No, Really, the Long Range Standoff Cruise Missile is Necessary

Kingston Reif says nothing new in his recent article at War on the Rocks, in which he argues that the United States should not invest in a new air-launched nuclear cruise missile. We’ve heard this all before from the disarmament community’s view. Unfortunately, Reif distorts the realities surrounding the military’s development of a necessary capability for nuclear deterrence. In Reif’s article, advocates for a robust nuclear deterrent are reduced to rabid planners who “make a hoarder seem frugal” with their nuclear funding demands, supporters of a weapon system rather than defense professionals within the Pentagon’s acquisition program. We are dismissed as “devotees” of the missile, as if we were worshipers of a South Pacific cargo cult and not serious defense analysts.

link.

Long Range Stand-off Missile RFP Expected in May/June

US defence prime contractors vying for the contract to build the nuclear-capable Long-Range Stand-Off (LRSO) missile that will replace the US Air Force's (USAF's) AGM-86 Air-Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM) expect the service to issue a final request for proposal (RfP) in May or June, a Lockheed Martin official said on 15 March.

"We've already had two or three [draft RfPs] and expect a final [one] in May or June and an award next year," Frank St John, vice-president of Lockheed Martin's Tactical Missiles business, told IHS Jane's during a briefing at a company-sponsored media day.

Four prime contractors - Boeing, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, and Lockheed Martin - are bidding for two Technical Maturation Risk Reduction contracts, according to St John.

He added that he expects each company to offer a unique technology solution. "Getting four prime contractors to work on something common is challenging, so I wouldn't be surprised if people went in different directions in the end," he said.

Lockheed Martin will draw heavily on lessons from its AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Stand-off Missile (JASSM) for its LRSO offering, he noted. However, the weapon will be an entirely new design not based on any legacy system.

"The requirements are such that nothing we have would fit that bill," St John said. "But I will say that a lot of the lessons that we've learned over the years on JASSM - in terms of survivability, in terms of aircraft integration, mission planning, and the like - are all things that are brought to bear in that competition."

link.

Congress Urged to Fund Long Range Standoff (LRSO) Cruise Missile

As one former defense secretary tries to kill the Pentagon’s effort to develop a next-generation nuclear cruise missile capability, the Air Force Association is urging Congress to move ahead with funding the program.

William Perry, who led the Defense Department's development and procurement of the B-2 stealth bomber and the current air-launched cruise missile in the 1990s, urged President Obama to cancel the Long Range Stand-Off (LRSO) program, arguing the step could lay the foundation for a global ban on nuclear weapons.

“Because they can be launched without warning and come in both nuclear and conventional variants, cruise missiles are a uniquely destabilizing type of weapon,” Perry wrote in an Oct. 15 Washington Post op-ed. President Obama can lead the world to a stabler and safer future by canceling plans for a new U.S. nuclear-capable cruise missile.”

AFA challenged Perry’s suggestion in a Dec. 14 letter to leaders of the four defense congressional committees, arguing that building LRSO to arm the Long Range Strike Bomber, the planned B-2 replacement, is critical to national security. The current capability, the Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM), is essential to the nuclear deterrent role of the bomber leg of the Pentagon’s nuclear triad, AFA President Larry Spencer and Executive Vice President Mark Barrett wrote in the letter.

“Funding its replacement, LRSO, is particularly important given the advanced air defenses of our adversaries,” Spencer and Barrett wrote. “Without a sustained bomber stand-off capability enabled by a modern cruise missile, the bomber leg of the triad will be increasingly at risk.”

The AFA officials also refuted Perry’s suggestion that the plan to buy 1000 LRSOs will inspire other countries to stand down their nuclear forces.

link.

There's a general bun fight between the usual suspects about the missile. I'd take some of the arguments more seriously if they were from folks other than the generally antinuclear folks.  Perry has more weight than they do.

Should the US Air Force's Next Air Launched Cruise Missile (LRSO) be Both Conventional *AND* Nuclear Capable

Tuesday, Northrop Grumman won the contract to develop the Air Force’s next strategic bomber. Specifics about the competing designs have remained a closely-guarded secret, and the exact capabilities of the new aircraft are likely to remain classified for some time. One fact that is already known about the new bomber, however, is that, like the B-52 and the B-2 before it, it will be designed to be “dual-use,” meaning that it will be able to carry either conventional or nuclear weapons as required. Dual-use is a critical — but controversial — capability.

The Air Force is also considering whether or not to pursue a new air-launched cruise missile (ALCM). The new ALCM – known in defense circles as the long-range standoff (LRSO) weapon – would possess advanced capabilities to increase the chances of success and against modern air defenses. Like the new bombers that may one day employ it, this missile is dual-use as well.

link.

B-2 Bomber Gets Upgrades, Planned to Have Hypersonic Missile

The Air Force is making upgrades to the communications and weapons systems carried by the B-2 bomber by accelerating development of an air-launched, guided nuclear cruise missile and preparing to produce modifications to the existing B-61 nuclear bomb, service officials said.

