nd Israel Multinational Missile...
Transcript of nd Israel Multinational Missile...
1
AUTOMOTIVE INFOCOM TRANSPORT, ENVIRONMENT & POWER ENGINEERING
AERONAUTICS SPACE DEFENCE &SECURITY
2nd Israel Multinational Missile Defence ConferenceSession 2: Interoperability and International Cooperation
“Industrial Aspects of NATO-Europe Territorial Missile Defence“- an European View –
Bernd Kreienbaum, Executive Advisor, IABG - Defence & Security
25. July 2011 Tel [email protected]
IABG is a leading European Technology Companyin Simulation and Testing
IABG: independent – medium-sized – owner-managedTurnover 2010: approx. € 200 Million - Employess: approx. 1.050
Automotive
Employees:appox. 120
Development & Operation ofMechatronic Test-Systems for OEM & Suppliers
Defence & Security
Employees :appox. 370
Operation of Military Simulations and Test Systems for Analysis & Concepts
Aeronautics
Employees :appox. 160
Service StrengthTests for cells andmodules
Transport & Environment
Power Engineering
Employees :appox. 140
Environmental services, alternative Energy Sources, andElectro-mobility
InfoCom
Employees :appox. 130
Development & Operation of secureInformation andCommunication Systems
Space
Employees :appox. 130
Operation of the ESA coodinated Space Test Centres in Ottobrunn & Noordwijk
87,4 % SCHWARZ Holding GmbH
12,6% IABG Mitarbeiterbeteiligungs AG
(Employees Shares)
2
Independent and Owner-managed
2
n BMD an “essential military mission” for NATO ( Lisbon Summit)
n Capability Goal or “formal program” ?
n CNAD tasking for a “High Level Advice on BMD Industrial Dimensions”
n NIAG Study Group 151
n The Unique Interoperability Aspects of BMD
n Key Recommendations on Technology Options and Cooperation Opportunities
n A German View on national/European contribution options
n Assumed European BMD Focus and BMD Roadmap view
n Final remarks
(The briefers personal view)
AUTOMOTIVE INFOCOM TRANSPORT & ENVIRONMENT
AERONAUTICS SPACE DEFENCE &SECURITY
• develop the capability to defend our populations and territories
against ballistic missile attack as a core element of our collective
defence, which contributes to the indivisible security of the Alliance.
We will actively seek cooperation on missile defence with Russia and
other Euro-Atlantic partners;
The New Strategic Concept on Missile DefenceLisbon Summit 19 Nov. 2010
*Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Lisbon
19.- We will ensure that NATO has the full range of capabilities necessary to deter and defend against any threat to the safety and security of our populations. Therefore we will:
3
5
36.-The threat to NATO European populations, territory and forces posed by
the proliferation of ballistic missiles is increasing. As missile defence forms
part of a broader response to counter this threat, we have decided that the
Alliance will develop a missile defence capability to pursue its core task of
collective defence. The aim of a NATO missile defence capability is to provide
full coverage and protection for all NATO European populations, territory and
forces against the increasing threats posed by the proliferation of ballistic
missiles, based on the principles of the indivisibility of Allied security and
NATO solidarity, equitable sharing of risks and burdens, as well as reasonable
challenge, taking into account the level of threat, affordability and technical
feasibility, and in accordance with the latest common threat assessments
agreed by the Alliance.
*Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Lisbon
Lisbon Summit Declaration* on Missile Defence20 Nov. 2010
6
37.- To this end, we have decided that the scope of NATO’s current Active
Layered Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence (ALTBMD) programme’s command,
control and communications capabilities will be expanded beyond the
protection of NATO deployed forces to also protect NATO European
populations, territory and forces. In this context, the United States European
Phased Adaptive Approach is welcomed as a valuable national contribution to
the NATO missile defence architecture, as are other possible voluntary
contributions by Allies. We have tasked the Council to develop missile defence
consultation, command and control arrangements by the time of the March
2011 meeting of our Defence Ministers. We have also tasked the Council to
draft an action plan addressing steps to implement the missile defence
capability by the time of the June 2011 Defence Ministers’ meeting.
Lisbon Summit Declaration* on Missile Defence20 Nov. 2010
*Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Lisbon
4
7
38.- We will continue to explore opportunities for missile defence co-
operation with Russia in a spirit of reciprocity, maximum transparency and
mutual confidence. We reaffirm the Alliance’s readiness to invite Russia to
explore jointly the potential for linking current and planned missile defence
systems at an appropriate time in mutually beneficial ways. NATO missile
defence efforts and the United States European Phased Adaptive Approach
provide enhanced possibilities to do this. We are also prepared to engage with
other relevant states, on a case by case basis, to enhance transparency and
confidence and to increase missile defence mission effectiveness.
