Smart missiles: weapons can switch targets in flight, send back pictures.

The Army is beginning to develop sophisticated "smart" missiles and launchers, intended to be deployed in advance of maneuver forces. Operated by remote control from miles away, these weapons would destroy enemy armored vehicles and other targets.

The project, called non-line-of-sight launch system, is one of several weapon platforms now being designed for the Future Combat Systems. The FCS is potentially a $90 billion program that aims to replace every weapon system in the Army with an integrated network of manned and unmanned vehicles.

The Army Aviation and Missile Command recently awarded a six-year $1.1 billion contract to a joint venture of Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. The companies will split the work.

Each NLOS-LS system will consist of a container launch unit, packed with missiles, which will be fired vertically. Two types of munitions will be employed: a so-called "precision-attack missile" and a "loiter-attack missile." Army officials say these missiles will be capable of identifying targets and re-directing themselves in flight, as targets move about. If die program stays on schedule, the first unit could be in operation by 2010.

According to current plans, each FCS brigade would be equipped with 60 launchers, which would make up a battalion, Within the battalion, NLOS-LS platoons will have firing batteries and a headquarters component to position the weapons on the battlefield. Once deployed, the NLOS-LS remains unattended. It will be Installed on the back of Army trucks, such as heavy wreckers, 5-ton tactical trucks or heavy Huwvees.

Once the brigade commander decides to fire, a computer launches the appropriate missile automatically without a dedicated launcher crew or operator pushing a button at the launch site.

The missiles will have automatic target recognition sensors and a two-way data-link that takes targeting updates in flight and returns imagery. With an operator in the loop, the system can be used to change targets in flight and assess battle damage.

Much of the technology, in NLOS-LS already has been demonstrated in other programs, officials note. Examples include propulsion, seeker, and communications technology developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, under a program called "net-fires." The Air Force incorporated similar technologies in a cruise missile called the low-cost autonomous attack munition.

The Army expects to create a dedicated program office for NLOS-LS in 2005. In the meantime, a task force of about 35 Army officers, engineers, analysts, and support contractors manages the project.

Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control is responsible for the loiter-attack missile. Raytheon Missile Systems is in charge of the precision-attack missile. Work on the launcher is divided between Raytheon and Lockheed Martin Maritime Sensors and Systems. Company Officials point out that the Navy is considering the vertical-launch NLOS-LS for its planned Littoral Combat Ship.

Both missiles are subsonic. The precision-attack weapon can uplink target updates and downlink images acquired just before impact. The loiter-attack missile cruises the target area and downlink status, target identities and laser radar images. Though each missile is tailored to a different target set, both will fly from a common launcher.

The launcher is a 69-by-45 inch box. The vertical launcher directs exhaust plumes out the top to minimize impact on the carrier vehicle. Sixteen sealed canisters contain 15 missiles and a fire-control computer with GPS receivers, inertial platforms, radios, batteries, antennas and special purpose-computers.

The box, with missiles included, would weigh about 3,100 pounds. Both missiles measure 7 inches in diameter and about 60 inches long and weigh approximately 120 pounds.

The precision-attack missile will engage armored targets at ranges of less than 5 km to around 40 kin. Raytheon developed the uncooled infrared semi-active laser seeker, network radio and canister.

The uncooled infrared seeker generates target imagery and an estimated target position. The semi-active laser seeker goes after targets designated by off-board lasers.

Though it fits the same canister as the precision-attack missile, the loiter-attack munition has a different flight profile and propulsion system. It is launched with a solid rocket motor, and then transitions to a turbojet to loiter for up to 30 minutes, out to 70 km from the launcher.

The cruising missile uses a three-dimensional laser radar seeker m search large areas, acquire targets, and identify targets.

Army officials also argue that the loiter-attack weapon could serve as a flying radio relay platform for other NLOS-LS missiles.

Army Future Combat System Face High Risk of Failure, Cautions Study

The Army is taking unnecessary financial risks as it develops its next-generation weapon systems, said the General Accounting Office. Specifically, the congressional watchdog agency pointed to the Future Combat Systems, a program designed to replace current weapons and vehicles with new vehicles and aircraft, all integrated in a single command-and-control network.

The Army budgeted nearly $15 billion for the program through 2009, and plans to introduce new systems by 2010, The long-term plan is to field up to 15 FCS brigades, called "units of actions," at a cost of more than $90 billion.

"FCS is at significant risk for not delivering required capability within budgeted resources," said a GAO report released in April. "Three-fourths of FCS needed technologies were still immature when the program started. The first prototypes of FCS will not be delivered until just before the production decision. Full demonstration of FCS ability to work as an overarching system will not occur until after production has begun."

Based upon the experiences of past programs, the FCS strategy is likely to result in cost overruns and delays, according to GAO. "Because it is promising to deliver unprecedented performance capabilities, the Army has little choice but to meet a very high standard and has limited flexibility in cutting FCS requirements. Because the cost already dominates its investment budget, the Army may find it difficult to find other programs to cut in order to further fund FCS."

Networking so many disparate systems is one of the riskiest parts of the program, said GAO. FCS will have 18 types of vehicles and 34 million lines of software code. With just five years between program start and a production decision, the potential for trouble is high. "Assuming everything goes as planned, the FCS program will begin production before all of its systems have been demonstrated. If all FCS elements are not ready at the production decision, Army plans still call for going forward with production and fielding," said the GAO report. "Based on the lessons learned from best practices and the experiences of past programs, FCS is susceptible to discovering costly problems in late development and early production."

The Army began system development and demonstration in May 2003 and plans to make an FCS production decision in 2008.

Among the concerns is a potential bandwidth shortage, which could cripple the program, said GAO. "The information-centric nature of FCS operations will require a great deal of bandwidth to allow large amounts of information to be transmitted across the wireless network. However, the radio frequency spectrum is a finite resource, and there is a great deal of competition and demand for it."

An internal study revealed that FCS bandwidth demand was 10 times greater than what was actually available. As a result, said GAO, the Army made a number of changes to the network design to use bandwidth more efficiently and to reduce demand. GAO warned that the FCS could be vulnerable to cyber attacks. "The Army is developing specialized protection techniques, as there is only limited commercial or government software currently available that will adequately protect a mobile network like the one proposed for FCS."

Paul L. Francis, director of acquisition and sourcing management at GAO, told lawmakers at a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee that the Army should consider alternatives to the current FCS strategy.

One option would be to focus first on the development and demonstration of its most critical capabilities, such as the network. This could be done via technology demonstrations, to reduce technical and integration risks, before proceeding with an acquisition program.