US Hypersonics - Prompt Global Strike Capability

[bobbymike]

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/pacom-chief-inf-treaty-degraded-u-s-edge-chinese-missile-technology/

The United States has fallen behind Chinese ground-based missile development due to a decades-old arms control treaty with Russia, threatening America's edge in future wars against Beijing, the top U.S. military commander in the Pacific warned Thursday.

"We are at a disadvantage with regard to China today in the sense that China has ground-based ballistic missiles that threaten our basing in the western Pacific and our ships," Pacific Command chief Adm. Harry Harris told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"We have no ground-based capability that can threaten China because of, among other things, our rigid adherence, and rightfully so, to the treaty that we sign onto, the INF treaty," he said, using the acronym for the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

Has he been reading my posts??

 

[Airplane]

Complete Article - https://www.scribd.com/document/373233297/DOD-Flies-Experimental-Hypersonic-Payload

The new glide vehicle was a scaled down version of the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon which successfully flew the same route in 2011 in the U.S. military's only successful boost-glide hypersonic flight test to date.

*&^%$#@ . . . there were several successful tests of intercontinental-range glide vehicles from the 1960s through the 1980s. A little weak on the research, methinks, Jason old buddy.

You have to keep the engineering talent pool warm by doing exercises like this to maintain first hand experience and knowledge.

 

[marauder2048]

Complete Article - https://www.scribd.com/document/373233297/DOD-Flies-Experimental-Hypersonic-Payload

The new glide vehicle was a scaled down version of the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon which successfully flew the same route in 2011 in the U.S. military's only successful boost-glide hypersonic flight test to date.

*&^%$#@ . . . there were several successful tests of intercontinental-range glide vehicles from the 1960s through the 1980s. A little weak on the research, methinks, Jason old buddy.

You have to keep the engineering talent pool warm by doing exercises like this to maintain first hand experience and knowledge.

Were any of those tests in the 60s through the 80s end-to-end? That seems to be the distinguishing feature of FE-1.

 

[marauder2048]

Were any of those tests in the 60s through the 80s end-to-end? That seems to be the distinguishing feature of FE-1.

End-to-end in what sense?

I'm abusing DOD's standard definition but:

Operationally relevant maneuvers, design-for-manufacturability/reliability components and a live-warhead.

 

[bring_it_on]

Lockheed Ship-Killer Could Show Path To Hypersonic Missiles

......“The transition of Lrasm from Darpa to the Navy has worked well and is a model we could follow,” says Frank St. John, executive vice president of Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control (MFC), which developed the anti-ship missile.

MFC is already working with Lockheed’s Skunk Works, which is under contract to Darpa and AFRL to begin flight testing two different air-launched high-speed missiles in 2019; the unpowered Tactical Boost Glide (TBG) and scramjet-powered Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept (HAWC). Lockheed is the sole contractor on TBG, while Raytheon is also working on HAWC.

MFC is providing boosters for the Skunk Works missiles and will perform aircraft integration, sensor and testing work once they transition from demonstrations to tactical missile programs. “We have also invited our production folks in, so they can build limited quantities and it will not be a do-over” when the missiles enter production, he says.

.
.
.
.

The Air Force has already begun working to transition the TBG, awarding the Skunk Works a contract under its existing agreement with Darpa to build operational prototypes of the follow-on Airborne Rapid-Response Weapon (ARRW) for flight testing in 2022-23. ARRW is running about two years behind TBG, he says, “and MFC is very involved in it.”

 

[bring_it_on]

National Hypersonics Initiative Gets Green Light

AUSTIN, Texas — A much talked about initiative to help the U.S. catch up in hypersonics technology with its rivals is moving ahead, a senior Defense Department official said March 20.

“There will be an effort to focus on hypersonics, whether it is an initiative or whatever. It is going to be a deliberate investment. And you will see that in the '19 budget with DARPA and the Air Force,” Mary Miller, who is performing the duties of the assistant secretary of defense for research and engineering, told National Defense.

