O’Reilly Urges Emphasis On Hitting Enemy Missiles In Ascent Phase, But Also Endorses Not Buying Another Airborne Laser Aircraft
ABL Needs Design Changes, O’Reilly Says; Existing ABL Shows How To Improve It
The ballistic missile threat facing the United States is surging forward, with 5,900 short- and medium-range missiles being wielded worldwide — and that doesn’t count the thousands of missiles in U.S., Russian and Chinese arsenals.
That’s up a hefty 28 percent from 4,600 just five years ago.
The troubling figures came from Army Lt. Gen. Patrick O’Reilly, director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), speaking at a breakfast forum of the Association of the United States Army – Institute of Land Warfare at a hotel near the Pentagon.
“The threat is proliferating” worldwide, he reported.
O’Reilly also said that the United States must have a missile defense system that strikes enemy missiles in their most vulnerable phase of flight, the boost/ascent phase, just after launch.
However, O’Reilly also said he fully supports the proposal by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates that would drop plans for purchasing even one more Airborne Laser plane, which until now has been the main U.S. missile defense system designed to hit enemy weapons in their boost/ascent phase.
Before buying another “tail,” O’Reilly said the MDA needs to improve the ABL design, incorporating lessons learned on the only aircraft in the program now, the prototype heavily modified 747-400F jumbo jet.
These were highlights of his speech:
A Major Missile Threat
Ballistic missile proliferation among all nations, including rogue states, “is not showing any sign of slowing down,” O’Reilly cautioned. “This is extremely worrisome.”
O’Reilly added that the upward trend of threatening missiles “is not abating in any way.”
He specifically cited Iran, which this year launched a satellite into orbit, demonstrating that Tehran has gained advanced missile technology, including the fine points of command and control.
He also cited North Korea, which last month launched what military analysts said was a Taepo Dong-2 intercontinental ballistic missile. While it failed to reach its maximum 4,000-mile range, falling into the Pacific Ocean east of Japan, this launch was vastly more successful than a 2006 attempt that destructed seconds after liftoff. This latest attempt traveled hundreds of miles.
It is worth noting that the North Koreans were “more successful than they had been in the past,” he said.
These rising threats show the urgent need for ballistic missile defense, so that the president and military commanders, confronted with incoming enemy missiles, can have an option other than watching the missiles strike U.S. or allied targets, and then launching a massive American retaliatory strike against the enemy, O’Reilly said.
In fashioning a protective anti-missile fence around the United States and its allies, he said that it is important to “defeat all missiles of all ranges in any phase of flight,” including the boost phase.
The other phases are the midcourse, where the trajectory path may take a missile into space, and the terminal phase, where the missile reenters the atmosphere and begins its final descent toward the target.
Missile defense presents “a very strong counter-proliferation message” to enemies contemplating developing expensive missiles that could be used to attack the United States, O’Reilly said.
While the MDA has focused heavily on hitting enemy missiles in their midcourse of flight, the agency also must place an emphasis on the ascent phase, and on the terminal phase, he said.
He noted that it makes sense to hit enemy missiles in their boost/ascent phase, noting that is a point in flight where the enemy weapon hasn’t yet had time to emit multiple warheads or confusing decoys or chaff. (For further reasons why the boost phase is the ideal time to hit enemy missiles, please see full story in this issue.)
One issue with the ABL is that some analysts say using a solid state laser would be better than the high-powered chemical laser currently emplaced on the ABL aircraft. However, one observer noted that it would take years to build a comparable high-powered solid state laser, and O’Reilly’s remarks show the global missile threat is rising rapidly now.
All things equal, he “would like to go to a solid state laser,” O’Reilly said. “They are much easier to maintain,” and much more survivable and “operationally effective.”
The MDA director described, in detail, how the ABL works, noting that a dozen times last year a laser beam struck a target.
“We are very excited by the success we’ve had” on the ABL, he said, including firing the megawatt class laser more than 70 times on the ground.
The Boeing Co. [BA], the prime contractor, provides the ABL aircraft and systems integration; Northrop Grumman Corp. [NOC] supplies the laser system; and Lockheed Martin Corp. [LMT] makes the beam control-fire control system.
Now the ABL plane and system is poised for “an exciting series of tests,” including shoot-downs of missiles of all ranges, O’Reilly noted.
At the same time, however, Gates announced he discarded plans to buy a second ABL aircraft, and “I agree with that wholeheartedly.”
The reason O’Reilly is upbeat about the ABL, and sees the need for a boost-ascent-phase missile defense system, but also favors dropping plans to buy more ABLs, is that “we have learned so much from this first one,” the prototype ABL aircraft and systems.
“This is a revolutionary military capability,” O’Reilly said. Already, the MDA has seen progress in “increasing its efficiency, its reliability,” and more.
Therefore, while the budget doesn’t contain money to buy another ABL, O’Reilly said the MDA is pleased to be receive funding just for further research and development, and testing, “and then to apply that.”
O’Reilly stressed that the ABL “still hasn’t proved itself.” The Airborne Laser is set for a test later this year in which it is to knock down a missile for the first time.
Even if the ABL is successful in that crucial test later this year, “we still need to do that type of redesign,” he said, “so we can build a more operational effective version in the future. But that decision has to occur first based on proven capability.”