Aegis BALLISTIC MISSILE D EFENSE

PROGRAM REVIEW 2011

At Sea...on Patrol!

[We] assumed lead for the Presidents Phased Adaptive Approach to the Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) of Europe and established the BMD Enterpriseand selected the DDG-51 Flight III as our Integrated Air and Missile Defense ship for the futurecompleted 20 of 24 successful demonstrations of operational BMD capability.
Admiral Gary Roughead, U.S. Navy Chief of Naval Operations CNO Guidance for 2011: Executing the Maritime Strategy

THE VISION REALIZED

vision

Two events a quarter-century apart have converged. In March1983, at the height of the Cold War, President Ronald Reagan challenged America and the world. What if free people could live secure in the knowledge that their security did not rest upon threat of instant U.S. retaliation to deter a Soviet attack, he asked, but instead that we could intercept and destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reached our own soil or that of our allies?1 The President then set the nation on a course to move from a strategy of mutual assured destruction to a new framework for a robust national ballistic missile defense system (BMDS) that would help avert nuclear Armageddon. In December of that year, the U.S. Navy commissioned the Aegis guided missile cruiser USS Ticonderoga (CG47), the first of what by 2011 would grow to a global fleet of Aegis warships. In the 1980s, Aegis cruisers were only a tiny fraction of the 600-ship Navy, but today they are the backbone of the U.S. Fleet, and several world navies have also embraced the Aegis shield. That said, when Tico entered service, only the most visionary prophet could imagine that BMD-capable Aegis warships would someday become the fulcrum of the national BMDS envisioned by President Reagan. Indeed, Aegis BMD has grown in prominence because the strategic landscape has changed dramatically. In September 2009, President Obama explained the need to reinvigorate U.S. BMD strategy with a new approach that would put the Aegis BMD system on shore. This new approach will provide capabilities sooner, he stated, build on proven systems and of-

fer greater defenses against the threat of missile attack than the 2007 European missile defense program.2 Both Presidents thus challenged America and the world to embark on new courses for national and global security. Even with delivery of new capabilities like Aegis Ashore, ship-based BMD will remain an essential and proven core element of any defense against ballistic missiles. The inherent flexibility and mobility of the ship-based solution provides a missile defense option political and military leaders can count on as integral elements of their defensive arsenals today and tomorrow. As Aegis BMD continues to evolve, Americas ability to defend our allies and friends worldwide, as well as our forces at sea and ashore, against ballistic missiles will become even more robust than it is today. Aegis BMD has become a crucial element of the nations defense and a key to forming and sustaining global and regional maritime partnershipsthe Aegis Global Enterprisethat can and will safeguard vital interests. Indeed, while the U.S. Navys Global Maritime Partnership has many components, the ability of this partnership to undergird global and regional naval cooperation has created a worldwide framework for defense and security in an increasingly dangerous world. In 2011, Aegis BMD is at sea, on patrol, near the homeland as well as in areas far forwardthe Shield of the Fleet and the nationand U.S. friends and allies worldwide.

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense / At Sea...on Patrol!

change

THE ONLY CONStANt IS CHANGE

The first ten years of the 21st Century have seen profound change for the United States Navy, the nation, and the world. In September 2001, the U.S. homeland experienced its first attacks in more than 50 yearsa tragedy that spawned two conflicts which have extracted an enormous cost in lives and national treasure. We are engaged worldwide in a war with radical extremism, at the same time that the nation continues its drawdown in Iraq and surge of combat operations in Afghanistan. We are watchful of the rise of a peer competitor that looks intent on becoming a global superpower. These dynamics are complicated by the ambitions of regional powers. It is little wonder that the National Intelligence Council predicts daunting change will accelerate and broaden: The international systemsas constructed following the Second World Warwill be unrecognizable by 2025 owing to the rise of emerging powers, a globalizing economy, an historic transfer of relative wealth and economic power from West to East, and the growing influence of nonstate actors. By 2025, the international system will be a global multipower one.3 Change has accelerated in the last few years for America and its Navy as a new Administration, a new National Security Strategy and the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review have called for a reordering of priorities and programs. The Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard have their first tri-service maritime strategy, and a new vision for countering irregular challenges further shapes the Navys strategies, plans, programs and operations.4 The 2010 Ballistic Missile Defense Review (BMDR)5 likewise put in motion profound changes in the U.S. approach to deal with the most deadly threat to the American homeland, our forces forward, and our allies and coalition partners: ballistic missiles armed with weapons of mass destruction (WMD). According to the 2010 BMDR: The United States will continue to defend the homeland from limited ballistic missile attack. These efforts are focused on protecting the homeland from a ballistic missile attack by a regional actor such as North Korea or Iran The United States will defend U.S. deployed forces from regional missile threats while also protecting our allies and partners and enabling them to defend themselves. The United States will seek to lead expanded international efforts for missile defense. It will work more closely with allies and partners to provide pragmatic and cost-effective capacity.6 The 2010 National Security Strategy further underscored this need: This Administration has no greater responsibility than the safety and security of the American people. And there is no greater threat to the American people then weapons of mass destruction, particularly the danger posed by the pursuit of nuclear weapons by violent extremists and their proliferation to additional states.7 The United States has now put in place a new approach to defeating this global threat. On September 17, 2009, the President revealed a sea change in U.S. ballistic missile defense policy.8 He terminated the existing plan that would have placed dedicated ground-based interceptors and missiledefense radar sites in Poland and the Czech Republic. In their stead, he announced a Phased Adaptive Approach (PAA) for a global sea-based missiledefense capability centered on the Navys Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system fitted out in the Ticonderoga and Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) guided missile cruisers and destroyers. A land-based Aegis Ashore component would follow, providing enhanced BMD protection from both the sea and land.9 Important particularly for the near term, the most effective leg of the nations BMD capability was already at sea and on patrol when the President announced the new approach to missile defense.

