The Future Threat

Repeated studies have confirmed that for America to mobilize all its military services swiftly in coordinated action against future threats — and to succeed in future high-priority missions with minimal casualties — depends on steady investment in science and technology.² So what is the future threat, and do we have technologies in development now to counter it? Perhaps this can best be determined by looking at three periods covering the next 25 years.

Near Term (2000-2010). The DoD's Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) envisaged a threat from "robust regional adversaries" early in the 21st Century and from "heavily-armed theater-level `peer' competitors or major powers" by about 2014. These potential adversaries are now acquiring threatening high technology in the areas of targeting, weapons of mass destruction (WMD), long-range delivery systems (theater ballistic missiles [TBMs] and cruise missiles), and airborne C⁴ISR (meaning "command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance").³ It has been noted that "some 20 nations have or are seeking weapons of mass destruction, and many are also seeking the missiles to deliver them," while "a wide range of nations have significant conventional arsenals that could pose threats to regional security."⁴

To counter these threats through 2010, the Air Force will put into the field systems which are products of R&D from the 1970s through the 1990s:

• The Airborne Laser (ABL), to be operational in 2007, grew out of projects beginning in the 1970s, like Project DELTA, the Field Test Telescope, the Airborne Laser Laboratory, adaptive optics, the chemical oxygen-iodine laser (COIL), and jitter algorithms. COIL was funded as an internal Air Force Research Laboratory basic research project in 1976, but was not successful until 1979, when it was moved into development. Jitter algorithms that went into the ABL project grew from a basic Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR) project. Development work continues, but funding is now relatively stable, and this program is on schedule. Preliminary design review was completed in February 1999.

• The Space-Based Infrared System (SBIRS) comprises constellations of satellites in high and low orbits to provide theater forces with improved detection and warning of missile launches. Initial operational capability (IOC) for the high orbit system is 2003, and for the low orbit counterpart, 2006. SBIRS uses staring infrared (IR) detection technologies in development since the 1970s. Funding for this effort has been assured over the coming Future Years Defense Program, but other R&D has been decreased as a result.

• The F-22, to be deployed initially in 2005, depends on 1980s research into supercruise, supermaneuver, Advanced Fighter Technology Integration (including digital flight control) and "supercockpit" research. This next-generation fighter is now in the engineering-manufacturing development stage, with a funding cap imposed by Congress.

• The Joint Strike Fighter, with a projected initial operational capability in 2008, uses 1980s research in short takeoff and landing, materials and stealth. It is now in the concept definition phase.

• For joint suppression of enemy air defense (JSEAD) in 2010, unattended ground sensors are under development, to be tied to a "robust" C⁴ISR system, including a dynamic controller to manage lethal and nonlethal attacks in real time. The ground sensors, equipped with Global Positioning System (GPS) links, will operate from precisely-known locations and provide "highly reliable" data on targets in their vicinity. The dynamic controller will deconflict lethal and nonlethal attacks, maintain an integrated electronic order of battle (EOB), and retask assets as needed.⁵

Mid-term (2010-2020). As one reviewing panel noted, "legacy systems procured today will be at risk in 2010-2020."⁶ Defense Secretary William S. Cohen declared in his report to Congress on the FY 1999 budget that the United States needs to "respond to the full range of military challenges throughout the next 20 years" in a "highly dynamic" security environment. This requires "extensive experimentation both to understand the potential contributions of emerging technologies and to develop innovative operational concepts to harness these new technologies."⁷ This research is needed because "U.S. technological superiority is essential to achieve the full spectrum dominance envisioned by Joint Vision 2010."⁸

Air Force systems fielded by 2020 to operate in this environment will be products of S&T projects initiated in the 1990s and the first part of the next century. As one analyst noted in 1997, "Joint Vision 2010 and the visions of the services contain many of the capabilities we need in the future. However, the procurement budgets of the services are focused primarily on current systems and do not adequately support the central thrust of their visions."⁹ Trying to reach the Air Force vision has already caused some budgetary discomfort. For example, the DefenseTechnical Objectives (DTOs)¹⁰ had no space goals in 1998, but the Air Force insisted on space being included in the 1999 objectives. Space will be allocated some 20% more of Air Force total obligational authority over the next 20 years at the expense of other programs. Space activities will center on:

• Global information management: creating a pervasive network of nodes facilitating intelligent information gathering, processing, analyzing and advising. Information "superiority" requires "a robust multisensor information grid providing dominant awareness of the battle space to U.S. commanders and forces" and "a sensor-to-shooter grid to enable dynamic targeting and cueing of precision-guided weapons, cooperative engagement, integrated air defense, and rapid battle damage assessment and re-strike."

