Nuclear experts from three different think tanks argue that it's time to be serious about the idea of mobile launchers for America's ICBMs, especially given that the Air Force now says Sentinel will “predominantly” need new silos after years of saying the existing infrastructure will work for the new missile.

KEY TAKEAWAYS: Relying entirely on the current plan for silo-based ICBMs could pose grave risks that leave a future president with a far too-small ICBM force when the adversaries’ combined ICBMs have swelled.

Empowering decision makers to cut through bureaucratic hurdles and deploying Sentinel on road-mobile launchers can ensure that continued cost-overruns don’t lead to delays and a diminished ICBM force in the long run.

DETAILS: Mobile launchers have the advantage of further complicating an adversary’s calculations and frustrating their targeting by denying them a fixed target to attack, as is the case with silo-based missiles.

By putting Sentinel on road-mobile launchers, pulled by heavy trucks in military convoys operating in the sparsely-populated quarters of the US, the next-generation ICBM could be deployed quicker — and cheaper — than waiting for new silos to be constructed. (This approach implies a mixed force of both mobile missile launchers and silo-based missiles).

Some have argued that the solution is not to pursue Sentinel, but to simply extend the life of the Minuteman silos and missiles once again. The GAO, for its part, indicated the Air Force could keep those missiles viable through 2050. This option has been explored repeatedly and is deeply unwise.

See the full article at Forge ahead with the Sentinel ICBM, but consider making it mobile - Breaking Defense