BLUF: Trump Administration's $175B Space-Based Missile Shield Advances Through SHIELD Contract Awards While Facing Questions on Feasibility, Conflict of Interest, and Strategic Stability

The United States' Golden Dome missile defense initiative has entered active acquisition as the Missile Defense Agency completes staggered contract awards under its $151 billion SHIELD vehicle, positioning more than 2,400 contractors to compete for work on President Donald Trump's signature homeland defense program while fundamental questions about technical feasibility, strategic implications, and procurement ethics remain unresolved.

Announced May 20, 2025, Golden Dome represents the Trump administration's pivot from decades of limited ballistic missile defense focused on rogue state threats to an ambitious "very close to 100 percent effective" shield designed to defeat peer adversaries through space-based sensors and interceptors, boost-phase engagement capabilities, and multilayered defenses against ballistic, hypersonic, and cruise missile threats.

Program Architecture and Technical Concept

Golden Dome draws conceptual inspiration from Israel's Iron Dome but operates at vastly different scale and against fundamentally different threats. Where Iron Dome defends limited territory against short-range rockets and mortars, Golden Dome aims to shield the continental United States against intercontinental ballistic missiles, hypersonic glide vehicles, and advanced cruise missiles potentially launched from peer adversaries thousands of miles away.

The system architecture integrates four primary layers according to government briefings revealed in August 2025:

Space-Based Sensing and Targeting Layer: A proliferated constellation of satellites providing continuous missile warning, tracking, and fire-control quality targeting data. This layer builds on the Space Development Agency's Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture (PWSA) and incorporates Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor (HBTSS) satellites demonstrated in April 2025 testing.

Ground-Based Radar Arrays: Integration of existing and planned discrimination radars including the Long-Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR) at Clear Space Force Station, Alaska, which successfully tracked its first ICBM-representative target in June 2025. Additional systems include Upgraded Early Warning Radars, the AN/TPY-2 Army Navy/Transportable Radar, and Sea-Based X-Band Radar.

Interceptor Layers: Multiple intercept opportunities spanning boost-phase through terminal-phase engagement. Existing systems including Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) interceptors in Alaska and California, ship and ground-based Aegis systems, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), and Patriot batteries would be integrated with new space-based interceptors and Glide Phase Interceptors designed specifically for hypersonic threats.

Non-Kinetic Capabilities: Electronic warfare, cyber capabilities, and directed energy weapons to augment kinetic intercept systems and provide "left of launch" options to neutralize threats before missile ignition.

The executive order establishing Golden Dome directed deployment of capabilities to defeat missile attacks before launch through preemptive strike capabilities, representing a significant expansion beyond traditional defensive missile defense concepts.

Acquisition Strategy and Contract Awards

The Missile Defense Agency structured Golden Dome acquisition around the Scalable Homeland Innovative Enterprise Layered Defense (SHIELD) indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract—a 10-year, $151 billion ceiling vehicle designed to accelerate technology delivery through rapid task order competition among pre-qualified contractors.

MDA issued SHIELD awards in staggered tranches beginning December 2025, with the third tranche completed January 2026 bringing total qualified vendors to more than 2,400 companies. Major defense contractors awarded SHIELD positions include Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon (RTX), L3Harris Technologies, Boeing, General Dynamics, BAE Systems, and KBR alongside non-traditional defense companies and small businesses.

The SHIELD structure allows both MDA and other Department of War (formerly Department of Defense) components to rapidly compete individual task orders across qualified contractors, potentially reducing acquisition timelines compared to traditional program-of-record competitions for each capability increment.

Actual funding flows through individual task orders competed among SHIELD awardees, with the $151 billion ceiling representing maximum potential contract value rather than committed funding. Congress appropriated $24.4 billion for Golden Dome-related efforts through the FY2025 One Big Beautiful Bill Act with an additional $13 billion allocated for FY2026.

