Source: DefPro
Kee: “MEADS addressed all requirements provided by the nations.”
Interview with Gregory L. Kee, General Manager, NATO MEADS Management Agency
The tri-national Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) programme is closing in on a final Critical Design Review. Major assemblies are now being integrated and tested in anticipation of the CDR, that will formally complete the design phase. The programme further demonstrates significant hardware progress toward flight tests in 2012. In an interview with MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, a media partner of defpro.com, Gregory L. Kee, General Manager, NATO MEADS Management Agency gives details and latest news.
Under development by Germany, Italy and the US, the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) is a ground-mobile air and missile defence system that will eventually being developed to replace the PATRIOT in the US, the HAWK and PATRIOT systems in Germany, and the NIKE HERCULES in Italy. It is the only medium-range air defence system that provides full 360° coverage for the warfighter.
MT: The US Army says that MEADS does not meet their requirements. Can you talk to me about that?
Kee: MEADS has addressed all requirements provided by the nations. It is important to recognise that the MEADS design requirements were set jointly by the US, Germany and Italy based on the increased need for coalition fighting and US experience with an aging PATRIOT system during both Iraq wars.
MEADS meets challenging requirements not addressed by any previous air and missile defence system. The system is easily deployed to a theatre and, once there, can keep pace with fast-moving manoeuvre forces. MEADS will be the only air and missile defence system able to roll off air transports with troops and almost immediately begin operations to protect manoeuvre forces and critical assets against tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, and manned aircraft.
MEADS is being built with open architecture and plug-and-fight, so it will have the ability to adapt to each of the three nation’s requirements. It will be interoperable with the other systems each of the participating nations uses and will operate effectively in a coalition environment. Looking even more broadly at NATO, MEADS will align and fit into the missile defence architecture that’s being developed for Europe.
MEADS addresses the limitations of the PATRIOT system, which began design and development in the late 1960s. Operation “Iraqi Freedom” and NATO operations in Afghanistan have underscored the need for the 360° protection that MEADS provides. The combination of 360° sensor operation, near-vertical launch capability, and the PAC-3 MSE missile gives MEADS a far greater defended area. MEADS advanced sensors see farther to make full use of PAC-3 MSE missile’s capabilities. MEADS sensors are also optimised for their functions; the UHF surveillance radar is optimised for efficient search over a very wide area, and the X-band multifunction fire control radar is optimised for very accurate tracking of today’s advanced threats.
MT: The Obama administration has focused on NATO and Trans-Atlantic armaments cooperation through its Ballistic Missile Defense Review and Phased Adaptive Approach. Does MEADS contribute any value?
Kee: Absolutely. From the beginning, MEADS has been a unique and far-reaching programme, tasked with demonstrating methodology to allow three NATO countries to share in development of a common system that enables interoperability for future coalition operations. As the US, Germany, and Italy develop MEADS, it has been shown to be a positive example of transatlantic cooperation. By working together to replace the aging missile systems of the three countries, we are accomplishing more with limited budget than each country could alone.
The MEADS programme continues to prove its value. The benefits of international cooperation are extending far beyond cost sharing (42% of the development costs are being covered by Germany with 25% and Italy with 17%), although European participation has freed up over $1.6 billion in budget authority that has been applied to other US defence needs. The contributions by German and Italian industry are world-class, and having such an advanced capability as MEADS in the hands of our allies ensures that the US will not need to respond unilaterally to every military crisis that threatens US citizens or interests worldwide.
Furthermore, having a shared system among coalition partners and within NATO promotes interoperability, cooperation, and exchange of information among allied forces. For these reasons, it is expected that MEADS will be purchased and fielded by many of our allies throughout NATO and elsewhere. MEADS is aligned to contribute to the European Phased Adaptive Approach.
MT: There was some recent Congressional language in the US that the programme was behind schedule. What is the current status of the system design?
Kee: The programme is on track to complete design approval and to begin test flights at White Sands Missile Range in 2012. Focus remains on completing the system-level Critical Design Review (CDR) in August 2010, which will be the last of 47 discrete design review events that have been held during the past two years. To date, more than 1,000 evaluation criteria required for final design approval of the system have been demonstrated. All major component designs for the radars, launcher, reloader, and battle manager are finalised and have been approved by the three nations.
Production of assemblies has already shown substantial progress as the programme moves into an integration and test phase in 2011. As noted in a March 2010 US Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, the MEADS programme's five critical technologies are fully mature ahead of CDR. In February, the MEADS interceptor, an advanced version of the current PAC-3 missile, successfully intercepted a threat-representative tactical ballistic missile target at White Sands Missile Range. The programme is now producing the radars, launchers, reloaders and battle managers needed for integration and test activities. Recent major integration and test milestones accomplishments include:
• A unique system test capability has been integrated that enables hardware-in-the-loop testing of MEADS elements in a system configuration. This integration enables use of the MEADS battle management system and its plug-and-fight capabilities;
• Tactical software deliveries have begun in support of system integration;
• A MEADS IFF unit is in test at Pratica di Mare Air Force Base in Italy;
• The first US Integrated Launcher Electronics System (ILES) has been completed and delivered to Germany for integration on the MEADS Launcher;
• The first Launcher Platform Group has been integrated onto an Italian prime mover and passed acceptance tests;
• Multifunction Fire Control Radar antenna elevation and automatic levelling tests were completed successfully following integration onto an Italian prime mover.
MT: What is the cost of the system?
Kee: Future MEADS production costs are expected be comparable to those of other air and missile defence systems while offering superior performance. Estimates being generated today have the benefit of actual costs for key components like the interceptor, transmit/receive modules for both radars, software, and launcher electronics. Additionally, operations and sustainment costs for MEADS are forecast to be nearly half of what it costs to maintain PATRIOT.
For example, MEADS requires far fewer soldiers and less equipment in a fire unit, but it protects more area than PATRIOT, with increased capability to handle more threats and at greater ranges. With MEADS mobility, range, and flexible architecture, far fewer MEADS units will be needed. For example, four PATRIOT units would be needed to provide the 360° protection of a single MEADS fire unit. Up to eight or more PATRIOT units would be needed to provide the range and coverage of a single MEADS fire unit.
MEADS benefits from reduced manpower needs, advanced prognostics, modular software, higher availability, and smaller, more fuel-efficient components. Since operations and sustainment costs of major weapons systems represent nearly 70% of the overall life cycle cost of a system, MEADS could potentially save user nations billions of dollars over the lifecycle of the system.
MT: Do you have any final thoughts?
Kee: I am optimistic that the nations will approve the next phase of the MEADS programme. MEADS’ 21st century open architecture allows operational mission-tailoring to the user. Based on our initial assessment, MEADS provides 3-8x greater firepower with 1/3 the force, resulting in dramatic operation and support cost savings over current systems. MEADS is also more transportable than PATRIOT. MEADS major elements and smaller vehicles weigh less and emplace more quickly than their PATRIOT counterparts, increasing airlift flexibility to get MEADS into the theatre and increasing mission flexibility once there.
Through MEADS plug-and-fight capabilities, nations gain the opportunity to easily and affordably integrate their own sensors or shooters into the MEADS open architecture. Existing stovepipe systems use a proprietary software-based battle manager that requires complex integration to incorporate additional capabilities. Germany will be the first nation to benefit from the MEADS open-architecture battle manager through integration of the IRIS-T SL missile into German MEADS fire units. MEADS is also the only terminal air and missile defence system using Mode V identification friend-or-foe (IFF) technology to help reduce fratricide.
MT: Mr Kee, thank you for this interview.
No comments:
Post a Comment