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

adaptability

PHASED ADAptABILItY
The Phased Adaptive Approach (PAA) includes several variants of the Standard Missile-Three (SM-3) to thwart the preponderant short- to intermediaterange ballistic missile threat from rogue nations.10 The PAA for BMD in Europe will leverage several elements of the BMDS, including forward-deployed sensors as well as sea- and land-based variants of the SM-3 interceptor. Evolutionary upgrades to the SM-3 Standard Missile and sensors combined with improvements to command and control infrastructure provide capability to the warfighter to perform an increasingly complex and critical regional and homeland-defense mission. Aegis BMD contributions to the PAA for BMD in Europe are highlighted in each of the four phases: Phase 1 (2011): Sea-based Aegis missile defense ships and radars will be deployed to defend against short- and medium-range ballistic missiles in Southern Europe. Phase 2 (2015), Phase 3 (2018) and Phase 4 (2020): Aegis SM-3 missiles will be upgraded to provide coverage against medium- and intermediaterange missiles, as well as inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). In 2011, the Phased Adaptive Approach will be implemented in Europe and will eventually be adapted for other regions, including the Middle East and East Asia. It will be tailored to the unique regional threats. The Presidents decision to deploy the European PAA accelerates fielding of proven technologies like the Aegis Weapon System and promises improved long-term protection of our NATO allies as well as the U.S. homeland. The successful 20-year track record of the Aegis Weapon System contributed to the Presidents confidence. The Navy commissioned the pioneer Aegis missile cruiser USS Ticonderoga in 1983. Ticonderogas impressive multi-mission warfighting capabilities centered on the Aegis Weapon Systemthe AN/SPY-1 multi-function phased-array radar, the Aegis Combat System and sophisticated surface-to-air missilesin addition to highly capable anti-submarine, anti-surface, and land-attack weapons. In 1991, the follow-on Arleigh Burke-class destroyers provided complementary warfighting quantity and quality. Although initially designed to protect Navy carrier battle and surface action groups from attacks in a nuclear-war-at-sea environment, the Navy adapted the Aegis and Standard Missile systems to counter the emerging global ballistic missile threat. In 2011, the Aegis weapon system is again providing a revolution in sea-based capabilitiesto defend U.S. forces at sea and ashore, Americas friends and allies, and the American homeland against the proliferating threat of ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as unmanned aerial vehicles and aircraft. Coupled with other ground-, sea-, and air/space-based elements of the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense System, Aegis BMD can already deter and defend against a growing global threat. In early 2011, 21 Aegis multi-mission warshipsfive Ticonderoga-class missile cruisers and 16 missile destroyers of the Arleigh Burke classwere in service. Since 2004, Aegis BMD has been on station with six or more ships at sea at any given time, conducting routine, in-stride ballistic missile defense. Of the 21 ABMD warships, 16 are assigned to the Pacific Fleet and five to the Atlantic Fleet.11 Comprising the ship-based leg of the U.S. national BMD forces, these ships deploy to the Mediterranean, the Arabian Gulf and the western Pacific, providing an umbrella of deterrence. The Navy plans to include BMD capabilities in all 22 Aegis cruisers and 65-plus destroyers, including newconstruction DDGs. In the meantime, Navy international programs are partnering with allied navies to energize coalition ballistic missile defense worldwide, and provide what the U.S. President described as stronger, smarter, and swifter defenses of American forces and Americas allies.12 This initiative to harness the power of U.S. and coalition partner nations and navies offers game-changing possibilities. There is great incentive for allied and partner navies to take advantage of our nearly five decades of research and development, testing, and real-world operations. Interoperability among U.S. and allied navies is the key reason why several have already embraced the Aegis solution -- recognizing the manifest benefits of the Aegis weapons system. Aegis BMD is proven, ready and deployed around the world. This reality enabled the President to make his PAA decision with assurance. Moreover, this new approach will provide capabilities sooner, build on successful systems and offer greater defenses than the 2007 European missile defense program. The Aegis BMD/SM-3 weapon system enables the Navy to immediately step up to this challenge.
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

threats

GLOBAL THrEAtS
The September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States killed more than 3,000 Americans. Moreover, they provided a stark warning that both states and other actors had the desire and the means to strike the American homeland. Today, a growing number of potential adversaries possessing ballistic missiles armed with chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and high yield explosive (CBRNE) weapons of mass destruction present an urgent security issue for the United States and its allies. Indeed, the National Defense Universitys Institute for National Security Studies report, Global Strategic Assessment 2009: Americas Security Role in a Changing World, notes: Our worst fears regarding the proliferation and use of weapons of mass destruction have not been realized to date, but important trends bearing on nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons have made it increasingly possible they will be.13 While Global Strategic Assessment 2009 addressed the need to deal with the threat of weapons of mass destruction as one security threat among a range of others, the threat of WMD delivered by ballistic missiles was so compelling that the following year National Defense Universitys Center for Technology and National Security Policy commissioned Dr. Jacques Gansler, former Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the cost-benefit tradeoff of a ballistic missile defense. According to the Gansler report, Ballistic Missile Defense: Past and Future: As demonstrated by the attacks on New York and Washington on September 11, 2001, there are those in some parts of the world who are not deterred by the threat of invasion or even nuclear retaliation (including some rulers of so-called rogue states). A national missile defense system could provide a shield from destruction in the event of a threatened or actual launch by a rogue state leader or a powerful transnational terrorist group as well as an unintentional launch by Russia or China. A limited system should be deployed because of its deterrent value and the possibility of saving so many American lives, but R&DE and testing should be continued to enhance its capability against evolving threats, and deployment should be done in connection with international agreements and controls related to new, national strategic posture, based on both offense and defense systems, as well as tightened proliferation controls.14 Throughout the past decade, numerous assessments have echoed the threats and trends outlined in the Ballistic Missile Defense: Past and Future report. For example, a June 2002 report issued by the National Defense Universitys Center for Technology and National Security Policy, Toward Missile Defenses from the Sea, summarized the challenges to and opportunities of Navy BMD: During the past several years, national intelligence estimates have indicated a growing missile threat from North Korea, Iran, and Iraq that will continue to increase throughout this decade. Developments of the past 18 months have created new possibilities for seabasing of national defenses against intercontinental ballistic missiles. Using missile interceptors based at sea to defend the United States against ICBMs offers several advantages, the most important of which are flexibility and control.15 Four years later, then-Missile Defense Agency Director, U.S. Air Force Lieutenant General Henry Trey Obering stated, I have a lot of confidence in the ability of the sea-based system to be able to execute an operational mission.16 These themes were reinforced by then-Program Director, Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, Rear Admiral Alan B. Hicks. For example, his 2007 Naval Institute Proceedings article framed the current and future BMD/WMD threat: Today, the United States faces a greater danger from an expanding number of hostile