SpaceX Role and Conflict of Interest Concerns

Beyond the broad SHIELD contract, specific Golden Dome components have generated intense political controversy centered on SpaceX's role. The Wall Street Journal reported in October 2025 that SpaceX is positioned to receive approximately $2 billion to develop an Air Moving Target Indicator (AMTI) satellite constellation potentially comprising up to 600 satellites for tracking missiles and aircraft.

This reported award, embedded in funding approved through the July 2025 tax and spending bill without public contractor identification, would represent SpaceX's expansion from launch services provider to prime integrator for national security satellite constellations. SpaceX reportedly is also positioned for major roles in two additional Pentagon satellite programs: Milnet, a classified military communications network using Starshield satellites, and a ground vehicle tracking constellation.

The SpaceX involvement triggered formal congressional oversight requests. In May 2025, 42 Democratic members of Congress formally requested the Department of Defense Inspector General investigate Elon Musk's involvement in Golden Dome procurement. The congressional letter cited concerns over "deviations from standard acquisition processes" and a proposed "subscription model" that could "give Musk undue influence over national security."

Specific conflict of interest concerns identified by congressional oversight include:

Government Position: Musk served as co-leader of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) with authority to review and recommend cuts to government programs including defense acquisition, creating direct conflict with his commercial interests in winning defense contracts.

Personnel Relationships: Four-star General Terrence J. O'Shaughnessy, former head of U.S. homeland missile defense at NORTHCOM, now reports directly to Musk at SpaceX, raising questions about revolving door influence.

Historical Relationships: Michael D. Griffin, founder of the Space Development Agency underlying Golden Dome architecture, traveled to Russia with a young Musk in 2001 to study ICBMs and subsequently steered $2 billion in NASA contracts to SpaceX. Griffin also serves as advisor to Castelion, a startup founded by former SpaceX executives developing hypersonic weapons potentially integrated into Golden Dome.

DOT&E Oversight: In April 2025, the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation determined Golden Dome fell under its oversight mandate for programs exceeding $3 billion. Days later, DOGE investigated and slashed DOT&E resources, potentially weakening independent technical oversight.

Musk publicly denied SpaceX involvement in April 2025, stating "SpaceX has not tried to bid for any contract in this regard" and expressing preference that "other companies (not SpaceX) can do this." However, subsequent Wall Street Journal reporting indicates SpaceX positioned to receive major Golden Dome-related contracts through mechanisms embedded in broader spending legislation.

The Musk-Trump relationship subsequently deteriorated over disputes regarding the "Big Beautiful Bill" spending package, with Trump threatening in June 2025 to "terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts" as "the easiest way to save money in our Budget." Reports in July 2025 indicated the administration courting Amazon's Project Kuiper and other alternatives to reduce SpaceX dependence, though SpaceX's dominant launch capabilities and existing satellite infrastructure likely ensure continued involvement.

Technical Testing and Capability Demonstrations

While full Golden Dome integration remains years away, component technologies have achieved significant testing milestones:

Long-Range Discrimination Radar: The LRDR at Clear Space Force Station successfully tracked its first ICBM-representative target during Flight Test Other-26 in June 2025. The Lockheed Martin-developed S-band radar tracked an air-launched target over 2,000 kilometers off Alaska's southern coast, passing sensor data to the Command and Control Battle Management and Communications (C2BMC) system supporting simulated GMD engagement.

LRDR provides critical capability to distinguish between actual warheads and decoys during midcourse flight—a persistent challenge for ballistic missile defense. The radar also supports space domain awareness for satellite and debris tracking. Future software upgrades could enable hypersonic weapon detection and tracking, though this remains a developmental requirement rather than demonstrated capability.

Hypersonic Tracking Satellites: The Missile Defense Agency confirmed in April 2025 that HBTSS satellites met performance targets in testing. These specialized sensors track hypersonic glide vehicles and other maneuvering threats through their unpredictable atmospheric flight profiles—a capability existing infrared satellites struggle to provide.