Lisbon Summit Declaration* on Missile Defence20 Nov. 2010
*Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Lisbon
“BMD from a Policy Debate to a NATO Mission”
SSA: Space Situation AwarenessCMD: Cruise Missile DefenceC-RAM: Counter Rocket Artillery MotarGBAD: Groundbased Air Defence
TMDEurope
BMD„new
Mission“
GBADAirborneAD
C-RAMCMD
Air-Policing
IAMD
TMD
GBADAirborneAD
C-RAMCMD
Air-Policing
NATINAD
TerritorialMD*
*a policydebate
Lisbon
5
NATO HQ Interpretation: Capability Goal to be developed
“..the Alliance will develop a MD capability to pursue its core task of collective defence”.“The aim of a NATO MD capability is to provide full coverage and protection for allEuropean populations, territory and forces against the increasing threat…”,”…we havedecided that the scope of NATO’s current ALTBMD Programme’ C3 capabilities will beexpanded beyond the protection of NATO deployed forces…” The US PAA is welcomed asa valuable contribution…” “..develop a MD consultation and C2 arrangements by March2011…” “…action plan addressing steps to implement the MD capability by June 2011Defence Ministerial meeting..”
Congressional Research Service Interpretation 28Dec10: a formal program
The Lisbon Summit agreement is significant in that NATO officials identified territorialmissile defense as a core alliance objective and adopted a formal NATO program inresponse. The agreement further outlined the development of territorial missile defensethrough an expansion of NATO’s ALTBMD program and its integration with the U.S.Phased Adaptive Approach. As a first step, alliance leaders tasked NATO staff “withdeveloping missile defence consultation, and command and control arrangements” forNATO’s March 2011 Defense Ministerial. The next step will be to draft an implementationplan for missile defense for the June 2011 Defense Ministers meeting.
NATO BMD after LisbonDifferent Interpretation
NATO INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY GROUPCNAD tasking in preparation of the Lisbon Summit
High Level Advise Study“The Industrial Dimension of NATO Territorial Missile Defence”
Final Report to CNADon
Mar 2011by the
Co-Chairmen
Bernd Kreienbaum
Robert Dehnert
NIAG SG.151
6
„NIAG SG.151 Teams“Formed by 31 participating Industries
Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4Capabilities
(31)
Business ModelsCollaboration Policy
(17)
InteroperabilityIssues & Opportunities
(16)
IPR SharingTADIC Barriers
(7)Aselsan (TUR)Astrium (DEU, FRA)BAE Systems (GBR)Boeing (USA)Cassidian (DEU, FRA)DCNS (FRA)Diehl (DEU)Fokker (NLD)IABG (DEU)Kongsberg (NOR)Lockheed Martin (USA)MBDA (DEU, FRA, GBR, ITA)MKE (TUR)NGC (USA)PIT (POL)Raytheon (USA)Rheinmetall (DEU)Roketsan (TUR)SAIC (USA)SAFRAN-SAGEM (FRA)SAFRAN-SNECMA (FRA)SELEX-Comms (ITA)SELEX-SI (ITA)SENER (ESP)Terma (DNK)Thales (FRA)
Astrium (FRA)BAE Systems (GBR)DCNS (FRA)Diehl (DEU)IABG (DEU)Indra (ESP)Fokker (NLD)Lockheed Martin (USA)MBDA (FRA, GBR)MKE (TUR)Navantia (ESP)PIT (POL)Raytheon (USA)Roketsan (TUR)Safran – Sagem (FRA)TRS (FRA)
Aselsan (TUR)Boeing (USA)Cassidian (DEU)DCNS (FRA)ITWL (POL)Kongsberg (NOR)Lockheed Martin (USA)NGC (USA)MBDA (DEU, GBR)NGC (USA)Raytheon (USA)Selex Sistemi Integrati (ITA)Terma (DNK)Thales (NLD)TRS (FRA)
Astrium (DEU)Boeing (USA)Lockheed Martin (USA)MBDA (DEU, GBR)Raytheon (USA)TRS (FRA)
12
Relative Time to Target
Cruise Missile
Aircraft
Ballistic Missile
EngageAuthorizeAssessDetect
The unique (Interoperability) Aspects of BMD in IAMD
+ WMD+ Velocity+ Range+ RCS
Driving Force for• dedicated ISR (EW and Tracking)• regional & global surveillance• “real” Real-time BMC³I & NEC• dedicated endo & exo atmospheric interceptors
7
13
Executive Summary Main Recommendations (1)
General Smart Defence !
§ Territorial MD will be based on multinational formations. Pooling of resources and Role-specialisation are ways to improve the efficiency and use of funding.
§ Active Territorial MD will complement other related capabilities and activities such as deterrence, non-proliferation regimes and arms control policies including technology and export control.
§ The necessary political/military consultations involving NATO-, Non-NATO-, European and Non-European Nations including the Russian Federation will require a new dimension of consultation and coordination far beyond that for ALTBMD capabilities, which was focused on the protection of deployed forces.