“We have a plan — a strategy for a national hypersonics initiative — that includes NASA as a key component,” Miller told the audience at the National Defense Industrial Association's Science and Engineering Technology conference in Austin, Texas.

Miller’s boss, the new undersecretary of defense for research and engineering Michael Griffin, said hypersonics is his No. 1 technical priority, and he is quickly moving ahead to put together an initiative. Griffin was the former NASA administrator.

The possibility of a national hypersonics initiative was first mentioned publicly earlier this month by Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Director Steven Walker on the same day Russia announced that it had developed new hypersonic weapons,

About a year ago, DARPA leaders met with then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Bob Work and “laid out where we thought the U.S. was in hypersonics and where we thought some of our peer competitors were in hypersonics, and really tried to convince the department that we need a national initiative in this area,” Walker told reporters March 1 during a meeting in Washington, D.C.

Walker’s office carried this thinking forward as the Pentagon built its fiscal year 2019 budget request, he noted.

“We did push for a very comprehensive initiative in the budget process this fall,” he said. “We did receive a budget increase at DARPA and in the services to do more hypersonics. I don’t think we got everything we wanted but it was a good first step.”

The fiscal blueprint calls for DARPA to receive $257 million for its hypersonics efforts in 2019, a 136 percent increase over the 2018 request, according to an agency spokesman.

Meanwhile, Moscow plans to deploy a new Avangard strategic missile system equipped with a hypersonic glide vehicle no later than 2019, Russian news agency TASS reported last week.

Griffin “is very determined to get not only offensive hypersonics in play, but defensive hypersonics in play,” Miller said.

She acknowledged that rivals have surpassed U.S. capabilities in the still developing technology, and they may have borrowed some U.S. ideas.

“This is an area where we have seen our adversaries exceed our ability where we were leading the charge for awhile. We slowed down. We thought we had it made. We had time to do this and then we got a little distracted by a war for a good number of years. And they moved ahead,” she said. “They moved ahead by leveraging everything they could get that we had done and proceeding from there,” she said without mentioning the name of the country.

“They were essentially a fast follower, and then they have taken it well beyond where we are currently. We are catching up and are at par in some areas. We just need to do more of this,” she added. “We need to certainly get it out faster.”

 

[flateric]

Finding that concept here and there mostly in DARPA XS-1 related papers where XS-1 is described as a potential test platform for TSW (Tactical Strike Weapon?)
Retractable wings looks just like those on Martin Astroplane.

Following traces are just my speculation:
https://www.activistpost.com/2012/02/battlefield-illusion-darpa-working.html

DARPA’s budget request for the Fiscal Year of 2013 includes a whopping $2.82 billion in spending – all of which we don’t have, and thus will just serve to sink the United States further into the black hole of debt – and even includes increased spending on the Collaborative Hypersonic Research (CHR) program which is intended to demonstrate the capability of a boost-glide vehicle as the predecessor to a tactical strike weapon capable of long-range attacks from a 21-inch or larger booster.

 

[bobbymike]

Do you have the full presentations for each? Thanks in advance

 

[bobbymike]

From Air Force Association

Hyten: No Way to Defend From Hypersonics, Only Deterrence­

The US cannot defend itself against hypersonic weapons that are rapidly in development in both Russia and China, and instead can only deter, the head of US Strategic Command warned lawmakers Tuesday. STRATCOM boss Air Force Gen. John Hyten told the Senate Armed Services Committee that both countries are placing a heavy emphasis on hypersonic weapons, a threat the US missile defense system does not have an answer for. “Our defense is our deterrent capability,” he said. “We don’t have any defense that could deny the deployment of those weapons against us.” Hyten’s comments came shortly after the release of both the Defense Department’s budget request, and the Pentagon’s new Nuclear Posture Review, both of which focus heavily on modernizing the deterrent, including more development of the Air Force’s next generation B-21 bomber, the long-range standoff weapon, and possibly the development of a new, low-yield submarine launched cruise missile. All of these steps are specifically “in response to a threat” from countries such as Russia and China, or rogue states like North Korea and Iran.—Brian Everstine