Integration Architecture: The Space Development Agency's PWSA provides the transport layer linking sensors to shooters through optical crosslinks, Link-16 tactical datalinks, and Ka-band satellite communications. Tranche 1 Transport satellites demonstrate the high-speed data relay essential for Golden Dome's distributed sensor-to-shooter architecture, though the Government Accountability Office warned in early 2025 that constellation satellites have not demonstrated reliable inter-plane links due to high relative motion between orbital planes.

Cost Estimates and Fiscal Sustainability

Golden Dome cost projections vary enormously depending on scope assumptions and analytical methodologies:

White House Estimate: President Trump cited $175 billion as total program cost with completion by January 2029—a timeline immediately disputed by technical experts and defense officials.

Congressional Budget Office: CBO estimated $161-542 billion over 20 years for space-based interceptor constellations alone, depending on constellation size and replenishment rates. This estimate does not include additional sensor layers, ground-based systems, or command and control infrastructure.

American Enterprise Institute Analysis: A comprehensive March 2025 study by Todd Harrison estimated total Golden Dome costs ranging from $252 billion to $3.6 trillion through 2045 depending on architectural choices. The trillion-dollar estimates reflect robust space-based interceptor constellations with continuous orbital replenishment to counter atmospheric drag degradation.

Congressional Leadership: Republican Senators involved in the program have publicly predicted end costs in the "trillions of dollars," acknowledging the White House $175 billion figure substantially understates likely requirements.

The wide cost variance stems from fundamental architectural uncertainties:

Space-Based Interceptor Quantity: Depending on required coverage, reaction time, and inventory depth against simultaneous attacks, space-based interceptor constellations could range from hundreds to thousands of satellites. Low Earth orbit deployment necessary for boost-phase intercept capability requires continuous replenishment as atmospheric drag causes orbital decay.

Replenishment Cadence: Space Force Chief of Space Operations General Chance Saltzman noted in May 2025 that in 34 years of defense acquisition experience, "I've never seen an early estimate that was too high. My gut tells me there's going to be some additional funding that's necessary."

Technology Maturation: Many Golden Dome technologies remain developmental. Space-based interceptors capable of boost-phase engagement against protected ICBMs have never been operationally fielded. Hypersonic glide vehicle intercept remains largely theoretical with limited testing against representative threats.

Strategic Implications and Arms Control Concerns

Golden Dome represents fundamental shift in U.S. strategic posture from measured protection against limited attacks to comprehensive homeland defense designed to defeat peer adversary strikes. This pivot generates significant strategic stability concerns:

First Strike Implications: Comprehensive missile defense theoretically enables first-strike scenarios by reducing adversary retaliatory capability. While current technologies fall far short of comprehensive defense, adversaries plan force structure based on potential future capabilities rather than current limitations.

Warhead Ambiguity: Space-based platforms carrying defensive interceptors are indistinguishable from platforms carrying offensive hypersonic gliders or kinetic weapons. Strategic theorists including RAND Corporation's Forrest Morgan and Carnegie Endowment's James Acton warn this "warhead ambiguity" creates "reciprocal fear of surprise attack," incentivizing adversaries to execute preemptive blinding strikes against satellite constellations during crises.

Adversary Response: The Arms Control Association notes Russia developing anti-satellite weapons, nuclear-powered cruise missiles, and hypersonic glide vehicles specifically designed to overcome future U.S. space-based interceptor networks. China's nuclear arsenal, currently approximately one-sixth U.S. levels, could expand substantially to ensure penetration capability against improved U.S. defenses.

Offensive Dual-Use: The Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture enabling Golden Dome sensors explicitly requires "fire-control quality" targeting data—precision sufficient to guide offensive weapons rather than merely track threats. Common-Hypersonic Glide Body systems like the Army's Dark Eagle, capable of 14-inch accuracy over 1,000 miles, could be deployed on the same satellite buses as defensive interceptors. Castelion's Blackbeard munition uses HIMARS-compatible form factors allowing high-density racking in satellite payload bays, creating what critics describe as orbital strike magazines.

