HG S2 (Intel Bot)

Land-based SM-3 concept (click to view full) SM-3 Standard missiles have been the backbone of the US Navy’s ballistic missile defense plans for many years now, and are beginning to see service in the navies of allies like Japan. Their test successes and long range against aerial threats have spawned a land-based version, which end up being even more important to the USA’s allies. In July 2008 the US Missile Defense Agency began considering a land-based variant of the SM-3, largely due to specific requests from Israel. Israel currently fields the medium range Arrow-2 land-based ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) system, and eventually elected to pursue the Arrow-3 instead of SM-3s. Once the prospect had been raised, however, the US government decided that basing SM-3 missiles on land was a really good idea. The European Phased Adaptive Approach to missile defense is being built around this concept, and other regions could see similar deployments. EPAA & The SM-3 Option Aegis Ashore (click to view full) The European Phased Adaptive Approach aims to use a combination of naval and land-based missile defense systems, which hope to share a common architecture and missile set. The core physical component is a “deckhouse” enclosure, containing the command and control center and a BMD-enhanced SPY-1(D) radar that’s similar to those aboard US Navy destroyers and cruisers. The software will be taken from the Aegis combat system on US Navy ships, beginning with version 5.0.1 and upgrading over time. A connected vertical launching system building will contain 24 SM-3 missiles, which will become more advanced as newer variants are fielded. The USA is building 3 Aegis Ashore sites: one test site in Barking Sands, Hawaii, USA, and sites in Deveselu Air Base, Romania and Redzikowo, Poland. The GAO estimates that building these sites and bringing them to operational status will cost the USA about $2.3 billion. Our own tracking includes R&D into land-based SM-3 options, and tracks obviously related categories in MDA’s shifting budget lines. The European Phased Adaptive Approach The European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) currently envisions 4 phases: EPAA Phase 1, 2011-2015 In 2011, the US Navy expected to have naval SM-3 Block 1A missiles and ships fully in place, on more BMD-capable ships than the 2 Atlantic Fleet destroyers available in 2009, to pair with land-based AN/TPY-2 radars that are also used in the THAAD system. Another 4 destroyers are being forward-deployed to Rota, Spain in FY 2014-2015. Unfortunately, naval SM-3 Block 1 missiles cannot cover the Czech Republic at all, and can offer only limited coverage for Poland. The Obama administration bowed to Russian pressure and picked the THAAD system’s AN/TPY-2 radar as the system’s ground accompaniment, to limit the distance they could see into Russian airspace. The Russians simply saw weakness, and kept up the pressure, but couldn’t make any more headway. Turkey agreed to host the AN/TPY-2 radar near Diyarbakir in SE Turkey, though they added conditions that the data must not be shared with Israel. This will be the only EPAA option until 2015, which is beyond the Obama administration’s current term of office. During that interim period, THAAD continues to receive upgrades. At sea, AEGIS BMD system 4.x is being rolled out beyond USS Lake Erie [CG 70], offering some capability improvements on board ship, and laying an open architecture foundation for future upgrades. In parallel, NATO has fielded an initial version Active Layered Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence (ALTBMD) command and control architecture. They declared an “interim” BMD capability in May 2012, after a successful multinational test. ALTBMD will also have European components to draw upon, including the national early-warning system under development by France. In August 2012, Poland announced that it was pursuing its own national BMD system, which may mirror many of France’s components. France (11 systems) and Italy (6 systems) can also contribute with their land-based SAMP/T Mamba and its Aster-30 missile, which is designed to address threats in the SRBM (<1,000 km) class. On the naval front, the Netherlands is upgrading its 4 top-tier air defense frigates with ballistic missile tracking capability, and its ships are compatible with SM-3 missiles if they decide to purchase some. Elsewhere, Aster-30s are already found on advanced air defense destroyers: the Franco-Italian Horizon Class, and Britain’s Type 45 Daring Class. The naval system hasn’t been tested against ballistic missiles yet, but the systems could all be upgraded to do so. EPAA Phase 2, 2015-2018 In Parallel: SAMP/T launch (click to view full) If progress continues per plan, 2015 would see advances on 2 fronts. One front involves improved SM-3 Block 1B missiles, which will expand the range of coverage for American ships. Serious orders for the Block 1B missile began in 2011, but technical issues have delayed full production. That delay means that US Navy ships based in Europe will be competing with other priorities in Asia and around the USA, as they seek to host the new missiles. A slower phase-in that extends to 2018 now looks most likely. The other element was to be a land-based “Aegis Ashore” site at Deveselu Air Base, Romania, hosting SM-3 missiles instead of Boeing’s longer-range, fixed-location GMD system. Aegis Ashore designs appear to have shifted from an easily-deployable configuration, toward high-investment fixed sites that are similar to the GMD program they replaced. The Romanian deployment would use SM-3 Block 1B missiles from an emplaced Mk.41 VLS launcher, and be controlled by a SPY-1D radar and AEGIS BMD 5.0.1 combat system. An interim setup was formally commissioned in October 2014. If successfully deployed, this is a defense against short and medium range missiles (SRBMs & MRBMs), with some capability against intermediate range missiles in the 1,850-3,500 mile class (IRBMs). On the other hand, the location of these defenses still leaves central Europe mostly unprotected. During Phase 2, NATO’s Active Layered Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence (ALTBMD) command and control network will be operational at an initial level. France, Italy, and possibly Poland will have armed land-based BMD systems of their own deployed, and it’s likely that ALTBMD compatible BMD-capable ships will be fielded. The Netherlands is already preparing its vessels for missile tracking and SM-3 hosting, and the Aster-30/ PAAMS combination is fielded on British, French, and Italian ships. EPAA Phase 3, 2018- SM-3: EPAA phases (click to view full) Around 2018, America expects to deploy the longer-range, 21″ diameter SM-3 Block II missile, on ships and (if deployments have been accepted) on shore. The US MDA would add Redzikowo, Poland to its list of land-based sites, defending Northern Europe with SM-3 Block 1B & Block IIA missiles, controlled by an AEGIS BMD 5.1 combat system. This system would be intended to kill SRBM, MRBM, and IRBM threats, with some capabilities against full intercontinental range missiles (ICBMs). Gen. Cartwright has stated that just 3 SM-3 Block II locations would be able to cover all of Europe, but that missile is an earlier-stage R&D effort, with all the expected implications for dates and certainty of capabilities. EPAA Phase 4, 2020+ Effectively cancelled. The USA was going deploy a new Next-Generation Aegis Missile (SM-3 Block IIB) design, to improve performance and begin to field a credible anti-ICBM capability. Technical issues became a serious problem, once experts concluded that the initial sites picked for EPAA aren’t all that helpful for defending the USA. A liquid-fuel booster could be used to boost interceptor speeds, but that isn’t safe to use on ships. Even though the best place to defend the USA against an ICBM launched from Iran is from the middle of the North Sea. Now throw in a planned development schedule defined by a wild-guess political promise, rather than solid information. The whole thing was a mess, and in March 2013, it was “restructured” into into an R&D program by the Pentagon. Aegis Ashore AN/TPY-2 (click to view full) Making these things happen requires a number of additional steps. AN/TPY-2 radars will provide initial services during Phase 1, and will continue to play a supplemental role thereafter in both EPAA and NATO’s ALTBMD. Beyond Phase 1, the USA has shifted to a larger and more permanent basing structure, which removes some of the benefits of switching away from GMD. The US Missile Defense Agency is building an “Aegis Ashore” test complex near Moorestown, NJ, and another at its missile defense testing center at Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii. The Hawaiian complex is hosting a land-based Mark 41 launcher, a 4-story building with a SPY-1 radar, and three 125-foot tall test towers. Poland is being considered for Aegis Ashore deployment in 2018, but the country is beginning to diversify its options. The September 2011 agreement with the USA is still in force, but Poland is determined to have its own missile defense infrastructure, and may choose to place their bets on a parallel NATO/ European system. Their other option would likely involve American PATRIOT and/or THAAD systems. Beyond Europe Aegis Ashore may spread beyond Europe. In the Pacific, Japan is already deploying SM-3s at sea, and may find land-based counterparts useful. Its neighbor South Korea shares Japan’s worries about North Korea’s evil and semi-stable regime; the ROK intends to load shorter range SM-6 missiles on its AEGIS destroyers, is buying and deploying Patriot PAC-2 GEM+ missiles, and has contracted with Israel for “Green Pine” air and missile defense radars. Its cruiser-size KDX-III AEGIS destroyers could be modified for a ballistic missile defense role, but land-based SM-3s linked to air and naval systems offer an option that doesn’t require naval upgrades. The other country that has been linked to land-based SM-3s had a more complicated set of choices, and possible rationales. See Appendix A’s coverage of Israeli deliberations, which ended with a decision to deploy their own Arrow technology instead. The Missiles SM-3 seeker: target! (click to view full) With a maximum range of about 300 miles/ 500 km, the Standard Missile 3 Block I (SM-3) has just 1/5th to 1/6th the reported reach of GMD’s Ground Based Interceptors, but a longer reach than current mobile land options like THAAD. SM-3 has 4 stages. The booster motor and initial stage launch the missile, and take it out of the atmosphere. Once it goes “exo-atmospheric,” the 3rd stage is used to boost the missile higher, and also corrects its course by referencing GPS/ INS locations. The final stage is the LEAP kill vehicle, which uses infrared sensors to pick out the target, then guides itself in to ram it. That target is expected to be an enemy ballistic missile, but America’s shoot-down of its own ailing satellite in 2008 showed that the same technology can be used against any low earth orbit object. The introduction of Raytheon’s SM-3 Block II variant will widen the missile’s diameter from 13.5″ to 21″, greatly extending its range and speed. That means better performance against longer range missiles that move faster, and offer different trajectories. Block II weapons will add the ability to handle longer-range, higher-flying IRBM (Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles, usually 3,000-5,000 km range), and even offer some hope against global-strike threats like ICBM (Inter Continental Ballistic Missile) warheads. SM-3 Block IIA is currently expected to debut around 2015, but testing and other requirements mean it won’t be part of EPAA until 2018 or later. Contracts & Key Events Europe scenario Because of the intertwined nature of the EPAA system, many contracts will be covered elsewhere. The AN/TPY-2 radar has its own article, as does the THAAD theater air defense system the TPY-2s were originally developed for. Standard Missile family contracts also have their own FOCUS article, as does the ubiquitous Mk.41 vertical launching system that will be part of the Aegis Ashore complex. Unless a contract of these types specifically notes dedicated assets for EPAA/Aegis Ashore, or is directly germane to key program technologies, they will not be covered here. FYs 2015 – 2021 NSF Devesulu opens. February 18/21: 126 Days A Year The Asahi has disclosed that the two new Aegis warships that Japan plans to build as the alternative to land-base Aegis Ashore sites are only able to be on station to defend the country for up to 126 days a year. The land-based solution is capable of being operational for 365 days a year. A report by the Ministry of Defense stated that the ship would require three months of maintenance each year. The crew would need refresher training after that before they can be declared ready for duty. August 25/20: Japan Lockheed Martin Rotary and Mission Systems won an $18.8 million contract modification under previously awarded Aegis Combat Weapon System development contract HQ0276-10-C-0001. Under this modification, the contractor will continue performing engineering design support and analysis of alternative services necessary for continuation of planning efforts and risk reduction efforts required to support the Aegis Ashore Japan analysis of alternatives and Foreign Military Sales. Japanese Defense Minister Taro Kono had cancelled plans to build two Aegis Ashore sites, citing cost and concerns that falling booster stages from the interceptor missiles could drop on residents. Japan, however, has reportedly not cancelled the $1 billion contract for the defense system’s radars, built by Lockheed Martin. Work will take place in Moorestown, New Jersey. Estimated completion date is December 31, 2020. August 21/20: First Ever Intercept The US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is on course to conduct the first ever intercept of a intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) target using a SM-3 Block IIA interceptor this year. Vice Adm. Jon A. Hill, director of MDA, says this will be executed under Flight Test Maritime 44 (FTM-44). It will be conducted in a “defense of Hawaii” scenario, with a ship and the SM-3 Block IIA, Hill added. Hill was speaking at a August 18 webinar sponsored by the Heritage Foundation, he said his agency is evaluating the feasibility of using the Aegis Combat System together with the SM-3 Block IIA interceptor as a layer in the missile defense of the US homeland. July 7/20: Aegis Floating Ashore The Japanese government is said to be considering a suggestion to put the Aegis Ashore system on a floating platform out at sea. However, the idea is met with skepticism by some as the floating base is vulnerable to tsunami and from torpedo attacks. Another suggestion was to have two more Aegis-equipped destroyers added to the fleet but the challenge is finding enough personnel to man those warships. One solution proposed was to have Ground Self-Defense Force personnel deployed on board the ships. But having more Aegis warships will not allow Japan to deploy them around the clock as the ships cannot operate effectively during bad weather. Japan announced on June 15 to suspend the Aegis Ashore program as it cannot guarantee that the SM-3’s Mk72 booster can safely drop inside the base in Yamaguchi Prefecture. June 17/20: Suspended in Japan Japan abruptly suspended plans to deploy its US-developed Aegis Ashore missile defense system on Monday, citing technical issues and mounting costs. “In view of the cost and time for the deployment, we will halt the process,” Defense Minister Taro Kono said to reporters. The system uses the Lockheed Martin Aegis Weapon System and the Raytheon Standard Missile for tracking and defending against incoming threats. Japan intended to deploy it to counter threats from North Korean missiles, but increasing problems raised the $2.15 billion estimated cost to over $4 billion, including purchase cost and an expected 30-year use. May 20/20: Aegis Ashore Lockheed Martin Rotary and Mission Systems won a $22.3 million Aegis Combat Weapon System development contract, which covers multiple Aegis Weapon System baselines and platforms. Under this modification, the contractor will continue performing engineering design support services necessary for continuation of planning efforts and risk reduction efforts required to maintain initial operational capability schedule to support the Aegis Ashore Japan Foreign Military Sales main case. The work will take place in Moorestown, New Jersey, with an expected completion date of July 31, 2020. Funds from the government of Japan in the amount of $22,300,000 are being obligated at the time of award. May 18/20: Akita Canceled The Japanese Ministry of Defense announced that plans to go ahead with the deployment of a land-based ballistic missile defense installation in Akita prefecture would be canceled. Akita prefecture had been identified as a site for the deployment of one of two Aegis Ashore installations that Japan is procuring to better defend against ballistic missile threats from North Korea. The decision to revisit the plan to deploy the system in Akita comes after months of sustained opposition from local politicians and constituents. The envisaged site was the Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force training area in Akita’s Araya district. Initial reports that the Japanese government had started reconsidering Akita as a deployment area came in December 2019. May 5/20: AN/USQ-82(V) DRS Laurel Technology won a $11.8 million modification to exercise options for procurement of AN/USQ-82(V) hardware in support of DDG-51 (guided missile destroyer) class new construction, DDG-51 class modernization, and Aegis Ashore Japan. Aegis Ashore is the land-based variant of the Navy’s Aegis Weapons System. The AN/USQ-82(V) Program is a control system network. Its purpose is to transfer mission critical data to and from users associated with combat, navigation, aviation, power, propulsion, steering, alarms indicating and damage control systems. Work will take place in Johnstown, Pennsylvania. Estimate completion will be by August 2021. August 19/19: Modernization The US Navy contracted Lockheed Martin with a $80 million modification for AEGIS Modernization (AMOD) production requirements. The deal covers the production, test and delivery of multi-mission signal processor equipment sets; electronic equipment fluid cooler; AEGIS Weapon System AMOD Upgrade equipment; Kill Assessment System 5.1 equipment; AEGIS spares; Australia Combat Systems Engineering Development Site; and AEGIS Ashore Japan Sites equipment. The upgrade is for the US Navy as well as the governments of Japan and Australia under the Foreign Military Sale program. The Aegis Combat System is an integrated naval weapons system using radar and computer technology to track and guide weapons in destroying enemy targets. The project was started by the US Navy in 1964 to defend ships from missile threats, and with constant upgrades is now a feature on over 100 US and NATO ships, as well as those of Australia, Norway and South Korea. It is also an integral part of NATO’s European missile defense system. Work under the modification is expected to be complete by November 2023. August 12/19: Romanian Repair Finished The Aegis Ashore Ballistic Missile Defence site in Romania has completed its upgrade, NATO announced. The work was completed on August 9 and the THAAD battery that had been temporarily deployed there will be relocated. The update is part of the United States European Phased Adaptive Approach to ballistic missile defense, which was announced in September 2009. A release by Nato said that the update, which has been taking place across the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system fleet, did not provide any offensive capability to the Aegis Ashore missile defense system. Aegis Ashore is the land-based variant of the Navy’s Aegis Weapons System and the centerpiece of Phases II and III of the European Phased Adaptive Approach. July 23/19: Saudi Arabia Lockheed Martin won a firm-fixed price modification worth $1.5 billion for the procurement of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Interceptor support items in support of the Foreign Military Sales case to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The contract award came a day after the US House of Representatives voted to block $8.1 billion in Arms Sales to Saudi Arabia and other Arab states, but without the majority needed to prevent President Donald Trump from vetoing the move. The THAAD is designed to hit-to-kill intercept both short- and medium-range ballistic missiles in terminal or descent phase. It is interoperable with Raytheon’s Patriot missile defense system, already fielded by Saudi Arabia. Work will take place in Texas, Arkansas, and Alabama. Period of performance is from July 19, 2019 through July 31, 2023. June 7/19: Flawed Data in Japan The Japanese defense ministry plans to deploy a radar-equipped Aegis Ashore unit in the Ground Self-Defense Force’s Araya training area in Akita, the capital of the prefecture. However, officials found several mistakes in the survey documents that supported the need to deploy missile interceptors in Akita, local news reported Thursday. The defense ministry said on May 27 that 19 other candidate sites were “unfit” for Aegis Ashore deployment, Jiji Press reported. The government survey in question included errors for terrain data on nine other areas that provided comparisons to the designated site. The US State Department approved the Aegis Ashore systems purchase to Japan in January. Total cost of the system is estimated at more than $2 billion. April 30/19: Poland and Romania The US Navy tapped Lockheed Martin, Rotary and Mission Systems with a $9.1 million contract modification for the AEGIS Ashore Support and Ship Integration and engineering of the AEGIS Weapon System as well as on-site support in Romania an Poland. The modification also includes technical data package and test package/procedure development, technical documentation, feasibility studies, configuration management support, lifecycle and system engineering, environmental qualification testing, topside analysis, Ballistic Missile Defense engineering, combat system alignment and integration of Advanced Naval Weapon Systems on DDG 51 Class ships. Just recently it was reported that the Aegis Ashore in Romania was undergoing updates. During the updates the USA will temporarily deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system to Deveselu in Romania. The Polish AEGIS Ashore system has been hit with delays due to construction issues at Redzikowo military base that are unrelated to the system’s performance. It won’t be operational until 2020. Work under the current contract modification will take place in Deveselu and Redzikowo as well as various sites within the US. Scheduled completion date is in September this year. March 4/19: Japan The US Missile Defense Agency awarded Lockheed Martin Rotary and Mission Systems Division a $10 million contract modification for engineering and design support services for the Aegis Ashore (AA) Japan Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Technical Assistance Case. The modification prepares for the AA Japan Main Case. The Aegis Ashore is a land-based component of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, that provides missile defense against short to intermediate-range ballistic missiles. On December 19, 2017, the Cabinet of Japan approved a plan to purchase two Aegis Ashore systems equipped with the Gallium Nitride AESA radar to increase the country’s self-defense capability against North Korea, using SM-3 Block IIA missiles. Work under the modification will take place in New Jersey, and is expected to be completed by October 31 this year. January 14/19: Engineering and Security support The Missile Defense Agency contracted Lockheed Martin with a $23 million sole-source, fixed-price incentive and cost-plus modification to provide Poland Aegis Ashore Engineering Agent (AAEA) engineering and security support. The modification includes AAEA test and site updates, risk mitigation support, and continued completion effort for the Aegis Ashore Poland site. Aegis Ashore is the land-based component of the Aegis ballistic missile defense system developed originally for deployment at sea aboard specially equipped U.S. Navy Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers. Work is expected to be completed by December 2020. December 14/18: Test The US DoD’s Aegis Ashore missile defense system achieves another milestone. During a recently held test the system successfully identified and tracked an intermediate-range ballistic test missile and intercepted it with a SM-3 Block IIA missile. The test was conducted somewhere over the Pacific with the interceptor launched from the Missile Defense Agency’s (MDA) Pacific Missile Range Facility at Kauai, Hawaii. “It was of great significance to the future of multi-domain missile defense operations and supports a critical initial production acquisition milestone for the SM-3 Block IIA missile program,” MDA Director Lieutenant General Sam Greaves told Reuters. The MDA has three Aegis Ashore systems in total. One station in Romania which, operational since 2016; and another in Poland, which is expected to be operational in 2020. The SM-3 Block IIA is the co-operative US-Japanese program. It adds the larger diameter, a more maneuverable “high-divert” kill vehicle, plus another sensor / discrimination upgrade to help deal with harder targets, countermeasures, and decoys. December 20/17: FMS-Cabinet Approval The Japanese cabinet has approved a procurement plan for two Aegis Ashore batteries, to be tasked with intercepting potential ballistic missiles over its airspace. Initial funding for the project will be ring-fenced in the next defense budget beginning in April, but no decision has been made on the radar, or the overall cost, or schedule, of the deployment, according to the MoD. The batteries—without missiles—are expected to cost $2 billion, with SM-3 Block IIA interceptor missiles costing approximately $30 million each. The inclusion of the US’s new Spy-6 radar—due to be in operation on US vessels by 2022—also needs to be negotiated, but is likely to prove a costly proposition for Japan as outlays on new equipment squeeze its military budget. December 12/17: Funding Request-FMS Japan has requested funding to lay the groundwork for its acquisition of the land-based Aegis Ashore missile defense system. $6.4 million has been requested in fiscal 2018’s budget to cover site surveys and deployment planning for the system, which will see two batteries deployed in Akita and Yamaguchi Prefectures. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s government plans to endorse the so-called Aegis Ashore deployment on Dec. 19, a government source said, as the country aims to bolster its defense capability against North Korea’s growing nuclear and missile threat. At present, Japan’s ballistic missile defense is handled by destroyers equipped with the Aegis combat system and Standard Missile-3 interceptors, for stopping missiles in outer space, and a ground-based Patriot Advanced Capability-3 system that can counter attacks in the lower spheres. October 20/17: The Japanese government is considering the inclusion of SM-6 interceptors—in conjunction with the anti-ballistic missile SM-3 Block IIA interceptor—at its proposed ground-based Aegis Ashore installations, giving the systems the capacity to counter cruise missiles. While a shorter-range will limit the SM-6’s coverage, Tokyo is deeming it a necessary procurement to counter the threat of Chinese bombers like the H-6, which can carry cruise missiles loaded with nuclear warheads that have a range of more than 1,500 kilometers. These aircraft are frequently sighted in the skies around Japan and current anti-air missiles in Japanese stocks are not designed to intercept cruise missiles until they are very close. While Aegis Ashore won’t be online until at least 2023, SM-6s will be deployed on Japan’s Aegis warships from next year. May 15/17: The Japanese government has completed its study into the possible procurement of the land-based Aegis Ashore system, concluding that developing a new missile defense layer with the system is more cost-effective than purchasing the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system. At present, Tokyo operates a two-tier missile defense system with the first being SM-3 interceptors onboard Aegis-equipped destroyers, while the surviving missiles will then face a Patriot battery firing Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) surface-to-air guided missiles. Discussions on the procurement are expected to last into the summer and will likely take several years to implement. It is expected that two fixed Aegis Ashore sites equipped with the SM-3 Block 2A missile would be sufficient to cover the country, at a cost of $705 million. May 16/16: The Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System (AAMDS) in Romania was declared as operationally certified. A ceremony on May 12 marked the occasion with the facility covering an area that protects allied countries in Southern and Central Europe, significantly reducing the risk of potential attacks with ballistic missiles from outside the Euro-Atlantic space. Construction of a second Aegis Ashore site in Poland has recently commenced as part of the final phase of NATO’s European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA). February 12/16: The US Army has awarded AMEC a $182.7 million contract with option to support the Aegis Ashore missile defense system in Poland. The contract comes as part of Phase III of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) program, which aims to boost land based missile defense systems for NATO allies against ballistic missile threats. The Polish installations will be placed to protect nations in northern Europe and follows the installation of an interceptor site in Romania during Phase II. The deployment of the Aegis systems will act as part of NATO’s forward deterrence policy in Europe in ally nations that border Russia. December 22/15: Raytheon has been awarded a $2.35 billion contract to deliver 52 SM-3 Block IB missiles. The contract finalizes a preliminary one for 44 missiles valued at $541 million. The addition of 8 further missiles comes as the US military is increasing its stocks of SM-3s in the wake of increased missile threats, and orders by foreign allies of its weapons systems. December 10/15: Raytheon has been awarded a not-to-exceed $543,337,650 undefinitized contract action modification to a previously awarded contract to manufacture, assemble, test, and deliver 17 Standard Missile-3 Block IIA missiles. The deal, initially set at $87 million, has now been extended to $543.3 million. The news comes after the US Navy and Missile Defense Agency (MDA) announced the second successful flight test on Tuesday. The SM-3 is the only ballistic missile killer to have the capability to be launched from both land and sea, and is being jointly funded and developed by US Navy and Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Forces. Future development of the program will see the interceptor be tested for the European missile defense system and hopeful deployment in Poland by 2018. Oct 10/14: Romania. NATO formally inaugurates Naval Support Facility Devesulu, the new Aegis Ashore facility in Romania. Capt. William Garren becomes the site’s 1st commander, and construction continues on site. It’s scheduled to become fully operational in 2015. Stars and Stripes, “Navy to commission missile defense base in Romania” | Romnaia TV, “Vin americanii! SUA preia vineri baza de la Deveselu” [picture is wrong] | Iran’s PressTV, “US will commission missile base in Europe amid tensions with Russia” | Russia Today, “US commissions ‘crucial’ NATO missile shield facility in Romania”. NSF Devesulu, RO opens FY 2014 GAO & CRS reports cite software issues, spectrum frequency conflict in Poland, question operating cost estimates and cost-sharing; Initial Turkish deployment was very ragged; 1st launch from AA facility; DDGs deploying; SM-3 Block IIA passes CDR. NATO BMD concept click for video June 2/14: DDG Deployment. USS Ross [DDG-71, uses BMD 3.6.1] steams out of Norfolk to its new base in Rota, Spain, where it will join USS Donald Cook [DDG-71, uses BMD 4.0.2] as part of EPAA efforts. Sources: WVEC Norfolk, “Photos: 2nd Navy destroyer leaves Norfolk for Spain”. May 22/14: SAMP/T. France and Italy carry out a test of their own at the French DGA’s Biscarosse test range, with SAMP/T Mamba systems from each country firing an Aster-30 missile and destroying a target drone. The larger story is the successful interconnection of their systems, within a broader test campaign that also involved French air force Crotale SHORADS batteries, French Army man-portable Mistral VSHORADS, and a French E-3F AWACS plane, all connected to the French 3D Defense Management Center (CMD3D) and control centers at Lyon and at Mont de Marsan. France is building a national air defense and anti-missile system, which needs to inter-operate with NATO. Italy is another natural partner for missile defense, as they’re also using Aster-30 missiles on land in SAMP/T Mamba systems, and using them at sea in Franco-Italian Horizon Project frigates. Sources: French DGA, “Vidéo : reussite d’un double tir SAMP/T franco-italien” | defense-aerospace, “Surface-to-Air Campaign at Biscarosse: “Barrois” Squadron from Saint Dizier Fires First Mamba, Demos Interoperability”. May 20/14: AA CTV-01. The 1st SM-3 launch from an Aegis Ashore facility takes place at the Pacific Missile Range Facility test site in Kauai, Hawaii. It’s a live SM-3 Block IB launch, but not a live intercept, since they’re only using a simulated target. The main goal is ensuring that all systems work when they’re transferred to land. Sources: US MDA, “Standard Missile Completes First Test Launch from Aegis Ashore Test Site” | Lockheed Martin, “Aegis Ashore Achieves Major Test Milestone for Worldwide Ballistic Missile Defense System” | Raytheon, “Aegis Ashore Launches Standard Missile-3 for First Time”. 1st Aegis Ashore launch April 11/14: GAO Report. The Pentagon has been reluctant to develop a life-cycle cost estimate for BMD in Europe, on the dubious grounds that it isn’t a separate program. that’s why GAO-14-314 concerns itself with EPAA’s costs and implementation issues. PATRIOT and AN/TPY-2 deployments have already shown weaknesses. The Turkish PATRIOT batteries faced roadblocks involving deployment when they arrived in December 2011. Other issues included training to different NATO engagement procedures, information-sharing uncertainties, soldiers deployed to cold mountaintops in tents that couldn’t handle the conditions, and poor local roads that could be dangerous. Build-out of longer-term infrastructure won’t even begin until mid-2014. The TPY-2 radar deployments to Turkey (2011) and CENTCOM (2013), meanwhile, still can’t share information and work together, because that hasn’t been worked out. For Aegis Ashore, previous reports (q.v. April 26/13) have mentioned the AN/SPY-1D radar’s conflicts with local civil frequency usage. That’s largely worked out now in Romania, but not in Poland. Indeed, the Poles are about to issue commercial licenses for key radar frequencies, which would complicate things even more. It doesn’t get easier to handle all of this when US Strategic Command, European Command, MDA, and the Navy all claim roles in each deployment. On the cost side, the US Navy will take over maintenance and operation of both European Aegis Ashore sites in 2018, but they haven’t developed a joint 25-year O&M estimate. There are also gaps concerning other BMD elements. The Army is estimating $61 million to support the Turkish TPY-2 radar, and $1.2 billion over 20 years. This assumes contractor support throughout, but different arrangements might be better and cheaper. A full analysis is expected in FY 2015. THAAD batteries have an estimated O&M cost of $6.5 billion over 20 years, but that $325 million per year involves basing in the USA. Costs for basing in Europe are expected to be higher. How much higher? We don’t know, because the US MDA and US Army can’t agree on how to do the analysis. April 9/14: Speed up? Vice Adm. James Syring of the US Missile Defense Agency responds to speculation by saying that they could speed up the deployment of Poland’s Aegis Ashore installation in response to Russia’s invasion of Crimea, but: “We’d need some additional funds in the budget, and we’d need to move up the development of the [SM-3 Block] IIA,” The first part of the statement is true. Given the likely cost of the SM-3 Block 1B missiles, and known costs for the facility, it will take somewhere between $400 – 500 million to fully pay for an operational site. The second part of Syring’s statement, however, is wishful thinking. Unless development is being slow-walked and funds are the primary bottleneck, extra funds have a very limited effect in moving up a project’s development. The SM-3 Block IIA isn’t the type of project that will get much benefit. Sources: Defense News, “US May Accelerate Deployment of Missile Defense System in Poland”. April 8/14: CRS Report. The Congressional Research Service updates their backgrounder covering the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system, which includes the EPAA. They confirm DID’s charts regarding these areas, though CRS doesn’t divide general naval BMD from the land-based European implementation. They do have some pointed questions for Europe, however, proposing a calculation of relative American vs. European total contributions to European missile defense, and asking “Why should European countries not pay a greater share of the cost of the EPAA, since the primary purpose of the EPAA is to defend Europe against theater-range missiles?” That’s a different attitude. Meanwhile, the FY 2015 budget cuts 132 SM-3 missiles from the FY 2014 budget’s 2015-2018 buys, and it will also change the composition and makeup of the naval BMD fleet via slower upgrades, and the mothballing of 4 BMD cruisers. Congress will want to know what effect that will have on overall capabilities, but asking the military will be pointless. April 1/14: GAO Report. GAO-14-351 focuses on acquisition goals and reporting for missile defense in general. Most of the key findings for EPAA have already been covered recently, but the program is concerned about flight test delays and cancelations affecting Aegis Ashore, while adding that a 17 month delay in the modernized Aegis system is at a problematic point: “Discovery of software defects continues to outpace the program’s ability to fix them; fixes may have to be implemented after software is delivered.” March 25/14: AA Poland. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training, Moorestown, NJ receives a $93 million contract, exercising options for the core radar and equipment in Poland’s Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System (AAMDS), and providing multi-year procurement funding for Aegis Weapon System (AWS) MK 7 equipment sets. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 budgets and FY 2013 shipbuilding budgets. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (85.5%), Clearwater, FL (13.1%), and Akron, OH (1.4%), and is expected to be complete by September 2021. US NAVSEA in Washington, DC manages the contract (N00024-14-C-5114). March 21/14: AA Poland. Raytheon IDS in Sudbury, MA receives a $45 million modification for 1 AN/SPY-1D(V) Transmitter Group and select Missile Fire Control System MK 99 equipment, which will become part of the Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System in Poland. Work will be performed in Andover, MA (78.3%); Sudbury, MA (19.3%); Canada (1%); Moorestown, NJ (0.9%); and Norfolk, VA (0.5%), and is expected to be completed by March 2016. All funds are committed immediately, using FY14 funds. US NAVSEA in Washington, DC manages the contract (N00024-13-C-5115). March 14/14: GAO report. The GAO releases GAO-14-248R, regarding the USA’s EPAA plans for defending Europe from ballistic missiles. The bottom line? There are a lot of moving parts, they’re being developed in parallel, and some of them aren’t moving as fast as others. Which means the system as a whole is going to be a bit behind. The MDA isn’t interested in acknowledging that, but the GAO makes a strong case by citing all the promised capabilities that are being removed from the beginning of each phase. Phase 1, 2011. A TPY-2 radar is deployed in Turkey, but C2BMC systems still haven’t tested scenarios where they’re managing more than 1 TPY-2 radar, and GAO says that “Key capabilities for Phase 1 will not be fully available until 2015.” Phase 2, 2015. The biggest issue is C2BMC S8.2 software, which has been delayed until 2017. It was supposed to improve the integration of incoming missile tracks for Phase 2, and provide a Lock-On After Launch firing capability for AEGIS BMD systems. Without it, radars like the TPY-2 will perform below their planned potential, and so will the missiles. Especially since the Romanian site’s Aegis Ashore system will only be an interim version, which will also wait until 2017 before it has all of the initially promised capabilities. On the mobile front, THAAD’s ability to distinguish incoming warheads in debris fields won’t reach desired capability until 2017, either. Phase 3, 2018. The 2-year delay of full Phase 2 Aegis Ashore capability leads one to wonder if AEGIS BMD 5.1 will really be ready for 2018 deployment. The same might be said of the SM-3 Block 2A missile, even though MDA says it’s on track. Meanwhile, C2BMC is the biggest issue again. S8.4 is meant to let AEGIS BMD systems intercept incoming missiles without using their own radars, thanks to faster integrated tracks, more precise tracking, and resilience in more “complex” conditions. It won’t arrive until 2020 or later, forcing the MDA to deploy an S8.2.x build instead. That lateness will affect THAAD as well as Aegis Ashore, and THAAD’s own upgrades will happen in a timeframe that means any issues found in testing will delay them until after Phase 3 has begun. Dec 27/13: Aegis multiyear. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training in Moorestown, NJ receives a multi-year $574.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for Aegis MK 7 equipment sets. All confirmed orders will be used in destroyer production and refits (DDG 117 – 123), but there’s 1 option that can be used for Poland’s Aegis Ashore complex, along with associated engineering services. Lockheed Martin confirms that the core of all sets will be Aegis Baseline 9, which includes missile defense features. $308.4 million in FY 2013 shipbuilding funds is committed immediately, to enable advance buys in bulk. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (85.5%); Clearwater, FL (13.1%); and Akron, OH (1.4%), and is expected to be complete by September 2021. As one would expect, this is a sole source contract under 10 U.SC 2304(c)(1). US NAVSEA in Washington Navy Yard, Washington, DC manages the contract (N00024-14-C-5114). See also Lockheed Martin, Jan 7/14 release. Oct 31/13: SM-3-IIA. Raytheon and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries have completed the SM-3 Block IIA’s Critical Design Review (CDR), and the USA and Japan have agreed on workshare arrangements that allocate development responsibility between each country. SM-3-IIA is the key new piece in EPAA Phase 3, and the successful CDR keeps it on track for flight test in 2015. Raytheon made the announcement at the 2013 AIAA Multinational Ballistic Missile Defense Conference in Warsaw, Poland. Sources: Raytheon, “New, Larger Standard Missile-3 Moves From Design to Testing” | Raytheon, Oct 31/13 release. Oct 28/13: AA Romania. American, Romanian and NATO officials break ground on the Aegis Ashore facility at Devsulu AB, based on the September 2011 accord between the United States and Romania. Romania’s SC Glacial PROD SRL has already done $3.3 million in site-activation work, including temporary offices, container housing units, a warehouse, and a vehicle inspection area. US Navy, “US, Romania begin work on Aegis Ashore missile defense complex”. FY 2013 SM-3 Block IIB canceled; European multi-system test; GAO Report; MBDA’s Aster-30 SAMP/T and USA’s GBI advance in parallel. 2013 BMD conference click for video July 18/13: AA Romania. KBR announces a $134 million Aegis Ashore build-out contract from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Europe District. The 269-acre site on Romania’s Deveselu Air Base will include a 4-story radar deckhouse structure relocated from New Jersey, security fencing, plus facilities and infrastructure including roads, support buildings, communications, security and utilities. April 26/13: GAO Report. The GAO looks at the Missile Defense Agency’s full array of programs in report #GAO-13-342, “Missile Defense: Opportunity To Refocus On Strengthening Acquisition Management.” With respect to EPAA/ Aegis Ashore, the report reiterates concerns from the GAO’s March 30/12 and April 20/12 reports (q.v.): unstable cost baselines, concurrent testing & development, and questions about the ability to use the SPY-1’s radar frequencies without creating spectrum interference problems for the host nations. The program office sees its greatest risks as (1) integration testing in Hawaii and New Jersey, (2) potential shipping or transportation delays, and (3) construction delays for the operational and test facilities. The disconnect stems from a fundamental disagreement about the project’s level of risk. With the program citing similarity to sea-based Aegis BMD as a reason for low risk. If the GAO’s concerns re: spectrum issues come true, however, the similarity will drop quickly. An analysis for Romania is due in 2013, but Poland will present its own independent situation. Meanwhile, knowledge gained from flight tests that begin in 2014 can’t be used to guide construction. Under a new plan, even Poland’s 2018 site will be ordering advance construction components in January 2014. The GAO estimates the cost to develop and build the Polish facility at $746 million, from R&D to operational status. As such, the MDA reported costs of all 3 Aegis Ashore facilities is $2.3 billion. The GAO wonders about the US MDA’s portfolio balance, given R&D needs for multiple missiles, plus full build out of Aegis Ashore and full production of the SM-3 Block IB, plus operation, support, and testing for the iffy GMD system. The GAO recommends Analysis of Alternatives studies as one way to help manage that portfolio. April 18/13: Poland. US State Department official Frank Rose (Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Arms Control, Verification and Compliance) speaks to the Polish National Defense University in Warsaw about Aegis Ashore. Poland is looking to build a national missile defense architecture, so Rose stresses the important of interoperability with NATO’s Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense (ALTBMD) command-and-control system (q.v. May 21/12). He adds that: “The Ballistic Missile Defense Agreement between the U.S. and Poland entered into force in September of 2011. This agreement places a land-based interceptor site, similar to Phase 2, in Redzikowo, and includes the SM-3 Block IIA interceptor. This EPAA Phase 3 site is on schedule and on budget for deployment in the 2018 timeframe. The interceptor site here in Poland will be key to the EPAA. Not only will it protect Poland itself, but when combined with the rest of the EPAA assets, Phase 3 will be able to protect all of NATO Europe against ballistic missile threats from the Middle East.” March 15/13: Following North Korea’s 3rd nuclear test attempt, the new US Secretary of Defense announces that the USA will add 14 more ground-based interceptors at Fort Greely, AK and Vandenberg AFB, CA, boosting the total number from 30 back to the 44 planned by the previous administration. At the same time, they’re re conducting Environmental Impact Studies for a potential additional GBI site in the United States. They’re paying for this by “restructuring” the SM-3 Block 2B Next Generation Aegis Missile program, whose 2020 deployment date was never realistic (vid. April 20/12 GAO report). It’s effectively canceled. Japan will continue to collaborate with the USA on the SM-3 Block 2A program, and they’ll get a 2nd AN/TPY-2 radar on their territory. Pentagon AFPS | Full Speech Transcript | Boeing | CS Monitor re: Russian angle. No EPAA Phase 4 March 6/13: SAMP/T. MBDA’s SAMP/T system is operated by a joint French & Italian crew, and successfully intercepts a 300 km (short range) tactical ballistic missile target. Eurosam describes it as: “…the first SAMP/T firing test in a NATO environment, close to what would be an operational use… [within] the alliance ALTBMD programme…. DGA sensors did provide the firing units and the command levels long-range detection data on A L16 radio network. DGA MI, in Bruz, acted as a L16 [Link-16] national C2, interfacing in L16 both with NATO BMDOC [in Ramstein, Germany], via L16 JREAP and with SAMP/T.” The SAMP/T system is now widely deployed in France & Italy, with 15 land-based units equipped, alongside naval use of its Aster-30 missile from the countries’ Horizon Class frigates. We won’t be covering it here beyond this initial milestone, but it will be part of NATO’s missile defenses going forward. France’s DGA [in French] | Eurosam. Feb 11/13: GAO Report. GAO-13-382R: “Standard Missile-3 Block IIB Analysis of Alternatives” throws cold water on the idea that the SM-3 Block 2B can defend the USA from bases in Poland or Romania. The geometry isn’t very good, and success may require a boost-phase intercept. Those are very tricky, and have limited range, because you have to hit the enemy missile within a very short time/ distance. Some members of the military think it’s possible, at an initial estimated budget of $130 million extra. The problem is the tradeoffs. Liquid propellants can boost speed, but are unsafe on Navy ships due to the fire risks. On the other hand, the middle of the North Sea offers much better missile intercept geometries. Maybe Block 2B shouldn’t be land-based at all, but then why replace Block 2A in such an expensive way? MDA still needs to set the future missile’s performance requirements and limits. Where should the tradeoffs be made? This brings us to the GAO’s point about the MDA developing the SM-3 Block IIB under a framework that dispenses with a good chunk of the usual paperwork, including an Analysis of Alternatives. On reflection, this is more than a bureaucratic point driven by “records show that programs doing the paperwork usually fare better.” One of the EPAA’s key underlying assumptions is now in question, and the proposed solution must now be in question as well. Is the best solution for land-based European missile defense still SM-3 Block IIB? What are the tradeoffs vs. using a system like the NRC’s recommended GMD-I from the USA (vid. September 2012 entry), and making Block 2B a ship-deployed missile? Does Block 2B even make sense now? Without good answers regarding capability, options, and maintainability, how does the MDA decide – or pick the right winning combination among the Block 2B competitors? A full AoA could improve those answers, and hence the odds of a smart pick. Dec 21/12: Radar components. Raytheon IDS in Sudbury, MA receives $19.7 million for firm-fixed-price delivery order for radar components: Stabile Master Oscillator ordnance alteration kits, Radio Frequency Coherent Combiner ordnance alteration kits and associated spares, and material and installation services in support of the modernization effort on Navy ships and Aegis ashore units. This contract includes options which could bring the contract’s cumulative value to $22.9 million. Work will be conducted in Norfolk, VA (63%); Andover, MA (27%); and Burlington, MA (10%), and is expected to be complete by June 2015. $19.7 million will be obligated at time of award. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N00024-11-G-5116, #0020). Dec 21/12: AA Romania. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ receives a $57.3 million contract modification for an Aegis Weapon System in support of DDG 116 and the purchase of material assemblies to support Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System Host Nation #1, Romania. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (85%), Clearwater, FL (14%), and Akron, OH (1%), and is expected to be complete by January 2017. All contract funds in the amount of $57,336,086 are committed immediately. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington DC manages the contract (N00024-09-C-5110). Dec 20/12: Trainer SDD. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors (MS2), Moorestown, NJ receives a $20.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price contract for the Aegis Ashore Team Trainer. This trainer will be designed to meet the Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System (AAMDS) individual watch station and watch team training, qualification and certification requirements. This contract will also fund information assurance requirements for the trainer, an information assurance training course, an instructor operator training course, and travel associated with the trainer’s development. $4.7 million are committed immediately. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ and is expected to be complete in October 2014. This contract was not competitively procured, pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 by the US Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division in Orlando, FL (N61340-13-C-0007). Dec 10/12: AA Romania. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors (MS2) in Moorestown, NJ receives a $45.9 million a contract modification for Aegis Ashore Engineering Agent engineering support and skid integration for “host nation” (which would be Romania) though “this is not a Foreign Military Sales [FMS] acquisition.” If the US military is buying it, it isn’t an FMS, even if they’re preparing to base it at a foreign location. This award raises the total contract’s value to date from $209.9 million to $255.8 million. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ through Dec 31/15, and $7.8 million FY 2013 Research, Development, Test and Evaluation funds will get things going. The US Missile Defense Agency in Dahlgren, VA manages this contract (HQ0276-10-C-0003, PO 0044). Nov 5/12: Networking. Boeing in Huntington Beach, CA receives a $16.7 million firm-fixed-price and time-and-material contract for gigabit ethernet data multiplex systems. They’ll be used in the DDG modernization program, new ship construction, and Aegis Ashore Systems. This contract includes options which could bring its cumulative value to $30 million. Work will be performed in Camarillo, CA (57%), Smithfield, PA (33%), and Huntington Beach, CA (10%), and is expected to be complete by May 2015. $475,975 will expire by the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. This contract was procured on a limited competition basis via the FBO.gov and Navy Electronic Commerce Online websites, with 2 proposals solicited and 2 offers received. The Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division, Dahlgren, VA manages this contract (N00178-13-C-2000). Oct 2/12: C2 Integration. ALTBMD. NATO’s NCI announces that “Ensemble Test 2” has been successful, using NATO’s Combined Federated Battle Lab Network (CFBLNet) as a test bench. Participants included 12 laboratories from 5 Nations across 2 continents, and the systems included: An Italian AN/TPS-77 transportable long range radar, built by Lockheed Martin French and Italian land-based SAMP/T systems, using MBDA’s Aster-30 missile Italy’s Horizon Class high-end air defense frigate, which uses the PAAMS combat system and Aster-30 missile US, Dutch and German PATRIOT missile defence systems A Dutch ADCF (De Zeven Provincien Class) high-end air defense frigate A German SAM Operations Centre from Germany, An American Aegis Ballistic Missile Defence System The USA’s C2BMC (Command and Control, Battle Management, and Communications) system The AN/TPY-2 radar that accompanies THAASD, and is part of EPAA The USA’s huge Shared Early Warning System (SEW) radars NATO’s Air Command and Control System (ACCS), the Air Command and Control Information Services (AirC2IS), CRC System Interface (CSI), and Interim Command and Control (ICC) system. Firing missiles is the easy part. Having different command and control systems work together, which is required for any sort of coordinated defense, is difficult. Ensemble Test 3 is scheduled for May-June 2013. NATO NCIA. FY 2012 NATO declares interim defensive capability; EPAA won’t really defend USA; SM-3 Block IIs may not meet EPAA schedule; Costs keep rising; Poland independent, but not out. Operational click for video Sept 25/12: AA Romania. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Sudbury, MA a $43.6 million contract modification “for the production and integration of an Aegis Weapon System (AWS) and Missile Fire Control System in support of DDG 116, and an AWS in support of Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System Host Nation #1” (HN-1, i.e. Romania). Raytheon makes the AN/SPY-1 radar transmitters and MK99 FCS illuminators. Work will be performed in Andover, MA (80%), Sudbury, MA (15%), and Portsmouth, RI (5%), and is expected to be complete by September 2017. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington DC manages the contract (N00024-09-C-5111). Sept 14/12: AA Romania. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems & Sensors in Moorestown, NJ receives an $18.5 million contract modification for the production and integration of an Aegis weapon system in support of DDG 116, and the purchase of material assemblies to support Aegis ashore missile defense system Host Nation 1 (Romania). Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (85%); Clearwater, FL (14%); and Akron, OH (1%); and is expected to complete by January 2017. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington DC manages the contract (N00024-09-C-5110). September 2012: NRC report. The US National Research Council publishes “Making Sense of Ballistic Missile Defense: An Assessment of Concepts and Systems for U.S. Boost-Phase Missile Defense in Comparison to Other Alternatives.” The report staff have deeply impressive backgrounds related to missile defense, and their main conclusion is that very fundamental reasons of geography and physics make boost-phase defense systems a waste of time. This includes AEGIS BMD systems. The report explains very clearly that the window for stopping a warhead before it has enough energy to hit “defended” areas makes it difficult to impossible to position a ship in a place that allows even future SM-3 Block II missiles to hit their target. It also states that EPAA Phase IV is not likely to be an effective way to defend the United States, and recommends that the USA make changes to its own GMD system and radar set. They’re not advocating the dismantling of EPAA, just saying that the USA should have a system in which EPAA is about Europe’s defense, and the USA has a system that doesn’t depend on it. Aug 30/12: AA Kauai. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ gets an $8.3 million contract ceiling increase, to provide Aegis Ashore Engineering Agent (AAEA) long-lead-time materials for the complex being built at the Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF) in Hawaii. This brings the total contract value from $200.1 to $209.3 million. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ through April 30/13, and $5 million in FY 2012 Research, Development, Test and Evaluation funds will be used as initial funding. The US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) in Dahlgren, VA manages the contract (HQ0276-10-C-0003, PO 0038). Aug 10/12: CRS Report. The US Congressional Research Service issues its latest update of “Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress” [PDF]. Key issues highlighted or examined by Mr. O’Rourke include the cost of forward-deploying 4 destroyers to Spain, the FY 2013 budget’s proposal to slow the 2013-2020 ramp-up rate for BMD ships, the potential for European contributions to naval BMD, the inability to simulate China’s DF-21 ship-killing ballistic missile, SM-3 Block IIB risks, and concurrency and technical risk in the AEGIS BMD program generally. With respect to the Spanish deployment (vid. Feb 16/12 entry), Rota can accommodate all of the new personnel, but infrastructure upgrades will be required. In total, the Navy estimated that it would incur approximately $166 million in up-front military construction, personnel, and maintenance costs; a small annual increase in operations and maintenance; and personnel costs of approximately $179 million – though really, you have to pay them wherever they are. Aug 6/12: Poland fixing its “mistake”. Polish President Bronislaw Komorowski states that Poland is prepared to create its own anti-aircraft and missile defense system as part of a NATO shield, at a cost of $3-6 billion. With respect to the USA’s defensive plan, which Poland hasn’t rejected yet: “Our mistake was that by accepting the American offer of a shield we failed to take into account the political risk associated with a change of president. We paid a high political price. We do not want to make the same mistake again.” The missile and air defense system proposed by the Polish president would target all short and some medium range missiles, just like the initial 2 stages of the EPAA. The system would be part of NATO’s broader air defense systems, as well as the emerging NATO ALTBMD Missile Defense shield. Germany and France are specifically mentioned as potential partners, and MBDA’s naval PAAMS system and Aster-30 missiles have already been converted to a land equivalent of their own. Their SAMP/T is the logical competitor if Poland wants to buy a non-American system. Its weakness is that it wouldn’t be able to grow into a counter against IRBM or ICBM missiles, but that could make it a very good complement to an American system that did. Relations with Israel are close, but David’s Sling is a joint development with Raytheon, and past American behavior has been to use its weapon export rules against potential competitors. Read “Alone, If Necessary: The Shield of Poland” for full coverage of Poland’s WISLA and NAREW air defense competitions. June 27/12: FTM-18 test. USS Lake Erie [CG-70] with its AEGIS BMD 4.0.1 system successfully launches an SM-3 block IB missile to hit a separating ballistic missile target. This is the same configuration that will be used for the land-based Phase 2 of the USA’s European missile defense plan, and represents an important success for the SM-3 block IB after the FTM-16 failure. This firing makes the AEGIS & SM-3 combination 23/28 in intercept tests so far (82.1%), vs. 31/40 (77.5%) for all other missile defense system intercept tests. US MDA | Lockheed Martin | Raytheon. June 7/12: AA Romania. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors (MS2) in Moorestown, NJ gets a contract ceiling increase of $9.8 million, increasing the total contract value to $197.4 million from $187.6 million. Under this modification, they’ll provide Aegis Ashore Engineering Agent Phase 2B support for the Host Nation 1 (Romania) skids and skids accessories. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ, and Akron, OH through Oct 31/13. $6.9 million in FY 2012 Research, Development, Test and Evaluation funds will be used as incremental funding. The US Missile Defense Agency in Dahlgren, VA manages this contract (HQ0276-10-C-0003, PO 0032). June 4/12: Aegis Ashore. URS Group, Inc. in San Antonio, TX wins a $129.5 million firm-fixed-price task order to build the Aegis Ashore test complexes in Moorestown, NJ and the Pacific Missile Range Facility at Barking Sands, Kauai, HI. In Moorestown, they’ll build a radar deckhouse and support building, and do related work to test the government-furnished, government-installed MK41 missile launchers. The Pacific Missile Range facility involves full site construction of a radar deckhouse, support building, launch pad, electrical power, potable water, sewer connection, synthetic natural gas system, and communications systems, in addition to testing their success in integrating government-furnished, government-installed MK41 missile launchers. The task order also contains 1 unexercised option, which, if exercised, would increase cumulative task order value to $130 million. Work will be performed in Kauai, HI (72%), and Moorestown, NJ (28%), and is expected to be complete by November 2013. Three proposals were received for this task order by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii (N62742-09-D-1174, HC02). See also Aug 24/10 entry. May 21/12: NATO ALTBMD. NATO leaders declared that the Alliance now has an interim ballistic missile defence capability, via a basic ALTBMD command and control system capability which has been tested and installed at Headquarters Allied Air Command in Ramstein, Germany. At present, ALTBMD is just a C2 network. NATO members need to provide sensors and interceptors to connect to the system. Full Operational Capability isn’t expected until the end of the current decade, or the early 2020s. NATO. ALTBMD interim capability April 20/12: GAO report. The US GAO releases report #GAO-12-486, “Opportunity Exists to Strengthen Acquisitions by Reducing Concurrency.” The implications for missile defense belie the bland title: “To meet the presidential 2002 direction to initially rapidly field and update missile defense capabilities as well as the 2009 announcement to deploy missile defenses in Europe, MDA has undertaken and continues to undertake highly concurrent acquisitions. Concurrency is broadly defined as the overlap between technology development and product development or between product development and production. While some concurrency is understandable, committing to product development before requirements are understood and technologies mature or committing to production and fielding before development is complete is a high-risk strategy that often results in performance shortfalls, unexpected cost increases, schedule delays, and test problems. It can also create pressure to keep producing to avoid work stoppages… During 2011, the Ground-based Midcourse Defense, the Aegis Standard Missile 3 Block IB, and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense experienced significant ill effects from concurrency. …Aegis Ashore began product development and set the acquisition baseline before completing the [Preliminary Design Review]. This sequencing increased technical risks and the possibility of cost growth… The program has initiated procurement of components for the installation and plans to start fabricating two enclosures called deckhouses – one for operational use at the Romanian Aegis Ashore installation and one for testing at the Pacific Missile Range Facility – in fiscal year 2012, but does not plan to conduct the first intercept test… until fiscal year 2014. Further, the program plans to build the operational deckhouse first, meaning any design modification identified through system testing… will need to be made on an existing deckhouse and equipment. As we have previously reported, such modifications on an existing fabrication may be costly.” March 30/12: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” for 2012. For Aegis Ashore, RDT&E costs have increased from $835.1 million in April 2010 to $1,418.6 million as of October 2011. The reconstitutable deckhouse design for the sites had not been included in its baseline, and the addition of hardware for a 3rd site in Poland also had to be paid for. GAO sees concurrency risks from the program’s decision to begin system development before the preliminary design review, and from its plan to buy operational components before testing is done. the Navy defends their practice by saying that all of these systems are in advanced testing or deployed on Navy ships already. The program’s last milestone was a Critical Design Review in December 2011, and flight tests aren’t expected to begin before Q2 2014. The 1st “deckhouse” with radar, missiles, etc, is expected to be ready in December 2015, and the 2nd by December 2018. GAO: “The SPY-1 radar requires modifications for its use on land and other changes may be necessary due to host nation radar frequency issues… In addition, the maturity of SM-3 Block IB may be overstated because some of its component technologies have not been flight tested or have experienced failures in testing. The multimission signal processor also faces development challenges, and the Defense Contract Management Agency has identified its schedule as high risk. We have previously reported that a significant percentage of its software still needs to be integrated.” March 30/12: SAR. The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 31/11 includes elements of EPAA: “Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) – Program costs decreased $3,596.4 million (-3.1%) from $122,362.6 million to $118,766.2 million, due primarily to a reduction in the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile production rate (-$1,247.2 million), the elimination of seven AN/TPY-2 radars (from 18 to 11) (-$1,237.2 million), and the placement of the Sea Based X-band (SBX) radar in limited test and contingency operation status (-$666.3 million). There were additional decreases for the reduction of three THAAD batteries (from 9 to 6) (-$540.8 million), reductions in Special Programs funding (-$408.2 million), a reduction of Aegis Standard Missile-3 Block IB missiles in FY 2013 (-$298.1 million), cancellation of the Airborne Infrared Program (-$239.3 million), and reductions in the Directed Energy Program (-$194.2 million). These decreases were partially offset by the application of revised escalation indices (+$684.8 million), increases to the Israeli Cooperative Program for FY 2011-2012 (+$217.8 million), increased construction estimates for Romania and Poland Aegis Ashore sites (+$213.0 million) [emphasis DID’s], and increases for Iron Dome in FY 2011 (+$205.0 million).” Program costs March 29/12: AA Romania. BAE U.S. Combat Systems in Minneapolis, MN receives a $23 million contract modification for MK 41 Vertical Launching System mechanical modules and related equipment and services for DDG 116 and Aegis Ashore, Host Nation One (Romania). Contract modification efforts includes requirements to procure MK41 VLS mechanical systems, production of support material, interim support parts, and equipment in support of DDG51-class new construction, and Aegis Ashore Missile Defense Systems requirements. Work will be performed in Aberdeen, SD (43%); Farmingdale, NY (19%); Aiken, SC (15%); Fort Totten, ND (10%); York, PA (7%); Minneapolis, MN (5%); and Louisville, KY (1%). Work is expected to complete by September 2015. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contract (N00024-11-C-5301). March 28/12: Beyond Europe? Hurriyet Daily News reports that EPAA could soon have other regional counterparts: “The US seeks to expand its missile systems to Asia and the Middle East by building regional shields against ballistic missiles, similar to the NATO shield already in Europe. A senior Pentagon official says the Obama administration will hold talks with South Korea, Japan, Australia and Gulf Cooperation Council countries.” Feb 23/12: AA Romania. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Sudbury, MA receives a $106.5 million modification to previously awarded contract for the production of an AN/SPY-1D-V radar transmitter group for Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System Host Nation 1 (Romania), as well as 2 AN/SPY-1D-Vs and a MK 99 Mod 14 targeting illuminator to equip the future DDG 116 destroyer. Work will be performed in Andover, MA (80%); Sudbury, MA (15%); and Portsmouth, RI (5%), and is expected to be complete by September 2017. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contracts (N00024-09-C-5111). Feb 18/12: Turkey(s). During meetings with NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu states the TPY-2 radar based at Diyarbakir (vid. Sept 3/11) must not have any of its data sets shared beyond NATO, with a specific reference to Israel. The radar is positioned in a way that makes it easy to see into Iran, for early detection of ballistic missile launches. Voice of America | UPI. Feb 16/12: Phase 2 ships. The US Navy announces the 4 Arleigh Burke Class guided-missile destroyers which will be forward deployed to Rota, Spain in FY 2014 and 2015. See also DoD Buzz. “The four include three from Norfolk, Va; USS Ross, USS Donald Cook, and USS Porter, and one from Mayport, Fla., USS Carney. The ships are in support of President Obama’s European Phased Adaptive Approach to enhance the security of the European region… Ross and Donald Cook will arrive in fiscal 2014 and Carney and Porter in fiscal 2015.” Nov 1/11: Radars. The US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) awards Raytheon IDS of Woburn, MA a maximum $307.6 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract. Under this new contract, Raytheon will maintain software required to operate “the X-band family of radars,” and perform and Ballistic Missile Defense System test planning, execution and analysis. Discussions with Raytheon personnel confirmed that the funding applies to the XBR radar on the SBX naval platform, as well as their AN/TPY-2 radars (THAAD, EPAA, deployed in Israel & Japan), and a “Ground Based Radar Prototype” that they’re working on as a technology demonstrator. Work will be performed in Woburn, MA from Nov 1/11 through Oct 31/13, and the MDA’s FY 2012 research, development, test and evaluation funds will be used to fund initial orders. The MDA at Redstone Arsenal, AL manages the contract (HQ0147-12-D-0005). FY 2010 – 2011 Europe grapples with BMD; Czechs out, Turkey in; Aegis Ashore shifts the plan and the costs; Progress report. (click to view full) Sept 15/11: Progress report. The White House offers an update on progress made so far on its European missile defense plans. By Phase: Phase 1: “In March of this year the USS Monterey [CG-61] was the first in a sustained rotation of ships to deploy to the Mediterranean Sea in support of EPAA. Phase One also calls for deploying a land-based early warning radar, which Turkey recently agreed to host as part of the NATO missile defense plan.” Phase 2: “This week, on September 13, the United States and Romania signed the U.S.-Romanian Ballistic Missile Defense Agreement. Once ratified, it will allow the United States to build, maintain, and operate the land-based BMD site [and SM-3 deployment] in Romania.” Phase 3: “Poland agreed to host the [SM-3] interceptor site in October 2009, and today, with the Polish ratification process complete, this agreement has entered into force.” Russia: “As an initial step, NATO and Russia completed a joint ballistic missile threat assessment and agreed that the [NATO-Russia Council] would resume theater missile defense cooperation. The United States and Russia also continue to discuss missile defense cooperation through a number of high-level working groups at the State and Defense Departments.” Sept 9/11: Aegis Ashore. The US Missile Defense Agency in Dahlgren, VA awards a $115.5 million sole source cost-plus-award-fee/ cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification to Lockheed Martin MS2 in Moorestown, NJ, for continued Aegis Ashore Combat System adaptation efforts, site planning, transportation planning, technology initiatives and studies. This award of contract line item number (CLIN) 0001, and increase in the amounts for CLINs 0011 (material) and 0012 (travel), increases the total contract value to date from $61.2 million to $176.7 million. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ, through Sept 30/12. FY 2011 research, development, test and evaluation funds will be used to incrementally fund this effort (HQ0276-10-C-0003, PO 0019). Sept 2/11: Turkey in. Turkey has agreed to emplace an AN/TPY-2 early warning radar, facing Iran and linked to US Navy systems via Cooperative Engagement Capability. Turkish reports place it near Diyarbakir in SE Turkey, which also hosts Patriot missile batteries. Col. David Lapan tells Stars & Stripes that the agreement has some further required approvals to clear, but “The hope is to have it deployed by the end of this year.” Zaman Dis Haberler [in Turkish] | Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance | Stars & Stripes | Russia’s RIA Novosti. Turkey Aug 23/11: Phase 3. Raytheon Missile Systems Co. in Tucson, AZ receives a $9.8 million sole-source, cost-plus-award-fee contract modification. The CLIN 0008 option, “Future Upgrades and Engineering Support,” will help the Missile Defense Agency execute technical analysis for the Aegis BMD 5.1/SM-3 Block IIA combination, which is critical to PAA Phase 3. Exercising CLIN 0008 increases the total contract value from $276.7 – $286.5 million. Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ through Sept 30/16, and will be incrementally funded by FY 2011 research, development, test, and evaluation funds. Though the SM-3 Block IIA is a cooperative program with Japan, this is not a foreign military sales acquisition. The US MDA in Dahlgren, VA manages the contract (HQ0276-10-C-0005, PO 0015). July 6/11: DSB Report. In an open letter, the US Defense Science Board aims to dispel impressions that they recommended against the SM-3, which by its nature is a mid-course or terminal phase interceptor: “The DSB concluded that the Missile Defense Agency is on the right track in developing European Phased Adapted Approach (EPAA) options, including continued evolution of the SM-3 family of missiles… The DSB also examined the potential in the EPAA context for EI [Early Intercept] in regional defense against short-range missiles before threat payloads could be deployed, and concluded that this was not a viable option because of technical constraints… The fact that this form of EI is not viable in shorter-range regional applications does not imply that either SM-3 family interceptors or the EPAA concept are flawed… MDA is on the right track in pursuing this capability for national missile defense, and examining the potential application in regional defense as a function of the range of threat missiles.” June 23/11: CRS Report. The US Congressional Research Service releases the latest update of “Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress” [PDF]. Key excerpts: “Some observers are concerned – particularly in light of the EPAA – that demands from U.S. regional military commanders for BMD-capable Aegis ships are growing faster than the number of BMD-capable Aegis ships. They are also concerned that demands from U.S. regional military commanders for… BMD operations could strain the Navy’s ability to provide regional military commanders with Aegis ships for performing non-BMD missions… MDA states that SM-3 Block IAs have a unit procurement cost of about $9 million to $10 million, that SM-3 Block IBs have an estimated unit procurement cost of about $12 million to $15 million, and that SM-3 Block IIAs have an estimated unit procurement cost of about $20 million to $24 million.” June 15/11: Czech Republic. The Czech Republic formally abandons its proposed role in the U.S. “Phased Adaptive Approach” to missile defense. Defense Minister Alexander Vondra told visiting Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn that his country no longer wanted to participate in the American system, but would continue working within NATO on potential European defenses. Stars & Stripes. Czech out April 15/11: Testing. Flight Test Standard Missile-15 (FTM-15) begins to test the European Phased Adaptive Approach architecture, firing an SM-3 Block 1A missile against an intermediate-range (officially, 1,864 – 3,418 miles) target, based on AN/TPY-2 ground-based radar data, before the USS O’Kane (DDG 77, equipped with AEGIS BMD 3.6.1) could pick the target up using its own radar. Initial indications are that all components performed as designed, and the missile recorded the 21st successful AEGIS BMD intercept in 25 tries. The target missile was launched from the Reagan Test Site, located on Kwajalein Atoll in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, approximately 2,300 miles SW of Hawaii. The AN/TPY-2 radar, which is also used as part of the THAAD missile system, was located on Wake Island, and crewed by Soldiers from the 94th Army Air and Missile Defense Command. It detected and tracked the missile, then sent trajectory information to the 613th Air and Space Operations Center’s C2BMC(Command, Control, Battle Management, and Communications) system at Hickam Air Force Base, HI. That was relayed to USS O’Kane, sailing to the west of Hawaii, which launched the SM-3-1A missile about 11 minutes after target take-off. O’Kane’s own AN/SPY-1 radar eventually picked up the incoming missile itself, and controlled the missile until impact. As an important sidebar, the 2 demonstration Space Tracking and Surveillance Satellites (STSS), launched by MDA in 2009, successfully acquired the target missile, providing stereo “birth to death” tracking of the target missile. FTM-15 was less dramatic than the 2008 satellite kill using an SM-3, but it’s equally significant. The successful full integration of ground and naval defenses, remote launch, and supplementary satellite track confirmed that EPAA Phase I, which has already deployed, works. It did so even though launch on remote track was supposed to wait for AEGIS BMD 5.1, and IRBMs were supposed to wait for SM-3 Block II. Instead, the test also combined to extend the current system’s proven capabilities, while validating the difficult connections that make a missile defense system more than the sum of its parts, and proving out an important early warning element (STSS) in the system. US MDA | Lockheed Martin | Raytheon | Lexington Institute. April 3-18/11: The Russian Question, Take 2. Russia’s NATO envoy Dmitry Rogozin describes the issue of NATO-Russian missile defense cooperation as “a complicated matter, but it is not hopeless.” Nonetheless, differences run very deep. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov roiled the waters recently when he said that: “We insist on only one thing: that we’re an equal part of [a joint missile defense arrangement]. In practical terms, that means our office will sit, for example, in Brussels and agrees on a red-button push to start an anti-missile, regardless of whether it starts from Poland, Russia or the U.K.” It’s not 100% clear if he meant veto power over launches, though it certainly sounds that way. In response, Sen. Mark Kirk [R-IL] sent a letter to President Obama, co-signed by 38 Republican senators. Excerpt: “In our view, any agreement that would allow Russia to influence the defense of the United States or our allies, to say nothing of a “red button” or veto, would constitute a failure of leadership… ask for your written assurances that your Administration will not provide Russia with any access to sensitive U.S. data, including early warning, detection, tracking, targeting, and telemetry data, sensors or common operational picture data, or American hit-to-kill missile defense technology…” They’re not likely to get those things, but it’s a warning shot that any agreement along these lines would face a Senate backlash, and become a 2012 election issue. NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen also poured cold water on the concept, saying “We are thinking about two systems – one NATO’s and one Russian – that will cooperate and exchange information to make us more secure.” Bloomberg re: Lavrov | Agence France Presse | right-wing Heritage Foundation | Russia’s ITAR-TASS | Moscow Times re: NATO | The Telegraph (UK) | Voice of Russia re: Rogozin | AEI’s Weekly Standard (incl. full text of Senators’ letter). March 24/11: GAO Report. The US GAO issues report #GAO-11-372: “Missile Defense: Actions Needed to Improve Transparency and Accountability.” Key excerpts: “In 2010, MDA was able to meet or exceed its delivery goals for several MDA activities, such as missile defense upgrades to Aegis ships… MDA finalized a new process in which detailed baselines were set for several missile defense systems… [but] GAO found its unit and life-cycle cost baselines had unexplained inconsistencies… DOD has not fully implemented a management process that synchronizes European missile defense acquisition activities and ensures transparency and accountability. Without key management and oversight processes, there is a limited basis for oversight, and there is a risk that key components will start production before demonstrating system performance… GAO makes 10 recommendations for MDA to strengthen its resource, schedule and test baselines, facilitate baseline reviews, and further improve transparency and accountability. GAO is also making a recommendation to improve MDA’s ability to carry out its test plan. In response, DOD fully concurred with 7 recommendations. It partially concurred with 3…” Feb 7/11: Turkey. With Turkey seen to be demurring on proposals to host one or more American AN/TPY-2 radars, as part of a European missile defense shield, US Senators Jon Kyl [R-AZ], James Risch [R-ID], Mark Kirk [R-IL] and James Inhofe [R-OK] have sent a joint letter to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, asking him to consider Georgia as one of several potential alternate hosts. Georgia’s Deputy Foreign Minister David Dzhalagania says the country has not formulated a concrete position, but thinks the proposal is interesting. The very thing that makes it interesting to Georgia – a major US asset that America would feel compelled to protect if hostilities begin again with Russia – is also the potential down-side to its placement in that country. On the other hand, a radar there would be very well positioned to monitor Iran. Civil Georgia | Georgia’s The Messenger | Russia’s RIA Novosti. Dec 27/10: AA Kauai. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ receives a $65.6 million contract modification for production of the Aegis Weapon System, tooling, test equipment, and associated technical services for the Aegis Ashore test site at the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Kauai, Hawaii. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (87%), and Clearwater, FL (13%), and is expected to be complete by October 2014. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contract (N00024-09-C-5110). Nov 3/10: AA Kauai. Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp. in Overland Park, KS receives a $6.5 million for firm-fixed price Task Order under an indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for architect-engineer services in support of the Aegis Ashore Missile Defense Test Complex at the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii. They’ll prepare plans, specifications, cost estimates for design-bid-build requests for proposal contract documents, and other related services for FY 2011. Work will be performed in Barking Sands, Hawaii, and is expected to be complete by June 2011. One proposal was received for this task order by NAVFAC Hawaii in Pearl Harbor, HI (W912GB-09-D-0062, SR02). Aug 24/10: AA Kauai. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors (LM MS2) in Moorestown, NJ, is being awarded a sole-source, not-to-exceed $69.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee letter contract to serve as the “Aegis Ashore” Engineering Agent. In accordance with the AA Program of Record. Contract finalization is expected to be complete by Nov 19/10. The work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ, and the performance period is from August 2010 through April 2011. This project is part of a $278 million program to increase missile testing on Kauai. LM MS2 will provide the engineering and necessary material to support the design of the Aegis Ashore Missile Defense Test Complex; the deployment sites; the integration of the Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System (AAMDS) into the removable deckhouse; the installation, test and checkout of the AAMDS at these sites; and initial site maintenance and logistics support during site transfer to the lead service. This unfinalized contract will allow LM MS2 to assist in the development of the Aegis Ashore Combat System (AACS) requirements, to include supporting program planning, element capability specification, and concept of operations development. LM MS2 will begin the AACS adaptation, design efforts associated with the configuration of the AAMDS in the removable structure, and designing the enclosures for transport. LM MS2 will begin those activities associated with validation and verification of the deckhouse requirements and will facilitate system requirements review in September 2010, and system design review in January 2011. FY 2010 Research, Development, Test and Evaluation funds will be utilized to obligate $10.1 million for this effort. The Missile Defense Agency manages this contract (HQ0276-10-C-0003). See also Honolulu Star-Advertiser. April 1/10: SAR. The Pentagon releases its April 2010 Selected Acquisitions Report, covering major program changes up to December 2009: “Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) – Program costs decreased $10,068.9 million (-9.7%) from $102,912.4 million to $92,843.5 million, due primarily to the following: cancellation of the Kinetic Energy Interceptor and Multiple Kill Vehicle Program (-$5,304.2 million); cancellation of the Airborne Laser Program (-$2,634.7 million); elimination of the Space Tracking and Surveillance System follow-on constellation (-$1,972.0 million); transition of the sensor content to procurement (-$1,223.7 million); general infrastructure reductions (-$1,216.7 million); revised estimates for special classified programs (-$1,155.4 million); application of revised escalation indices (-$1,169.1 million); reduced Ground-Based Interceptor inventory due to the change of European site architecture (-$88.0 million); and infrastructure reductions (-$1,216.7 million). These decreases were partially offset by the change in European architecture to Aegis Ashore (+$2,493.5 million) [emphasis DID’s] and the consolidation of targets and revised Integrated Master Test Plan (+$1,646.4 million). In addition, procurement costs of $9,520.3 million, which were previously excluded from the SAR due to its pre-Milestone B Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E)-only status pursuant to section 2432 of title 10, United States Code, were added as an adjustment to the program in accordance with Congressional direction. RDT&E and Military Construction (MILCON) costs of $14,340.1 million were also added as adjustments to reflect the addition of two years to this program, which is considered Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) limited and has been allowed to add two years of cost to the program with each biennial budget. These adjustments are not considered to represent cost growth.” Program costs Dec 7/09: Europe BMD. Aviation Week notes several undercurrents involved in discussions around Europe’s missile defense. One is “consequences of intercept,” which are certainly less than the consequences of a missile strike, but could well fall outside the launching country. Another is the compressed time frames, which means authority will reside in the commander – who will that be, and where will that commander be based? A 3rd question is how the proposed SM-3 phases mesh with European NATO plans, including NATO’s Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense (ALTBMD) program command and control hub, and proposed land-based radars. Which are going to be an issue all their own, since the system requires them, and the American TPY-2s may not be the only players. Finally, there’s the question of whether European navies will join the program, which would further blue the question of whether this is an American system with NATO ancillaries, or a NATO system with American assets. Nov 17/09: Early intercept. Northrop Grumman announces a 3-month $4.7 million task order from the US Missile Defense Agency, under an indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity Joint National Integration Center Research and Development Contract. Under the Sept 29/09 task order, the firm will help the MDA integrate and demonstrate an early-intercept capability using existing SM-3 and GBI missiles. This kind of capability is especially relevant for forward-based SM-3s. The Early Intercept effort aims to address renewed focus by the U.S. Department of Defense on dealing with large raids and countermeasures. Early Intercept will demonstrate an integrated architecture of early warning sensors, including space, airborne, land and sea; regional fire control and battle manager systems; and secure communications. This integrated architecture will enable current systems to engage threats earlier in the battle space to improve protection against large raids and facilitate “shoot-look-shoot” opportunities. Northrop Grumman will begin by assessing existing sensor and battle management systems’ ability to support missile interception in the difficult boost phase, including technology developed for programs like the now-canceled Kinetic Energy Interceptor and battle management projects. The firm will plan demonstration experiments, leading toward the design and development of an experimental, plug-and-play architecture for battle management, command and control. FY 2008 – 2009 Israeli interest in land-based SM-3; EPAA plan unveiled. SM-3 launch from CG 70 (click to view full) Sept 17/09: Plan B – EPAA. The Obama administration announces revised plans for its European missile defense architecture. Instead of positioning Boeing’s Ground-Based Interceptors, which could intercept even the longest-range ballistic missiles, they choose an architecture based around the SM-3. According to Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. James Cartwright, the new plan begins with the current deployment of Patriot PAC-3 point defense systems in Europe, which may be adjusted. Those adjustments will bear watching, as early indicators of seriousness. In 2011, the US Navy is expected to have naval SM-3 Block 1A missiles and ships fully in place, on an expanded fleet of BMD-capable ships versus the 2 Atlantic Fleet destroyers available today. Unfortunately, naval SM-3 Block 1 missiles cannot cover the Czech Republic at all, and can offer only limited coverage for Poland. This will be the only option until 2015, which is beyond the Obama administration’s current term of office. 2015 would see progress on 2 fronts. One is SM-3 Block 1B missiles, and an improved AEGIS BMD system that will expand the range of coverage for American ships. The other would be land-based SM-3s in an easily-deployable configuration, based in Europe, instead of the longer-range Boeing Ground Based Interceptors. Political support for that land-based deployment is likely to become a political flash point, again. The final iteration would take place in 2018 or so, with deployment of the much larger SM-3 Block II missile, on ships and (if deployments have been accepted) on shore. Gen. Cartwright stated that no more than 3 SM-3 Block II locations would be able to cover all of Europe, but cautions that it’s an earlier-stage R&D effort, with all the expected implications for dates and certainty of capabilities. Cartwright and Gates also added several additional considerations that affected their decision. One was Russian concerns about having large X-band BMD radars that could peer deeply into Russia. By using shorter-range, directional TPY-2 radars deployed in the Caucasus, Iranian aggression can also be hedged without covering Russia so deeply – something that allies like Poland may not necessarily see as a plus. The other, more significant Russian concern was that the GBI missile was powerful enough to be fitted with a nuclear warhead, and become an offensive MRBM with very low warning time. American denials did little to dissuade the Russians, since one must plan on the basis of capabilities rather than intent. That concept becomes technically ridiculous with an SM-3, removing that issue from the table. Another issue for the USA was cost and flexibility. Gen. Cartwright cited a cost-per-missile of $3.3 million for a Patriot PAC-3, about $9 million for THAAD v1, $9.5-10 million for SM-3 Block I, about $13-15 million estimated for SM-3 Block II… and $70 million for the GBI interceptors. In a global environment that was seeing rapid growth of medium-range offensive missiles, that cost disparity had implications for strategic flexibility, as well as budgets. According to Gates and Cartwright, the GBI deployment was really designed to deal with 3-5 incoming intercontinental missiles, rather than larger salvos of medium-range missiles that are now possible. GBI is also silo-based and so immobile, as opposed to mobile ships and redeployable land-based SM-3s. The question is whether the USA will actually increase its planned buys of SM-3 in response, something that Information Dissemination’s report suggests hasn’t really been thought through yet. The US Navy’s next 5-year budget plan will tell the tale. With that cost and architecture change comes a 3rd consideration: greater capacity for allied burden-sharing. Several other nations deploy and will deploy AEGIS ships that could be upgraded to SM-3 BMD capability, including Japan (Kongo class, being upgraded), South Korea (KDX-III), Spain and Australia (F100), plus the non-AEGIS F124 frigates fielded by Germany and the Netherlands. The SM-3 missile has already been exported, and could easily be exported more widely. Gen. Cartwright cited the potential for development of a common architecture linking land and naval systems, which would be deployed in Europe, Asia, Israel, and elsewhere. The architecture is being developed to incorporate non-American systems, and Israel’s IAI/Boeing Arrow was specifically cited. Gates added that talks along these lines had begun with Arab Gulf states, who are already developing their own missile defense preparations based on regional command and control systems, Patriot missiles, and possibly THAAD and MBDA’s comparable Aster-30 SAMP/Ts. Meanwhile, THAAD missiles are still scheduled to deploy to Europe in 2009, as part of operational testing, and the system is still planned for roll-out as the Army’s area-defense weapon. The USA is also still interested in adding 2-stage capability to its GMD/GBI interceptors in Alaska and California, in order to improve their speed and increase their range. The big winner in these changes, however, is unquestionably Raytheon’s SM-3. Pentagon: Gates/ Cartwright press conference | Pentagon: DoD/ Czech MoD press conference | Aviation Week | Aviation Week Ares | Defense Tech called it early | Information Dissemination | Lexington Institute. Switch to EPAA August 18/09: Onto land. In a presentation at the 2009 Space and Missile Defense Conference & Exhibition in Huntsville, AL, Raytheon announces that it is developing a land-based system SM-3 system that would work with THAAD’s Raytheon-made AN/TPY-2 long range radar, and could be ready as early as 2013. The presentation states that this solution could provide Israel a near-term solution to counter ballistic missiles from Iran, given the deployment of TPY-2 radars in Israel by the US government. It is also reportedly under consideration for use in Europe as the missile component of planned deployments in Poland and the Czech Republic. It’s no accident that this comes just as Boeing announces a “mobile GMD” proposal for Europe by 2015, and Lockheed Martin has gone farther by submitting a modified THAAD proposal to the US Missile Defense Agency for consideration in the 2011 budget. Lockheed Martin has already invested privately funded R&D into a 21″ wide THAAD variant that would nearly double the Army interceptor missile’s range. Current SM-3s are 13.5″ in diameter, current THAADs are 14.5″, and the proposed SM-3 Block II being developed in partnership with Japan will also be 21″ in diameter. It would appear that a competition for the forward-deployed theater defense role may be brewing. Arutz Sheva | Reuters | Aviation Week re: shifts in doctrine | Aviation Week re: THAAD | Jerusalem Post re: Boeing’s “mobile GBI”. April 27/09: Study. Japan’s Yomiuri Shimbun reports that the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has started studying a new missile defense system capable of launching the Standard Missile-3 from the ground. Aug 4/09: Study. Colin Clark of DOD Buzz publishes a short video interview with Raytheon VP of advanced missile defense and directed energy Mike Booen. The interview took place at the 2009 Paris Air Show, and the topic is the $50 million FY 2010 US military budget request to study land-based SM-3 deployment. July 17/08: Israel. Aviation Week reports that the US Missile Defense Agency is considering a land-based variant of the SM-3 Standard missile, at Israel’s request: “SM-3 prime contractor Raytheon is examining a range of options — including a moveable, but not highly mobile, system that could fill Israel’s needs. Very few modifications would be needed for the missile and some tweaks would be required in the command and control system. The system would employ the same vertical launch modules, in an eight-pack configuration, used in the Aegis ship-based system.” Appendix A: EPAA – The Rationale for The Switch GBI Missile loading (click to view full) When it was first announced in 2009, land-based deployment of SM-3 missiles was seen as a political move. That’s partly true. The proposed GBI missile is so powerful that it could be fitted with a nuclear warhead, and become a serviceable MRBM itself. This made Russia very uneasy. Then, too, a massive American investment in fixed site deployments, in countries that could cave in to pressure and ask the USA to leave later on, was both politically and financially problematic. There’s also a valid military rationale in the European theater for replacing the longer-range Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system used in the USA itself, with the shorter-range and seemingly less-capable SM-3. The bottom line is more missiles, in semi-mobile locations. SM-3 missiles cost about 80% less than GMD’s GBI missiles, and the ground-based infrastructure of adapted Mk.41 vertical launchers and mobile radars is also less expensive than GMD’s full multi-silo complex and fixed radar. Now throw in the ability to move those assets once they’re built, and to quickly bulk up defenses using similar systems deployed at sea. That’s very useful against an enemy who is building a lot of MRBM/IRBM missiles, and could easily use a mass rush offense to overwhelm limited numbers of GBI interceptors – possibly coupled with terrorist operations against their fixed GMD launch complexes. All of the rationales regarding mobile options vs. fixed sites evaporated when the US MDA switched to the Aegis Ashore configuration, which shares all of the same drawbacks inherent to fixed GMD deployments. The cost benefits remain intact, however, and so does the rationale for deploying more missiles in theater. Meanwhile, the switch had political costs. Countries like Poland and the Czech Republic are out of range for naval SM-3 Block 1 coverage, and would require too many THAAD batteries on land. That had prompted the push for GBI missiles, and those governments had held firm in the face of domestic political controversy. The USA’s revised plans dealt them a political setback, and delayed meaningful local missile defenses until around 2015 or later. The shift was somewhat jarring, and the Czech Republic subsequently dropped out of US missile defense plans. In 2012, Poland followed with a declaration that it would deploy its own parallel system. Israel’s Possible Rationales Arrow test concept (click to view full) Statements from Raytheon indicated that Israel was already doing research into a land-based SM-3, despite its existing Patriot PAC-2 GEM+ and Arrow-2 architecture. In the end, however, Israel maintained of its focus on an improved “Arrow-3” interceptor, and America agreed to support that program in the FY 2010 budget. Those developments leave dim odds for land-based SM-3s in Israel. The question is why they were interested in the first place. Several possibilities exist that might justify an Israeli desire to retain an active Arrow missile fleet, and still deploy the SM-3s. One is the naval defense option. While Israel has apparently decided on a different direction, its proposed LCS-I frigates would have possessed the ability to fire SM-3 missiles, and their proposed MEKO derivatives might still have that if they’re equipped with strike-length Mk. 41 VLS launchers. The Arrow missile has not been integrated with the Mk.41 VLS, and the program has not described navalization plans. The 2nd possible justification for an Israeli SM-3 buy revolves around and command-and-control developments. Like the LCS-I, any new Israeli frigates firing an SM-3 would need to link to an anti-ballistic capable radar for guidance. Israel already fields ABM-capable land radars like its “Green Pine” system, and the USA has reportedly moved manned AN/TPY-2 THAAD radars into Israel as additional insurance against a Second Holocaust perpetrated by Iran. Linkage of a naval missile’s guidance to those kinds of land platforms would involve many of the same modifications required by a fully land-launched and controlled SM-3, and statements by America’s General Cartwright say that the USA’s land-based anti-missile command and control systems that will work with land-based SM-3s, are also being developed to include the Arrow. The 3rd possible justification is range. The SM-3 boasts a range about 5x longer than the Arrow-2, at 300 miles vs. 50-60 miles. A tripartite system of SM-3, Arrow-2, and Patriot missiles would effectively offer the 3 layered tiers required by a country of Israel’s size: national defense/ first line of defense, defense of key regions/ second shot, and defense of specific sites/ final attempt. Fourth, deployment would coincide with a growing shift in the USA to focus on “ascent-phase intercept” of medium (MRBM) and intermediate-range (IRBM) missiles. If the launchers are deployed close enough to the firing missile, interceptions become possible sometime between the boost and mid-course phases during entry into space, right before the target missile can begin deploying decoys. The Middle East’s compressed distances are a threat, due to low warning times and the resulting hair-triggers. They might also be an opportunity. Finally, the SM-3 is an active production item for the USA and Japan, which leverages the infrastructure created by a large-scale, full-rate production set of programs. This means that SM-3s can be produced far faster than additional Arrow missiles. If developments in Iran are leading Israel to conclude that it needs to deploy many more theater-range defensive missiles within a short period of time, the THAAD and Arrow programs are unlikely to be able to handle that request due to the stage they’re at, and the industrial framework around them. That would leave the SM-3 as Israel’s only realistic rapid plus-up option. In the end, as noted above, Israel decided to improve its Arrow system and create the Arrow-3, with funding assistance from the USA. The country clearly considers ballistic missile defense to be a strategic technology capability, has yet to purchase ships that would make naval SM-3 deployment possible, and have already spent the money to integrate the Arrow system with Israel’s air defense architecture. The SM-3’s land-based progress will happen elsewhere. Additional Readings Background: EPAA Systems US MDA – Aegis Ashore. US MDA – Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense: Future Capabilities. DID FOCUS – Raytheon’s Standard Missile Naval Defense Family. NATO – Ballistic missile defence. DID – Alone, If Necessary: The Shield of Poland. Poland will be fielding a national air and missile defense system as a complement to EPAA – and also as insurance against its failure. Official Reports US National Research Council – Making Sense of Ballistic Missile Defense: An Assessment of Concepts and Systems for U.S. Boost-Phase Missile Defense in Comparison to Other Alternatives. Tremendous in-depth look at US missile defense, from September 2012. US GAO (April 11/14, #GAO-14-314) Ballistic Missile Defense: Actions Needed to Address Implementation Issues and Estimate Long-Term Costs for European Capabilities. US Congressional Research Service (#RL33745) – Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress [PDF]. Last update April 8/14. US GAO (April 1/14, #GAO-14-351) – Missile Defense: Mixed Progress in Achieving Acquisition Goals and Improving Accountability. US GAO (Apr 26/13, #GAO-13-432) – Opportunity to Refocus on Strengthening Acquisition Management. Notes a civil wireless spectrum issue with EPAA’s radars. US GAO (Feb 11/13, #GAO-13-382R) – Standard Missile-3 Block IIB Analysis of Alternatives. Argues why they should do one. They cancel it instead. US GAO (April 20/12, #GAO-12-486) – “Opportunity Exists to Strengthen Acquisitions by Reducing Concurrency. US GAO (March 24/11, #GAO-11-372) – Missile Defense: Actions Needed to Improve Transparency and Accountability. Includes EPAA. News & Views Breaking Defense (Oct 17/13) – Why Russia Keeps Moving The Football On European Missile Defense: Politics. “Ironically, moving the technology further away from Russian borders could increase the potential for its successful use against Russian missiles. So, whether or not Russian technical concerns could ever really be assuaged must be questioned.” Commentary Magazine (December 2009) – The Missile Defense Betrayal. The revised European missile defense plan was not universally well-received on the political front, with many conservatives sharply critical. Commentary Magazine’s article includes coverage of the political dynamics at work in Poland and the Czech Republic. Lexington Institute (Nov 5/09) – Aegis Ashore: The Navy’s New Missile Defense Mantra. View the full article

