Countermeasures Hands On Program CHOP by Leesacks

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 14

									                                                        UNCLASSIFIED


                                              TABLE OF CONTENTS


1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 1
1.1. PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................. 1

1.2. MISSION .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.3. HISTORY.............................................................................................................................. 1

2. ORGANIZATION .............................................................................................................. 2
2.1. MISSION TEAM .................................................................................................................... 3

2.2. CORE TEAM ........................................................................................................................ 4

2.3. MANAGEMENT TEAM .......................................................................................................... 4

2.4. REFEREE TEAM ................................................................................................................... 5

2.5. MISSION (TEST) DEFINITION GROUP.................................................................................... 5

3. CHOP PROCESS................................................................................................................ 6
3.1. PROBLEM STATEMENT ........................................................................................................ 6

3.2. MISSION MODES ................................................................................................................. 6

3.3. PROCESS OVERVIEW AND TIMELINE .................................................................................... 7

3.4. CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT PHASE ......................................................................................... 8

3.5. DESIGN PHASE .................................................................................................................... 8

3.6. FABRICATION PHASE ........................................................................................................... 9

3.7. TEST PHASE ........................................................................................................................ 9

4. CHOP PRODUCTS .......................................................................................................... 10

5. COSTS ............................................................................................................................... 11

6. AHOP ................................................................................................................................. 11

7. SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 12

                                                        UNCLASSIFIED                                                                        i
                                                   UNCLASSIFIED




                                                       FIGURES
Figure 1: Organizational Interfaces .......................................................................................... 3

Figure 2: Skunkworks Mission Process ................................................................................... 7




                                                   UNCLASSIFIED                                                               ii
                                    UNCLASSIFIED



1.    Introduction


       Purpose

The purpose of this document is to provide a detailed description of the Countermeasures
Hands-On Program (CHOP). Presented within the document are the evolution and history,
objectives, organization, operational doctrine, and products of the program.


       Mission

The Countermeasures Hands-On Program (CHOP) supports the development of robust
missile defense systems by providing responsive hardware demonstrations of likely threats
and countermeasures. Traditional CHOP missions assess the level of difficulty for adversary
rest-of-world (ROW) countries to buy or build effective threat and countermeasure systems
using a strict simulation of a ROW environment. Advanced missions, known as Advanced
Hands-On Program (AHOP) missions, allow greater access to experienced personnel and
modern technology to effectively characterize threat system performance.


       History

The ballistic missile defense (BMD) requirements of the United States entered a new era in
the early 1990s as the world situation changed due to the demise of the Soviet Union and the
end of the Cold War. Future BMD threats would likely be associated with regional conflicts
involving the proliferation of Third World theater ballistic missiles (TBMs) that could be
used against U.S. forces deployed worldwide.

At the same time, the changing world situation caused the need to redefine the role of
ballistic missile defenses. Concern about the viability of the Strategic Defense Initiative
(SDI), especially in the threat countermeasures area, prompted the House Appropriations
Committee (HAC) to call for a review of the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization’s
(SDIO) countermeasures program, seeking assurances that the program was sufficiently
independent to truly challenge the SDI concept. This review was performed by a Defense
Science Board (DSB) Task Force which recommended the establishment of a “skunk works
like” project to determine the likelihood and ability of a Third World nation to acquire or
build simple and effective Theater Missile Defense (TMD) countermeasures.




                                    UNCLASSIFIED                                          1
                                               UNCLASSIFIED

The SDIO Countermeasures Office responded with the Countermeasures Hands-On Project
(CHOP) in the fall of 1992. CHOP was not based on the famous Lockheed skunk works1
high technology research and development approach, but rather a low technology approach
assumed consistent with Third World capabilities. The freewheeling, hands-on aspects of the
skunk works program were incorporated into the CHOP model. The SDIO countermeasures
skunkworks concept plan included an independent team of junior engineers restricted to the
use of commercial off-the-shelf hardware and existing technology that could be available to
ROW countries.

CHOP is directed by the BMDO Systems Engineering Office and executed by the Air Force
Research Laboratory (AFRL), Kirtland AFB, Albuquerque, NM. The purpose of the program
is to demonstrate, through firsthand engineering practices, the difficulty and likelihood of
various ROW potential threats and countermeasures. The CHOP process utilizes small teams
of junior government and contract engineers to perform the concept, design, fabrication, and
testing of hardware they developed or purchased, and to execute the systems engineering
along potential paths of a ROW nation.