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

threats

Global Threats (continued)

regimes and terrorist groups that seek to acquire and use ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). These adversaries may not respond to traditional tools and concepts of deterrence.17 And, the next year Rear Admiral Hicks provided additional insight into the emerging threat from ballistic missiles armed with WMD: These threats range from terrorism to ballistic missiles tipped with WMD, intended to intimidate the United States by holding it, its friends, and its allies hostage. Not only are forward deployed forces at risk from ballistic missiles, but also the U.S. homeland is within range of these threats, which continue to grow in number, range, and complexity.18 The security of the U.S. homeland, deployed U.S. military forces, and allies is increasingly threatened by the proliferation of sophisticated ballistic missile systems. By early 2011, according to Admiral Roughead, some 30 countries had deployed ballistic missiles, compared to only nine countries in 1972, 16 in 1990 and 25 in 2006: So thats a nation every three years thats acquiring ballistic missile capability.19 While many of these are allied or friendly nations, some critical technologies have been transferredlegally or illegallyto other countries or even sub-national groups that seek to harm the United States and its partners. Potential enemies such as China and Iran possess ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction, and todays rogue leaders view WMD as weapons of choice, not of last resort. Chinas missiles hedge against a Taiwan contingency, while simultaneously undergirding its antiaccess/area denial (A2/AD) efforts in the Asia Pacific region. One notable effort in this regard is the development of the worlds first anti-ship carrier killer ballistic missile, the DF-21D. Patrick Cronin, senior director of the Asia Program at the Center for a New American Security, wrote that the missile can be fired from protected land-based bastions far

away, travels at high speed, and provides mid-course correction and a maneuverable reentry vehicle with great precision and lethalityThe DF-21D is the ultimate carrier-killer missile.20 Moreover, Admiral Robert Willard, Commander of U.S. Pacific Command, in August 2010 warned that the DF-21D was close to being operational.21 Given U.S. strategic interests in the Middle East, Irans missile development is perhaps even more troubling; the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency in June 2010 warned that it could be a mere two years before Iran is able to threaten other states with nuclear warheads mounted on ballistic missiles,22 and the Defense Intelligence Agency has reported that Iran could field an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the East Coast of the United States by 2015.23 Iranian ballistic missile firings have accelerated, with several mid-range ballistic missiles launched during the past several years.24 Coupled with the determination to acquire WMD, Irans missiles pose grave threats to U.S. interests and Americas Middle Eastern, South Asian, and European allies. Clearly, this capability and intent from Iran and other potentially hostile nations, as well as sub-national groups, that obtain ballistic missiles carrying WMD, will hold U.S. forces overseas and our allies in jeopardy. In the future, U.S. forces conducting power projection operations abroad will face myriad challenges, the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) explained: States with the means to do so are acquiring a wide range of sophisticated weapons and supporting capabilities that, in combination, can support anti-access strategies aimed at impeding the deployment of U.S. forces to the theater and blunting the operations of those forces that do deploy forward. North Korea and Iran, as part of their defiance of international norms, are actively testing and fielding new ballistic missile systems.

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

framework

StrAtEGIc FrAMEWOrK fOr AEGIS BMD

In 2011, the United States has fielded an initial national-level BMDS capability, with all aspects of the integrated systemland, sea, air and spacelinked together to provide the best possible defense. The Navys contribution to BMDS, built around the Aegis Weapon System, has grown in importance based on its proven performance as well as its long-term potential. Aegis BMD complements and integrates seamlessly with other elements of the national BMDS. The first priority of the BMDS implementation strategyestablishing a limited defensive capability against North Korean ballistic missileshas largely been achieved with Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) batteries, the Ground-based Mid-course Defense (GMD) System, the Forward-Deployed AN/ TPY-2 Radar, and Aegis BMD long-range search, cueing, and engagement ships. The Aegis BMD system is integrated with Fleet and Joint Force war-fighting standards, and the BMDS Command, Control, Battle Management and Communications (C2BMC) elements. Aegis BMD easily interoperates with other in-theater assets, including the Terminal HighAltitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, as well as other ground- air- and space-based sensors. Aegis BMD has the ability to operate independently to defeat ballistic missiles, but also to function as an integral node in the overall, integrated national BMDS. Perhaps most critically, Aegis BMD maintains this capability while also being able to carry out other vital general-purpose naval warfare missions and tasksfrom humanitarian assistance and counter-piracy operations to naval gunfire support of forces ashore. This in turn allows Aegis BMD to demonstrate the Department of Defense and the Navys commitment to network-centric operations using existing mobile and flexible multi-mission systems fully enabled by adaptable networks. Support for Aegis BMD is growing outside the Navy and the Department of Defense. In 2009 the Independent Working Group on Missile Defense, the Space Relationship & the Twenty-First Century strongly recommended limiting fixed ground-based missile defense deployments based on GMD in favor of expanding theater/regional defenses centered on sea-based missile defense deployments (along with Aegis Ashore, Land-Based SM-3 and THAAD radars), recommending, in particular: Equip additional U.S. vessels with the Aegis anti-missile system. Encourage U.S. allies equipped with Aegis/SM to do the same.25 The President leveraged the half-century of progressive Aegis system and Standard Missile development to play an important role in defending Europe as well as providing a proven and mobile capability for regional defense world-wide It is the precursor to a fundamental shift in the nations BMD policy from a predominantly landand-space-based system to a predominantly seabased system that is further enabled by space and airborne sensors. Each success of the Aegis BMD test program underscores the potential of Navy BMD to defend against short- mid- and long-range ballistic missiles. In 2011, Navy BMD is the only certified, operationally effective, and suitable system to defend against theater and regional ballistic missile attack. This was possible only because of the Navys commitment to make BMD a core mission for all Aegis ships and the continued growth in capability and capacity these ships deliverwith in-service warships receiving extensive modernizations and upgrades to stay ahead of the threat and extend service lives. This vital capability has been delivered at only 10 percent of the total national BMD budgets. The Navy will continue to align efforts to better support BMD as a core Navy capability and it is virtually certain that Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) will gain more prominence as a core mission of the U.S. Navy and one of the key enabling capabilities that the Navy provides the joint force. To support this shifting mission set, the Navys Ballistic Missile Defense Enterprise and Navy Air and Missile Defense Command (NAMDC) will continue to bring together the technology, concepts and programs for air and missile defense, ensuring that Aegis BMD remains the shield of the Navy, the Nation, and increasingly, our friends and allies.

