A NATO air and missile defense development effort has shown sufficient technological maturity to proceed into its systems integration and flight testing phases, the system’s manufacturer recently said.
The Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) has just completed its critical design review, industry officials said.
“Close to 1,100 design elements have been demonstrated to date,” MEADS International President Steve Barnoske said during a teleconference. “No air defense program has been as thoroughly evaluated as MEADS.”
A multinational joint venture headquartered in Orlando, Fla., MEADS International’s participating companies are MBDA in Italy, LFK in Germany and Lockheed Martin [LMT] in the United States. The United States funds 58 percent of the program, and European partners Germany and Italy provide 25 percent and 17 percent, respectively, as partners in the NATO Medium Extended Air Defense System Management Organization (NAMEADSMA).
NAMEADSMA General Manager Gregory Kee said all of the MEADS system’s hardware maturity was validated during the review.
“MEADS makes air and missile defense affordable,” Kee added. “Cost-sharing with allies and the lower operational and sustainment costs than the legacy systems make this a money-saving program.”
System integration activity is expected to begin in Italy later this year, according to Barnoske, with flight testing scheduled to commence in 2012. He added that discussions with the three governments on when production will begin are ongoing.
The current MEADS development schedule is based on a plan set forth by top Pentagon weapons buyer Ashton Carter and his German and Italian counterparts in an amended memorandum of understanding that addressed cost increases and schedule delays late last year.
Earlier this year, the Senate Armed Service Committee’s version of the FY ’11 Defense Authorization Bill fenced funding for MEADS until the Defense Department reports on possible alternatives, thorough future cost estimates and other details of the multibillion-dollar program. The Senate provision specifies that the Pentagon’s report should contain a cost estimate performed by the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE); an analysis of alternatives (AoA); and a description of the planned schedule for the remainder of the development, production and deployment of the system. The House version of the bill contains no parallel provision, but Hill sources have indicated that some funding fence is expected to survive when the two are reconciled in conference (Defense Daily, March 23).
An official with knowledge of the MEADS program said its cost has reached at least $3.5 billion.
The program is currently in the U.S. Army’s air defense portfolio. In February, Army officials circulated a memo expressing renewed concerns that requirements for MEADS, formulated in 1999, “do not address current and emerging threats.” The Army instead advocates harvesting MEADS technologies and improving the Patriot program it was designed to replace (Defense Daily, Feb. 25).
Senior Army officials who met with representatives from the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) in March reached no decision on the service’s plan to transfer management of MEADS to the agency. Senior representatives of both organizations agreed to continue discussing the possibility. In the meantime, both the Army and the CAPE office are conducting reviews and new cost estimates for the program (Defense Daily, March 23).
MEADS is a mobile system that was designed as a replacement for the Patriot program in the United States, the Nike Hercules in Italy and both the Hawk and Patriot systems in Germany. It was designed for interoperability among the three allies and to provide 360-degree coverage for troops against tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles and aircraft.