As stated by congressional accountants, Raytheon Co.’s venture of cultivating, for the land-based American missile defense system, a new interceptor warhead is approximated to face a surge in cost by about $600 million, since the grant of the contract, due to chief design problems.
According to a report by the Government Accountability Office on Thursday, Raytheon Co. was given the $1 billion contract for the project in May of year 2017. It stated how the project has so far been fruitless and lagging behind by at least 2 years.
According to the GAO, this project has faced numerous systems engineering, design, quality check, and production issues. The repost stated how Raytheon is utilizing commercial already-made material and also re-using the gears from Navy missile interceptors, regarding which the GAO formerly raised apprehensions.
The GAO officer responsible for supervising the report, Cristina Chaplain, explained how the $600 million raise is the cost approximated by the Missile Defense Agency of recovering from the problems in performance identified by the program in end of year 2018 regarding the re-use of gears. She added how these problems were the reasons why the project faced unsettlements and experienced the delay spread at 2 years.
Mike Doble, the spokesperson for Raytheon, has not given a statement yet.
$412.4 million has been asked for by the Missile Defense Agency in the coming fiscal year, so they are able to keep up their study on the warhead.
Heather Babb, the spokesperson for Pentagon, stated how the previous month, the head of research and engineering at the Defense Department, Michael Griffin, gave out an unusual ‘stop-work’ command to Boeing Co. (the company in charge of managing the United States missile-defense system) after viewing the latest test outcomes which showed how the existing design was not feasible.
Heather Babb added that the Pentagon has begun an inquiry into the alternate paths that could be take.
The restructured ‘Kill Vehicle’ will serve the purpose of significantly advancing the reliability of the warhead presently in use. The warheads established in the end of year 2004, when the system first became active, were discovered to be problematic when they failed to seize pseudo targets in test runs.