On Wednesday, the House Armed Services Committee held a hearing entitled, ‘Missile Defense & Missile Defeat Programmatic Updates.’
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Thank you all for your very sobering and important opening statements.
00:04I will now turn to member questioning.
00:06We'll recognize each member for up to five minutes, and I'll start by recognizing myself.
00:13While I understand that the final architecture for Golden Dome remains under review,
00:18it would be helpful to hear from each of you how your organizations have contributed to the plans so far.
00:23And General Guillo, let's begin with you.
00:27Chairman, thank you.
00:28As you mentioned, we still don't know the final configuration.
00:34But NORAD and NORTHCOM, as separate commands, provided input to both OSD and Joint Staff
00:40in terms of the supported command, what capabilities we would need from a Golden Dome approach.
00:47And what we provided, sir, were three separate layers.
00:51First is a domain awareness layer that detects all threats from seabed to space
00:56to include the air and terrestrial layers in between that are integrated to feed two defeat layers,
01:05the first being an ICBM defeat layer, which largely exists today with the GBI's that can defeat a North Korean threat,
01:13and then an air layer that would defeat cruise missiles and air threats.
01:21The challenge, I think, is the hypersonics, which at different parts of their flight profile could be in the ICBM phase or the air phase.
01:30And so making sure that the detect and track capability was flexible enough to handle hypersonics.
01:38And then, of course, the defeat mechanisms as well.
01:40General Collins.
01:43Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
01:45So the Missile Defense Agency, as you can imagine, we have been working on a national missile defense architecture for 42 years.
01:53And so we certainly have been a big part of playing.
01:56And as the IMD Tech Authority as well, we were a key part of the team supporting what it takes to put together an integrated missile defense system.
02:04And both what we have been doing, the analysis that we've conducted over many decades,
02:10and we're at the core of helping support and form the department in putting together an architecture that's comprehensive,
02:17that covers all pieces and parts, and could be executable.
02:21General Ganey.
02:26The Army, Kurt, I, as the commander of Space and Missile Defense Command,
02:30has not personally been involved with the architecture build.
02:33I am more of the operational side when it comes to implementation.
02:38However, our team continues to man the GBI's and are prepared to support NORTHCOM in any capacity moving forward.
02:46Thank you, sir.
02:47And Ms. Yaffe.
02:50Given the whole of department nature of this problem set and the expansive vision,
02:54the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Policy joined with joint staff early in the days of receiving the executive order
03:00to try to convene the core elements of the department.
03:02The experts, the stakeholders, to help frame it in terms of what the department would need to do,
03:08lay out the requirements, make sure that we understood the guidance from the White House,
03:12and start building out different options.
03:14We certainly turned it to the technical folks to dig in and build the architecture from there.
03:18But this is an all-encompassing problem, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Policy has helped in the early days to coordinate it.
03:25And once we have a decision on the architecture, the intention is to go to phase two and to lead and conduct a theater missile defense review,
03:31as that will be important, as well as just broader considerations of strategic requirements.
03:38General Guillaume, can you talk about how the threats were considered in this process?
03:43This isn't just building capability for the sake of capability.
03:48This is based on evolving threats to the homeland.
03:50And I think it's interesting we talked about what it was six years ago, what it is today, and what you expect it to be.
03:55And from your opening statements, obviously there's great concern.
03:58So can you just talk about how you went about this?
04:03Chairman, we did use the threat as the basis for our requirements that we put forward,
04:10certainly starting with the ICBM threat that we see from North Korea and that we could potentially see from Iran
04:18should they decide to take their space launch vehicle and turn that into an ICBM.
04:23Then the hypersonic threat, which as I mentioned a moment ago, kind of goes through both the ICBM portion,
04:29depending on how it's launched, all the way through a terminal phase challenge for us.
04:34And then the air threat, which certainly over the last six years, as you mentioned, has increased
04:39as we look at both Russia and China and their doctrine, which says they will use cruise missiles
04:43to hit various points of critical infrastructure for us.
04:48And making sure that those were all tied together with a sensing grid that could feed, detect and track and feed
04:55the defeat mechanisms, and then ensure that we have the right command and control system
05:00where we could seamlessly go from one of the layers to another, excuse me, with one operator
05:08to make sure we're defeating those threats.
05:10Okay. My time has expired. I'll recognize the ranking member, Mr. Moulton, for five minutes.
05:15Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
05:17General Collins, given what we have heard from industry, is it accurate that space-based interceptors
05:22would be deployed in low-Earth orbit?
05:26Sir, we have not finalized what the space-based interceptor architecture would be.
05:31We are going to open it up to industry.
05:33I fully expect that part of that would be in the LEO environment, sir.
05:36Okay. It's hard to imagine where else there would be.
05:39General Guilla, would you agree with that assessment?
05:42Yes, sir, I would.
05:43Okay. Mr. Affey, have Russia and or China publicly or privately expressed concerns
05:49with U.S. missile defense systems posing strategic stability concerns
05:53with regards to second strike capabilities?
