Under the terms of the contract, Lockheed Martin Space
Systems, based in Denver, CO, is responsible for management of the design,
development, procurement and testing of systems to target ballistic missile
threats. The targets developed under the auspices of the program will test the
effectiveness of the missile defense components currently in development.
The program specifically tests the ability of the primary
technologies in question, including the Airborne Laser, Kinetic Energy
Interceptor, Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD), Aegis Ballistic Missile
Defense, Patriot Advanced Capability 3 and Theater High Altitude Area Defense
(THAAD), to destroy incoming ballistic missiles at various points in their
flight paths.
Reavis could not discuss how Lockheed Martin would address
specific components of the missile defense system due to the classified nature
of the work, but he did elaborate on some of the general approaches planned by
Lockheed Martin.
“The contract, over a period of time, is to basically
accomplish two or three things,” Reavis explained. The first goal is to provide
overall management services for the contract, as covered by the amount of the
initial four-year award. Reavis added that Lockheed Martin must also “use the
system engineering process of spiral development for new technologies, meaning
a flexible, on-time, affordable target set for the MDA.
“Instead of having a great multitude of targets out there,
they want to strengthen the number of targets they have available where they
can be robust, cost-effective and available on time,” he said. “There will be
increased complex systems development in this contract as the requirements come
from the MDA. We receive our requirements from the MDA.”
In response to questions from an industry day briefing on April 4, 2003, MDA-TC announced that it “is moving away from developing prototype
solutions for individual Element tests.” Instead, the directorate seeks to
acquire or develop a small number of products to test each line of defense.
The directorate further said it would like to find solutions
that could be integrated and launched quickly to meet all of its target
requirements. The MDA has been testing the GMD system at Fort Greely, AK, in
recent months, but Reavis declined to comment as to exactly where Lockheed
Martin first expects to examine targets and countermeasures.
“We will be developing systems wherever MDA requires them to
be developed,” Reavis said. “That is yet to be determined.”
What Should a Target Look Like?
Over the past several years, critics have charged that the
targets and countermeasures deployed by the MDA did not represent the true
capabilities of an enemy ballistic missile attack. In June 2002, Philip Coyle,
assistant secretary of defense and director, operational test and evaluation
from 1994 to 2001, wrote in the Washington Post, “Up to now, the target cluster
has consisted of a mock re-entry vehicle—simulating an enemy warhead—and
various countermeasures or decoys.
“So far, the decoys have been round balloons, which do not
look at all like the target re-entry vehicle. The latest test, last March, had
three such balloons; all the earlier flight intercept tests had just one.”
Reavis acknowledged the concerns of past efforts but
affirmed that Lockheed Martin would manage the targets prime contract to
produce an increasingly complex system of “capabilities-based” targets and
countermeasures in an effort to meet MDA task orders.
Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin has established a program office
in the Crystal City complexes of Arlington, VA, to provide quick physical
access to MDA.
Structure
Lockheed Martin has also opened offices in Huntsville, AL,
and Albuquerque, NM, in support of the targets and countermeasures program. A
great deal of work on targets and countermeasures occurs in Huntsville, home to
the Army’s Redstone Arsenal and Space and Missile Defense Command, which houses
several military missile commands, and the Air Force’s Detachment 12, Space and
Missile Systems Center, at Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque, NM.
Offices previously established by the company in Sunnyvale, CA,
and its space systems headquarters in Denver will also support the targets and
countermeasures office. Lockheed Martin estimates that it will dedicate about
250 people to the effort, across all locations, on a full-time basis.
Lockheed Martin has recruited a team of partners, including
the following, to provide the company with technical advice on orders received
from MDA: Battelle Memorial Institute, Colombus, OH; Booz Allen Hamilton Inc.,
McLean, VA; Dynetics Inc., Huntsville; Honeywell International Inc.,
Morristown, NJ; InSys LLC, UK; International Launch Services, a joint venture
of Lockheed Martin and the Russian Khrunichev Space Center; ITT Industries
Inc., White Plains, NY; Millennium Space Systems, Los Angeles; Space and
Missile Defense Technologies, Huntsville; Teledyne Brown Engineering, Los
Angeles; Titan Corp., San Diego; and Toyon Research Corp. Goleta, CA.
“Those subcontractors are not hardware suppliers per se for
us,” Reavis emphasized. “We are using these people for technical advice and
management.”
Reavis said that if any of the advisors do provide hardware
or other assistance to the contract, it would be after a fair and open
competition. When it receives a requirement under the contract, Lockheed Martin
will first confirm if the requirement is part of an ongoing system. If it is,
the prime contractor will go to the company that provides that ongoing system.
If the requirement is new, Reavis vows that Lockheed Martin will hold a competition
for the task.