The program officially began in November 1992 and the first Skunkworks Mission (SM-1)
was successfully tested in December 1993. As a result, BMDO decided to vigorously
continue CHOP as an official BMDO program.2 The project has since been a proven process
to answer threat and countermeasures likelihood and difficulty concerns for ROW potential
threats to U.S. defense system elements.


2.        Organization

CHOP is supported by several organizations with the common goal of providing a program
that can identify credible countermeasure threats potentially obtainable by ROW nations. The
CHOP organizational interfaces, which support this goal, are shown in Figure 1.

Team members are provided with the “big picture” perspective, which gives them the
opportunity to interface with multiple intelligence agencies and work directly with a variety
of government agencies and contractors. The projects have joint service interest and
participation. CHOP personnel understand the U.S. Missile Defense community and are
interested in aiding their effort to design and produce a robust missile defense system.



1
     The term skunk works was used by the Lockheed Aircraft Company starting in the early 1940s for its covert
     research and development organization made famous by Kelly Johnson. A skunkworks project has since
     become synonymous with a freewheeling project or agency that is nonbureaucratic and unconstrained by
     normal government acquisition practices. Kelly Johnson’s skunk works was the prototype for rapid
     development of high technology/performance, and responsive advanced state-of-the-art military aircraft.
2
     On 13 May 1993, Secretary of Defense Les Aspin announced that the Strategic Defense Initiative
     Organization was being renamed the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO). In explaining the name
     change, Aspin stated that the change “signals the end of the Star Wars era” that coincided with the last years
     of the Cold War.


                                               UNCLASSIFIED                                                      2
                                              UNCLASSIFIED



                P ro p e r in te rfa ce s e lim in a te th e p o s s ib ility o f co n ta m in atio n .

                                                       BM D O
                                                     S ys tem s
                                                   E n g in e erin g



     R e fe re e T e am
      (Inte llig e n c e
      C om m un ity)                                   CHOP
                                                  M a n a g em e nt
                                                      (A F R L )




                                                        T e am s C o o rdin ato rs
                                                                (F a c ility)




           Test                                                                                 T e c h n ic al
     O rg an iza tio n s                                                                        A d v is o rs
                                                D e s ig n T e a m




                                  Figure 1: Organizational Interfaces


The project is multifaceted and comprised of the Mission and Core Teams (referred to
collectively as the “Design Team”), Management Team, Referee Team, and a Test Definition
Group. Each of these teams is subsequently detailed.


        Mission Team

The Mission Team is comprised of junior officers and civilians from many government
agencies (e.g., AFRL, U.S. Army Space and Strategic Defense Command, Naval Surface
Warfare Center, and Defence Research Agency (U.K.)). These government engineers
(nominally four) are paired with four junior contractor engineers. Typically, four basic
engineering disciplines are represented in each team: Systems Engineer, Electrical Engineer,
Aerospace Engineer, and Mechanical Engineer.

A hands-on approach provides the junior officers and engineers the opportunity and training
to apply their technical expertise across the entire acquisition cycle (concept to test). Team
members often cross-train in different functional engineering disciplines to fill the needs of a


                                              UNCLASSIFIED                                                        3
                                     UNCLASSIFIED

CHOP mission; this results in broadening their technical awareness and value-added for their
career and parent organization.


       Core Team

The Core Team members are junior contract engineers, also relatively inexperienced, with no
previous countermeasure experience before CHOP. They, along with the Mission Team,
emulate the capabilities that could be found in any ROW country – well-educated engineers
with limited experience and information. The Core engineers provide the Mission Team with
assistance in analysis, machine tool practices and fabrication instruction, safety awareness,
and personnel support for demonstration testing. As the CHOP paradigm emphasizes the
hands-on approach, the Core Team provides one-on-one mentoring to the Mission Team.
They employ the systems engineering approach including team dynamics, an integrated
product team environment, leadership, and enhancement of professional technical briefing
skills.

The CHOP Integrated Product Team (Mission and Core teams) is responsible for the
development of an entire countermeasure, from the initial concept to the testing of a final
product.


       Management Team

The Management Team consists of the Program Manager, CHOP Test Manager, Chief
Engineer, and Teams Coordinator. The Program Manager is responsible for program
oversight, planning, and direction. The CHOP Test Manager is responsible for the day-to-
day operation of the program, as well as CHOP testing issues. The Chief Engineer provides
advice and solutions to the government management. Additionally, this individual serves as
the CHOP representative in BMDO Red/Blue exercises. This participation is important in
keeping the Red Team aware of CHOP activities, as well as keeping CHOP informed of Red
Team concerns. The Chief Engineer serves as a focal point for suggesting mission concepts
for consideration by BMDO. The CHOP Teams Coordinator serves as liaison between the
Design Team and CHOP Management, who receives their direction from BMDO Systems
Engineering Directorate, Threat and Lethality Group (BMDO/SET).