05:58Sir, I think the Russians are on the record for many years expressing concerns
06:01about missile defense at the same time as they build their own capabilities.
06:04Yeah, the Chinese have as well.
06:07So given General Collins' response regarding a space-based intercept architecture being placed
06:12in LEO, as General Guillaume affirmed, would it be susceptible to effects of a nuclear detonation
06:19in that orbit?
06:23Sir, were there to be a nuclear detonation in LEO, then perhaps it would be.
06:27Obviously, all the folks involved in the architecture discussions are tracking the threats.
06:31Yeah, so with what we know about Russia's efforts to develop and deploy a nuclear weapon
06:34in space and their fear of U.S. missile defenses, has there been an assessment done
06:40on the likelihood or increased chance that Russia would employ such a weapon in conflict early
06:46on to take out our space-based intercept layer?
06:53Sir, it sounds like an intelligence assessment, and I would defer that to the intelligence community.
06:57No, no, no. It's an operational question. You're going to spend billions of dollars of taxpayer money
07:01building things that could inspire the Russians to say, oh, we need to take them out
07:06before they get used.
07:08You better figure that out if you're going to spend a lot of taxpayer money on this.
07:12Sir, I understand the question.
07:14I think we have seen that Russia is pursuing these capabilities in any case,
07:18given the threats that they see broadly.
07:20However, they also continue to count on these threats with their own missiles.
07:23Well, I'll tell you what, you better figure out, if you're going to build this whole thing
07:26at the cost of tens of billions of dollars of taxpayer money,
07:30and then the Russians just plan to take it out with their space-based nuke,
07:33that's not going to work too well for anybody,
07:35because, of course, it's going to take out all the rest of our satellites as well.
07:40But, Safi, you also used a word today that I've not heard before when describing Golden Dome,
07:45aerial.
07:46Is it indeed the President's vision to only defend against aerial threats like the Iron Dome system
07:51where you got this idea?
07:52So, in other words, all China needs to do is develop the kinds of sea-based delivery systems
07:57Russia started developing after we pulled out of the ABM Treaty just to get around Golden Dome?
08:03No, sir.
08:03The executive order calls for the defense of the United States against ballistic,
08:07hypersonic, advanced cruise missiles, and other next-generation aerial attacks.
08:11The earlier part of the year.
08:12Aerial attacks.
08:13Correct.
08:13Other next-generation.
08:13So not sea-based?
08:16I mean, a sea-based ballistic missile would be part of this.
08:19As we all know, there's other ways you can run a boat up into Los Angeles Harbor, right?
08:26It's clear that Golden Dome is not designed to defend against that.
08:29Is that your understanding as well, General Guillaume, since aerial is in the executive order?
08:34Yes, it is.
08:35Okay.
08:38Seems like another big hole we should investigate before we spend a lot of money on this.
08:42General Guillaume, given your responsibilities as the Commander of Northern Command,
08:45do you believe that the strategic landscape has significantly changed in the past six years,
08:51such that the second Trump administration would dramatically change its strategic defense policy
08:57from the first Trump administration?
09:00Congressman, I do think that the landscape has changed significantly
09:04with the number of countries that are either possessing or pursuing ICBMs, the hypersonics.
09:12Are you talking about China?
09:14Because we knew six years ago that China was doing this.
09:16No, I'm talking about Iran's pursuit and Pakistan's pursuit.
09:22Okay.
09:23Well, Iran and Pakistan have been pursuing those things for a long time.
09:27Well, yes, sir.
09:28But they're certainly more advanced now than they were six years ago.
09:32Well, apparently we're going to get rid of Iran's nuclear capabilities with a deal.
09:37So I guess they're going to be off the table.
09:39Of course, we've had ways of dealing with Pakistan for a while.
09:42General Ganey, what's our pacing threat right now, according to the National Defense Strategy?
09:48The North Korean threat.
09:50Actually, it's the Chinese threat.
09:51So given that we are conducting a shift to the Pacific, how does moving THAADs and Patriot batteries
10:01out of the Pacific into the Middle East help support our national defense strategy?
10:09Any movement of any of our Patriot or THAAD systems take under careful consideration.
10:15And we also have additional assets at home station prepared to deploy and fill those voids if necessary.
10:24But every deployment is carefully considered as part of our gift map.
10:27Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:29Chair, now recognize the gentleman from Nebraska, Mr. Bacon, for five minutes.
10:34Thank you, all four of you, for being here.
10:37I was fortunate to do missile defense in Israel in 2009 and 2010.
10:41We worked with the Aero Missile Team, put in a radar satellite support, and I would never
10:48have thought that we could have shoot down 99% of 110 ballistic missiles and then later
10:53180 ballistic missiles at a 99% PK.
10:56So thank God for missile defenses.
10:58Israel has seen the impact of a system that works.
11:03And granted, we had a different problem set.
11:06We're a lot bigger.
11:06But I think our country will be well served to have a strong missile defense as well.
11:12My first question is to General Guillo.
11:14I'm a little worried about some of the cuts in our National Guard.