11

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

elements

U.S. SHIp-BASED BMD ELEMENtS

The U.S. Navys strong commitment to a national BMDS is articulated in the 2007 tri-service A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower, which explains, Maritime ballistic missile defense will enhance deterrence by providing an umbrella of protection to forward-deployed forces and friends and allies, while contributing to the larger architecture for defense of the United States.26 Emphasizing the Navys intent to push this defensive capability forward, the 2007 strategy also states, Maritime forces will defend the homeland by identifying and neutralizing threats as far from our shores as possible. Ship-based Aegis BMDs inherent mobility, persistent forward presence, readiness, ability to operate in international waters and conduct simultaneous multi-warfare operationsincluding long-range strike and scalability to match the needare key attributes brought to any future military operation. Aegis BMD can reposition in response to a crisis, cover undefended flanks, thicken defenses of key areas and regions, and add firepower. The ability of these naval forces to use the vast worlds oceans for strategic and tactical movement, combined with the increasing stealth and self-defense capabilities of U.S. warships, as well as their increasing ability to fully exploit the global space commons for additional capability, allows commanders to maintain a persistent, scalable and visible naval presence anywhere in the world with low risk. The multi-mission capability of Aegis missile cruisers and destroyers enables them to defend themselves, other forces in the region, and assets ashore. With organic logistics support, the Navy can sustain these ships on forward-deployment station for extended periods. Aegis warships can also conduct other critical missions while tasked as ballistic missile defense assetsfrom humanitarian relief to launching longrange, precision strikes with Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles. No additional personnel or assets are needed for these full-spectrum operations. This was underscored by the 2010 QDR, which noted, U.S. naval forces likewise will continue to be capable of robust forward presence and power projection operations, even as they add capabilities and capacity for working with a wide range of partner navies. The rapid growth in sea- and land-based ballistic missile defense capabilities will help meet the needs of combatant commanders and allies in several regions.27 The Aegis weapon systems adaptability has enabled the Navy to add improved hardware and software in successive Aegis spiral upgrades through a coordinated, disciplined and aggressive approach. The Aegis weapon system in 2011 consists of four major components: (1) the AN/SPY-1 radar system; (2) the Aegis Combat System; (3) the Mk 41 VLS; and (4) Standard surface-to-air missiles. Aegis BMD leverages and builds upon capabilities inherent in the Aegis Weapon System and ballistic missile command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, and reconnaissance systems seamlessly integrated with other ship systems. The Aegis legacy of building, testing, and learning was the primary reason that Aegis BMD was the first element of the national BMDS to complete the entire MDA test process. This operationally realistic testing and capability development has enabled Aegis BMD to be the pacing element of the national BMDS. By closely coordinating testing with development and acquisition, the Navy will continue to deliver upgraded capabilities and capacities to Aegis BMD ships.

13

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

Aegis BMD
success from building and testing over time.
VT Fuze Guns & Radar TALOS & Radar Project Typhoon Project Bumblebee initiated

NAVYS RESPONSE

Weap En de Withington Study defines Advanced Surface Missile concept

1964 1965

1960 1958

1941 1942

1945 1957

1959 1946
Beginning of Cold War

1939
World War II: European Theater

1944

1945

End of World War II

First USSR operational ICBM deployment

Anti-ship cruis

EVOLVING THREAT
Kamikazee attacks on ships V-2 attacks on cities

USSR orbits Sputnik I

Exocet

SM/LEAP demonstration

Israel tests Arrow Missile Aegis BMD transitions to the U.S. Navy

First SM-3 intercept USS Ticonderoga commissioned First U.S. BMD patrol USS Arleigh Burke commissioned

First intercept of separating target

Aegis pons Systems ngineering evelopment begins

1991 1983

1992

2002

2004

2005

2008

2010 1998 2002

U.S. withdraws from ABM Treaty

2006

2009

1969 1972

1987 1983

President Reagan Anti-Ballistic announces Missile Strategic Treaty Defense signed Initiative

Iranian Great Prophet II exercise North Korean Taepo Dong overflies Japan

North Korea launches Unha-2 rocket Tests: Three Shots... Three Hits

se missile USS Stark struck by Iraqi Exocet

To put it simply, our new missile defense architecture in Europe will provide stronger, smarter, and swifter defenses of American forces and Americas allies. It is more comprehensive than the previous program; it deploys capabilities that are proven and cost-effective; and it sustains and builds upon our commitment to protect the U.S. homeland against long-range ballistic missile threats; and it ensures and enhances the protection of all our NATO allies.
President Barak Obama 17 September 2009

