Industry input sought on space-based interceptors
The U.S. Space Force is seeking information on how industry could develop space-based interceptors, a critical component of the Trump administration's proposed "Golden Dome for America" missile defense system. The move comes as the ambitious program awaits congressional funding and clearer strategic direction.
On Friday, the Space Force's Program Executive Office for Space Combat Power issued a request for information (RFI) aimed at assessing the industry's ability to develop and deploy space-based interceptors (SBIs). These are missile-killing weapons stationed in space, intended to shoot down hostile rockets before they reach their targets. -
The RFI calls for industry responses by July 11 and outlines interest in a proliferated constellation of interceptors capable of knocking down ballistic and hypersonic missiles in multiple flight phases — including boost, mid-course, and glide. -
The Space Force wants both exoatmospheric SBIs (targeting threats outside Earth's atmosphere) and endoatmospheric SBIs (for interceptions within the atmosphere). The document also highlights a need for "terminal guidance" capabilities — meaning interceptors must autonomously track and destroy targets during the final seconds before impact. -
This marks the second major inquiry on SBIs this year. In February, the Missile Defense Agency launched its own RFI. As envisioned, Golden Dome would shield the U.S. homeland from long-range missile threats, including hypersonics. The idea of using SBIs dates back to President Ronald Reagan's "Star Wars" program. Then, the vision collapsed under the weight of technological and cost barriers. Today, with breakthroughs in satellite tech, sensors and launch systems, the Pentagon is revisiting the approach.
Big vision, bigger hurdles
While the strategy might look promising on paper, defense experts warn the U.S. faces a serious industrial base challenge. At last week's Defense One Tech Summit, analysts warned the U.S. is lagging behind China and Russia in the pace and scale of weapons development — particularly in hypersonics.
"The terrifying thing isn't just the systems they have, it's the industrial engine behind them," said Masao Dahlgren, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. China, he said, tests hypersonics far more rapidly than the U.S., aided by an agile, consumer-scale manufacturing ecosystem. By contrast, U.S. hypersonic testing is bottlenecked — "a two-year wait to build a factory, another two just to get on a test range," Dahlgren said.
The disparity is especially stark in infrared technology, a key enabler for missile tracking. The U.S. has only a few suppliers of infrared focal plane arrays; China mass-produces them for both consumer and government markets, giving it a substantial cost and volume edge.
Command and control: Who's in charge?
Even if the U.S. builds the technology, operationalizing the Golden Dome poses its own labyrinth of challenges. "Who decides when and how to intercept a missile?" asked Maj. Gen. Mark Piper, deputy director of operations at NORAD.
In what's described as a globally distributed threat scenario — say, a missile launched in the Pacific, arcing through space, and re-entering over North America — coordination across multiple combatant commands and authorities becomes critical. Piper warned of "seams across geography, domains and decision-makers" that could jeopardize response time without clear, rehearsed protocols.
Meanwhile, there needs to be a process for dealing with a data deluge, said Doug Loverro, a former Pentagon official now advising in industry. There's going to be a flood of information coming from the Space Force, the Missile Defense Agency and the intelligence community, he said. The challenge is turning that volume into coherent, actionable intelligence for commanders. "One of the hardest things in this project is to figure out how that information is presented to a decision maker."
| 