Greenland and Ground Infrastructure

President Trump claimed January 14, 2026, that U.S. acquisition of Greenland was "vital for the Golden Dome that we are building." Strategic analysis identifies Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base) as critical Golden Dome infrastructure:

Satellite Communications: GAO analysis noted constellation satellites require reliable inter-plane links to maintain continuous tracking custody. Pituffik serves as critical ground station bridge enabling communication across orbital planes—one of few locations providing geometric coverage of multiple orbital inclinations.

Optical Downlinks: Pituffik's polar desert environment provides exceptionally low precipitable water vapor, creating atmospheric windows for V-band and laser communications otherwise attenuated in temperate zones. This enables high-bandwidth data backhaul necessary to "close the kill chain" for hypersonic interceptors requiring real-time targeting updates.

Replenishment Logistics: Space-based interceptors in low Earth orbit experience continuous atmospheric drag requiring regular replacement. Pituffik's location supports efficient launch trajectories for replenishment satellites and provides forward logistics for the continuous resupply Golden Dome's orbital architecture requires.

While the U.S. already operates from Pituffik under agreement with Denmark, Trump administration officials argue sovereignty would eliminate political constraints and ensure uninterrupted control over assets critical to Golden Dome operations.

Technical Feasibility Questions

Independent technical assessment raises fundamental questions about Golden Dome achievability within stated timelines and cost parameters:

American Physical Society Analysis: A comprehensive March 2025 study by the APS Panel on Public Affairs concluded that strategic ballistic missile defense systems "cannot be expected to provide a robust or reliable defense against more than the simplest attacks by a small number of relatively unsophisticated missiles" even considering 15-year technology development horizons. The study noted "few of the main challenges have been solved, and many of the hard problems are likely to remain formidable."

Boost-Phase Intercept Physics: General Michael Guetlein, Golden Dome program manager, acknowledged in July 2025 that "the real technical challenge will be building of the space-based interceptor," while asserting "all the technology needed to realize Golden Dome exists today" and "we have proven every element of the physics." However, no space-based interceptor has demonstrated boost-phase intercept against protected ICBMs—systems specifically designed with countermeasures including shortened boost phases and hardened booster casings.

Hypersonic Defense Gap: Hypersonic glide vehicles maneuver unpredictably at extreme speeds in the atmosphere, rendering them far more difficult to track and intercept than ballistic missiles following predictable trajectories. While HBTSS satellites demonstrate improved tracking, actual intercept of maneuvering hypersonic threats remains largely theoretical with limited test data against operationally representative targets.

Countermeasures Evolution: Adversaries continuously develop countermeasures designed to defeat missile defenses including advanced decoys, electronic warfare, anti-satellite weapons, and saturation attacks. The Congressional Budget Office noted even optimistic Golden Dome architectures could be overwhelmed by adversaries "simply launching a salvo of missiles" with "basic countermeasures that could spoof the sensors."

Congressional Oversight and Legislative Activity

Congress has established dedicated oversight mechanisms while grappling with funding decisions and programmatic authorities:

Caucus Formation: Senate and House members formed Golden Dome caucuses to coordinate legislative activity and oversight. General Michael Guetlein received Senate confirmation in July 2025 as direct reporting program manager, establishing Golden Dome as a designated major defense acquisition program.

Authorization Legislation: The Senate Armed Services Committee-reported FY2026 National Defense Authorization Act revises U.S. missile defense policy to emphasize defending against "foreign attack by increasingly complex ballistic, hypersonic glide, and cruise missiles, and other advanced aerial threats" while maintaining second-strike capability and cooperating with allies. The House-passed version emphasizes deterring and defending against "any foreign aerial attack on the homeland."

Information Adequacy: Congressional Research Service analysis identifies persistent information gaps hindering effective oversight. While Trump announced Golden Dome in January 2025 with May 2025 details, the Defense Department has not publicly released the reference architecture, requirements document, or implementation plan that Executive Order 14186 directed submission by March 2025. DOD stated in September 2025 that it "plans to socialize" the Golden Dome architecture though whether this will be public or classified remains unclear.