revolution

BuILD-A-LIttLE REvOLutION
Beginning in the early 1960s, when Aegis was first conceived, and throughout nearly two decades of development that led to the commissioning of the first Aegis cruiser in 1983, Navy planners and engineers structured the Aegis system with the potential to take on future naval missions. Under the stewardship of visionary program managers, most notably the late Rear Admiral Wayne E. Meyer, widely regarded as the Father of Aegis, the system had an overarching imperative to build-a-littletest-a-littlelearn-a-lot as the prudent way to insert revolutionary capabilities into the Fleet in an evolutionary manner. As Admiral John C. Harvey, Commander Fleet Forces Command, explained in September 2010, what made the Aegis Program so successful was a single-minded dedication to the pursuit of technical excellence.28 As new threats emerged, the Navys leadership learned that an Aegis system designed originally to protect U.S. Navy carrier strike groups from waves of attacking Soviet aircraft and cruise missiles in a nuclear environment also had the potentialwith a disciplined process of sensor, weapon, and systems upgradesto be the key component of an integrated national BMDS.29 Aegis BMD offers a significant return on investment by taking advantage of its more than $80 billion of investment in the sensors, weapons, command-and-control systems, ships, people and facilities that comprise the Aegis weapon system. Aegis BMD capability is developed and delivered in two-year block upgrades providing increased capabilities at every step. The Aegis BMD Block 2004 delivered the first Aegis BMD Long-Range Search and Track (LRS&T) system certified for tactical deployment. The Aegis BMD Block 2006 focused primarily on improved prototype radar discrimination. And, the Aegis BMD Block 2008 further developed Aegis BMD to provide fully integrated advanced radar discrimination. The 2010 configuration of Aegis BMDthe Aegis 3.6 weapon systemincludes the Aegis BMD weapons system teamed with the advanced RIM-161 SM-3 Block 1A missile. This configuration provides two primary warfighting capabilities to the national BMDS. The first capability is for hit-to-kill target engagement and destruction. Aegis cruisers and LRS&Tfitted destroyers are equipped with the capability to engage short- to intermediate-range ballistic missiles in the midcourse phase of flight with the SM-3 Block 1A missile, as well as counter enemy aircraft and cruise missiles. LRS&T provides the U.S. national BMDS with its first mobile, global, and deployable capability that can destroy ballistic missiles both above and within the atmosphere something that cannot be delivered by any other system. This crucial capability grew out of Navy Standard Missile testing beginning with the Terrier/LEAP (Lightweight Exo-Atmospheric Projective) demonstration project in 1993. This included assessing the capabilities of the LEAP Kinetic Kill Vehicle (KKV), continuing with the USN Theater Wide/Aegis LEAP Intercept (ALI) program in the late 1990s, and culminating in Standard Missile improvements to the LEAP KKV, which then evolved into a Navy Standard Missile with a Kinetic Warhead (KW). This hit-to-kill engagement capability was rigorously engineered, successfully tested at sea, improved, and deployed in Aegis cruisers and destroyers. Looking to the future, key upgrades include: Tracking Improvements: The Aegis BMD signal processor improves system signal and data processing capability that results in more precise target information that supports real-time identification of the warheads and decoys. Two-color sensor technology in the SM-3 seeker provides the capability to sense infrared images in two wavebands and improves the ability to sort out small hot objects from larger hot objects. This upgraded seeker also improves detection range. These upgrades to the SM-3 are sched-

17

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

revolution

Build-a-Little Revolution (continued)

uled for deployment in 2011. The combination of the improved radar tracking and resolution provided by the BMD Signal Processor and the two-color seeker will help to retain Aegis BMDs high kill probability against advanced threats.30 Longer-range Threat Set Capability: Longer-range, multi-stage ballistic missiles challenge the capabilities of stand-alone defensive systems. One way to successfully reach and intercept missiles with long range and high speed and at the altitudes that these missiles fly is to give the SM-3 a head start by firing the missile based on off-board sensor information or completing the engagement entirely with off-board track information. The capability to fire the SM-3 on off-board sensor information is available today, as the 2010 BMDR noted: DoD will also continue to improve the SM-3 interceptor missile defense capability. By 2015 a more capable SM-3 missile, the Block IB, will be available. It will have an improved seeker capability for greater on-board discrimination and greater area coverage. This interceptor will be deployed both at sea and on land, with the Aegis Ashore system. Developing the technology to launch an SM-3 interceptor in response to remote sensor data will also increase the coverage area. Once this capability is fully developed, the interceptorsno longer constrained by the range of the Aegis radar to detect an incoming missilewill be able to be launched sooner and therefore fly further in order to defeat the incoming threat. Terminal Capability: One of the most challenging areas of ballistic missile defense is intercepting these missiles or reentry vehicles during their terminal phase of flight, when speeds are high and timelines are short. A high-priority program for the MDA and Aegis BMD is the development, integration, and testing of a near-term Sea-Based Terminal (SBT) capability. This capability was tested and ready for deployment in 2009, just two years after program start. Aegis BMDs near-term Sea-Based Terminal capability joins the U.S. PAC-3 and Israeli Arrow System in the terminal defense end game.

Standard Missile Improvements: The SM-3 Block IB is the next sea-based missile spiral upgrade. The seeker, signal processor, and propulsion system of the SM-3 Block IB missile kinetic warhead are improved versions of the Block IA missile and will result in increased missile effectiveness over longerrange and more sophisticated ballistic missiles, including an improved capability to identify closely spaced objects and better probability of kill. Engineering upgrades have undergone laboratory and ground tests, and flight-testing of the SM-3 Block IB missile occurred in 2010, and fleet deployment could begin as early 2011. The next step in the evolutionary development of the Standard Missile is the longer-range SM-3 Block IIA missile being co-developed with Japan. This upgrade increases the range and velocity of the missile, providing additional reach, firepower, performance, and operational flexibility. The capabilities of the SM-3 Block IIA missile, coupled with enhanced sensor performance, will enable Aegis BMD to engage more hostile ballistic missiles and with a greater probability of kill. On June 23, 2006, Japan and the United States signed an agreement to transition the research of the Joint Cooperative Research Project to the SM-3 Cooperative Development (SCD) Program to develop jointly the SM-3 Block IIA missile. The SCD Program focuses on a 21-inch diameter variant of the SM-3 missile that can be launched from the existing MK 41 VLS. Initial flight testing of the SM-3 IIA will be in 2014 with a first intercept test in 2015. Software Improvements to Transition to Open Architecture: The Navy recently demonstrated a software upgradeAegis BMD 4.0.1that marks the transition to the Navys open architecture, a transition that will be complete with software upgrades known as Advanced Capability Build 12, scheduled for completion in 2012. This next-generation signal processing capability greatly improves Aegis BMD performance against expanding enemy threats and will enable Aegis BMD to remain well ahead of the emerging threat, while ensuring Aegis BMD takes full advantage of the Navys move to a services-oriented architecture standard for all its ships.