I am happy we are talking more about wargames, but I am losing confidence in our ability to understand what they are and how to properly use them. The fact they are being used to justify further divestment from our hard won - yet still rump - fleet of smaller warships only adds to my concerns that we are making a huge mistake. Quotes and more thoughts over at USNIBlog. Come by and wonder what in the wide world of sports is going on over there. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=yIl2AUoC8zA http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=qj6IDK7rITs http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=ok0wOryRI68:sp61AB0UM0g:gIN9vFwOqvQ http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=ok0wOryRI68:sp61AB0UM0g:-BTjWOF_DHI http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=ok0wOryRI68:sp61AB0UM0g:V_sGLiPBpWU http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=ok0wOryRI68:sp61AB0UM0g:F7zBnMyn0Lo http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/FAFV/~4/ok0wOryRI68View the full article

Americas F-35 fighter plane engines are in short supply, with the solution months away, causing the Defense Department to reduce its schedule of exhibition flights and to start planning for a shortage as soon as 2022. The Defense Department’s F-35 office has advised that about five to six percent of the US. F-35 fleet could be without useable engines by 2022, and up to 20 percent of the plane’s fleet could be sidelined by 2025. According to Defense News, the F-135 Heavy Maintenance Center, located at Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma, has been unable to process engines for repairs and maintenance, and catching up will take months. According to Lockheed Martin, the company will soon begin supporting formal integration and testing of the US Army’s combat vehicle protection system intended to keep warfighters safer and more secure from battlefield threats. Under a new contract, the company will provide its Modular Active Protection System (MAPS) base kit, which includes an open-architecture processor that integrates vehicle sensors and countermeasures in a common framework to detect, track and defeat rocket-propelled grenades and anti-tank guided missiles. Lockheed Martin will deliver five production-ready base kits with an option for up to 20, and support Army integration and testing on Abrams, Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, Bradley and Stryker vehicles. Middle East & Africa The Israeli ministerial committee for military acquisitions signed off on the purchase of another squadron’s worth of F-35 fighter jets, as well as four Boeing KC-46 refueling planes and advanced missiles and bombs on Tuesday, following government approval last week for a contentious funding scheme to pay for the equipment involving massive loans from the United States, the government said. Turkish companies Ares Shipyard and Meteksan Defense launched the first prototype of their ULAQ weaponized unmanned surface vehicle (USV) in early February, according to a joint statement released by both firms. The prototype USV was launched in Antalya, where Ares Shipyard is located, and an intensive period of sea trials has been initiated. While the companies did not disclose further details at the launch event it is understood that initial testing will focus on sea keeping, maneuverability, and other navigational matters. Europe The British Army says that the Urban Training Facility boasts “moveable walls; interactive smoke, light, and sound effects; and a video monitoring system for soldiers to be able to review their performance”. It is designed to let troops, armed with rifles adapted to use paint marker ammunition, practice entering and moving through buildings, clearing the enemy as they go. Asia-Pacific Vietnam’s Ministry of Defense has signed a contract with Czech’s OMNIPOL for 12 L-39NG aircraft. The jets will be delivered between 2023 to 2024. The value of the contract was not given but includes the training of pilots, instructors, ground crew and mechanics. Vietnam had previously ordered 31 L-39s. Today’s Video Watch: Turkey’s Armed USV “ULAQ” starts sea trials View the full article

As we briefly reviewed last summer, Turkey's bullying action from the Aegean to Cyprus to Libya was having the effect of pushing surrounding nations closer together - and getting the attention of larger powers on the other side of the Mediterranean as well. After a series of provocations by Turkey, it was only natural that the nations of the Eastern Mediterranean would either have to fold or stand up. They've taken the later option; Egypt, Cyprus and Greece have demanded respect for the sovereignty and sovereign rights of states in their maritime areas in the eastern Mediterranean. The demand came in a joint statement from the three countries’ foreign ministers during their meeting in Athens, where they discussed cooperation to deepen their political and economic commitment, regional challenges and delivering a clear message that the region had the potential to be peaceful and stable.They welcomed the preparations for the establishment of a Tripartite Secretariat, based in Nicosia, Cyprus, that launches later this year, and for the founding charter of the EastMed Gas Forum that enters into force on March 1. The charter establishes the forum as a regional organization based in Cairo. The forum is open to all countries that share the same values ​​and goals and have the desire to cooperate for regional security and prosperity. ... They stressed the importance of respecting the sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction of each state over its maritime areas in accordance with international law, while condemning any activities that violated international law. Their statement said the expected words about Syria, Israel, the Palestinians, and Libya, but there is no question here the concern revolves around their mutual history with the Turks/Ottomans. On balance, this is good for the international community. Turkey needed to be checked, and these neighbors - in an East Med "community watch" - put their obnoxious neighbor at the end off the cul-de-sac on notice. Good. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=yIl2AUoC8zA http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=qj6IDK7rITs http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=EVRr-IcWywY:T-Z5S6436UE:gIN9vFwOqvQ http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=EVRr-IcWywY:T-Z5S6436UE:-BTjWOF_DHI http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=EVRr-IcWywY:T-Z5S6436UE:V_sGLiPBpWU http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=EVRr-IcWywY:T-Z5S6436UE:F7zBnMyn0Lo http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/FAFV/~4/EVRr-IcWywYView the full article

Americas The Coast Guard received its newest Sentinel Class fast response cutter, the Coast Guard Cutter Frederick Hatch, from Bollinger Shipyards in Key West, Florida. The Frederick Hatch will be the third FRC stationed in Guam, and will arrive in Santa Rita during the summer. The Frederick Hatch, which will support a crew of 24, was placed in commission, special status, and will remain in Florida while the crew completes pre-commissioning trials and maintenance. Ultra has announced a contract award to commence work on the key Variable Depth Sonar (VDS) system for the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) programme, named the Towed Low Frequency Active Sonar (TLFAS). This subcontract moves the development of CSC’s anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capability from the programme definition phase into the full manufacture and delivery of the vessels suite of sonars. The TLFAS system is designed and manufactured by Ultra in Nova Scotia. In the two years since having been originally awarded program definition studies for CSC, Ultra’s Canadian team has grown by over 150 employees, with another 80 roles expected to be made available in 2021. Middle East & Africa According to Reuters, Israel’s air force began a “surprise exercise” to improve combat readiness along the country’s northern border. The military said the “exercise simulates combat scenarios in the northern front, and will test all components in the (air force’s) core missions, including maintaining aerial superiority, protecting the country’s skies, as well as attacking and gathering intelligence.” Europe Airbus will showcase a wide range of cutting-edge technologies, capabilities and solutions from Airbus Defense and Space and Airbus Helicopters at the International Defense Exhibition and Conference (IDEX) 2021. The event is set to take place at Abu Dhabi National Exhibition Centre (ADNEC) from February 21 – 25 and is held under the patronage of His Highness Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, President of the UAE and Supreme Commander of the UAE Armed Forces. Asia-Pacific A second batch of Japan Ground Self-Defense Force (JGSDF) MV-22 Ospreys arrived home at MCAS Iwakuni, Japan on February 14. The air station’s advanced capabilities and deep water port allow for aircraft to arrive via ship before receiving functional checks and flying to their final destination. The Australian Financial Review revealed that the Royal Australian Navy will send a warship to join HMS Queen Elizabeth Carrier Strike Group and the Australian ship will rendezvous with the group in Singapore. The strike group will sail via the critical Malacca Strait and probably transit through the contested South China Sea. Australia will join American, Japanese and Dutch forces that have already announced their involvement. An American destroyer, The Sullivans, will be part of the carrier group while a squadron of US Marine Corps F-35 joint strike fighters will operate from HMS Queen Elizabeth during the deployment. Today’s Video Watch: JGSDF V-22 Ospreys arrive at MCAS Iwakuni View the full article

R.K. Lembke has an article over at Small Wars Journal that had me nodding my head in agreement on the subject more than any I have read in a long time. Regular readers of CDR Salamander will see many of the issues we've raised here over they years, but Lembke's presentation, tying them in together while providing sound and well documented quotes from the start, is simply a powerhouse. I spent half a decade of my active duty life on, and for a few months, in Afghanistan. A wee bit early on at the Tactical, but most as a staff weenie on the in-theater Operational and Strategic levels at USA and NATO commands from Bush43 through to the first year of the Obama administration. I am not in full alignment with everything Lembke stakes out, but almost all. The most important gift in the article is his focus, as much as one can as an outsider, on the Afghan people. He goes to the heart of the issue and does not focus on just the latest news and personalities of today. The hardest part of Afghanistan - the greatest challenge - has always been the long game; the Afghan people and their culture(s) and how that is understood from the western mind. Lembke lets you know in the first paragraph - he's not taking the indirect approach - and he's naming names; Peace is possible in Afghanistan, but it has to be by the terms of the average, rural, Muslim, Afghan tribesman. They represent the majority of the Afghan population. Taliban, U.S., and Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (GIRoA) empathy and accommodation of the average Afghan is the only door to peace. Thanks to the U.S. and international involvement in Afghanistan, for right or wrong, Afghanistan has become the poster child of what happens when western-inspired Progressive, Post- Modernist, Critical Theory meets Islamic Tribalism – and it's not working out very well for the average Afghan. Thanks to the Taliban, Afghanistan has also become the poster child of when the execution of 7th Century Islamic jurisprudence meets the modern world – also not working out very well for the average Afghan. Unfortunately, it appears the desires of the average rural farmer population doesn't matter to anyone at the peace table. He follows up on each point with the facts of the reality on the ground. I am not going to do a fully paragraph by paragraph review. It is too long for this format and readers here have varying levels of understanding of the topic at hand. I really would like everyone to take time to read it in full. I do want to bring up two topics he raises that have bothered me for a decade and a half because they do not get enough discussion; The Bonn Conference and agriculture. Regular readers have heard them raised here and on Midrats, and they are brought in to Lembke's critique. While updating OPLANS for AFG, we would discuss Bonn as the original sin - the fatal flaw - in everything we were trying to do. We feared that no matter how hard we tried, however many forces we brought in - we may not be able to help the Afghans construct something useful around the internationalist fantasy that came out of Bonn. The Taliban claim the Afghan government is not legitimate and the Afghan Constitution needs to be changed. Frankly, if one is honest, they have a point. It is likely even if the Taliban were to surrender tomorrow, fighting would ensue once the rest of the population know of the conflict between the constitution and their tribal/Islamic rules. The seeds of GIRoA and the constitution began from Bush Doctrine with progressive, postmodern, and Critical Theory elements. The seeds grew into the root of the current government, the 2001 Bonn conference (Office of the Deputy Minister of Policy, 2001). While the Afghan representatives to the Bonn conference represented the Bush administration’s progressive values, the old monarch values, and those of the victorious minority backed by the U.S., they did not represent the single largest intersectional group in Afghanistan – the Pashtun who practice the Deobandi Fiqh of Islam (BBC News, 2020). The corrupted root grew into the tree, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. From the tree grew a constitution that was at best a compromise between the secular United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the Holy Koran (Freedom or Theocracy?: Constitutionalism in Afghanistan and Iraq, 2005; Jura Gentium, 2010; New York Times, 2003). Progressives claim the constitution gave too much power to the Mullahs, the Taliban claim the constitution is the UDHR in Islamic window dressing (Afghan Constitution, 2020; Rand, 2003). ... The 2001 Bonn conference in 2001 was significant because its attendees appointed the interim government, designed the blueprints for the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (GIRoA), and defined the process to use to write the constitution (U.N., 2001). Based on the demographics, one would expect the Bonn conference to have a fair proportional representation of all intersectional groups' values in Afghanistan, but it didn't (Conciliation Resources, 2018; PBS, 2009; Office of the Deputy Minister for Policy, 2001; Vendrell, 2012). Historically, tribal traditions and the Islamic fiqhs form Afghan's values (Afghanistan Culture, 2009; Yassari & Saboori, 2010). Based on the intersection of ethnicities, fiqhs, and social classes, the representation in Bonn should have been proportioned to reflect the values of the following intersectional groups: The rural Pashtun Deobandi Hanafi should have been represented by at least 43% of the representatives; the rural Tajik Hanafi Lahori by 29%; the Hazara Shiite by 11%; the rural Uzbeki Hanafi by 11%; Urban Kabulis - Ex-royalists, academic, communists, and modern progressives- by 6% (CIA World Factbook, 2020; World Population Review, 2021). The actual Bonn conference consisted of 24 voting members and one nonvoting member. All but one represented competitors to the rural Pashtun Deobandi Hannafis. Of the 24 voting members, 30% were rural Tajik Hanafi Lahori; 12% were urban academic progressives; 30% represented wealthy elite Pashtun Kabulis, Pashtun Monarchist, and progressive Pashtun academia; 20% were Hazara Shia; 4% was Uzbeki Lahore Hanafi (Bonn Conference, 2001; International Conference on Afghanistan, Bonn, 2001). Not one person represented the rural Pashtun Deobandi Hanafi community, not even Pacha Khan Zadran, who was both too controversial to be effective and associated with the monarch. While it is comforting to some in the West to point to the Afghans as the problem, they are wrong. Afghanistan is their culture, their people, their history. The problem was we refused to make the effort to see the problem from their eyes. We allowed us to get played by exiles of questionable worth and then took the worst ideas from think tanks and academia and tried to spot weld them on a people who would instantly become an antibody to them. Deconstructing Bush's doctrine, there are elements of progressive, postmodern, Critical Theory defining the U.S. approach to constructing the "new" post-Taliban Afghanistan. Walter Nugent in 2010 defined progressivism as the belief that societies will evolve from uncivil to civil societies through the application of empirical knowledge (Nugent, 2010). As embodied by Wilson, progressives exchange their faith in the invisible hand of a God to that of the bureaucrats in administrative states (Link, 1967; Pestritto, 2007). Whether one agress with it or not, progressivism has become the philosophy of choice in foreign policy in the modern west (Reeb, 2020; Schambra & West, 2007; Van Jackson, 2018). I am guessing the Muslims who watched hundreds of millions of people executed by modern secular governments in the 20th century - such as China and the USSR - are a little skeptical of the wisdom of "expert" progressive bureaucrats. It is clear the philosophy of Islam is popular with 99% of Afghans – they have not yet given up on their faith in the invisible hand of God (Nelson, 2013; Asia Foundation, 2019). Between 2002 and 2005, Bush gave 37 speeches reference the Afghan people's rights and aspirations (Whitehouse Archives, 2004). He never mentioned God, faith, or divine rights once. Bush's following quotes reference the importance of government, coalitions, and even armies –but nothing about faith or God. "Under the Taliban, women were oppressed, their potential was ignored. Under President Karzai's leadership, that has changed dramatically. A number of innovative programs designed in collaboration with the Afghan government are increasing the role of women in the private sector." President Bush's remarks in a press conference with President Karzai of Afghanistan -The Rose Garden, Washington, D.C. June 15, 2004. (Whitehouse Archives,2004) [Comment: I do not think the 100,000+ mothers who gave permission for their sons to fight for the Taliban felt oppressed by their definition of oppression. Understanding by current progressive postmodernist Critical Theory ideology they are ignorant and have been fooled by males to thinking that way. Yet, they are still allowing their sons to fight for what they believe – no matter how wrong we think their beliefs are.] "Afghanistan and America are working together to print millions of new textbooks and to build modern schools in every Afghan province. Girls, as well as boys, are going to school, and they are studying under a new curriculum that promotes religious and ethnic tolerance." President Bush's remarks in a press conference with President Karzai of Afghanistan The Rose Garden, Washington, D.C. June 15, 2004. (Whitehouse Archives,2004) [Comment: The Afghan government and U.S. developed the new curriculum - not GIRoA, Ulema, and parents worked together in developing he curriculum.] "In Afghanistan, we helped to liberate an oppressed people. And we will continue helping them secure their country, rebuild their society, and educate all their children, boys and girls." President Bush Delivers the State of the Union, January 28, 2003. (Whitehouse Archives,2004) [Comment: First, the 43 % + of the country supporting the Taliban didn’t think they were oppressed. Secondly, note the “U.S.”. will rebuild their community and educate their children. Bush did not say we would work with the government, parents, and Ulema to build society. In his statement, Bush was saying the secular U.S. is replacing the elders and Ulema. ] Point by point, Lembke brings receipts. You may not like it, but his case is solid. Finally, the second point I was so happy to see Lembke bring up. We tried on multiple occasions to get more rural expertise on the planning staffs. There were just a few of us who would try to pull at least the ideas in, but with few exceptions, no interest was shown by the senior uniformed and civilian leadership. We would bring up the importance of understanding rents and land lords, security and quality of transportation of goods to market. We even tried to bring in the well known concept of subsidies for certain crops to overcome the inadequacy of both security and access to markets - something we in the West do for our farmers - but besides a few small projects ... nope. Our military and civilian senior leaders were either so far removed from any rural understanding or, more likely, uninterested in it. Especially in the USA with our states that have land grant universities with large agricultural expertise in climates not dissimilar to Afghanistan - and untold numbers of National Guard members with that expertise - in the half decade I was involved with planning the operation, we could never get traction on the concept. In a rural society - find out what the farmers need, get them on your side, and at best the rest will follow - or at least they won't actively help those who will get in the way of your help to them. Yes it's transactional. Welcome to the real world. According to the farmers’ and southern Pashtun I have talked to, they perceived the Taliban movement’s beginning as a movement against the injustice caused by expatriated monarch families returning to Afghanistan to take back their lands and power – not to establish a terrorist occupation. The communist government redistributed land from wealthy landowners (representing the “rich” half of the tribes in the south) to poor land workers (representing the “poor” half of the tribes in the south) in the late 1970s and early 1980s (Rubin, 2002). The wealthy landowners took their money and ran to the U.S., Europe, Russia, Pakistan, and Turkey. After the communist government fell, the old landowners came back and made a deal with the Mujahadeen government: their tribes’ support in exchange for their old lands and power. In fact Karzai, the first "appointed" President of Afghanistan, was a son of one of the wealthy returning Popalzai families (Hamid Karzai Biography, n.d.). The workers, who had been allowed to own and work their own land for the first time in centuries, rebelled against the government giving the monarchists their old lands back. Most joined the Taliban to unite against the monarchists and their supporting Army Brigades. The Taliban movement quickly spread into a national movement for peace and justice. As it turned out, the Taliban couldn't govern fairly and compassionately, proving to be an inadequate alternative (Ghufran, n.d.). Once the U.S. jumped in the war, the old autocrats and their sons used their U.S. and European colleagues' influence to reclaim their wealth through the Bonn Conference and constitution (Bonn Conference, 2001; Conciliation Resources, 2018; Freedom or Theocracy?: Constitutionalism in Afghanistan and Iraq, 2005; International Crisis Group, 2003 ). It is easy to say, "We need new elites." but we do. If we will continue to insist on pulling people from the same intellectually inbred lines, we should at least hold them to account and make them address their shortcomings. Yes, the Afghans failed themselves, but we did not help them all that much either. We damaged our own - and their - opportunity after the events of almost 20-years ago. We will repeat those errors again, somewhere else, if we do not look at how we failed - who led that failure - and the ideas that drove their failure - with clear eyes. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=yIl2AUoC8zA http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=qj6IDK7rITs http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=uXVH3VdFPiU:DPJUQ51Mq74:gIN9vFwOqvQ http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=uXVH3VdFPiU:DPJUQ51Mq74:-BTjWOF_DHI http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=uXVH3VdFPiU:DPJUQ51Mq74:V_sGLiPBpWU http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=uXVH3VdFPiU:DPJUQ51Mq74:F7zBnMyn0Lo http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/FAFV/~4/uXVH3VdFPiUView the full article

Americas The US Air Force is to contract Sikorsky to upgrade its HH-60W Jolly Green II combat search and rescue (CSAR) helicopter to improve on the 2012 requirements baseline. According to the service, the manufacturer is to bring the capabilities of the Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH) up to today’s specifications, ahead of the commencement of full rate production in fiscal year 2022. Under the potential five-year deal for rolling capability upgrades to both the helicopter’s hardware and software systems, Sikorsky stands to receive up to $980 million. Work to integrate the AN/SPY-6 radar on the new Aegis Flight III guided-missile destroyer, the future USS Jack H. Lucas (DDG 125), has started. Installation is being carried out at the Huntington Ingalls Industries shipyard in Pascagoula, Mississippi. “As the future USS Jack Lucas takes shape, we are at the cusp of a new era for detection and discrimination of threats and decision-making at sea,” said Capt. Jason Hall, program manager for Above-Water Sensors for the US Navy’s Program Executive Office for Integrated Warfare Systems. “SPY-6 will fill critical mission gaps and enable precision operations in jammed and cluttered environments like never before.” Middle East & Africa The US State Department that it has approved an FMS package to Jordan, worth about $60 million, for an F-16 air combat training centre and related equipment. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) delivered the required certification on February 11 to notify Congress of this possible sale. The government of Jordan has asked to buy an F-16 Air Combat Training Center and related equipment, which includes full mission trainers, combat tactics trainers, instructor/operator stations, tactical environment simulators and brief/debrief stations, as well as technical support and documentation. “This proposed sale will support the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a Major Non-NATO Ally that is an important force for political stability and economic progress in the Middle East,” the DSCA’s announcement said. Europe The French defense procurement agency has awarded Thales and Airbus a contract for the new joint tactical signals intelligence (SIGINT) system to upgrade the French forces’ critical signals monitoring, direction finding and spectrum analysis capabilities. The tactical SIGINT programme will upgrade the electronic warfare capabilities of front-line units, providing a set of high-performance portable or vehicle-mounted assets compatible with the latest communications technologies. Kongsberg disclosed that it has been awarded $31 million by the Norwegian Materiel Defense Agency to upgrade the Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) portion of the Sentinel radar for the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System (NASAMS). “Norway continues to upgrade their ground-based air defense capability by implementing the latest available technology. The modernization will enhance NATO commonality and reinforce the NASAMS capability,” says Kjetil Reiten Myhra, Executive Vice President of Integrated Defense Systems in Kongsberg. Asia-Pacific The Times Now News from India has reported that the Indian Army has leased four Heron unmanned air vehicles from Israel as part of an emergency procurement program. The news coincide with a press release from IAI recently on the lease of two Herons to an unnamed country in Asia. The lease comes with the defense ministry changing the rules and allowing for the leasing of certain weapon systems. Similarly, the Navy has leased Predator drones from the United States. Today’s Video Watch: First HH-60W Jolly Green II Helicopters Arrive At Moody View the full article

