Comment:  Letter from an AAFM member -- Thanks Colonel Thomas!  You are not alone!

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/letters-51/

Quote:

Accountability on Sentinel

As a career missile officer and a tax- payer, I am embarrassed and appalled by the recent report that “Sentinel ICBM Survives Pentagon Review as Costs Jump 81%.” [World, July/August, p. 27]. How can a program exceed the estimates by 81 percent and someone not get fired?  In private industry such an inept program management team would find their office contents in boxes in the parking lot with a severance check.

 This is living proof of the comment by the recent Commission on National Defense strategy which stated, “Despite years of attempted acquisition reform, the military remains hobbled by a ponderous procurement system that slows innovation and the fielding of new equipment.” 

The Minuteman ICBM (solid fueled) has been operational since 1962.  It has seen countless mods and upgrades.  Additionally, in the mid to late 1980s, the USAF developed and demonstrated Peacekeeper and a Small ICBM (both solid fueled)  as options to upgrade the ICBM force.

Therefore, research has been done for over 60 years on land-based, solid-fueled ICBM, single and multiple warhead systems, both mobile and fixed based. However, today it appears that some program managers are making a career out of reinventing the wheel and demonstrating a task that apparently exceeds their ability.  It makes you wonder if there is any “real” desire by DOD or the current administration for a new ICBM system.

The National Defense Authorization Act of 2007 directed modernization of the ICBM force. That was 17 years ago. Am I the only one embarrassed?

Col. Quentin M. Thomas,
USAF (Ret.)
Woodstock, Ga