11:17Your predecessor talked about, had some concerns too, about having enough aircraft to do the alerts.
11:24How does the air portion of this mission fit in with Golden Dome?
11:29I mean, is it, you would think it would be more radars and interceptors, but I think aircraft
11:34play a role too.
11:35Congressman, I think you're exactly right.
11:39As we envision the entire network, it would include space-based AMTI, airborne moving target
11:46indicator, which would detect and track aircraft and cruise missiles, a land-based capability
11:52such as over-the-horizon radar, and certainly fighter aircraft with capable interceptors missiles
11:59to defeat cruise missiles, which, in addition to the ranking member's question that I answered
12:05on ICBMs, I think cruise missiles is probably the biggest advancement that we've seen over
12:10the past six years, and that needs to be a part of this integrated system.
12:15Do you get a voice when the services are looking at reductions, because your predecessor had
12:25expressed concern on the reductions with the Air National Guard, and they're the ones who
12:28are providing the alert capabilities.
12:30Do you feel well enough coordinated with it, and is your comfort zone good right now with
12:34what we have?
12:35Yes sir, to both.
12:36I do get a voice, and I am very comfortable with the Air National Guard's presentation for
12:42our alert force.
12:43Okay.
12:45General Collins, yesterday we voted on a $150 billion plus-up to our defense spending.
12:50We want to get us to about 4% GDP spending, which is the norm.
12:54Right now we're at 2.9%.
12:55It's inadequate for all the systems we want to fuel, plus taking care of our troops.
13:00So I'm excited about what we're going to be able to do this next year to right-size our
13:04defense spending.
13:05I think we're going to be spending $5.6 billion on missile defense with this.
13:11The money that we apportioned.
13:12What do you think is the first steps for you, and what do you need to feel for space interceptors
13:22and things like that?
13:23What's your first priority with this influx of money?
13:26Thank you for that, Congressman.
13:30We certainly do see the opportunity of a reconciliation to begin quickly and bring much-needed resources
13:37into the missile defense enterprise.
13:39It really is probably not just one thing.
13:41I think there's really two lanes to look at when we look at the missile defense enterprise.
13:47Number one is making sure we have the capability capacity with the kit we have today to improve
13:52the defense posture today or as quickly as we can.
13:55We can make a difference today with systems that we have.
13:58And then the second piece would be really looking at the disruptive technology piece and pushing
14:03on that development piece and getting into an agile prototyping construct as quickly as possible,
14:09whether that be directed energy, non-kinetics, or space-based interceptors.
14:14And I think we'd look to do a very heavy cyclical prototyping phase to get after that and mature
14:20that capability as quickly as possible.
14:23It would seem to me you would have to have a really good sensor system first before you
14:28can intercept.
14:29And I know something we've talked about before, obviously ballistic missiles from the sea, from
14:34the continent, but the hypersonics are very hard to track.
14:39And so I would see a real need there to really work on the sensor problem first.
14:44Yes, sir.
14:46Much of the kit that we have today, we certainly have proven sensor architectures to track ballistic
14:51missiles today, ground-based.
14:53And we are one year into our prototyping experiment with the HPTSS, the Hypersonic Ballistic Tracking
15:02Space Sensor, which has been going very well and showing very positive performance against
15:08the hypersonic threat.
15:10And so as part of that, we would look to then expand that.
15:14The Space Force and the Space Development Agency already had a plan to integrate HPTSS
15:19into the proliferated warfighting space architecture.
15:22We would look with additional resources to accelerate that as much as possible to bring that capability
15:26to bear.
15:27Thank you so much.
15:28And even if we have a differing of opinions on the actual missile defense, it seems like
15:32the sensor stuff is something we can all agree to and we need.
15:37With that, I yield.
15:38The gentleman yields back.
15:39The chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. Whitesides.
15:42Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
15:45Thanks for your service and for being here today.
15:49General Ganey, I was struck by your comments about the challenges on the deployed folks.
15:57And I recently got back from the Middle East from a trip.
15:59We went to Iraq and various Gulf nations and met with troops who are working on some of
16:06these missile defense things over there.
16:09They're doing heroic work.
16:11What could Congress do to help this challenge for these deployed folks?
16:16You referred to one program in your testimony, but I just wanted to give you the chance to
16:19elaborate a little bit further on this issue.
16:21Yes, sir.
16:22Thanks for asking that question.
16:26The Air Missile Defense Force is a very resilient force and we've asked a lot of our force and
16:31they continue to respond as you saw in the Middle East.
16:35Where Congress can support is continue to support the funding of our missile defense modernization.
16:42Our modernization is going to allow us to not completely rely on our Patriot system as the
16:48system of choice, but also filled out our integrated battle command system, which will integrate
16:53our counter cruise missile capability into our common C2 construct.
16:59So therefore, the Patriot system is not the only system that we'll have to rely on for the
17:04range of threats.
17:05It will give us the portfolio to have the appropriate shooter for the appropriate threat set.
17:11Okay.
17:12Thanks.
