Register here

Author Topic: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)  (Read 20578 times)

Offline r3mu511

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #15 on: April 20, 2017, 08:43:42 pm »
^this line from the article made me laugh:

Quote
The “discrimination” in the name doesn’t mean the radar’s racist.

:P the day is going to come when SJWs will be clamping down on all the technical terminology we use in our engineering work, I sure as hell hope I'll be retired from the industry by then, lol...

Offline GTX

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2582
  • All hail the God of Frustration!!!
    • Beyond The Sprues
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #16 on: April 21, 2017, 02:16:20 pm »

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2160
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #17 on: April 21, 2017, 03:23:27 pm »
I would guess that some of the impetus for an upgraded booster is to accommodate the MIRV'd interceptors from the MOKV program.

My impression was the software selectable 2 or 3 stage burn would facilitate (along with the improved sensors) Shoot-look-shoot.

Offline DrRansom

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 512
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #18 on: April 21, 2017, 08:27:08 pm »
MDA seeks industry ideas for new GBI booster upgrade

The Missile Defense Agency is seeking ideas from industry on new booster designs for the Ground-based Interceptor, and is signaling plans for the government to be the lead systems integrator  -- supplanting an industry prime contractor -- in a project to upgrade the entire Ground-based Midcourse Defense guided missile fleet with nearly 80 booster stacks beginning in 2023.
-----------------------------------
Good news for the solid rocket motor industry along with the GBSD.

The 2012 NAS study of missile defense suggested using the KEI first stage for the missile interceptor launch. The KEI first stage would give the overall architecture a Shoot-Look-Shook ability and allow a heavier kill vehicle with better sensors.

It is sad that, only now, the missile defense agency is looking at that advice. Worse that they just aren't using the existing technology to get something done soon.

Offline bring_it_on

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1837
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #19 on: April 22, 2017, 03:32:28 am »
The latest DSB report concluded that the MDA would require approximately $2 Billion in additional annual funding to keep up with the advances in the threat. The burden of buying intercepters needs to be shifted to the services that operate the equipment and the MDA needs to concentrate on improving systems, developing capability and R&D/S&T efforts.
Old radar types never die; they just phased array - Unknown

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2160
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #20 on: April 23, 2017, 06:33:15 pm »


The 2012 NAS study of missile defense suggested using the KEI first stage for the missile interceptor launch. The KEI first stage would give the overall architecture a Shoot-Look-Shook ability and allow a heavier kill vehicle with better sensors.

It is sad that, only now, the missile defense agency is looking at that advice. Worse that they just aren't using the existing technology to get something done soon.

IIRC, the range penalty for the two-stage KEI version of GBI necessitated (at a minimum) four CONUS sites.
Then there was the cost of maintaining (in the interim) a split inventory.

I think MDA is getting most of what they need from the 2/3 stage selectable booster stack and improved discrimination.



Offline DrRansom

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 512
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #21 on: April 24, 2017, 07:37:39 pm »
IIRC, the range penalty for the two-stage KEI version of GBI necessitated (at a minimum) four CONUS sites.
Then there was the cost of maintaining (in the interim) a split inventory.

I think MDA is getting most of what they need from the 2/3 stage selectable booster stack and improved discrimination.

From what I remember of the NAS study, they said a two stage KEI would enable Shoot-Look-Shoot from Iranian and North Korean missiles, using two / three launch points. Also, do you know if the new sensor will be networked? A key point of the NAS study was that the infrared sensor of the first missile was critical to enable high quality target discrimination.

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2160
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2017, 09:54:26 pm »
IIRC, the range penalty for the two-stage KEI version of GBI necessitated (at a minimum) four CONUS sites.
Then there was the cost of maintaining (in the interim) a split inventory.

I think MDA is getting most of what they need from the 2/3 stage selectable booster stack and improved discrimination.

From what I remember of the NAS study, they said a two stage KEI would enable Shoot-Look-Shoot from Iranian and North Korean missiles, using two / three launch points. Also, do you know if the new sensor will be networked? A key point of the NAS study was that the infrared sensor of the first missile was critical to enable high quality target discrimination.

IIRC, imaging LADAR returns would be downlinked via dual-band (X and S band) datalink. 

Offline bring_it_on

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1837
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #23 on: April 29, 2017, 03:59:47 am »
MDA soliciting industry ideas for a 'transportable' Ground-based Interceptor


Quote
The Missile Defense Agency is soliciting ideas for a new variant of the Ground-based Interceptor -- one that would not be emplaced in a silo as currently utilized by the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, but moved around, presumably on the back of a heavy truck, in an effort to give commanders more flexible options to defend the nation.