Engineering Technical Advisors are brought in, as required, from outside contractors to assist
the Design Team with specific questions they might have regarding analysis, availability of
materials, etc. Any analysis or opinions of these organizations is fed back to the Design
Team only through the Teams Coordinator after review by CHOP Management. At the same
time, CHOP Management requests the concurrence of the Referee Team. While the Design
Teams address the operational application of their countermeasure on a specific ROW
ballistic missile, the test demonstration of the countermeasure will be performed to U.S. test
standards, or in a non-ROW manner, to demonstrate acceptable test results to the missile
defense community. The CHOP Test Manager and the Test and Payload Integration (TPI)


                                     UNCLASSIFIED                                           4
                                     UNCLASSIFIED

contractor work directly with the Design Team to develop the proper testing approach to
demonstrate the countermeasure concept feasibility for the lowest cost in the shortest time
frame. CHOP Management monitors this testing process to eliminate any potential team
contamination.


       Referee Team

The Referee Team is composed of representatives from various intelligence organizations
(CIA, DIA, MSIC, NAIC, ONI, and NGIC) who oversee the CHOP process and verify its
authenticity. This team increases the credibility of the methodology (very important to the
System Program Offices) and guarantees a strong connection between the intelligence
community and CHOP activities.

The Referee Team is responsible for reviewing the draft problem statements before release to
CHOP, ensuring that CHOP activities are consistent with Third World capabilities, attending
reviews and critiquing the CHOP missions with regard to Third World capabilities, and
providing quick-response reference sources for questions from CHOP about the degree to
which certain technologies are Third World-capable. The team is not allowed to direct or
suggest technical approaches.

The presence of intelligence organizations on the team allows the intelligence community to
“validate” the technologically feasible countermeasure threats produced by CHOP in “real-
time.” Because these representatives systematically review the CHOP process and the
countermeasures threats produced, they are readily prepared to incorporate the CHOP results
into the technologically feasible section of the BMD Strategic Threat Assessment Report
(STAR) when it is updated annually. Additionally, potential intelligence indicators, spin-offs
of the CHOP process, can be valuable to the intelligence community and SDIO Intelligence
Production Requirements can be enhanced by the CHOP results.


       Test Definition Group

The Test Definition Group (TDG) is made up of CHOP management, TPI contractors, flight
test agencies, BMDO SE/TA, and other “experts.” The group objectively identifies the
technical issues, test requirements, and effectiveness analysis requirements (test data output
format for post-test performance analyses) associated with the Design Team’s
countermeasure design. Their purpose is to objectively review the design, determine its
feasibility, and provide the CHOP Test Manager with first world test recommendations and
cost estimates.

Other government agencies (e.g., NASA, MIT/LL, Sandia National Laboratory, test ranges,
etc.) also participate in miscellaneous support and demonstration testing. The Aerotherm
Corporation was selected in June 1995 as the TPI contractor, replacing Sandia National




                                     UNCLASSIFIED                                           5
                                    UNCLASSIFIED

Laboratories, for all subsequent CHOP flight and ground test proof-of-concept
demonstrations.


3.    CHOP Process

Each Skunkworks Mission follows a congruent methodology. The process is initiated by a
BMDO-generated Problem Statement, continues through a four-phase mission operations
cycle, which concludes with testing of the countermeasure.


       Problem Statement

Typically, the BMDO Threat and Lethality Group (BMDO/SET) generates potential mission
concepts through the Threat Risk Assessment (TRA) process. When a TRA identifies a
countermeasure concept that could impact U.S. defensive systems, but cannot easily assess
the likelihood of the concept, it becomes a candidate CHOP mission. The mission must then
be reviewed by BMDO’s Scientific and Engineering Advisory Board (SAEB), and upon the
board’s approval, the mission enters the CHOP mission queue. This is then codified into a
problem statement by BMDO/DTC and issued to the Design Team.


       Mission Modes

BMDO countermeasures problems are structured in two primary tasking modes and one
alternative mode.

       Responsive Mode: The CHOP IPT is free to conceive any type of countermeasure
they decide would have the most impact on the defensive system, as specified in the Problem
Statement.