14
§ NATO industry (in Europe and North America) can bring to bear a significant range of capabilities and technologies that can be applied for BMD in general, either already existing and/or under development.
§ However, it cannot be denied that there is a discrepancy between U.S. and European Missile Defence capabilities, resulting in a major hurdle for burden sharing. It is hoped that NATO Territorial Missile Defence can serve as an instrument to bring these capabilities more into balance.
§ European Union- and Russian Federation-owned and operated capabilities may play a role at a later stage.
§ Multinational funding of an interceptor pool for example (SM-3, Exoguard, Aster Block 2), would allow the cost efficient provisions for shared operations of European land- and sea-based upper-layer.
Industry capabilities and cooperation opportunities
Executive Summary Main Recommendations (2)
8
5 years 10 years
BI-SC AISACCS & NGCSExtension
Core CapabilityInterceptor
NATO
SensorsNATO
NationalSystems*(Example)
BMC³INATO
Early Intercept MissileTransAtlantic Develop.NGAM/ Exoguard
SAMP-TBlock 1
THAAD
PatriotPAC 2+PAC 3
AMDF **SMART-L ELRSM-3 IB
MEADS
AegisSPY-1SM-3 IA
Airborne IRAGS Add-on
TPY-2
AsterBlock 2
NATOSM-3 Pool
OA- BMC³IIBCS Europe Interface
IBCS
ABIRUS & Europe
NATO MD War-gaming & Consultation Support Centre NATO HQ
* may include EU assets; **Air & Missile Defence Frigates;
EW-Sat
SM-3 IBlandbased
SM-3 IIASea-& landbased
EuropeanEW-Sat
MD Test Bedbuilt on ALTBMD-ITB
NATO & EU IAMDSSA Sensors
NATOPool
Early Intercept Missile
Upper Layer
Lower LayerIAMDSystem
DEWR
AegisSPY-1SM-2
SCCOAC2BMC
Figure 1: Notional Evolutionary Approach & Cooperation Opportunities
????
§ National contributions will be important; in addition to these, (transatlantic) cooperative development opportunities have been identified, for example:
o Enhancing transportability/mobility of land-based SM-3 / Aegis Ashore. o Ensuring ability of U.S. interceptors to be interoperable with European platforms and vice
versa, e.g. SM-3 dual frequency data link modification so they can be used on European frigates.
o Open architecture BMC³I interfacing with IBCS and BMDS C²BMC. o NATO BMC³I Extension, bearing on the continuity of ALTBMD Capabilities and taking into
account the expected Military Requirements for Territorial MD. o MEADS as a lower tier capability and an example of multi-national cooperation to develop
an open architecture system that can integrate with other similar systems.o MD Test Bed development taking into account existing ALTBMD capabilities. o Development of a war gaming/exercise and training capability supporting all MD-aspects
from political consultations, performance assessment, architecture and CONOPS adaptation and education & training.
o Early warning and tracking sensors like ABIR as possible add-on to AGS; or Space-based early warning.
o High energetic, early intercept missile and the supporting infrastructure to defeat longer range threats including ICBMs (see also PAA Phase 4).
Executive Summary Main Recommendations (3)
9
17
Collective self-defence as laid down in Article 5 of the Treaty remains themain purpose of the Alliance
At the same time, the Alliance emphasizes its commitment to disarmamentand arms control. It maintains and develops a coordinated spectrum ofconventional and nuclear capabilities, including missile defence, that istailored to the existing risks and threats.