19

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

excellence

TEStS CONfIrM AEGIS BMD EXcELLENcE

Aegis BMD has undergone a comprehensive test program involving 25 at-sea live-firings between January 2002 and the end of 2010. These tests have become progressively more operationally challenging throughout the course of the test program. Since
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Tests
TEst DAtE TARGEt TYpE AEGIs SHIp HIt MIss

the first Aegis BMD intercept test, the Navys element of the overall U.S. BMDS has enjoyed unprecedented success: 21 intercepts out of 25 at-sea tests, including dual intercepts by two interceptors during one test event.31

TTV = Target Test Vehicle; ARAV = Terrier Oriole Target; MRT = Medium Range Target; FM/FTM = Flight Test Standard Missile; MRBM = Medium-Range Ballistic Missile; SRBM = Short-Range Ballistic Missile; Unitary Target = warhead remains attached to booster rocket (SCUD-type technology); Separating Target = warhead separates from booster rocket (North Korean No-Dong-type technology). Source: Fact Sheet Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Testing; Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, Missile Defense Agency, at http://www.mda.mil/system/aegis_bmd.html. Accessed 3 December 2010.

21

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

January 2002 TTV Unitary (SCUD) Lake Erie X June 2002 TTV Unitary (SCUD) Lake Erie X November 2002 TTV Unitary (SCUD) Lake Erie X June 2003 TTV Unitary (SCUD) Lake Erie X December 2003 TTV Unitary MRBM Lake Erie X February 2005 TTV Unitary SRBM Lake Erie X November 2005 MRT Separating Lake Erie X May 2006* Unitary (SCUD) Lake Erie X June 2006 MRT Separating Shiloh X December 2006 TTV Unitary Lake Erie No fire. April 2007 ARAV-A Unitary SRBM Lake Erie X June 2007 MRT Separating Decatur X November 2007 Two ARAV-A SRBMs Lake Erie XX December 2007 MRT Separating Kongo (Japan) X June 2008* Unitary (SCUD) Lake Erie X November 2008 Two ARAV-A SRBMs Paul Hamilton X Hopper X November 2008 MRT- Separating Chokai (Japan) X March 2009 SRBM Benfold X July 2009 Unitary ARAV-A SRBM Hopper X October 2009 Separating MRT Myoko (Japan) X October 2010 Separating MRT Kirishima (Japan) X *Standard Missile SM-2; all others SM-3 missiles.

excellence

Tests Confirm Aegis BMD Excellence (continued)

In an August 2009 briefing at the George C. Marshall Institute, Rear Admiral Hicks, then-Program Director, Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, underscored the rigor and success of this extensive testing program: The tests executed a high degree of operational realism and testing rigor. The Aegis BMD system is operationally effective and operationally suitable. During the past several years, other real-world events have underscored the value that Aegis BMD brings to the nations defenses. For example, when the Curtis Wilbur (DDG 54) deployed to the Sea of Japan on the worlds first BMD patrol, few envisioned Aegis BMD would demonstrate real-world value so soon. Ten months later, on July 4 and 5, 2006, North Korea launched seven ballistic missiles, including a long-range Taepo Dong-2 missile. Operating in conjunction with other elements of the national BMD System, the LRS&T-equipped Curtis Wilbur provided early warning and tracking of these launches. In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command noted, The United States demonstrated a credible operational missile defense capability for homeland defense. The Missile Defense Agency director later added, For the first time in U.S. history, we had the capability to defend ourselves from a long-range ballistic missile attack. Additionally, the 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 tests involving Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force guided missile destroyers demonstrated the promise of a broad-based coalition enterprise that will link several navies Aegis capabilities to address shared operational requirements. This is crucial for European Aegis BMD, as several European navies are procuring the Aegis weapon systems, presaging potential partnering opportunities for mutual self-defense and greatly enhanced interoperability.

AEGIS 1 / SaTELLITE 0

In Operation Burnt Frost, the United States had to go where no defensive missile system had gone before. In late 2007, the Department of Defense predicted that an inactive 5,000-pound U.S. reconnaissance satellite with hazardous fuel compounds on board would reenter the Earths atmosphere in a matter of weeks, posing risk of injury, death or property destruction. The President directed the U.S. Strategic Command to develop a course of action to destroy the satellite at an altitude where it would pose no hazard to population centers and other satellites in earth orbit but without generating hazardous space debris. The technical and operational challenges were significant. The school bus-size satellite was to be engaged higher and at a faster speed than any target engaged during years of testing the national BMDS and Aegis BMD systems, and the satellites hydrazine tankthe targets aim pointwas only a fraction of the overall mass of the satellite. Because of the higher closing velocities due to the satellites speed of greater than 17,000 miles per hour, a successful intercept would require longer radar and missile-seeker ranges, extended missile flight time and greater guidance accuracy. The Navys BMD warships were the assets of choice the only assets capable of destroying the satellite, reliably and efficiently.
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

Three Aegis warshipsthe USS Lake Erie (CG-70), Russell (DDG-59) and Decatur (DDG-73)were tasked to participate in the satellite shoot-down, with Lake Erie designated as the principal firing ship. Following extensive materiel, electronic and training preparations (including critical, one-time modifications to the SM-3 missiles), on February 20, 2008, Lake Erie launched a single SM-3 missile, which intercepted the satellite at an altitude higher than 150 miles and a closing speed greater than 22,000 miles per hour. The results were spectacular. The errant satellites fuel tank detonated in a brilliant flash, destroying the satellite without danger of space debris.