        Directed Mode: The CHOP IPT is directed by the Countermeasures Office to
consider a countermeasure concept that BMDO believes is possible based on Red-Blue
interaction studies. How the ROW country views the requirements and their approach for
designing such a concept, as well as defining the difficulty for constructing the
countermeasure, are also identified.

        Freewheeling Mode: This is an informal mode of developing ideas that are not
related directly to a BMDO mission or Problem Statement, but are related to countermeasure
development in general (e.g., decoy ejector mechanisms). These ideas are worked on by team
members as the CHOP schedule permits on a time-availability basis or as a supporting
subsystem to a new Skunkworks Mission.




                                    UNCLASSIFIED                                         6
                                           UNCLASSIFIED


        Process Overview and Timeline

A four-phase design and development procedure for CHOP is performed in a simulated
ROW engineering environment that is created by restricting the team to the following
information: data about open-market technology and open-literature information on U.S.
missile defense systems. Limited support from Western “experts” may also be allowed.
Additionally, the Referee Team may approve a specific request for information or assistance.

Once developed, a countermeasure is tested through a ground and/or flight test demonstration
to assess its performance and credibility as a ROW system. This is done via the resources of
AFRL, Aerotherm, other test agencies, and various missile ranges. To evaluate proof-of-
concept, this process is considered the best “reality-check” on the difficulty and performance
of each mission’s countermeasure. The CHOP Skunkworks Mission Process is displayed in
Figure 2.




                              Concept Development
                                    Phase

      Responsive
                                                               Concept
                                                               Review          Design
   Problem Statement
                                                                               Phase


                               Concept Evaluation
                                    Phase


        Directed                                             Requirements
                                                                Review




           Flight                 Fabrication
           Test                     Phase


               Test
                                                                    Design
              Phase
                                                                    Review


                    Ground
                     Test                            Final
                                                    Report




                             Figure 2: Skunkworks Mission Process


The four-phase Skunkworks Mission Process is designed to fit a schedule of nine to ten
months as follows:




                                           UNCLASSIFIED                                     7
                                     UNCLASSIFIED


                  Concept Development Phase                ~6 weeks
                  Design Phase                             ~8 weeks
                  Fabrication Phase                        ~20 weeks
                  Demonstration Test Phase                 ~4 weeks


       Concept Development Phase

During the first phase, or concept development, the CHOP IPT brainstorms possible
countermeasure solutions that are responsive to the perceived missile defense specified in the
Problem Statement. An architecture model of the U.S. missile defense is constructed based
entirely on open literature sources (e.g., Jane’s International Defence Review publications,
Aviation Week, sales brochures). The team uses to its advantage commercial off-the-shelf
hardware and materials, computer software and hardware, and the World Wide Web. These
tools are certainly sufficient to develop effective countermeasures and would be all that is
required for any ROW nation to do the same.

All missile defense specifications used by the team to evaluate the countermeasure design
and performance requirements are compiled into a formal document. This document is in the
form of a MIL-STD-490A, Type B1 specification, classified SECRET by compilation
because of the specific missile defense system. The team uses their model of the defense and
a systematic process to eliminate ineffective concepts and downselect to their preferred
concept. The team presents its recommendations at a formal review and generally the
BMDO Countermeasures Office approves the countermeasure recommended. They can then
proceed to the engineering design phase.


       Design Phase

During the design phase, the CHOP IPT performs complete engineering design and
performance analyses, exercising their engineering disciplines. They also identify and
perform all developmental testing to aid in their engineering design during this phase.
Developmental testing (including wind tunnel tests) and prototype fabrication are frequently
required and encouraged to expedite electronic, aerodynamic/kinematic, and mechanical
design solutions. The team interacts with commercial component manufacturers and
materials suppliers and draws design information from commercial marketing engineers for
inclusion in their design analyses. In most cases, team members can obtain information and
component hardware anonymously and often just phone and fax conversations and a purchase
order are required. Software (e.g., controls, guidance, timing, etc.) is also developed during
this phase, as required. Often a team has no prior engineering knowledge of guidance and
controls design; however, they are able to develop excellent designs and have demonstrated
that the required design knowledge can be obtained from textbooks and commercial software
programs (e.g., Matlab). The team’s design is formally presented at the end of this phase,
along with analyses results and a complete set of engineering drawings. The design is frozen
after BMDO approval.