The B-2 upgrades will outfit the attack aircraft with next generation digital nuclear weapons called the B-61 Mod 12 with a tail kit — and speed up development of a nuclear cruise missile called the Long Range Stand-Off weapon or, LRSO, Eric Single, chief of the Global Strike division for Air Force acquisition, said in an interview with Military​.com.

The LRSO will replace the Air Launched Cruise Missile, or ALCM, which right now is only carried by the B-52 bomber, Single said.

link.

Yes, Virginia: We Really DO Need to Modernize the Entirety of the Nuclear Triad

Nuclear modernization will receive at least $1.2 billion more this year than last year’s $23.5 billion if the president’s Defense Department budget request is approved. Modernization funding for nuclear weapons and their delivery systems comprise 4 percent of the defense budget and 0.6 percent of the Federal budget. These include : the Ohio-class submarine replacement program (ORP); a new long range bomber (LRSB); and a follow-on air launched cruise missiles (ALCM), as well as the ground-based strategic deterrent (currently the Minuteman missile system.)

Critics says that’s too much. They want to eliminate four of the ORPs while retiring four of the current submarines early and delaying by four years the procurement of the first new sub; delay buying the LRSB; cancel the ALCM and modernization of the ground-based cut upwards to allegedly save $75 billion over the next decade.

Are these reductions workable? Would they contribute to improving and enhancing our strategic deterrent, especially in terms of questions of stability and the future adequacy of our deterrent?

link.

US Air Force's new Long-Range Standoff (Hypersonic? Stealthy?) Cruise Missile Moves Ahead

Maintaining the shroud of secrecy surrounding the US Air Force's (USAF's) new Long-Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B), the general in charge of the USAF's nuclear forces would only tell reporters that advances in air defence technology drove the development of the Long-Range Standoff (LRSO) cruise missile being designed to arm the US bomber fleet.

"As we look around the world, air defences are getting more and more sophisticated as technology improves," said Lieutenant General Stephen Wilson. "We'll need a missile that can penetrate more sophisticated air defences."

He added that a conventional variant of the LRSO would be built after a nuclear-tipped missile is first developed.

The general said the USAF has completed its analysis of alternatives (AoA) and is now waiting on senior Pentagon leadership to allow the acquisition effort to proceed.

"We've finished the analysis of alternatives except for the Office of the Secretary of Defense coming forward, but we are proceeding on track," he said. "We're proceeding with an LRSO, working on the phasing and the timing and the funding for that going forward."

The USAF studied "a variety of options - different capabilities, different speeds, lots of different options", he added. "We narrowed our focus to what we currently have. Beyond that, I can't get into specifics."

In December 2012, the Pentagon announced plans to issue separate contracts to Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman for the technology development (TD) phase of the LRSO programme. A request for information released just ahead of that announcement contained no details about whether the USAF was seeking a subsonic, a supersonic, or even a hypersonic weapon.

Only a small amount of information about what the USAF is seeking in an LRSO missile is in the public domain.

Testifying before the Senate Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee in 2012, Lt Gen Wilson's predecessor described the LRSO as a stealth cruise missile. He was earlier on the record as saying that the weapon's range would be longer than the 500 n mile (c.900 km) range of the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile Extended-Range (JASSM-ER) and "closer to the current air-launched cruise missile [ALCM] range". The maximum range of the legacy nuclear-armed AGM-86B ALCM is 2,500 km. The maximum range of the conventionally armed AGM-86C and D models is 1,200 km.

The warhead for the nuclear-tipped LRSO is also unknown.

link.

US Air Force Delays Long Range Strike Missile by Three Years

The US Air Force has once again delayed development of its long-range standoff (LRSO) weapon, announcing it will push back a contract award by three years until fiscal year 2018.

The service, which had expected to award a contract in fiscal year 2015, attributes the delay to budget constraints in a document posted on the government’s procurement website.

The latest delay follows a two-year delay — from 2013 to 2015 — announced by the USAF in early 2013.

The USAF’s five-year spending plan, released on 11 March, provides move details about the service’s plan for LRSO development.

According to those documents, the USAF proposes to spend $4.9 million on LRSO in fiscal year 2015. That’s $35.6 million less than the $40.5 million that the USAF had previously expected to spend on the project that year.

The change makes way “for higher Air Force priorities,” says the service.

LRSO funding under the plan would then double each year for the next three years before jumping to nearly $145 million in fiscal year 2019.

The LRSO programme seeks to develop a weapon that can penetrate and survive integrated air defence systems, according to Pentagon budget documents.

LRSO weapons would be carried by the service’s future long-range strike bomber (LRS-B), which the service hopes to field by the mid-2020s.

The USAF is required to have an operational LRSO weapon by around 2030 under the National Defense Authorisation Act for fiscal year 2014, signed by president Obama late last year.

link.