Vendor Lock Concerns: Senate Armed Services Committee members including Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) expressed concerns about excessive reliance on single contractors, particularly SpaceX. The Pentagon's Defense Science Board warned that such "vendor lock" can "negate the strengths of the market by stifling innovation and inflating prices."

Program Status and Near-Term Outlook

As of January 2026, Golden Dome exists as funded development effort with established program management, expanding contractor base, and component technology demonstrations, but without publicly released integrated architecture or firm capability delivery timelines:

Immediate Priorities: Program Director briefings in January 2026 outlined priorities through 2027 focused on architecture finalization, critical technology maturation, and initial capability demonstrations. The first major integrated Golden Dome test is targeted for late 2028.

Fiscal Reality: With $24.4 billion appropriated for FY2025 and $13 billion for FY2026—totaling 2.2% of federal discretionary budget—Golden Dome funding must compete against other defense priorities including nuclear modernization, next-generation combat systems, and force structure sustainment. Sustained funding at levels necessary to field comprehensive space-based interceptor constellations faces uncertain political support as costs become more apparent.

Alliance Integration: NATO allies and Pacific partners have expressed interest in contributing to or benefiting from Golden Dome capabilities. Representatives from Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Greenland, Sweden, and Canada have indicated willingness to contribute to sensor development and infrastructure. Canada has expressed intent to support the project directly, recognizing NORAD's evolving role in integrated air and missile defense.

Technical Risk: The aggressive timeline—Trump committed to "fully operational" status before January 2029—creates significant technical risk. Defense officials described the schedule as "technically very risky" with reports indicating White House desires high-profile Golden Dome tests in weeks leading to November 2028 elections, potentially driving politically-motivated schedules rather than technically-sound development timelines.

Historical Context

Golden Dome invites comparison to President Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) announced in 1983. SDI aimed to protect the United States from large-scale Soviet nuclear attack using lasers and kinetic interceptors but ultimately failed due to technological immaturity, spiraling costs, and concerns about strategic stability and space weaponization.

Key differences include contemporary launch cost reductions driven by SpaceX's reusable rocket technology, improved sensor capabilities through commercial satellite proliferation, and artificial intelligence enabling faster sensor-to-shooter engagement cycles. However, fundamental physics challenges remain largely unchanged—space-based interceptors must overcome enormous kinetic energy disadvantages against boosting missiles, discrimination between warheads and decoys remains difficult, and adversaries retain capability to develop countermeasures faster than defenses can adapt.

The "Brilliant Pebbles" concept from late-stage SDI proposed thousands of small, space-based interceptors in low Earth orbit—an architecture remarkably similar to Golden Dome's reported design. Brilliant Pebbles died with the Cold War's end and budget pressures, never achieving operational deployment.

Industry Positioning and Competition

Traditional defense contractors and emerging technology companies are positioning aggressively for Golden Dome work:

Lockheed Martin: Emphasizing combat-proven missile defense systems including THAAD, Aegis, PAC-3, and LRDR while touting C2BMC command and control integration experience. The company established dedicated Golden Dome for America marketing emphasizing "proven capability providers" over "unproven technology."

Northrop Grumman: Highlighting interceptor development expertise and space systems integration capabilities. The company emphasizes decades of missile defense experience and existing production infrastructure.

L3Harris Technologies: Promoting HBTSS satellite development and sensor fusion capabilities. The company received $3.5 billion Space Development Agency contract in 2025 for Transport Layer satellites supporting PWSA.

Anduril Industries: Defense technology startup founded by Palmer Luckey, backed by Trump supporters, proposing advanced autonomy and AI-enabled engagement systems. Early reports suggested Anduril partnership with SpaceX and Palantir for integrated Golden Dome offerings.

Palantir Technologies: Software company founded by Peter Thiel, major Vice President JD Vance backer, offering AI-driven data fusion and command and control capabilities. Palantir's Aegis software reportedly central to system-of-systems integration concepts.