• Sensors. "Future sensor grids will feature a variety of new imaging and signals intelligence sensors, currently in advanced stages of development, deployed abroad in Global Hawk, DarkStar, and Predator unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), as well as new space-based sensor grids, like the high and low-orbit elements of the Space-Based Infrared System (SBIRS)."¹¹

• C⁴ISR will be integrated across systems to maximize warfighters' view of the battle space, but in this mid-term period there still will be disconnects between incompatible systems. It could cost $1-2 billion per year to make systems talk to each other. Requirements for this integration are now being written. Investment is projected to be $100 billion over the next 20 years.

• Information Warfare/Information Operations (IW/IO). Potential adversaries will have access to sophisticated commercial communications systems, will be aware of U.S. dependence on information dominance, and will act accordingly through asymmetrical responses like jamming and hacking. Information operations to counter them must integrate deception, software, doctrine and tactics.

Long-term (2020 and beyond). Assessing the potential enemy over 20 years in the future is a difficult, risky endeavor. As an Air Force planner noted recently, the future is "not linear: it is chaotic." Even lacking a clear definition of the opposition, the following technologies have been identified as needed for the year 2025 and beyond¹²:

• Sanctuary base: for field deployment, a secure, low-observable, all-weather forward operating base with highly automated base security and support. Because of worldwide terrorism, there will be no other sanctuary, and all sites—even in the United States—must be protected.

• Global surveillance, reconnaissance and targeting system: a space-based, multisensorial collection, processing and dissemination real-time database. UAVs are part of this C⁴ISR effort. This marks a further integration of the field global information management architecture.

• Piloted single-stage-to-orbit transat-mospheric vehicle: a vertical takeoff rocket and hypersonic air-breathing vehicle that could provide space support and global reach from the earth's surface to low earth orbit using a combination of rocket and hypersonic air-breathing technology and then be able to land on conventional runways.

• Global area strike system: this may involve a transatmospheric vehicle integrated with high-energy laser and kinetic energy weapons or an extended range strike aircraft using hypersonic standoff weapons. Standoff warfare is now receiving a lot of work because of opponents' probable use of WMD to create exclusionary zones.

• Uninhabited combat air vehicle: an unmanned long-endurance vehicle integrated with multispectral sensors and precision-guided standoff munitions.

• Space-based Laser (SBL) system: a space-based multimegawatt, multimode high-energy chemical laser constellation. SBL R&D studies began under the Strategic Defense Initiative in the late 1970s.¹³

• Solar-powered high-energy laser system: same as above, but solar-powered.

• Attack microbots: a class of highly miniaturized robotic systems capable of mass deployment and having wide potential for innovative uses.

The DoD's S&T vision for this period is spelled out in documents such as the Basic Research Plan, giving investment strategy for "six particularly promising technologies: biomimetics [materials that mimic living cells and tissues], nanoscience [the study of processes and devices at the atomic level], smart structures, mobile wireless communications, intelligent systems, and compact power sources."

Ten basic research areas are highlighted for further concentration:

1. atmospheric and space sciences
   
2. biological sciences
   
3. chemistry
   
4. cognitive and neural sciences
   
5. electronics
   
6. materials science
   
7. mathematics and computer sciences
   
8. mechanics
   
9. terrestrial and ocean sciences
   
10. physics
    

This technology emphasis is based on the Air Force's core competencies:

• Air and space superiority
• Rapid global mobility
• Precision engagement
• Information superiority
• Agile combat support
• Global battlespace awareness

To sum up, the future threat presents both uncertainty and opportunity; it requires an Air Force with the technologies to respond flexibly and decisively to a wide range of threats. The question then becomes whether the Air Force today has the S&T and R&D capabilities in place, together with the appropriate commitment represented through budgetary funding plans, to make available to the warfighter after 2020 those technologies that will be needed.