$40-billion missile defense system proves unreliable - Los Angeles Times

David Willman (Pulitzer Prize winning journalist) wrote an excellent article about the problems with the US Missile Defense System.

$40-billion missile defense system proves unreliable - Los Angeles Times:



It was interesting because just the day before, I read an editorial in a few month-old copy of the MOAA magazine that complained that the Government needed to make an even stronger commitment to fully funding the Missile Defense.

I understand that missile defense is a VERY difficult engineering job.  However the efforts to develop a system has been going on for decades with only limited success.   It seems crazy to start production of a system before the R&D effort can demonstrate that they have a system that will work.  However, most of the "long poles" in the typical development are site preparation, and production of the actual launch vehicles.  The complex and risky part of the development is in the hardware and software that sits on top of the missile.  That hardware and software can often be developed quickly once the problems are solved.  So from that sense, maybe the strategy makes sense.

However, my experience in dealing with engineers in that MDA organization is that they have a very strange "culture"  I've worked with Navy, the NRO, and Air Force space programs for almost 40 years, but MDA is very different!  I think their management and risk-management system may have evolved from the Army, which has less experience with space.  -- Even when dealing with fully cleared, need-to-know associates, they tend to play their cards close to their chest, and are not open to discussion or alternatives.  I've often wondered if their management style and "culture" is what has kept them from achieving success.