Beyond major primes, over 2,400 SHIELD-qualified contractors spanning traditional aerospace, emerging commercial space, software companies, and small businesses create broad industrial base participation.

International Developments

European and Asian allies are monitoring Golden Dome with mixed reactions:

European Concerns: While NATO allies expressed general support for improved missile defense, some European analysts warn Golden Dome could undermine strategic stability and trigger renewed arms races. Marion Messmer of London's Chatham House noted Golden Dome faces challenges "much greater than the ones that Israel's Iron Dome" addresses given peer adversary capabilities and continental-scale defense requirements.

Competing Infrastructure: The European Space Agency began construction of an optical ground station in Greenland in late 2025, creating rival terabyte-speed data transfer capability bypassing U.S. networks—potentially complicating U.S. control of Greenland-based infrastructure.

Technology Transfer Questions: Allies contributing to Golden Dome development may seek technology sharing arrangements, creating tensions between operational integration requirements and U.S. desires to protect sensitive technologies.

The stakes extend beyond a single program or fiscal debate. As peer competitors field increasingly sophisticated missile capabilities including hypersonics, fractional orbital bombardment systems, and advanced cruise missiles, the United States faces genuine strategic choices about homeland defense investment levels, technical approaches, and acceptable strategic stability risks.

Whether Golden Dome delivers on its ambitious promises or joins Strategic Defense Initiative as cautionary tale in technological overreach remains to be determined. What is certain is that the program has already altered U.S. strategic posture, defense industrial base dynamics, and allied relationships in ways that will reverberate regardless of ultimate technical outcomes.

