Todd Jacobson
NS&D Monitor
9/26/2014
The Nuclear Weapons Council quietly selected the W80 warhead last month for use in the new long-range standoff weapon (LRSO), a National Nuclear Security Administration spokesman confirmed to NS&D Monitor this week. The W80 is the warhead currently used on the Air Force’s air-launched cruise missile, and it was picked over the W84 warhead, which was used on the ground-launched cruise missile and is part of the inactive nuclear stockpile. The W84 was retired when the ground-launched cruise missile was prohibited by the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. “Of all the options considered, the W80’s size and performance characteristics best fit the needs of the LRSO program,” NNSA spokesman Derrick Robinson said in a statement.
Robinson did not elaborate on the decision, but a U.S. Strategic Command spokesman said the W80 was selected because the warhead inventory meets the “operational requirement” of the long-range standoff weapon. “The warhead is currently part of the active stockpile which allows for a better understanding of the operations and maintenance,” the spokesman said. “The warhead also offers flexible decision opportunities on life extension options.”
A Sign of Schedule Acceleration?
The decision to down-select the W80 for the long-range standoff weapon came sooner than expected, according to nuclear experts, and could be a sign that the Obama Administration is planning to accelerate the completion of the LRSO refurbishment as part of its FY 2016 budget rollout. Because of budget constraints, the program was delayed by three years in the Administration’s FY 2015 budget request to Congress, with a First Production Unit pushed back from 2024 to 2027. At the time, the Administration said it was hoping to cut back that delay to one year.
The decision drew significant criticism, especially from Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee, who included language in the House-passed version of the FY 2015 Defense Authorization Act to eliminate the delay. On the other hand, the Senate-led Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee has opposed the LRSO warhead life extension program, zeroing out funds for the program in its version of the FY 2015 Energy and Water Appropriations Act, because it said the W80 was not in need of refurbishment. “This could be the system trying to ready itself to bring LRSO back to the left,” one Congressional aide told NS&D Monitor.
A Debate About Attributes
The Air Force is believed to have been a strong proponent of using the W80 warhead for the long-range standoff weapon, while some in NNSA—including weapons program chief Don Cook—were believed to favor the W84 because of its safety and surety features. Unlike the W80, the W84 has a fire resistant plutonium pit, and it also has insensitive high explosives rather than conventional explosives. However, the W84 is believed to have been a more expensive option than the W80, in part because it is believed to be harder to work on and refurbish. The U.S. also has more W80 warheads than W84 warheads.
The decision drew criticism from some arms control groups, including the Union of Concerned Scientists. UCS Senior Analyst Stephen Young said the decision to use the W80 warhead makes sense performance-wise as the W80 was designed for the air-launched cruise missile. But he said the Administration was missing an opportunity to make safety and surety improvements to the stockpile. “While the NNSA talks a lot about safety and security, there continues to be a great deal of emphasis on performance, as the agency’s statement notes,” Young said.
Diverging Views on Need for LRSO
Young suggested that focus on performance does not fall in line with President Obama’s goal to rid the world of nuclear weapons and reduce their role in U.S. national security policy. “For an administration that was seeking to reduce the role for and number of nuclear weapons, the idea of developing a brand new cruise missile that will likely be vastly more capable than the current version, is quite shocking indeed,” Young said. “It sends a signal that the administration continues to place great value on nuclear weapons, and will go to great lengths to increase their war-fighting capabilities. To me, that seems diametrically opposed to the goals that President Obama laid out when he first entered office.”
Lt. Gen. James Kowalski, the vice commander at U.S. Strategic Command, called the LRSO “absolutely critical” on the sidelines of a speech at the Capitol Hill Club in Washington Sept. 25. “I think it is absolutely critical to be able to give the President that option to keep that on the table,” he told NS&D Monitor. “The ALCM frankly is long passed its planned life and we’re keeping it alive and we have life extension programs for it but eventually we need a much more modern weapon with the latest stealth technology designed into the missile.”
