GBSD: LGM-182A: Sentinel ICBM Development/Operations Dicussion/Updates Thread

[Arch Admiral]

I said it before and I say it again:  There is no chance that the Congress will fund the production of 600 Peacekeeper-sized ICBMs and ~6000 nuclear warheads. There are only 450 Minuteman silos left to deploy them in. Rail-mobility was tried with Minuteman I and Peacekeeper, and failed because most US railroad tracks are so poorly maintained that the missile electronics are shaken constantly during travel. There are now far fewer miles of track for missile dispersal than in 1964 or even 1984.

This program is obviously a stalking horse for Minuteman IV. It is so grandiose that it makes LGM-30H seem reasonable by comparison. Politicians can have a fake battle between these programs while avoiding the real debate: are land-based ICBMs obsolete and useless?

The best you can say for GBSD is that it makes more sense than the Russian "Sarmat" program - a 2025 copy of the Ukrainian R-36 which is a copy of Titan II from 1964!!

[russianhalo117]

I said it before and I say it again:  There is no chance that the Congress will fund the production of 600 Peacekeeper-sized ICBMs and ~6000 nuclear warheads. There are only 450 Minuteman silos left to deploy them in. Rail-mobility was tried with Minuteman I and Peacekeeper, and failed because most US railroad tracks are so poorly maintained that the missile electronics are shaken constantly during travel. There are now far fewer miles of track for missile dispersal than in 1964 or even 1984.

This program is obviously a stalking horse for Minuteman IV. It is so grandiose that it makes LGM-30H seem reasonable by comparison. Politicians can have a fake battle between these programs while avoiding the real debate: are land-based ICBMs obsolete and useless?

The best you can say for GBSD is that it makes more sense than the Russian "Sarmat" program - a 2025 copy of the Ukrainian R-36 which is a copy of Titan II from 1964!!

Air, road, silo, and proposed sea based option from carrier decks.

[edkyle99]

Rail-mobility was tried with Minuteman I and Peacekeeper, and failed because most US railroad tracks are so poorly maintained that the missile electronics are shaken constantly during travel. There are now far fewer miles of track for missile dispersal than in 1964 or even 1984.

Far fewer miles of track today, yes, but the tracks that remain are generally in much better condition than the rails of the 1960s-80s.  They are busier, too, which means that the railroad companies would be less likely to be receptive to the imposition.  There are far fewer "boxcar" type trains than there used to be, replaced in large part by double-stack container trains, so it would be much more difficult to hide a missile car on the rails.  Finally, of course, there would be the much more organized internet-era public opposition to having a missile role through your town.

I've never understood why the U.S. didn't do a road-mobile "Midgetman", or Topol equivalent.  The U.S. has spent billions upon billions trying to figure a way to counter Topol.

 - Ed Kyle

[ZachF]

$86 billion / 450 missiles = ~$190 million per missile. 

These MIC megaconglomerates need to be broken up.

[edkyle99]

$86 billion / 450 missiles = ~$190 million per missile. 

These MIC megaconglomerates need to be broken up.

My guess is that the cost covers more than just the missiles.  There is the system development cost up front, including testing, then the launch sites have to be built or rebuilt or refurbished, including all of the launch support equipment.  There will be ground support equipment, for transport and for maintenance in wing hangars.  There will be the cost of training, etc.

 - Ed Kyle

[russianhalo117]

$86 billion / 450 missiles = ~$190 million per missile. 

These MIC megaconglomerates need to be broken up.

My guess is that the cost covers more than just the missiles.  There is the system development cost up front, including testing, then the launch sites have to be built or rebuilt or refurbished, including all of the launch support equipment.  There will be ground support equipment, for transport and for maintenance in wing hangars.  There will be the cost of training, etc.

 - Ed Kyle

They are planning to strip the silos and there control bunkers et al of all legacy MM hardware and software and install new generation systems.

[Ronsmytheiii]

Sounds like Boeing is teeing up a legal challenge:

Caret says the Air Force inadvertently disclosed Boeing proprietary information to Northrop Grumman employees on April 3, including Boeing's concerns about the terms of the procurement. This was serious enough to compromise the integrity of the competition, in Boeing’s opinion.

https://mailchi.mp/spacenews/sn-military-space-boeings-long-list-of-complaints-about-the-gbsd-competition-deadline-for-air-force-launch-rfp-extended

[gongora]

Reminder that this thread should not stray too much into political opinions and military strategies.