17:13So actually building on that, you know, one of the things that we heard throughout the
17:16Middle East was that everybody is just super eager to get more of our missile defense equipment,
17:25you know, and they are frustrated, honestly, by how long it takes for our American industrial
17:30base to produce that stuff.
17:32This is a question for maybe General Collins, or I don't know if you may, General Guillaume,
17:36you may have comments as well.
17:39What's going on?
17:40How could we improve that?
17:41You know, we're talking about folks taking 10 years to get systems that they've, you know,
17:45ordered or, you know, five to 10 years.
17:49What's the underlying challenges?
17:50How could Congress help?
17:52What does American industry need to do to do better in that production side?
17:57Thank you, Congressman, for that question.
18:00It is certainly a challenge that we continue to face with especially new developments, developments
18:05of capability that starts from scratch that does not exist.
18:08And some of those do take a considerable amount of time.
18:12There are certainly activities to focus on more mature technologies as you start the program,
18:17to focus on more open systems and modular systems so that the solution, the first solution
18:23may not be the perfect solution.
18:25It's capability to bring to bear and then evolve it and grow it over time.
18:31What I'd call more of an agile approach to bringing capability to bear.
18:36I think that's really important.
18:37I think some of the delays in like the interceptor production lines and the munitions production
18:42lines.
18:43One, I think there's improvements we could make to stabilize the funding and the demand
18:50signal on the munition line.
18:52I bought munitions for the Air Force.
18:54I buy munitions now.
18:56And the yank up and yank back, invest to expand lines, then don't fund production on those lines.
19:02I think a stabilization of that could actually help us to increase the cadence and the availability
19:08of the needed weapons that we require going forward.
19:11I think that's probably a very key item where we could look at and potentially even how we
19:15procure munitions.
19:17We procure munitions with a lot of the same rule sets that we do from larger weapon systems.
19:23There may be a more agile way to get after how we buy the parts and set up the production
19:28lines to support more agile weapons development and delivery.
19:33Thanks so much.
19:34Mr. Yaffe, last question.
19:37I've got about a minute here.
19:38I'm the new guy here.
19:39So what I don't really get is we were doing missile defense before and now we have this
19:44Golden Dome thing.
19:46What were we not working on before that we now are working on?
19:50Or is Golden Dome sort of like a rebranding of what we had before under a new executive order?
19:57Like is there some requirement that we didn't do before that we now have?
20:00And we have about 45 seconds.
20:01Sir, thank you for the question.
20:04The basic answer is that until now missile defense has been focused on rogue state ICBM
20:08threats, so truly North Korea.
20:10The direction in the Golden Dome executive order is to focus on the whole range of missile
20:16threats, the ballistic hypersonic cruise missile advanced aerial threats from all nations.
20:20And that's the significant shift in both policy and direction.
20:23So what we were we were doing that before, but you're talking about like maybe numbers
20:27like we're now going to be able to intercept hundreds or thousands of of things that are
20:31heading towards us or something?
20:33Sir, I can't comment on what the architecture will be and what it will be kinds of numbers
20:37that will be set up against.
20:38But ultimately, the homeland missile defense was focused on leveraging the GBI interceptors
20:43for the North Korea threat, which was, of course, much smaller in number.
20:47Thanks.
20:48Yield back.
20:49The gentleman yields back.
20:51The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Messmer, for five minutes.
20:56Thank you, Chairman.
20:57General Collins, thank you for our conversation earlier today.
21:00Your predecessor testified that the glide phase interceptor program schedule, which anticipated
21:05in 2032 roughly, in his words, didn't meet the threat.
21:10Is MDA developing options to accelerate the program?
21:13Congressman, thank you, and thank you for your time this morning.
21:17I think missile defense is a key area that does need additional focus.
21:21The glide phase interceptor program was due to priorities and resourcing decisions last
21:27year.
21:29We were driven to make an earlier selection and a down select years earlier than planned.
21:35That has actually delayed the program and the funding line and profile that we have in
21:39the budget that you all received last year will actually push that delivery to 2035.
21:45We are pursuing and evaluating acceleration options.
21:51It is primarily a resourcing at this point.
21:53There are some technology things that need to happen in the next three to five years, but
21:59then there is a resourcing and alignment issue that could accelerate that.
22:02We believe we could recover to 2032 with no increased level of programmatic risk across
22:08the program.
22:09But that's about the fastest we could to do today.
22:12We are looking and exploring other alternatives and options to potentially bring residual capability
22:18or partial capability from other weapons systems we have.
22:22But as it stands today, the only hypersonic maneuvering target defense capability we have is in the
22:28fleet with the SM-6 and the C-based terminal capability.
22:32What's the status of the next generation interceptors?
22:34Yes, sir.
22:36The next-gen interceptor, as briefed last year as well, due to a funding decision and priorities,
22:42we did down select to a single contractor last year a year and a half earlier than expected.
22:51That program still continues on and is our largest and highest priority program for homeland defense.
22:57We have made significant progress at the system level.
23:00The NGI is the booster, the interceptor, but the broader weapon system is also now fully
23:05aligned and synchronized with the NGI program, which is a major feat for the enterprise.
