Analysis of G LEO Kinetic Bombardment An

of 28

  • date post

    05-Jul-2018
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    213
  • download

    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Analysis of G LEO Kinetic Bombardment An

  • 8/16/2019 Analysis of G LEO Kinetic Bombardment An

    1/28

    © 2014 Rammah M. Elbasheer

    A002-R01-2014

    Project Polemos

    K-BOMB: Analysis of G/LEO Kinetic Bombardment

    and Application to National Security

    Strategies for Full-Spectrum Military

    Interoperability

    Rammah M. Elbasheer

    May 2014

  • 8/16/2019 Analysis of G LEO Kinetic Bombardment An

    2/28

    © 2014 Rammah M. Elbasheer

    Abstract

    The objective of this study centralized on the analysis of a

    kinetic bombardment long-rod penetrator system and its evident

    processes, ramifications, and applications. Applications spanned

    three broad operational intentions; deep bunker breach, intercontinental strike capability, and preeminence over

    terrestrial forces without matched investment. The ambition of a

    viable Kinetic Bombardment Orbital Mechanism (KBOM), is for the

    cost in its entirety from being put into orbit, to maintenance,

    and ejecting payloads, to be less than or equal to the same amount

    of marginal effort required to build, maintain, and launch the

    required number of ICBMs to complete a given set of tactical

    objectives.

    Eleven potential Kinetic Bombardment Rod (KBR) configurations were

    initially developed varying between two forms; standard tungsten carbide rods and tungsten carbide rods equipped with thermobaric

    warheads. Through an Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) down select

    process, a final standard tungsten carbide rod composition was

    selected for use as a case example for further investigation.

    It is concluded that as policies are shaped to allow less

    restricted military activity in space, kinetic bombardment systems

    will be acquired in response to distinct international events or

    threats. Peer nations seeking to match U.S. general terrestrial

    forces without matching U.S. investment may also look to acquire

    orbital defense satellites. In regards to nations such as the

    United States that already own weapons effective against all

    classes of targets, kinetic bombardment systems will only become

    viable prospects once launch costs decline with the development of

    reusable launch vehicles. This study makes the beginning but surely

    not the whole case, for the long pursued concept of orbital defense

    satellites as the obstacles that once stood in the way recede.

    While it does not however suggest or constitute the immediate

    development of such a project, it perhaps constitutes its future

    consideration.

  • 8/16/2019 Analysis of G LEO Kinetic Bombardment An

    3/28

    © 2014 Rammah M. Elbasheer

    Table of Contents Abstract

    List of Tables 

    List of Figures 

    Nomenclature and Acronyms

    1.0 Introduction

    2.0 History of Kinetic Bombardment

    3.0 Kinetic Bombardment

    3.1 Parameters

    3.2 Process

    3.3 Penetration

    4.0 Vulnerability and Revision

    4.1 Vulnerability

    5.0 Payload Transportation

    5.1 ELVs and RLVs

    6.0 Nuclear Weapons and the KBOM

    5.1 Efficacy and ICBM Contrast

    7.0 Anti-Bombardment

    8.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

    References

  • 8/16/2019 Analysis of G LEO Kinetic Bombardment An

    4/28

    © 2014 Rammah M. Elbasheer

    List of Tables

    Table 1: Parameters of a Case Tungsten Rod

    Table 2: Space Transportation RLV and ELV Cost Comparison

    Table 3: Average ELV Price Per Pound - Futron

    Table 4: Tungsten Rod Transportation Comparison

    List of Figures

    Figure 1: Space Transportation Cost History to Low Earth Orbit

    Figure 2: Prospective Method of Calculated Deorbit (Pulsed Laser)