23

global

AEGIS GLOBAL ENtErprISE

The engagement of allied navies in the Aegis programJapan, Spain, Norway, Australia and Korea has laid the foundation for an Aegis global enterprise. The global effort began with a foreign military sales relationship with Japan, and has evolved to include a commercial relationship in Spain, a blended enterprise between the major Spanish shipyard and Lockheed Martin in Norway and an expanded relationship with Australia and Korea. The evolution of the Aegis system to an open architecture has accompanied the global migration of engagement in the Aegis effort. For example, the Australian MOD became interested in using the Aegis architecture to connect other maritime assets into an integrated architecture as well. The foundation for a global maritime security architecture has emerged with the construction and operation of allied Aegis warships. The Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) has the Aegis system on the Kongo-class destroyers and Atago-class destroyers. The Spanish Navy has the Aegis system aboard the F-100 frigates. And the Spanish success has migrated to the Norwegian and Australian navies, where Spanish shipbuilders have combined with U.S. weapons integrators to put Aegis aboard the Norwegian F-310 frigates and the Australian Navy Hobart-class destroyers. South Korea has announced plans to build six 5,600-ton KDX-IIIA Aegis-equipped destroyers beginning in 2019, to complement the three Sejon-Daewan KDX-III destroyers that will be in service by 2012. Other navies have participated directly in the U.S. flight test maritime (FTM) program. For example, the Japanese MSDF Kirishima was the first foreign warship to participate, in FTM-10 (2004), and in October 2010 the warship successfully engaged a target ballistic missile. The LCF Tromp (F 803) was the first European participant in the test program, with the ships modified SMART-L systems tracking the ballistic missile target in FTM-11. The Spanish navys Mendez Nunez (F 104), outfitted with a BMD software modification, tracked a ballistic missile target in FTM-12. And, the following ships actually launched SM-3 missiles at medium-range, separating-warhead targets with good results: Kongo (JMSDF), December 2007, hit  Chokai (JMSDF), November 2008, miss, no ship error, failure in KV end game Myoko (JMSDF), October 2009, hit Kirishima (JMSDF), October 2010, hit These tests demonstrated the promise of a broadbased coalition enterprise that will link several navies Aegis capabilities to address shared operational requirements. The success of the jointly developed JapaneseU.S. SM-3 Block 2A missile has led the U.S. Department of Defense to initiate talks with Japan aimed at urging Japan to relax its decades-long arms embargo and export the SM-3 Block 2A to other nations such as U.S. European allies.32 As the 2010 Ballistic Missile Defense Review acknowledged, Other allies already own or are working with the United States to acquire specific capabilities, such as naval vessels equipped with the Aegis defensive system that could be adapted to include a missile defense capability. A primary U.S. emphasis is on ensuring appropriate burden sharing. The Administration recognizes that allies do not view the specifics of the missile threat in the same way, and do not have equal resources to apply to this problem, but there is general recognition of a growing threat and the need to take steps now to address both existing threats and emerging ones.33 The success of Aegis BMD afloat and the promise of Aegis Ashore have also garnered interest from a wide range of non-traditional partners, such as India.34 At the end of the day, sovereign interdependence and interoperability will remain core attributes of the Aegis global enterprise. The Aegis BMD system is already well integrated and interoperable with other U.S. assets and will eventually be held to this same standard with regard to coalition operations. NATOs Active Layered Theatre Ballistic Missile Defense (ALTBMD) program has conducted tests demonstrating Shared Situational Awareness with the U.S. C2BMC system, with the ultimate goal of true C2 interoperability. The 28 NATO allies are expected to soon decide whether to connect the European allies short- and medium-range theatre missile defense systems via NATO to the U.S. longrange missile defense system. The high level of commitment to international partnership from both the United States and its allies will encourage successful interoperability initiatives. This interoperability will, in turn, ensure the success of the U.S. Phased Adaptive Approach to ballistic missile defense. Globally, in early 2011, the Aegis weapon system was deployed on 88 ships, with another 18 Aegis warships under construction or planned.

25

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

ahead

THE COurSE AHEAD

The U.S. Navy will continue to populate its current Aegis fleet with BMD via modernization and upgrades, as well as in new-construction destroyers. Plans call for the Navy to increase the number of Aegis BMD-capable ships from the 21 in early 2011, to 27 by 2012, and as many as 32 ships by 2013, as well as Aegis Ashore.35 As part of the Presidents September 2009 decision, the United States will deploy SM-3 interceptors using the sea-based Aegis BMD system, and then deploy improved SM-3s in 2015 on both ships and land.36 Rather than the ten ground-based interceptors originally envisioned in Poland, Aegis Ashore looks to deploy 40 to 50 SM-3 missiles on land, with more on board Navy BMD ships operating in nearby waters. More advanced SM-3 versions will be deployed in 2018 and yet another generation in 2020, the latter based on the U.S./Japan cooperatively developed SM-3 Block IIA, which promises significantly more capability to counter intercontinental ballistic missiles. Indeed, the new approach in Europe will also rely on a distributed network of sensors and proven SM-3 interceptors that can be fired from Aegis warships and land. This will ensure greater geographic flexibility, greater survivability and greater scalability in response to an evolving threat. Moreover, as one indication of how the Administration might fast track Aegis Ashore, in August 2010 the Missile Defense Agency announced plans to build an Aegis Ashore test site at the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii.37 Even with delivery of the innovative Aegis Ashore, sea-based BMD will remain a core element of any defense against ballistic missiles.38 The inherent flexibility and mobility of Navy BMD assets provides a missile-defense option Combatant Commanders count on as part of their defensive arsenal. Indeed, surging Aegis BMD has become standard operating procedure in any crisis where defense against ballistic missiles is needed.39 The decision to truncate the Zumwalt (DDG-1000) program at three ships and the concomitant decision to continue the Aegis destroyer program beyond the numbers originally envisioned underscores the importance of Aegis BMD for the Navy and the nation. Indeed, the Chief of Naval Operations has stated that BMD is a fundamental mission of the service. Further, recognizing the likely growth in importance of Aegis BMD, the Navy has proposed a 20-year, $10 billion program to upgrade and modernize the 2011 fleet of 84 Aegis cruisers and destroyersensuring that these ships reach service lives of 35 years, if not 40, which would be unprecedented for U.S. surface combatants. These Aegis Mod upgrades, coupled with other BMD enhancements, will be the foundation for mission success for decades to come. The broad scope of these upgrades is testimony to the long-term commitment to Aegis BMDthe Shield of the Fleetand the nationas well as U.S. friends and key allies worldwide. In 15 years, Aegis BMD has grown from its small niche in the national ballistic missile defense system to a robust, key BMD capability that has become the model for the national and international BMD. The Presidents decision to leverage Navy BMD for his Phased Adaptive Approach in Europe speaks volumes regarding the capabilities of Navy Aegis BMD. Navy BMD will continue to build a littletest a littlelearn a lot to ensure that this critical capability delivers on its past success as well as its enormous promise. Aegis BMD is and will remain ready todayat seaand on patrol with a steady focus on technical excellence and operational success in order to ensure our nations tomorrows.
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

27

footnotes
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense...At Sea On Patrol

