By Davis Florick
Russia and China are quickly developing robust hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV) programs intended to coerce the United States (U.S.), allies, and partners. In recent years, Moscow’s and Beijing’s HGV testing programs have significantly outpaced Washington’s comparable program. Russia and China have prioritized these programs, believing that HGV capabilities can easily overcome U.S., allied, and partner defenses. Therefore, both are working to attain a coercive and debilitating capability. Exacerbating the problem, Moscow and Beijing have reportedly broached the possibility of arming HGVs with conventional or nuclear munitions thus complicating how the U.S., allies, and partners might handle a crisis situation. Russia’s and China’s races to field HGVs make imperative a U.S. response which includes more modern missile defenses and sufficient response options.
HGV technology could be a revolutionary transformation overriding existing ballistic and cruise missile capabilities. Traveling at hypersonic speeds, HGVs reduce the defending party’s response time. In addition to improved speed, their considerable mobility and range allow HGVs to overcome or circumvent existing missile defense systems. On one hand, even if an HGV is within range of current missile defense interceptors, its speed and agility will challenge the computing programs used to plot the course for an interceptor. On the other hand, missile defense sensors and interceptors are often intended to defend against threats from one direction. HGVs could have the range to approach targets from a wider series of azimuths, negating current missile defenses. Collectively, when compared to traditional intercontinental ballistic missiles, the advantages provided by HGVs give them a greater penetration capability. This would reduce the necessary force employment package for a potential adversary to achieve the same objectives in a limited employment scenario. Particularly for the first state to develop HGVs, it will likely be an effective coercive instrument.
Russia is fast approaching an operational HGV capability. In recent years it has tested an HGV, the “Avangard,” as the vehicle for a modified SS-19 intercontinental-range ballistic missile (ICBM), the SS-X-19 Mod-4. While Avangard has reportedly been tested with a modified SS-19, Russian officials have hinted that it will be fielded on the Sarmat – Russia’s new heavy ICBM, expected to be fielded by 2020. Russia is also apparently developing an air-launched hypersonic cruise missile, the Kinzhal. It was reportedly tested using a MiG-31 as the launch platform in early March. Armed with these capabilities, President Putin has explicitly stated he intends to threaten the U.S., allies, and partners.
To date, China’s HGV program has been concentrated in ground-launched capabilities. Its prototype HGV apparently is the WU-14, also known as the DF-ZF. In theory, Beijing could use the WU-14, or a modified version, on multiple ballistic missile systems. Diversifying delivery vehicles could, for instance, allow China to make use of more affordable shorter range systems while also putting multiple HGVs on its ICBMs. In recent months, it has reportedly conducted multiple HGV tests with the DF-17, a medium-range ballistic missile with an estimated range between 1,800-2,500 kilometers. Similar to Russia’s Sarmat ICBM, China’s developmental DF-41, with a range of at least 12,000 km, may be able to carry multiple WU-14 HGVs. China’s emerging HGV program threatens not only the U.S. but also states such as Japan and India.
The U.S. HGV program stands in sharp contrast to Russian and Chinese efforts. Unlike Moscow and Beijing, Washington has taken longer to develop a robust HGV program – possibly delaying naming a lead Service until 2020 – and has focused its projects only on conventional capabilities. As a result, the Air Force, Army, Navy, and the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) have each tested HGV concepts. The Navy, building on prior Army testing, conducted the U.S.’s most recent test in November 2017 and is attempting to develop an intermediate range capability that could be launched from a submarine or surface vessel. Meanwhile, the Air Force and DARPA are working on an air-launched missile, the X-51. It would use a booster to accelerate to Mach 4.5 and the HGV, armed with a scramjet, would then exceed such speeds. Given the multiple efforts underway, Congress has attempted to focus work by directing that an “early operational” capability be produced by 2022.
Moscow and Beijing are likely racing to field HGV capabilities in the hope that they can be a central component in a strategy to coerce Washington, its allies, and its partners. Russian and Chinese officials regularly threaten their neighbors, believing this could separate them from the U.S.. Given that HGVs can easily overcome current missile defense capabilities, if Russia and China can master HGV technology, they would possess a highly provocative and effective coercive capability. Vladimir Putin has already threatened U.S. allies and partners with HGVs – a modification to his nuclear threats–in his March 2018 speech to the Duma. He specifically targeted European states that have supported U.S. missile defense efforts in an attempt to intimidate and coerce those most willing to cooperate with the U.S.. While Chinese officials are less likely to publicly threaten their neighbors with missile strikes, territorial incursions against Japan, India, Vietnam and others are clear signs that Beijing seeks to intimidate those most willing and able to cooperate with the U.S..
In response to Russian and Chinese HGV programs, the U.S. must modernize its missile defense capabilities and develop additional response options. Enhancing missile defense requires improvements in two areas. First, the transformation from traditional ballistic missiles reentry vehicles to HGVs will likely necessitate improvements to the software used to track incoming trajectories and plan intercept courses. Second, intercepting missiles in the initial launching phase mitigates the value of fast, long-ranging, and highly maneuverable HGVs. This will require a new emphasis on overhead capabilities, such as directed energy. Additionally, should deterrence fail, and a potential adversary begins launching missiles, the U.S. must possess a range of response options. This will likely come via air-, ground-, and sea-launched capabilities with an emphasis on responsiveness, to one day include HGV systems. Expanding and modernizing missile defense capabilities and response options is necessary given the highly provocative and dangerous technologies Russia and China are now vigorously pursuing.