On April 28, MDA published a request for information seeking industry ideas for a "transportable Ground-based Interceptor," an initiative that aims to satisfy a statutory directive for the agency to assess options for a version of the guided-missile interceptor that could be launched from multiple locations. The agency is seeking industry ideas in the form of white papers by June 2.

"MDA will use industry's technical responses to support 'evaluation of alternative GBI deployments' as directed in Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act," the solicitation, published in Federal Business Opportunities, states. MDA makes clear that the government has no plan to develop or procure such a system, and is exploring the concept because of a statutory requirement.

MDA is required to prepare a report that outlines a potential transportable GBI capability, including a "detailed program development production and deployment cost and schedule for the earliest  technically possible deployment," and comparative cost to the fixed-based GBI, according to the FY-17 act. The report is also to address technical readiness and "feasibility of a transportable ground-based interceptor as a means to deploy additional ground-based interceptors" to defend the nation against a limited ballistic missile attack.

MDA, according to the notice, will focus on "transportable" capability, not "mobile" capability, seeking ideas for a GBI that could reposition, emplace and be ready to launch "within days" as opposed to be able to do the same "within minutes."

"A 'mobile' capability also tends to drive complex operations concepts, special security requirements, mobile command, control, communications, and a level of launcher sophistication that pushes costs to unsustainable levels," MDA notes.

MDA seeks industry ideas to address questions set forth in the defense authorization act, including deployment and operating concepts; technical descriptions, enabling technologies, technical risks and relevant technical readiness levels.

MDA also wants a "rough order of magnitude" cost estimate for such a capability.

Proposed concepts "must show tangible benefits" to the Ballistic Missile Defense System and either the "potential to significantly reduce costs over fixed-site acquisition in order to increase projected GBI inventory with no loss in GMD system effectiveness" or the potential to "significantly increase effectiveness or operational utility over fixed-site capability," according to the notice.

The GMD program is designed to defend the nation against a limited attack from North Korean- or Iranian-launched intermediate- and long-range ballistic missiles by intercepting the incoming warheads midway through their flight path. In response to North Korean technical advances and provocations in 2013, the Pentagon set a goal to expand the number of fielded GBIs at Ft. Greely, AK, and Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA, from 30 to 44 by the end of 2017.

MDA, also in response to congressional direction, is exploring the idea of an East Coast GBI site as a hedge against a potential, future Iranian long-range ballistic missile threat.

Boeing is the lead industry team for GMD development, integration, testing, operation and sustainment and Northrop Grumman oversees ground system elements and supports operation and sustainment and system engineering test support. Boeing, as prime contractor, integrates a Raytheon-built exoatmospheric kill vehicle on a booster stack built by Orbital Sciences Corp.
Old radar types never die; they just phased array - Unknown

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8522
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #24 on: April 29, 2017, 06:25:55 am »
Was hoping 'mobile' as an easy conversion to a future IRBM prompt strike missile
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11230
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #25 on: April 29, 2017, 12:08:58 pm »
Was hoping 'mobile' as an easy conversion to a future IRBM prompt strike missile

"MDA, according to the notice, will focus on "transportable" capability, not "mobile" capability, seeking ideas for a GBI that could reposition, emplace and be ready to launch "within days" as opposed to be able to do the same "within minutes."

Why not just do it right?   ::)

"A 'mobile' capability also tends to drive complex operations concepts, special security requirements, mobile command, control, communications, and a level of launcher sophistication that pushes costs to unsustainable levels," MDA notes.

Funny, Russia, China, India, and even North Korea manage to make mobile missiles doable.  What is it about the North American continent that makes it unpossible?
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline bring_it_on

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1837
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #26 on: April 29, 2017, 12:40:56 pm »
I assume they want to look at this for the East coast site(s) that the Congress wants them to work on next. I think mobile vs transportable comes down to cost and the trades that entails (would you want to pay for mobility at the expense of greater number of interceptors for a finite budget for example). Wouldn't/shouldn't they look to put an LRDR on the East coast before they place interceptors there if indeed this is still the direction the Congress wants MDA to focus on?
Old radar types never die; they just phased array - Unknown

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2160
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #27 on: April 29, 2017, 04:20:15 pm »
KEI (as originally envisioned) would have split the difference with about a three hour emplacement time.

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8522
Re: Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
« Reply #28 on: April 29, 2017, 04:36:25 pm »
KEI (as originally envisioned) would have split the difference with about a three hour emplacement time.
A couple hundred on Guam with a SWERVE on top in a super hardened 'dense pack' would work for me.......  :o
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8522
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot