Defence`s Feeds

EDA Deputy Chief Executive Rini Goos travelled to Czech Republic this week for a series of meetings with Central and Eastern European defence industry representatives on the margins of the IDET defence show in Brno. There he also chaired a workshop on the balanced European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB).

On the opening day of the IDET show, Rini Goos delivered a speech at the “Security Trends” conference, highlighting the EDA’s role of strengthening the European defence industry. “At EDA, we fully recognize the diversity of the defence industry in Europe”, he stressed during his speech. “Diversity is an asset we need to exploit and this is why we are keen to insist on the notion of a balanced EDTIB”.

During his visit to Czech Republic, Rini Goos also had a series of bilateral meetings with defence industry representatives of Central and Eastern European (CEE) Member States such as Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia.

On 20 May, the EDA Deputy Chief Executive chaired an EDA-organised workshop dedicated to the Balanced EDTIB. “Europe can no longer afford to ignore the contribution of Central and Eastern European Member States’ defence industries to the European defence industry as a whole”, Rini Goos insisted during the event. “The EDA has just launched a six-month study whose goal is precisely to study the capabilities of the CEE countries and to identify ways to increase capacity building between them”, he added. Two similar workshops were previously held in Brussels in October 2014 and March 2015.

More information

• EDA Chief Executive visits Czech Republic
• IDET Defence Show in Brno

Reaper, ready…
(click to view full)

The MQ-9 Reaper UAV, once called “Predator B,” is somewhat similar to the famous Predator. Until you look at the tail. Or its size. Or its weapons. It’s called “Reaper” for a reason: while it packs the same surveillance gear, it’s much more of a hunter-killer design. Some have called it the first fielded Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV).

The Reaper UCAV will play a significant role in the future USAF, even though its capability set makes the MQ-9 considerably more expensive than MQ-1 Predators. Given these high-end capabilities and expenses, one may not have expected the MQ-9 to enjoy better export success than its famous cousin. Nevertheless, that’s what appears to be happening. MQ-9 operators currently include the USA and Britain, who use it in hunter-killer mode, and Italy. Several other countries are expressing interest, and the steady addition of new payloads are expanding the Reaper’s advantage over competitors…

The MQ-9 Reaper, and its Little Brothers MQ-1 landing -
1 Hellfire fired?
(click to view full)

The MQ-9 Reaper was once called “Predator B,” but it is only loosely based on the famous MQ-1 Predator drone. The Reaper is 36 feet long, with a 66 foot wingspan that can be modified to 88 feet. Its maximum gross takeoff weight is a whopping 10,500 pounds, carrying up to 4,000 pounds of fuel, 850 pounds of internal/ sensor payload, and another 3,000 pounds on its wings. Its 6 pylons can carry heavier reconnaissance payloads, as well as an impressive array of weapons including GPS-guided JDAM family bombs, Paveway laser-guided bombs, Sidewinder missiles for air-air self defense or ground strike use, and other MIL STD 1760 compatible weapons, in addition to the Hellfire anti-armor missiles carried by the Predator. The Reaper becomes the equivalent of a close air support fighter with less situational awareness, lower speed, and less survivability if seen – but much, much longer on-station time.

The MQ-1A/B Predator. This UAV is flown by the USAF and Italy. It’s 27 feet long, with a 55 foot wingspan. Maximum gross takeoff weight is 2,3000 pounds, and it can carry 625 pounds of fuel, 450 pounds of internal payload (sensors), and another 300 pounds on its wings for up to 2 AGM-114 Hellfire anti-armor missiles or equivalent loads. Its service ceiling is 25,000 feet, which can keep it well above the 10,000-15,000 ceiling above which most guns are ineffective. The piston engine is a Rotax 914 turbo that runs on aviation fuel, and pushes the Predator at a slow speed of 120 KTAS. It’s controlled by UHF/VHF radio signals.

US Army MQ-1C ER/MP. The Gray Eagle looks a lot like the Predator but is a little bit bigger, can carry more weapons, and has an engine that can run on the same “heavy fuel” that fills up the Army’s land vehicles. It’s 28 feet long, with a 56 foot wingspan and a service ceiling of 29,000 feet. Maximum gross takeoff weight is 3,200 pounds, carrying up to 600 pounds of fuel, 575 pounds of internal payload (sensors, plus a communications relay), and another 500 pounds on its wings. This doubles weapon capacity, to 4 AGM-114 Hellfire anti-armor missiles or equivalent loads.The piston engine is a Thielert 135hp that runs on heavy fuel or higher-grade aviation fuel, and gives it a slightly faster speed of 135 KTAS. The Improved Gray Eagle substitutes a higher-power Lycoming DL-120 engine, while adding fuel and payload.

The USAF also had an MQ-1B Block X/ YMQ-1C project to develop a Predator system that would run on heavy fuel and carry up to 4 Hellfires. They canceled it, and their Predator buys in general, in favor of the MQ-9 Reaper.

MQ-1 vs. MQ-9
(click to view full)

The MQ-9 Reaper. This UAV is far more of a fighter substitute or close-air support complement than other UAVs. Larger than its companion MQ-1 UAVs, its reinforced wings give it far greater weapons carrying capacity of 3,000 pounds. Since most manned jet fighters aren’t carrying that many precision weapons for close support missions over Iraq and Afghanistan, that limit lets the MQ-9 fulfill close-air support roles in most low-intensity conflicts.

Its service ceiling is reportedly 50,000 feet unless it’s fully loaded, which can make a lurking Reaper very difficult to find from the ground. That wouldn’t have been useful to UAVs like the Predator, given the Hellfire missile’s range. On the other hand, the ability to drop GPS and laser-guided bombs makes precision high altitude Reaper strikes perfectly plausible. As one might expect, the MQ-9 Reaper’s default sensor package is more capable than the MQ-1 family’s; it includes General Atomics’ AN/APY-8 Lynx I ground-looking radar, and Raytheon’s MTS-B (AN/AAS-52) surveillance and targeting turret.

The engine is a Honeywell TPE 331-10T, which pushes it along at a rather speedier clip of 240 knots. Not exactly an F-16, or even an A-10, but the Reaper’s extra speed does get it to the problem area faster than a Predator could. A total fatigue limit of 20,000 safe fight hours is about double that of a life-extended F-16, and around 20% higher than an EMB-314/ A-29 Super Tucano counter-insurgency turboprop. The flip side is that UAVs have about twice as many accidents as manned fighters.

Horsham AS brief

Reaper ER. This upgrade adds stronger landing gear, a pair of “wet” hardpoints that can handle a pair of fuel tanks, and a stretched 88′ wingspan that includes the ability to carry fuel in the wings. The standard Reaper is configured for 30 hours in surveillance mode, and roughly 23 hours if armed with Hellfire missiles. General Atomics believes the ER model will raise that to 42 hours for ISR and 35 hours with the Hellfire.

Block 5. The latest MQ-9 version is the Block 1+, soon to be known as Block 5. Improvements focus on 3 areas: power capacity, payload capacity, and communications capacity. Power is improved via a new high-capacity starter generator, and an upgraded electrical system whose new backup generator can support all flight critical functions with a triple redundancy. Payload is improved using new trailing arm heavyweight landing gear (TA-MLG), and a weapons kit upgrade from BRU-15 [PDF] bomb release units to ITT Exelis’ BRU-71/A [PDF]. Finally, communications upgrades include encrypted datalinks, bandwodth improvements, upgraded software to allow the 2-person aircrew to operate all onboard systems, and dual ARC-210 VHF/UHF radios with wingtip antennas that allow simultaneous communications between multiple air-to-air and air-to-ground parties.

SOCOM. US Special Operations Command (SOCOM) flies the MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1 Predators. Both are referred to as Medium Altitude Long Endurance Tactical (MALET) platforms, and the 160th SOAR added the MQ-1C Gray Eagle in November 2013. If SOCOM has to bring the MALET down to hammer a target, they fly in enhanced variants with improved video transmission, infrared modifications, signals intelligence payloads, and “delivery of low collateral damage weapons.” The latter presumably includes precision mini-missile options like Raytheon’s Griffin, and precision glide bombs like Northrop Grumman’s GBU-44 Viper Strike and Lockheed Martin’s Scorpion, all of which allow a single Hellfire rail or weapon station to carry multiple weapons. SOCOM does want the Reaper to be more transportable, though, for quick delivery and use in theater.

Other. General Atomics’ Mariner/ Guardian maritime surveillance variant and FAA-certified high-altitude Altair research UAV are both derived from the MQ-9 Reaper. So, too, is NASA’s Ikhana.

Program Highlights

A basic MQ-9 Reaper system consists of 4 UAVs, each with a Raytheon MTS-B day/night surveillance and targeting turret, General Atomics AN/APY-8 Lynx ground-looking SAR/GMTI radar, and satellite communications equipment; Weapon kits with integrated hardpoints for certified weapons; 1 Ground Control System; and Ground Data Terminals.

Operational squadrons will also have appropriate support equipment, simulator and training devices, and Readiness Spares Packages (RSP) on hand. A lot of support is still handled by contractors, but some is being moved inside the military.

Excel
download

The average flyaway cost of an MQ-9 is between $17-21 million, based on FY 2015 budget documents. Note that flyaway cost subtotals also include shares of Ground Control Stations (GCS), Ground Data Terminals (GDTs), and Predator Primary Satellite Links (PPSLs), which means that buying different numbers of ancillary systems or UAVs changes the cost number from year to year.

Export buyers will incur higher costs, as the few UAVs they buy need the entire set of back-end infrastructure and support systems. Co-location with the USAF or Britain in a satellite-linked operations center can help defray the biggest expenses, but costs will still be far higher than they would be for a USAF purchase.

American budget totals reflect the number of individual UAVs purchased, though each year is also buying the other equipment needed to make the Reapers work, and making long lead-time buys for the following year. Note that both RDT&E funding and procurement funding beyond FY 2015 reflect the USAF only, and don’t include the minor contributions of US SOCOM.

A complete timeline of the MQ-9 program, including export sales and requests, and planned milestones:

Competitors & Prospects USAF on UAV futures

The MQ-9 has few competitors at the moment. Other UCAVs like the US Navy’s X-47 UCAS-D, the European nEUROn project, and Britain’s Taranis all focused on the stealthy fighter replacement role, and conventional UAVs optimized for surveillance rather than strike, Serious competition would involve existing UAVs that begin integrating and proving a variety of weapon sets, and have the capacity to carry a substantial payload. The challenge is that many of those UAVs will hit limits to payload carriage or endurance before they can match the Reaper, or run afoul of the 300 mile range/ 500 pound ordnance limit embedded in the Missile Technology Control Regime treaty.

The BAE Mantis/ Telemos UAV, whose twin pusher-propeller design and T-tail make it look like the unmanned offspring of an A-10 “Warthog” and Argentina’s IA 58 Pucara counter-insurgency aircraft, was well positioned to compete. Instead, it was sidelined by lack of funding and commitment from Britain and France. Israel has UAVs in a similar size class (Heron-TP, Hermes 900, Dominator), but they don’t routinely carry weapons, and heaven’t been exported as armed UAVs. Italy and the UAE are building Piaggio’s fast Hammerhead P.1HH, but the MCTR cripples its payload, and plans to arm the UAV remain distant. The UAE touts their Yabhon United 40 Block 5, but it needs to be inducted and proven in operational service. China has begun to export its Wing Loong armed UAV, but its peer comparison is the MQ-1 Predator.

That’s the good news for General Atomics. The bad news is that is that MQ-9 export approval beyond NATO and similarly close allies seems unlikely. MQ-9s are currently in service with the USAF, Britain (10), France (2), and Italy (4). The Netherlands has committed to buy 4, but hasn’t placed a contract yet. Poland is also said to be considering a purchase, and Germany was a strong export candidate before its current government backed off buying any drones at all. Note that even within this group, Britain has been the only country allowed to arm their Reapers.

Future Planning & Developments MQ-9 Block 5
(click to view full)

As of March 2013, the USAF intends to fulfill the MQ-9 Increment One CPD requirements with a final UAS configuration consisting of the MQ-9 Block 5 UAV with OFP 904.6, and the Block 30 GCS. The program will be reducing or deferring 12 required block 5 capabilities related to aircraft endurance, radar performance, and reliability, and other areas. The UAV’s core OFP flight software has been a development issue, and DOT&E expects further delays, along with added risks because cyber-vulnerabilities haven’t been heavily tested.

AFOTEC hoped to conduct formal operational testing of the final MQ-9 Increment One UAS in late 2014, but the addition of manufacturing issues has pushed things back to early 2016.

“Increment II” upgrades beyond the MQ-9 Block 5 were slated to include GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb integration, Automatic take-off and landing, Deicing, and National Airspace certification for flights in American civil airspace. At present, those upgrades languish in an unfunded limbo.

Contracts & Key Events, 2005 SDD – Present MQ-9, Kandahar
(click to view full)

Some support contracts are common to the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper fleet. They are not covered here. Britain’s MQ-9 Reaper program has its own DID Spotlight article, but its items are reproduced here as well.

Unless otherwise indicated, all contracts are managed by Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, where the 658th AESS/PK is the Predator Contracting Group. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. of Poway, CA (near San Diego, north of MCAS Miramar) is the contractor. Note that, for whatever reason, many USAF orders don’t seem to be announced through standard channels. See budgets, above, for a clearer sense of the numbers involved.

FY 2014 – 2015

Afghan Pre-Flight
(click to view full)

May 21/15: General Atomics was awarded a production contract for eight additional MQ-9 Reaper Block 5 UAVs on Wednesday, with this $72.1 million contract following a similar $279.1 million order for 24 of the aircraft last month.

July 2/14: Germany. The whole subject of UAVs remains very contentious along left-right lines (q.v. Nov 14/13), as a long Defence Committee hearing on June 30/14 demonstrated once again. But German Defence Minister Dr. Ursula von der Leyen [CDU] has now stated her support for buying UAVs that can carry weapons, on the condition that the German Bundestag would vote to send them on any foreign missions, and decide whether they should be armed.

That would seemingly favor the MQ-9 in the short term, but she stated her satisfaction with the current leasing program for Heron-1 UAVs, which can be continued without sparking a divisive armed UAV debate in the Bundestag. Over the longer term, she also spoke in favour of developing “a European armed drone.” The NSA remains the political gift that keeps on giving to non-American defense sector competitors:

“Once again, the NSA affair has made it clear to me what it means to lie dormant through 10 to 15 years of technological development and suddenly face the bitter reality of how dependent one is on others…. Europe needs the capabilities of a reconnaissance drone so it is not permanently dependent on others.”

The challenge is that European partners want a UAV that can carry weapons, so Germany probably needs to accept that in order to find partners. Time will tell. Source: Euractiv, “German defence minister backs ‘European armed drone'”.

June 26/14: Upgrades. General Atomics – Aeronautical Systems, Inc. in Poway, CA receives a $15.3 million firm-fixed-price sole-source contract for the MQ-9 Fuel Bladder Retrofit Kits, Time Compliance Technical Orders (TCTO) and initial spares. The certified O-level TCTOs enable the removal of existing Aero Tech Labs fuel bladders, and enable the installation of the new fuel bladders on MQ-9 Reaper Block 1 aircraft. GA-ASI will also update existing technical orders and manuals, and deliver initial retrofit spares. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2012 & 2013 USAF aircraft budgets.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA, and is expected to be complete by March 6/17. USAF Life Cycle Management Center’s, Medium Altitude Unmanned Aircraft Systems group at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8620-10-G-3038, DO 0071).

May 9/14: Australia. Air Marshal Geoff Brown tells Fairfax Media that he’d like to see Australia buy some MQ-9s. Australia has trialed MQ-9s in a maritime border patrol role (q.v. May-September 2006). Their military intends to move ahead with the jet-powered MQ-4C Global Hawk derivative that won the US Navy BAMS competition, but an MQ-9 fleet bought to support the Army would likely find itself on call to support Coast Guard duties as well. That could be done with standard equipment, as Italy has done (q.v. Jan 15/14), or via additional buys to obtain SeaVue radars like the MQ-9 Guardians operated by US Customs (q.v. Dec 7/09). Brown:

“I’m a great fan of capabilities that have a very multi-role aspect to them, and I think Predator-Reaper does have that… I think the combination of a good ISR platform that’s weaponized is a pretty legitimate weapon system for Australia…. I’d love to have [MQ-4C] Triton tomorrow… I’d certainly like to have Predator-Reaper capability as well, and I’d like to bring [our rented fleet of IAI’s] Heron back so we build on those skills that we’ve got.”

He’s thinking in terms of the next 5 years, and the place to set that in motion would be the coming Force Structure Review. Sources: Sydney Morning Herald, “Air Force wants to buy deadly Reaper drones”.

April 17/14: SAR. The Pentagon releases its Dec 31/13 Selected Acquisitions Report. For the MQ-9:

“Program costs decreased $1,451.8 million (-10.9%) from $13,318.2 million to $11,866.4 million, due primarily to a quantity decrease of 58 aircraft from 401 to 343 (-$962.1 million), associated schedule, engineering, and estimating allocations (+$66.9 million), and areduction of initial spares and support equipment related to the decrease in quantity (-$432.9 million). There were additional decreases for the removal of the Airborne Signals Intelligence payload 2C (ASIP 2C) requirement (-$280.1 million) and sequestration reductions (-$142.5 million). These decreases were partially offset by increases for a warfighter requirement for extended range retrofits and communications requirements (+$138.9 million) and the addition of production line shut down costs that were not previously estimated (+$132.7 million).”

Program cuts

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. The MQ-9 Block 5’s manufacturing issues include “delinquencies in completing technical data, software delays, and fuel tank issues”; the latter were severe enough that they required production line changes and fleet retrofits. As a result, deliveries were slowed, operational testing had to move back from October 2014 to January 2016, and Block 5 software won’t be fully fielded until March 2016. Meanwhile,

“As of December 2013, 21 Block 1 aircraft have been produced, but are still awaiting the necessary software capability upgrades before they can be delivered. Until these software upgrades are complete, aircraft are only being delivered based on urgent needs. According to program officials, the program has developed an aircraft delivery recovery plan that should allow deliveries to be back on track by April 2014.”

Since more than half of the planned fleet will have been manufactured before a “Full Rate Production Decision” is made, the Pentagon has decided to have an “in-process review” in February 2016 instead.

March 26/14: Weapons. An MQ-9 successfully finishes December 2013 – January 2014 tests at US Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, CA, firing MBDA’s dual-mode radar/laser Brimstone missile against a variety of targets. The Brimstone is similar to the Reaper’s regular laser-guided AGM-114 Hellfire, with a slightly longer range, a fire-and-forget radar seeker, a “man in the loop” feature, and the ability to deploy on fast jets. Consolidating on the Brimstone would let the RAF use a single weapon type for short-range light strike.

The test was a cooperative effort between Britain and the United States (q,v, May 3/13), and all of the RAF’s primary and secondary trial objectives were met. Brimstone isn’t formally integrated onto the MQ-9, but it looks as if that’s about to change. Sources: MBDA, “MBDA’s Brimstone Demonstrates its Precision Low Collateral Capability from Reaper”.

March 4-11/14: FY15 Budget. The US military slowly files its budget documents, detailing planned spending from FY 2014 – 2019. The FY 2015 request supports the procurement of 12 MQ-9 UAVs and 12 fixed ground control stations, while funding MQ-9 Extended Range fleet modifications. Deliveries out to 2019 are being cut, but the budget isn’t changing that much because of required investments in spare parts, support infrastructure, and technical data rights.

There are currently 143 MQ-9 aircraft in USAF inventory, with an estimated designed service life of 20,000 hours each. For comparison purpose, that’s about double the total lifespan of an F-16 with life-extension refits, and slightly longer than a manned Super Tucano turboprop’s ~16-18,000 hours.

Near-term upgrades include new Linux processors, high definition monitors, and ergonomic improvements. Future planned upgrades include integrating improved human-machine interfaces, open systems architecture, improved crew habitability, and multiple aircraft control. Future GCS configurations will leverage the Unmanned Aerospace System (UAS) Command and Control (C2) Initiative (UCI) government-owned open system standard to enable improved capabilities for situational awareness and multi-mission management monitoring and oversight.

Feb 24/14: Budgets. Chuck Hagel’s FY 2015 pre-budget briefing explains that cutbacks are on the way for the drone fleet, but perhaps not the Reapers:

“The Air Force will slow the growth in its arsenal of armed unmanned systems that, while effective against insurgents and terrorists, cannot operate in the face of enemy aircraft and modern air defenses. Instead of increasing to a force of 65 around-the-clock combat air patrols of Predator and Reaper aircraft, the Air Force will grow to 55, still a significant increase. Given the continued drawdown in Afghanistan, this level of coverage will be sufficient to meet our requirements, and we would still be able to surge to an unprecedented 71 combat air patrols under this plan. DoD will continue buying the more capable Reapers until we have an all-Reaper fleet.

If sequestration-level cuts are re-imposed in 2016 and beyond, however, the Air Force would need to make far more significant cuts to force structure and modernization. The Air Force would have to retire 80 more aircraft, including the entire KC-10 tanker fleet and the Global Hawk Block 40 fleet, as well as slow down purchases of the Joint Strike Fighter – resulting in 24 fewer F-35s purchased through Fiscal Year 2019 – and sustain ten fewer Predator and Reaper 24-hour combat air patrols [DID: down to 45]. The Air Force would also have to take deep cuts to flying hours, which would prevent a return to adequate readiness levels.”

Sources: US DoD, “Remarks By Secretary Of Defense Chuck Hagel FY 2015 Budget Preview Pentagon Press Briefing Room Monday, February 24, 2014″.

Feb 5/14: Bandwidth innovation. The USAF touts changes they’ve made to the MQ-9 Reaper, allowing it to relay data through inclined orbit satellites that have become slightly unstable. The satellites’ wobble cuts their leasing costs sharply, so UAVs can cut operating costs by integrating updated satellite location data with software to point their receivers, and having procedures to manage the associated situations. The USAF has successfully tested exactly this kind of system on the MQ-1 and MQ-9 UAVs.

The Jan 28/14 DOT&E report gave the MQ-9 program both barrels for what it saw as lack of organization, and a development culture that pursued off-record efforts at the expense of their planned capabilities. Announcements like this one, and the Feb 5/14 AFSOC report, remind us that less-planned but potentially significant enhancements can add up to important steps forward. Read “I.O. Satellites for UAVs? USAF Reaping Savings” for full coverage.

Feb 5/14: 38 ER conversions. A maximum $117.3 million unfinalized contract will finance conversions to create 38 MQ-9 Extended Range UAVs, with larger wings and more fuel.

$41.5 million committed immediately, using a combination of FY 2013-2014 RDT&E budgets, and the FY 2014 aircraft budget. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, and is expected to be complete by July 7/16. USAF Lifecycle Management Center/WIIK’s Medium Altitude Unmanned Aircraft Systems group at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8620-10-G-3038, #0118).

MQ-9 ER conversions begin

Feb 5/14: AFSOC Support. A $166 million delivery order for “Lead-off Hitter AFSOC MQ-9 Software Line,” which will provide MQ-9 software engineering support for the AFSOC fleet of MQ-9 unmanned aerial systems. In an interesting note about some of the changes underway, the FY 2013 DOT&E report mentioned that:

“AFSOC demonstrated the successful transmission of encrypted, high-definition full motion video from the RPA to remote video terminal-equipped ground units in support of urgent AFSOC capabilities needs. AFOTEC will conduct formal evaluation of full motion video transmission during FOT&E of the MQ-9 Increment One system.”

Work will be performed in Poway, Calif., and is expected to be completed by Feb. 6, 2015. Fiscal 2013 research and development funds in the amount of $2,063,006 are being obligated at time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center/WIIK, Medium Altitude Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8620-10-G-3038, DO 0114).

Jan 28/14: DOT&E Testing Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2013 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The MQ-9 is included, and the report paints the program as a mess, getting UAVs out the door but tripping over itself elsewhere thanks to the lack of an Integrated Master Schedule, inability to prioritize or meet timelines, and only limited Information Assurance cyber-testing.

The result of these failings, in conjunction with “competing schedule priorities for non-program of record capabilities,” is that the program formally acknowledged an Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) breach in May 2013 and said they couldn’t meet the program of record schedule. The Increment 1/ Block 5 system can’t undergo Full OT&E in FY 2014 as planned, and integration of the GBU-38 JDAM was postponed. Indeed:

“Development, operational testing, and fielding of Increment One program of record capabilities will likely experience continued delays until the program is able to better prioritize and control maturation of these capabilities in accordance with a predictable schedule. Ongoing schedule challenges, combined with RPA production emphasis, increase the likelihood that the MQ-9 UAS will complete the delivery of all planned MQ-9 RPAs under low-rate initial production. FOT&E of the Increment One UAS configuration, originally planned for 2013, will likely be delayed several years beyond FY14.”

Jan 22/14: EW. General Atomics and Northrop Grumman conduct the 2nd USMC demonstration of MQ-9s as electronic warfare platforms (q.v. Aug 13/13), using NGC’s Pandora low-power, wideband electronic warfare pod. They tested Pandora’s compatibility with the Reaper’s avionics and command and control architecture, including control of the Pandora pod’s operations, and tested the entire system’s integration into a Marine Command and Control (C2) network.

A Cyber/Electronic Warfare Coordination Cell (CEWCC) located at MCAS Yuma ran the pod and UAV, which supported a large aircraft strike package that included EA-6B Prowler jamming aircraft. General Atomics sees this as an important way to broaden the Reaper’s usefulness, in order to keep it from budget cuts (q.v. Jan 2/14). Sources: GA-ASI, “GA-ASI and Northrop Grumman Showcase Additional Unmanned Electronic Attack Capabilities in Second USMC Exercise”.

Jan 15/14: UAV SAR. General Atomics touts the use of its MQ-1 and MQ-9 UAVs in search and rescue scenarios, which will become much easier once civil airspace rules are changed to provide clear requirements for UAVs.

MQ-9 UAVs were used in New Mexico to find missing kayyakers in April 2012, and MQ-1s and MQ-9s were both used in October 2013 to find a missing German mountain biker who was stranded and injured in the Lincoln National Forest. Interestingly, their main role was to search less-likely areas, ensuring that they were covered while allowing humans to search the most likely areas.

The Italian jobs were a bit different, because they were conducted under Operation Mare Nostrum (“our ocean,” also colloquial Roman for the Mediterranean), which aims to find and rescue migrants who are trying to cross the sea in makeshift boats from North Africa. They use radar more extensively, and the Italian MQ-9s’ AN/APY-8 Lynx Block 30 multi-mode radars will soon add software to give them a new Maritime Wide Area Search (MWAS) mode. Sources: GA-ASI, “Predator-Series Aircraft Pivotal to Search and Rescue Missions”.

Jan 2/14: Budgets. Military.com quotes Pentagon director of unmanned warfare and ISR Dyke Weatherington, who says of the new UAV Roadmap that the 24% reduction in UAV spending of from 2012-2013, and 30% cut from 2013-2014, is a trend that will continue. The shift to the Pacific is likely to hurt UAVs below the top end, but:

“This roadmap is two years since the last one. We knew budgets would be declining. I don’t think two years ago we understood how significant the down slope was going to be so this road map much more clearly addresses the fiscal challenges…. We can generally say that from 2014 to 2015 the budget… will be reduced”…. there was about a 24-percent reduction from 2012 to 2013 and a 30-percent reduction from 2013 to 2014…. the Pentagon’s shift to the Pacific and overall Defense Strategy articulates a need to be prepared for more technologically advanced potential adversaries…. “EW is one of those areas where we are going to see opportunities for unmanned systems, likely in tandem with manned systems…”

In this environment, the program to add MALD-J loitering jamming decoys is promising for the MQ-9, but further budget cuts are not. Sources: DoD Buzz, “Pentagon Plans for Cuts to Drone Budgets”.

Jan 1/14: France. Defense World reports that French MQ-9s arrived “in the Sahel Region” on this day, for operations over Mali. Defense World, “France Receive First MQ-9 Reaper Drone”.

Dec 31/13: UK Support. A sole-source, unfinalized $31.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price option for Phase 1 & 2 contractor logistics support: urgent repairs and services, logistics support, field service representative support, contractor inventory control point and spares management, depot repair, flight operations support and field maintenance.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA, and is expected to be complete by March 31/15. The USAF acts as Britain’s agent (FA8620-10-G-3038, 0080, 09).

Dec 24/13: Support. A $362.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee sole-source contract for MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper contractor support, including program management, logistics support, configuration management, technical manual and software maintenance, contractor field service representative support, inventory control point management, flight operations support, depot repair, and depot field maintenance.

$90 million in USAF O&M funds are committed immediately. Work will be performed at Poway, CA, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/14. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WIKBA at Robins AFB, GA manages the contract (FA8528-14-C-0001).

Dec 19/13: France. The DGA procurement agency receives its 1st Reaper UAV, which is being readied for deployment to Mali along with a 2nd UAV, associated ground systems, etc. The DGA praises the USA’s help in getting personnel trained, helping with communications planning, etc. A record of six months from order to delivery is impressive, and demands nothing less.

French delivery

Nov 21/13: Dutch OK. The Dutch MvD delivers a report to the legislature, announcing the results of their MALE UAV program study phase, which began in 2012. Their requirements included 24 hour endurance, and payload options that included the standard surveillance and targeting turret and SAR/GMTI ground scanning radar, plus a wide-area ground-scanning radar and a SIGINT/COMINT interception pod. Weapons aren’t part of their plan, but they did want an option to add them later, if necessary. The MvD intends to buy 4 Reapers for fielding on expeditionary operations by 2016, and achieve full operational capability from their base at Leeuwarden by 2017. The budget for this purchase is just EUR 100 – 250 million.

That budget could be a problem.

The brief to Parliament lists European airworthiness certification as a major budget risk. It is. The fact that Britain, France, and Italy will also be MQ-9 customers was an argument for a Dutch buy, because they create a pool of partners who can benefit from each other’s work. Cost pooling is an even bigger factor for eventual certification beyond restricted airspace, whose success will involve sense-and-avoid technologies, and certifications whose cost can’t be predicted. Past estimates have involved hundreds of millions of dollars.

The other source of significant risk to the program involves integration the wide-area ground scanning radar, and SIGINT/COMINT payloads. The scope of that effort will have to be assessed. It’s worth noting that payloads are subject to network effects: a larger customer list in Europe makes it easier or more attractive to add payloads, which then provide another reason for new customers to sign on. Sources: Dutch MvD, “Defensie kiest Reaper als onbemand vliegtuig” and “Kamerbrief voorstudie project MALE UAV”.

Nov 20/13: Euro MALE. Defence Ministers committed to the launch of 4 programs during the EU European Defence Agency’s Steering Board session, 1 of which centered around a 4-part program for UAVs. “Ministers tasked EDA to prepare the launch of a Category B project” to develop a Future European MALE platform, to be introduced from 2020 – 2025. Other documents, noting the obvious potential for ridicule since Future European MALE = FEMALE, refer to it as “MALE 2020″ – a timeline that would be imperative for industrial and competitive reasons. EDA hasn’t launched the project yet. Once it does, can Europe’s traditionally fractious program negotiations and fragmented execution hit a 2020 target date?

In parallel, a coalition of countries also plan to create an operator community of UAV users, so they can share experiences and improve the foundation for future cooperation. Germany, France, Spain, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands and Poland have all joined.

Other areas of cooperation will include streamlining UAV certification in European airspace, now that its costs and uncertainties have already killed Germany’s major Eurohawk UAV program. In a related move, Austria, Belgium, Britain, the Czech Republic, Germany, France and Spain signed a joint investment program around technologies required for UAV use in civil airspace. Sources: EDA, “Defence Ministers Commit to Capability Programmes” | Les Echos, “Drones : des pays europeens s’engagent a collaborer”.

Nov 14/13: Germany. Chancellor Merkel’s narrow victory has an important military consequence. A draft version of the coalition agreement between Merkel’s center-right Christian Democrats and the center-left Social Democrats reportedly says that:

“We categorically reject illegal killings by drones. Germany will support the use of unmanned weapons systems for the purposes of international disarmament and arms control…. Before acquiring a qualitatively new arms system, we will thoroughly investigate all associated civil and constitutional guidelines and ethical questions.”

Translation: Don’t expect a purchase of Reaper or Heron UAVs during the lifetime of this 4-year legislative session. Sources: The Local.de, “Germany halts purchase of armed drones” | See also the left-wing Truthout, “How Europeans Are Opposing Drone and Robot Warfare: An Overview of the Anti-Drone Movement in Europe”.

Nov 9/13: Support. The USAF Sustainment Center and General Atomics reach an enterprise-level, public-private partnership agreement which allows the 2 organizations to partner in the maintenance of MQ-1B/C and MQ-9 unmanned aircraft systems (UAS).
Work can be performed at AFSC logistics complexes in Georgia, Oklahoma and Utah:

“The WR-ALC is expected to begin work on UAS batteries in 2014 and interim modem assemblies in 2015. The battery workload is estimated to bring in 5,000 repair hours and grow to 9,600 repair hours by 2016. The modem workload is estimated to bring in 2,600 repair hours in 2015, growing to 4,500 in 2016. By the end of fiscal 2016, Warner-Robins will have more than 15,000 repair hours from the Predator/Reaper/Gray Eagle workload…”

It’s the 1st center-wide UAS partnership agreement implemented since the stand-up of the Air Force Sustainment Center in June 2012. Sources: Pentagon DVIDS, “Increased unmanned aircraft workload on the horizon thanks to new partnership”.

Nov 1/13: France. A maximum $27.6 million unfinalized delivery order for Phase I of France’s MQ-9 UAS Contractor Logistics Support program. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, and run until Oct 31/14.

This sole-source acquisition is handled by USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WIIK, Medium Altitude Unmanned Aircraft Systems at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, acting as France’s agent (FA8620-10-G-3038, #0113).

FY 2013

France commits to buying 2, considers up to 16. Competitions in Canada, Netherlands, possibly Poland. FAA tests for civil airspace, and a European effort too; Deliveries stalled by fuel tank problem; JDAMs still a problem; MQ-9 Increment II in limbo; CAE will develop the sim/training system; OMX partnership in Canada as the future of local supplier efforts; Plans aside, what’s the real future of the Reaper force? RAF Reaper Refuels,
Afghanistan

Oct 15/13: FY13 main order. GA-ASI receives a maximum $377.4 million, unfinalized delivery order for 24 MQ-9 Block 5 Reaper aircraft, shipping containers, initial spares and support equipment. It’s paid for with $305 million in FY 2013 procurement funds, with the rest coming from FY 2012 leftovers.

Though it is now technically a new fiscal year, the federal government shutdown was just the cherry on the cake for a messy FY 2013. This explains delayed orders, and their likewise late public announcement, like this one (FA8620-10-G-3038, #0050).

“USA buys 24

Sept 30/13: Reaper. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. in Poway, CA receives a not-to-exceed $49.8 million unfinalized cost-plus-fixed-fee contract action for France’s MQ-9 Reaper urgent request program of 2 UAVs. That seems about right.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA, and is expected to be complete by July 15/15. USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WIIK’s Medium Altitude Unmanned Aircraft Systems group, at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, acts as France’s FMS agent (FA8620-10-G-3038, DO 0112).

Just days earlier the first of 3 crews from the French air force had taken its initial training flight at Holloman AFB, NM. They want to be ready when 2 UAVs and 1 GCV are delivered at the end of the year. Sources: Pentagon | French Air Force, “Premier vol d’un equipage francais aux commandes d’un drone Reaper”.

France orders 2

Sept 25/13: Sensors. Raytheon Co. in McKinney, TX, has been awarded a $13.2 million delivery order, buying another 24 Multi-Spectral Targeting Systems High-Definition Infrared (MTS-B HD IR) turrets for the MQ-9 Reaper. All funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed at McKinney, TX, and is expected to be complete by May 30/15. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WIIK’s Medium Altitude Unmanned Aircraft Systems group at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contracts (FA8620-11-G-4050, #0008, modification 12).

Sept 16/13: SOCOM. US SOCOM wants its MALET MQ-9s to have the same kind if easy transportability as its MALET MQ-1s. The Predators can be boxed, shipped in a C-17, and re-assembled in 4 hours. SOCOM wants its Reapers to be packable in under 8 hours, and assembled in less than 8 hours, but it’s going to take some work to get there.

As an aside, one of the most challenging aspects of a new MALET base is actually the ground station. That has to be present for launches and landings, since remote control from the USA is only suitable during the flight. Source: Military.com, “SOCOM Wants to Deploy MQ-9 Drones to Remote Areas”.

Aug 25/13: Help Wanted. The USAF has a pilot recruitment problem for drones, driven by lower recognition and a true perception that promotions are less likely in that service. Here’s the math:

The USA has 61 round-the-clock UAV Combat Air Patrols, and plans to increase that to 65 by 2015. That increase is now suspect. If it’s maintained, the Pentagon’s April 2012 “Report to Congress on Future Unmanned Aircraft Systems Training, Operations, and Sustainability” says the USAF will require, at minimum, 579 more MQ-1/9 UAV pilots from December 2011 – 2015. In 2012, the 40 USAF training slots attracted just 12 volunteers, and training attrition rates are 3x higher than they are for regular pilots. Unlike the USAF’s manned aircraft training slots, only 33 RPA (Remotely Piloted Aircraft) training slots were filled (around 82%), triggered in part by the correct perception that those who succeed will have less career success. Based on present rates, 13% fewer RPA pilots have become majors, compared to their peers.

The US Army has an easier time of things with their MQ-1C fleet, because they tap enlisted and non-commissioned soldiers: 15W Operator and 15E Repairer are enlisted soldiers positions, and 150U technician positions involve a warrant officer. Sources: Stars & Stripes, “Unmanned now undermanned: Air Force struggles to fill pilot slots for drones” | See Additional Readings section for full Pentagon report.

Aug 16/13: Block 5 Testing. An $11.4 million firm-fixed-price contract to buy initial MQ-9 Block 5 spares and support equipment, to support 2 Block 5 UAVs. Technically, it’s an engineering change proposal (ECP) to calendar year 2011 spares and support equipment buys. All funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed at Poway, CA, and is expected to be complete by March 28/16. USAF Lifecycle Management Center/WIIK, Medium Altitude Unmanned Aircraft Systems at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH manages the contract (FA8620-10-G-3038, DO 0001-01).

Aug 13/13: EW. General Atomics touts a successful April 12/13 successful demonstration of the MQ-9 as an electronic warfare platform, during the USMC’s Weapons and Tactics Instructor (WTI) course at MCAS Yuma. A company-owned Predator B equipped with a Digital Receiver/Exciter pod and controlled by a GA-ASI Ground Control Station (GCS) was among over 20 aircraft participating. The Northrop Grumman pod “proved to be effective and seamlessly integrated with the Predator B avionics, command and control architecture.”

That’s a minimum baseline. Future demonstrations will work with other unmanned aircraft systems and USMC EA-6B Prowler EW aircraft at places like NAWS China Lake, directing the MQ-9’s EW payload and other assets from the Cyber/Electronic Warfare Coordination Cell (C/EWCC) located at MCAS Yuma. Work to integrate the jet-powered MALD-J jamming missile onto the MQ-9 will be another area of future focus, giving the UAV a range of EW capabilities ranging from jamming remote land mine detonators along convoy routes, to supporting attacks on enemy air defense systems. Source: General Atomics Aug 13/12 release.

Aug 12/13: A maximum $26.2 million, unfinalized sole-source contract for the MQ-9’s Extended Range Phase 2 project, which involves adding longer 88′ wingspan wings that carry internal fuel (q.v. March 12/13). About $7 million is committed immediately from a range of budgets, including FY 2012 R&D, procurement, and repair funds, and FY 2013 R&D funds.

Work will be performed at Poway, CA, and is expected to be complete by Aug 12/15. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WIIK, Medium Altitude Unmanned Aircraft Systems at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8620-10-G-3038, DO 0106).

June 27/13: France wants more? The US DSCA notifies Congress [PDF] of a possible Foreign Military Sale to France for 16 unarmed MQ-9s and the necessary equipment and support, for a potential $1.5B total. Such a commitment would further damage the prospects for a future European UAV, but this is a possible sale at this stage, not a contract yet. This will surely get Dassault and EADS howling.

Le Figaro (a newspaper incidentally owned by Dassault) explains [in French] that the size of the request is just a reflection of the FMS process, but that the maximum quantity France would buy is 12 UAVs – in line with the latest whitepaper – for a maximum of 670 million euros (about $875M). But this gives France the option to meet more than its urgent operational requirement. If not directly off-the-shelf as some amount of “francisation” would be expected, at least from a supplier with an already well-established program.

The package would include 48 Honeywell engines (2 spare engines for each installed one), 8 ground control stations, 40 ground data terminals, 24 satellite earth terminal substations, 40 ARC-210 radio systems, and 48 IFF systems. Again, these quantities are very unlikely to happen.

DSCA: France request

June 26/13: Civil certification. In the wake of Germany’s Euro Hawk cancellation (q.v. May 14/13 entry), General Atomics makes an ambitious commitment to civil certification. This theme was also touched on in the Dutch MoU with Fokker (q.v. June 19/13 entry), and General Atomics has a signed a similar agreement with its German partner RUAG to pursue an:

“Independent Research and Development (IRAD) effort to develop a variant of its Predator B RPA that is fully compliant with the airworthiness requirements of the U.S. Air Force and anticipated NATO foreign customers, as well as offers enhanced capabilities for integration into domestic and international airspace. It is envisioned that the system solution will be a multi-nation, certifiable, exportable configuration built upon the company’s Block 5 Predator B aircraft capabilities and Advanced Cockpit Ground Control Station (GCS) layout.”

Which is all well and good. General Atomics’ team can probably develop the technical means, and Europe’s government are in fact working toward a framework for including UAVs in civil airspace. The problem is that the framework does not exist yet, and getting the bureaucrats to certify something totally new is estimated to cost EUR 500 – 600 million. That sum has to be paid by a customer government or governments, who probably don’t have it lying around in their budgets. If they do put the funds together as some kind of multinational consortium, local projects like the proposed EuroMALE are more likely to get that investment, because the certification becomes a big barrier to entry for foreign firms. Which means more jobs at home. General Atomics.

June 19/13: Netherlands. At the 50th Paris Air Show, General Atomics and Fokker Technologies announce a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to bid the MQ-9 as a solution for Dutch UAV requirements. Fokker has a very strong position in Dutch aerospace, and should be able to improve the Reaper’s chances.

In the MoU, Fokker commits to help adapt the UAV to Dutch national standards; offer guidance and support for Dutch airworthiness certification requirements; provide design, manufacturing, and support for the Electrical Wiring Interconnection system; offer engineering support related to landing and arresting gears; and support the UAV after delivery. GA-ASI.

June 18/13: Sub-contractors. For the past 2 years, General Atomics and Canada’s CAE have been teamed for Canada’s JUSTAS high-end UAV program, offering MQ-9/Predator B and/or Predator C Avenger UAVs. CAE is also a top-tier global simulation and training firm, however, and so GA-ASI is partnering with them to develop the global Mission Training System for the unarmed Predator XP, MQ-9 Reaper, and jet-powered Predator C Avenger.

As a bonus, sales and support of future training systems in Canada and abroad would count toward Canada’s required requirement for 100% industrial offsets against the purchase contract’s value. GA-ASI.

May 31/13: MQ-9. French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian writes an article for Les Echos, stating his commitment to buy 2 MQ-9 Reaper UAVs from the USA, for delivery before the end of 2013. After so much procrastination, with only 2 Harfang drones operational, and with pressing commitments in Mali and elsewhere, he says that France must take the immediately available choice. Defense Aerospace suggests that the French Air Force finally got their way, after stalling other options.

The Americans’ reluctance to allow even key NATO allies like Italy to arm their drones suggests that French MQ-9s will also be unarmed, which Le Drian explicitly confirmed in an interview with Europe 1. France’s reputation for pervasive industrial espionage, even during combat operations, may also get in the way of advanced sensor exports, leaving their Reapers with 3,000 pounds of ordnance capacity that doesn’t get used. The other unresolved issue involves long-range control. If France wants to operate the Reapers via the preferred satellite link method, they’ll need to either spend the time and money to build their own control facility, make arrangements to share Britain’s newly-built RAFB Waddington facility, or co-locate with the USAF at Creech AFB, NV.

Ultimately, Le Drian argues for a European partnership that will share expertise and develop a Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) UAV like the Reaper. The Italians must be happy to hear that, and Le Drian seems to be referring to their discussions when he says “Cette ambition est d’ores et deja en chantier” (loose trans. “we’re already working on it”). The question in Europe is always whether talk will lead to action, so we’ll wait until we see a contract. Les Echos | Defense-Aerospace | Europe 1 .

France will buy 2 MQ-9 Reapers, and pursue a European MALE UAV project

May 14/13: Germany. Germany has decided to end the RQ-4 Euro Hawk project. Not only would it cost hundreds of millions to attempt EASA certification, but reports indicate that German authorities aren’t confident that they would receive certification at the end of the process. Rather than pay another EUR 600 – 700 million for additional UAVs and equipment, and an equivalent amount to attempt EASA certification, Germany will attempt to find another path.

This is bad news for General Atomics’ hopes of selling Germany MQ-9 Reaper UAVs. Reapers also lack anti-collision electronics, and would face many of the same certification problems. Read “RQ-4 Euro Hawk UAV: Death by Certification” for full coverage.

May 9/13: Italy. Foolish American intransigence may be about to create a Reaper competitor.

Aviation Week interviews Italy’s national armaments director Gen. Claudio Debertolis, who reveals that Italy asked to arm its MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper UAVs 2 years ago. The USA has refused to cooperate, halting Italian efforts, while allowing the British to arm their Reaper UAVs. Italy is responsible for wide swathes of territory in Afghanistan, and was the point country for NATO’s campaign against Libya in 2011.

Arming their UAVs is a high priority, and Debertolis confirms that Italy is in talks with potential European partners to move forward with a covert “Super MALE” weaponized UAV program. If they don’t develop a new UAV from scratch, the existing nEUROn program could fill this niche with a full stealth UCAV, and BAE/Dassault’s Mantis/ Telemos is a natural competitor to the Reaper. A 3rd option would be to just buy Heron UAVs from Israel, which that country has reportedly armed. France’s Harfang is a Heron derivative, and Germany is already operating them as rent-a-drones, so an armed Heron and conversion kit could offer a quick solution for all concerned.

The question for any of these options, and even for going ahead and converting existing MQ-1/9 UAVs with American permission, revolved around funding. America may have delayed Italy for so long that it doesn’t have the budget to do anything, even convert its existing UAVs. Aviation Week.

May 3/13: Brimstone for Reapers? With JAGM fielding still some way off, if ever, the USAF’s 645th Aeronautical Systems Group rapid acquisition office is being prodded by the UK to add MBDA’s competing dual laser/ MW radar guided Brimstone missile to the MQ-9’s arsenal. It’s real attraction is a ‘man in the loop’ feature that lets the firing aircraft abort an attack after launch, or correct a missile that locks on the wrong target. In Libya, those characteristics reportedly made it one of the few weapons NATO commanders could use to hit enemy armored vehicles in urban areas.

Brimstone already serves on RAF Tornado GR4 strike jets, and was an option for Britain’s Harrier GR9s before the entire fleet was sold to the US Marines. With Britain’s MQ-9s deployed, they’ve reportedly asked for tests using USAF MQ-9s, and also hope to interest American armed services in the weapon. Defense News | Defense Update.

April 23/13: Canada. General Atomics announces a 2-year agreement with OMX, who has developed the largest, amalgamated structured database of suppliers in the Canadian defence, aerospace, and security industries. Their searchable database has gathered and collected almost 50,000 companies “from existing information available on the Internet by a series of proprietary algorithms,” and has been live since December 2012. Why is this a great deal for OMX? Because:

“Canadian companies interested in becoming suppliers to GA-ASI are encouraged to claim their complimentary company profiles on www.theomx.com and update their information, including Canadian Content Value (CCV) percentages per product.”

It’s a different approach to finding local suppliers, but one that we expect to quickly become the norm around the world.

April 11/13: Support. General Atomics AIS in Poway, CA receives a sole-source $18.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for MQ-1/MQ-9 organic depot activation at Hill FB, UT; Warner-Robins AFB, GA; and Tinker AFB, OK.

Work is expected to be complete by April 4/15. The contract uses FY 2011 monies. USAF Life Cycle Management Command /WIIK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8620-10-G-3038, 0044).

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.

With respect to the MQ-9, the FY 2014 budget cuts 12 Reaper systems. It will buy just 12 MQ-9 Block 5s this year, then pursue the same schedule as the FY 2013 plan. That’s the official line, anyway. FY 2018 adds another 24 Reapers as it moves the planning horizon forward a year, with 65 systems left in the planned program to bring the total to 401.

Delivery of the last 3 FY 2010 and the first 26 FY 2011 UAVs is delayed due to a General Atomics fuel tank manufacturing issue. The Government isn’t accepting aircraft until the manufacturing issue is corrected, but a solution was approved. Correction of tech data, spares and support equipment will be complete in May 2013.

April 2/13: What now? Defense News aptly summarizes the key question facing the USA’s MQ-9 plans:

“On the one hand, the work in Mali shows that the signature weapon of the U.S. war in Afghanistan is outlasting that conflict. On the other, the detachment is a tiny fraction of the Predator/Reaper fleet – and just where are the rest of them going to go?”

With flights below 60,000 feet heavily restricted within the USA, there aren’t that many options stateside, and most of the MQ-9 fleet’s $8,000 per flight hour operations are funded by wartime OCO appropriations. AFRICOM may have the best combination of circumstances abroad, but it can’t absorb all of them, and the $6,000 per flight hour manned MC-12s are a natural competitor.

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 MQ-9 Block 1 Reaper is in production, and the USAF has bought 117, or roughly 30% of their envisioned requirements. Block 5 production decision was delayed 2 years to July 2013, in part due to concerns about software delays, and integration and testing backlogs. Despite the extra time to mature key technologies, the program is currently incorporating several Urgent Operational Requirements from the front lines, including the Advanced Signals Intelligence Payload (ASIP).

Block 5 operational testing is currently planned for November 2013, and the program will be reducing or deferring 12 required block 5 capabilities related to aircraft endurance, radar performance, and reliability, and other areas.

Meanwhile, the USAF is currently re-evaluating its requirements and strategy for managing future Reaper upgrades – which puts the increment II program (GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb integration, Automatic take-off and landing, Deicing, and National airspace certification) in an unfunded limbo.

