Q&A: Lieutenant General Kevin T. Campbell
Written by Marty Kauchak
Delivering Decisive Capabilities to the Warfighter
Lieutanant General Kevin T. Campbell
Commanding General,
U.S. Army Space and Missile
Defense Command/Army Forces
Strategic Command & Commander,
Joint Functional Component
Command - Integrated Missile Defense
Campbell’s previous assignments include: chief of staff, U.S. Strategic Command, Offutt Air Force Base, Neb.; director of plans, U.S. Space Command; deputy commanding general, U.S. Army Air Defense Artillery Center and Fort Bliss, Texas; commanding general, 32nd Army Air and Missile Defense Command (AAMDC), Fort Bliss, Texas; assistant deputy chief of staff for Combat Developments, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, Fort Monroe, Va.; commander, 94th Air Defense Artillery Brigade, Darmstadt, Germany; political-military planner (Eastern Europe/Bosnia), J5, the Joint Staff, Washington, D.C.; G3, 32nd AADCOM, Darmstadt, Germany; commander, 2nd Battalion (Patriot), 43rd Air Defense Artillery, Hanau, Germany; executive officer, 3rd Battalion (Patriot), 43rd Air Defense Artillery, Fort Bliss, Texas; chief, Unit Training Division, Directorate of Training and Doctrine, Fort Bliss, Texas; ROTC Instructor, University of New Hampshire; Adjutant, 1st Battalion (HAWK), 2nd Air Defense Artillery, Korea; assistant operations officer, 38th Air Defense Artillery Brigade, Korea; commander, Nike Hercules Battery, Homestead AFB, Fla., and Fort Bliss, Texas; and artillery team commander, Datteln, Germany.
His decorations and awards include the Defense Superior Service Medal (with Oak Leaf Cluster), Legion of Merit (with Oak Leaf Cluster), Bronze Star, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, Meritorious Service Medal (with two Oak Leaf Clusters), Army Commendation Medal (with two Oak Leaf Clusters), Army Achievement Medal (with two Oak Leaf Clusters), Southwest Asia Service Medal (with three Bronze Stars), Kuwait Liberation Medal, Ranger Tab and Parachutist Badge.
Q: What is your perspective of the Defense Department’s fiscal year 2010 request to redirect $700 million to theater missile defense systems [THAAD and SM3] from other programs and technology efforts within the ballistic missile defense system?
A: Regarding the overall fiscal year 2010 budget, Secretary Gates stated, “We must balance this department’s programs in order to institutionalize and enhance our capabilities, to fight the wars we’re in today and the scenarios we’re most likely to face in the years ahead, while at the same time providing a hedge against other risks and contingencies.”
In this context, the redirection of $700 million to theater systems makes perfect sense and is the normal business of the budget reflecting priorities established by our senior leaders as acquisition is synchronized with all elements of U.S. power. It was a tough but prudent decision based on the realities of the international environment, our allies and our existing capabilities to counter the threat. This decision will better protect our deployed forces, allies and friends against the existing short- and medium-range ballistic missile threat and is consistent with the combatant commanders’ [CCDRs’] requirements for theater-level missile defense.
The CCDRs also agree that our current capability against longer range ballistic missiles is sufficient in the near term and that our developmental efforts are equally sufficient to address future threats. As threat assessments change, so too will our budget, developmental and fielding priorities.
Q: USAMDC/ARSTRAT recently took delivery of eight nanosatellites weighing 4 kilograms each. Please discuss the limitations, challenges and opportunities of employing the current generation of nanosatellites.
A: The SMDC-ONE nanosatellites were recently delivered to USASMDC/ARSTRAT by the prime contractor Miltec. These satellites are very small—about the size of a common loaf of bread—and weigh about 4 kilograms each. They are designed to provide an over-the-horizon communications and data exfiltration capability for the ground component warfighter. In addition to SMDC-ONE, USASMDC/ARSTRAT has established several other nanosatellite technology initiatives. Because of their small size, each individual nanosatellite is limited in power, data transmission capability and resolution.
However, their small size also makes them highly affordable on a per unit basis, usually much less than $1 million each. This level of unit cost enables these satellites to be affordably deployed in large numbers, allowing the Army to potentially achieve coverage persistence for the warfighter. What each satellite lacks on an individual basis, compared to much larger traditional satellites, it makes up for by unit affordability and the ability to be deployed into constellations providing a continuing presence over given geographic areas. This technology represents tremendous potential for providing tactical data to the ground component warfighter when and where they need it.
Q: How else will the Army increase its use of the space products in the near term—in the next five years?