 

[jsport]

From Air Force Association

Hyten: No Way to Defend From Hypersonics, Only Deterrence­

The US cannot defend itself against hypersonic weapons that are rapidly in development in both Russia and China, and instead can only deter, the head of US Strategic Command warned lawmakers Tuesday. STRATCOM boss Air Force Gen. John Hyten told the Senate Armed Services Committee that both countries are placing a heavy emphasis on hypersonic weapons, a threat the US missile defense system does not have an answer for. “Our defense is our deterrent capability,” he said. “We don’t have any defense that could deny the deployment of those weapons against us.” Hyten’s comments came shortly after the release of both the Defense Department’s budget request, and the Pentagon’s new Nuclear Posture Review, both of which focus heavily on modernizing the deterrent, including more development of the Air Force’s next generation B-21 bomber, the long-range standoff weapon, and possibly the development of a new, low-yield submarine launched cruise missile. All of these steps are specifically “in response to a threat” from countries such as Russia and China, or rogue states like North Korea and Iran.—Brian Everstine

"Hyten: No Way to Defend From Hypersonics, Only Deterrence­"

is everyone sure that is the case.

 

[flateric]

Do you have the full presentations for each? Thanks in advance

Updated post, see attachments.

 

[sferrin]

From Air Force Association

Hyten: No Way to Defend From Hypersonics, Only Deterrence­

The US cannot defend itself against hypersonic weapons that are rapidly in development in both Russia and China, and instead can only deter, the head of US Strategic Command warned lawmakers Tuesday. STRATCOM boss Air Force Gen. John Hyten told the Senate Armed Services Committee that both countries are placing a heavy emphasis on hypersonic weapons, a threat the US missile defense system does not have an answer for. “Our defense is our deterrent capability,” he said. “We don’t have any defense that could deny the deployment of those weapons against us.” Hyten’s comments came shortly after the release of both the Defense Department’s budget request, and the Pentagon’s new Nuclear Posture Review, both of which focus heavily on modernizing the deterrent, including more development of the Air Force’s next generation B-21 bomber, the long-range standoff weapon, and possibly the development of a new, low-yield submarine launched cruise missile. All of these steps are specifically “in response to a threat” from countries such as Russia and China, or rogue states like North Korea and Iran.—Brian Everstine

I don't believe that for five seconds. The whole purpose of UpSTAGE, back in the day, was to go after maneuvering hypersonic targets in the atmosphere. It can be done if they do the work. Deterrence is great and all but what do you do if it fails? Do you lay your head on the block or put up a fight? I'd prefer the latter. Furthermore, abandoning the field will merely embolden a potential adversary and reduce the deterrent value of what you already have. Most of "deterrence" is putting uncertainty in the other party's mind. Defenses do that.

 

[bring_it_on]

Pentagon advisory panel calls for establishment of near-term hypersonic defense capability

An influential Pentagon advisory board has recommended the U.S. military quickly develop and field an interim capability to defeat hypersonic weapon threats, launching a program to develop a defensive capability against a new-class of ultra-high-speed strike systems that are the focus of an race between Washington, Beijing and Moscow.

Missile Defense Agency Director Lt. Gen. Sam Greaves previewed findings of the not-yet-public Defense Science Board's 2017 summer study on hypersonic strike weapons in written testimony prepared for the Senate Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee on March 21.

Greaves said the Pentagon's $120 million request in fiscal year 2019 to advance the new-start hypersonic defense program MDA launched in FY-18 at congressional direction carries out the DSB's advice.

"This effort will execute the Defense Science Board’s recommendations to develop and deliver a set of materiel solutions to address and defeat hypersonic threats informed by a set of near-term technology demonstrations," Greaves wrote.

