In the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration, (NNSA), officials of nuclear weapons programs try to keep them out of the limelight. But extending the life of the B61 is attracting all kinds of unwanted attention.
The cost of the nuclear bomb has doubled, with estimates now projecting that the weapon designed to defend Europe could cost $10 billion. On top of the weapon's ballooning price tag, the Air Force is working on a $1.2 billion tail kit program that adds a limited guidance capability to the bomb. And the arms control community is starting to buzz about the implications.
News about the B61's cost growth and two-year schedule delay is gaining traction on Capitol Hill. The concern among lawmakers could have implications for the program and the NNSA that oversees the U.S. nuclear force.
B61 bombs are the oldest in the U.S. stockpile. They entered the force in the 1970s, and can be used on fighter jets and long-range bombers. The arsenal has five different versions, both strategic and tactical, focused on protecting NATO members.
The latest life-extension program (LEP) aims to extend their life, merging four of those variants, all with different-sized explosive capabilities, into the B61-12. The B61-12 would draw on the design of the smallest nuclear explosive, or yield, weapon. The administration says using one variant will save money, and the B61-12 weapon would add an advanced security system to prevent unauthorized access to the weapons.
A wide range of players within the nuclear weapons complex are involved in the life-extension program. According to a Government Accountability Office report from 2011, Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and Sandia National Laboratory—run by a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin, in New Mexico and California—are directly involved in designing the refurbished B61. NNSA's Pantex Plant in Texas is tasked with assembling key subcomponents of the refurbished bomb. Additional work is completed at the Kansas City (Mo.) Plant. And a host of contractors, including Lockheed Martin and Boeing, are vying for the right to assemble the tail kit.
Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.), the chair of the Senate Appropriations energy and water subcommittee, received information on the cost growth from the NNSA and the Pentagon's Cost Analysis Program Evaluation (CAPE). On the heels of CAPE's $10 billion program estimate, she is vowing to increase oversight.
We have to find a way to stop this from happening,” Feinstein said. “We've asked that we receive monthly reports, that one person be put in charge . . . . The purpose of that is to make people solve problems quickly, before they are left and they just continue to grow.”
The outsized cost of the B61 has already had an impact on other parts of the arsenal. The administration has slowed work on other programs, including the W76 warhead, used on the Navy's Trident D5 submarine-launched weapon system, according to a congressional aide.
And the cost and schedule slip-ups have some blaming the NNSA. Rep. Michael Turner (R-Ohio), the chairman of the House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee, says the cost growth is evidence that NNSA is “incapable of performing its basic mission.”
“For the third time in two years, NATO reaffirmed recently that it wants U.S. forward-deployed tactical nuclear weapons to remain in Europe,” Turner said last week. “Yet, we are faced with the risk, of our own doing, that we may fail to honor that commitment. Why? Because the latest NNSA estimate is that this LEP, originally projected to cost $4 billion is now going to cost at least $8 billion, and, while it has already been delayed once by NNSA, from fiscal 17 to fiscal 19, there is a risk of further delay.”
The Air Force is also working on a $1.2 billion tail kit program that would add a guidance capability. A competition among top contractors for assembly of that tail kit is already underway, and the service expects to award a contract by the first quarter of fiscal 2013.
The Air Force stresses that the tail kit would not use GPS or provide “precision” level accuracy similar to a Joint Direct Attack Munition. Rather, it would “maintain the current military effectiveness given the reduction in yield.”
Merging the four versions of the B61 into one has been used to argue for removing more nuclear material from the arsenal.
But movement to lower-yield, more precise nuclear weapons is a shift that is only now coming into public view, says Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project for the Federation of American Scientists. In the past, movement toward more precise and even lower-yield nuclear weapons has been rejected by Capitol Hill. “Suddenly this weapon becomes more useable,” he says.
The B61-12 will be based on components from three different B61 types: B61-3, B61-4 and B61-7.
The secondary will be from the B61-4 or remanufactured.
Although the NNSA budget mentions replacing conventional high explosives with insensitive high explosives, all stockpiled B61s already have insensitive high explosives.
Saranno anche troppo costose ..... ma intanto gli esperimenti continuano .....
Dal "Daily Report" dell'AFA di ieri .....
Less than Critical .....
The United States last week conducted a subcritical nuclear experiment to collect data to help the nation maintain a safe and reliable nuclear weapons stockpile, announced the National Nuclear Security Administration, an agency of the Energy Department.
Dubbed Pollux, the plutonium-based experiment took place on Dec. 5 at the Nevada National Security Site in southern Nevada, northwest of Las Vegas, according to NNSA.
"Challenging subcritical experiments maintain our capabilities to ensure that we can support a safe, secure, and effective stockpile without having to conduct underground testing," said NNSA Administrator Thomas D'Agostino, in the agency's Dec. 6 release.
A new diagnostic tool used in Pollux "resulted in more data collected in this single experiment" than in all other previous subcritical tests, said NNSA Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs Don Cook.
Non solo gli esperimenti stanno continuando ..... ma c'è anche la ferma intenzione di finanziare un missile da crociera di nuova generazione ..... a testata nucleare .....
Dal "Daily Report" dell'AFA di questa mattina .....
Air Force Eyes Studies on Future Nuclear Cruise Missile .....
The Air Force announced that it intends to award contracts to Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon for each company to study performance attributes of the next-generation nuclear cruise missile that the service intends to develop and field.
Each company is expected to receive a fixed-price contract for these trade studies, which will support the technology development phase of the Long Range Standoff, or LRSO, program, states the notice posted at the Federal Business opportunities website on Dec. 5.
LRSO is envisioned as the successor to the Air Launched Cruise Missile that B-52s carry as an element of the US strategic nuclear deterrent.
In late March, senior service officials told Congress that the LRSO acquisition program would start in Fiscal 2015, two years later than originally planned, due to service-wide budgetary constraints.
However, the LRSO analysis of alternatives was still scheduled for completion early in this fiscal year, and there was no gap anticipated between LRSO and ALCM, which is expected to remain viable out to 2030 or beyond, they said.