                                     UNCLASSIFIED                                           8
                                      UNCLASSIFIED

The CHOP countermeasure design philosophy stresses simplicity of design as this tends
toward lower costs, easier fabrication, and higher reliability. CHOP IPTs are encouraged to
apply current technology available to the ROW and within the ground rules set by the
Problem Statements, and innovate, not invent, through use of common sense, practical
engineering, analyses, and building prototype models to test their ideas. The fact that junior
engineers with little or no hardware fabrication background can produce a feasible
countermeasure strengthens the likelihood of such a threat from a ROW nation and supports
the development of robust BMD weapon systems.


       Fabrication Phase

During the fabrication phase, most, if not all, of the countermeasure hardware used for test
demonstrations is fabricated by the team members within the CHOP machine shop and
electronics laboratory facilities. Some routine work may be contracted out locally. Mission
Team members generally have very limited hands-on hardware experience or
materials/component acquisition experience, but are guided by the Core Team in the
appropriate mechanical/electrical processes. The resulting hardware produced by the CHOP
IPT has proven to be of professional quality and has been very durable.


       Test Phase

During the design phase, the team is responsible for developing testing requirements that
demonstrate the feasibility of their countermeasure from a ROW-operational perspective,
although a ROW-simulated demonstration test is not the goal for CHOP. The real test of
value to BMDO is a “first-world” test program -- a proof-of-concept demonstration of the
CHOP design to determine the likelihood that such a threat capability could be expected from
a ROW country. When a flight test is required, the team-built flight test hardware is
integrated with a common sounding rocket booster for flight testing during the test phase.

The testing of the CHOP-developed countermeasure is primarily to demonstrate the
feasibility of the Design Team’s countermeasure point design, recognizing the fact that other
designs based on the same concept could also be feasible. Thus, the basic CHOP design
philosophy is demonstration, not optimization. The goal is to provide a low-cost and quick
response to BMDO Problem Statements and the missile defense system designers.
Therefore, test demonstrations need only confirm the countermeasure works as intended and
are not to gather an extensive amount of information on the physics of the countermeasure.
Proper test instrumentation and data retrieval are vital to the success of these demonstrations.
Therefore, the team works closely with the CHOP Test Manager and the TPI contractor in the
development of a proof-of-concept demonstration test plan, and the identification of the
proper test instrumentation, data retrieval sensors, and test trajectory environment for the test
range of choice. The desire is to ground or flight-test the full-scale version of the team’s
design in an environment as close as possible to the actual ROW missile environment. The
team participates in the payload integration of their own fabricated countermeasure hardware


                                      UNCLASSIFIED                                             9
                                     UNCLASSIFIED

with the sounding rocket booster or payload module under the supervision of the TPI
contractor and the testing facilities.


4.     CHOP Products

CHOP’s overall contribution to the threat community has been to add credibility to potential
countermeasures that could be expected to threaten U.S. missile defense systems under
development or in the field. The successful results of several of the CHOP countermeasure
demonstrations have been reflected in the variation of design-to requirements for some
systems. The output of a CHOP mission provides point designs and test performance data to
the user that can be used in the development of threat signature models and characteristic
attack scenarios for evaluation of missile defense system performance and simulations. A
summary of CHOP products is provided below.

         Final Report: The final report for each CHOP mission takes the unique approach of
telling the CHOP IPT story from concept through test. The report describes the thoughts and
rationale behind the countermeasure selection, design issues and their resolution process,
prototype hardware and development testing, and outlines the difficulty and likelihood for a
ROW nation to develop such a countermeasure. A final report is written for every mission,
and occasionally a presentation is given to the BMDO Director and BMD community. The
report is completed within 60 days of proof-of-concept testing.

        System Specifications: Descriptions of the U.S. BMD systems, including
operational concepts and defense operational parameters, are collected or derived from open
source literature searches by each team. With this information, the team assembles a
classified system specification of the BMD system and provides this document to the
appropriate Program Offices. These specifications have shown the propensity of information
available to any nation, as well as the accuracy of these open sources to define the true
performance capabilities of U.S. BMD systems.

       Engineering Drawings: A complete set of component and assembly engineering
drawings is created during each mission. These drawings are used for the fabrication of the
countermeasure and test hardware by the IPT or by an outside machine shop if the CHOP
machine shop is overloaded or does not have the appropriate machining capability.

        Prototype Hardware: Prototype countermeasure hardware is fabricated as required
to aid in the design process as well as to support development testing. This hardware is made
available to the threat community to assist in the countermeasure characteristics definition
and threat simulation modeling.