23:12Last year, I briefed at our number one issue and risk going forward with either of the vendors
23:17at that time was the solid rocket motor effort and development.
23:21This is a new booster, a new development.
23:24And we have experienced delays and issues with that development and are expecting 18-month
23:31or more delay into the delivery of that initial capability.
23:35We've taken actions to shore up that development as well as bring in an additional source to help
23:42buy down the schedule risk of the development as we move forward.
23:45It still is the foundation for the future of ICBM protection of the homeland, and we are 100% committed
23:53and focused on that program.
23:55Okay.
23:57What do you see in the space-based interceptor's role in the layered defense to ballistic and
24:01hypersonic threats?
24:03Thanks, Congressman.
24:04We're certainly taking a closer look.
24:07The executive order has opened that up for us to take a closer look and move forward on
24:12developing that.
24:13We will work through the technology piece to better understand and move that as quickly
24:17as possible.
24:19If anything that we've learned over the last year, two years in Israel, Eastern Med, in Ukraine,
24:26is that a layered missile defense approach and design is paramount to the large rate sizes
24:33that we expect, that we've seen last year, and that we would expect in the future.
24:37And adding another layer, a space-based intercept layer, to that certainly looks to increase
24:44the performance of the overall architecture.
24:47As a follow-up to that, with General Guillou, you've previously stated support for a layered
24:51missile defense approach with the space component.
24:54Could you go into more detail on how that would fit in the NORTHCOM's perspective from a defense
24:59standpoint?
25:00Congressman, having a layered approach from the NORAD and NORTHCOM perspective is essential
25:07to make sure that we can identify, track, and guide on all threats.
25:12Okay.
25:16General Collins, as you know, Iron Beam is an Israeli-developed directed energy defense
25:21system designed to defend against short-range rockets, drones, artillery, and mortar bombs.
25:25Can you discuss where things stand with our Iron Beam procurement and any funds set aside
25:31for this?
25:32Yes, Congressman.
25:34On the U.S. side, there are no funds at this point set aside for Iron Beam.
25:39As part of the Israeli supplemental from last year, there is a portion of that that we are
25:44working with our Israeli missile defense organization partners to execute and bring that money to
25:51them to continue the development and fielding of Iron Beam.
25:56One thing that we have negotiated in that agreement, though, was 50 percent of that investment is
26:01a payback into the U.S. economy.
26:03So, while it goes to Israel, they have to have half of their, half of the contracts, half
26:08of the money comes back into building our industry base.
26:10And so, that supplemental actually will serve to increase the industry base skill set and
26:17capability for, that will pay back into our directed energy efforts as we move forward.
26:22Okay.
26:24Yield back my time.
26:25The gentleman yields back.
26:26The chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. Carbajal.
26:30Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to all the witnesses being here today.
26:35We hear a lot about Golden Dome, but there doesn't really seem to be a whole lot of clarity
26:42on what the point is.
26:43You know, it reminds me of that commercial, that Wendy's commercial, where's the beef?
26:48And so, it seems that, you know, a concept has been thought of, which has been thought of
26:54before in the past.
26:56And it seems that we're going about it in a way, backwards way, to fill this system eventually.
27:03General Guillot, Collins and Gainley, how is the concept of Golden Dome different than
27:08our current missile defense architecture?
27:11And did any plans exist to develop space-based capabilities for both missile tracking and
27:17missile interception prior to January 2025?
27:20Congressman, I think the big difference that you'll see is Golden Dome takes all of the
27:27existing requirements that we had, but for the first time integrates multiple layers into
27:34one system that allows us to detect, track, and defeat multiple types of threats that affect
27:40us in different domains with one system.
27:43So while a lot of the components and the requirements were there in the past, this is the first time
27:47that it's all tied together in one system.
27:51And yes, there were certainly space-based ability to detect and track prior to this.
27:58Congressman, to build on General Guillot's response.
28:04The architecture plan that a missile defense agency had before January of 2025 included a space
28:12layer for hypersonics and ballistic missile tracking and discrimination as we move forward.
28:19And most of the other components and pieces, parts of what the executive order included,
28:25were part of the architecture plan that we were going to get after.
28:30I think maybe the biggest impact of this activity is it will accelerate many of those options.
28:37Quicker resources, the schedule was pretty long to get to some of these activities.
28:41The space-based interceptor piece was not in the architecture plan as we were before January
28:4625.
28:48And Congressman, the only point I will add that wasn't covered by General Guillot and General
28:54Collins is the executive order also called out left of launch missile defeat.
28:59I think that's an important aspect of missile defense that has been neglected to date.
29:04And focusing capabilities and efforts towards the trading of a missile force prior to launch
29:10is an important aspect of the holistic missile defeat program.
29:15General Collins, can you give us an update on the hypersonic and ballistic space sensor HBTSSS
29:21program?
29:23And what we have learned from the prototype demonstrations?
29:26What is the current plan to develop an operational constellation beyond the prototype stage?