German Defence Policy Guidelines*- German Minister of Defence – Berlin 18 Mai 2011
− Safeguarding National Interests− Assuming International Responsibility− Shaping Policy together
* DPG describes the strategic Framework for the binding mandate and assignments of the Bundeswehr
DPG Motto
German/European Contribution Optionsfor European IAMD (ff)
Excerpt:NATO INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY GROUP, NIAG Subgroup 151,High Level Advice Study on“The Industrial Dimension of NATO Territorial Missile Defence”, 2010
EuropeanEW Satellite System
Source: AMD AG Präsentation
PBOT
10
European BMDVery short term Contribution Option (1)
• Space Situation Awareness
• Orbital Target Tracking
• Ballistic Target Tracking
• Target Discrimination
Classification
Identification
• Precision COI Monitoring
ISR/SSA
High Power Radar “TIRA”
20
European BMDShort/Mid term Contribution Option (2)
• Highly mobile, flexible Sensors
• Long Range multiple Target
• Surveillance
• Acquisition
• Precision Tracking
Coherent Operation of MFCR’sor
Larger Dish Radar Assemblyby available T/R Technology
3 MFCR je in DEU und TR3 MFCR je in DEU und TREuropean X BandMEADS
Technology
EW & Tracking
European X-Band Sensor
11
Early Warning ElementsEarly Warning ElementsEndo &Endo & ExoExo--Atmospheric Discrimination RequirementsAtmospheric Discrimination Requirements
Airborne PBIRS System requirements deriving from ALTBMD NSR for IR surveillance, detection, tracking, range-typing and discrimination
+ HALE UAV or Aerostat+ Altitude > 18,000 m+ Surveillance, Tracking
Discrimination+ Cued or uncued
+ Two platforms for triangulation+ Tracking at or above local
horizon+ Tracking on boost or post-boost+ Midcourse tracking and
discrimination+ COI Assessment+ multi-colour discrimination
European BMDMid term Contribution Option (3)NEW ISR Element
Post Burn Out IR Sensor (PBIRS) on Airborne Platform
European BMDMid Term Contribution Option (4)
Seabased Early Warningby Radar-Upgrade
for TMD & BMD Support
SMART-L/S-1850 M Extended Range Radar
TMD BMD
German F 124 Frigate
EuropeanCooperation
Standard Sensor on ≈ 20 ships of
6 European Navy’s
12
Early Warning & Space TrackingSatellite Systems
Missile detection pre- and post burn outMidcourse trackingCueing of EffektorsSpacemonitoring in real time of all relevant Battlespace
European BMDMid/long term Contribution Option (5)BMD
Source OHB: LEO Concept Athene or PTSS or others
TMD
EuropeanCooperation
European BMDLong term Contribution Option (6)BMD
European Upper Layer Interceptor
Notional Coverage
Coverage
Coverage
EuropeanCooperation
TransatlanticCooperation?
+ Interceptor Know-How available
+ Ambition and Budget
+ Question of European Sovereignty
13
European Missile Defence Focus
Assumed Priorities• Early Warning (European)• BMC3I (NATO = US + European)• Weapon Systems(transatlantic or European)
Contribution focus• Early Warning
• Airborne IR-Sensor (HALE)• Satellite IR-Sensor & European Small Satellite EW System• Long Range High Resolution RADAR (existing and new)• OTH radar enhancement
• Weapon Systems• Endo & exo atmospheric interceptors (Exoguard)• Propulsion, warhead• Upper Layer (cooperative transatlantic) developments
Role of Russia ??
European Space Situation AwarenessElement of EU Space Policy
Source Astrium
+ Civil and military assets available(e.g. TIRA & GRAVES Radars)
+ national & multinational activities+ European Research Cooperations+ ESA SSA Preparatory Programme+ Harmonized Requirements for future
systems (European Defence Agency)+ European SSA Centre ? ~ EUSCSpace Picture
- collision warning- object catalogue- overhead warning- Missile Warning &Tracking
Potential for IAMD Contribution
Source: IABG
14
2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030
US
PAA
NAT
O E
UR
OPE
EUAL
TBM
D
NAT
O
NR
CR
US
European BMD Roadmap View(notional)
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4
InCa LLIOC FOC
ULIOC FOC
DEU-FRA etc
European Parliament - European Space Policy
Space Situation Awareness; Space Intel
EU/EDA Air & Missile Defence Programms; Air & MD Command
Info Exchange Centre
Radars Interoperability Centre
Step A Step B Step C Step D
C² only
BM
D
Final Remarks (1)
• BMD as an “essential military mission” (Lisbon Summit) will push NATO’s battle
space in the range and time domain and further into space
• BMD will push technology edges across the board of the aerospace domain with
particular impact on ISR sensors incl. radars, space & high altitude platforms,
“real time” BMC³I and missile developments (Upper and Lower Layer)
• BMD has the potential to become one of the very few new armaments growth areas
for NATO and the European Defence Community
• NATO Secretary General calls MD his personal focus and MD being the “game changer”
for NATO-RUS cooperation
• Also US-PAA will be the “Lion Share” of NATO BMD in this decade, European
and EU contributions will be essential to provide indivisible security for Europe
• A European BMD architecture must consider European elements & Russian aspects
even if the lay-out assumes independent NATO & Russian systems, because they
must be highly interoperable
15
• European Industries are getting ready to play a role in BMD based on available
technologies and future orientated developments, they are open minded for
multinational and transatlantic cooperation efforts including Russian industries
• Industry regards multinational formations and pooling of assets as a way
to build capabilities effectively and efficiently and as driver for cooperation‘s
• However the discrepancy between political NATO declarations and reality is
disappointing. The “smart Defence” process based on pooling and sharing has
started with dramatic set-backs and delays in NATO programms as MEADS, AGS,TMD
and others.
• Lack of ambitions and decreasing coherency as well as the program management
record by NATO is supporting the use of European armaments schemes (EDA/OCCAR)
• On the long run, the European Defence Initiatives will make the difference.
Final Remarks (2)
Questions?
Thinking the Future
Mastering the Present