The possibilities for HGVs represent a significant leap in missile technology. Representing a quantum leap over the speed, maneuverability, and range of existing capabilities, HGVs provide a substantial advantage over current missile defense systems. Until defensive systems can meet the technological advancements HGVs present, the likelihood of successful employment with of HGVs will be very high. Particularly should Russia and China field HGVs well in advance of the U.S., Moscow and Beijing will possess a valuable employment option that could threaten the U.S., allies, and partners in new ways. As a result, the U.S. must expand and modernize its missile defense capabilities and response options to negate the advantages Russia and China seek.
Davis Florick is a James A. Kelly non-resident fellow with the Pacific Forum and a senior fellow with the Human Security Centre.
The views in this Information Series are those of the authors and should not be construed as official U.S. Government policy, the official policy of the National Institute for Public Policy or any of its sponsors. For additional information about this publication or other publications by the National Institute Press, contact: Editor, National Institute Press, 9302 Lee Highway, Suite 750 |Fairfax, VA 22031 | (703) 293-9181 |www.nipp.org. For access to previous issues of the National Institute Press Information Series, please visit http://www.nipp.org/national-institute-press/information-series/.
High Speed Strike Weapon (Photo courtesy of Lockheed Martin)
Military.com 22 Apr 2018 By Oriana Pawlyk
If the great Space Race that began in the 1950s helped define technologies that would take satellites and mankind into space, a new kind of global competition today will define technologies that move at more than five times the speed of sound.
The U.S. Air Force this week awarded Lockheed Martin Corp. a contract to develop a prototype hypersonic cruise missile, or the Hypersonic Conventional Strike Weapon. The project -- one of two hypersonic weapon prototyping efforts the service is pursuing -- could cost as much as $928 million over the course of its lifetime.
The award comes as Pentagon officials say they fear the U.S. may be lagging behind in hypersonics, while rivals Russia and China have made hypersonic technologies national programs of record and have made recent advances. Like nuclear weapons, officials have said speedy weapons can act as deterrents, as well as game changers, in responding to conflict from hundreds of miles away.
"The Air Force is using prototyping to explore the art of the possible and to advance these technologies to a capability as quickly as possible," spokeswoman Ann Stefanek said in a statement.
The service did not specify a timeline for the contract, as "funds are not obligated on this contract vehicle until task orders are issued and awarded," Stefanek said on Wednesday.
Aside from additional concepts underway from the Air Force Research Lab and DARPA, the Air Force is also setting funds aside for its Air Launched Rapid Response Weapon, known as "Arrow." According to the fiscal 2019 budget request, the Air Force is asking for roughly $260 million for the Arrow experiment.
'IT JUST MEANS IT GOES FAST'
One company that specializes in rockets, engines, missiles and spacecraft has been rapidly prototyping a variety of concepts in hopes of gaining more footing in the hypersonics game.
Aerospace and defense tech company Orbital ATK has in recent months tested a partially 3-D printed hypersonics warhead and a 3-D printed supersonic combustion ramjet, or scramjet, engine part.
The company deemed both to be successful, and is waiting until the Defense Department chooses what type of weapons it may someday want to procure.
In its research and development phase, Orbital has been designing a hypersonic warhead to start preparing for "that day when somebody will want a hypersonic" mission, said Bart Olson, vice president of strategy and business development for Orbital ATK's defense group.
"They went from design to production to test in 60 days," said Michael Kahn, president of Orbital ATK's defense systems group.
In late March, the company for the first time tested a 50-pound warheadpartially made with additive manufacturing, known as 3-D printing.
With the help of 3-D printing, engineers can work faster and make parts much more cheaply, Olson and Kahn said. Military.com sat down with both executives on April 10 during the annual Sea-Air-Space conference in National Harbor, Maryland.
"Three-D printing is a big deal for us, especially from the engineering perspective because you can design something ... that you can't build with conventional machines," Kahn said.
The challenges for any weapon going beyond Mach 5 speeds has been to prevent overheating and control how the weapon strikes a target, Kahn said.
Olson said its common to tailor the warhead to the effects needed. But in hypersonics, there's more of an emphasis on fragmentation at such high speeds.
Depending on launch platform -- air, land or sea -- the company is testing payloads from as small as 7 inches to 40 inches in diameter.
"We're involved in the entire tradespace," Olson said.
The 'secret sauce' to hypersonics? Their engines and propulsion, they say.
"We've been building hypersonic engines for many years, for NASA, the Air Force," Olson said. "We currently hold the record for the fastest air-breathing demonstration in history, which was a Mach 10-plus."
"We have motors that come in all shapes and sizes," he continued. "On the propulsion front, we've had numerous tests of solid propellant solutions and ... on the air-breathing side, all across the spectrum of need."
Kahn added how it's propelled shouldn't matter. "Hypersonics just means it goes fast," he said.
In January, the company announced a partnership with DARPA to study a possible integration of turbine and hypersonic engine technologies under DARPA's Advanced Full Range Engine (AFRE) program.
Orbital said they're encouraged by recent commentary from Mike Griffin, undersecretary of defense for research and engineering, who has zeroed in on hypersonics, but also other emerging technologies in an era where Russia and China continue to make vast strides ahead of the U.S.
The U.S.'s "earlier research work in hypersonic systems development was basically what our adversaries have used to field their own systems," Griffin told lawmakers this week.
"It is time for us to renew our emphasis on and funding of these areas in a coordinated way across the department, to develop systems which can be based on land for conventional prompt strike, can be based at sea, and later on can be based on aircraft," he said during a House Armed Services committee hearing on innovation.
There has been more of an "energy from DoD" to get hypersonics involved in major systems beyond just design phases, Kahn said.
"Up until now there's been a lot of design, a lot of testing, not a lot of fielding," Kahn said.
Olson added, "We're very encouraged by ... the new philosophy from new leadership to go on past it."
-- Oriana Pawlyk can be reached at oriana.pawlyk@military.com. Follow her on Twitter ar @oriana0214.
No comments:
Post a Comment