AMDR testbed (click to view full) The US Navy’s Dual-Band Radar that equips its forthcoming Gerald R. Ford class super-carriers replaces several different radars with a single back-end. Merging Raytheon’s X-band SPY-3 with Lockheed Martin’s S-band VSR allows fewer radar antennas, faster response time, faster adaptation to new situations, one-step upgrades to the radar suite as a whole, and better utilization of the ship’s power, electronics, and bandwidth. Rather than using that existing Dual-Band Radar design in new surface combatant ships, however, the “Air and Missile Defense Radar” (AMDR) aims to fulfill DG-51 Flight III destroyer needs through a new competition for a similar dual-band radar. It could end up being a big deal for the winning radar manufacturer, and for the fleet. If, and only if, the technical, power, and weight challenges can be mastered at an affordable price. AMDR: The Program DDG-77 USS O’Kane (click to view full) Faced with a growing array of advanced threats, the US Navy confronted a need for more dual-band naval radars among its top-end surface warships. Both CG (X) and FSC were proposed for cancellation in the FY 2011 defense budget, but the “Air and Missile Defense Radar” (AMDR) is expected to continue as the radar centerpiece for their true successor: the DDG-51 Flight III Arleigh Burke Class. Rather than extending or modifying the existing Dual Band Radar combination used on its DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class, aimed to fulfill these need through a re-opened competition. The resulting AMDR radar will have 3 components: The AMDR-S radar will provide wide-area volume search, tracking, Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) discrimination, and missile communications. While top-tier air and missile defense vessels are “blue water” ships by nature, critical naval chokepoints and war scenarios don’t always give commanders a choice. As such AMDR requirements also call for defense against very low observable/very low flyer (VLO/VLF) threats in heavy land, sea, and rain clutter, where S-band has some advantages. The AMDR-X radar will provide horizon search, precision tracing, missile communications, and final illumination guidance to targets. It will be available in AMDR sets 13 onward. The first 12 ship sets will use an upgraded version of Northrop Grumman’s in-service SPQ-9B radar instead. The back-end Radar Suite Controller (RSC) will perform all coordination, ensuring that the radars work well together. Design goals explicitly involve hardware and software modularity, future technology, insertion, and open architectures. The limitations of the DDG-51 ship design forced some flexibility all by itself, and the initial specification added that it’s “designed to be scalable to accommodate current and future mission requirements for multiple platforms.” The 1st DDG 51 Flight III destroyer will be part of the FY 2013 – 2017 multi-year award, beginning with long-lead materials ordered in FY 2015, and built as the 2nd ship ordered in FY 2016 (DDG 123). By the end of the multi-year contract, which was issued in May 2013, the USN can contract for 3 AMDR/Flt III vessels with 14′ diameter AMDR-S radar faceplates, and integrated control involving the smaller rotating AN/SPQ-9B+ X-band radar. If AMDR-S isn’t ready, or other issues arise, the Navy could decide to delay the FLight III changes to FY 2017, or even to move them outside the contract. Even if orders begin on time, Flight III buys are expected to continue trough 2022, and possibly through 2031. Budget documents to date are all for Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation: AMDR: Opportunities and Challenges DDG-1000 w. DBR (click to view full) The demand for adjustable size is the key to AMDR’s larger opportunity. If the adjustments can be taken far enough, it could give the Navy an opportunity to add or retrofit AMDR to some of its 60+ serving Arleigh Burke Class ships, DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class destroyers, or later carriers of the CVN-78 Gerald R. Ford Class. On the smaller end, it’s very nice to have AMDR capabilities available in a common core system for a wider range of vessels. More ships mounting AMDR would reduce fleet-wide maintenance & training investments. It would also mean that each AMDR hardware or software improvement becomes available improve many more ships throughout the fleet. At the larger end of the scale, it’s good news because the US Navy has determined that it needs a 20’+ diameter AMDR-S radar, in order to completely fulfill expected future ballistic missile defense and air defense needs. AMDR offers them the opportunity to find a suitable ship based on a known and understood core system. The bad news is that any retrofit, or even installation in new “DDG-51 Flight III” variants, will be more complicated than it appears. The visible face of a naval radar is only the tip of the iceberg. Most of its weight and space comes from its need for 2 things: power, and cooling. More powerful radars usually need more power to drive them, which can tax the limited 7.5 MW capacity an older ship like the DDG-51 Flight I/II/IIAs. More power also means more cooling much of the time. Power storage, power conversion, and cooling require weight and space. All of which are usually in short supply on a warship. Even if that space exists, the additional equipment and antennas must be installed without unduly affecting the ship’s balance and center of gravity, and hence its seakeeping abilities. AEGIS operations (click to view full) In 2009, the US Congressional Research Services’ “Navy DDG-1000 and DDG-51 Destroyer Programs: Background, Oversight Issues, and Options for Congress” report update (#RL32109) explained the potential impact: “Multiple industry sources have briefed CRS on their proposals for modifying the DDG-51 design to include an active-array radar with greater capability than the SPY-1. If the DDG-51 hull is not lengthened, then modifying the DDG-51 design to include an improved radar would require removing the 5-inch gun to make space and weight available for additional equipment needed to support operations with the improved radar. Lengthening the hull might provide enough additional space and weight capacity to permit the 5-inch gun to be retained.75 Supporting equipment to be installed would include an additional electrical generator and additional cooling equipment.76 The best location for the generator might be in one of the ship’s two helicopter hangar spots, which would reduce the ship’s helicopter hangar capacity from two helicopters to one.” An October 2008 report from the right-wing Heritage Foundation draws on other sources to note that weight shifts can also create issues: “…SPY-1E [active array] radar could affect the stability of the upgraded Arleigh Burkes because the radar’s phased-array panels weigh more than the panels of the earlier SPY-1 radar, which it will replace. While the SPY-1E’s weight is concentrated more in the panels, freeing more space below deck,[78] this greater weight would be added to the ship’s superstructure. Combined with the DDG-51’s relatively narrow hull width and short length, this could cause stability problems, particularly when sailing in rough weather.” Obviously, those kinds of trades are less than ideal, but they may be necessary. Whether, how many, and which trades end being necessary, depends on the precise technical details of Raytheon’s offering, and of expected ship changes in Flight III. AMDR: The Contenders Raytheon Raytheon on AMDR click for video Raytheon won. They went into AMDR with a lot of experience. First of all, they developed both the existing Dual-Band Radar’s Radar Suite Controller, and the accompanying SPY-3 X-band radars that are mounted on DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class battlecruisers and CVN-78 Ford Class supercarriers. The dual X/S band system that will equip the Cobra Judy (USNS Observation Island) Replacement vessel used to track missile launches and tests around the world also comes from Raytheon. Phased array radars for wide-area air and ballistic missile defense are another strong point. Raytheon builds the AN/TPY-2 X-band radar used by the land-based THAAD missile system, the 280 foot high X-band array on the floating SBX missile defense radar, and the large land-based ballistic missile Upgraded Early Warning Systems like the AN/FPS-108 Cobra Dane and AN/FPS-115 PAVE PAWS. On the S-band side, the firm builds the S-band transmitters for Lockheed’s SPY-1 radar on board existing American destroyers and cruisers. Unsurprisingly, Raytheon personnel who talked to us said that: “…leveraging concepts, hardware, algorithms and software from our family of radars provides a level of effectiveness, reliability and affordability to our proposed AMDR solution… The challenge for all the competitors will be to deliver a modular design. The requirements demand that the design be scalable without significant redesign… A high power active radar system requires significant space not only for the arrays themselves but also for the power and cooling equipment needed to support its operation. Finding space for additional generators and HVAC plants can be quite challenging for a backfit application. That is why power efficiency is a premium for these systems.” Lockheed Martin – lost Lockheed’s AMDR-S click for video Lockheed Martin stepped into the competition with several strengths to draw on. Their AN/SPY-1 S-band radar is the main radar used by the US Navy’s current high-end ships: DDG-51 Arleigh Burke class destroyers, and CG-47 Ticonderoga class cruisers. Lockheed Martin also makes the AEGIS combat systems that equips these ships, and supplies the advanced VSR S-band radar used in the new Dual Band Radar installations on board Ford class carriers. This strong S-band experience, and status as the supplier of the combat system that any DDG-51 fitting would have to integrate with, gave them leverage at multiple points. Some observers publicly wondered if they had so much leverage that the competition would become a mirage, especially since the US Navy insisted on keeping AEGIS as the combat system. Nor were they devoid of X-band or ballistic missile defense experience. Their L-Band AN/TPS-59 long range radar has been used in missile intercept tests, and is the only long range 3D Radar in the Marine Air-Ground Task Force. It’s related to the AN/TPS-117, which is in widespread service with over 16 countries. Then, too, the firm’s MEADS air defense technology demonstrator’s MFCR radar will integrate an active array dual-band set of X-band and UHF modules, via a common processor for data and signal processing. It was a strong array of advantages. In the end, however, it wasn’t enough. Northrop Grumman – lost NGC on AMDR click for video Northrop Grumman was a less obvious contender, despite its leadership position in advanced AESA active array radars for use on aircraft of all types and sizes. They’ve also developed unique software-driven land-based systems like the US Marines’ new Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar (G/ATOR), which is specifically architected to switch between a wide range of radar performance modes and requirements. It’s important to note that Northrop Grumman has shipboard radar experience. They’re the prime contractor for the AN/SPQ-9B track-while-scan X-band radar that’s guaranteed to be part of the initial AMDR set, and SPQ-9A/B radars already equip America’s Ticonderoga Class cruisers, Nimitz Class aircraft carriers, America Class escort carriers, Wasp Class LHD amphibs, and San Antonio Class LPD amphibs. AN/SPQ-9Bs can also be found on Australia’s Hobart Class Aegis air warfare destroyers. On a less visible note, the firm has been working under several CRAD research programs from 2005 to the present, targeted at technology demonstrations, system risk reduction, and new integration techniques for advanced S-band shipboard radars. Finally, the firm has a partnership with Australia’s CEA Technologies, which is developing an advanced AESA X-band (CEAMOUNT) and S-band (CEAFAR) radar set that equips Australia’s upgraded ANZAC class frigates. What did this team see as important? Beyond an open architecture approach, it was all about the SWaP: “The ability to scale up to a potential future cruiser or down to a DDG-51 variant is fundamental to the Northrop Grumman radar architecture. Size, weight and power (SWaP) of the radar system are the key drivers… Minimizing the radar impact is key to an affordable surface combatant solution. We are focused on not just the radar technology, but to minimize the ship impact while allowing for scalable growth in the future. We are working closely with various elements in the Navy to address the ship impact of large AESA radars on the entire ship.” AMDR: Contracts and Key Events FY 2019-Today Raytheon wins EMD phase; DRS will produce power conversion module; CRS and GAO reports point out issues. AMDR engagement click for video February 15/21: USS Jack H. Lucas Work to integrate the AN/SPY-6 radar on the new Aegis Flight III guided-missile destroyer, the future USS Jack H. Lucas (DDG 125), has started. Installation is being carried out at the Huntington Ingalls Industries shipyard in Pascagoula, Mississippi. “As the future USS Jack Lucas takes shape, we are at the cusp of a new era for detection and discrimination of threats and decision-making at sea,” said Capt. Jason Hall, program manager for Above-Water Sensors for the US Navy’s Program Executive Office for Integrated Warfare Systems. “SPY-6 will fill critical mission gaps and enable precision operations in jammed and cluttered environments like never before.” July 23/19: Adjustment Raytheon won a $27.4 million incentive-fee modification to settle a request for equitable adjustment for contractor provision of Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) program Pacific Missile Range Facility site generators and associated support hardware. The deal resulted from a government change order. The contract includes engineering and manufacturing development (EMD), as well as options for up to nine low-rate initial production shipsets. The AMDR program is an ACAT IC acquisition program in the Production and Deployment Phase. In June 2009, after full and open competition, the program awarded three AMDR-S/RSC concept study contracts to Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. Each of the three contractors developed concepts for AMDR showing the major subsystems and expected features of the AMDR Suite. Raytheon’s AN/SPY-6(V) is the US Navy’s next generation integrated air and missile defense radar. The modification increases the value of the AMDR EMD phase to account for new scope directing the contractor to provide Pacific Missile Range Facility site generators and support. Work took place in Massachusetts and Hawaii and was finished in June 2018. July 18/19: Production Raytheon won a $40.2 million modification to produce two AN/SPY-6(V) configuration variants – the SPY-6(V)2 Rotator Radar and the SPY-6(V)3 Fixed Face Radar. The AN/SPY-6(V) is an active electronically scanned array air and missile defense radar. The Navy’s next generation radar system will address Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) and Air Defense capability gaps identified in the Maritime Air and Missile Defense of Joint Forces Initial Capabilities Document. AN/SPY-6(V)1 provides surface combatants with the Joint Battlespace Threat Awareness and Defense capability to counter current and future threats in support of joint forces ashore and afloat, providing the combat system with simultaneous sensor support of the IAMD mission with ancillary support of Surface Warfare missions. The single-face rotating array designated AN/SPY-6(V)2 variant is for amphibious assault ships and Nimitz Class carriers. The three fixed-face array designated AN/SPY-6(V)3 variant is for Ford Class aircraft carriers and the future FFG(X) guided missile frigates. Raytheon will perform work in Marlborough, Massachusetts and is scheduled to be finished by June 2020. April 24/19: Integration and Production The Navy awarded Raytheon a $28 million contract modification for integration and production support for the Air and Missile Defense Radar AN/SPY-6(V). The AN/SPY-6(V) next-generation integrated radar will be featured on the Flight III Arleigh Burke Guided Missiles Destroyers. According to Raytheon, the SPY-6 is built with so called Radar Modular Assemblies, each of them a self-contained radar in a 2’x2’x2’ box. They can stack together to form any size array to fit the mission requirements of any ship, which would make the SPY-6 the Navy’s first truly scalable radar. In January, the radar completed an important milestone when it successfully tracked a ballistic missile target in the system’s final development test. The radar is on schedule for delivery to the Navy in 2020, replacing the SPY-1 radar. The contract includes support for continued combat system integration and testing, engineering, training, software and depot maintenance as well as field engineering services. Raytheon will perform work at various locations within the US. The estimated completion date is in December this year. March 21/19: New Generation Raytheon’s Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR) will begin live testing at Wallops Island Test Facility, the company announced on Tuesday. The EASR is the newest sensor in the US Navy’s SPY-6 family of radars. It is the Navy’s next generation radar for aircraft carriers and amphibious warfare that provides simultaneous anti-air and anti-surface warfare, electronic protection and air traffic control capabilities. The radar just recently completed subsystem testing at Raytheon’s Near Field Range in Sudbury, Massachusetts. Raytheon is building two variants of EASR: a single-face rotating array designated AN/SPY-6(V)2 for amphibious assault ships and Nimitz class carriers, and a three fixed-face array designated AN/SPY-6(V)3 for Ford class aircraft carriers and the future FFG(X) guided missile frigates. According to Raytheon, the radar will undergo system-level testing, tracking a variety of aircraft through the end of 2019 once it is up and running. March 18/19: LRIP The US Navy awarded Raytheon a $402.7 million contract modification for the Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) Program low-rate initial production (LRIP). Raytheon will build three advanced-prototype versions of the new AN/SPY-6(V) Air and Missile Defense Radar for Arleigh-Burke Class (DDG 51) Aegis Destroyers. LRIP means building small quantities of the system to enable Navy experts to test it thoroughly, ensuring it meets Navy requirements. It is the first step to switch from customized hand-built prototypes to the final mass-produced end product. The AMDR aims to fulfill DDG 51 Flight III destroyer needs through a new competition for a dual-band radar. According to Raytheon, the AN/SPY-6(V) AMDR will improve the Burke Class destroyer’s ability to detect hostile aircraft, surface ships, and ballistic missiles. Work will take place in Marlborough, Massachusetts and is scheduled to be completed by March 2023. FY 2018 December 21/18: Integration & Production Raytheon is being contracted to support the US Navy with Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) integration and production efforts. Priced at $114 million, the contract provides for continued combat system integration and test services including engineering and training; software and depot maintenance, as well as field engineering services and procurement of spare parts. The AMDR, designated AN/SPY-6(V), will fulfill integrated Air and Missile Defense requirements for multiple ship classes. The AN/SPY-6 is 30 times more sensitive than its predecessor, its additional sensitivity supercharges the vessel’s capabilities in anti-air warfare and ballistic missile defense. Work will be performed at multiple locations throughout the US. They include Marlborough, Massachusetts; Kauai, Hawaii; Portsmouth, Rhode Island; San Diego, California; Fair Lakes, Virginia and Moorestown, New Jersey. The contract includes options which could bring the total value of the order to $357 million and is expected to be completed by December 2019. December 11/18: Power Units DRS Power & Control Technologies is receiving additional funding to exercise an option to support the Navy’s Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. The contract modification is priced at $13.4 million and provides for the delivery of power conversion modules (PCM) for Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) production ship sets. Efforts covered under this contract include non-recurring engineering work, procurement of long-lead-time materials and of low-rate initial production units for testing. Up to 12 ship sets for the guided missile destroyers can be procured. PCMs support Raytheon’s AN/SPY-6 air and missile defense radar with the right power output. This contract supports DDG-51 Flight III ships. Work will be performed in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and is expected to be complete by April 2022. October 3/18: LRIP continues The US Navy is ordering more production services for its Air and Missile Defense Radar from Raytheon. The awarded cost-plus-fixed-fee modification covers a number of engineering services and associated costs needed to support the low-rate initial production of the AN/SPY-6 at cost of $22.7 million. The new AMDR is being developed to fulfill integrated Air and Missile Defense requirements for multiple ship classes. The AMDR-S radar will provide wide-area volume search, tracking, Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) discrimination, and missile communications; while the AMDR-X will provide horizon search, precision tracing, missile communications, and final illumination guidance to targets. It will equip various types of vessels such as DDG-51s in Flight III configuration and Gerald F. Ford-class aircraft carriers. Work will be performed at Raytheon’s Marlborough facility and is expected to be completed by November 2018. May 15/18: Navy gets an extra punch Shipbuilder Huntington Ingalls recently announced that the first steps towards constructing the first Flight III Destroyer have been taken. The destroyer ‘Jack Lucas’ will join the Navy’s fleet in 2024. The vessel is modelled after the 73 Arleigh-Burke class destroyers already in service, but it will be a very different, more capable killer than its predecessors. ‘Jack Lucas’ gets its extra punch by adding Raytheon’s newly developed AN/SPY-6 air and missile defense radar. The Flight III is a major overhaul of the guided-missile destroyer. It required a 45 percent redesign of the hull, most of which was done to accommodate the AN/SPY-6 and its formidable power needs. The Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) has been procured through a competition between Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. The AMDR-S provides wide-area volume search, tracking, Ballistic Missile Defense discrimination, missile communications and defense against very low observable and very low flyer threats in heavy land, sea, and rain clutter. In addition, the AMDR-X provides horizon search, precision tracing, missile communications, and final illumination guidance to targets. The AN/SPY-6 is 30 times more sensitive than its predecessor, its additional sensitivity supercharges the vessel’s capabilities in anti-air warfare and ballistic missile defense. FY 2014 Sept 11/14: Sub-contractors. DRS Power & Control Technologies, Inc., Milwaukee, Wisconsin, is being awarded a base $15.7 million firm-fixed-price, time-and-materials contract for DDG 51 Class Power Conversion Modules (PCM) to support AMDR with the right kind of power input. This contract provides for AMDR PCM non-recurring engineering, long-lead-time material buys, low rate initial production units for testing, associated engineering services and support, and up to 12 production ship sets for DDG 51 Flight III Class ships. Just $2.4 million in FY 2014 US Navy RDT&E funding is committed immediately, but options could bring the cumulative value of this contract to $88.9 million. Work will be performed in Milwaukee, WI, and is expected to be complete by April 2015. This contract was competitively procured using full and open competitive procedures, with proposals solicited via FBO.gov, and 4 offers were received by contract manager US Navy NAVSEA in Washington, DC (N00024-14-C-4200). July 23/14: Testing. Raytheon announces that their AMDR radar has completed its hardware Preliminary Design Review and Integrated Baseline Review. They look at the capabilities of the system, removal of technology risks so far, and the inherent innovation and flexibility of the design. Successful completion keeps the program on schedule so far, but remember that this schedule has changed due to challenge delays, and that ship integration issues will present their own hurdle. Sources: Raytheon, “Raytheon completes key Air & Missile Defense Radar reviews”. April 17/14: SAR. The Pentagon releases its Dec 31/13 Selected Acquisitions Report. AMDR enters the SAR with a baseline total program cost estimate of $5.8327 billion, based on 22 radars. SAR baseline April 8/14: CRS Report. The latest iteration of “Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress” offers a greater focus on the DDG-51 Flight III destroyers, which includes AMDR. Note that CRS reports aren’t made public directly, so it took until May 2014 for public copies to appear. One big issue for AMDR is capability. The 14′ design expected on Flight III destroyers meets the US Navy’s minimum expectations for missile and air defense roles, but there’s some question whether it will be enough. CRS’ report includes the concept of a dedicated radar ship to augment task groups in high-risk areas. The other option? “Building the Flight III DDG-51 to a lengthened configuration could make room for additional power-generation and cooling equipment, additional vertical launch system (VLS) missile tubes, and larger growth margins. It might also permit a redesign of the deckhouse to support a larger and more capable version of the AMDR than the 14-foot diameter version currently planned for the Flight III DDG-51. Building the Flight III DDG-51 to a lengthened configuration would increase its development cost and its unit procurement cost.” There’s also some concern about AMDR’s timeline, and whether the 1st AMDR-S can be fully ready in time to support a ship ordered in FY 2016. AMDR-S entered system development 6 months late due to protests, and software development to integrate both the new S-band radar and the X-band SPQ-9B+ remains a concern (q.v. March 28/13). Ship power generation and cooling could also be an issue, depending on the final design. The good news? Because the Flight III is structured as an optional ECP change within a multi-year contract, the Navy can choose to delay issuing the ECP, shifting the start of Flight III procurement and AMDR orders to FY 2017 or later. March 31/14: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2013, plus time to compile and publish. “AMDR entered system development in October of 2013 with all four of its critical technologies approaching full maturity. This was 6 months later than planned, leading to a delay in many of the program’s future events…. Additionally, the delays might also hinder timely delivery of necessary information related to AMDR’s parameters, such as power, cooling, and space requirements needed for ongoing and planned design studies related to [DDG-51 destroyer] Flight III development.” Despite this, the program is still promising delivery in time for a 2019 fit onto DDG 123. GAO describes AMDR’s components as almost mature, including 2 key technologies. With that said, they’re unhappy that AMDR proceeded to EMD development without fully mature technologies demonstrated in an operational environment, so the program would have a better idea of the required form, fit, and changes to its host ship. AMDR also didn’t complete a Preliminary Design Review before EMD, either, though they did have the competition and evaluations: “All four of the AMDR’s critical technologies are approaching full maturity and were demonstrated using a [small scale] 1000-element radar array…. two technologies previously identified as the most challenging — digital-beam-forming and transmit-receive modules, have been demonstrated in a relevant environment…. digital-beam-forming is necessary for AMDR’s simultaneous air and ballistic missile defense mission. The AMDR’s transmit-receive modules… use gallium nitride [GaN] technology instead of the legacy gallium arsenide technology for potential efficiency gains. The other two critical technologies are related to software and digital receivers and exciters. Officials stated that software development will require a significant effort. A series of software builds are expected to deliver approximately 1 million lines of code and are designed to apply open system approaches to commercial, off-the-shelf hardware. Integrating the X-band radar will require further software development.” Feb 25/14: Sub-contractors. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems announces an contract to continue their AMDR-related with Raytheon. The sub-contract could be worth up to $250.1 million over 10 years, and builds on previous GD-AIS efforts involving AMDR-S Digital Receivers/Exciter (DREX) and Digital Beam Forming (DBF) subsystems. Sources: GD, “General Dynamics Awarded $250 Million Contract to Support U.S. Navy’s Air and Missile Defense Radar Program”. Jan 10/14: Protest dropped. Defense News: “Lockheed Martin protested the Navy’s award of the Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) contract because we believed the merits of our offering were not properly considered during the evaluation process,” spokesman Keith Little said Jan. 10. “While we believe that we put forward an industry-leading solution, after receiving additional information we have determined it’s in the best interest of the Navy and Lockheed Martin to withdraw our protest.” The move still leaves Lockheed Martin in charge of the Aegis combat system. Raytheon, who had been responsible for delivering SPY-1 radar transmitters to Lockheed, is now responsible for the entire AMDR S-band radar and dual-band controller, while Northrop Grumman’s AN/SPQ-9B acts as the initial X-band radar. Sources: Defense News, “Lockheed Drops AMDR Protest”. Oct 22/13: Protest. Lockheed Martin filed a protest with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), arguing that they “submitted a technically compliant solution at a very affordable price. We do not believe the merits of our offering were properly considered during the evaluation process.” Lawmakers from New Jersey, where Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors is located, had sent a letter to the Navy Secretary a few days ago criticizing the award to Raytheon. The Navy subsequently issues a stop-work order, while the GAO has until the end of January 2014 to give its verdict. Oct 10/13: EMD. Raytheon Company announces that they’ve won, receiving a $385.7 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for the AMDR-S and Radar Suite Controller’s (RSC) Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase. The base $157 million contract begins with design work leading to Preliminary Design Review, and will finish with system acceptance of the AMDR-S and RSC engineering development models at the end of testing. AMDR-S is the large S-band radar, while the RSC provides S- and X-band radar resource management, coordination, and an interface to Lockheed Martin’s Aegis combat system. The full contract would produce initial ship sets that will work with Northrop Grumman’s AN/SPQ-9B as their X-band counterpart. This contract also includes options for low-rate initial production systems, which could bring the cumulative value to $1.6 billion. These options would be exercised after a successful Milestone C decision, which the Pentagon plans to make in FY 2017. Sources: Raytheon, Oct 10/13 release. Raytheon wins EMD contract Oct 18/13: CBO Report. The Congressional Budget Office publishes “An Analysis of the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2014 Shipbuilding Plan“. With respect to AMDR: “Adding the AMDR [to the DDG-51 design] so that it could operate effectively would require increasing the amount of electrical power and cooling available on a Flight III. With those changes and associated increases in the ship’s displacement, a DDG-51 Flight III destroyer would cost about $300 million, or about 20 percent, more than a new Flight IIA destroyer, CBO estimates. Thus, the average cost per ship [for Flight III DDG-51s] would be $1.9 billion…. Most of the decrease for the Flight III can be attributed to updated information on the cost of incorporating the AMDR into the Flight III configuration. The cost of the AMDR itself, according to the Navy, has declined steadily through the development program, and the Department of Defense’s Cost Analysis and Program Evaluation (CAPE) office concurs in the reduced estimate…. Considerable uncertainty remains in the DDG-51 Flight III program, however.” FY 2013 Major program shifts. LMCO’s AMDR concept (click to view full) June 3/13: NAVSEA Clarifications. NAVSEA replies to some of our program questions, and clarifies the program’s structure. They clarifiy the GAO’s wording concerning “AMDR initially using an upgraded SPQ-9B radar,” by saying that the initial SPQ-9Bs will be off-the-shelf models, acquired under a separate program. SPQ-9A/B radars already equip America’s Ticonderoga Class cruisers, Nimitz Class aircraft carriers, America Class escort carriers, Wasp Class LHD amphibs, and San Antonio Class LPD amphibs. The SPQ-9B will still be integrated with AMDR-S, but there are some differences in implementation between it and AMDR-X, hence the additional software required. The result will effectively create DDG-51 FLight III and Flight IIIA ships, as the Navy has no plans to backfit AMDR-X to Flight III ships that get the SPQ-9B. The remaining question is when a winner will be picked. The GAO said (q.v. March 28/13) that an EMD winner and development award was expected in March 2013, and we’re past that. All NAVSEA would say is that the AMDR program office is still conducting evaluations. They also said that AMDR-X’s acquisition strategy isn’t set yet, which leaves the door open to a divided radar contract. May 8/13: The US Senate Armed Forces Seapower subcommittee hears testimony [PDF] regarding US Navy shipbuilding programs. An excerpt: “The Navy is proceeding with the Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) program to meet the growing ballistic missile threat by greatly improving radar sensitivity and longer range detection for engagement of increasingly complex threats. This scalable radar is on track for installation on DDG 51 Flight III ships to support joint battle space threat awareness and defense, including BMD, area air defense, and ship self defense. The AMDR radar suite will be capable of providing simultaneous surveillance and engagement support for long range BMD and area air defense. The Navy intends to introduce AMDR on DDG 51 Flight III in Fiscal Year 2016.” GAO documents have referred to AMDR’s introduction in FY 2019, but procurement buys will begin in FY 2016. April 26/13: Real Competition? Aviation Week reports on the AMDR program. Beyond the materials in the GAO’s report, discussions with the US Navy offer cause for concern. They quote AMDR program manager Capt. Doug Small as saying that AMDR will be just an evolution of Aegis, providing better performance for “only slight more” weight, power, and coolant demands, and “a fraction of the resources needed to run all of dual-band radar (DBR) or even existing Aegis SPY radars to conduct similar missions.” The SPY-3/ SPY-4 DBR comparison seems like a pretty big stretch, given that they haven’t picked their AMDR radar yet, much less tested it. Article author Michael Fabey’s concerns, on the other hand, lie in another area: “….the Navy will have to take great pains to ensure the competitiveness of the AMDR program. The service can ill afford to have this effort be seen as just an extension of the “Aegis Mafia,” often seen as… the automatic property of Lockheed, the combat system’s creator and prime contractor throughout the decades.” It’s a real dilemma. Commonality with an existing combat system makes cross-fleet upgrades much easier, while lowering overall maintenance and upgrade costs. In Aegis’ case it also leverages work that has been and will be done on Ballistic Missile Defense modes. On the other hand, Aegis’ existing inter-dependencies with Lockheed’s own SPY-1 design are a stumbling block. Can the Navy really deliver AMDR on budget, while swapping in an S-band radar from another company? If they say yes and it’s not actually doable, AMDR will flounder and may fail. If the Navy decides that they can’t risk it, then the whole AMDR-S competition was a waste of time. An AMDR-S award to Raytheon might still be thinkable if the Navy goes with the lesser standard of fleet combat system commonality, using the Raytheon combat system that drives the 3-ship DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class, and leveraging Raytheon’s combat system and controller work integrating the CVN-78 Ford Class carriers’ Dual-Band Radar. April 10/13: FY 2014 Budget. The President releases a proposed budget at last, the latest in modern memory. The Senate and House were already working on budgets in his absence, but the Pentagon’s submission is actually important to proceedings going forward. See ongoing DID coverage. “Missile integration with AMDR-S radar for DDG 51 Flight III ships will include requirements review/updates and analysis, verification; technical documentation, design review and working group SME support, missile/radar integration, missile test hardware procurement, risk assessment, safety, test and evaluation planning, analysis, data collection. Deliverables include interface specs and engineering documents to support AMDR PDRs HW&SW (FY13) and CDRs HW&SW (FY14); EDM testing (FY15), interface specs and engineering documents to support AMDR/ACBNext for DDG 51 Flight III E3 Testing, Analysis and Reports. Missile variants: ESSM Block I; SM-2 Blk IIIB MU2, SM-6 Block I (Current Aegis Configuration).” Meanwhile, the Cooperative Engagement Capability program plans to spend 2013 working on interfaces that will let it work with AMDR. The Standard and ESSM programs will have related items on their plate, and Flight III destroyers will gain an interesting benefit from a discontinued carrier program. The AN/SPS-74(V) CVN Periscope Detection Radar program was canceled on Dec 17/12, with FY 2012 – 2013 funding directed to develop the algorithms and interface for the AN/SPQ-9B Radar instead. March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish. Its AMDR section gives a program cost of $6.57 billion total to develop & buy 22 radars. As one might imagine when comparing to last year’s report (q.v. March 30/12), the program’s $9.24 billion cost drop heralds some major shifts in the program. Instead of using AMDR-X radars, the first 12 AMDR systems will use Northrop Grumman’s existing SPQ-9B radar as their X-band component. According to the Navy, the SPQ-9B radar fits better within the Flight III DDG 51’s sea frame, and “expected power and cooling.” That’s no surprise, given that the “Spook-9” is already set to operate beside the S-band SPY-1D radar on Australia’s smaller Hobart Class destroyers. The bad news is that additional software work will be required to integrate a 2nd radar (SPQ-9B) with the new active S-band radar. AMDR was already on the hook for about 1 million lines of developed code, and software development has bent quite a few DoD project schedules. The Navy will also have to compromise on radar performance in several areas. The Navy has now settled on a forced scale-down from the 20-foot aperture needed to meet their AMDR specifications, to a 14-foot aperture that’s the largest they can safely fit in the DDG-51 design. On the X-band front, SPQ-9B will eventually be replaced by a new X-band design for the last 10 units (13 – 22), but until AMDR-X arrives, the system won’t perform as well in X-band against the most advanced threats. Major program shifts Nov 26/12: NGC. Northrop Grumman announces that their AMDR technology demonstration contract is done. The firm says that they achieved both contract objectives: demonstrating that the critical technology is mature, and advancing the design of the tactical system. Northrop Grumman also successfully completed far field range testing of the AMDR-TD prototype, which reportedly met performance goals and radiated at top power for all waveforms. FY 2011 – 2012 Functional reviews from contenders. RFP proposals in. NGC’s AMDR-TD (click to view full) Sept 10/12: NGC. Northrop Grumman announces that its AMDR prototype has successfully completed initial range testing. Near Field Range testing validated the AMDR’s digital beam forming performance, tuning techniques, and reliability. Subsequent Far Field Range testing at Northrop Grumman’s radar test site in Baltimore, MD included successful full-power operational demonstrations. July 31/12: RFP Proposals in. Lockheed Martin announces that it has submitted its “AMDR-S” proposal. Northrop Grumman and Raytheon both confirmed to DID that they also submitted proposals. Lockheed Martin. April 2/12: NGC. Northrop Grumman announces that they’ve successfully finished AMDR’s System Functional Review (SFR) in late December 2011, and Test Readiness Review (TRR) “several weeks later”. SFR is a multi-disciplined technical review conducted to ensure that the system under review is technically mature enough to proceed into preliminary design. TRR assesses the readiness of the system for testing configuration items. During the SFR, Northrop Grumman demonstrated digital beamforming and advanced tactical software modes, using its pathfinder early testing radar with a prototype radar suite controller to successfully detect and track airborne targets. March 30/12: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” for 2011. AMDR is scheduled to enter system development in October 2012, and the current program envisions $15.837 billion to develop and field 24 radar sets on DDG-51 Flight III destroyers. Program officials believe that digital beamforming in a radar of AMDR’s size will be the most significant technical challenge, and will likely take the longest time to mature. Unfortunately, that technology is necessary for AMDR’s simultaneous air and ballistic missile defense mission. Meanwhile, a 14-foot version of AMDR-S is the largest radar they can safely fit within the DDG-51 destroyer’s deckhouse, even though it would take a 20-foot diameter aperture to fully meet all of the Navy’s specifications. The Navy is still discussing the precise size for AMDR-S in Flight III ships, and the design is supposed to be scalable up or down in size to fit on smaller or larger ships. Nov 16/11: Power problem. Jane’s Navy International is reporting that DDG-51 flight III destroyers with the new AMDR radar and hybrid propulsion drives could cost $3-4 billion each. If that is true, it’s about the same cost as a DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class ship, in return for less performance, more vulnerability, and less future upgrade space. AMDR isn’t a final design yet, so it’s still worthwhile to ask what it could cost to give the Flight IIIs’ radar and combat systems ballistic missile defense capabilities – R&D for the function doesn’t go away when it’s rolled into a separate program. Indeed, if the Flight III cost estimate is true, it raises the question of why that would be a worthwhile use of funds, and re-opens the issue of whether continuing DDG-1000 production and upgrades might make more sense. DoD Buzz. Sept 19/11: Raytheon. Raytheon touts the performance of its Gallium Nitride AMDR T/R modules, which demonstrated no degradation after more than 1,000 hours of testing. Raytheon is developing a technology demonstrator for the system’s S-band radar and radar suite controller, and says that their testing figures exceed Navy requirements. June 12/11: Growth problems? Aviation Week reports that AMDR’s key platform may be hitting growth problems. Power, cooling, and weight distribution have always been seen as the most likely stumbling blocks to fitting AMDR on the DDG-51 hull, and: “As the possible requirements and expectations continue to grow for the proposed DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class Flight III destroyers, so is the concern among defense analysts and contractors that the U.S. Navy may once again be trying to pack too much into one ship… And yet it is the need to field [AMDR] that is driving some of the additional requirements for the Flight IIIs… “Sometimes we get caught up in the glamour of the high technology,” Huntington Ingalls Industries CEO Mike Petters says. “The radars get bounced around. They get changed. Their missions get changed. The technology changes. The challenge is if you let the radars drive the ships, you might not get any ships built.” June 7/11: Raytheon. Raytheon announces that it has conducted a system requirements review (SRR) for AMDR Phase II beginning May 17/11. Their release does not describe it as successful, offering only the less categorical claim that the “Navy’s feedback throughout the review was favorable,” and pointing out that the firm “matured its design ahead of schedule, surpassing customer expectations.” DID asked Raytheon about this. They said the review was successful, but they wanted to different phrasing for a change. Raytheon is currently developing a technology demonstrator for AMDR’s S-band radar and radar suite controller, and the firm demonstrated hardware from that pilot array during the review. The SRR also included Raytheon’s understanding of AMDR’s requirements, how its design and architecture meets those requirements, and Raytheon’s its analysis of those requirements, including cost and performance trade studies. A System Functional Review will be held later in 2011. June 1/11: AMDR Issues. An Aviation Week article looks at AMDR, and adds some cost estimates and perspective on the program. “AMDR is the brass ring for Navy radar programs… Capt. Doug Small, program officer for Naval Sea Systems Command (Navsea), [says that] “We’re working hard to balance a tough set of requirements for this radar with its costs… BMD (Ballistic Missile Defense) targets drive radar sensitivity. There’s no substitute for having detect-and-track [capability] at a long distance… [But] To do simultaneous air defense [and BMD], you have to spend less time doing air defense. It’s a radar resource issue… [Fortunately,] The ability to create multiple beams digitally [digital beamforming] means you spend less time doing certain other functions.” “ The article adds that Lockheed Martin demonstrated S-band digital phased-array antenna beam forming during recent NAVSEA tests of the Advanced Radar Technology Integrated System Test-bed, which combines multifunction S-band active phased-array radars. It’s a joint U.S.-U.K. radar effort spearheaded by Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems, and Lockheed Martin’s VP naval radar programs, Brad Hicks, says the technology is now ready to enter full engineering development. May 19/11: Raytheon. Raytheon announces that it has produced the first group of S-band transmit/receive (T/R) modules for the U.S. Navy’s AMDR program. FY 2009 – 2010 Initial studies, tech development contracts. CG-49: USS Vincennes (click to view full) Sept 30/10: US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington Navy Yard, DC solicits bids via the Federal Business Opportunities website, receives 3 offers, and issues 3 technology development contracts for the AMDR S-band radar and its radar suite controller (RSC). AMDR-S will provide volume search, tracking, ballistic missile defense discrimination and missile communications. The RSC will perform all coordination actions to ensure that both radars work together. This approach dovetails with the Pentagon’s focus on competitive prototypes, as a way of reducing long-term risks of failed development and cost overruns. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Sudbury, MA received a $112.3 million fixed-price incentive (firm target) contract. Work will be performed in Sudbury, MA (81%), Fairfax, VA (18.3%), and New York, NY (0.7%), and is expected to be complete by September 2012 (N00024-10-C-5340). See also Raytheon. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ receives a $119.2 million fixed-price incentive (firm target) contract. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (86.2%); Clearwater, FL (5.5%); Fairfax, VA (3.5%); New Brighton, MN (2.5%); Clearfield, UT (1.3%); and Huntsville, AL (1%), and is expected to be complete by September 2012 (N00024-10-C-5358). See also Lockheed Martin. Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems in Linthicum Heights, MD receives a $120 million fixed-price incentive (firm target) contract. This contract is incrementally funded, with $38.4 million placed on the contract at the time of award. Work will be performed in Linthicum Heights, MD (99.4%), and Arvonia, VA (0.6%), and is expected to be complete by September 2012 (N00024-10-C-5359). See also Northrop Grumman. Tech development contracts Aug 10/10: An opinion from the Information Dissemination article Happy Thoughts and DDG-1000: “I love Chris, and I don’t think anyone in the Navy deserved their star more than Jim Syring… but this Navy Times article is just a bit too much happy half-the-story for me. Here is how half the story gets told… The real reason the Navy is dropping the VSR on DDG-1000 is because the Navy intends to put… AMDR on the DDG-1000… because the timeline works out. The thing is the Navy can’t actually say this because there is no official AMDR program yet and the DDG-1000 isn’t supposed to be a ballistic missile defense ship – remember? This story in Navy Times is what it is because when it comes to US Navy shipbuilding, the Navy under CNO Roughead is never completely honest with the American people about what the Navy is doing. Sorry if the truth hurts.” June 2/10: DDG 1000 loses DBR. As expected, the Pentagon this week certifies that the DDG-1000 destroyer program is vital to national security, and must not be terminated, despite R&D loaded per-ship cost increases that put it over Nunn-McCurdy’s legislated limit. There will be at least one important change, however: the S-band SPY-4 Volume Search Radar will be deleted from the DDG-1000’s DBR. Performance has met expectations, but cost increases reportedly forced the Navy into a cost/benefit decision. The Navy would not release numbers, but reports indicate possible savings of $100-200 million for each of the planned 3 ships. The X-band SPY-3 has reportedly exceeded technical expectations, and will receive upgrades to give it better volume search capability. The move will save weight and space by removing SPY-4 aperture, power, and cooling systems, and may create an opportunity for Raytheon’s SPY-3 to be upgraded for ballistic missile defense – or replaced by the winner of the BMD-capable AMDR dual-band radar competition. The full DBR will be retained on the USS Gerald R. Ford [CVN 78] aircraft carrier, as the SPY-4 replaces 2 air search radars and will be the primary air traffic control radar. No decision has been made for CVN 79 onward, however, and AMDR’s potential scalability may make it attractive there as well. Gannett’s Navy Times | US DoD. No DBR on DDG-1000 Feb 26/10: CRS Report. The US Congressional Research Service lays out what remains of AMDR’s opportunity, in an updated report. From “Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress” : “The Navy’s FY2011 budget submission calls for procuring two DDG-51s in FY2011 and six more in FY2012-FY2015. The two DDG-51s that the Navy wants to procure in FY2011 received $577.2 million in FY2010 advance procurement funding. The Navy’s proposed FY2011 budget requests another $2,922.2 million in procurement funding for the two ships, so as to complete their estimated combined procurement cost of $3,499.2 million. The Navy’s proposed FY2011 budget also requests $48.0 million in advance procurement funding for the one DDG-51 that the Navy wants to procure in FY2012, and $186.3 million in procurement funding for DDG-1000 program-completion costs. The Navy’s FY2011 budget also proposes terminating the Navy’s planned CG (X) cruiser program as unaffordable. Rather than starting to procure CG (X)s around FY2017, as the Navy had previously envisaged, the Navy is proposing to build an improved version of the DDG-51, called the Flight III version, starting in FY2016. Navy plans thus call for procuring the current version of the DDG-51, called the Flight IIA version, in FY2010-FY2015, followed by procurement of Flight III DDG-51s starting in FY2016. Navy plans appear to call for procuring Flight III DDG- 51s through at least FY2022, and perhaps until FY2031. Flight III DDG-51s are to carry a smaller version of the new Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) that was to be carried by the CG (X). The Navy’s proposed FY2011 budget requests $228.4 million in research and development funding for the AMDR. Detailed design work on the Flight III DDG-51 reportedly is to begin in FY2012 or FY2013.” June 26/09: The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC issues 3 firm fixed-price contracts, covering initial concept studies for the (AMDR) S-band and Radar Suite Controller (RSC) only. Deliverables will include the S-band and radar suite controller conceptual design, systems engineering studies and analyses, and a technology development plan. This contract was competitively procured via the Federal Business Opportunities and Navy Electronic Commerce Online websites, with 3 offers received. Northrop Grumman receives a $10 million contract. Work will be performed in Linthicum Heights, MD, and is expected to be complete by December 2009 (N00024-09-C-5398). See also NGC’s July 28/09 release. Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ, receives a $10 million contract. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ, and is expected to be complete by December 2009 (N00024-09-C-5312). See also Lockheed Martin’s July 14/09 release. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Sudbury, MA receives a $9.9 million contract. Work will be performed in Sudbury, MA (94%); Fairfax, VA (4%); Bath, ME (3%); Andover, MA (3%); Tewksbury, MA (3%); and East Syracuse, NY (2%), and is expected to be complete by December 2009 (N00024-09-C-5313). See also Raytheon’s Aug 3/09 release. Initial studies contracts Additional Readings Background: AMDR FBO.gov (# N0002412R5315) – 58 – Synopsis for the AMDR-S/RSC Engineering and Manufacturing Development Contract with LRIP Options. Issued April 16/12, last modification May 14/13. USN Electronic Commerce Online – N00024-12-R-5315 AMDR EMD Solicitation. GlobalSecurity.org – Solid State SPY Radar/ Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR)/ Air & Missile Defense Radar (A&MD Radar)/ Next-Generation Maritime Air & Missile Defense/ Multi-Function Advanced Active Phased-Array Radar. Raytheon – Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR). Winner. Lockheed Martin feature, via WayBack – Lockheed Martin selected to demonstrate designs for next phase of Navy’s Air and Missile Defense Radar program. Northrop Grumman, via WayBack – Northrop Grumman Air & Missile Defense Radar (AMDR). Background: Related Systems US Navy – AN/SPQ-9B Radar Set. AMDR’s initial X-band counterpart. DID – BMD in Bunches: The USN’s Multi-Year Destroyer Contract, FY 2013 – 2017. The contract includes options for AMDR-equipped destroyers in FY 2016 and FY 2017. DID – US Destroyers Get a HED: More Power to Them! Hybrid-Electric drive modifications might be needed, in order to solve the class’ power problems. Official Reports US Congressional Research Services – Navy DDG-1000 and DDG-51 Destroyer Programs: Background, Oversight Issues, and Options for Congress. April 8/14 update. US Congressional Budget Office (Oct 18/13) – An Analysis of the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2014 Shipbuilding Plan. News & Views Aviation Week (June 12/11) – Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms. Could have strong implications for AMDR. Aviation Week (June 1/11) – AMDR program sets big goals. Military & Aerospace Electronics (June 29/09) – Next-generation missile defense radar systems for Navy warships is goal of new study contracts Defense News (Feb 2/09) – New Destroyer Emerges in U.S. Plans: Options Mulled As DDG 1000 Hits $6 Billion [dead link]. Includes AMDR coverage. DID Spotlight – The US Navy’s Dual Band Radars. Covers the SPY-3/VSR combination aboard the new DDG-1000 Zumwalt class destroyers and CVN-78 Gerald R. Ford class aircraft carriers. View the full article