The DSB study on Countering Anti-Access Systems With Longer Range and Standoff Capabilities is not yet public; an unclassified summary of the final report is expected as soon as April, according to Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. Michelle Baldanza.

Last summer, the Defense Intelligence Ballistic Missile Analysis Committee in collaboration with the Air Force's National Air and Space Intelligence Center identified hypersonic glide vehicles -- being developed by Russia and China to penetrate U.S. ballistic missile defenses -- as an "emerging threat." For a decade, the U.S. military has been developing technologies to support an intermediate-range hypersonic strike weapon; the Pentagon plans to identify a formal acquisition program for an offensive capability in 2020.

Meantime, MDA -- established in 2004 to focus primarily on ballistic and cruise missile threats -- is now leading the new effort to develop a fledgling program to counter hypersonic boost glide threats. Intercontinental ballistic missiles move at hypersonic speeds -- 20 times the speed of sound -- on trajectories that are predictable.

Hypersonic boost glide weapons fly a different path. After being lifted by rocket near the edge of the atmosphere, the experimental payload separates from its booster rocket near space and flies a flatter, non-ballistic trajectory, gliding unpowered at speeds of at least Mach 5 to its destination. Their ability to maneuver gives this potential new class of weapons the ability to penetrate current air defenses.

The new hypersonic defense program, according to Greaves, consists of a number of efforts, including systems engineering and efforts to "identify and mature the full kill-chain technology" to counter hypersonic threats. MDA is looking for "target-of-opportunity events" and execute near-term, "space-sensor technology and multidomain command-and-control capability upgrades to address defense from hypersonic threats."

"An integrated set of enhancements will provide incremental capability measured by progress and knowledge points in the following areas: establishment of systems engineering needs and requirements to identify alternative material solutions; execution of a series of sensor technology demonstrations; modification of existing BMDS sensors and the C2BMC element for hypersonic threats; and definition of weapon concepts and investments in key technologies to enable a broad set of solutions, including kinetic and non-kinetic means," according to Greaves.

MDA is currently conducting an analysis of alternatives to explore potential materiel solutions for a hypersonic defense capability. That analysis, often a precursor to a major weapons program, is running behind schedule.

The FY-18 omnibus appropriations act cut MDA's $75 million request to launch the hypersonic defense program to $60 million, peeling back $15 million because the funding was "Early to need pending completion of analysis of alternatives." The FY-18 budget request anticipated the AOA being complete this spring; the FY-19 budget request anticipates the AOA being complete this summer.

 

[sferrin]

THAAD-ER would be a good place to start.

 

[bring_it_on]

I think they will be looking at broader capability insertion across the IAMD architecture. There are just 7-9 THAAD units currently planned so you cannot have it everywhere and this is something that can be easily exploited by an adversary looking at more tactical use of these systems which is bound to happen. You would almost have to get this capability down to the Patriot level if not eventually down to IFPC (cruise missile defense extending out to hypersonic weapons as well). But first the Patriot needs to get a sensor capable to track and engage in the 360 degrees which the Army has tried to get for what 2-2.5 decades now but so far has not succeeded.

 

[bobbymike]

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/380364-china-russia-eclipse-us-in-hypersonic-missiles-prompting-fears

Russia and China are outpacing the United States in the development of super-fast missile technology, Pentagon officials and key lawmakers are warning.

Russia says it successfully tested a so-called hypersonic missile this month, while China tested a similar system last year expected to enter service soon.

“Right now, we’re helpless,” Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in advocating for more investment in hypersonics, along with missile defense.

Hypersonics are generally defined as missiles that can fly more than five times the speed of sound.

When you remember what we were doing in the late 50's and 60's this is pretty sad. :'(

 

[marauder2048]

There's a programmatic aspect to Hyten's remarks; MDA has been given the mandate (statutorily by Congress) to develop
defenses against hypersonic weapons which bypassed STRATCOM's role in prioritizing capabilities.