29:32One, how do adversaries growing counter space capabilities influence MDA's view of the appropriate
29:40mix of space-based and ground-based sensors and missile defense?
29:46Thank you, Congressman.
29:47So first off, HBTSSS, it was launched in February last year on Valentine's Day.
29:53We quickly had our first hypersonic testbed test in June and then we had one later in the year.
30:02And both of those were very successful.
30:04The three main objectives of the HBTSSS prototyping were to show that we could have the appropriate
30:10sensitivity in orbit to see a hypersonic vehicle throughout its entire flight.
30:17To be able to have the quality of service, the accuracy of a track to be able to close
30:23the fire control loop and for that data to come down and enter the command and control
30:27system fast enough, so latency.
30:30And we have had two hypersonic testbed flights as well, coincident with another flight test that
30:39we did just a month and a half ago taking a look at SM6, we also had HBTSSS in view and
30:45it tracked that new hypersonic target that was used in that test very well.
30:51And so we have proved out the capability to get after the accuracy, get after the latency.
30:58We are tweaking the algorithms to improve our quality of service, but we see it as a very
31:02successful demonstration of that capability.
31:05We have been partnered with the Space Development Agency all along.
31:09They have been tracking and part of our HBTSSS development and they have our requirements and
31:16plan to integrate that capability, that level of requirement and tech into the proliferated
31:20warfighter space architecture and build that up over the coming tranches to give us eventually
31:27a global capability to track hypersonic weapons.
31:33Your last question, sir, was I'm out of time.
31:36If you could answer that for the record, that would be great afterwards.
31:39Will do, Congressman.
31:42The chair now recognizes the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Wilson.
31:48And thank you very much, Dr. Chairman Desjardins.
31:53And we appreciate all of your service and what an important time in history.
31:57What a great opportunity, I believe, we have in history to protect the American people.
32:02And we thank you all for being here today.
32:04And sadly to me, we're in a conflict we didn't choose, and that is dictators with rule of gun
32:10invading democracies with rule of law.
32:12It began February 24, 2023, the invasion by war criminal Putin of Ukraine.
32:17October 7, the invasion I consider of Israel by Iran, its puppets.
32:25And so we've just got to be prepared.
32:28And we know that earlier this month that Russia launched over 70 missiles in the capital of
32:35Kyiv against civilian targets that had catastrophic effect on 35 people killed on a bus over and
32:43over again.
32:45Just war crimes that should never occur.
32:48And then Tehran has directly fired missiles itself directly from Iran and with its puppets
32:56against civilian targets in Israel.
32:59And then we have the Chinese Communist Party continuing to expand their arsenal of median and
33:04intermediate range ballistic missiles, posing a significant threat to the United States
33:09and our allies across the Pacific.
33:12And it's my view that we must be prepared to strengthen our capabilities to deter the adversaries
33:19so that we can establish peace through strength.
33:22And General Ganey, as we modernize to deter and defend ourselves against the adversaries
33:29with increasingly deadly capabilities, we are moving towards setting up a revolutionary
33:34new missile defense system, the Golden Dome, which has been so advocated and appreciated
33:40by President Donald Trump.
33:42With that in mind, General Ganey, as the service representative on the panel with the, quote,
33:47organize, train, and equip responsibilities, are you providing input on the personnel and
33:54training requirements that would be associated with the options under the consideration for
33:59Golden Dome?
34:00Congressman, thank you for that question.
34:03I have not been part of the architecture work to date.
34:08So therefore, I have not had any input on the organizational training aspect of it.
34:13But what I can say is I have significant input into the Army's organization modernization
34:19and way forward in any elements of the Army that may be part of that architecture will
34:25have already have been vetted.
34:27And as the operational, potential operational component for NORTHCOM doing the ground-based
34:33mid-course defense system, as we ingest additional technology into the architecture, my team will
34:41be prepared to advise NORTHCOM and assist as necessary.
34:44Well, we certainly have faith in you and your colleagues.
34:47With that in mind, too, General Ganey, as the, as war criminal Putin's unprovoked invasion,
34:53which is to actually reestablish the failed Soviet Union, we see the axis of evil of the Chinese
35:01Communist Party, war criminal Putin, DPRK, North Korea, and the regime in Tehran continue to
35:08build up their missile capabilities, with a threat against the United States and our allies continuing to grow.
35:15And, General, what is the Army's position on foreign military sales for the lower-tier air and missile defense sensor?
35:23Does the Army support partner nations purchasing the system as a stand-alone item?
35:29Again, Congressman, thanks for your question.
35:32The LTAM's radar is an exportable system, currently, and it's currently part of our foreign military
35:42sales system, and Poland has purchased the system already.
35:48And, yes, it is available as a stand-alone option.
35:52However, we continue to encourage it to be purchased as part of the integrated battle command system,
35:57because that promotes the interoperability between our allies and the U.S. as we move forward.
36:03And that's exciting.
36:04It's so exciting to see Poland come to life and be free.