Verified Sources with Formal Citations and URLs

Wikipedia contributors, "Golden Dome (missile defense system)," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Dome_(missile_defense_system) (accessed January 29, 2026).
Congressional Research Service, "Defense Primer: The Golden Dome for America," IF13115, September 29, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF13115
Euronews, "What is Donald Trump's proposed 'Golden Dome' missile defence system and how would it work?" January 19, 2026, https://www.euronews.com/next/2026/01/19/what-is-donald-trumps-proposed-golden-dome-missile-defence-system-and-how-would-it-work
Indo-Pacific Defense FORUM, "U.S. Golden Dome homeland defense initiative progresses," October 6, 2025, https://ipdefenseforum.com/2025/10/u-s-golden-dome-homeland-defense-initiative-progresses/
Lockheed Martin Corporation, "Golden Dome for America," https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/capabilities/missile-defense/golden-dome-missile-defense.html (accessed January 29, 2026).
Northrop Grumman Corporation, "Golden Dome," October 6, 2025, https://www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/missile-defense/golden-dome
19FortyFive, "Golden Dome: America's Masterplan to Stop Nuclear Missile Attacks and Hypersonic Weapons," December 23, 2025, https://www.19fortyfive.com/2025/12/golden-dome-americas-masterplan-to-stop-nuclear-missile-attacks-and-hypersonic-weapons/
RealClearDefense, "Golden Dome: America's Answer to the Hypersonic Threat," April 3, 2025, https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2025/04/03/golden_dome_americas_answer_to_the_hypersonic_threat_1101683.html
GovConWire, "MDA Expands SHIELD Pool With 1,086 Additional Awards for Golden Dome," December 19, 2025, https://www.govconwire.com/articles/mda-1086-second-tranche-shield-awards
GovConWire, "MDA Awards Spots to Over 1,000 Contractors on $151B SHIELD Contract for Golden Dome," December 3, 2025, https://www.govconwire.com/articles/mda-shield-golden-dome-multi-award-contract
Defense Security Monitor, "Pentagon Mobilizes Industrial Base for 'Golden Dome' Missile Shield with $151B SHIELD Award," January 16, 2026, https://dsm.forecastinternational.com/2026/01/16/pentagon-mobilizes-industrial-base-for-golden-dome-missile-shield-with-151b-shield-award/
The Wall Street Journal, "SpaceX Set to Win $2 Billion Pentagon Satellite Deal," October 31, 2025 (as reported by multiple secondary sources).
Fortune, "Elon Musk denies SpaceX is frontrunner for Trump's $500 billion 'Golden Dome' missile-defense project," May 21, 2025, https://fortune.com/2025/05/21/elon-musk-denies-spacex-frontrunner-for-trump-golden-dome/
The Daily Beast, "Fury Over Musk Bid to Build Trump's $175 Billion 'Golden Dome,'" May 21, 2025, https://www.thedailybeast.com/fury-over-musk-bid-to-build-trumps-175-billion-golden-dome/
The New Republic, "Trump's 'Golden Dome' Won't Work—but It'll Make Elon Musk Richer," May 28, 2025, https://newrepublic.com/article/195608/trump-golden-dome-elon-musk-richer
The Intercept, "Trump Threatened to Cut Musk's Contracts. Golden Dome Deserves Worse," June 10, 2025, https://theintercept.com/2025/06/09/trump-musk-golden-dome-missile-spacex/
The New Republic, "Elon Musk Is Getting Billions Thanks to Trump's Stupid 'Golden Dome,'" October 31, 2025, https://newrepublic.com/post/202516/elon-musk-billions-trump-golden-dome
Breaking Defense, "Missile Defense Agency's long-range radar tracks ICBM test target for first time," June 24, 2025, https://breakingdefense.com/2025/06/missile-defense-agencys-long-range-radar-tracks-icbm-test-target-for-first-time/
Defense News, "After years-long delay, missile tracking radar test declared a success," June 24, 2025, https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2025/06/24/after-years-long-delay-missile-tracking-radar-test-declared-a-success/
Todd Harrison, "Build Your Own Golden Dome: A Framework for Understanding Costs," American Enterprise Institute, September 2025, https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/WP-Estimating-the-Cost-of-Golden-Dome.pdf
American Physical Society Panel on Public Affairs, "Strategic Ballistic Missile Defense Analysis," March 2025 (as referenced in secondary sources).
CNBC, "Space firm Redwire stock rockets 29% after joining $151 billion contract for Trump's 'Golden Dome,'" January 27, 2026, https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/27/redwire-stock-trump-golden-dome-defense.html
Defense Daily, "Golden Dome Director Outlines Priorities Through 2027," January 2026, https://www.defensedaily.com/golden-dome-director-outlines-priorities-through-2027/missile-defense/
KBR Inc., "KBR Awarded Seat on MDA's SHIELD Contract Supporting Golden Dome for America," January 7, 2026, https://www.kbr.com/en/insights-news/press-release/kbr-awarded-seat-mdas-shield-contract-supporting-golden-dome-america
ExecutiveBiz, "ITC Federal Awarded Spot on MDA SHIELD Contract," January 2026, https://www.executivebiz.com/articles/itc-federal-mda-shield-contract-golden-dome
V2X Inc., "V2X Secures SHIELD IDIQ Contract from MDA to Support America's Golden Dome Defense System," January 12, 2026, https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/v2x-secures-shield-idiq-contract-from-mda-to-support-americas-golden-dome-defense-system-302657798.html
Sidus Space Inc., "Sidus Space Awarded Contract Under Missile Defense Agency's SHIELD IDIQ Program," December 22, 2025, https://investors.sidusspace.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/267/sidus-space-awarded-contract-under-missile-defense-agencys
Cherokee Federal, "Cherokee Federal Companies Awarded MDA SHIELD Contracts Supporting Golden Dome Defense," January 15, 2026, https://www.cherokee-federal.com/all-news-insights/multiple-cherokee-federal-companies-awarded-missile-defense-agency-shield-contracts-in-advancement-of-golden-dome-defense-priorities

Aerospace Electronic and Defense Systems

Thursday, January 29, 2026

Golden Dome Progresses Amid Political Controversy, Technical Uncertainty, and Spiraling Cost Estimates