March 4/13: Reaper-ER plans. Gannett’s Air Force Times reports that the USAF wants to go ahead with the full suite of MQ-9 Reaper ER refits (vid. April 18/12 entry) to extend the UAV’s range and endurance, even in the middle of budget cuts. The USAF wouldn’t confirm FY 2014 budget plans, but GA-ASI director for strategic development Chris Pehrson has told Defense News that “They’ve approved it; it’s a matter of details now.” The report adds that:

“The ER model could allow incursions into Pakistan despite the loss of the Afghan bases that have been home to many unmanned launches in the past decade…. The standard Reaper is configured for 30 hours for the ISR model, and roughly 23 hours if armed with Hellfire missiles. General Atomics believes the ER model would up those to 42 hours for ISR and 35 hours with the Hellfire.”

Some of the ER’s modifications, like winglets on the wingtips and upgraded landing gear, are already slated for fielding in the MQ-9 Block 5. What the ER model adds is upturned instead of parabolic winglets (based on graphics shown to date), and longer wings (+22 feet wingspan, to 88 feet) with 2 “wet” hardpoints that can take fuel tanks. Gannett’s Air Force Times.

Reaper-ER

Jan 17/13: DOT&E Testing Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2012 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). Despite “incremental progress,” the MQ-9 remains in limbo for GBU-38 500-pound JDAM integration, and hasn’t resolved the fuzing and weapons envelope discrepancies identified in 2010.

The Air Force intends to fulfill the MQ-9 Increment One CPD requirements with a final UAS configuration consisting of the Block 5 RPA, Block 30 GCS, and OFP 904.6. The UAV’s core OFP flight software has been a development issue, and DOT&E expects further delays, along with added risks because cyber-vulnerabilities haven’t been heavily tested. AFOTEC hopes to conduct formal operational testing of the final MQ-9 Increment One UAS in 2014.

Dec 21/12: Support. A $337.1 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee and time and material contract to procure logistics services for the USAF’s MQ-1 and MQ-9 Predator/Reaper fleets. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/13. The AFLCMC/WIKBA at Robins AFB, GA manages this contract (FA8528-13-C-0002).

Beyond the original manufacturer GA-ASI, Battlespace Flight Services LLC is also a major support provider for Predator family fleets. Their most recent award was a $950 million contract issued to cover MQ-1/9 fleet support from January 2013 – March 2014.

Dec 20/12: UK. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. in Poway, CA, is being awarded a $42.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price contract for Phase 1 and 2 contractor logistics support to the British MQ-9 fleet.

Work will be performed at Poway, CA; Creech AFB, NV; Waddington, United Kingdom; and Afghanistan. Work is expected to be complete by March 31/15 (FA8620-10-G-3038, 0080).

Dec 19/12: France. DGA chief Laurent Collet-Billon confirms to reporters that France is discussing the option of buying MQ-9s through the US Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program, modifying them to carry European sensors and weapons. Collet-Billon believes that this proposition could interest existing operators in Britain and Italy, as well as potential future operators in Germany and Poland.

IAI’s Heron TP also remains in the running. Aviation Week.

Nov 30/12: Support. A $12.6 million option for the MQ-9 Reaper’s FY 2010/2011 retrofits. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, and is expected to be complete by Sept 30/15 (FA8620-10-G-3038, DO 001302).

Nov 30/12: NASA upgrade. GA-ASI announces an agreement with NASA’s Dryden Flight Center to upgrade their MQ-9 “Ikhana” UAV with new satellite link capabilities. It’s part of a no-cost Space Act Agreement signed in September 2012, and will let the UAV operate in places like the Arctic, where communications can be spotty. NASA Dryden center director David McBride:

“The system improvements enabled by this agreement expand the utility of the Ikhana MQ-9 for NASA science and the development of technology required for unmanned air systems to fly in the national airspace. Both are key national priorities that benefit from this government/industry cooperative effort.”

See: NASA | GA-ASI.

Nov 5/12: + 10 A $125.5 million contract for 10 MQ-9 “modified Block 1″ (Block 5) UAVs. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, and is expected to be complete by Nov 28/14 (FA8620-10-G-3038, DO 0052).

USA buys 10 Block 5s

Oct 25/12: FAA. GA?ASI announces that they’ve successfully demonstrated BAE’s reduced-size AN/DPX-7 Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B)-based system, using a US Customs and Border Protection MQ-9 Guardian (maritime Predator B) flying off of the Florida coast. The test follows GA-ASI’s successful 2011 test of a prototype airborne X-band “Due Regard” AESA Radar aboard a manned aircraft, and is another step toward civil airspace certification.

The FAA has mandated that all aircraft flying above 10,000 feet or around major U.S. airports must be ADS-B equipped by 2020. ADS-B is a GPS-based surveillance system, and DPX-7 combines military IFF (Identification, Friend or Foe) with civilian ADS-B compatibility. The goal of these tests, and of the broader program, is to have a UAV that knows when other aircraft are approaching, and can likewise inform them of its own presence and location. The Guardian UAV did that with ADS-B in the tests, but a Due Regard radar would give it a secondary backup that could also find aircraft whose ADS-B was absent or malfunctioning.

Oct 22/12: UK. The Guardian reports that RAF XIII Squadron being stood up on Oct 26/12 will operate its 5 Reapers from a new control facility at RAFB Waddington. They’ll have 3 control terminals at Waddington, and all 5 UAVs will deploy to Afghanistan. The 5 Reapers already in service there will continue operation from the USAF’s Creech AFB, NV, but Britain wants to consolidate all of its MQ-9 operations to Waddington later on.

XIII Squadron’s deployment will place all 10 British Reapers in Afghanistan. The question is how many of them, if any, will remain there after 2014, when all NATO combat operations are due to end.

FY 2012

GA-ASI develops Reaper ER, adds auto-takeoff and landing. Here’s looking
at you, kid…
(click to view full)

Sept 17/12: Auto-land. GA-ASI announces that the MQ-9 Reaper has successfully completed 106 full-stop Automatic Takeoff and Landing Capability (ATLC) landings, with no issues.

The core ATLC system comes from the US Army’s MQ-1C Gray Eagle, and the move represents a departure for the USAF. The approach to date has been to have pilots fly the Reaper, so of course the tradition is to let them fly all aspects. The problem is, the Army found that they had far fewer accidents with automated landings, than the USAF was having with pilots at the controls. The Army also appreciated the ability to use lower-ranking individuals as UAV controllers. Reapers aren’t cheap, and lowering accident rates took priority. So here we are.

The tests took place at the company’s Gray Butte Flight Operations Facility in Palmdale, CA. The next steps will include envelope expansion for takeoffs and landings at higher wind limits and greater maximum gross weights, differential GPS (dGPS) enhancements, and terrain avoidance with adjustable glideslope. GA-ASI.

Sept 13/12: Support. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. in Poway, CA receives a $297 million cost plus fixed price, firm-fixed-price and time and materials contract for MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper contractor logistics support. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/12. The ASC/WIIK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract.

The mystery revolves around who it’s for. The original Sept 10/12 release mistakenly said that the contract involved foreign military sales to Afghanistan, Iraq and Africa. The Sept 13/12 “correction” said it involved foreign military sales to United Kingdom.

GA-ASI, who should know, says that neither of those descriptions is accurate. It finalizes a December 2011 contract to support the USAF and British RAF’s deployed MQ-1 and MQ-9 units, and includes field support representatives at remote sites. General Atomics is already 9 months into fulfilling it, and this is the revised dollar amount (FA8620-10-G-3038, 002403).

Sept 5/12: MQ-9 block 5. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. announces a successful 1st flight of the MQ-9 Reaper Block 1-plus. With the completion of development, testing, and expected Milestone C decision this fall, the MQ-9 Block 1-plus configuration will be designated “MQ-9 Block 5.”

Block 5 flies

Aug 28/12: GCS. A $46.5 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for ground control stations. Work is to be completed by Feb 28/14 (FA8620-10-G-3038, #0031).

Aug 20/12: Upgrades. An $87.3 million combination firm-fixed-price, cost-plus fixed-fee contract for retrofit kits and their installation on up to 80 FY 2010/2011 MQ-9 Block 1 aircraft, to be completed by August 2016 (FA8620-10-G-3038, #0013).

When asked, GA-ASI clarified that these kits have 2 main components. One involves installing new trailing arm heavyweight landing gear (TA-MLG), to increase weight capacity. The other big change involves upgrading the weapons kit from BRU-15 [PDF] bomb release units to ITT Exelis’ BRU-71/A [PDF]. These new pneumatic bomb racks are meant to be safer, easier to maintain, and more capable.

Note that this retrofit does not update these Reapers to the future Block 5 standard, which will also encompass other upgrades such as redesigned avionics.

July 10/12: Sensors. Raytheon announces a $191 million contract to provide 149 MTS-B multispectral surveillance and targeting turrets for the USAF’s MQ-9 Reaper. Deliveries are scheduled to begin in January 2013, and the contract also includes support equipment and spares.

The MTS-B is used aboard MQ-9s operated by the USAF, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Britain, and Italy, and has been picked for the U.S. Navy’s MQ-4C Triton/ BAMS Global Hawk UAV variant.

June 20/12: POGO, stuck. James Hasik undertakes a thorough analysis of MQ-9 costs, and comparables for the USA’s F-16 fleet, as a riposte to a paper by Winslow Wheeler of the Project On Government Oversight (POGO, vid. March 1/12). To put it charitably, he doesn’t think very much of Wheeler’s analysis. Hasik’s argument and analysis are worth reading in full, but the core sums to this:

“Actually, 29.5 hours is 17 percent of a week… a tad below the objective of 21 percent, and… With proceed time, it could be more like 12/7 coverage [for a 4-UAV set]. But honestly, I don’t know of any other military aircraft that spends 17 percent of its life airborne… For a 7,300-hour per year four-ship CAP, the estimated costs for MQ-9s are $10.5 million in manpower, $17.2 million in variable flying expenses, and $ 9.2 million in depreciation, for a total of $36.9 million. The estimated costs for F-16Cs are $14.5 million in manpower, $37.3 million in variable flying expenses, and $34.1 million in depreciation, for a total of $85.9 million… [even] operating and dumping four old F-16Cs [would cost] ($51.8 million). In peacetime… F-16 aircrews would still need to get in their 200+ hours to maintain proficiency. How much flying is required for Reaper aircrews to maintain the same? Possibly zero… [and] the per-hour cost of the MQ-9 is so much lower than that of the jets that it’s still clearly the better choice.