A: We are actively working across several areas that impact how the Army will use space products. Our efforts range from near-space [highaltitude airships] to earth orbit [micro-satellites] to geostationary orbit [Wideband Global SATCOM].
As we work to support the warfighter, we have become better at defining and developing true net-centric effects, and we are working to make these effects more and more transparent. Within the vertical domains of land up to space, using net-centric capabilities to make land/near-space/space support transparent to the user/warfighter is the focus of our effort.
Consider the analogy of the iPhone. On the iPhone is a collection of applications. These applications are enabled through the networking of multiple sources. ... I really do not care how Google Earth images are sent to my handheld or what path my text messages are taking. ... All I care about is the situational awareness the applications provide. Our vision is for every company commander to be empowered with a handheld device with applications enabled by multi-source communications.
This is the concept the USASMDC/ARSTRAT Technical Center is working to implement with other agencies. We plan on presenting this as an operational demonstration or a TacSat 6 initiative. We believe this is the future evolution of Army space and where the Army needs to take space in the next five years.
Q: I hear the Army is adding space operations officers [Functional Area 40] to brigades and divisions to improve tactical, operational and strategic/national space support. How is this mission going? What benefits have you noticed?
A: This mission is going very well. As part of the Army’s modernization strategy, we are involved in the redesign or updating of many of the Army’s command and control [C2] headquarters. This modernization effort includes the integration of Army space operations officers [FA40] into select C2 headquarters such as the Fires brigade, division, corps and theater Army headquarters.
At the Fires brigade, the Army added one space operations officer. This officer supports the planning and execution of fire support by providing information regarding key space-based enablers, such as the global positioning system, or satellite systems that support the detection and identification of targets. This benefits the warfighter by having immediate access to GPS accuracy data for precision strike operations and a significantly improved understanding of the satellite systems and capabilities that support the Fires brigade missions.
At the division, corps and theater Army C2 headquarters level, the Army is also adding space operations officers. This provides a permanent Army space presence in each of these key C2 headquarters. The space operations officer is part of the coordinating staff and supports both the commander and staff in all aspects of operational and tactical planning. The benefit of adding Army space professionals is that they provide information and products regarding the capabilities, limitations and availability of space assets that impact the area of operations.
Q: Let’s continue to talk about your soldiers. Please discuss some efforts to increase the force’s ability to train and operate in a joint environment.
A: We have made significant progress in the areas of command and control integration, sensor integration, weapon system integration, operational readiness and system testing. In order to do so, we’ve maintained a strong focus on integration of sensors, shooters, and command and control systems.
With systems such as the Army’s Terminal High Altitude Area Defense System and the Navy’s Aegis BMD system, we have systems that can contribute to the protection of multiple areas of responsibility. We gain a significant advantage when we can use the sensor data from multiple sensor platforms spread across regions and, in fact, the globe. As the missile defense elements become more interoperable, command and control must keep pace providing commanders with a common operational picture and common planning and execution tools.
Operating globally also means operating across the areas of responsibility of our CCDRs. Global operations present a number of challenges for the missile defense community, such as command and control of operations simultaneously occurring in multiple regions; the operational control of capabilities; supported and supporting relationships; and outage/maintenance scheduling.
To address these challenges, we are developing a global concept of operations that defines the principles, relationships and processes for the planning, coordination, integration and execution of missile defense operations. The concept aims to tie together the strategic, ground-based midcourse system with regional architectures that employ systems with capabilities to defend more than one area of responsibility and systems designed to provide point defense. The geographic CCDRs are fully engaged in the development of this CONOPS.
In addition to the development of a Global CONOPS, we are also evaluating a potential role in support of U.S. Strategic Command as the Global Synchronizer for ballistic missile defense in support of a DoD global campaign plan. The Global Synchronizer serves as the planning lead CCDR responsible for directing the coordinated planning efforts of CCDRs, services, combat support agencies, defense agencies and field activities in support of a DoD global campaign plan. This methodology is already used within the DoD for managing other global operations.
Q: What are the Army space and missile defense top technology challenges that industry and the academic community can help solve?
A: 1) Lightweight, low-power payloads for high-altitude and space platforms that have low-probability-of-detection/intercept communications and ISR capabilities.
2) Tools to help commanders determine optimum responsive space infrastructure for given mission requirements, constraints and capability sets.
3) One of the largest cost drivers for missile interceptors is the seeker—lower cost, lightweight infrared and radar seekers for the next generation of missile interceptors.
4) Directed energy [lasers] show continued maturation. Solid state lasers are now being tested at the 100 kw power levels. The continued development of this technology into weapon systems would assist in filling several needs and could revolutionize the capabilities available to the warfighter. ♦