One year and a week ago - 05 Feb 2020 - I wrote the below and posted it at USNIBlog as it became clear to me that we may have a pandemic on the way. It stands up well. As I read it again, it wasn't as much of about the coming pandemic, but in a way - a love letter to my Navy. It also is a story Fullbore worthy. I'm going to repost it in full as I wrote it at the time. Of course our Navy has a distinct culture. Unless you were born in to it – in which case you get a head start on everyone else – you walk in to it as a young man or woman to be shaped by it. The Navy’s culture slowly changes over time, shaped by its national culture and and trends, but there is a lot of consistency to it that goes back centuries and is universal not just in time – but across borders. Much of it is formed by the demands of a career at sea. You can see the cross-border navy culture when you meet people from other nations who serve in their navy. You are usually just a minute or two from a shared experience or story. Heck, my wife found herself half way through a dinner with a young woman we were hosting when she found out her husband happened to be a LT in the Chinese Navy, AKA PLAN. Even navy wives from different nations have the same issues, stories, and way of making fun of their husbands’ shared quirks. Even a retired USN CDR and a serving PLAN LT have similar personality quirks I came to find out. Eventually, all Sailors come ashore – but we don’t leave our Sailor habits behind. If you service just one tour or a few decades of service, some habits and ways of doing business at sea will always be with you. A great example from a century ago – a time of the last great pandemic – is an under-told story about a retired US Navy officer who kept his culture with him to the furthest reaches of the planet to a small job in a forgotten corner … and saved the lives of thousands. If you ever wonder what skills you will bring with you might be of any use to the world outside the Navy, just think of John Martin Poyer, USNA class of 1884. After an uneventful career, he was medically retired from the Navy in 1906 as a Lieutenant Commander due to ill health. Before it was all said and done though, in “retirement” he would find himself promoted to Commander and receive the Navy Cross. Why? Well, you know why. From the blog West Hunter; John Martin Poyer, an officer that had retired from active duty due to illness, was brought back to active duty in 1915 to serve as Governor of American Samoa. … The 1918 influenza pandemic hit every country on Earth … Worldwide, the Spanish Flu killed 3-5% of the population … In the South Pacific, the flu was spread by the SS Talune, which regularly visited Tonga, Fiji, American Samoa, and West Samoa. Crewmen had picked up the flu in New Zealand and spread it to those ports, excepting American Samoa. …here is when that Navy training kicked in; Washington didn’t micro-manage American Samoa, not being all that interested. A policy of benign neglect was interpreted by Poyer as an opportunity to act on his best judgment, in the finest traditions of the US Navy. He imposed quarantine. That was harder that it sounds, because of the frequent family visits between West Samoa and American Samoa – but Poyer also had the support of the local chiefs, who understood how serious imported epidemics could be. The people of American Samoa self-blockaded, on top of official quarantine: they sent out canoes to stop any and all visitors. They never had a single case. Why was that so different than other islands? American Samoa was physically quite close to Western Samoa, less than 100km. … The islands of Western Samoa were administered by New Zealand, which had recently seized them from Germany. The administrator (Colonel Robert Logan) had little administrative experience (former sheep farmer) – he felt that he needed approval from Wellington for any action and he received no instructions. Medical officers also waited for instructions – none came. In addition, plantation interests were important, and they opposed any quarantine, which was also the case in Fiji. So, no quarantine. Thing went very badly: so many were sick (~90% of the population) that few were left to care for them. Since food was mostly in gardens, rather in cupboards, people starved while weak. … 20-25% of the population died, concentrated among young adults, the highest death rate in the world. No one in the Navy can stand a micro manager. I think it is because it isn’t just it is a horrible environment to work in, but because we know it is foreign to what is our natural culture. Have good officers. Help them know how to have sound judgement and give them the authority to act on it. Hey, it saves lives. From his Navy Cross Citation; The President of the United States of America takes pleasure in presenting the Navy Cross to Commander John Martin Poyer, United States Navy, for exceptionally meritorious service in a duty of great responsibility as Governor of American Samoa, for wise and successful administration of his office and especially for the extraordinarily successful measures by which American Samoa was kept absolutely immune from the epidemic of influenza at a time when in the neighboring islands of the Samoan group more than 10,000 deaths occurred, and when the percentage of deaths throughout the Polynesian Islands as a group, is reported to have ranged from 30 to 40 per cent of the population As a side note, if you find yourself at Arlington National Cemetery, you can find Commander Poyer’s grave in Section 2, Site 1182. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=yIl2AUoC8zA http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=qj6IDK7rITs http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=xpEEtHS6S9k:i_qffwGtwLY:gIN9vFwOqvQ http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=xpEEtHS6S9k:i_qffwGtwLY:-BTjWOF_DHI http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=xpEEtHS6S9k:i_qffwGtwLY:V_sGLiPBpWU http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=xpEEtHS6S9k:i_qffwGtwLY:F7zBnMyn0Lo http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/FAFV/~4/xpEEtHS6S9kView the full article

Americas Northrop Grumman has revealed its concept for the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) LongShot program to develop an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) capable of employing multiple air-to-air weapons. The company released a conceptual rendering of its proposed design on 10 February, two days after it was awarded a contract alongside General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc (GA-ASI) and Lockheed Martin for the first phase of its LongShot program. “The LongShot program enables us to combine our digital engineering skillset with our extensive knowledge in advanced technology weapons, autonomous systems, and strike platforms to increase weapon range and effectiveness,” Jaime Engdahl, program director, kinetic weapons and emerging capabilities at Northrop Grumman was quoted as saying. The 104th Fighter Wing has painted an American flag on the nose of its flagship F-15C and the graphic is composed of the names of members in the wing as well as those who had lost their lives while serving the 104th Fighter Wing. The roughly six-foot by four-foot nose art graphic is painted on both sides of the aircraft and the names of those who had fallen are painted in gold color. This F-15C #85-125 scored a kill against a Iraqi MiG-29 on January 17, 1991 using a AIM-7 missile. Middle East & Africa A US-Turkey joint Navy exercise on the Black Sea successfully integrated surface, air and subsurface warfare capabilities this week, the two countries announced. The US Sixth Fleet’s Arleigh Burke Class guided-missile destroyers USS Donald Cook and USS Porter, joined by a P-8A reconnaissance plane, joined Turkish frigates TCG Orucreis and TCG Turgutreis and two Turkish F-16 fighter planes for the one-day exercise on Tuesday, the US Navy said. “The training conducted for the fundamental types of naval warfare has further strengthened cooperation between the Naval Forces of the two countries and has contributed to their interoperability,” the Turkish defense ministry said Wednesday in a statement. Europe Germany has flown the first Panavia Tornado combat aircraft to have its service life extended with the goal of seeing the wider fleet out to its 2030 retirement date. The Luftwaffe announced that the first Tornado, serial 43+42 from Tactical Air Force Wing 33, had flown following the process that had seen its airframe life extended to 8,000 flight hours from the type’s current 6,000 flight hours. “A decision by the Federal Ministry of Defence was decisive for the laborious step of dismantling the fuselage,” the Luftwaffe said. “According to this, all 85 Tornados should remain in service until the end of 2030. This can only be achieved if such extensive work is done.” There’s a new layer of defense around the British HMS Lancaster and her 200 crew to keep enemies at bay. According to the Royal Navy, the Portsmouth-based warship has been fitted with heavy machine-guns to fend off small, fast-attack craft – guns tested for the first time off the South Coast this week as the ‘Queen’s Frigate’ shakes off winter cobwebs. Asia-Pacific Greece will buy frigates from France to strengthen its navy, the National Herald reported on Wednesday. The plans to buy the Belharra class ships follow the signing of a $2.79 billion deal with France to buy 12 used and six new Rafale fighter jets, the New York-based Greek American newspaper said. Greece has close political and defense ties with France, which has backed Athens in a dispute with Turkey over territory in the eastern Mediterranean. The acquisition of the French frigates will constitute the largest weapons program ever undertaken by the Greek armed forces, the National Herald said. Total spending would amount to $6.05 billion, it said. Today’s Video Watch: HMS Lancaster tests newly installed heavy machine guns View the full article

When you take the 30 Year Shipbuilding Plan published last December, throw in the desired decommissioning of the first four LCS and the very good chance that we will have to decommission all the Freedom Class LCS early due to a fatal design flaw in the combining gears ... and then mix in what the communist Chinese are building ... Well ... here are the Terrible 20s in all their horror. Come on over to USNIBlog and ponder the numbers with me. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=yIl2AUoC8zA http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=qj6IDK7rITs http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=uXjO5PiHges:KPfTylzdbTA:gIN9vFwOqvQ http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=uXjO5PiHges:KPfTylzdbTA:-BTjWOF_DHI http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=uXjO5PiHges:KPfTylzdbTA:V_sGLiPBpWU http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=uXjO5PiHges:KPfTylzdbTA:F7zBnMyn0Lo http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/FAFV/~4/uXjO5PiHgesView the full article

Americas General Electric Aviation won a $21.1 million contract modification, which procures 4 T408-GE-400 turboshaft spare engines and various spare engine parts in support of CH-53K Lot 5 low rate initial production aircraft. The CH-53K is the United States Marine Corps’ (USMC) heavy lift replacement for the CH-53E. The most powerful helicopter in the Department of Defense, the CH-53K is a new-build helicopter that will expand the fleet’s ability to move more material, more rapidly throughout the area of responsibility using proven and mature technologies. The T-408 engines are more powerful and more fuel efficient than the T-64 engines currently outfitted on the CH-53E. GE Aviation says the T408 turboshaft engine offers cutting edge technology and the latest design innovations for maximum power at minimum cost. Work will take place in Massachusetts. Estimated completion will be in December 2024. According to Oshkosh Defense, the company just recently recently produced its 10,000th Joint Light Tactical Vehicle -more than half it’s orders for the vehicle. Oshkosh officials pointed to the JLTV becoming a central piece of the US military’s ground force, as both the Army and Military Corps plan to adopt the vehicle, as making the milestone significant. Oshkosh Defense has received orders for 18,126 JLTVs for a total contract value of more than $6 billion. “Producing the 10,000th JLTV in under five years is further evidence of our ability to meet the demands of our domestic and international customers,” George Mansfield, vice president and general manager of joint programs for Oshkosh Defense, said in a press release. Middle East & Africa Vectrus Systems won an $18.3 million contract modification to provide all personnel, equipment, supplies, transportation, tools, materials, supervision and other items and non-personal services necessary for food services at the Area Support Group-Kuwait dining facility. Area Support Group – Kuwait implements the Defense Cooperation Agreement on behalf of US Army Central with the Kuwait Ministry of Defense, operates as the Base Operations Support Integrator and Security Coordinator for Kuwait, Command and Controls US Army Camps and Security Forces, and provides support for Reception, Staging, Onward Movement, and Integration of forces to facilitate theater operations. Work will take place in Kuwait City, Kuwait. Estimated completion date is February 10, 2022. Europe BAE Systems has been selected to supply 12 Bofors 40 Mk4 naval guns to the Belgian and Dutch navies as part of the Mine Counter Measures Vessels (rMCM) program, the company announced in a press release. The Bofors 40 Mk4 is a flexible, highly versatile gun system designed to react quickly in coastal environments. Lightweight and compact, the naval gun system combines long range and a high rate of fire, giving the mine hunting vessels a greater level of defense against surface, air, and shore-based threats. Asia-Pacific South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) has given an update to the press on the status of the joint development of the KF-X fighter with Indonesia. Kang Eun-ho, chief of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, told the reporters that both parties are “sounding out each other’s position” and South Korea “will elaborate in detail when the time is right.” Indonesia has failed to pay $584 million in development fees for the KF-X project. The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) will reactivate the No. 100 Squadron as the Air Force Heritage Squadron to mark its 100th anniversary. The squadron will fly warbirds such as Spitfire, Mustang and Sabre from Point Cook, Victoria, and Temora, New South Wales. The minister for Defense Personnel Darren Chester said 100 Squadron had a proud history and after a 75-year absence it was fitting that RAAF reactivates it in the same year as it commemorates its first 100 years. Today’s Video Watch: JLTV (Joint Light Tactical Vehicle) 8th Comm Marines conduct advanced drivers course during MEFEX View the full article