“We will run an open and fair competition across the
industry to see what is the best value—to MDA—to perform that specific task,”
he said. “It quite possibly might not be Lockheed Martin. It will be an open
and fair competition across the board.”
Lockheed Martin won the targets and countermeasures contract
with stiff competition from other large systems integrators like Northrop
Grumman and Raytheon. Reavis said the competition for the December 9, 2003, contract award grew out of a white paper that Lockheed Martin drafted about four
years ago. The white paper examined the feasibility of a targets prime contract
for MDA. Lockheed Martin executives examined the paper then transmitted it to
MDA for consideration. The idea eventually blossomed into a competitive bid.
Work performed by Lockheed Martin previously for MDA served
as strong past performance in its response to the targets and countermeasures
request for proposals (RFP), Reavis said. The company has performed some past
work specifically for the targets and countermeasures staff in Huntsville.
Lockheed Martin also created the Multi-Service Launch System
(MSLS) Vehicle for missile defense under a contract awarded in May 1992.
Utilizing the rocket boosters of the retired Minuteman II missile, the MSLS
vehicle served as a target vehicle for missile defense experiments. The program
tested payloads up to 1,450 pounds in weight for distances of up to 4,200 miles
away. Lockheed Martin could utilize MSLS or parts of the program in response to
future requirements if it fulfilled them.
In a statement of objectives received by competing
contractors on March 28, 2003, MDA-TC stated its intent for the prime contract
to develop target systems, which it defined as those products formed from the integration
of boosters, payload reentry vehicles and countermeasures, and instrumentation.
In the RFP, MDA-TC agreed that the prime contractor might recycle past products
developed for certain missions if they meet the specifications of future
requirements.
Indeed, MDA-TC revealed that “certain target missions” will
require the incorporation of “target components and payloads designed and built
by the national labs and/or federally funded research and development centers.”
As such, MDA-TC anticipated the prime contractor would form a close working
relationship with the national laboratories.
The RFP also directs the contractor to “use, where possible,
the existing range, logistics and instrumentation support capabilities at all
Government ranges and facilities, including but not limited to Hill AFB, Reagan
Test Site, Wake Island, White Sands Missile Range, Fort Wingate, Vandenberg
AFB, Pacific Missile Range Facility, Wallops Flight Facility, Kodiak [at Fort
Greely], Western Range and Poker Flat Research Range.”
MDA-TC placed the annual costs of the contract at $400
million to $500 million per year during an industry day briefing on July 24, 2002. In a slide presentation, MDA-TC said it was proud of its successful target
flight history to date but warned that the multiple contracts to be managed by
the prime contractor would result in an increase in flight test tempo and
growth of target capabilities.
The directorate also noted it was concerned that the its
industrial base may become saturated. In a mission description dated July 2003,
MDA reported that TC had launched more than 120 targets to date.
In response to contractor questions, MDA-TC added that
certain sample tasks included in the RFP might become actual task awards upon
award of the contract or within several months after the award. The RFP
indicates that a secret-clearance package lists about half a dozen sample tasks
and several products, but that list was supplied only to those bidding
contractors who met release requirements.
MDA-TC notes, in the RFP, that target efforts predating the
contract award would transfer to the new prime contractor where appropriate.
Most of these orders should run to completion with the expiration of their
contracts.
However, the directorate anticipated the new prime contractor
would address “near-term emerging target requirements,” imagined to resemble
“those currently met by existent target systems, such as the Long Range Air
Launch Target, Short Range Air Launch Target and the Target Launch Vehicle.”
Lockheed Martin may also assume responsibility for new development represented
by the Multi-Mode Medium Range Target and Short Range Liquid Fuel Target
System.
The prime contract awarded to Lockheed Martin replaced
several contracts that would down before it began. For example, the
Consolidated Theater Targets Services (CTTS) contract expired in 2003, leaving
all efforts that would have performed under CTTS to be performed under the
targets prime contract.
Meanwhile, the Air Force continues to support the Orbital
Suborbital Program (OSP) 2 contract. Orbital Sciences Corp. manages many of the
Air Force’s needs for launch vehicles within OSP-2.
Vicious Circle
Which came first - the target, the countermeasure or the
interceptor? The developmental cycle never ends. Just when one countermeasure
is developed, a new system to defeat that countermeasure is being designed and
then comes the newest countermeasure.
The need for targets that authentically replicate the
movement and actions of inbound missile threats is important. Tactical
ballistic missiles, with differing terminal velocities and flight telemetry,
have provided historical data, as have tests against various targets systems to
date. MDA is now moving aggressively to develop more true-to-form targets that
will able to mimic what threats are expected in the future and how target
countermeasures may affect interceptor vehicles and tracking systems. The key
is a targets and countermeasures program that is open architectured in such a
way to grow each time the threat environment does.