…In short, including these aircraft in the force structure is good idea simply to save unjustified wear-and-tear on the fighters, which might actually, someday, again be needed for the big war.”

May 29/12: Arming the Italians. There’s no formal DSCA announcement yet, but media reports indicate that the US government wants to approve Italy’s request to arm its MQ-9 fleet.

If that comes to pass, all 3 Reaper customers (the USAF, Britain, and Italy) will have armed their UAVs. The clear implication would also follow that any NATO member, or close allies like Australia, would be authorized to buy armed American UAVs. That has been a source of controversy in the past (vid. Dec 15/11), and until approval and work take place, this can’t be seen as a completely done deal just yet.

Italy’s military has responsibility for a wide area of northern Afghanistan, and arming its MQ-9s would certainly be helpful to them. So far, Italy appears to have bought 4 MQ-9s, out of their approved total of 6.

April 18/12: Reaper ER. General Atomics announces a pair of “extended range” MQ-9 versions, developed with its own funds. Step 1 is heavyweight landing gear, which increases maximum landing weight by 30%, and maximum gross takeoff weight to 11,700 pounds (+12%). Step 2 is a pair of “wet” hardpoints that can handle a pair of fuel tanks. With those enhancements, aerial endurance without other payloads rises from 27 hours – 37 hours. That endurance also translates into range, but endurance is usually the bigger issue for UAVs.

Step 3 could add a bigger change, replacing the Reaper’s 66 foot wingspan with new wings that have internal fuel tanks. The new wingspan becomes 88 feet, with winglets at the tips, and a UAV with this configuration would raise endurance without other payloads to 42 hours. Both sets of changes can be made as upgrades to existing drones. GA-ASI | AIN | WIRED Danger Room.

strong>March 2/12: +2. A $38.4 million firm-price-incentive-firm (FPIF) and firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract for 2 modified MQ-9 Block 1 UAVs (FPIF) and 2 Aircraft Containers (FFP). Work is expected to be complete in November 2013 (FA8620-10-G-3038, 0051).

USA buys 2

March 1/12: How many crashes? Winslow T. Wheeler of the Center for Defense Information asks how many Predators and Reapers are being lost to crashes. He has to extrapolate to great lengths because of less-than-transparent information sharing from the Pentagon and the Air Force. Wheeler himself doesn’t seem to factor in training and maintenance needs, except to say that he believes that MQ-9s may require more maintenance than advertised. That could be a sufficient explanation for the “excess” ordered drones all by itself, if the Pentagon’s goal is to maintain the required number of combat patrols.

As of February 2012, there are 87 MQ-9 aircraft in inventory according to the Air Force’s latest P-40 document. DID doesn’t have the precise number of deliveries to date, but this probably leaves room for a dozen or more missing aircraft, based on the 101 units ordered to the end of FY10, and delays between orders and deliveries that range between 6 – 24 months.

Though the Air Force doesn’t publicly report all its UAV crashes, Mr. Wheeler’s estimate that the Air Force has “anticipated” an attrition rate of up to 35% strikes us as quite the stretch.

Feb 13/12: FY13PB Bad News. the FY 2013 President Budget cuts the order rate per year from 48 to 24. This would go back to the rate executed in FY 2009 and FY 2010, leaving only FY11/12 at the full rate of 48 units per year. Gross weapon system cost for FY13 is at $553.5 million, down from $719.6 million planned for FY 2012. This, as well as a number of aircraft and system upgrades, should drive unit cost above $15 million. The total number of units by the end of FY 2017 would reach 317 aircraft. If Congress agrees with these quantities this will mean that the program peaked in FY 2011 slightly above $1.2 billion in combined procurement and RDT&E, with spending decreasing to about $650-$800 million per year starting in the coming fiscal year. See spreadsheet above.

While procurement takes a hit, total RDT&E over the next 5 years increased by about $200 million vs. the set of numbers communicated by the Air Force in the FY12PB. Finally the budget for modifications is expected to reach a peak of $238.4 million in FY 2013, up from $149.7 million for FY 2012. Modifications would reach $1.15 billion for 2012-17 out of a total $2.5 billion over the life of the program.

Jan 12/12: GCS. The Register – which never has any love lost for Microsoft – reports that recent pictures show that GCS block 30 Predator-Reaper Ground Control Stations are partly switching over from Windows to Linux computer operating systems, after successful keylogger hacking attacks reported in October 2011.

In reality, using Linux in Block 30 was already in the pipeline months before said security incident (Air Force PDF). Work on the next-generation Block 50 continues.

Dec 15/11: Dis-armed. The Wall Street Journal reports that Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Dianne Feinstein [D-CA] is lobbying against selling armed UAVs to any other countries beyond Britain, even key allies. This news is bracketed by announcements that EADS is expanding its UAV cooperation agreements to include Italy’s Alenia, and that those agreement include the possible development of armed UCAV platforms. In a sense, it doesn’t really matter if Feinstein succeeds. The mere fact that she is trying, and that the Obama administration is seen to be vacillating on the issue, will cause other countries to step up their own independent efforts. Wall Street Journal [subscription] | Alenia | EADS.

Dec 8/11: +40 A $319.2 million firm-fixed-price contract for 40 MQ-9 Block 1 UAVs, and 40 aircraft containers. Work is expected to be complete in September 2013. This was a sole-source acquisition (FA8620-10-G-3038 0017).

USA buys 40

Dec 7/11: CIA Reapers? Flight International discusses Google Earth photos that appear to show an MQ-1 or MQ-9 being towed on a runway at Yucca Lake, NV, which is owned by the US National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA).

Their report collates what is known from a variety of sources, but the core speculation is that Yucca Lake may be a CIA base, capable of holding 10-15 drones. The CIA is known to operate both MQ-1s and MQ-9s, alongside the RQ-170 Sentinel stealth drone which recently ended up in Iran’s hands. An earlier Google Earth image, showing what appear to be a Pilatus PC-12 and Beechcraft King Air on the ramp, has also fueled speculation that Yucca Lake is used by Lockheed Martin.

Dec 2/11: Protests. DeWitt Town Justice David Gideon rules that 31 protesters are guilty on 2 charges of disorderly conduct, and sentences 4 to jail time, for blocking the main entrance to the New York Air National Guard’s Hancock Field on April 22/11. They were protesting the base’s MQ-9 Reaper drones, which the 174th Fighter Wing has been remotely flying over Afghanistan, from Syracuse, since late 2009. Syracuse Post-Standard.

Dec 1/11: Away from the FAA. The US Army confirms that the MQ-9 Reaper has begun training missions at Wheeler-Sack Army Airfield in Fort Drum, NY, which allows it to use that site’s restricted airspace without having to get FAA waivers. The cockpit sits at Syracuse’s Hancock International Airport, in order to make takeoffs and landings near-real time, after which the MQ-9 remains connected via satellite.

Nov 28/11: France. The French Senate adopts its Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee’s recommendation to re-route EUR 109 million in funding from France’s 2012 UAV budget, and remove French industrial policy as a decision factor. The move is explicitly designed to favor the MQ-9 Reaper as France’s interim drone, over the more expensive Heron TP picked by France’s DGA. The way France’s political system is structured, however, makes this a long-odds shot at changing the DGA’s mind. Read “Apres Harfang: France’s Next High-End UAVs” for full coverage.

FY 2011

US ramps up Block 1 orders, analyzes limitations; Air Force defers Milestone C decision for Block 5 RPA. Program continues to lack an approved Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP). France loss might still be reverted. Click for video

Sept 14/11: Un-American MQ-9. GA-ASI and SELEX Galileo complete initial testing of a new UAS open payload architecture for their Sovereign Payload Capability (SPC) Demonstration, using GA-ASI’s System Integration Lab (SIL). The broad goal is to be able to add 3rd party sensors and control software without the need to modify software on the MQ-9 or its ground controllers, while letting on-board systems access aircraft data links and communication buses, control certain aircraft power switching, and receive vehicle and sensor data feeds.

The narrower goal involves supporting SELEX Galileo’s sophisticated SeaSpray 7500E AESA maritime radar into the MQ-9, which fits with wider efforts to demonstrate the MQ-9/Predator B’s attractiveness as a maritime surveillance platform.

SPC is a privately-funded Independent Research and Development (IRAD) effort between GA-ASI and SELEX Galileo. GA-ASI is performing the software and hardware modifications, while SELEX Galileo is developing the airborne payload control software, and delivering the radar for integration. A live flight demonstration over the Pacific Ocean is expected in early December 2011. GA-ASI.

Oct 17/11: Italy +2. A $15 million firm-fixed-price contract for the Italian Air Force MQ-9 Reaper Program. This gets production going for 2 MQ-9 Reapers, 3 Lynx Block 30 radars, and 1 spare engine. ASC/WIIK, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8620-10-G-3038, 0006).

In 2008, Italy’s original $330 million DSCA request was for 4 UAVs and 3 ground stations. A Nov 19/09 DSCA request looked to pay up to $63 million more, in order to raise the order limit to 6 equipped UAVs and 4 ground stations. This buy makes 4 UAVs, and 2 ground stations so far. General Atomics’ support contracts (about $30 million so far, vid. Nov 30/10, Aug 26/09) are likely to expand along with the fleet.

Italy buys 2

Oct 14/11: FAA training OK. The FAA has decided to allow MQ-9s from the Hancock Air National Guard to fly training missions in Fort Drum’s special use airspace at all times, rather than on a case-by-case basis. This has been required up until now, because UAVs lack basic “sense and avoid” safety measures, and so have very restricted flight certifications.

The next step is a plan that would allow the 174th Fighter Wing to fly its Reapers from Hancock, NY to Fort Drum, instead of being loaded onto trucks and driven. Sen. Kristen Gillibrand [D-NY] | Read Media | WSYR | YNN Central NY.

Oct 7/11: Virus! WIRED Danger Room reports that a “keylogger” virus has infected the USAF’s MQ-1A/B Predator and MQ-9 Reaper fleets. This is a surveillance virus that records keystrokes, and may periodically send the results elsewhere:

“The virus, first detected nearly two weeks ago by the military’s Host-Based Security System, has not prevented pilots at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada from flying their missions overseas. Nor have there been any confirmed incidents of classified information being lost or sent to an outside source. But the virus has resisted multiple efforts to remove it from Creech’s computers, network security specialists say… “We keep wiping it off, and it keeps coming back,” says a source familiar with the network infection, one of three that told Danger Room about the virus. “We think it’s benign. But we just don’t know.”