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/27/politics/general-hyten-hypersonic-weapon-threat/index.html

Washington (CNN)In a series of unusually candid remarks, the US general in charge of the nation's nuclear arsenal has issued a stark warning that Russia and China are "aggressively" developing new high-speed, or hypersonic, weapons that the US currently has no defense against.
The weapons might not be operational for several years, but Gen. John Hyten, the four-star head of US Strategic Command, is warning that changes to missile defenses are urgently needed or the US will be unable to detect them when they are operational.

"China has tested hypersonic capabilities. Russia has tested. We have as well. Hypersonic capabilities are a significant challenge," Hyten told CNN in an exclusive interview. "We are going to need a different set of sensors in order to see the hypersonic threats. Our adversaries know that."

Hyten and other military officials say the current generation of missile detecting satellites and radars won't be enough to detect these new generation weapons. Hypersonic is generally defined as a speed of Mach 5 or over 3,806 miles per hour.

 

[bobbymike]

https://carnegieendowment.org/2018/04/02/hypersonic-weapons-explainer-pub-75957

With the recent testing and media attention on Russia’s hypersonic developments, news stories have often focused on the idea that the United States is behind its adversaries, Russia and China, in the development and testing of these weapons. James Acton, co-director of Carnegie’s Nuclear Policy Program and a physicist by training, explains what these weapons actually are and some of the pervasive myths around their discussion.

 

[bring_it_on]

The Pentagon, aiming to expand its investment in cutting-edge technologies, is planning new joint program offices focused on hypersonic missiles and artificial intelligence, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told lawmakers today.

Mattis, who appeared before the House Armed Services Committee to discuss the Defense Department's fiscal year 2019 budget request, said Under Secretary of Research and Engineering Mike Griffin is a "varsity player" who is hard at work on establishing new programs, with hypersonics as his top priority.

"We're going to move things into production prototyping," he said. "We are not going to have more paper. We are going to move on hypersonics, move on AI. What do I mean by move? A joint program office, not a bunch of different organizations all feeling a way [forward]."

At present, the most high-profile joint program office at DOD oversees the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the most expensive weapons acquisition effort in U.S. history.

Mattis said DOD's FY-19 budget request would begin to establish a more robust hypersonics program, but added that more can be expected in the near future.

"What I found is what we call a limiting factor," he said. "It was that we were not set up to embrace the whole challenge of hypersonics. Within the budget, we've addressed this to a degree, but we are going to have to have a complete support program for this. This is going to be a major effort. Just rest assured . . . we know where we want to go and this is one of the key building blocks of getting us there."

Mattis said DOD has similar aspirations for artificial intelligence.

"We have a number of AI efforts underway right now," he said. "We're looking at pulling them all together."

Mattis stressed the hypersonic program would be a serious effort intended to transition technology onto the battlefield, not another laboratory.

"Our goal is to get something in the air," he said. "It is focused, it is going forward. It is our number one priority of innovative technologies, not to the exclusion of artificial intelligence."

Griffin, the former chief of NASA, has said publicly that hypersonics development is his top priority.

"He's really got what he needs in terms of experience to drive this forward," Mattis said of Griffin. "Not for theory, not for experiments, but putting something out for test and moving it into a capability."

Meanwhile, Missile Defense Agency Director Lt. Gen. Samuel Greaves told the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee April 11 there is "extremely high" risk that hypersonic strike weapon technology being developed in China and Russia could proliferate to North Korea and Iran.

"I'm not a fortune teller, but I know the future," Greaves said. "The hypersonic threat is real and it is coming. Just the open press reports on what the Chinese and Russians have been doing in that area for the last five to 10 years should be cause for concern."

The Defense Science Board has also recommended DOD quickly develop and field an interim capability to defeat hypersonic weapons threats.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry (R-TX) told reporters after the hearing he was surprised members questioned the defense secretary about hypersonics and other developmental technologies.

"I think members are very concerned not just about what's in front of us, but also what's ahead of us," he said.

