![]() |
![]() |
||||
![]() |
|||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
U.S. Plans: Pentagon Might Combine Airship, Mirror System, LasersThe U.S. Defense Department might combine two of its missile defense efforts — the Aerospace Relay Mirror System and the High Altitude Airship — to increase the range of military laser systems, Jane’s Defense Weekly reported this week (see GSN, July 23). The Missile Defense Agency is scheduled to begin flight tests of the airship in 2006, and officials want to conduct experiments that combine both systems around that time. The airship is primarily being developed to track missiles, but it could be teamed with the mirror relay system to allow ground-based lasers to track targets that are out of direct view, according to Jane’s. The mirror system would be attached to the airship with cables and would sit 50 meters below the aircraft, according to Donald Washburn, who manages strategic relay mirror programs for the Air Force Research Laboratory at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico (Michael Sirak, Jane’s Defense Weekly, July 30).
From July 24, 2003 issue.Taiwan: Taipei Formally Requests PAC-3 Missile Defense BatteriesTaiwanese officials have formally asked to purchase three Patriot Advanced Capability 3 missile defense batteries from the United States, according to Jane’s Missiles and Rockets as reported today by Agence France-Presse (see GSN, July 8). The U.S. Defense Department is reviewing the request and is likely to recommend that U.S. lawmakers approve the sale, Jane’s reported. “Taiwan is moving forward on missile defense, including PAC-3 and EWR (early warning radar),” a U.S. government official said (Agence France-Presse, July 24).
From July 24, 2003 issue.U.S. Plans I: Northrop Grumman Refutes Airborne Laser CriticismU.S. defense contractor Northrop Grumman has criticized a recent report issued by the American Physical Society that claims the Airborne Laser system would be ineffective at destroying enemy ballistic missiles during their boost phase, the Abilene Reporter-News reported today (see GSN, July 15). Northrop Grumman Vice President of Missile Defense Patrick Caruana said some of the challenges facing the ABL system are inherent to any first-time weapons program. Both Northrop Grumman and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency plan to examine the APS report, he said. Bill Ehrie, former commander of Dyess Air Force Base in Texas, said he believed the U.S. Air Force would have already considered the effectiveness of the ABL as a boost-phase defense system. “I’d like to know how so late in the game they could come up with this conclusion,” said Ehrie, who has not seen the APS report. “It would seem strange that this issue hadn’t already been considered by the Air Force, given the length of time they’ve been in development with ABL,” he said (Tara Copp, Abilene Reporter-News, July 24).
From July 24, 2003 issue.U.S. Plans II: Cities Lobby to Become X-Band Radar BaseSome U.S. cities that border the Pacific Ocean are lobbying the Defense Department to station a floating missile-defense radar near their communities, the Seattle Times reported yesterday (see GSN, June 19). The Sea-Based Test X-Band Radar would be part of the developing national missile-defense system. The Defense Department is considering positioning the radar platform in the Marshall Islands; Adak, Alaska; Valdez, Alaska; Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; Ventura, Calif.; Oxnard, Calif.; or Everett, Wash. Adak Mayor Chuck Luck traveled to Washington Tuesday to promote his island community as a good home for the radar, while Everett Mayor Frank Anderson has vigorously opposed it, noting that the radar could rise 25-stories above the sea. “We could have shook hands and said, ‘Everett doesn’t want it — give it to us,’” Luck said. “We’re a struggling city. We’re trying to build our economy and our tax base,” he added. Meanwhile, Ventura and Valdez officials have also lobbied for the radar platform. “They are talking about putting this monstrosity literally in our downtown,” Anderson said. “If there are places that want it, why don’t they take Everett off the list? We’d be happy to help them get it,” he added (Rachel Tuinstra, Seattle Times, July 23).
From July 23, 2003 issue.U.S. Plans: Defense Officials Develop Plan to Use Airborne LaserU.S. Air Combat Command officials have completed a preliminary plan for how to use the Airborne Laser missile defense system in combat once it is fully developed, Inside Missile Defense reported today (see GSN, July 15). The plan remains tentative, however, because the Defense Department has not determined how many ABL aircraft will be built, according to Lt. Col. Rick Nefzger, the chief of the system’s special management organization at Air Combat Command. The laser system is a Boeing 747-400 aircraft that will operate with four lasers designed to shoot down an enemy missile in its boost phase. The Missile Defense Agency is set to spend $3.5 billion on the program between fiscal 2004 and fiscal 2009. “The original idea was seven aircraft,” Nefzger said. “But right now I don’t know how many aircraft we are going to get because no one has told me what they really want us to do. Do you want one orbit? Do you want two orbits? Do you want one 24-hour orbit or do you want two 24-hour orbits?” he asked (Thomas Duffy, Inside Missile Defense I, July 23). Contingency Plan Involves Chemical Dump Officials at Edwards Air Force base in California, where the system will be tested, are considering ejecting dangerous chemicals from the laser system if the plane’s landing is jeopardized. “During nominal test conditions the ABL system will launch out of Edwards, perform flight tests and return to base with remaining chemicals onboard,” base officials said. “However, if an in-flight emergency arose that required jettison of chemicals in order to avoid a safety incident, the ABL would do so prior to landing at a divert base other than Edwards,” they added. The chemicals would be dumped over the California desert, Inside Missile Defense reported (Thomas Duffy, Inside Missile Defense II, July 23).
About Newswire | Contact National Journal | Re-Use Guidelines HOME | CONTACT US | GET INVOLVED | SITE MAP |
|||||||||||||||||||||||