A Historic Beginning (Washington, D.C.: Ballistic Missile Defense Agency, 2005). Peter Baker, White House Scraps Bushs Approach to Missile Shield, The New York Times, September 18, 2009. See also,  Thinking About Future Naval Ballistic Missile Defense, U.S. Naval Institute Online, September 17, 2009. 3 National Intelligence Council, Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 2008),  accessed at: www.dni.gov/nic/NIC_2025_project.html. 4 A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Navy, October 2007) and The  U.S. Navys Vision for Confronting Irregular Challenges (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Navy, 2010), pp. 1-13. See also, Ronald ORourke, Navy Irregular Warfare and Counterterrorism Operations: Background and Issues for Congress (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, September 2010), pp. 1-27. 5 Department of Defense, Ballistic Missile Defense Review Report (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, February 2010).  6 BMDR, op.cit., pp. 11-12 7 The National Security Strategy (Washington, D.C.: The White House, May 2010). 8 White House Press Release, Fact Sheet on U.S. Missile Defense Policy, A Phased Adaptive Approach for Missile Defense in  Europe, September 17, 2009; and Ronald ORourke, Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, June 2010), pp. 8-9, 36-48. 9 Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, Missile Defense Agency, at http://www.mda.mil/system/aegis_bmd.html. See also, ORourke,  Navy BMD, ibid., pp. 5-7 for a description of Aegis Ashoreas well as Aegis ships and SM-3including funding across the Future Years Defense Plan. 10 Ballistic Missile Defense Review Report, op.cit. 11 Aegis BMD, MDA at: http://www.mda.mil/system/aegis_bmd.html. 12 Peter Baker, White House Scraps Bushs Approach to Missile Shield, op.cit. 13 M. Elaine Bunn, ed., The Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, in Global Strategic Assessment 2009: Americas Security  Role in a Changing World (Washington, D.C.: National Defense University Institute for National Security Studies, 2009), pp. 162-185. 14 Jacques Gansler, Ballistic Missile Defense: Past and Future (Washington, D.C.: National Defense University, 2010), pp. viii-x.  15 Hans Binnendijk and George Stewart, Defense Horizons: Toward Missile Defenses from the Sea (Washington, D.C., National De fense University, June 2002), pp. 1-6. 16 Otto Kreisher, Bigger Shield, Seapower, December 2006, pp. 40-43.  17 Hicks, Extending the Shield: Sea-Based Ballistic Missile Defense, U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings, January 2007, pp. 56-59.  18 Hicks, Seabased Ballistic Missile Defense, Joint Forces Quarterly, Issue 50, 3rd quarter 2008, pp. 39-45.  19 Remarks by Admiral Gary Roughead, Chief of Naval Operations, at the Engineering the Total Ship Symposium,  September 26, 2008. 20 Andrew Erickson and David Yang, On the Verge of a Game Changer, U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings, May 2009,  pp. 26-33; Andrew Erickson and David Yang, Using the Land to Control the Sea: Chinese Analysts Consider the Antiship Ballistic Missile, Naval War College Review, Autumn 2009, Volume 62, Number 4, pp. 53-86; and Marshall Hoyler, Chinas Antiaccess Ballistic Missile and U.S. Active Defense, Naval War College Review, Autumn 2010, Volume 63, Number 4, pp. 84-105. 21 Admiral Willard: Chinese Anti-Ship Missile Close to Operational, Inside the Navy, August 30, 2010.  22 Leon Panetta, Interview With Jake Tapper, This Week, ABC, June 27, 2010. Accessed at: http://abcnews.go.com/  print?id=11025299. See also Bill Gertz, Inside the Ring, Washington Times, October 7, 2010 for reporting on a September 25, 2010 test of the DF-21 missile. 23 James Woolsey and Rebekah Heinrichs, Iran and the Missile Defense Imperative, Wall Street Journal, July 14, 2010.  24 Mark Thompson, The Pentagon Prepares for a Missile Attack from Iran, Time.com, December 17, 2009, for one of the  earliest open-press reports detailing the threat from short- and mid-range Iranian missiles. 25 Independent Working Group on Missile Defense, the Space Relationship & the Twenty-First Century (Washington, D.C., Institute for  Foreign Policy Analysis, 2009). 26 A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower, op.cit.  27 Quadrennial Defense Review Report, op.cit.  28 Remarks the American Society of Naval Engineers Conference, September 14, 2010.  29 Naval Engineers Journal, The Story of Aegis: Special Edition, Volume 121, Number 3, 2009, provides detailed descriptions of the  Aegis Program. 30 BMDR, op.cit., pp. 20-12.  31 Aegis BMD, MDA at: http://www.mda.mil/system/aegis_bmd.html. On the October 28, 2010 Japanese Maritime Self  Defense test, see Jim Wolf, U.S. and Japan Stage Successful Missile Defense Test, Reuters, 29 October 2010, accessed at: http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE69S0S120101029. 32 U.S. Urges Japan to Export SM-3s, Japan Times, October 25, 2009.  33 Ballistic Missile Defense Review Report, op.cit., p. 32.  34 Amy Kazmin and Farhan Bokhari, New Delhi Weighs Up US Missile Shield, Financial Times, January 8, 2009.  35 Aegis BMD, MDA at: http://www.mda.mil/system/aegis_bmd.html.  36 Lockheed: Aegis Ashore Will Use Same Technology as Aegis Afloat, Inside the Navy, November 2, 2009, and Obamas Mis sile Plan Clears Hurdle, National Journals Congress Daily PM, November 24, 2009. 37 MDA Awards Lockheed Contract for Aegis Ashore Hawaii Test Site, Inside the Navy, August 30, 2010.  38 Readiness of Warships Eyed to Meet Obamas Missile Defense Goals, Inside the Navy, October 4, 2010.  39 Hans Binnedijk, A Sensible Decision, Washington Times, September 30, 2009; David Wood, Missile Defense: Whos  Jeering Now?; and Walter Pincus, New Missile Plan Would Link Allies Radar, Other Systems,
1 2

27

Department of Defense Missile Defense Agency 7100 Defense Pentagon Washington, DC 20301-7100
Approved for Public Release 10-MDA-5934 (6 January 2011)