Thornberry, whose full committee is meeting May 9 to mark up the FY-19 defense authorization bill, said the legislation would be focused on ensuring DOD has what it needs to invest in rebuilding readiness, but also in winning future fights.

"There's a number of policy objectives, but I think fixing the force, preparing for the future are at the top of the list," he said.

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/04/hypersonic-warhead-being-developed-with-3d-printed-parts-in-the-hypersonic-weapons-race.html

In 2016, Orbital ATK (NYSE: OA), a global leader in aerospace and defense technologies, successfully tested a 3D-printed hypersonic engine combustor at NASA Langley Research Center. The combustor, produced through an additive manufacturing process known as powder bed fusion (PBF), was subjected to a variety of high-temperature hypersonic flight conditions over the course of 20 days, including one of the longest duration propulsion wind tunnel tests ever recorded for a unit of this kind. Analysis confirms the unit met or exceeded all of the test requirements. One of the most challenging parts of the propulsion system, a scramjet combustor, houses and maintains stable combustion within an extremely volatile environment.

https://www.orbitalatk.com/news-room/insideOA/IM-weapons/default.aspx

 

[marauder2048]

DOD Contracts

April 18, 2018


Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Space, Huntsville, Alabama, is the successful offeror of a $928,000,000
ceiling indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for the hypersonic conventional strike weapon. This contract
provides for the design, development, engineering, systems integration, test, logistics planning, and aircraft integration
support of all the elements of a hypersonic, conventional, air-launched, stand-off weapon. Work will be performed in
Huntsville, Alabama. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition and three offers were received. Fiscal 2018
research, development, test and evaluation funds will be obligated at the time of award on the first task order. Air
Force Life Cycle Management, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, is the contracting activity (FA8682-18-D-0003).

 

[bobbymike]

Article on award

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/04/usaf-announces-major-new-hypersonic-weapon-contract/?utm_campaign=Raytheon%20Space%20Symposium%20&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=62221348&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9ZhcN1w93d3Wlno3-_5ja0q70SUl4koFHXLylKQdeiES0jeeMC5bcOp66xdUTb0WSNMiJGzY2F1NVo4WiXF3h20NFy0w&_hsmi=62221348

 

[Moose]

Might be wise to break the Lockheed contract out into a new thread specifically about that weapon system.

 

[bring_it_on]

Might be wise to break the Lockheed contract out into a new thread specifically about that weapon system.

Done!

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,30251.0.html

 

[bobbymike]

http://aviationweek.com/aviation-week-space-technology/argonne-national-lab-high-energy-x-ray-facility-s-hypersonic-test-rol

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.nipp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/IS-430-rev.pdf

Russia and China are quickly developing robust hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV) programs intended to coerce the United States (US), 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 US, 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 US, allies, and partners might handle a crisis situation. Russia’s and China’s races to field HGVs make imperative a US 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.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/04/22/pentagon-aims-win-global-race-new-hypersonic-technologie.html

 

[Flyaway]

The Pentagon wants its new AI center up and running in six months, but is taking a different track on directed energy and hypersonics, Deputy Defense Secretary Shanahan says.

While it’s clear the Pentagon leadership thinks they have a winner in the nascent JAIC, they’re doing things differently when it comes to hypersonics and directed energy weapons. In establishing new directed energy programs, “it may not be that there’s a center,” Shanahan said. “What we may do is parse things out until someone’s doing power supply, somebody’s doing beam control. It’s different aspects of the technology that we’ll probably parse out, either to a service or one of the research labs.”

Griffin has repeatedly said that developing new hypersonic capabilities is his top priority, and Shanahan confirmed Tuesday that Griffin has already delivered an interim report on his plans for ten key technology areas for the Pentagon, with a final report due on his desk in July.

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/04/pentagon-run-ai-center-coming-hypersonics-work-in-progress/

 

[Flyaway]

Now I wonder what project or projects this is going to concern.

