she prematurely discarded an important arrow in our quiver:

The United States has no plans to shoot down the North Korean rocket, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Wednesday in an interview with CNN’s Jill Dougherty...

To the spectacle of Secretary of Defense Gates simply giving up on utilizing our missile defense assets even as our missile defense commanders proclaim confidence in our ability to down a hostile North Korean ICBM:

Appearing on "FOX News Sunday," Gates said North Korea "probably will" fire the missile, prompting host Chris Wallace to ask: "And there's nothing we can do about it?"

"No," Gates answered, adding, "I would say we're not prepared to do anything about it."

And culminating in our most advanced missile defense radar, the Sea-Based X-Band (SBX) Radar, being ordered to stay anchored at Pearl Harbor:

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates denied permission for the U.S. Northern Command to use the Pentagon's most powerful sea-based radar to monitor North Korea's recent missile launch, precluding officials from collecting finely detailed launch data or testing the radar in a real-time crisis, current and former defense officials said.

Well, someone at Obama's Pentagon got the message, for Hawaii is being fortified with a new deployment of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptors and the SBX is finally putting to sea:

Mr. Gates told reporters that the U.S. is positioning a sophisticated floating radar array in the ocean around Hawaii to track an incoming missile. The U.S. is also deploying missile-defense weapons to Hawaii that would theoretically be capable of shooting down a North Korean missile, should such an order be given, he said.

"We do have some concerns if they were to launch a missile to the west, in the direction of Hawaii," Mr. Gates said.

Gates went on to say that the long range Ground-Based Interceptors (GBIs) in Alaska --- slated to be cut by Obama, but-that's-not-important-right-now --- were also ready to engage:

Although Gates did not explicitly say that the U.S. would try to shoot down a test missile aimed in the direction of Hawaii, he noted that interceptor missiles in California and Alaska were ready.

"The ground-based interceptors are clearly in a position to take action," Gates said. "So without telegraphing what we will do, I would just say, I think we are in a good position, should it become necessary to protect American territory."

Perhaps the reality of missile defense is setting in on a few of the adults in Washington. Or more likely, perhaps someone's watching the polls:

A new Gallup Poll finds 51% of Americans saying North Korea currently poses a direct threat to U.S. security. That is the highest percentage seen for eight countries or territories tested in the poll whose political climates or ongoing conflicts present a threat to U.S. interests in the world.

Which, of course, makes this the perfect time to slash missile defense funding --- "Missile Budget Cut Still Stands":

An attempt Tuesday to restore money slashed from the missile defense budget failed to gain traction when an amendment that would have paid for additional interceptors in Alaska was defeated.

.

Gates At Greely: Saaaaay, On Second Thought, Maybe These GBIs ARE A Good Idea

Gates Inspects a Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI) at Fort Greely, Alaska (photo credit)

As the ballistic missile threat to the US crisply materializes by the second, Secretary of Defense Gates begins to doubt his and Obama's spectacularly ill-timed budget cuts to missile defense:

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates has not ruled out pumping more funds into the nation's anti-missile defense budget if North Korea threatens the United States.

Gates was visiting Fort Greely which houses parts of the US anti-missile defense shield -- a land-based system with about 20 interceptors -- and said of Pyongyang that its "behavior has certainly alarmed people."

In the past Gates proposed slicing a billion dollars off the anti-missile system budget and freezing the development of interceptors at 30, instead of the 44 originally planned. But he indicated he might re-examine his proposal.

"My recommendation to the president was for the fiscal year 2010 budget, it's not a forever decision," the defense secretary said.

"And if capabilities in one of these rogue states should develop faster, or on a more worrisome way than anybody anticipates right now, then I think the way is opened in the future to add to the number of silos and interceptors up here."

Good thing it only took hectic North Korean missile and nuclear weapons testing to make Gates reconsider his stance. Geez.