The Romanian site was declared “technically capable” in December 2015, and the MDA Director Vice Adm. James Syring turned the site over to the operational commander, Vice Adm. James Foggo, commander of the U.S. 6th Fleet and Naval Striking and Support Forces NATO. It will be operationally certified sometime later this year.

“The crews are there, and the system is up and operational,” said Ferguson. “It’s being tested under various scenarios now.  It’s like a ship coming out of new construction. The crew is going through a period of workup, to make sure it’s integrated fully into the BMD architecture within Europe. On the U.S. side, we integrate with the U.S. Air Force (by the 603rd Air and Space Operations Center) in Ramstein, Germany, and our BMD ships now based in Rota. On the NATO side, we’re integrating with Striking and Support Forces NATO and AIRCOM, the Allied Air Component Command. When the site reports to NATO, there will be NATO officers in the command and control aspects of that operation. We’re now working through the doctrine to integrate into NATO.”

According to Ferguson, the two AAMDS sites only address threats with very specific geometries. “If that threat axis were to change in the south, our ships are able to reposition. So we’ve seen increasing interest by our allies in investments in BMD.”

The BMD architecture in Europe involves decision-making of both land-based systems and sea-based systems, including Patriot batteries and other sensors and assets.

Ferguson said if a ballistic missile is launched from the Arabian Gulf, the engagement time is about 12 minutes, and the decision time to conduct an intercept is shorter than that. “There’s only so many missile cells, so you need to determine whether to shoot, and which targets do you engage. The decision will have to be made who’s going to take the shot. That has to be done in minutes. And you’re coordinating between ships at sea and the shore site. So the architecture really is about the connectivity of the sensors, as well as the decision-making systems in a very compressed time engagement. We’re exercising procedures for this scenario.”

“We talk about the individual contribution to the team, because we only have 11 people on a watch team, there’s no bench. Each one is a fairly unique in the skill set and job function, so everybody’s got to be good. After the academy we go through the Aegis Ashore Team Trainer, which is modeled after the same training syllabus that we would give a ship – there’s a basic phase at the beginning, individual watch qualification, validation, and then team performance. …”

There are benefits to both the afloat and ashore option. A ship can be positioned where needed, but it may be in port or not available to respond.

“We are seeing increased collaboration with our allies in this area. We also see an increasing interest by our allies as they look at the threat to also invest in the systems that can address these threats – the sensors, the software, and the interceptors,” Ferguson said.

AAMDS was designed and built to use the same architecture and software as a DDG. Before building the site in Romania, an Aegis Ashore test site was assembled and tested at Lockheed Martin’s Moorestown, New Jersey, facility, next to the “Cruiser in the Cornfield,” where the first Aegis system was developed. The prototype facility was then taken apart and shipped to the Pacific Missile Range Facility at Barking Sands, on the Hawaiian Island of Kauai. A second Aegis Ashore site was then built at Moorestown, and this one was then dissembled and packed up for shipment to Deveselu – a small community located in relatively flat farm country about a three hour drive from Bucharest and a hosting former Warsaw Pact air base – after successful testing.