We can expect an important announcement in a few weeks that “a significant acceleration is doable” of the Air Force’s hypersonic efforts. Roper said he’d completed a review of all the service’s work on hypersonic, one of the Pentagon’s top priorities

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/04/big-hypersonic-news-coming-faster-progress-likely-roper/

 

[bobbymike]

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/real-missile-gap-looming-hypersonic-weapons-25650

A new “missile gap” is emerging, one that is based in fact. This is the disparity between the United States and its main competitors, Russia and China, in the field of hypersonic weapons systems. A hypersonic vehicle is one that moves through the atmosphere at a minimum speed of five times that of sound, or Mach 5. A hypersonic cruise missile travels continuously through the air employing a special high-powered engine. A hypersonic glide vehicle is launched into space atop a ballistic missile, after which it maneuvers through the upper reaches of the atmosphere until it dives towards its target. Both vehicle types can carry either conventional or nuclear weapons.

 

[bring_it_on]

Congress eyes conventional hypersonic triad, seeks details of marquee DOD hypersonic project

Draft legislation would require Pentagon brass to validate a requirement for a potential conventional hypersonic strike triad -- setting the stage for a ground-, sea-, and air-launched ultra-fast boost-glide weapon -- along with cost estimates for accelerating initial operational capability of each notional leg of this fledgling new class of weapon.

The chairman's mark of the House Armed Services Committee's version of the fiscal year 2019 defense authorization bill includes provisions that aim to tighten congressional oversight of the Conventional Prompt Strike program, the U.S. military's marquee effort to develop an intermediate-range hypersonic strike capability.

The draft legislation, made public May 7, calls for the defense secretary to provide Congress by Nov. 30 "a validated requirement for ground-, sea-, or air-launched (or a combination thereof) conventional prompt global strike hypersonic capabilities."

The Pentagon does not have a formal acquisition program of record for a hypersonic strike capability. The Defense Department is exploring potential boost-glide hypersonic technologies as part of a research and development effort overseen by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, a project that has spent nearly $1 billion to date, with plans to allocate nearly $2 billion over the next five years.

In accordance with congressional guidance in the FY-16 National Defense Authorization Act, DOD plans a materiel development decision for a Conventional Prompt Strike capability in FY-20, the initial gateway to a formal acquisition effort. In preparation, the Pentagon earlier this year revealed plans to give the Navy responsibility to manage development of the Conventional Strike Program beginning in FY-19.

At congressional direction in the FY-18 NDAA, Pentagon leaders are drafting a "plan to reach an early operational capability for the conventional prompt strike weapon system by not later than September 30, 2022." The report, due in June, is to be prepared by the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman in consultation with the heads of U.S. European, Pacific and Strategic commands, and will outline "the required level of resources that is consistent with the level of priority associated to the capability gap."

The high-level Pentagon panel responsible for endorsing the need for a new weapon system program -- the Joint Requirements Oversight Council -- has examined the issue of hypersonic strike at least twice in the last five years. In September 2016, the panel re-validated the requirement for Conventional Prompt Strike as part of a larger "family of systems," according to the Joint Staff.

And in 2013, the JROC validated the Conventional Prompt Strike -- which previously aspired to have a "global" reach -- focus on demonstrating the feasibility of a hypersonic, boost-glide weapon for a potential intermediate-range strike system that could be deployed independent of service or service platform.

In addition, the draft legislation unveiled by the House this week would direct the Pentagon's acquisition executive to deliver a report by Jan. 31, 2019 on a plan to "deliver a conventional prompt global strike weapon system" by the 2022 target date. That report, according to the draft legislation, is to include "options with cost estimates for accelerating the initial capability for such a system" and an outline of the policy issues required by Pentagon leaders in order to "employ hypersonic offense capabilities from each potential launch platform of such system."

