Cheap cruise missiles in prospect

ARLINTGON, Va., Dec. 11 (UPI) -- American naval research soon could augment its cruise missiles with relatively inexpensive versions of the weapons, but terrorists or rogue states probably will not be able to copy this capability, an analyst said Wednesday.

The Office of Naval Research has integrated commercially available components into the "Affordable Weapon," a "cruise-like" missile costing about $40,000, 10 times less than existing systems, ONR staffers told United Press International.

Today's cruise missiles, such as those used in Afghanistan, are launched from planes or ships, flying below radar coverage using preloaded maps, internal radar and military-grade Global Positioning System receivers to find their way.

A small turbojet engine, basically a modified automotive supercharger, gives the Affordable Weapon a range of several hundred miles, said John Petrik, an ONR spokesman. Commercial GPS sets generate the guidance information, with onboard processors available to accept retargeting or loitering commands from a remote observer via satellite or direct radio links.

System tests at ranges in the desert Southwest showed the system can be launched from its shipping container using a small rocket booster. ONR teams hope to adapt the missile further, both to add about 200 miles to its range and to accept existing standard payloads.

"The plan is to field 100 missiles, 80 warheads, and their shipping containers by the end of September 2003," said Tom Taylor, ONR program manager. "Payloads will vary from weapons to surveillance packages."

U.S. taxpayers will benefit from lower costs, and members of the armed forces would have access to more weapons if necessary, said retired Marine Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold, chief operating officer of the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, an Arlington, Va. think-tank. The international intelligence community has been well aware of cheap cruise missile development efforts, but the ONR work does not easily translate to hostile nations or groups doing the same, he told UPI.

"If this was going to happen anyway on a global basis, I don't see much of a downside," Newbold said. "If shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles were incredibly cheap then we would have a grand problem on our hands; but that (argument) would only be relevant if (the Affordable Weapon) was technology that would not be available otherwise."

Other research, including work at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, is already working on defenses against inexpensive cruise missiles and similar threats, Newbold said.

Integrating the various components into a usable weapon is difficult, even for experienced U.S. systems engineers, said Navy Capt. Stephen Hancock, acting head of the Naval Expeditionary Warfare Science and Technology Department. As little as a year ago, executives at American aerospace companies said an inexpensive cruise missile simply wasn't possible, he told UPI.

"This is not Lincoln Logs or Erector sets, it's not that simple," Hancock said. "You can't go back to the manufacturer and say, 'This GPS isn't accurate enough, improve it,' you have to make tradeoffs in other places."

For example, a heavier warhead could make accurate maneuvering difficult, or the computing demands of redirectable targeting systems could compete with navigational requirements, Hancock said. The time is right, however, for looking at commercial components and seeing how well they work under rigorous military conditions, he said.

The missile's low price tag makes it attractive for a number of possible non-lethal missions, including placing a GPS repeater station over a battlefield to defeat jamming. The catch to such widespread use, however, lies in writing off the cost of advanced sensors and other systems in such a payload, Hancock said. Newbold said easily recovered unmanned airplanes would be far more likely to handle such missions for the time being.