36:08And, Secretary Yaffe, I'm very concerned about the weaponization of space by war criminal Putin
36:15and the Chinese Communist Party, and with the potentiality of overriding or evading the ground
36:22and sea-based missile defense systems.
36:25How can this be addressed to the weaponization of space?
36:33Secretary Yaffe, thank you for the question.
36:35I think we're tracking China and Russia's developments in space very closely.
36:38They've both put up a number of capabilities of concern designed to hold our critical space-based assets at risk.
36:43And that's part of the discussion.
36:45At the same time, we hope to leverage space to enable our sensors to be most effective in the future Golden Dome system.
36:50future Golden Dome system.
36:51Well, thank you again for your service.
36:52I yield back.
36:53The gentleman yields.
36:54The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Van Orden.
36:58Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
37:00I just want to clear up a couple things here.
37:04This is the missile defense and missile defeat programmatic updates hearing.
37:08So we're here to talk about these, right?
37:12I took the liberty of having my crack graphics team draw up some of these.
37:17We're here to talk about this stuff, right?
37:20So if this happens and we don't stop it, this is going to happen, right?
37:26Mushroom cloud.
37:27No more America.
37:28So we're not here to talk about these, correct?
37:30Okay, I'm a retired Navy SEAL senior chief.
37:33We know how to take care of boats.
37:34All right.
37:35General Guillaume, I just want to clear that up.
37:40When was the Iron Dome first developed?
37:43Congressman, I'm not exactly sure.
37:47But it's been a couple of decades.
37:48Okay.
37:49Has it been improving, would you say?
37:52The Iron Dome, the Israeli system?
37:54Yes.
37:55Yes, it has been improving.
37:56Okay.
37:57So it started, they started without a missile defense system, then they had an idea, and
38:03then they started building on it, and then they got to IOC, and now they're continuing
38:07to improve it.
38:08So could we logically say, like we could extend our thought, just like do a thought experiment
38:16here, like an Einstein thought experiment.
38:18Could we say that we, as the United States of America has been intimately involved in the
38:21development of the Iron Dome system, could we say that maybe we could apply that here
38:27in the United States and that it will work?
38:29Sir, we have been involved with the development of the Iron Dome.
38:34I think General Collins could attest to that.
38:37The first, I want to confirm you.
38:42Yes, sir.
38:43So we have been partnered with Israel Missile Defense for two decades, and we actually were
38:49not part of the development of Iron Dome.
38:51We helped co-produce that, but we have their upper tiers, David Sling and Arrow, we have
38:56co-developed with them.
38:57So we've helped partner, design their architecture, and are intimately integrated.
39:01Our system and their system are integrated together to work.
39:03Yes, sir.
39:04Okay.
39:05So we could say that there's a function, a pretty darn, General Bacon pointed out 99%
39:10of these things.
39:11That's functioning in Israel right now.
39:13We have a larger industrial base than Israel.
39:16We have greater GDP than Israel, and we have a larger population than Israel.
39:22So can we say that if we applied the same type of thought process, the development of Iron
39:26Dome, and we put it here in the United States and we called it like Golden Dome or something,
39:31could we reasonably assume that that will function at some point in the future to protect the United
39:35States of America against these threats?
39:38Yes, sir.
39:40Okay.
39:41Well, I'm glad we cleared that up.
39:44Now listen, I am not of the mind that we should be shaping our defense policy on whether or not
39:54it's going to provoke Russia.
39:56I think that is a straw man argument.
39:59And I think that it is a politically derived argument that potentially puts the United States
40:04of America in jeopardy.
40:06So what we need to do is make sure that we robustly, and I trust you guys to do this.
40:11How long have you been doing this job, General Gil?
40:13I've been the commander since...
40:15No, I mean like the Air Force.
40:16Oh, 36 years.
40:1736 years.
40:1836 years.
40:19General Collins, how long have you been doing this?
40:2132.
40:22General Ganey?
40:2334.
40:24Ma'am, they've all been doing their job longer than you've been alive.
40:27How long have you been in a defense position like this?
40:32In this position for a few months.
40:35I've been in the OSD for 15 years.
40:36Okay.
40:37So we've got 100 and some years of whatever experience like dealing with defense policy
40:43and anti-missile, anti-missile machinery equipment policy deployment, right?
40:50Okay.
40:51That means that you guys are a table full of subject matter experts.
40:55And because we sit behind this dais with a microphone doesn't make us experts in these
41:00types of fields.
41:01And so I would just want to make sure that we are leaning heavily on the experts and understand
41:06that you've done this before.
41:08We're using integrated anti-missile defense systems in Israel and that they can work.
41:13And this is the last thing before my time expires.
41:16I represent Volk Field and also Fort McCoy.
41:19I'm giving you an open invitation to when this Golden Dome gets done, I'd like a battery
41:25of whatever it's going to look like at Volk Field or Fort McCoy in the state of Wisconsin
41:30to help protect the upper Midwest.
41:32That is an open invitation.
41:33If you guys haven't been there, I want to invite you.
41:35I'll give you some cheese curds, but I want your soldiers and airmen and space force people
41:39or whatever, their guardians, at some point in my district to help protect the United States
41:43of America.