The proposed bill also seeks an explanation from DOD of the "assessed level of ambiguity and misinterpretation risk relating to the conventional prompt global strike weapon system," including any potential confusion by adversaries as to whether the hypersonic strike weapon could be carrying a nuclear warhead. In addition, the report is to outline potential risks related to Conventional Prompt Strike and "platform ambiguity" and "perceptions of the survivability of strategic nuclear forces."

 

[sferrin]

"defense authorization bill includes provisions that aim to tighten congressional oversight of the Conventional Prompt Strike program"

Great. Just what we need; more political empire-building, interference, and grandstanding.

 

[Moose]

"defense authorization bill includes provisions that aim to tighten congressional oversight of the Conventional Prompt Strike program"

Great. Just what we need; more political empire-building, interference, and grandstanding.

I mean, why should the white house have all the fun?

 

[sferrin]

"defense authorization bill includes provisions that aim to tighten congressional oversight of the Conventional Prompt Strike program"

Great. Just what we need; more political empire-building, interference, and grandstanding.

I mean, why should the white house have all the fun?

You know he's going to win in 2020 right?

 

[Moose]

"defense authorization bill includes provisions that aim to tighten congressional oversight of the Conventional Prompt Strike program"

Great. Just what we need; more political empire-building, interference, and grandstanding.

I mean, why should the white house have all the fun?

You know he's going to win in 2020 right?

Anything to own teh libs.

 

[bring_it_on]

The Congress (and not the WH) controls the purse strings so if they have taken a fancy to the CPGS effort and want to add more scrutiny there is really nothing that can be done about it. Same applies to them adding back funds on JSTARS and other efforts that go against what the service concerned is pushing. But the Congress can look a lot different come 2019 and so can the committees and this is what I fear the most and why I hate the added layer of congressional control on some pet programs. I'd much rather they stick to working to get rid of the sequester and operate within the normal oversight roles, rather than taking on efforts like CPGS but then that's just me..

 

[sferrin]

The Congress (and not the WH) controls the purse strings so if they have taken a fancy to the CPGS effort and want to add more scrutiny there is really nothing that can be done about it. Same applies to them adding back funds on JSTARS and other efforts that go against what the service concerned is pushing. But the Congress can look a lot different come 2019 and so can the committees and this is what I fear the most and why I hate the added layer of congressional control on some pet programs. I'd much rather they stick to working to get rid of the sequester and operate within the normal oversight roles, rather than taking on efforts like CPGS but then that's just me..

I'd thought they got rid of sequestration idiocy? That needs to go.

 

[bring_it_on]

No they just agreed to a two year deal. The Caps will be in place again in FY20 until the BCA is repealed. I believe FY20 and FY21 will see sequestration (as part of the 10 year BCA ) unless another deal is negotiated.

 

[bobbymike]

The Congress (and not the WH) controls the purse strings so if they have taken a fancy to the CPGS effort and want to add more scrutiny there is really nothing that can be done about it. Same applies to them adding back funds on JSTARS and other efforts that go against what the service concerned is pushing. But the Congress can look a lot different come 2019 and so can the committees and this is what I fear the most and why I hate the added layer of congressional control on some pet programs. I'd much rather they stick to working to get rid of the sequester and operate within the normal oversight roles, rather than taking on efforts like CPGS but then that's just me..

Like when Bush 43 wanted RNEP, RRW and ACI nuke programs and Congress [Republican committee even :'(] said nope.

 

[bring_it_on]

National Hypersonics Initiative

The committee is aware of a National Hypersonics Initiative under
development by the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, in
conjunction with the military services, defense labs, and the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency. The committee recognizes the growing amount of
resources and emphasis placed by the Department of Defense on the research and
development of hypersonic vehicle technology. The committee supports the
development of a National Hypersonics Initiative, and believes it is prudent and consistent with the roles and responsibilities granted to the Department’s Joint Hypersonics Transition Office as authorized in the National Defense Authorization
Act of 2018 (Public Law 115-91).
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than September 15, 2018, on the status of the National
Hypersonics Initiative