        High Visibility: CHOP mission results are of value to the BMDO project offices, the
intelligence agencies, and the general BMD community. Demonstration tests of simple and
effective countermeasure hardware created within a short and low-cost time line have
provided positive and extensive exposure for CHOP. The CHOP Shop paradigm provides a


                                     UNCLASSIFIED                                         10
                                     UNCLASSIFIED

valuable vehicle for the investigation and demonstration of the proof-of-concept of various
first-order technologies for a very low cost and would be suitable for consideration by many
Pentagon projects.


5.    Costs

The average cost of a complete CHOP mission (from receipt of the Problem Statement
through Final Report, including all hardware, labor, and range testing costs) has been
approximately $2.5 million, with a low of $1.3 million (SM-1) to a high of $3.8 million
(SM-2). The time needed to complete a full mission has averaged about twelve months (one
being as short as nine months and one being as long as 17 months). The cost and time frame
to complete a Skunkworks Mission is dependent on the BMDO Problem Statement, the
acquisition time line for special materials, the complexity of the countermeasure design, and
the availability of flight test ranges and other test facilities.


6.    AHOP

Since its inception, CHOP has acquired considerable capabilities. A very complete machine
shop, metal working equipment, electronics laboratory, and analysis tools are located on the
CHOP facilities. In addition, CHOP personnel have established contacts with many
aerospace vendors and local machine shops. CHOP’s test agency also possesses extensive
fabrication and testing equipment and has quick access to many first-world testing resources
including AFRL. Some of the contractor engineers at CHOP have progressed well beyond
junior engineers, and although no longer on the core team, they continue to support other
CHOP related projects as experienced and seasoned engineers.

These resources were recognized by BMDO and are utilized through the Advanced
Hands-On Program (AHOP) missions conducted by CHOP. By nature these missions are
less structured than the standard Skunkworks Missions and involve a higher level of skill.
AHOP is used to address many ballistic missile defense issues including: critical
technologies, lethality issues, countermeasure designs, hardware fabrication demonstrations,
quick studies, and one-of-a- kind targets.

Mission teams are unique to each problem. Teams are composed of more experienced
government engineers, a government/contractor mix as in CHOP missions, or a small
contractor team. Team size is determined by the scope of the problem. In general, most of
the ROW constraints present in a CHOP mission do not exist, and therefore, all the
capabilities of CHOP, including TPI and senior engineers, are applied to the problem.
Although mission time lines are determined by the problem, duration does not exceed nine to
twelve months in most cases. AHOP gives BMDO an in-house capability for examining
many critical issues in a timely and cost effective format.




                                     UNCLASSIFIED                                         11
                                     UNCLASSIFIED


7.    Summary

The BMDO Skunkworks Countermeasures Hands-On Program has demonstrated that basic,
simple, and potentially effective countermeasure threats to planned U.S. BMD systems can
be developed by ROW countries. The CHOP experience of utilizing junior engineers is less
than could be expected of ROW countries that have their own engineers (trained in Western
universities) and the ability to hire experienced consultant engineers and high-quality
technicians. The successful CHOP countermeasures flight test demonstrations have strongly
supplemented the BMDO Red Team mission of the Countermeasures Office in providing
reality and credibility to BMD threat descriptions, aiding defense systems design and
performance requirements. The breadth of CHOP’s value is very appropriate for assisting the
Theater Missile Defense, National Missile Defense (NMD) and cruise missile defense
designers in developing robustness, flexibility, and evaluating threat realities. CHOP is an
excellent vehicle for the evaluation of defense element subsystem technology issues through
a quick and low-cost exercise responding to Red-Blue Team issues within a time line
compatible with most study profiles.

As of February 2000, CHOP has initiated 15 Skunkworks Missions and two Freewheeling
Missions since the program kickoff on 1 November 1992. Of the 17 missions, there have
been six completely successful flight test demonstrations. The remaining missions have
undergone ground test demonstrations. Currently, one mission is in the process of
engineering design and another mission is in the testing phase.

The most important resource and product of the CHOP process is its people and CHOP
experience has enhanced the careers of all its participants. The hands-on opportunity to take
an idea from thought to flight is not widely available to engineers of this generation. The
CHOP engineers have gained a wealth of practical engineering knowledge and leadership that
places them in a category of “expert” at an early stage of their careers. The agencies these
engineers belong to have also benefited from the training received by their people, creating
new and talented project leaders. In today’s work environment, CHOP is a unique experience
and opportunity.




                                     UNCLASSIFIED                                         12

								
To top