KODEF ’11 slide (click to view full) South Korea has been thinking seriously about designing its own fighter jet since 2008. The ROK defense sector has made impressive progress, and has become a notable exporter of aerospace, land, and naval equipment. The idea of a plane that helps advance their aerospace industry, while making it easy to add new Korean-designed weapons, is very appealing. On the flip side, a new jet fighter is a massive endeavor at the best of times, and wildly unrealistic technical expectations didn’t help the project. KF-X has progressed in fits and starts, and became a multinational program when Indonesia joined in June 2010. As of March 2013, however, South Korea has decided to put the KF-X program on hold for 18 months, while the government and Parliament decide whether it’s worth continuing. Indonesia has reportedly contributed IDR 1.6 trillion since they joined in July 2010 – but that’s just $165 million of the DAPA’s estimated WON 6 billion (about $5.5 billion) development cost, and there’s good reason to believe that even this development budget is too low. This article discusses the KFX/IFX fighter’s proposed designs and features, and chronicles the project’s progress and setbacks since 2008… Changing Stories: The “F-33/ Boramae” KF-X Fighter Unofficial KF-X vid click for video Unrealistic early visions of an F-35 class stealth aircraft developed on the cheap produced some attention-getting models, but they appear to have given way to the idea of a fighter with slightly better kinematic performance than an F-16C/D Block 50, along with more advanced electronics that include a made-in-Korea AESA radar, the ability to carry a range of new South Korean weapons under development, and a better radar signature. The Jakarta Globe adds that the plane is eventually slated to get the designation F-33. The project goes ahead, the 1st step will involve picking a foreign development partner, and the next step will involve choosing between 1 of 2 competing designs. The C103 design’s conventional fighter layout would look somewhat like the F-35, while the C203 design follows the European approach and uses forward canards in a stealth-shaped airframe. It’s likely that the choice of their foreign development partner will determine the design choice pursued. Either aircraft would be a twin-engine fighter weighing around 10.4 tonnes, with stealth shaping. In order to keep ambitions within the bounds of realism, KFX Bock 1 fighters would only have to meet the radar cross-section of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet or Eurofighter Typhoon. Sources have used figures of 0.1 – 1.0 square meters. Note that even this specification amounts to developing a plane similar to or more advanced than the JAS-39E/F Gripen, from a lower technological base, with less international help on key components, all for less development money than a more experienced firm needed to spend. South Korea’s own KIDA takes a similar view, questioning the country’s technical readiness for something this complicated, and noting an overall cost per aircraft that’s twice as much as similar imported fighters. KFX Block 2 would add internal weapon bays. Present plans call for Block 1 would be compatible with the bays, and hence upgradeable to Block 2 status, but Block 1 planes wouldn’t begin with internal bays. The fighter’s size and twin-engine design offer added space compared to a plan like the Gripen, but this feature will still be a notable design challenge. Additional tolerance and coating improvements are envisioned to reduce stealth to the level of an F-117: about 0.025 square meters. KFX Block 3 would aim for further stealth improvements to the level of the B-2 bomber or F-35. No timeline has been discussed for Block 2 and Block 3 improvements. At this stage of the program, any dates given would be wildly unreliable anyway. KF-X: Program & Prospects T-50 line (click to view full) The KF-X project remains a “paper airplane,” without even a prototype under construction. The program was reportedly postponed until April 2011 due to financial and technological difficulties, and now a second postponement appears to extend to June 2014. If South Korea elects to proceed at all. The ROK Agency for Defense Development says that if full-scale development begins in October 2014, the 1st KF-X Block 1 prototype flight wouldn’t take place until September 2020. Based on the history of other programs, the new plane would be hard pressed to enter service before 2025. Indonesia is currently the only KF-X foreign development partner, with 20% of the project. The project is sometimes referred to as “IFX” (Indonesia Fighter eXperimental) in that country, whose huge archipelago leads them to value range. That could create a problem if the KF-X design shrinks, in order to present a lower cost profile. Turkey is a big defense customer for South Korea, and discussions have been held concerning KF-X, but Turkey wanted more control over the project than a 20% share, and no agreement has been forthcoming. The TuAF is already committed to buying about 100 F-35As to replace its F-4 Phantoms, and many of its F-16s as well. They’re also investigating the idea of designing their own fighter, and have enlisted Sweden’s Saab to assist (vid. March 20/13 entry). In the interim, KAI’s FA-50 is emerging as a low-end fighter to replace existing ROKAF F-5s and F-4s, and South Korea is scheduled to have its F-X-3 competition decided before the KF-X resumes. That could leave them with a high-end fleet plan of 80-100 stealth-enhanced F-15SE Strike Eagles, split between new buys and upgrades. It’s fair to ask where an expensive KF-X program would fit in that mix, especially when even on-budget performance of WON 14 billion for development and production could buy and equip over 110 more F-15SEs, instead of 130-150 “F-33s”. ROK Flag Moreover, if KF-X was developed, how big would the 2025 – 2040 export market really be? The Teal Group’s Richard Aboulafia is right that “The world fighter market needs a modern, F-16-class mid-market fighter.” With that said, even in a hypothetical market where F-16, F/A-18 family, Eurofighter, and Rafale production lines had all shut down, that would still leave South Korea competing for mid-tier purchases against China’s J-10, J-11, and “J-31”, Russia’s SU-35 and possibly its MiG-35, and Sweden’s JAS-39E/F. On the other hand, KAI needs development work after the FA-50 is done. As one 2009 article asked, how far can industrial nationalism go? The next 18 months will offer an answer to that question. Contracts & Key Events 2014 – 2021 K-FX C-501: no. (click to view full) February 11/21: Indonesia South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) has given an update to the press on the status of the joint development of the KF-X fighter with Indonesia. Kang Eun-ho, chief of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, told the reporters that both parties are “sounding out each other’s position” and South Korea “will elaborate in detail when the time is right.” Indonesia has failed to pay $584 million in development fees for the KF-X project. December 10/19: FA-50 Link 16 South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) signed a contract with Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) to update the Link 16 tactical datalink system for the Republic of Korea Air Force’s (RoKAF’s) fleet of FA-50 light attack aircraft, according to Jane’s. The FA-50 Link 16 Performance Improvement Project aims to enhance security in the encryption system and harden it against interference. DAPA has also plans to sign contracts in the first half of 2020 for similar updates to be performed on nine other platform types, including E-737 airborne early warning and control aircraft, F-15K fighters and KDX-III Aegis-equipped destroyers. October 9/19: Second Phase South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) said in a report presented to the National Assembly for a parliamentary audit that the country will launch the second phase of the F-X project in 2021. $3.3 billion will be allocated for this phase of the project. Codenamed the F-X, or Fighter eXperimental, South Korea has been pushing to replace its aging fleet of F-4 and F-5 fighter jets since 2012. Under the first phase of the project, the country has decided to buy 40 F-35A stealth fighters by 2021. October 23/18: Unpaid bills The Indonesian government plans to renegotiate its partnership with South Korea in the K-FX development program. The agreement between the two countries was formalised in 2014, and outlined that Indonesia will contribute about $1.9 billion to the project which has an overall value of $7.9 billion. Indonesia’s coordinating minister for political, legal and security affairs is seeking to negotiate a way for Indonesia to pay its contribution, of which about $200 million is unpaid. Reuters says that “Indonesia’s request on the financial terms of the deal comes as it is trying to support the rupiah, which is trading near a 20-year-low, and to reduce the use of foreign exchange reserves.” The KF-X program will likely be South Korea’s largest defense acquisition program, that sees for the delivery of 120 jets for its own air force, and 80 to Indonesia. September 12/18: UK company lands another contract UK defense company Meggitt is deepening its involvement in the South Korean KF-X fighter program. The company will supply Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) with engine vibration monitoring units (EVMUs) to be installed on KF-X prototypes. Meggitt already delivers fire detection and bleed air leak detection systems, produces wheels and brakes, and designs the jets sensors and displays. The South Korean Air Force plans to replace its ageing F-4D/E Phantom II and F-5E/F Tiger II aircraft once the production starts in the mid-2020s. July 23/18: More British parts UK firm Meggitt is set to contribute towards South Korea’s KF-X fighter program. The company will supply Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) with its fire detection and bleed air leak detection systems. Meggitt has already won a number of multi-million contracts in support of the program, including the production of the KF-Xs nose and main wheels, carbon brakes, brake control system; and for the design, development and supply of standby flight displays, engine displays, and heading sensors for the fighter jet. Meggitt’s fire detection system uses a pneumatic detector that senses a rise in average temperature across the whole overheat sensor. KAI is scheduled to complete its critical design reviews by 2019 and then roll-out the firs KF-X prototype by 2021. April 12/18: Oxygen systems British aerospace equipment manufacturer Cobham has been selected by Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) to provide oxygen systems for South Korea’s indigenous fighter effort—the KF-X. The multi-year agreement covers the aircraft’s development phase and tasks Cobham with designing an onboard oxygen generating system that includes technologies such as the Next Generation Oxygen Concentrator—which creates breathable oxygen from engine bleed air—and the Electronic Seat Mounted Regulator that allows pilots to control the flow of oxygen. This will be the forth contract given to Cobham for various systems on the KF-X. So far the firm has been tasked with providing missile ejection launchers, communication, navigation and identification conformal antennas, as well as the fighter’s external fuel tanks and pylons. March 27/18: Ejectors Selected Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) selected the Mk18 ejection seat produced by Martin-Baker for its KF-X fighter program. The selection of the Mk18 seat continues long history of cooperation between KAI and Martin Baker which included both the KT-1 and T/A-50 programs. The Mk18 ejection seat is the most advanced ejection seat ever produced for fighter and trainer aircraft. A similar seat to the one currently in competition for the US Air Force new trainer Jet, the T-X. The KF-X fighter program started back in 2008 and is part of South Korea’ success story in the defense sector. The ROK has become a notable exporter of aerospace, land and naval equipment. The KF-X program has progressed in fits and starts, and became a multinational program when Indonesia joined in June 2010. DARPA’s estimated that the KF-X program will cost about $5.5 billion, Indonesia reportedly contributed about $165 million so far. In a nearly 70 years long history Martin-Baker products have saved the lives of 7,563 aircrew from around the world. November 21/17: Subcontract-BRUs Harris Corporation will deliver bomb rack units (BRUs) to Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) for use on the next-generation KF-X experimental fighter. The company will provide both its BRU-47—a single store carrier designed for use on the Boeing F-15E and F-22 Raptor—and BRU-57—a smart-weapon-enabled, twin store carrier that doubles the payload capacity of aircraft without the need to modify any hardware, which allows for a wide array of payload configurations. Further details on the contract were not disclosed. Seoul plans to produce a total of 120 next-gen fighters, as well as help produce a number of aircraft for program partner Indonesia. November 07/17: Indonesia has failed to pay the latest round of fees for its involvement in the South Korean KF-X fighter program, prompting lawmakers in Seoul to threaten postponement of the program. Jakarta’s state-owned PT Dirgantara Indonesia (PTDI) had been expected to pay the remaining $124.5 million required for this year at the end of October, after agreeing in January 2016 to cover 20% of the program’s overall expenses—or some $1.33 billion. Questioning the government on the matter, Rep. Kim Jong-dae of the Justice Party said “If Indonesia does not pay in time, then Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) has to shoulder the burden of 40 percent of the development costs,” adding that the “KF-X project could easily be put in danger,” and accusing the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) of downplaying concerns over the delayed payment. DAPA responded by saying that the matter will be discussed during an upcoming summit between the leaders of both countries later this week. August 25/17: Cobham Mission Systems has been selected to provide launchers for South Korea’s next-generation KF-X fighter program. The company will provide an unspecified number of the launchers by 2020 at a cost of $9 million. Ken Kota, general manager of Cobham Mission Systems, called its launcher system “a highly robust, long stroke ejection system that allows the interchangeable carriage and release of either Meteor or AMRAAM air-to-air missiles without role change.” South Korea plans to produce 120 KF-X fighters while Indonesia, a program partner, looks to operate 80 IF-X aircraft. May 24/17: Elta Systems has been brought in to help South Korean efforts to support the testing of an indigenous AESA radar for the KAI KF-X fighter. The state-run Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) stressed that the contract is just for support and not development work—which is being led by Hanwa Thales. The value of the contract is believed to be worth $35.5 million. March 6/17: Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) has selected Triumph Group to provide Airframe Mounted Accessory Drives for the KF-X fighter project. Triumph will support the project by designing and producing the AMADs, which will allow the aircraft to receive and distribute engine power to generators, pumps and other systems. The award follows January’s selection by KAI of the US-based Texstars for the provision of canopy and windshield transparencies for the aircraft, as well as February’s opening of a KF-X joint program office in order to facilitate program cooperation with Indonesia. February 10/17: Indonesia and South Korea have opened a joint program office in Sacheon, South Korea, in order to collaborate on the KF-X/IF-X fighter program. 74 personnel from PT Dirgantara Indonesia have made the move to work on the program, and will work with staff from the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) and Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI). The opening of the office comes just a year after both governments signed a $7.1 billion agreement to jointly develop the KF-X/IF-X 4.5-generation fighter. In exchange for their capital, Jakarta will receive 50 IF-X fighters as well as a certain amount of knowledge and technological transfer. December 16/16: South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) will commence research on an indigenous Taurus-class cruise missile. Development work on the missile will begin in 2018, with the aim being to produce around 200 missiles for deployment on the upcoming KAI KF-X fighter jet. Costing $690 million, the new missiles will give Seoul an increased cruise missile range from 280 km to 500 km. November 23/16: Officials from South Korea have continued their negotiations in Washington over technologies needed for their KF-X fighter program. A request for AESA radar, infrared search and track, electro-optical target tracking devices, and jammer technology transfers was denied by the Pentagon last year, resulting in Seoul having to pursue the technologies themselves. Speaking on the discussions, Korean Minister for the Defense Acquisition and Procurement Administration (DAPA), Myoung-jin Chang, said “there are additional technologies that we are awaiting approval from the US government and we are pushing for these to be approved and we look forward to your continued support.” August 12/16: South Korea’s Agency for Defense Development (ADD) has given the second half of 2020 as the date for the first prototype of their indigenous active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar. Developed in conjunction with Hanwha Thales, DAPA foresees six years of development, with the new radar to be ready for deployment in 2026. The radar will be integrated on the upcoming KF-X indigenous fighter. June 20/16: Next month will see Hanwha Thales commence work on developing the active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar for South Korea’s KF-X program. In April, the defense section of the Hanwha conglomerate was selected to participate in building the AESA radar to be installed on about 120 fighters that South Korea plans to have developed by the mid-2020s. A working prototype is expected for next June and if it is successful, an upgraded version will be made available in 2018. May 27/16: General Electric is to provide its F414-GE-400 engines for South Korea’s KF-X fighter after beating a European consortium offering the Eurojet EJ2000. The deal is estimated to be worth up to $3.5 billion, and contracts are expected to be finalized and signed in June. Korea Aerospace Industries Ltd (KIA), who is developing the jet alongside Lockheed Martin, plans to develop and produce 170 twin-engined jets initially, with 50 destined for export to Indonesia. April 21/16: South Korea looks set to decide on which engine provider will be selected for its KAI KF-X fighter as early as the end of the month. Suppliers looking to win the contract are European firm Eurojet Turbo GmbH and the US’s General Electric. Seoul is seeking to locally produce 120 twin-engine combat jets under the KF-X program that is estimated to cost some $16 billion. Deployment of the new planes is hoped to start in mid-2020 to replace its aging fleet of F-4s and F-5s. January 25/16: South Korea’s KF-X fighter program has kicked off as officials from KAI, the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), Lockheed Martin, the Indonesian Defense Ministry and PT Dirgantara Indonesia (PTDI) met in Sacheon, South Korea for the first time. Six prototypes of the fighter will be produced by 2021 with completion of the development due for 2026. 120 fighters will be produced by 2032 to replace the F-4 and F-5 jets in service. Collaboration in the program sees Lockheed Martin provide twenty-one key technologies used in the US F-35 fighter and the government of Indonesia is to provide $1.4 billion toward research and development in the project. Seoul will spend $7.1 billion in the project’s development. December 28/15: South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) is set to sign a development contract with Korea Aerospace Industries for the continued production of the indigenous KF-X fighter. The news follows the granting by the US government for the transfer of 21 technologies used in Lockheed Martin’s F-35 which had been the subject of much wrangling over the last number of weeks. Washington had denied the transfer of four key technologies back in April citing security concerns. The contract will see the production of six prototypes by 2025 with an expected 120 jets produced by 2032. December 7/15: South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) has been accompanied by high level diplomats to discuss the KF-X fighter program with Lockheed Martin. The trip to the US follows the visit by Lockheed staff to Seoul last month to discuss the transfer of 21 technologies from their F-35 fighter jet. The inclusion of diplomats shows that Korea is looking to bolster their bargaining power amid the refusal to allow the transfer of four key technologies by the US government. DAPA claimed that they are capable of developing these four key technologies, but failure to secure the remaining 21 would be of serious consequence to the development of Korea’s own indigenous fighter. November 19/15: Lockheed Martin staff are visiting South Korea this week to further discuss the transfer of technologies in relation to the development of the $6.9 billion KF-X fighter program. The talks come following a recent refusal by the US to allow the transfer of the four core technologies necessary for the program which could put the future of its development in jeopardy. Despite this, both Lockheed and the South Korean government are confident that the transfer of another 21 technologies will go ahead as planned with possibly some minor alterations to the technologies initially listed. The State Department however did approve the sale of 19 UGM-84L Harpoon Block II All-Up-Round Missiles and 13 Block II upgrade kits totally $110 million. October 30/15: A subcommittee in South Korea’s Parliament has passed a $58.8 million budget for the country’s indigenous KF-X fighter program, with the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) planning to press ahead with the development of critical technologies required for the jet, despite the US State Department preventing F-35 prime contractor Lockheed Martin from exporting four key technologies to the country. The country’s Ministry of National Defense will also stand-up a KF-X project team to manage the development of these four technologies. October 26/15: South Korea’s defense acquisition agency is reportedly planning to press ahead with development of the four key technologies required for the country’s KF-X indigenous fighter program, refused by Washington in April. South Korea is thought to be capable of finding replacements for three of these technologies; however the acquisition of an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar system is a particularly difficult problem for Seoul. It was thought that the technology would be transferred as part of offset arrangements for the South Korean F-35 acquisition, with Saab reportedly offering to develop an AESA solution for South Korea, unveiling a new radar system earlier this month. October 21/15: South Korea’s president has fired the country’s senior presidential secretary for foreign affairs Ju Chul-ki following failure to secure the transfer of four key technologies from the US required for the country’s KF-X indigenous fighter program. The blockage of the technologies in April – subsequently confirmed by the South Korean government in September – has also led to a criminal investigation into a senior security official in the country, as US SecDef Carter publicly reiterated the refusal to transfer the critical technologies last week. October 7/15: South Korea and Indonesia look set to sign a set of agreements later this month to cement the two countries’ industrial commitments to the collaborative development of the South Korean KF-X indigenous fighter program. The two states signed an engineering and development agreement in October 2014, which split the development costs 80-20 to South Korea. The two countries reiterated their commitment to the program in May this year. Meanwhile, the South Korean Defense Acquisition Program Administration announced on Tuesday that a separate organization will be established specifically to manage the KF-X program. September 28/15: South Korea’s $6.9 billion KF-X program has hit a major speed bump with refusal by the US government to approve the transfer of four core technologies from F-35 prime contractor Lockheed Martin to the country’s defense procurement agency, with the South Korean government now confirming that Washington refused the transfer back in April. The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) will now have to look elsewhere to acquire these technologies, which include an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, EO targeting pod, RF jammer and IR search and track system. Lockheed Martin promised to transfer 25 technologies to the country when it signed a Foreign Military Sales contract for 40 F-35s in September, with the homegrown fighter project seemingly now in jeopardy. April 10/15: GE to push engines. General Electric is reportedly looking to supply jet engines for the South Korea KF-X program, submitting a proposal to Korea Aerospace Industries, following the company’s selection as preferred bidder at the end of last month. The F414 engines GE is proposing has previously equipped the US Navy’s Super Hornets and Growlers, the Saab Gripen NG and the Indian Mk II Tejas. March 31/15: KAL eliminated. South Korean manufacturer Korean Aerospace Industries (KAI) was selected as preferred bidder today in the country’s indigenousKF-X fighter program, South Korean media reported today, beating a partnership of Airbus and Korean Airlines. KAI are expected to partner with Lockheed Martin for the $7.9 billion program, which will replace the existing Korean fleet of F-4 and F-5 fighters, as well as equip the Indonesian Air Force, which joined the project in 2010. Feb 23/15: KAL partners with Airbus. On February 22, Yonhap reported that KAL indeed signed an MOU with Airbus to present a join offer. Jan 27/15: KAL prospects dim. After proposals were sought on December 23, one government official was quoted as saying that price may be a controlling factor. That probably presupposes that KAL’s international partners, like Boeing, were staying with them, as they can help make up for the leaner engineering department at KAL. But one report indicated that Boeing was pulling out. The consortium, also to have included Airbus, would have pushed a revised F-18 model. Oct 15/14: F-35 & KF-16. Korean media report that a proposed $753 million price hike for BAE’s KF-16 upgrade deal could result in cancellation. Lockheed Martin waits in the wings, and is reportedly extending an offer that would include more technical help with the multinational KF-X fighter program if the ROKAF switches. The US government is reportedly demanding another WON 500 billion (about $471 million) for unspecified added “risk management,” while BAE is reportedly requesting another WON 300 million ($282 million) to cover a 1-year program delay. The Koreans are becoming visibly frustrated and distrustful, and have said openly that the deal may be canceled. Lockheed Martin’s angle is a spinoff from their recent F-35A deal, which will supply 40 aircraft to the ROKAF. Part of their industrial offsets involved 300 man-years of help designing the proposed KF-X. They were cautious about providing too much help, but they reportedly see enough benefit in badly wounding an F-16 upgrade competitor to offer another 400 man-years of support for KF-X (total: 700) if the ROKAF switches. Sources: Chosun Ilbo, “U.S. in Massive Price Hike for Fighter Jet Upgrade” | Defense News, “F-16 Upgrade: Problems With S. Korea-BAE Deal Could Open Door to Lockheed” | Korea Times, “Korea may nix BAE’s KF-16 upgrade deal”. Sept 24/14: F-35A. DAPA agrees on a WON 7.3 trillion deal for 40 F-35A fighters. including technology transfer in 17 sectors for use in KF-X. Transfers will include flight control and fire suppression technologies, and this appears to have been the final part of the KF-X puzzle. DAPA is said to have finalized their WON 8.5 trillion KF-X development plan, but it still has to be approved. Subsequent reports indicate that Lockheed Martin has limited its proposed help with KF-X to just 300 man-years, rather than the 800 desired. In exchange, they offered a very unusual offset: they would buy a military communications satellite for South Korea, and launch it by 2017. Lockheed Martin isn’t saying anything, but Thales is favored as the source, as they provided the payload for South Korea’s Kopmsat-5 radar observation satellite, and have played a major role in KT Sat’s Koreasat commercial telecommunications satellites. Why wouldn’t Lockheed Martin, which makes these satellites itself, just built one? Because this way, it doesn’t have to deal with any American weapon export approval processes and restrictions, which would have delayed overall negotiations and might have endangered them. That’s a lot of effort and money, in order to avoid ITAR laws. Or added help for KF-X. Sources: Yonhap, “Seoul to buy 40 F-35A fighters from Lockheed Martin in 7.3 tln won deal” | Defense News, “F-16 Upgrade: Problems With S. Korea-BAE Deal Could Open Door to Lockheed” | Reuters, “Exclusive: Lockheed to buy European satellite for South Korea in F-35 deal”. Aug 31/14: DAPA gave public notice of KF-X bids this month, with plans to pick the preferred bidder (likely KAI) in November 2014, and sign a system development contract in December 2014. The estimated WON 20 trillion development and production cost for 120 fighters is giving South Korea pause, especially with the ROKAF’s coming fighter fleet shortage (q.v. March 26/14). Sources: Korea Herald, “Fighter procurement projects pick up speed”. Aug 21/14: Engines. GE declares their interest in equipping the ROKAF’s KF-X. The firm already equips some ROKAF F-15Ks (F110), Korea’s own T/TA/FA-50 fighter family (F404), Surion helicopters (T700-701K), and many ROK naval ships (LM2500). The F404, LM2500, and T700 are all assembled locally in South Korea. GE is promising to expand aero engine technology cooperation, increase the component localization rate, and support KF-X exports via joint marketing, while ensuring that over half of KF-X’s engine components are locally assembled. GE’s F404, F414, and F110 jet engines are all viable possibilities. The key questions will involve matching their engineering specifications to the new platform: space, weight and balance, fuel consumption vs. onboard fuel, and twin-engine thrust vs. expected weight. GE competitor Pratt & Whitney’s F100 engine equips some ROKAF F-15Ks, and all of its F-16s. Sources: Yonhap, “GE eyes S. Korea’s fighter jet development project” | Joong An Daily, “GE wants in on new fighter jets”. July 18/14: Twin-engines. South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff endorse the plan to develop KF-X as a twin-engine fighter by 2025. That seems to pick the C-103/ C-501 (q.v. Feb 6/14), a twin-engine design that’s similar to the F-35 in overall shape. This decision an important step, but it isn’t a contract, or even a budget. The state-funded Korea Institute for Defense Analysis (KIDA) didn’t favor the twin-engine option, because they believed it would increase the fighter’s cost, and wouldn’t have a competitive edge. There actually is an edge for twin-engine fighters in a number of markets, because they’re less likely to crash due to engine failure. A country with large or remote areas to cover – Indonesia, for instance – will benefit from that choice. As for increases in cost, fighters like the Anglo-French Jaguar and Taiwan’s F-CK are smaller twin-engine planes that were successfully developed at reasonable cost. The key cost factor isn’t engines, it’s overall specifications. With that said, this choice does rule out KF-X’s least-cost, least-risk C-501/ KFX-E design, which would have been derived from the single-engined FA-50 that’s currently in production at KAI. Sources: Defense News, “S. Korea Opts for Twin-Engine Fighter Development” | Reuters, “S.Korea military chiefs endorse $8.2 bln development plan for home-built fighters”. JCS picks twin-engine C-103 design March 26/14: Fill-ins. The ROKAF needs to retire its fleets of 136 or so F-5E/F Tiger light fighters, and about 30 F-4 Phantom fighter-bombers. Meanwhile, The F-16 fleet is about to begin a major upgrade program that will keep part of that fleet out of service. The F-X-3 buy of F-35As is expected to be both late, and 20 jets short of earlier plans. The KF-X mid-level fighter project will be even later – it isn’t likely to arrive until 2025, if it arrives at all. The ROKAF is buying 60 FA-50s to help offset some of the F-5 retirements, but the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses (KIDA) sees this combination of events leaving South Korea about 80 planes short. FA-50 deliveries only began in August 2013, and foreign FA-50 orders from Iraq and the Philippines are beginning to take up additional slots on the production line. As such, the ROKAF may be leaning toward a quicker stopgap: “The Air Force is considering leasing used combat jets as part of ways to provide the interim defense capability because replacement of aging F-4s and F-5s wouldn’t take place in a timely manner,” a senior Air Force official said, asking for anonymity. “As midlevel combat jets are mostly in shortage, the Air Force is considering renting 16 to 20 used F-16s from the U.S. Air Force…. “The U.S. Air Force stood down some F-16s in the wake of the defense spending cut affected by the sequestration,” another Air Force official said, asking not to be named. “Under current circumstances, we can rent F-16s or buy used ones.” It will be interesting to see if the USAF will let the ROKAF lease, or just have them buy the jets at cut-rate prices. Sources: Yonhap, “S. Korea considers F-16 lease deal to replace aging jets”. Jan 5/14: Budget. The Korea Times reports that the 2014 defense budget has appropriated KRW 20 billion (about $19 million) to finalize KF-X’s design. A subsequent report from Aviation Week describes conditions that might be difficult for KF-X to meet: “The latest South Korean budget provides 20 billion won ($19 million) to continue KF-X studies in 2014, hedged by two major conditions—development cost must be capped at just under $8 billion and be complete by 2025, and the aircraft must be approved for export by the U.S. An international partner must be found and contribute a 15% investment.” A decision between the available design options is possible by February, and would be followed by detail design work. With respect to US export approval, AW confirms that “Eurofighter is still trying to offer South Korea 40 Typhoons, along with support for KF-X.” Unlike Lockheed Martin’s expected assistance, the vast majority of Eurofighter GmbH technology would be beyond American export approvals. Unfortunately, the ROK military’s short-circuiting of DAPA’s fighter competition (q.v. Nov 22/13) will expand the scope of possible American KF-X export clearance interference. Korea Times, “Military to flesh own fighter jet plan” | Aviation Week, “Fast-Changing Trends In Asia Fighter Market”. Feb 6/14: KAI’s official blog talks about the prospects for the K-FX. It clarifies that the design decision will be between the C-103, which is a twin-engine design similar to the F-35 in overall shape, and the FA-50 derived C-501/ KFX-E. Sources: KAI Blog. 2011 – 2013 Program halt lifted, as specs get clearer; Indonesia confirms, then faces a delayed program again; Turkey invited, but seem to be going their own way. KAI’s FA-50 (click to view full) Nov 22/13: KF-X moved up. South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff add urgency to proposed development of the local KF-X fighter, moving it from a long-range project to an intermediate-term project for development by 2020. Past timelines have given 7 years from the beginning of development to the end, which is already pretty fast. Even if KF-X receives follow-on approval and budgets, 7 years means development doesn’t end until 2022 or so. They also announce that there will be no competition for F-X Phase III – the F-35 is the only option. As a result, Lockheed Martin is expected to lend its expertise to KAI for KF-X, as part of an industrial offsets program that will also include a new military communications satellite and a cyber-warfare training center. ROK’s Yonhap, “(LEAD) S. Korea decides to buy 40 Lockheed F-35s from 2018” | Aviation Week, “South Korea To Order 40 F-35s, Maybe 20 More Later” | E&T, “South Korea confirms F-35 fighter jet deal” | NY Times, “In South Korea, Delays Drag a Project to Build Homegrown Fighter Jets” | China’s Xinhua, “S. Korea picks Lockheed Martin’s F-35 as main fighter jet”. Nov 5/13: Sub-contractors. Rockwell Collins is expressing interest in KF-X. They’re already a significant avionics supplier for existing T-50 family jets and Surion helicopters. Honeywell’s senior director of APAC Customer Business Mark Burgess: “We are in discussions with KAI and Samsung Techwin to explore how Honeywell can contribute to the KF-X program.” Oct 28/13: KF-X shrunk? Aviation Week reports that KAI has responded to the KF-X’s program’s stall with a smaller, single-engine “KFX-E/ C501” design that uses the F-35-style C103 design as a base, and proposes to reuse some systems from the FA-50. Overall weight would drop from around 11 tonnes to 9.3t (an F-16 is 8.9t), removing advance provision for an internal weapon bay, and leaving 2 underbody stations unused if a centerline fuel tank is carried. Engine choices would involve the same PW F100 or GE F110 choice available to F-16s, leaving KFX-E vulnerable to US export bans. Avionics would come from LIG Nex1, and a Korean AESA radar with about 1,000 T/R modules and a claimed performance similar to the F-16E/F’s AN/APG-80 would be fitted. Unlike the F-35, the targeting pod would have to be carried externally, and self-protection antennas will be part of a carried package, rather than conformal. South Korea believes they can develop the targeting pod themselves, and they’ve already developed an ALQ-200K ECM pod that could be adapted for internal carriage. The problem with all of this is that the design math is adverse. KFX-E’s ceiling offers poorer acceleration and range versus the F-16, a design that doesn’t appear to be optimized for maneuverability, and a radar that’s likely to be technically behind the ROKAF’s upgraded KF-16 fighters, all without the benefits of stealth in its initial configuration. The product would due to enter service the mid-2020s, and costs are difficult to predict but are unlikely to be less than a current F-16. This would augur poorly for exports, and makes the case for internal ROKAF adoption more difficult. Worse, launch partner Indonesia in particular values range, which would endanger their continued participation. KFX-E seems to be a formula that minimizes one type of risk, while increasing others. Sources: Aviation Week, “KAI Proposes Smaller KF-X Design” | IHS Jane’s, “ADEX 2013: KAI unveils new version of KFX fighter” (incl. picture). July 30/13: Turkey. Hurriyet quotes “a senior official familiar with the program” who says that $11 – $13 billion would be a realistic development cost for Turkey’s planned TF-X fighter. That actually is a reasonable estimate for a 4.5+ generation machine, but even this figure adds $50 million per plane to a large national order of 200 fighters. Keeping costs within the official’s $100 million per plane target will be challenging, which means a 200 jet program would cost Turkey $31 – $33 billion if everything goes well. Which won’t happen, especially if Turkey pushes for ambitious specifications. That math offers daunting odds for a national jet program, and much of the same math can be expected to apply to KF-X. Will sticker shock cause Turkey to take another look at collaboration with Korea? Push them to abandon TF-X and buy something else? Or just be ignored by local politicians looking to make big promises? Hurriyet Daily News. May 23/13: EADS. EADS Cassidian reportedly announces that they would invest $2 billion in the K-FX fighter development project, and help market the plane internationally, if the Eurofighter is chosen for F-X-3. Investments would include a maintenance repair and overhaul (MRO) facility that could extend to the KF-X, and an aerospace software center. It isn’t a bad idea for EADS. Barring multiple orders from new sources, it’s very unlikely that the Eurofighter will still be in production by 2022. Upgrades and maintenance will continue for some time, but the C-203 KF-X design could offer EADS a new option to sell, with a fundamental design that can improve toward stealth fighter status. The question is whether South Korea wants to go forward. Yonhap News. May 16/13: Indonesia. Indonesian Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro says that they remain committed to the KFX/IFX program. The Jakarta Post: “We have told our South Korean counterparts that we will continue doing our part. Whatever their decision is, and whatever technology they focus on, we will follow their lead and our 20 percent of share will remain,” Purnomo said…. TB Hasanuddin of House Commission I on defense and foreign affairs, said that about Rp 1.6 trillion ($164.8 million) was already spent on the project.” The question is whether South Korea chooses to pick up the project again, after the 18-month delay is over. April 29/13: Details. Aviation Week recaps the ROK ADD’s KF-X plan (q.v. Feb 18/13 entry), and quotes “a former air force officer who has been involved in planning for KF-X” to say that radar cross-section for Block 1 will be between 0.1 – 1.0 square meters. It adds that the choice between the conventional layout C103 and C203 canard design probably comes down to the development partner Korea chooses: C103 if American, C203 if European. Candidate engines for the twin-engine design are reportedly the GR F404 used in the FA-50, Eurojet’s EJ200 used in the Eurofighter, or GE’s F414 used in the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, JAS-39E/F Gripen NG, and India’s Tejas Mk.II. Snecma’s M88, used in Dassault’s Rafale, reportedly isn’t a candidate. Aviation Week. April 5/13: South Korean media detail a proposal from EADS to produce 80% of F-X Phase 3’s 60 fighters at KAI, if DAPA picks their Eurofighter. The Yonhap report also discusses this potential industrial boost for KAI in the context of the KF-X program,: “Many have been calling on the Park Geun-hye administration to promptly make a decision to either go ahead with the large-scale airplane development project or put on the brakes if it is deemed economically unsustainable.” The rest of the Yonhap report may be switching contexts to the F-X-3 high-end fighter acquisition, as it describes a decision to be made by June 2013, as part of a renewed emphasis on major defense projects in light of North Korea’s actions. That doesn’t entirely track with previous reports that place resumption of KF-X at June 2014, if it happens at all. It does track with reports concerning the F-X-3 program, so the confusion could just be poor writing. What is true is that provocations from North Korea are very much a double-edged sword for KF-X. On the one hand, they boost the idea of defense spending generally. On the other hand, they raise needs like anti-submarine warfare, missile defense improvements, etc. that will be higher priorities than KF-X. Yonhap News Service | Hankoryeh. March 20/13: Turkey. The Turks appear to be picking an independent course toward their future fighter aircraft, in line with rumors that they wanted more control than the KF-X program could give them. Their SSM signed an August 2011 deal with Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI) to carry out the conceptual design work, and recent reports add a preliminary agreement between TAI and Saab Group for technical assistance. Reports add that TAI is expected to acquire Saab’s aircraft design tools, which would make cooperation much easier. These moves don’t completely rule out KF-X participation, but they do weight the odds the other way. Defense Industry Undersecretary Murad Bayar says that Turkey’s project began in 2012, adding that after some modeling trials, one of the designs has matured. After completing the design phase, the undersecretary will offer a program plan to Turkey’s Defense Industry Executive Committee. Turkey faces some of the same dilemmas as South Korea. If 2023 is the first flight date for a 4.5 generation fighter, there’s a real risk that the design will be outmoded from the outset. On the other hand, designing and prototyping an indigenous jet from scratch takes time, and technical overreach versus current capabilities is incredibly risky. One “top official from a Western aircraft maker” told Hurriyet that Turkey may already be headed down that path: “…we had to step back when we understood that the technical requirements for the aircraft are far from being realistic.” Hurriyet | Hurriyet follow-on | AIN. March 1/13: 2nd Delay. Indonesian Defense Ministry official Pos Hutabarat confirms that KF-X has been postponed by 18 months to June 2014, while President Park Geun-hye decides whether to continue the project, and secures Parliamentary approval for that choice. Indonesia signed a 2010 MoU to become part of the project. Reports indicate an investment to date of IDR 1.6 trillion (about $165 million), with 30 PT Dirgantara Indonesia engineers at KAI working on the project. UPI says that the KFX/IFX fighter’s price has already risen to $50-$60 million per aircraft, and this is before a prototype even exists. That’s already comparable to a modern F/A-18E/F Super Hornet or JAS-39 Gripen, in return for hopes of similar performance many years from now. Jakarta Globe | UPI. 2nd program delay Feb 18/13: Details. Aviation Week reports that the Korea Institute for Defense Analysis has given KF-X a sharp negative review, even though it’s a defense ministry think-tank. In brief: the ROK isn’t technologically ready, and the project’s KRW 10+ trillion cost will be about twice as much as similar imported fighters. The 2013 budget is just KRW 4.5 billion, to continue studies. Those studies are coming to some conclusions. The ROK ADD would still have a pick a design if they go ahead: either the conventional C103 fighter layout, or the C203 design with forward canards. Either aircraft would be a twin-engine fighter weighing around 10.4 tonnes, with stealth shaping. Bock 1 would only have to meet the radar cross-section of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet or Eurofighter Typhoon. Block 2 would add internal weapon bays, which Block 1 would be compatible with but not have. Additional tolerance and coating improvements would reduce stealth to the level of an F-117. Block 3 would aim for further improvements to the level of the B-2 bomber or F-35. The ROK Agency for Defense Development says that if full-scale development begins in October 2014, the 1st KF-X Block 1 prototype flight would take until September 2020. Based on the history of other programs, the new plane would be hard pressed to enter service before 2025. Aviation Week. Oct 27/11: KF-X specs. Fight International: “In 2013, South Korea and two national partners will start developing a medium-sized and probably twin-engined fighter. It will be more agile than a Lockheed Martin F-16, with an advanced sensor suite and fusion software on a par with the US company’s new-generation F-35. Aiming to enter operations in 2021, the new design will also carry a bespoke arsenal of indigenous missiles and precision-guided munitions. That is the vision for the KF-X programme, outlined on 21 October at the Seoul air show by South Korean government and academic officials.” DAPA’s technical requirements reportedly include an AESA radar and onboard IRST (InfraRed Search and Track) sensors, standard fly-by-wire flight and HOTAS (hands on throttle and stick) pilot controls, an NVG-compatible helmet-mounted display, and sensor fusion to the large screen single display. That last bit is especially challenging, and DAPA acknowledged that foreign partners will be needed. They hope to begin flight tests in 2016-2017, with an 8-year system development phase and a 7-plane test fleet (up from 5 prototypes at the Indonesian MoU). Under this vision, South Korea’s LiG Nex1 would also develop a compatible line of short and medium range air-to-air missiles, strike missiles, and precision weapons to complement DAPA’s 500 pound Korea GPS guided bomb (KGGB). That array will expand global weapon choices if DAPA follows through, but the challenge will be getting them integrated with other countries’ aircraft. Ask the French how that goes. KF-X specs July 14/11: Indonesia confirmed. About a year after the MoU, The secretary general of Indonesia’s defence ministry, Erris Heriyanto, confirms the MoU’s terms to Indonesia’s ­official Antara news agency. KAI EVP Enes Park had called Indonesia’s involvement unconfirmed at the November 2010 Indo Defence show, but the Antara report appears to confirm it. Turkey unveiled indigenous fighter plans of its own in December 2010, with the aim of fielding a fighter by 2023, but they haven’t made any commitments to KF-X. Flight International. April 2011: Postponement of the KF-X project is reportedly lifted, as South Korea gets a bit clearer about their requirements. Resumed 2008 – 2010 Reality check scales back specs, before indecision suspends program; Indonesia signs MoU. T-129: Quid pro quo? (click to view full) Dec 27/10: Yo-yo. South Korea’s Yonhap News agency reports that South Korea’s military is trying to swing KF-X back to a stealth fighter program, in the wake of North Korea’s Nov. 23 shelling on Yeonpyeong Island. Subsequent reports indicate that the uncertainty about KF-X requirements leads to a program halt, until things can get sorted out. Yonhap. Aug 9/10: Turkey. DAPA aircraft programs director Maj. Gen. Choi Cha-kyu says that Turkey is actively considering the K-FX fighter program, and would bear the same 20% project share as Indonesia if they come on board. There are reports that in return, Turkey wants the ROK to pick the T-129 ATAK helicopter under the AH-X heavy attack helicopter program. Turkey bought the A129 Mangusta design from AgustaWestland, as part of a September 2007 contract to build 51-92 helicopters for the Turkish Army. Korea Times | Hurriyet. Now: TNI-AU F-16A (click to view full) July 15/10: Indonesia. Indonesia signs a Memorandum of Understanding to participate in KF-X. They’ll pay 20% of the estimated WON 5.1 trillion (about $4.1 billion) development effort, with 5 prototypes to be built before 2020, and commit to buying 50 of the fighters. South Korea has only committed to 60% of the development cost, which leaves 20% in limbo. DAPA’s KF-X program director Col. Lee Jong-hee says: “There are two options on the table. One is to lure financial investments from other nations, such as Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. The other is to receive investments from Western aircraft makers wishing to participate in the KF-X.” The Indonesian agreement follows a March 2009 Letter of Intent that was co-signed by South Korean President Lee Myung-bak. Indonesian MPs urged the government to conduct a feasibility test beforehand, but that wasn’t done. Key issues from Indonesia’s point of view include KF-X’s adequacy for the TNI-AU’s needs; technical and fiscal feasibility; technology and cost risk; the benefits to Indonesia’s aviation industry, given a break-even set by Aviation Week at 250-300 fighters for under $41 million each; and the role of 3rd country tech for engines. etc. which could still leave the fighters subject to foreign embargoes. Defense News | Jakarta Post. Indonesia joins the program Sept 12/09: KF-X drivers. Aviation Week offers their take on KFX’s positioning and industrial drivers: “South Korea has decided that it can’t afford to build a cutting-edge stealth fighter…. it is considering building a gen-4.5 fighter, which might emerge as a jazzed up Typhoon or Super Hornet…. KFX would go into service in the early 2020s, perhaps a quarter of a century behind its technology level. ….Korea Aerospace will run out of fighter development work in a few years when the FA-50 is finished. It presumably does not have the technology to step straight from that to a combat drone. And it can’t spend next decade building up skills with an improved, single-seat FA-50, because the air force wants bigger aircraft…. the KFX would perhaps be an extreme example of sacrifices made in the name of self reliance or, perhaps, nationalism.” July 23/09: KF-X. Defense News reports that “South Korea Drops 5th-Generation Fighter Plan,” but the title is misleading. The Weapon Systems Concept Development and Application Research Center of Konkuk University asked Boeing, Eurofighter, Lockheed Martin and Saab about their views on the per-plane cost estimate of $50 million, as well as budget-sharing ideas and technology transfer. The problem is that South Korea’s specifications as described most closely mirror the ($150-180 million each, and $10+ billion development) F-22 Raptor, indicating that some reconciliation with reality is still necessary. The center will wrap up the feasibility study by October 2009, and DAPA is supposed to issue a decision on the KF-X initiative by year’s end. That will determine whether KF-X competes with/ supplants F-X-3, or proceeds as a separate program. May 12/09: Changing gears. The Korea Times reports that the ROKAF’s Studies and Analyses Wing made an interim decision KF-X operational requirements in March 2009: “Basic requirements call for a F-18E/F Super Hornet-class aircraft equipped with 4.5-generation semi-stealth functions, a domestically-built active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar [“based on accrued technologies from Israel”], a 32,000-pound of engine thrust and fully integrated weapons and sensors systems…. The KF-X aircraft would be either a single-engine fighter or a twin-engine one, [the source] added. It is the first time that KF-X operational requirements have been revealed.” DAPA expects a final program decision around the end of 2009, and KF-X is expected to be part of the military’s 2010-14 force improvement package. Jan 28/08: Reality check. The current program was scheduled to be followed by a KF-X program to develop and indigenous 5th generation/ stealth fighter to replace all F-5E Tiger IIs and F-4E Phantom IIs. After a feasibility study in 2008, the project would aim to produce the next-generation jets by 2020, with the goal of building 120 planes in a bid to secure proprietary technology and strengthen the country’s medium level fighter jet capacity. The goal is reportedly a single-seat, twin-engine plane with about 40,000 pounds of thrust from its engines, with more stealth than the Eurofighter Typhoon or Dassault Rafale, but less stealth than the F-35. Now the Korea Development Institute has delivered a report concluding that the economic and industrial returns would be weak in proportion to its cost: about 3 trillion won/ $3 billion in returns, on a 10 trillion won investment. Papers quote foreign experts who estimate development costs of up to $12 billion. Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration said the KDI report was for reference only, and the project decision would include other factors such as export prospects and technological capacity. $7 billion is not a sum to be thrown away casually, and the difference would be very noticeable within South Korea’s defense budgets. Options like partnering with EADS on a stealthier version of the Eurofighter, for instance, might lower development costs and offer an additional option. Nevertheless, with F-X-3 likely to select a stealthy platform, a merger with the K-FX program and negotiation of an industrial deal seems more likely. Especially given South Korea’s demographic crunch, which will begin to bite by 2020. Chosun Ilbo | Korea Times. Additional Readings The KF-X Program Aviation Week – KFX Timeline. To 2013. Aviation Week (Feb 3/14) – Fast-Changing Trends In Asia Fighter Market Flight International (Oct 27/11) – IN FOCUS: South Korea outlines strategy for indigenous fighter. World Politics Review (Aug 13/10) – Global Insider: Indonesia-South Korea Joint Fighter Project (subscription). Says that KF-X will be based on KAI’s T-50, and aims to produce a fighter on par with the F-16C/D Block 50. Defense News (July 15/10) – Indonesia Joins South Korean Fighter Effort The Jakarta Post (July 12/10) – RI-S. Korea KFX cooperation: The second best option? Aviation Week (Sept 21/09) – A Generation 4.5 Fighter for the 2020s Related Programs DID – Korea’s T-50 Family Spreads Its Wings. Some accounts have KF-X as an FA-50 derivative. DID – Korea’s F-X Multi-Role Fighter Buys: Phases 2 & 3. The ROKAF’s high-end fighter plans. View the full article

Americas Raytheon Technologies won a $49.2 million deal, which provides for one conventional take-off and landing and two short take-off/vertical landing F135 engines to support F-35 Lightning II Block Four developmental testing program for the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and non-US Department of Defense (DOD) participants. The Pratt & Whitney F135 is an afterburning turbofan developed for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II. Last week Raytheon was awarded a $290 million contract, which provides material and support equipment for depot maintenance facilities, program administrative labor for non-recurring sustainment activities, mockup engines and modules for test cells, as well as supplies, services, and planning for depot activations in support of the F-35 Lightning II Program Lot 13 propulsion system for the Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, non-Department of Defense (DOD) participants and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) customers. Work will take place in Connecticut, Washington, California, Michigan, Florida, New Jersey, Ohio, Illinois, Texas, Maine and New Hampshire. Expected completion is in January 2023. Bell Boeing Joint Project Office won a $17.9 million contract modification, which exercises an option to procure 60 MV-22 and 10 CV-22 proprotor hub spring and drive link retrofit kits; and six CV-22 modification spares kits, in support of the Marine Corps MV-22 aircraft and Air Force CV-22 aircraft. Work will take place in Fort Worth, Texas. Estimated completion is in February 2023. Middle East & Africa Israel Aerospace Industries unveiled the WASP, a new aerial surveillance system that it said identifies and tracks moving targets in wide areas, day and night, with great precision. Utilizing state-of-the-art electro-optical and infrared sensors, artificial intelligence algorithms and adaptive rule engines, the WASP covers large areas with a high revisit rate, tracks and identifies moving targets that correlate with mission requirements and objectives, and alerts the system’s operator. Compact, lightweight and requiring low power consumption, the WASP can be used with various aerial platforms such as tactical UAVs, drones, fixed and rotary wing aircraft and tethered surveillance balloons, IAI said. Europe A US Air Force KC-135 aerial refueling tanker from the 100th Air Refueling Wing will fly to Finland from February 9-10 to let Finnish Hornet pilots practice aerial refueling. Between 8-14 F/A-18s will participate from their bases in Rovaniemi, Rissala and Pirkkala. The refueling training will take place over Rovaniemi, Kuusamo, Kajaani and Oulu. The British HMS Queen Elizabeth and her crew are simulating a “global crisis” to see how the aircraft carrier and her escorts would fare in the real world. At its largest, her task group will comprise more than a dozen warships, support vessels and squadrons, including three dozen F-35B jets and helicopters – around 3,700 military personnel in all. According to the Royal Navy, the two-week-long Virtual Warrior is one of two final assessments the ship and command staff must come through before the 65,000-tonne warship leads her task force on deployment. Asia-Pacific The US Navy and the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force concluded a nine-day mine warfare exercise off the Japanese coast, the Navy announced. The annual event, this year named Mine Warfare Exercise 1JA 2021 and held in southwestern Japan’s Ise Bay, is designed to increase mutual proficiency in mine countermeasure operations. The nine-day exercise, which began on January 28, involved a simulated clearing of a route for ships, using unit-level mine warfare tactics for mine hunting, detection and neutralization. Today’s Video Watch: Know Your Aircraft: The Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker View the full article

There is a lot of wishcasting when it come to talking about "the next war." A lot of money is to be made in peace selling a vision of what people desire the next war to be; a fast war, an easy war, a war fought on our ethical spectrum with the weapons we like, on a timescale that works best for us. History teaches that war does not work this way. No one gets the next war exactly right, but some get it partially right. That is why you need to be suspicious of single points of failure or any cult-like following of concepts or personalities that make this historically hard seem easy. There is one thing that you can count on when it comes to big or even medium wars; they will last longer than you think. You will also find out in the first few months what you bought in to works or does not work; what kit you need more of, what you have in excess. In those few months you will also see something else come out in stark relief against the background; the hints about what this war would be like were there all along in bits and shadow from the small and medium sized wars in the decade or so prior to the big one. The longer an army or navy is at peace before the next war, the greater the delta will exist between theory and reality. As we've discussed here, there are examples of small conflicts going on right now that are providing invaluable lessons that should be the center of our attention. Most of the lessons from these conflicts - Ukraine, Syria, and Libya are just three - are land centric, but in all three places there are some useful lessons in the maritime sector on the margins. While it is easy or comfortable to discuss things on the tactical level, or as in the above paragraph service specific topics, on Syria, what are a few things we should be looking at - on the strategic level? Eyal Berelovich over at Military Strategy Magazine has a great overview of the long Syrian Civil War. In line with the bias towards long wars, this one bit rang especially true; Attrition-based warfare ... proved to be an operational concept that allows the Syrian army to overcome its enemies. The question is will it affect the future structure and military strategy of the Syrian army: ... ...it is plausible to think that the army will be made of two armies: one that can execute offensive operations to limited geographical objectives and another that will be able to only do defensive operations. Both armies will have sufficient fire power to attrite enemy forces while minimizing the damage the enemy could cause them. Other nations are learning this lesson. They have nurtured a briar patch they will love for someone to jump in to. While some potential opponents will pay attention to these lessons - which parallel what we are seeing in Ukraine and Libya - I don't think we are likely to want to take these lessons onboard. They are unpleasant. They are not in line with how our republic likes to fight its wars. Additionally, there is a modern twist here that I'm not sure how to fully see how it plays out. For all of modern history, waring nations were young and growing with high fertility rates. What if the nature of war has not changed as much as human demographics have changed? What is the impact of wars of attrition on ageing populations with many families only having one child, or at best one son? How do they respond differently based on the system of government they exist under? If you properly examine these questions, how do you arrange your force structure and OPLANs? Leaving the strategic questions and returning to a service specific question; does the 2021 USN look more like the IJN or USN prior to WWII when it comes to the ability to fight a naval war of attrition? If wars of attrition are the old/new of the 21st Century ... how do we posture our military and industrial base to flex to that need? Crossposted on substack. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=yIl2AUoC8zA http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=qj6IDK7rITs http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=WXgk1R6ywg4:Wjtpmsa0Y8I:gIN9vFwOqvQ http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=WXgk1R6ywg4:Wjtpmsa0Y8I:-BTjWOF_DHI http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=WXgk1R6ywg4:Wjtpmsa0Y8I:V_sGLiPBpWU http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=WXgk1R6ywg4:Wjtpmsa0Y8I:F7zBnMyn0Lo http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/FAFV/~4/WXgk1R6ywg4View the full article

Americas The US Air Force has secured funding to buy the first of six new E-11A Battlefield Airborne Communication Node aircraft. The press release from the 66th Air Base Group Public Affairs says the BACN Program Office is expected to award the contract by end of March, and the aircraft to be delivered by the end of June. The five-year indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity agreement also includes funds for research, development, testing and evaluation, and integration of existing and future payloads. The contract also provides support for infrastructure contained in or connected to the BACN system and associated ground stations, controls, and ancillary or support equipment for system integration laboratories. The Chilean Government is seeking to procure Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) Block IIIA missiles through the US foreign military sale (FMS) programme. Approved by the US State Department, the potential FMS has an estimated value of $85 million. Under the proposed sale package, Chile has requested for the supply of 16 SM-2 Block IIIA rail launched missiles, two MK 89 Mod 0 guidance sections, and one target detection device kit, including shroud and MK 45 Mod 14. The principal contractor will be Raytheon Missiles and Defense, Tucson, Arizona. There are no known offset agreements in connection with this potential sale. Middle East & Africa The Jerusalem Post reports that Israel’s security cabinet has approved the Defense Ministry’s proposal to buy new aircraft and helicopters from the US. This ends a three-year long dispute between the Defense and Finance ministries over how to pay for the purchase. The defense side wants to take a foreign loan to pay for the deal but finance says this will bypass a spending limit set by law. News reports say the arms deal involves four KC-46A tankers, more F-35s, purchase of the F-15EX and CH-53K. The purchase still requires final approval by the procurement ministerial committee. Europe HMS Talent recently fired a torpedo at itself – three times. This was part of the trial process and according to the Royal Navy, there was no risk to the submarine. “The Trafalgar-class boat – whose mission is to hunt and, if necessary, kill hostile submarines – fired the upgraded Spearfish on the ranges near the Isle of Skye to rigorously test it before it enters service. During the three-day trial, the cutting-edge Spearfish was fired at Talent three times – and was programmed to safely pass the submarine to ensure there was no risk of the boat torpedoing herself“, the service said. The trials provided valuable data in the final stages of the upgraded torpedo’s development ahead of its impending entry into service. Kongsberg Maritime announced the next generation of its advanced HUGIN Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV). The company claims HUGIN Endurance will offer up to 15 days of mission runtime and travel distances of up to 2,200 km – which it notes is equivalent to the sailing distance from New York City to Cuba – enabling shore-to-shore commercial and military inspection and survey operations without the need for an attendant mothership. However, it can still be launched and recovered on a vessel of opportunity (VOO) if desired. The AUV can also be configured with a range of sensors focused on mission capabilities and situational awareness, such as the HISAS 1032 dual-receiver synthetic aperture sonar (SAS), which is claimed to be capable of generating a 1,000 m swath at 2.5 kt with a typical resolution of 5×5 cm for SAS imagery. Asia-Pacific The latest edition of the annual exercises between the Indian and US armies kicked off on February 8 at the Mahajan Field Firing Ranges in Rajasthan, a western Indian state bordering Pakistan. The 16th edition of the Yudh Abhyas exercises, which will continue until February 21, will focus on counterterrorism and promote interoperability between the two forces, according to the Indian Army. Exercise Yudh Abhyas is one of the largest running military training and defense cooperation endeavors between India and US. Today’s Video Watch: Bombardier E-11A BACN (SN 11-9358) View the full article