41:44So thank you very much.
41:45And with that, I yield back.
41:46The gentleman yields back.
41:47The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Crank.
41:53Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
41:54Thank you to our witnesses.
41:56You know, and it's interesting as I'm listening to this discussion.
42:00I had a colleague came to me not long ago after I was talking about Golden Dome and my support
42:07for it.
42:08And that colleague said to me, essentially, you know, that's a pipe dream.
42:14It's just never going to work.
42:16And I got to thinking about it because I have maybe a bit of a unique perspective.
42:22I worked as a staff member on Capitol Hill 30 years ago.
42:27I look across these pictures and Les Aspen was chairman, Ron Dellums, Mr. Spence.
42:35And I remember Mr. Dellums specifically was an outspoken opponent of ballistic missile defense.
42:42This was in the 1990s and we had arguments on the House floor about how this would never
42:48work.
42:49Missile defense would never work.
42:50And, you know, today, as I was talking to that colleague, I'd ask, well, maybe we should
43:01ask the Israelis if it would work.
43:04I mean, and I guess I would ask you this.
43:07We have these arguments about whether this is a technical problem or whether this is a
43:13problem of political will.
43:16And America does great things.
43:17But every great thing we've ever done has been difficult.
43:20There were people at the time who said we couldn't land a man on the moon.
43:25And we did it.
43:26But there were naysayers back then who said we can't do this.
43:29I would ask General Guillaume your thoughts.
43:32Is this a technical issue or is it a political will issue?
43:36Can we do this technically?
43:37Yes, Congressman.
43:40There are certainly technical challenges with the integration of all these capabilities into
43:44one.
43:45But it's certainly possible.
43:46Yeah, General Collins, your thoughts?
43:49Sir, we've demonstrated over the last two years that these systems can work, the ground-based
43:54systems that we have today.
43:56We have some understanding to do, to General Guillaume's point, the technical integration
43:59to bring a space-based interceptor to work.
44:01The understanding of what a life cycle cost of maintaining a constellation and what that
44:06brings to the fight.
44:07All those things need to be worked through as we move forward.
44:09But we certainly believe in layered missile defense and we've shown throughout the last
44:15two years that those systems work and bring capability and they save lives.
44:19Yeah.
44:20General Ganey.
44:21General Ganey.
44:22Thank you, Congressman.
44:23I agree.
44:24And in a previous job where I worked counter unmanned aerial system technology, pushing the envelope
44:31on technology, whether it's directed at energy, non-kinetics, it's amazing what industry can
44:35come up with.
44:35Yes, there's challenging, but there's always opportunities.
44:38Yeah.
44:39It seems to me that there's some people on Capitol Hill who are just so invested in mutually
44:43assured destruction that we can't shift our paradigm a little bit.
44:48And we better hope, if that's what we're going to rely on, is mutually assured destruction,
44:52is that our adversaries don't figure out a way to have ballistic missile defense, that
45:00they don't figure out a golden dome.
45:02Because then mutually assured destruction will be a thing of the past and will be left in the
45:07dust on that.
45:08So I think that's very important.
45:10With the remaining time I have, General Collins, MDA has been a strong advocate for the importance
45:17of space-based sensors that collect fire control quality data.
45:21Can you talk about why that level of fidelity is so important to missile defense operations?
45:26Yes, thanks for that, Congressman.
45:29Certainly we do see a future, as I mentioned, our architecture did include a number of different
45:34sensing capabilities in space.
45:36One being the HPTSS to look down and pick up the maneuvering targets and hold them under
45:40custody through the entire time of flight.
45:44Closing the fire control loop is what we call it, fire control, the kill chain for missile
45:47defense.
45:48We, to get our interceptor to work, we need to get it into the right location and looking
45:53in the right space to find the missile when it comes time to intercept.
45:58Again, without the appropriate level of sensitivity, track quality, and timeliness, we do not get
46:04that information to the interceptor in time, and therefore we cannot consummate the intercept
46:08and we will miss.
46:09So that's going to be very important, whether that's a hypersonic interceptor, whether that
46:14is a ballistic missile that we intercept in boost phase, mid-course phase, or terminal phase.
46:20We need to get that queue really, really tied in, and to the interceptor, to the command
46:26and control system and into the interceptor as quickly as possible, to be able to close
46:30that chain and actually do the intercept.
46:33Yeah.
46:34Thank you, General.
46:35I appreciate that.
46:36I would just say, Mr. Chairman, I mean, these are hard discussions, but we sit in this committee
46:39room and we hear about the threat from China day in and day out.
46:42We hear about the threat from Russia day in and day out.
46:45And then we sit up here from this dais or out on the House floor and we make excuses about
46:51why we can't fund these things.
46:52I'd yield back.
46:54I thank the gentleman.
46:55And I would like to thank all of our witnesses on behalf of Ranking Member Moulton and all the
47:00committee members for your thoughtful testimony.
47:02That will conclude the open portion of this hearing.
47:04We will now move into the closed session upstairs.