    Figure 3: Conventional Trident II Breakdown

    Figure 4: X-51 WaveRider

    Figure 5: Inertial Reference Platform

    Figure B: Armour Piercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot

    Figure 6a: Mapped Mesh for Generic Re-Entry Body

    Figure 6b: Mapped Mesh for Generic Spiked Re-Entry Body

    Figure 7: Diagram of Aerospike Induced Flowfield

    Figure 8: ELV Space Transportation Costs Figure 9: RLVs to ELVs Comparison

  • 8/16/2019 Analysis of G LEO Kinetic Bombardment An

    5/28

    © 2014 Rammah M. Elbasheer

    Nomenclature and Acronyms

    ODS Orbital Defense Satellite

    KBR Kinetic Bombardment Rods

    KBOM Kinetic Bombardment Orbital Mechanism

    KB Kinetic Bombardment

    NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

    NNPT Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

    OST Outer Space Treaty

    WMD Weapons of Mass Destruction

    UK United Kingdom of Great Britain

    USA United States of America

    FAA Federal Aviation Agency

    RLV Reusable Launch Vehicle

    ELV Expendable Launch Vehicle

    LEO Low Earth Orbit

    GPS Global Positioning System

    SSO Semi-Synchronous Orbit

    GEO Geosynchronous

    GSO Geostationary

    PGS Prompt Global Strike

    ODM Orbital Defense Mechanism

    MEO Medium Earth Orbit

    AOA Analysis of Alternatives

    APFSDS Armour Piercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot

    IRP Inertial Reference Platform

    CEP Circular Error of Probability

    OCST  Office of Commercial Space Transportation 

    NGSO Non-Geosynchronous Orbit

    ABMDS Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System

  • 8/16/2019 Analysis of G LEO Kinetic Bombardment An

    6/28

    © 2014 Rammah M. Elbasheer

    1.0 Introduction

    In August of 2006, the Bush administration revised the National

    Space Policy to reject arms-control agreements that hinder freedom

    of action in space. The direction and planning of space policy is

    defined by such events and others like it, such as the recommendation of the implementation of orbital kinetic energy

    weapons by the Defense Science Board to the Department of Defense

    for the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joint Vision 2010. Or again, in the

    long-range plan of the United States Space Command (USSC), calling

    for policy makers to “shape [the] international community to accept

    space-based weapons to defend against threats in accordance with

    national policy.” USSC currently projects that there will be

    weapons in space within the first two or three decades of the 21st

    century driven by the need for alternatives to terrestrial

    capabilities. 2003 brought the most recent and cited explicit

    Government mention of a kinetic energy weapon, the hypervelocity

    rod bundle, by the U.S. Air Force Transformative Flight Plan.

    Actions such as the aforementioned have set the political

    groundwork for the introduction of KBOMs, yet the 64-year old

    dilemma continues to be the launch cost. Thus far, the argument

    has been terrestrial ICBMs can complete the same objectives as

    KBOMs for a more reasonable amount. However, Reusable Launch

    Vehicles (RLV) are beginning to solve that dilemma, as can be seen

    in Figure 1, and bringing ICBMs and KBOMs to a tactical crossroad.

    One will not replace the other but rather they will each becomeappropriate in differentiating sets of circumstances.

    Figure 1: Space Transportation Cost History to Low Earth Orbit 

  • 8/16/2019 Analysis of G LEO Kinetic Bombardment An

    7/28

    © 2014 Rammah M. Elbasheer

    2.0 History of Kinetic Bombardment

    Framework of Orbital Defense Mechanisms (ODM), such as bombardment

    satellites, were designed in the Cold War era to become prospective

    delivery platforms for nuclear weapons. The Eisenhower

    administration sponsored satellite research development programs for bombardment, electronic countermeasures, and military

    communications along with novel concepts such as manned lunar

    stations  —   all summarized by a then classified 1958 National

    Security Council Space Policy Subcommittee report. Kinetic

    bombardment was given further credence by the military in the 1950s

    when it was proposed by RAND to equip ICBMs with tungsten rod

    bundles in the effort to reinforce their capability. On the

    opposing side of the Cold War and in the pursuit of the application

    of space weapons, the Soviet Union ICBM program later tested a

    Fractional Orbital Bombardment system in the 1960s, orbiting mock

    nuclear warheads in LEO and setting them to an objective by

    calculated deorbit.

    Figure 2: Prospective Method of Calculated Deorbit (Pulsed Laser)

    However, the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 and the subsequent SALT II Treaty of 1979 put an end to the research and development of

    orbital WMDs. Be that as it may, modern day military research on

    kinetic bombardment, progressions in space transportation, and

    recent changes in global space policy have once again shed the

    light of possibility on kinetic bombardment and by extension KBOMs,

    with programs emerging as recently as the past decade from groups

    such as Boeing, DARPA, NASA, and Pratt & Whitney.

  • 8/16/2019 Analysis of G LEO Kinetic Bombardment An

    8/28

    © 2014 Rammah M. Elbasheer

    Kinetic bombardment became reborn in 1990 with the introduction of

    the Prompt Global Strike (PGS) program, the objective of which

    according to deputy commander Lt. Gen. C. Robert Kehler (U.S.