I wish I made the observation first, but last week I noted another's spot on commentary on LCS that was simply damning in its simplicity; LCS-1 will be decommissioned before any of the mission modules it were to carry are FMC. All that being said, LCS will be with us for awhile, and good people in hard jobs are doing their best to squeeze some utility out of them. That is great ... but we have so little actual experience with LCS besides a few bespoke deployments that we need to be very careful thinking we can transfer "lessons" to new classes, like FFG-62, that will be used in very different ways ... like useful ways ... but I digress. That won't stop some people, it seems; “When we started building frigate, we looked at lot at LCS and what we can learn – for example, the way we train on LCS, train to qualify, is a really good model and we’re going to leverage that for FFG-62,” Kitchener said during the media call ahead of this week’s Surface Navy Association annual symposiums. I'm open to that, I guess. If it were so great - and I don't know if it is - why aren't we doing this with already existing classes of warships? Are we? “And then the manning, we just looked at what we’ve done on LCS, the blue/gold concept, and how we’re going to fit them out. And we think that is probably the way to get the most presence” out of the frigate hulls. Bullshit. Blue/Gold only works in the submarine world. If you want to copy their program, then great. All experience we have with Blue/Gold in surface ships doing surface ship business - and LCS has never done that - has always been, what is the world, "suboptimal." It appears that this may be soaking in. Perhaps we are mature enough as an organization to admit that we can say, "No, this was a mistake." Close ... so close ... but perhaps we are allowing some to save face. We'll see. “The ink’s not dry yet – we’re looking at, as the SWO Boss said, there’s some lessons learned from blue/gold crewing, I think there’s some ability to potentially deploy the ships for longer with a rotational crew model, and we are still learning about how to do that and what that right rotation is. So it’s a little bit pre-decisional still with Connie,” he said. Let's pour bleach on that ink before it is dry and toss what remains in the shredder. “The crew on a frigate will be larger, so there’s kind of inherently more capability in that crew. It’s not a minimally manned platform as the LCS was. … That means that the frigate, the Connie-class crew size, will support being able to do more multi-mission sorts of things, whereas the LCS is more single-mission, one mission at a time platform,” he said. “And there’s some more ability for the crew to do its own maintenance; planned maintenance will be done much more so by the ship’s force crew on a frigate, on the Connie class, than on the LCS.” So close, so close to sounding like a customer of the military industrial complex as opposed to a PR spokesman ... so close. That being said, nice that Big Navy is starting to accept the critique from the Front Porch about LCS here well over a decade and a half old. I like how we are finally calling LCS's manning CONOPS not "optimally manned" but "minimally manned." Also admitting that - shocking I know - a ship needs the ability to do some of its own repairs ... and hey, multi-mission is a thing again. Good. Potential enemies were being a bit persnickity about signaling what the PMA of the Quarter was going to be in time for us to get the non-existent mission modules installed. Maybe soon we can say, "Little to nothing from LCS can be adopted by FFG-62. We learned a lot from LCS and will continue to, but the manning and deployment CONOPS for FFG-62 will be better aligned to a multi-mission frigate as we understand it in our and allied navies." http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=yIl2AUoC8zA http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=qj6IDK7rITs http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=xe5oVzBKp9E:ADZ_1TNElas:gIN9vFwOqvQ http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=xe5oVzBKp9E:ADZ_1TNElas:-BTjWOF_DHI http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=xe5oVzBKp9E:ADZ_1TNElas:V_sGLiPBpWU http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=xe5oVzBKp9E:ADZ_1TNElas:F7zBnMyn0Lo http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/FAFV/~4/xe5oVzBKp9EView the full article

Americas L3Harris Technologies won a $45.9 million deal, which provides engineering maintenance and repair support services for Advanced Self-Protection Jammer AN/ALQ-165, Integrated Defensive Electronic Countermeasures AN/ALQ-214, and aircraft self-protection optimization software in support of F/A-18 series aircraft for the Navy and Foreign Military Sales customers. The AN/ALQ-214 is the next-generation radio frequency (RF) integrated countermeasure system. The legacy (V)3 version is currently deployed on the US Navy’s F/A-18E/F aircraft to provide self-protection. Work will take place in Clifton, New Jersey. Estimated completion will be in February 2026. Sikorsky won a $478.6 million contract modification, which exercises options for the procurement of five Lot Three low rate initial production Presidential Helicopters Replacement Program (VH-92A) aircraft, and associated interim contractor support, two cabin interior reconfiguration kits, support equipment, initial spares, and system parts replenishment. The new Marine One, also referred to as VH-92A, is the next-generation presidential transport helicopter being developed for the US Marine Corps (USMC). It will replace the ageing VH-3D presidential helicopter in service with the USMC. Work will take place in Connecticut, Pennsylvania, New York, Maryland, Arizona and Virginia. Estimated completion will be in December 2023. Middle East & Africa Dyncorp International LLC won a $42 million contract modification for aviation maintenance services. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Army) funds in the full amount were obligated at the time of the award. US Army Contracting Command is the contracting activity. Work will take place in Afghanistan and Iraq. Estimated completion date is August 31, 2021. Europe Greece’s first F-16V has arrived in Belgium and the jet is expected to reach Forth Worth, Texas on February 10. The aircraft had its Hellenic Air Force insignias removed and replaced with US Air Force ones. The plane is registered under the US Air Force so that it can fly with US airspace with less restrictions. The flight from Belgium is expected to take approximately 10 hours and three F-16s from other countries will be joining it. Asia-Pacific Kazakhstan has unveiled an indigenous unmanned air vehicle (UAV) dubbed Chagall. The drone is developed by the National University of Defense of Kazakhstan. It has a range of 30 kilometers and an endurance of 2.5 hours. It runs on a rechargeable battery that was developed in-house. The French Navy is sending its Mistral Class amphibious assault helicopter carrier Tonnerre to Japan from this month. It will be accompanied by La Fayette Class frigate Surcouf during this mission to Asia. Both warships are expected to depart on February 18. They are expected to be back home in July. Today’s Video Watch: The world’s Top Combat Drones | Ranking the Top Ten View the full article

Aborted landing (click to view full) In January 2005, the U.S. Navy selected the US101 as the new “Marine One” baseline helicopter, for use by the President of the United States. The US101 is an American variant of AgustaWestland’s successful AW101 multi-mission medium helicopter; it beat out Sikorsky’s S-92 Superhawk, which is already in use as a government VIP transport in countries like South Korea. That $1.7 billion victory was first endangered, and then destroyed, by ongoing changes from the White House staff. In 2008, the program’s ballooning costs and requirements got a temporary reprieve when US Navy agreed to proceed with the VH-71, despite a cost per aircraft equal or greater than the President’s Air Force One 747s. By June 2009, however, the VH-71 program had shot itself down. Another round of competition is on the way, and back in 2009 the Pentagon said it was considering buying 2 different helicopters in the VXX follow-on program. Faced with an initial Analysis of Alternatives deemed too expensive, the OSD accepted the Navy’s revised approach in May 2012, setting things in motion for a new program of record. The New Marine One Helicopter Programs: A Quick History VH-3D (top), VH-60N (click to view full) The Marine Corps currently operates 11 VH-3D Sea Kings, and 8 smaller VH-60N Black Hawk helicopters. The VH-3Ds were originally placed in service in 1974 and 1975, and the VH-60s entered service in the 1980s. They’re safe and reliable due to low and careful use, but they no longer had the growth capability to incorporate the equipment that George W. Bush’s White House believed was required in a post 9/11 environment. The new “Marine One” helicopter, expected to be in service for up to 4 decades, was officially designated VH-71A in July 2005. The platform never made it into service. The Presidential office kept adding requirements, the Navy couldn’t or didn’t refuse, and eventually the entire project crashed. Each helicopter had become more expensive than a VC-25 “Air Force One” Boeing 747. What Now? When the VH-71 program was terminated, in 2009, the question was what to do with the 9 delivered machines. The President and Pentagon believed that the 5 pilot production VH-71s wouldn’t be useful, long-lived, and cost-effective enough to join the Presidential fleet, while some in Congress still believed the 5 should be fitted out and pressed into service. By September 2011, however, all 9 VH-71 airframes had all been shipped to Canada, for use as spare parts. In its place, the US DoD plans with a revised “VXX” program that aims to field 21 operational helicopters, divided between Presidential helicopters and associated supply helicopters. In 2012 the Navy and the Office of the Secretary of Defense agreed on a cost-effective revised Analyses of Alternatives, setting things in motion to restart a program of record that won’t be in a position to replace the current fleet until 2020 at the earliest. The VXX RFP was issued in May 2013. During the EMD phase, the selected contractor will provide 6 test helicopters, 4 of which will transition to front-line service in HMX-1. They’ll join another 17 production helicopters: 4 from LRIP Lot 1, 5 from LRIP Lot 2, and 8 from “full-rate production”. Flight and maintenance training systems and contractor support will also be part of the contract, and the level of security around the project will be very tight. Meanwhile, the Pentagon moved ahead with a program to refurbish the existing VH-3/VH-60 helicopter fleet, while adding 12 V-22 tilt-rotors that will carry cargo, support staff, and media members. The 1st HMX-1 V-22 was inducted in May 2013. VH-3/ VH-60 Refurbishment VH-3D (click to view full) This section covers efforts underway to improve existing VH-3D/ VH-60N helicopters, or extend their lifespans. The VH-3D Lift Improvement program consists of the operational level installation of 55 composite main rotor blades on all 11 VH-3Ds. Sikorsky and their partner Carson Helicopters have been working on upgrades to the VH-3D’s commercial S-61 counterpart, using a 5-blade upgrade of new composite main rotor blades, while strengthening the helicopter’s tail pylon and transmission mounts. This costs just $1.25 million per aircraft, while boosting lift capacity by 2,000 pounds (910 kg), increasing speed by 15 knots at regular power, stretching range by 15%, and doubling service life to 20,000 hours. The Structural Enhancement Program consists of efforts to redesign the VH-3D’s cabin redesign to reduce total gross weight, replace critical aircraft structure on the VH-60N, upgrade the safety of the fuel system on the VH-3D, and perform Service Life Extensions on the VH-3D and VH-60N. The VH-3D and VH-60N Cockpit Upgrades consists of an upgrade to LCD panels, replacing mechanical dials and gauges. The Communication Suite Upgrade consists of Demand Assigned Multiple Access Satellite Communication radio upgrade, Digital Frequency Modulation radio upgrade, High Frequency radio upgrade, the Presidential redundant secure communications upgrade, Data Transfer capability upgrade, and Crypto Modernization Upgrade. The Obsolescence Management Program will manage impending Executive Helicopter obsolescence issues. A variety of factors will be addressed including communication, navigation, operational weight, safety, and engine upgrades to remain mission relevant. An H-3 and H-60 will be converted to TH-3D and TH-60N training helicopters, in order to reduce wear on the operational fleet. The addition of VH-22 Osprey tilt-rotors to the squadron as of May 2013 will also help in this regard, though they’re never used to carry the President. A Sept 15/14 contract aims to refit the VH-3s with new cabin interiors and air conditioning. Note that other contracts exist for something called “Special Progressive Aircraft Rework.” These are not upgrades, just an enhanced version of the helicopters’ Standard Depot Level Maintenance that occurs after a set number of flight hours or months, whichever comes first. It includes partial disassembly of the airframe, replacement of components, refurbishment of interior furnishings, and repainting the aircraft. VH-71/VXX Marine One: Contracts & Events US Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) in Patuxent River, MD manages these contracts; exceptions are noted in the text below. Note that this article covers the Presidential fleet only. Ancillary planes like the Presidential squadron’s supporting VH-22 Ospreys will have milestones mentioned, but won’t receive full coverage. FY 2016-2021 Preliminary Design Review for VH-92A S-92 VIP February 8/21: VH-92A Sikorsky won a $478.6 million contract modification, which exercises options for the procurement of five Lot Three low rate initial production Presidential Helicopters Replacement Program (VH-92A) aircraft, and associated interim contractor support, two cabin interior reconfiguration kits, support equipment, initial spares, and system parts replenishment. The new Marine One, also referred to as VH-92A, is the next-generation presidential transport helicopter being developed for the US Marine Corps (USMC). It will replace the ageing VH-3D presidential helicopter in service with the USMC. Work will take place in Connecticut, Pennsylvania, New York, Maryland, Arizona and Virginia. Estimated completion will be in December 2023. May 15/20: Windows 10 and Server 16 Sikorsky Aircraft won an $9 million contract modification, which provides support for the integration and transition of Windows 10 and Server 16 into various VH-92A training devices. The Sikorsky/Lockheed Martin VH-92 will replace the US Marine Corps VH-3D and VH-60N helicopters that transport the US president, while operating under the name of Marine One. The VH-92 presidential helicopter has an executive interior and military mission support avionics, including triple electrical power and redundant cockpit flight controls. The Navy awarded a $542 million order to Sikorsky last June for six Lot I VH-92A presidential helicopters. Sikorsky will begin deliveries of the first six VH-92A helicopters in 2021. Work will take place Quantico, Virginia and its expected to be finished by October 2022. February 21/20: Six Low Rate Initial Production Sikorsky won a $470.8 million modification, which exercises options to procure six low rate initial production lot II VH-92A aircraft, interim contractor support and six cabin interior reconfiguration kits in support of the Presidential Helicopter Replacement Program. The VH-92 will replace the US Marine Corps VH-3D and VH-60N helicopters that transport the president, while operating under the name of Marine One. The VH-92 will replace the U.S. Marine Corps VH-3D and VH-60N helicopters that transport the president, while operating under the name of Marine One. The Navy awarded a $542 million order to Sikorsky last June for six Lot I VH-92A presidential helicopters. Sikorsky will begin deliveries of the first six VH-92A helicopters in 2021. January 29/20: HMX-1 And HX-21 National Technologies Associates won a $104.9 million deal in support of the Presidential Helicopters Program Office, Helicopter Marine Squadron One (HMX-1), and Air Test and Evaluation Squadron Twenty-One (HX-21). The contract is specifically for contractor logistics; research, development, test and evaluation; limited engineering and aircraft maintenance support on designated aircraft. The Presidential Helicopters Program Office has the responsibility of providing current and future (VXX) safe and timely helicopter transportation for the President and Vice President of the United States, heads of state and other official parties. Work will take place in Maryland and Virginia and is expected to be complete in February 2025. June 12/19: Six VH-92As Sikorsky won a $542 million firm-fixed price modification to produce six VH-92A Presidential Helicopters. Under the terms of the contract, known as Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) Lot 1, Sikorsky will begin deliveries of six VH-92A helicopters in 2021. The remaining production aircraft will be delivered in 2022 and 2023. The contract also provides spares and training support. The VH-92A is the military variant of the Sikorsky S-92. It is currently under development and will replace the Marine One US Presidential Transport Fleet. The aircraft has undergone government testing and operational assessments, including over 520 flight test hours establishing the aircraft’s technical maturity and readiness of its mission systems. Lockheed Martin delivered and installed the first VH-92A training device at the Presidential Helicopter Squadron HMX-1 in Quantico, Virginia, earlier this year. Sikorsky will perform work within the US and is expected to be finished in April 2022. April 15/19: Upgrade and Update Sikorsky won a $9.5 million contract modification to upgrade the Mission Communications System of the VH-92A presidential helicopter. The modification is for the integration of the Mission Communications System Version 3.0 hardware changes. Sikorsky will perform work in Patuxent River, Maryland and is expecting completion in April 2020. The VH-92 is currently under development and is supposed to replace the Marine Corps’ Marine One US Presidential transport fleet. According to a new report from the Government Accountability Office, the VH-92A program will cost less than initially anticipated. The cost has declined from $5.18 billion to $4.95 billion since 2014. The Navy previously attempted to replace this aging fleet starting in 2002, selecting a variant of the AgustaWestland AW101 called the VH-71. However, the Navy terminated the contract in 2009 due to schedule delays, performance issues, and a doubling of cost estimates, from $6.5 billion to $13 billion. The VH-92A program has also seen some delays. Specifically, the Milestone C review to authorize low-rate initial production has been pushed back five months, from January to June 2019, and the initial operational test and evaluation start has been pushed back from October 2019 to March 2020. An initial operational capability decision is now anticipated in October 2020, three months later than originally expected. May 7/18: ‘Marine One’ cheaper as expected Sikorsky has announced that its fleet of VH-92A helicopters, that are replacing the President’s Marine One, are on schedule and slightly below previous cost estimates by 2.4%, or about $123 million. Cost reductions came from a small number of design changes, stable requirements and efficiencies from cost saving initiatives. The Marine Corps currently operates 11 VH-3D Sea Kings, and 8 smaller VH-60N Black Hawk helicopters. The VH-3Ds were originally placed in service in 1974 and 1975, and the VH-60s entered service in the 1980s. They’re safe and reliable due to low and careful use, but they no longer had the growth capability to incorporate the equipment in a post 9/11 environment. The US Navy plans to acquire a fleet of 23 VH-92A helicopters to replace the Marine Corps’ existing fleet of VH-3D and VH-60N helicopters at a total cost of $5.1 billion, and with an initial delivery scheduled by FY 2020 through FY 2023. The new “Marine One” helicopters are expected to be in service for up to 4 decades. August 07/17: Lockheed Martin has announced that the VH-92A presidential helicopter has made its maiden flight. Two flights were made by Engineering Development Model 1 (EDM-1) on July 29 at Sikorsky Aircraft in Stratford, Connecticut with both sorties lasting for one hour. During the test, the team made hovering control checks, a low speed flight, and a pass of the airfield. An additional EDM-2 is on track for its first flight later this year. Expected to enter service in 2020, both helicopters will transport the president and vice president of the United States and other officials. July 27/16: The US Navy has cleared Lockheed Martin’s VH-92A program Critical Design Review (CDR). Tasked with transporting the president and vice president of the United States and other officials, the VH-92 will see initial fielding in 2020, and production continuing until 2023. First flight is expected next year. June 21/16: Sikorsky has announced that its VH-92A Marine One helicopter VH-92A program is the subsystem critical design review of the helicopter at the end of next month, and that is expected to take place earlier than scheduled. November 6/15: Sikorsky has completed a Preliminary Design Review (PDR) for its new Presidential transport helicopter, the VH-92A. The company was awarded a $1.2 billion engineering & manufacturing development contract in May 2014 for development of the helicopter, with options covering 21 operational and 2 test helicopters. The Presidential Helicopter Recapitalization Program (or VXX) saw Sikorsky become the only bidder after other competitors dropped out. The VH-92A is scheduled for fielding in 2020, with the PDR allowing Sikorsky to move into a Critical Design Review (CDR) stage. FY 2014 VXX development contract; final VH-71 settlement. Sept 16/14: VH-3s. Sikorsky in Stratford, CT receives a $9.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price delivery modification for one-time efforts redesigning the VH-3D’s cabin interior and environmental control system, including VIP seats, a cabin interior kit, and special tooling. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 US Navy aircraft budgets. Work will be performed in Stratford, CT, and is expected to be completed in August 2016. US Navy NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-14-G-0004, DO 4010). May 7/14: VXX Contract. Sikorsky in Stratford, CT receives a $1.245 billion fixed-price-incentive-firm target contract for the Presidential Helicopter Replacement program’s Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase. The EMD Phase includes 6 VH-92 test aircraft and associated support equipment, with “mature government-defined mission systems” integrated, flight training and maintenance training devices/ simulators, and various forms of support. $42 million is being committed immediately, using FY 2014 RDT&E funding. Work will be performed in Stratford, CT (62.22%); Owego, NY (19.38%); Coatesville, PA (14.25%); Orlando, FL (1.44%); Phoenix, AZ (.86%); Cedar Rapids, IA (.85%); Vergennes, VT (.53%); and Torrance, CA (.47%), and is expected to be complete in October 2020. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD received 1 offer (N00019-14-C-0050). VXX EMD contract Jan 27/14: VH-71 Termination. Inside Defense reports that Lockheed Martin and the US government finalized the end of the VH-71 helicopter program on Dec 19/13 with a final $91.1 million payout: $38.5 million for completed work and $51.6 million in termination fees. That brings the termination total to about $203 million (q.v. June 2/11). The contract was terminated on June 2/09, and the total amount paid to Lockheed over the entire contract ends up costing the taxpayer about $2.2 billion. The biggest reason for all that waste is a President’s own office that couldn’t stop adding requirements (q.v. Dec 13/07, Jan 19/08), but enforcing Navy certification requirements on a helicopter designed to commercial aviation standards wasn’t helpful, either (q.v. March 14/08). Sources: Inside Defense, “DOD, Lockheed Settle On Final $2.3 Billion Tab For Terminated VH-71 Program”. FY 2013 VXX RFP out; 1st V-22 joins HMX-1; 2014 budget highlights VH-3/VH-60 upgrade costs. HMX-1’s V-22 (click to view full) Sept 6/13: GAO Report. The GAO releases a short report that looks at the Navy’s rationale for waiving competitive prototyping requirements for either the base VXX helicopter, or its equipment suite. That’s normally required by The Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009, but prototyping can be waived with a justification to the US Comptroller General. As VXX hit Milestone B, the US Navy had calculated that competitive prototyping would delay fielding by 16 months, and raise development costs by somewhere between FY11$ 782 million – 3.38 billion. At best, spending in the higher end of this range would save FY11$ 542 million in lifetime costs, which is a poor deal. The helicopter justification is straightforward this time, because the program is insisting on an off-the-shelf helicopter, without huge modifications to change performance. For the mission sub-systems, most of the components are known, and prototyping wouldn’t be a big help to integration. GAO did note that this aspect of the program is likely to be challenging, and may be more challenging than the Navy thinks, but the question is whether competitive prototyping would help. GAO thought the Navy’s documentation and analytical rigor around that question was good, and accepted the Navy’s rationale. That’s good news, if the Navy wants to go ahead with just the VH-92. Sources: US GAO Report #GAO-13-826R. Aug 2/13: VXX. Reuters quotes “Defense officials” who say that the pullout of AgustaWestland and Boeing won’t change their plans to proceed, “and said there were procedures in place to ensure competitive pricing even in cases involving a single bidder.” These procedures include re-use of existing equipment in the new airframe, and could involve the CRH search and rescue helicopter approach of requesting more price data from Sikorsky. Sources: Reuters, “UPDATE 1-U.S. Navy defends presidential copter bid format as firms bail out”. S-92 (click to view full) July 29/13: VH-92 left. Boeing and AgustaWestland both confirm to Aviation Week that they don’t intend to bid on the VXX RFP. That leaves only Sikorsky & Lockheed Martin’s VH-92. The S-92 is widely used as a head-of-state VIP helicopter, but this probably isn’t the outcome the Navy was looking for. AgustaWestland: “After a comprehensive analysis of the final RFP…. There are fundamental proposal evaluation issues that we believe inhibit our ability to submit a competitive offering, and that provide a significant advantage to our likely competitor…. we believe we have the best, most suitable aircraft for the President.” Eurocopter never stepped in. Then there’s Boeing, whose response also removes Bell Helicopter: “The Boeing Company will not submit a bid for the U.S. Navy’s VXX Presidential Helicopter program. While both the Boeing H-47 Chinook and the Bell Boeing V-22 are often used to transport military and government leaders in theaters of operation, we do not believe these aircraft would be competitive for this program as it is currently structured.” The downwash issues on the White House lawn made those machines rather improbable from the get-go, and you can’t transport a V-22 in a C-17, unless you remove the wings. Leaving the question: now what? Sources: Aviation Week, “VXX Becomes One-Horse Race”. May 4/13: VH-22. The 1st of 12 MV-22B Ospreys is delivered to the HMX-1 Presidential Squadron. These Ospreys will never carry the President, just cargo, support staff, and media members. V-22 flight operations at HMX-1 technically began on April 26/13, but flights with support staff and news media representatives won’t begin until later in 2013. Sources: USMC | US NAVAIR. V-22 joins HMX-1 May 3/13: VXX RFP. The US Navy issues their VXX RFP. Proposals for the 23 helicopters are due in 90 days with a goal to award a fixed-price incentive engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) contract, with production options, by mid-calendar year 2014. Proposals will be evaluated on “best value,” which means a more expensive proposal can win, and technical factors are “slightly more important” than cost. Vendors can gain an extra 10% for assessed strengths in some or all of Fully-outfitted Performance with Overall Weight Growth Margin; Transportability – C-17 Load/Unload Timeline; Cabin Reconfiguration Timeline; and Reliability. Another 5% premium can be gained by offering risk reduction benefits, for a maximum of 15%. The government will define the mission systems, which is what crashed the program last time, and choose the interior aesthetics from among options offered by the contractor. One hopes that past lessons have been learned. They do have a cost target, which may seem low: “The affordability target for unit recurring flyaway VXX Integrated Air Vehicle and support equipment, provided for guidance, is $41M. Unit recurring flyaway is defined as that which is associated with the “end item” (excluding GFE hardware) and is comprised of the Prime Mission Equipment including airframe, propulsion, avionics, and it is also comprised of the Software, Integration, and Systems Engineering / Program Management (SEPM) to repeat build of the end item…. The affordability target for Production Support, provided for guidance, is $12M per option year.” The thing to remember is that most of the helicopter’s total cost will be tied up in the Government Furnished equipment. The difficult interactions happen when the amount of equipment starts forcing overall design changes to the helicopters that can’t be met by off-the-shelf technologies. Having said that, some requirements like the ability to safely land in very small landing zones, with minimal damage to the surroundings, are non-negotiable. Sources: FBO.gov | US NAVAIR. VXX RFP May 4/13: H-92. Sikorsky reiterates that they’ll be submitting a variant of their S-92 for VXX, in partnership with Lockheed Martin. They’ll compete against Northrop Grumman and AgustaWestland (AW101), and Boeing (TBD). Sources: Sikorsky, May 4/13 release. April 10/13: FY 2014 Budget. The President releases a proposed budget at last, the latest in modern memory. The Senate and House were already working on budgets in his absence, but the Pentagon’s submission is actually important to proceedings going forward. See ongoing DID coverage. Planning changes from FY 2013 to FY 2014 are “directly related to the reprogramming of funds to support the unplanned requirements associated with keeping the existing fleet of Presidential VH-3’s and VH-60’s [sic] safely operating beyond their originally planned service life until replaced by VXX. Requirements include obsolescence issues and safety improvements such as weight reduction efforts, and structural improvements.” Overall, life extension and modernization work on the current fleet of 11 VH-3Ds and 8 VH-60Ns amount to about $708.7 million from FY 2012-2018. March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish. The VXX program gets a short 1-page entry, which notes an April 2012 VXX analysis of alternatives (AOA) study: “The program plans to leverage existing avionic and mission systems and it uses less stringent requirements than those developed for VH-71. In addition, the acquisition approach includes integrating a government developed communication package and mission systems…. A May 2012 Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) memo certifying the AOA study states that the analysis demonstrates that the proposed approach to avoid [requiring flight recertification of the final helicopter] is feasible for a number of options and, if adopted, offers potential for reduced cost and schedule.” The tradeoff involves reduced requirements from the VH-71 program, and GAO says that the final Capabilities Development Document didn’t make any changes that would destroy the assumptions of the AOA study. Nov 29/12: Program Support. Engility Corp. in Mount Laurel, NJ received a $9.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide technical and engineering support services. They’ll help with requirement specification, design, implementation, test, management, and maintenance of laboratory/information system and project/program related software in support of the MH-53 program for minehunting helicopters, the existing VH-3/60 Executive Transportation Program, the VXX program, and general Avionics System Integration. Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (95%), and Lexington Park, MD (5%), and is expected to be completed in November 2013. $2.4 million is committed immediately, and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 by the US Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Patuxent River, MD (N00421-13-C-0006). Nov 29/12: VXX. US FBO: “The VXX Program will conduct a Pre-solicitation Conference on 10 December 2012 at the Southern Maryland Higher Education Center located at 44219 Airport Road, California, MD 20619, from 1:00p.m. to 5:00p.m. EST. The purpose of this event is to provide a brief status update of the VXX Program, inform industry of program requirements, receive industry’s feedback on the draft RFP, and provide a Question & Answer/networking opportunity.” Nov 23/12: VXX. FBO.gov releases NAVAIR’s draft for the VXX competition, #N00019-12-R-0063. Once the RFP is refined and released, it will be about designing, building, testing, qualifying, and delivering 25 helicopters. The 2 VXX Engineering Development Model (EDM) machines would be delivered within 30-36 months, and 4 System Demonstration Test Article (SDTA) helicopters would be delivered within 42-52 months. They would be followed by 11 Low Rate Initial Production lots, and 8 “Full-Rate Production” lots. Each lot is actually 1 helicopter. On the one hand, NAVAIR is trying to keep development costs down: “Offerors will be highly encouraged to propose an existing, in-production helicopter platform from which the VXX will be derived. It is the Government’s desire to hold development to an absolute minimum on the VXX Program and focus the program effort on integration of mature subsystems on a mature platform. While minor changes to the platform to accommodate integration of subsystems are inevitable, change to major components such as drive train, rotors, engines and basic structure is highly discouraged. In keeping with this approach, the Offerors will be encouraged to not propose any design elements that contain immature technology or that might be deemed Critical Technology Elements (CTEs).” Announced competitors Finmeccanica/Northrop Grumman (AW101) and Sikorsky/Lockheed (S-92) both fit the basic requirements. On the other hand, the VH-71/AW101 fiasco involved an in-production, C-17 transportable platform, led by a US contractor. It needed so many changes to its engine, rotors, etc. because of the program’s equipment and range requirements, which couldn’t be met by any existing helicopter. These aspects of VXX have yet to become public. A pre-solicitation conference will be held in Maryland on December 10. Sources: US FBO.gov, “Presidential Helicopter Replacement Program (VXX) Contract” | Aviation Today, “NAVAIR Sets Ball Rolling (Again) for Presidential Helicopter (VXX) Replacement” | Reuters, “Navy moves ahead to replace presidential helicopters”. FY 2011 – 2012 VXX Analysis of Alternatives; VH-71s sold to Canada as spares. CH-149 Cormorant SAR (click to view full) August 2012: AoA. Navy Public Affairs Officer Capt. Cate Mueller tells DID that the revised Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) was approved back in May. The focus for the program is set on “affordability, cost control and risk reduction” which reflects adjustments asked by the Pentagon after the original AoA was deemed to set an unaffordable path. The next step in the acquisition process is work on a Capabilities Development Document (CDD), the key deliverable of the Technology Development (TD) phase. This is expected to be submitted for approval to the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) in 2013. Once that is approved, an Independent Cost Estimate (ICE) has to be made before moving to Pre-Engineering & Manufacturing Development and issuing an RFP. All told, this puts the program at least “8 years away from when a new helicopter could replace the current fleet” according to Mueller. The Congressional Budget Office, in its July 2012 assessment of the FY 2013-2017 FYDP, assumes a replacement for Marine One will happen “in the second half of this decade.” Feb 27/12: GAO Report. the Government Accountability Office publishes its second report on DOD’s handling of the VH-71 cancellation aftermath and VXX follow-on. (The first report was released in March 2011.) The GAO conducted a performance audit from March 2011 to February 2012 that reviewed work on the Navy’s AOA and a number of high-level Pentagon and Navy briefings. The AOA submitted by the Navy in March 2011 was not approved by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) because of a lack of a cost-effective solution. At least that was OSD’s perception as it is relayed in the GAO report. The Navy apparently believed it had been faithful to DOD guidance in its analysis. OSD then provided additional guidance in December 2011. There won’t be a Milestone A, nor an official program, until that is resolved. The revised AOA is expected to be presented to OSD in March 2012. Feb 13/12: 2013 Budget. The US Navy is asking for $61M in FY2013 for V-XX program definition. Sept 12/11: Off to Canada. HW Farren Company announces that it has finished transporting the USA’s 9 VH-71 helicopters to Canada’s Department of National Defence, for use as spare parts to Canada’s CH-149 Cormorant fleet. The CH-149s have had readiness issues, and have been consuming spares at a rapid clip. Hence the mention that the 9 helicopters were “in care of” maintenance contract holder IMP Aerospace in Enfield, NS. The first 4 VH-71s were broken down for transport, but the last 5 could not be disassembled, and HW Farren had to designed and fabricate special wheel cradles for them. They were loaded on a barge, transported to Baltimore, off-loaded, placed on an Atlantic Container Line Roll-On Roll-Off Vessel for transport to Halifax, then re-loaded onto barges, for transport to Canadian Forces Depot Bedford. CFAD Bedford is technically part of CFB Halifax, but the “Bedford Magazine” is its own major property occupying the entire northern shore of Bedford Basin. It houses all of the weaponry and ammunition for MARLANT vessels, and has a loading jetty and several nearby anchorages. HW Farren | CASR. VH-71s to Canada as spares June 2/11: Termination fees. Lockheed Martin MS2 in Owego, NY receives a $53.4 million modification to the previously awarded cost-plus-award-fee VH-71 system development and demonstration contract, which was terminated for the convenience of the government. This modification provides funding for post-termination related expenses, including, but not limited to: physical inventory of contractor acquired property; proposal preparation; security; disposition of contract inventory; subcontractor settlement costs; and termination management activities. When combined with the June 2010 contract, it raises termination expenses to $112 million. Work will be performed in Owego, NY (36%), and at various subcontractor facilities located within the United States and in the United Kingdom and Italy (64%), and is expected to be complete no later than September 2012 (N00019-05-C-0030). FY 2010 Teaming for VXX VH-71/ EH101 concept (click to view full) June 21/10: Termination fees. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Owego, NY receives a $58.6 million modification for termination-related expenses. The cost-plus-award-fee VH-71 System Development and Demonstration contract (N00019-05-C-0030) was terminated for the convenience of the government, but there are still some associated costs that the government must pay. This modification provides funding for post termination related expenses, including, but not limited to, the physical inventory of contractor acquired property; proposal preparation; security; disposition of contract inventory; subcontractor settlement costs; termination management activities; and applicable fees. Work will be performed in Owego, NY (36%) and at various subcontractor facilities located within the USA, and in the United Kingdom and Italy (64%), and is expected to be complete by September 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10 (N00019-05-C-0030). June 7/10: AW101. The EH101 is back, as Boeing teams with AgustaWestland. Finmeccanica’s subsidiary has produced several Boeing helicopters under license in England and Italy (WAH-64 Apache, CH-47 Chinooks), and now Boeing will return the compliment with the AW101. The license will give Boeing full intellectual property, data and production rights, making its version of a Presidential AW101 bid a Boeing aircraft, built by Boeing personnel, at one of its U.S. facilities. Boeing says that it will respond to the current VXX RFI by the June 18/10 deadline. This decision is likely to create several ripples. Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute points out that: “Boeing’s bid could create some embarrassing moments for both itself and Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin spent years arguing that the AgustaWestland airframe was superior to the Sikorsky product it now supports… By the same token, Boeing is engaged in a bitter dispute with Airbus concerning European aircraft subsidies, and [the AW101 has received them]… As Christopher Drew noted in today’s New York Times, the government will be selecting between the same two rotorcraft in the new competition that were offered the first time around, albeit with different teams behind them. Whether the government ultimately saves any money… will depend on how it re-writes its performance specifications… the more likely outcome is that… the greater capacity of the EH101 will once again prevail.” See: Boeing | Finmeccanica [PDF] | AgustaWestland | DoD Buzz | Lexington Institute. April 20/10: V-22? Boeing and Bell Helicopter are reportedly considering a VV-22 tilt-rotor bid for the VXX competition. The V-22 offers significant speed and range advantages, but there’s a reason the V-22 didn’t make the finals the first time. Massive downdrafts too strong for the White House lawns didn’t fit the RFP, and a low-ceilinged cabin design didn’t fit the idea of a President walking in without stooping. Not to mention continued jitters concerning its safety, though that can cut both ways as a political statement. DoD Buzz. April 19/10: H-92. Sikorsky and Lockheed Martin team for VXX. This day, the 2 companies also jointly submit a response to the U.S. Navy’s VXX request for information, detailing how they would design and manufacture the next Marine One. The agreement has Sikorsky as the prime contractor, offering its H-92 Superhawk medium-lift helicopter, with Lockheed Martin as the major integrator of all required electronic subsystems. In addition to the VXX teaming agreement, the firms also signed a Memorandum of Understanding to explore business opportunities involving “other Sikorsky programs” beyond VXX, or their existing 38-year partnership surrounding the US Navy’s SH-60/MH-60 Seahawk naval helicopters. Sikorsky | Lockheed Martin | Aviation Week Ares. Feb 16/10: VXX. The USA releases a 27-page RFI for new “VXX” Presidential Vertical Lift Platform(s). Interested parties are asked to provide a 5-page response by March 3/10. The responses will be used to support a new analysis of alternatives, the first step toward a formal Request for Proposal. One change is that VXX would feature at least 2 versions of the new helicopter: an executive model for VIP transport and a passenger-cargo variant for support. Total buy for both models will track closely with VH-71 plans, at 23-28 aircraft. FedBizOpps #VXX-RFI | Defense News. “VXX” RFI Oct 14/09: Politics. US Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates sends a letter to Congress [PDF], in advance of House/Senate efforts to reconcile their defense bills into a single agreed budget. It includes the following excerpt: “The conference bill should not provide funding for weapons that are not working or are no longer needed. To that end, the Department strongly objects to the House’s addition of $400 million to make operational five partially-completed VH-71 helicopters and appreciates that the Senate did not add funds [for the VH-71] to the President’s [budget] request. These helicopters currently have no mission equipment and would require in excess of $2 billion to complete and operate as Presidential helicopter. Even with these funds, they would not meet full operational requirements for the mission. The Department [of Defense] and the White House are conducting a requirements analysis, and the outcome of this effort should not be pre-empted. If the final bill were to include funds that continue the existing VH-71 program, or would pre-judge the plans to re-compete the Presidential helicopter program, I would recommend that the President veto the bill.” FY 2009 VH-71 cancellation VH-71 MSB simulator (click to view larger) June 2/09: It’s official: Arrivederci, VH-71. A Pentagon press release states that: “The Navy today announced that it will terminate the VH-71 System Development and Demonstration (SDD) program contract. The announcement follows a Department of Defense (DoD) decision to cancel the existing presidential helicopter replacement program… Navy contract N00019-05-C-0030 and associated work with Lockheed Martin Systems Integration – Owego (LMSI-O), Owego, N.Y., awarded Jan. 28, 2005, for the SDD of the VH-71 program, has been terminated for the convenience of the government. The under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics issued a VH-71 program acquisition decision memorandum on May 15, 2009, which directed the program be cancelled, to include both Increment 1 and Increment 2.” VH-71 terminated June 1/09: Arabian Aerospace quotes Sikorsky VP of Business Development Frank DiPasquale, who says that: “We have worked very hard to establish the S-92 in a Head of State role in the Middle East and that has been a great success. The aircraft is performing that mission in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and in Saudi Arabia where the royal family is now flying in the S-92.” May 21/09: What Next? One of the big problems with the new helicopters was the need to pack all of that communications gear, into a helicopter that can fly nearly 300km without refueling to an emergency airbase at Andrews AFB or Camp David, while remaining small enough to avoid damaging the White House lawn. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told the defense subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee that the Pentagon is now considering a request for 2 different helicopter types: one for routine shuttle trips, and a more capable escape aircraft designed for use in emergencies. This would allow a much lower-budget fleet of standard helicopters for everyday use, and a much smaller fleet built on a larger design that didn’t have to care about the White House lawn. May 15/09: Stop work. The VH-71 program receives a stop work order from the Pentagon. Another 225 layoffs are expected at Lockheed Martin’s Owego, NY facility before the end of the month. The 5 production and 4 test aircraft would still be the property of the US Navy, but many have not had their advanced systems integrated yet. It will be up to the US Navy to decide what to do with the helicopters. The US Navy said that the $85 million 2010 budget request includes money to cover termination costs, government efforts to develop options for a replacement program, and service life extensions for the current presidential helicopter fleet. Some estimates place termination costs as high as $500 million, but that figure remains to be negotiated between Lockheed Martin and the federal government. Elmira Star Gazette | Ithaca Journal | NY Times op-ed | Wall Street Journal on local impacts | WICZ Fox 40 news | bNet | The Hill magazine | Wall Street Journal on cancellation. April 28/09: Testing. The 9th and final (4 test + 5 pilot production) VH-71 to be built under “Increment 1” of the US Presidential Helicopter Replacement Program leaves AgustaWestland’s Yeovil, UK facility. It will be sent to the United States for completion by prime contractor Lockheed Martin. AgustaWestland release. April 28/09: Politics. In a Reuters interview, AgustaWestland CEO Giuseppe Orsi takes issue with the Pentagon’s characterization of the VH-71 Increment 1 helicopters’ expected lifespan. Orsi says that even with the additional armor and modifications, the new VH-71 helicopters are certifiable for a minimum 10,000 flight hours of operation, or about 30 years of service in the Presidential fleet. The firm has agreed to tests with the US Navy to verify that performance. Those tests may be important, because Orsi also backed a compromise plan being floated in Congress. It would revert to the original budget of $6.8 billion, in exchange for sticking to the VH-71 Increment 1 specifications. Note the March 17/08 entry, below, which explains that a number of original requirements were deferred from Increment 1 to improve affordability. Since the Increment 2 specifications are not realistic or cost-effective, the question going forward must be which specifications can be cut, even if the competition is re-started. The question is whether the Increment 1 helicopters can serve for the required length of time, and are close enough to the reduced requirements, to justify continuation of the program. The alternative involves termination costs that could run to $200 million, in exchange for a renewed competition and a helicopter that offers a more exact match for the new requirements. Reuters | New York Times. April 27/09: Layoffs. Lockheed Martin Corp. announces an initial round of 225 job cuts at its Owego, NY plant, with further layoffs expected. About 800 of the plant’s 4,000 workers are dedicated to the VH-71 program, and others have been working on an EH101 derivative for the USAF’s CSAR-X search and rescue competition. AP, via Forbes. April 6/09: Stop. In an unusual move, American Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates announces his FY 2010 budget recommendations to the President. He recommends full cancellation of the VH-71 program, on the grounds that the Increment 2 helicopters will cost more than an Air Force One 747, and “Increment One helicopters do not meet requirements and are estimated to have only a five- to 10-year useful life.” New options for the future Presidential helicopter are to be developed for a replacement program that’s expected to begin in FY 2011. March 5/09: Bloomberg reports that the latest estimate and 15-page report, prepared for congressional defense committees, revises the VH-71’s program cost from $11.2 billion to $13 billion – 113% above the original baseline of $6.1 billion. Based on 28 helicopters built, the allocated R&D and purchase cost would be $464.3 million per helicopter. The report adds that instead of having the first 5 helicopters ready no earlier than September 2010, there would be a delay of 18 months (April 2012), and that the upgraded version with more sophisticated communications and the most advanced defenses would slip from December 2017 – December 2019. The US Navy would not confirm these changes or comment, because Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has yet to provide a formal certification of cost and justification for the program to Congress, per the Nunn-McCurdy legislation’s review process. Bloomberg News | Congressional Quarterly | Washington Post | Ithaca Journal | Britain’s The Independent discusses the effect in Britain. Costs rise again Feb 27/09: Hacked. P2P Intelligence firm Tiversa claims that in Oct/Nov 2008, it traced a file that contains details regarding the VH-60N Presidential Helicopter’s CAAS avionics architecture, and some program financial data, on public-access peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing networks. On Feb 25/09, the file was found on the IP address of an Iranian computer. The CAAS avionics architecture is slated for use in the VH-71 as well. Read “P2P Network Leaks: The VH-60N Helicopter” for full treatment of this breach, its implications, and the underlying trend at work. Feb 23/09: Arrivederci? Disparaging comments at the White House fiscal summit by President Obama, and by his Republican Party opponent Sen. John McCain, cast doubt on the VH-71 program’s future. From The Australian’s report : “Yesterday Mr Obama, as if playing both speaker and leader in the Westminster style, first called on Senator McCain in this version of question time. “Thank you for doing this,” said Senator McCain, “your helicopter is now going to cost as much as Air Force One. I don’t think that there’s any more graphic demonstration of how good ideas have cost taxpayers an enormous amount of money”. “I’ve already talked to (Secretary of Defence Robert) Gates about a thorough review of the helicopter situation,” he said. “The helicopter I have now seems perfectly adequate to me,” he said, generating laughs before adding “of course, I’ve never had a helicopter before … maybe I’ve been deprived and I didn’t know it.” He said it was an example of the “procurement process gone amok. And we’re going to have to fix it”. Those comments by both men were widely reported, and triggered a drop in Finmeccanica’s share price. AgustaWestland USA chief executive Stephen C Moss stated his belief that the program will go forward, with changes, and pointed out that in 63 cases of Nunn-McCurdy cost overruns, only 2 programs have been canceled. Changes have been proposed to the VH-71, including reducing the number of helicopters, and removing some of the troublesome requirements. Other proposed changes include putting the program up for rebid, building new VH-3s with updated communications, or simply canceling the program without replacement. In the current economic environment, more extreme solutions become more likely. Given that the existing VH-3/ VH-60 fleet is not suffering from flying hour fatigue, these comments from Obama and McCain will make the required Nunn-McCurdy justifications to Congress very problematic. See also: Washington Post | CNN Money with Moss statement | MSNBC re: Connecticut delegation’s rebid push | The Hill | AP | Helciopter Association International | Flight International | WIRED Danger Room. Jan 29/09: Cost breach. The US Navy announces that the VH-71 program is more than 50% over budget, triggering “Nunn-McCurdy” legislative provisions and stopping work on development of the VH-71’s Increment 2 design. Under those provisions, the Defense Department either must end the program, or certify that it is essential for national security, that the new unit costs are reasonable, that management structure can control future growth, and that no substitutes exist that provide equal or greater military capability at less cost. Reuters, via Forbes. Nov 26/08: SDD. Another $500 million in System Development and Demonstration (SDD) funds to Lockheed Martin Systems Integration in Owego, NY. Work on this modification to the existing cost-plus-award-fee contract (N00019-05-C-0030) will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (28%); Owego, NY (26%); Yeovil, UK (20%); Cascina Costa, Italy (15%); Rolling Meadows, IL (3%); Lynn, MA (3%); Clifton, NJ (2%); Denton, TX (1%); Grand Rapids, MI (1%); and Rancho Santa Margarita, CA (1%), and is expected to be complete in December 2014. Oct 9/08: SDD. Lockheed Martin Systems Integration in Owego, NY receives a $173 million modification, raising the January 2005 cost plus award fee contract (N00019-05-C-0030) for the System Development and Demonstration (SDD) of the VH-71 Presidential Helicopter. Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (28%); Owego, NY (26%); Yeovil, United Kingdom (20%); Cascina Costa, Italy (15%); Rolling Meadows, IL (3%); Lynn, MA (3%); Clifton, NJ (2%); Denton, TX (1%); Grand Rapids, MI (1%); and Rancho Santa Margarita, CA (1%), and is expected to be complete in September 2011. FY 2008 Price inflation; pilot helo. VH-71 Demonstrator (click to view full) Sept 22/08: Testing. The first operational pilot production helicopter (PP-1) completes its maiden flight at AgustaWestland’s facility in Yeovil, England. Lockheed Martin release. March 14/08: New deal. The Pentagon reaches an agreement with the White House re: the VH-71 program, and confirms that the cost of the 28 helicopter program has jumped to $11.2 billion – from $6.1 billion when the contract was signed in 2005. Increment 1 rose from $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion, and Increment 2 jumped from $4.5 billion to $7.5 billion. The price of the Increment 2 helicopters would be over $325 million each – comparable to the current Air Force One 747 fleet, even when adjusted for inflation since 1990. The original VH-71 program planned to rely on an existing commercial helicopter and make modest modifications, but Pentagon acquisition chief John Young has now acknowledged that no existing medium-lift helicopter can meet all of the requirements crammed into VH-71 Increment 2: “The Navy and industry team did not clearly realize the full implications of the White House requirements… These issues were further complicated by the enforcement of Navy certification requirements on a helicopter designed to commercial aviation standards.” That’s a rather startling admission. Now, the Navy and industry teams are will complete a “substantial” redesign of the EH-101 base helicopter to meet Increment 2 requirements. The Day Paper, CT | Aviation Week | Defense News New deal, costs rise Feb 27/08: Testing. Test Vehicle 3 makes its initial flight in Yeovil, England marking the 4th program helicopter to enter flight test. TV-3 will be the first vehicle tested that is outfitted with mission systems, which means it will be able to validate in-flight performance data for the helicopter’s equipment, instead of relying on lab tests. TV-3 is due to arrive at the Presidential Helicopter Support Facility here on March 17/08 and will then travel to Lockheed Martin Systems Integration in Owego, NY for final assembly and mission systems integration. TV-3 will join TV-1, TV-2 and TV-5, which have accumulated more than 650 total hours of flight test so far. One additional test vehicle is scheduled for flight testing and missionization after TV-3, before the initial lot of production aircraft are delivered to Patuxent River. NAVAIR release | Flight International. Jan 19/08: VH-71 stays. Defense Technology International reports that After considering alternatives to the Lockheed Martin VH-71 presidential helicopter – including upgrading the Sikorsky H-3s – the Navy has reportedly decided to stick with the US101 aircraft and fund an additional $1 billion in modifications in “Increment 2,” on top of the program’s initial $6.1 billion price tag, on the grounds that other alternatives wouldn’t be any better. DTI reports that White House and Navy requirements are essentially turning the helicopter into another “Air Force One” (Presidential 747), which involves hundreds of specifications not included at the program’s outset. In addition to extra electronics, the changing specifications will include structural modifications to the US101 helicopter, in order to extend its range beyond what the current airframes can deliver. Adding hundreds of new performance requirements in mid-stride does make successful program delivery very difficult – and being on that ride has cost Lockheed Martin before, during evaluations of another modified US101 for the $10-15 billion CSAR-X combat search and rescue helicopter. Jan 10/08: Testing. The first 2 VH-71 Increment 1 helicopters (TV-2 and TV-5) have entered the flight test phase with the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD. They are the first of 4 Increment 1 test aircraft; TV-3 and TV-4, will undergo additional assembly and missionization at Lockheed Martin Systems Integration in Owego, NY, before being transferred to NAS Patuxent River in 2008 for testing. NAVAIR release. Jan 3/08: Cancellation? Inside Defense reports that the VH-71 program may face significant cuts: “The fate of the VH-71 presidential helicopter program is hanging in the balance as senior defense officials privately weigh the elimination of the bulk of the program, according to sources tracking the issue inside and outside the Pentagon…” Dec 13/07: Cancellation? Gannett’s Marine Corps Times reports that cost increases and schedule problems, “driven in part by nearly 2,000 requirement changes,” (vid. April 2007 entry) forced a meeting with the White House Military Office to discuss the program’s fate. Rumors of cancellation began shortly after that, though the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Aviation Programs later said that there “has been no decision to terminate the program… We’re continuing to look at all the options. We’ve looked at almost every conceivable option…” Nov 14/07: Industrial. Lockheed Martin announces that its VH-71 Systems Integration Lab (SIL) is now operational at the Navy’s Presidential Helicopter Support Facility at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD, in preparation for the arrival of the first aircraft built for the VH-71 program. The new SIL at Patuxent River will allow engineers to test VH-71 avionics and mission systems prior to installation aboard the aircraft – for instance, ensuring that the President can communicate with several government agencies simultaneously. It consists of test benches to evaluate individual subsystems currently in development. The SIL at Lockheed Martin Systems Integration in Owego, NY, which became operational in August 2007, includes a master systems bench full-scale functional mockup of the VH-71 cockpit and cabin that allows the Navy-Lockheed team to run mission scenarios of the final integrated systems. Test Vehicle 2 (TV-2) is scheduled to arrive at Patuxent River in mid-November 2007 to commence a comprehensive testing program. Another 3 test vehicles are scheduled for delivery to the U.S. this winter, followed by 5 production aircraft during 2008. Capt. Don Gaddis, the U.S. Navy’s Presidential Helicopters program manager, said that: “A Systems Integration Lab at the Presidential Helicopter Support Facility will enable the Marine Corps to test the integrated systems more quickly during the flight test phase… Having this on-site test capability is critical to meeting our requirements.” FY 2006 – 2007 Maiden test flight, full flight. VH-71 1st flight (click to view full) July 3/07: Testing. The 1st VH-71 pilot production helicopter makes its maiden flight at AgustaWestland’s facility in Yeovil, UK. Before that TV2 model is delivered to the test facility in Patuxent River, MD in fall 2007 for structural testing, the aircraft will complete initial shake-down flying and embark on flight trials to test the integrated avionics systems and aircraft systems. Lockheed Martin release | GE release. April 2007: 2,000 changes? A systems requirements review reveals that nearly 2,000 design changes will be needed to meet Pentagon requirements for the VH-71 Increment 2 model – the first model intended to offer the President full command and control capability while in flight. The changes reportedly included a new tail, transmission and rotor blades. Source. Oct 24/06: Sub-contractors. GE Aviation officially opens its new Presidential Helicopter engine facility at the Lynn, Massachusetts, plant. The dedicated area in Lynn Product Development & Delivery will house the assembly and shipment operations of CT7-8E and CT7-8CE1 engines for the next-generation “Marine One” helicopter that will be used by the President of the United States. Lockheed Martin Systems Integration in Owego, NY awarded GE a $65-million contract to provide CT7-8E and CT7-8CE1 engines for use during the system development & demonstration (SDD) phase of the Presidential Helicopter Replacement program. GE Aviation release. June 12/06: Industrial Lockheed Martin formally opens the VH-71 Presidential Helicopter Integration Facility. The new 176,000-square-foot facility features aircraft integration hangars, program management and engineering office space, systems integration laboratories, aircraft parts storage, and maintenance and helicopter paint facilities. The complex also includes a new helicopter flight operations area. Lockheed Martin release. October 2005: First test flight of the VH-71. 1st test flight FY 2003-05 VXX/US101 dubbed VH-71A US101, 1st test flight (click to view full) July 7/05: VH-71. The next generation US presidential helicopter sheds its generic “VXX” placeholder and contractor’s “US101” moniker and received its mission design series designator of “VH-71A.” A popular name for the VH-71A is still under consideration. NAVAIR release. VH-71 designation May 19/05: Politics. The House Armed Service Panel approves the FY 2006 defense appropriations bill, including the Presidential helicopter. Money for the project now is included in the House version of the Defense Appropriations bill. Congressional maneuvering had left this result in some doubt, along with about 750 jobs at the Lockheed Martin Systems Integration plant in Owego, NY. Government Executive. April 2005: Politics. Sikorsky’s home-state Sen. Christopher Dodd [D-CT] inserts an amendment to a State Department authorization bill that would have prohibited any European companies in “countries that do business with terrorist-sponsoring states” from producing components of the US101 helicopter. The amendment was crafted to target AgustaWestland, but Lockheed Martin home-state Sen. Chuck Schumer’s [D-NY] objections to the amendment kill it. Towanda, PA Daily and Sunday Review Jan 28/05: Winner! U.S. Navy NAVAIR selects the US101 as the new “Marine One” helicopter for the President of the United States, issuing a $1.7 billion System Design & Development (SDD) contract. The US101 is a derivative of AgustaWestland’s 3-engine EH101. The reason for such a large contract is that the helicopter may be a tested platform, but there’s a lot of gear to position, integrate, and test, including expensive propositions like electronic interference testing. Team US101 release | Lockheed Martin release. US101 wins, gets SDD contract Dec 1/03: US101. The US101 Team competing to provide the president of the United States with a new Marine One helicopter fleet selects GE Aircraft Engines (GEAE) to supply American-made CT7-8E engines for the US101 Presidential helicopter. At more than 2,500 shaft horsepower, the CT7-8E is one of the newest and most powerful derivative of GEAE’s successful T700/CT7 family of helicopter engines. Lockheed Martin release. Appendix A: VH-71 – The Plan, and the Problems Air Force One (click to view full) Given the immense complexity of the electronics involved, the plan was for VH-71 deliveries to involve 2 separate “increments” that separated the full electronics suite from the airframe and basic functions. In the Increment 1 phase, 4 test aircraft and 5 pilot production VH-71 aircraft were to be delivered through 2009. Increment 1 would answer the urgent need for an air system with enhanced performance over existing VH helicopters, but would not include many of the desired technologies. Increment 2 was supposed to see a significant increase in helicopter performance, and communications, for the operational helicopters that would remain for many years as America’s Presidential fleet. According to the Pentagon’s Selected Acquisition Reports, these 28 VH-71 aircraft were initially expected to cost a total of of $6.145 billion, including both R&D and production. Even that worked out to about $219.5 million per helicopter, a sum that could purchase a new civilian 747 jumbo jet. Tier one of the program’s problems began when it rushed the schedule. The original schedule for the Presidential Helicopter Replacement Program, known as VXX, had called for an initial operating capability in 2014. That schedule was accelerated by 4 years after the 9/11 attacks, even though it had taken several years to award the contract. Based on the contract schedule, the first US101 that was equipped to transport the President was expected to be available in 2009. The entire fleet of 28 US101s was scheduled for delivered to the Marine One squadron by late 2015. Tier 2 of the program’s problems are a common refrain in US Navy acquisition programs: a long stream of requirements changes mid-process, creating technical specifications that current technologies cannot meet, with production starting long before a final design is agreed upon. In this case, however, many of the changes were driven by White House staff, not by the Navy. By March 2008, the Pentagon confirmed a new figure of $11.2 billion, or $400 million per helicopter – comparable to a new buy of the USAF’s VC-25 “Air Force One” 747s. Their next SAR was forced to incorporate that jump, and report the VH-71 program as being in breach of American Nunn-McCurdy regulations. Those laws require cost increases of over 25% to re-justify the program to Congress. That proved to be a very difficult exercise, amidst the meltdown of the global financial system. VXX 1.0 – Team Lockheed’s “US101” US101 Demonstrator (click to view full) This competition had some unique requirements, including rotor wash and helicopter weight that had to avoid being too hard on the White House landscaping. Those requirements had reportedly washed out Bell Textron and Boeing’s V-22 tilt-rotor, which meets a number of the program’s challenging range requirements and offers speed advantages. Aside from its downwash effect on the local flora, the Osprey also had a very low-ceilinged cabin and safety questions, and was never seriously considered for presidential use. Bell Helicopter joined Lockheed’s US101 team. In 2005, after a long competition, a modified AgustaWestland EH101 beat out Sikorsky’s smaller S-92, which already operates as a head-of-state helicopter in other countries. Team US101 lead Lockheed Martin received a $1.7 billion contract from the Navy for the VH-71 Marine One program’s systems development and demonstration phase. Team US101 was led by Lockheed Martin as system integrator. AgustaWestlandBell, a joint venture between AgustaWestland and Bell Helicopter Textron, was the principal American subcontractor to Lockheed Martin. Despite being a subcontractor, they would have responsibility for the basic helicopter design, production build, and basic air vehicle support. While most European EH101s use a Rolls Royce/ Turbomeca RTM322 engine, The VH-71/US101s will be powered by 3 of GE’s CT7-8E and CT7-8CE1 engines, derived from the T700 series that powers many US military helicopters. The CT7-8 delivers 2,520 shp at sea level, and subsequent models were expected to surpass that. Other key suppliers included ITT, Northrop Grumman, Kaman Aerospace, and Palomar Products. Aircraft final assembly will be by Bell Helicopter in Amarillo, TX, with mission equipment installation and final integration by Lockheed Martin Systems Integration in NY. New engines, and a rotor downwash that wouldn’t mess the flowers, were only the beginning of the changes to the basic airframe and systems. Another key modification for the new US101 a 6-foot-tall main cabin airstair door, instead of the shorter opening on regular EH101s. Why? It makes for better TV. The taller door matches the height of the cabin, and so the President needs only a tip of the head to get into Marine One, instead of having to duck down. The VH-71 would retain the EH101’s active control system, which cancels out rotor and transmission vibration to create an airliner-like ride. Sound-absorbing material was also installed throughout, to provide a better work environment. All this would be present in the Initial Increment 1 helicopters. Increment 2 would add other technical features, including head-up displays in the cockpit, a more robust tail rotor design, a higher power gearbox, slightly redesigned rotor blades for better flight characteristics, and higher performance engines. The Presidential helicopters’ most important technologies, however, involved an array of EMP (Electro Magnetic Pulse, created by nuclear blasts) resistant communications systems. While VH-71 Increment 1 helicopters would have limited capabilities in this regard, the full production VH-71 Increment 2 birds were expected to feature a wide array of new capabilities, allowing the President of the United States to work while in transit, and exercise command while en route to longer-term crisis transportation. From a temporary transport with some communications capabilities, Marine One was morphing into a platform that began to resemble the USA’s “Air Force One” VC-25s/ 747s. In VH-71 Increment 2 helicopters, the 4th aircrew member would operate an elaborate, state-of-the-art, open architecture communications suite providing secure access to the White House communications network, along with technical enhancements designed to give the President full command and control capability while in flight. Unfortunately, advanced EMP-resistant systems of this type are expensive, proprietary, inherently bulky, and draw a lot of power when aggregated together. In a 747, that isn’t a show-stopping problem. It’s a serious engineering problem in a very confined space, however, and also creates weight issues that will bite especially hard with a less-efficient helicopter aircraft. They bite even harder if that helicopter must also have truly unusual range, something that’s rather difficult to do if it’s loaded to the gills with gear, power generators, and other weight-creating equipment. The 1st flight of a VH-71 pilot production helicopter took place in Yeovil, England on July 3/07. In March 2008, Pentagon acquisition chief John Young acknowledged that no existing medium-lift helicopter could meet all of the requirements crammed into VH-71 Increment 2, adding the startling admission that “The Navy and industry team did not clearly realize the full implications of the White House requirements…” Following a program reorganization, the Navy and industry teams worked to complete a “substantial” redesign of the EH-101 helicopter to meet those Increment 2 requirements. It was this redesign that drove costs so high, as the helicopter was required to carry tons of extra gear and up to 15 passengers, while flying farther than current VH-3 and VH60 helicopters. No problem is insoluble, if enough dollars and engineering resources are applied. Projects can and will be killed, however, if those dollars and resources climb too high. In the end, that’s what happened to the US101. Additional Readings Background: Helicopters & Program FBO.gov – Presidential Helicopter Replacement Program (VXX). Solicitation Number: N00019-13-R-0060. AgustaWestland – AW101 Bell Textron – The Bell-Boeing V-22. Didn’t contend in either phase, but VH-22s are becoming HMX-1 Squadron’s associated utility platform, carrying cargo and VIPs other than the President. They’ll eventually supplant the VH-60s. Sikorsky – S-92 Superhawk GE – CT7-8E and CT7-8CE1. This engine also equips the S-92 Superhawk, and Spanish NH90 helicopters. GE CT7-6 variants power Italian EH101s. Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine (Q4 2004) – Landing on the Lawn Background: Legacy Helicopters Wikipedia – VH-71 Kestrel. They were eventually sold to Canada as spare parts for the CH-149 (AW101) search and rescue fleet. Lockheed Martin, via WayBack – US101. They’re now part of Sikorsky’s S-92 team. Team US101, via WayBack. This was Lockheed Martin’s collaboration with AgustaWestland, for the VH-71. GlobalSecurity.org – VH-60 Marine-1 GlobalSecurity.org – VH-3D Marine-1 Official Reports US GAO (Sept 6/13, #GAO-13-826R) – Department of Defense’s Waiver of Competitive Prototyping Requirement for the VXX Presidential Helicopter Replacement Program US GAO (Feb 27/12, GAO-12-381R) – Effort Delayed as DOD Adopts New Approach to Balance Requirements, Costs, and Schedule. This is about VXX. US GAO (March 25/11, GAO-11-380R) – Application of Lessons Learned and Best Practices in the Presidential Helicopter Program Congressional Research Service (Dec 2009) – VH-71/VXX Presidential Helicopter Program: Background and Issues for Congress News & Views Defense News (Feb 7/05) – Lessons of US101 [PDF format] IEEE Internet Computing (6(1), February 2002), via – Mapping the Gnutella Network: Properties of Large-Scale Peer-to-Peer Systems and Implications for System Design [PDF]. Explains the system behind the VH-60N avionics leak. US Navy, via GlobalSecurity (November 2001, N88-NTSP-A-50-0008/A) – Navy Training System Plan for the VH-60N [PDF] View the full article

