http://www.aviationnow.com/awin/awin_awst/awin_awst_story.jsp?issueDate=2004-09-13&story=xml/awst_xml/2004/09/13/AW_09_13_2004_p62-63-01.xml

Aviation Week & Space Technology

09/13/2004, page 62

William B. Scott

Colorado Springs

Terrorist threats are reshaping the decades-old command

Expanding Norad

The binational U.S./Canadian North American Aerospace Defense Command may add a third member and assume more responsibilities to bolster security of the entire continent, according to Norad's four-star commander.

Expanding Norad to include Mexico may not happen soon but is, "someday, going to make sense," according to USAF Gen. Ralph E. (Ed) Eberhart, Norad and Northern Command chief. The continuing threat of asymmetric attacks on North America makes "cooperation with our neighbors, both north and south, increasingly important." Political leaders of the U.S., Canada and Mexico obviously have to agree that a revamped Norad is mutually acceptable and protects each nation's sovereignty, "but to not consider it, to not address it, I think, would be a mistake. It has to evolve," he said during a recent round-table discussion here at Norad headquarters.

Expansion of Norad responsibilities beyond air and space to also encompass the land and maritime realms is being discussed as part of drafting a new U.S.-Canada Norad agreement to be signed in 2006. Although bringing Mexico under the Norad umbrella apparently is not being addressed for this next five-year pact, the agreement might lay the groundwork for closer trinational cooperation in the future.

Concern about potential terrorist attacks on seaports and coastal regions is stimulating consideration for broadening Norad responsibilities. "We're threatened no longer just by air and space threats. [They] can come from land or maritime, or be natural threats," Eberhart said.

He noted that "domain situational awareness" is not as mature or sophisticated for maritime and land areas as it is for U.S. and Canadian air transportation systems. Adding maritime sensors, stationing law enforcement officials at points-of-origin to check cargo ships before they embark for North America, and taking other measures have definitely improved coastal security, but "we still have a long way to go," the general says.

"I think it's just a matter of time until the terrorists try a seaborne--a maritime--attack against us. That could come in terms of bringing a ship into port [carrying] high explosives or weapons of mass destruction, or standing off from a distance and launching a UAV [unmanned aerial vehicle] or a cruise missile," he added. Canada already has a "professional, adept maritime force," and steps have been taken to align its procedures with those of the U.S. Making Norad the hub for not only air and space warning and control, but also for North American land and maritime protection, would be an obvious security enhancement, its officials believe.

Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, Norad has altered its orientation. Instead of "looking outward" to detect aircraft and missile threats approaching national borders, then warning U.S. and Canadian leaders, Norad now looks inward as well. Operations centers in Cheyenne Mountain, Colo., receive data from 51 FAA radars, plus myriad short-range systems that scan the continent's interior. An updated Air Warning Center can monitor the track of any aircraft on a flight plan in North America, and communications among critical agencies and offices are much improved.

The command generates "irregular air patrols" over certain cities, with the number of fighter sorties launched on a given day depending on intelligence received about specific threats. Under ongoing "Noble Eagle" domestic air operations, U.S. Air National Guard (ANG), Reserve forces, active-duty and Canadian military aircraft had flown more than 36,400 air defense-related sorties as of late August. They encompass fighter, air refueling tanker, AWACS and other missions. Some were NATO AWACS missions flown over the U.S., as well.

THE HIGH NUMBER of fighter intercepts--more than 1,600--without a single shootdown is proof that Norad procedures are working, Eberhart notes. Still, there's room for refining communications and coordination channels. For example, when a Beech King Air carrying Kentucky's governor approached Washington without a working transponder, it triggered a multi-aircraft scramble and, ultimately, evacuation of the nation's Capitol building. The King Air had permission to enter protected airspace, but that word didn't reach all the right parties quickly (AW&ST July 21, p. 26). Two Norad alert fighters were launched, but weather conditions in the area prevented them from visually identifying the suspected intruder aircraft.

"It was a breakdown in communications. As long as you have humans in the loop, occasionally there are going to be mistakes," Eberhart acknowledged. But, "we didn't come close to shooting [the King Air] down. . . . I know, because I was working the problem," he stressed. "The real message here is we didn't make a mistake, and the system actually worked like it's supposed to work. . . . If we shot people down based on them violating airspace, there wouldn't be a day that goes by without shooting somebody down."

"We don't have a contract that protects us from that, if you will," Eberhart explained. "I muse about that only because I know, in the aftermath--if we ever had to [shoot an aircraft down]--the person or people who authorized that decision, their life would never be the same. Nor would the life of the fighter pilot--man or woman--who actually pulled the trigger or released the missile. Obviously, that all pales in comparison to the future lives of the loved ones, families and friends of those on board that aircraft."

============================================

http://www.aviationnow.com/awin/awin_awst/awin_awst_section_story.jsp?issueDate=2004-12-06&section=Washington+Outlook

Washington Outlook

Aviation Week & Space Technology

12/06/2004, page 27

Edited by Frank Morring, Jr.

Showtime

The Pentagon is expected to undertake another flight test of its missile defense system this week, in a Dec. 8-11 launch window. The much-delayed event--designated IFT-13C--features new engagement geometry, with the target to be launched from Kodiak, Alaska, rather than Vandenberg AFB, Calif. That could mean higher and more realistic closing speeds between the kill vehicle and target. Even if that's the case, critics note not much else in the test is operationally realistic, particularly since the defense system will get a lot of data about the target it wouldn't have in a realistic scenario. The test isn't billed as an intercept attempt, although the "zero-offset flyby" label means that if things work, the target and kill vehicle will collide. Regardless of the outcome, time is running out for the White House to declare the system operational. President Bush promised that would occur before the end of 2004, and Pentagon officials insist the hardware is technically ready to be considered of limited operational use. But procedural issues related to command and control of the system continue to be debated.