[edkyle99]

I'm interested in how this might lend itself to orbital launch.  It depends, I suppose, on Northrop's plans for the ICBM itself.  If they really do propose a Castor 120-type (ish) first stage, then a decent capability launcher family could appear as an adjunct.  Meanwhile, if it is OBV-ish, a lower-cost smallsat launcher could appear.  Of course Minotaur 4/5 etc. and Pegasus/Minotaur-C already exist, but they or whatever replaces them might cost less and fly more often as a result.

 - Ed Kyle

[russianhalo117]

Not sure which GBSD stage but AFRL LCS-2 award was conceded to AR by OATK to develop. With NG in charge of pathfinding GBSD AR relocated its Sacramento facility to Huntsville for motor Casings (AMF) and Camden for motor finishing, prop loading, testing, and storage. There is a nit in the story in that AMF can build 72 inch motors at present but can support 92 inch motors in the future:

https://www.waaytv.com/content/news/Skilled-to-work-Aerojet-Rocketdyne-moves-production-of-large-solid-rocket-motor-casings-to-Huntsville-566505311.html

[russianhalo117]

GSBD Design and Build award: https://spacenews.com/northrop-grumman-wins-competition-to-build-future-icbm-by-default/

[russianhalo117]

GBSD related: MM3 to drop below critical 400 missile minimum for total coverage by 2026 before GBSD comes online. Also other more severe silo issues are playing a factor on readiness:
https://www.airforcemag.com/report-icbms-to-fall-short-of-mission-needs-in-2026/

[russianhalo117]

GBSD Design shown in this video:

[Steven Pietrobon]

Here's the missile.

[russianhalo117]

Here's the missile.

The new design is a concession change to allow AR to participate. The previous design was built solely in house using the 92 inch LCS Family of Motors derived from Peacekeeper, CASTOR-120XL, CASTOR 30XL, and STAR-92 (orbital variant) development.

[russianhalo117]

To be periodically updated:

GBSD Stage Processing Facility (VAFB) Contacting process documents:
https://beta.sam.gov/opp/aa71aba7c7f44a6398c0a18ad6136eaf/view?index=opp&notice_type=r

GBSD EIS documents and related information:
GBSD NEPA: https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2509117/air-force-releases-environmental-study-on-ground-based-strategic-deterrent-icbm/
https://fas.org/blogs/security/2020/11/environmental-assessment-reveals-new-details-about-the-air-forces-icbm-replacement-plan/
http://www.gbsdeis.com/

[russianhalo117]

Proposed 1 decade delay:
https://www.airforcemag.com/garamendi-pause-gbsd-as-other-nuclear-modernization-efforts-proceed/

[edkyle99]

Proposed 1 decade delay:
https://www.airforcemag.com/garamendi-pause-gbsd-as-other-nuclear-modernization-efforts-proceed/

More than that.  Garamendi also "said there are ongoing discussions on if the silo-based ICBM leg of the nuclear triad is even necessary." 

Elections have consequences?

 - Ed Kyle

[Zed_Noir]

<snip>
Elections have consequences?

 - Ed Kyle

Maybe.


Or it could the cash crunch the next few years from the aftermath of COVID-19. Foresee a lot more people that will have persistent and serious health issues. Restarting and reformatting the post pandemic economy. Add in the likely possibility of more than a few more major weather events. Postponing the decision on big ticket items like the new ICBM is not that surprising.


Also Boeing might get it's act together to be able to submit a somewhat competitive bid later on. Just saying

[russianhalo117]

<snip>
Elections have consequences?

 - Ed Kyle

Maybe.


Or it could the cash crunch the next few years from the aftermath of COVID-19. Foresee a lot more people that will have persistent and serious health issues. Restarting and reformatting the post pandemic economy. Add in the likely possibility of more than a few more major weather events. Postponing the decision on big ticket items like the new ICBM is not that surprising.


Also Boeing might get it's act together to be able to submit a somewhat competitive bid later on. Just saying

We are beyond bids now. Only subcontracting and procurement for non NG manufactured components remain AR (future LM) has already been selected to build some alternative
concession stages to agreed joint design as manufacturing and refurbishment can be split between NG and AR (future LM).

Boeing is fighting through lobbying for another MMIII extension/refurbishment cycle dubbed and pushing for reconsideration of the MMIV (LGM-30H) project proposal which was first rejected and then proposed/withdrawn from the GBSD competition after NG bought, merged, and dissolved OATK (OA) fully into the existing company in order to have a fully in house, cost leveraging and prioritised bid which was selected and then modified to add in the AR (future LM) motor concessions) resulting in the official award through the testing and evaluation process before final approvalto proceed with the build.