Today we are going to discuss military strategy from the a macro level. We will cover the ways to teach military strategy to already seasoned military and civilian personnel, some of the significant members of the strategic canon, and larger strategic challenges we find today. Our guest for the full hour Sunday from 5-6pm Eastern will be Dr. Alessio Patalano. Alessio is Reader in East Asian Warfare and Security at the Department of War Studies (DWS), King’s College London (KCL), and specializes in maritime strategy and doctrine, Japanese military history and strategy, East Asian Security. From 2006 to 2015, he was visiting professor in Strategy at the Italian Naval War College (ISMM), Venice. In Japan, Dr. Patalano has been a visiting professor at the Japan Maritime Command and Staff College (JMCSC). He is also a Senior Fellow at the highly influential think tanks Policy Exchange and RUSI. If you use iTunes, you can add Midrats to your podcast list simply by clicking the iTunes button at the main showpage - or you can just click here. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=yIl2AUoC8zA http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=qj6IDK7rITs http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=WSIrkaJE89E:3DYLcmXNKcU:gIN9vFwOqvQ http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=WSIrkaJE89E:3DYLcmXNKcU:-BTjWOF_DHI http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=WSIrkaJE89E:3DYLcmXNKcU:V_sGLiPBpWU http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=WSIrkaJE89E:3DYLcmXNKcU:F7zBnMyn0Lo http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/FAFV/~4/WSIrkaJE89EView the full article

HMS Nelson. One of the more curious, no, the most curious Battleship classes (2) ever built. The first thing that comes to mind is "Shipmate, where is your stern?" If it looks like a ship built by committee, well that is because it is. A product of The Washington Treaty, "compromises" were made. Though it was the only RN ship with 16" guns, the ship herself was a tad slow, and once the war was done - like the rest of the RN Battleships - off to the breakers she went. Best pictures here. Other sites here and here. Orig. posted 16JUN06. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=yIl2AUoC8zA http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=qj6IDK7rITs http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=2wclv3IG1Co:ANc5dY81DM0:gIN9vFwOqvQ http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=2wclv3IG1Co:ANc5dY81DM0:-BTjWOF_DHI http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=2wclv3IG1Co:ANc5dY81DM0:V_sGLiPBpWU http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=2wclv3IG1Co:ANc5dY81DM0:F7zBnMyn0Lo http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/FAFV/~4/2wclv3IG1CoView the full article

Americas Sikorsky Aircraft won a $19.4 million contract modification, which provides for non-recurring engineering, engineering change order, logistics and programmatic support of the Data Transfer Unit and Defensive Electronic Countermeasure System Replacement and ARC-210 program, to replace existing subsystems within the CH-53K production aircraft. The CH-54K is an all-new heavy-lift helicopter that will expand the fleet’s ability to move more material more rapidly. Work will take place in Iowa, Connecticut and Texas. Estimated completion will be in August 2021. The 103rd and 139th Airlift Wings of the US Air National Guard recently participated in an Agile Combat Employment exercise at the Wallops Flight Facility in Wallops Island, Virginia, January 13. This marks the first time that the C-130H has been used in such an exercise with the F-22. The 103rd focused on the refuel operation while the 139th conducted the simulated munitions resupply. Middle East & Africa Israel’s IMCO Group recently announced the signing of a memorandum of understanding with Innocon, a private Israeli company in the unmanned aircraft field. The companies are to promote the establishment of a joint venture, controlled by IMCO, in this field, using the years of manufacturing, development and marketing capabilities of the IMCO Group, combined with the unique technologies of Innocon. Eitan Zait, CEO of IMCO, said, “We are happy to partner with Innocon, an innovative developer of tactical UAVs. IMCO Group, together with its subsidiaries, affiliates, and partners, offers One-Stop-Shopping for end-to-end integrated defense solutions.” Europe A plan to draw down US troop strength in Germany was put on hold, US European Command chief Gen. Tod Wolters said. President Joe Biden’s administration is reviewing the proposal to remove about 12.000 troops from Germany by former President Donald Trump, who was angered by Germany’s lack of commitment to a pledge for increased NATO funding, Wolters said. Deployment of Britain’s carrier strike group to the Indo-Pacific area shows increased Britain-Japanese defense cooperation, the British defense secretary said. Defense Secretary Ben Wallace and Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab discussed the deployment of HMS Queen Elizabeth during the ‘2+2’ virtual meeting with their respective Japanese counterparts, Ministers Toshimitsu Motegi and Nobuo Kishi. Both the Foreign and Defence Secretary reaffirmed the UK’s long-term commitment to working closely with Japan to uphold the security of the Indo-Pacific and demonstrate the value of a unified approach to facing global challenges. Asia-Pacific South Korea will “determine its stance” on upcoming joint military exercises with the United States to avoid a “serious problem” with North Korea. Unification Minister Lee In-young said Wednesday. The government’s review will consider issues that include COVID-19 and the Biden administration’s policy toward North Korea, and will be “in line with denuclearization and a permanent peace settlement on the Korean Peninsula,” Lee said at a briefing with international journalists in downtown Seoul. Today’s Video Watch: Here Comes the New CH-53K King Stallion (The Marines’ Expensive Helicopter) View the full article

Americas The US Navy’s Tactical Combat Training System Increment II (TCTS II) pod made its first flight on December 11, 2020. A flight with the pod on two F/A-18Es took place on December 15. The TCTS II system, developed by Collins, is the first certified encrypted, multi-level security training pod that communicates with both airborne and ground equipment. The Boeing F-15EX fighter jet completed its first flight Tuesday, paving the way for the early delivery of the first two of the new fighter jet to the Air Force later this quarter, Boeing announced. According to the company, the jet took off from St. Louis Lambert International Airport and completed a 90-minute test flight before returning to the airport. Matt Giese, Boeing F-15’s chief test pilot, checked out the jet’s avionics, advanced systems and software while a test team monitored the data collected during the flight in real time, confirming that the aircraft performed according to plan. Middle East & Africa The ambassador of the United Arab Emirates to the US, Yousef Al Otaiba, is convinced that the deal for the sale of F-35 stealth fighters to his country will be implemented when the “review” of pending arms deals is finished. The UAE ordered 50 F-35 stealth fighters and 18 armed drones worth a total of $23 billion. During a virtual conference of the Washington Institute on Monday, he said “We did everything by the book and they will discover that once the review is complete and it will proceed,” describing the review as “pro forma”. The State Department announced that the administration is “temporarily pausing the implementation of some pending U.S. defense transfers and sales” to allies. Regarding the move, Ambassador Al Otaiba said “If you are going to have less of a presence and less involvement in the Middle East you can’t at the same time take tools away from your partners who are expected to do more.” Europe It has been disclosed that Greece’s first upgraded F-16V will be flying to the United States on February 4 for certification purpose. F-16V #005 will make a stop in Belgium before cross the Atlantic Ocean for Fort Worth. It will make 10 mid-air refuelings during the trip. Over 200 Air Force personnel from Texas’ Dyess Air Force Base are traveling to Norway to support upcoming Bomber Task Force missions out of Norway’s Orland Air Base. US Air Force personnel will travel with an expeditionary B-1 Lancer bomber squadron and train in a variety of areas, US European Command said. The training will include operations in the high north and improving interoperatbility with allies and partners from across Europe. Asia-Pacific Kazakhstan has taken delivery of the Buk-M2E air defense missile system that it ordered back in 2018. The Buk missile system is a family of self-propelled, medium-range surface-to-air missile systems. It was developed by the Soviet Union and later the Russian Federation. The system is designed to counter cruise missiles, smart bombs, fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft and UAVS. Today’s Video Watch: Buk-M3 medium range SAM system View the full article

At least on the Navy side, it seems that many have learned the hard lessons of the Rumsfeld Era Transformationalism mistakes that still hobble our Navy. Sadly, it seems the head of the USMC and USAF have not learned that lesson. Head on over to USNIBlog to see the return of the snakeoil. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=yIl2AUoC8zA http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?d=qj6IDK7rITs http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=3p1oFyDYCWU:2CHqSe84a_E:gIN9vFwOqvQ http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=3p1oFyDYCWU:2CHqSe84a_E:-BTjWOF_DHI http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=3p1oFyDYCWU:2CHqSe84a_E:V_sGLiPBpWU http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/blogspot/FAFV?i=3p1oFyDYCWU:2CHqSe84a_E:F7zBnMyn0Lo http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/FAFV/~4/3p1oFyDYCWUView the full article

Americas Rolls-Royce won a $97 million delivery order for C-130J propulsion long-term sustainment. This order provides funding for Option IV. The Lockheed Martin C-130 is the US Air Force’s principal tactical cargo and personnel transport aircraft. The C-130J Hercules is the latest model, featuring a glass cockpit, digital avionics and a new propulsion system with a six-bladed propeller. Work will take place in Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, and is expected to be completed on January 31, 2022. Northrop Grumman Systems won a $7.8 million task order under the ground subsystems sustainment contract for the Minuteman III Launch Control Center Block Upgrade production for the exercise of Option Year One of Malmstrom Wing I. The LGM-30G Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missile, or ICBM, is an element of the nation’s strategic deterrent forces under the control of the Air Force Global Strike Command. Work will take place in Ogden, Utah and expected completion date is August 15, 2022. Middle East & Africa Israel Aerospace Industries announced that an unnamed country in Asia has signed a contract to lease two of its Heron MK II unmanned air vehicles. Moshe Levy, IAI executive vice president and general manager of the Military Aircraft Group, says the aircraft will “will operate in the terrestrial configuration and will fulfill various tasks, including border protection.” The White House ordered a pause on arms sales last week, including major sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Antony Blinken, the new Secretary of State for the administration of President Joe Biden called for a review of recent arms sales of some of the most advanced aircraft and munitions made in the United States. At issue are sales of 50 F-35 fighter planes and 18 Reaper drones to the UAE, and precision-guided munitions to Saudi Arabia. The agreements came late in the administration of former President Donald Trump and although Congress questioned whether the sales could conflict with Israel’s legally guaranteed “qualitative military edge” of equipment, legislators took no action. Europe Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a five-year extension of the New START nuclear arms treaty with the United States on Friday. The signature came a week before the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty was set to expire. The agreement caps the two countries’ deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and heavy bombers to 700 each; deployed warlords on deployed ICBMs, SLBMs and heavy bombers to 1,550 each; and deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers and heavy bombers to 800 each. It was first implemented in 2010. Asia-Pacific Indian company Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has completed the last Su-30MKI that India has contracted from Russia and the 222th aircraft will be delivered to the end user this month. India ordered 272 Su-30MKIs and 50 were produced in Russia. “One aircraft is certified and inducted for BrahMos modification. Another aircraft has been produced and planned to be certified by February end,” a HAL official said. The delivery formalities for acceptance by the customer are being finalized. Today’s Video Watch: Indian Air Force Sukhoi Su-30MKI Exercise Pitch Black 2018 View the full article