See also Las Vegas Review-Journal.

MQ-9, armed
(click to view full)

Aug 19/11: R&D. An $11.6 million cost-plus-incentive and firm-fixed-price contract for development of the MQ-9’s aircraft structural improvement program master plan; a left set synthetic aperture radar; and a high definition integrated sensor control system (FA8620-05-G-3028, 0049-19).

General Atomics’ Lynx SAR ground radar, developed in conjunction with Sandia National Laboratories, is widely used on MQ-1A/B Predator and MQ-1C Gray Eagle UAVs, and operates aboard MQ-9s flown the Italian Air Force and US Customs & Border Patrol.

July 21/11: Loss in France. The French Defense Ministry enters into talks with Dassault Aviation to adapt IAI’s Heron TP for use by the French military, starting in 2014, to plug the gap before a “new generation” of drones becomes available in 2020. Reports cite General Atomics’ MQ-9 Reaper drones as the military’s preferred choice, but the high-value workshare for Dassault and Thales SA clinched the Heron TP as the Ministère de la Défense’s interim choice instead.

France eventually changes its mind, and buys MQ-9s. Read “Apres Harfang: France’s Next High-End UAV” for full coverage.

“Loss” in France

July 1/11: Wildfires. U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) Office of Air and Marine has begun using its MQ-9 and the agency’s “Big Pipe” video service, to help agencies fighting Arizona’s wildfires. NASA’s Ikhana has also been used in a fire survey role, and USCBP appears to have formalized the capability.

The UAV, launched from National Air Security Operations Center-Sierra Vista, is using both its electro-optical and radar sensors, then sending the results down to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Department of Interior (DOI), and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). USCBP Big Pipe images can be viewed anywhere there is an internet connection, including smart-phones. Reviews from the field have been positive. GA-ASI.

May 25/11: Canada. General Atomics and CAE announce an exclusive teaming agreement to offer the MQ-9 as a contender for Canada’s JUSTAS UAV program. GA-ASI.

April 27/11: Germany. General Atomics signs a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with RUAG Aerospace Services GmbH. They plan to offer the MQ-9 as a successor to Germany’s SAATEG program, which is leasing IAI Herons and services from Rheinmetall to cover Germany’s Afghan deployment (vid. Oct 28/09 entry). GA-ASI.

March 31/11: UK. A General Atomics Aeronautical Systems UK Ltd (GA-UK) subsidiary is established with an office in London, managed by Dr. Jonny King. Britain has received 6 MQ-9s, and will grow that fleet to 10 as the December 7/10 orders arrive. GA-ASI.

March 21/11: +6. A $50.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 6 production MQ-9 Reapers, and 2 MQ-9s that will become ground maintenance trainers. Work will be performed in Poway, CA (FA-8620-10-G-3038, 002801).

Feb 2/11: +24. A $148.3 million contract for 24 MQ-9 Reaper UAVs. At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA8620-10-G-3038 0028).

USA buys 31

Feb 2/11: MQ-9 Issues. Defense news quotes Col. James Gear, director of the USAF’s Remotely Piloted Aircraft Task Force, on the future of its UAV fleet. Despite a big commitment to the MQ-1 Predator, the MQ-9 Reaper caused a major mid-stream shift in plans. Col. Gear cites some existing issues with the MQ-9, which could leave it open to a similar shift.

The Reaper does not fare well in icing conditions, and is also not considered survivable against anti-aircraft systems. The issue of jam and snoop-proof data links, and trace-back and verification of signal origins, has also been a live question during the MQ-1 and MQ-9’s tenure. The “MQ-X” that replaces it will have to do better on all 3 counts, and the USAF also wants it to be easily upgradeable via switch-out modules. The Colonel believes the resulting UAV will end up being common with the US Navy’s carrier-based UCLASS requirement, as the 2 services are cooperating closely. That could give Northrop Grumman’s funded X-47B N-UCAS an edge over Boeing’s privately developed X-45 Phantom Ray, but General Atomics will also be submitting its own Avenger/ Sea Avenger.

Having said all of that, the MQ-9 Reaper would be superior to jet-powered UAVS in an environment where airspace is secure and the USA needs lower-cost, long endurance UAVs that combine surveillance and hunter-killer capability. There, it doesn’t need higher-end capabilities, and can deliver the same or better results for less money.

Dec 7/10: Prime Minister David Cameron announces that Britain will “double” its current MQ-9 Reaper fleet, under a GBP 135 million contract. That would place the fleet at its full requested size of 10 UAVs. UK MoD | Flight International.

UK buys 5 more

Dec 1/10: Military support. About 75 airmen from the USAF 451st Expeditionary Aircraft Maintenance Squadron assume responsibility for MQ-9 Reaper maintenance operations at Kandahar Airfield, Afghanistan, replacing a civilian contract force. They become the first USAF servicemembers to maintain MQ-9s since they entered combat operations in Afghanistan. USAF.

Nov 30/10: Italy. An $18.1 million contract modification, covering contractor logistics support for the Italian Air Force’s MQ-9 Reaper program, including all logistics necessary to support the Italian Air Force main operating base and possibly a forward operating base. At this time, $5.4 million has been committed (FA8620-10-G-3038).

Oct 5/10: Support. A $34.4 million contract modification which will provide organizational maintenance support for MQ-9 Reapers and related systems at Creech Air Force Base, NV; Holloman Air Force Base, NM; and deployed locations worldwide. ACC AMIC/PKC at Langley Air Force Base, VA issued this contract (FA4890-07-C-0009, PO 0041).

FY 2010 RAF MQ-9 to Afghanistan
(click to view full)

Sept 15/10: Support. A $51.5 million contract for Initial Spares, Deployment Readiness Packages, and Ground Support Equipment to support the FY 2008 MQ-9 Reaper buy. At this time, all funds have been committed (FA8620-05-G-3028; 0066).

Sept 10/10: UK. Britain has sent an extra MQ-9 Reaper UAV to Afghanistan:

“This latest addition to the Royal Air Force’s Reaper fleet will allow 39 Squadron to fly multiple Reaper aircraft at any one time over Afghanistan. A total of 36 hours of video surveillance can now be delivered in support of troops on the ground every day of the year, which marks an 80 per cent increase over the past 12 months. Reaper has been supporting ground forces in Afghanistan since October 2007 and has now flown over 13,000 hours in direct support of operations.”

Sept 9/10: +6. A $38.3 million contract modification which will buy 6 MQ-9 Reaper aircraft. Which is not the same thing as 6 Reaper systems (which would include all ancillaries), or even 6 fully-armed Reapers (sensors and weapons are separate contracts). At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA8620-05-G-3028; 0050012).

Aug 25/10: Support. A $7.8 million contract modification for the MQ-9 System Development and Demonstration Increment I program. The contract includes a credit for stopped work, a cost overrun for on-going activities, additional scope for a high capacity starter/generator, and the AWM-103 for Hellfire development effort. The AN/AWM-103 is a release and control test set used for pre-flight operational checks of various missile and ordnance launch interfaces, and will also be used for the AIM-9X Sidewinder.

At this time, $3.6 million has been committed by the ASC/WIIK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (F33657-02-G-4035, 0023 36).

June 25/10: France. France’s future UAV options are coming into clearer focus as they prepare to release their new “DTIA” RFP. The MQ-9 is still seen as a contender, but it isn’t alone by any means. Read “Apres Harfang: France’s Next High-End UAV” for in-depth coverage.

June 24/10: New GCS bases. The USAF will create additional ground control bases for its MQ-1 and MQ-9 fleets. Whiteman Air Force Base, MO is expected to reach Initial Operational Capability by February 2011. Ellsworth AFB, SD will achieve IOC by May 2012. Each base will add about 280 people, but no UAVs. USAF.

June 15/10: +4. A $24 million contract for 4 more MQ-9 Reaper (2 production aircraft and 2 ground maintenance trainers). At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA8620-05-G-3028).

A conversation with General Atomics confirms that these 4 MQ-9s are for the USAF, which is exercising a FY 2009 option for more UAVs.

USA buys 5

June 9/10: Italy. Defense News reports that Italy’s 2 ordered Reaper systems will be delivered in July 2010 to Puglia air base in southern Italy, and are expected to start serving in Afghanistan before year-end. The original delivery schedule for the February 2009 order was before 2009 year end, but that has slipped.

An Italian Air Force source told Defense News that 2 more Reapers will be delivered by the end of 2010. The Italian Air Force reportedly wants to have 2 UAVs (Predator or Reaper) ready to fly at all times in Afghanistan, or 1 permanently flying. Italy already operates a small set of MQ-1 Predator UAVs. See also Feb 5/09 ad Dec 19/09 entries.

June 4/10: Automatic? A $9 million contract which will provide “for MQ-9 auto take-off and landing capability modification to the system development and demonstration bridge effort.” US Army UAVs have tended to use automatic take off and landing, which allows them to use non-commissioned officers as UAV controllers. It has also led to lower crash rates, compared to USAF UAVs.

At this time, $1 million has been obligated by the 703th AESG/SYK at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8620-05-G-3028).

May 19/10: UK. The UK MoD announces that The RAF’s MQ-9 Reaper program has now exceeded 10,000 hours of armed overwatch in support of UK and coalition forces in Afghanistan.

The Reapers are flown by 39 Squadron via satellite from a UK operations facility at Creech AFB, NV, USA. Its primary role is surveillance, but from May 2008 the system has been armed with Hellfire missiles and laser-guided bombs. In the last 12 months alone, 39 Squadron has more than doubled its operational flying output, and more RAF MQ-9s are expected to arrive in theater in 2010. UK MoD.

March 30/10: Euro-competitor? The UK’s Labour Party Minister of Defence Quentin Davies says that the U.K., France and Italy have commissioned a set of firms including Dassault Aviation SA to study a multinational project for an armed UAV with surveillance capabilities. The goal is “an improvement on [MQ-9] Reaper, the next generation,” and the report is due for completion in June 2010.

BAE’s Mantis UAV project is one possible basis for an effort of this type, and the UK MoD has confirmed that “Mantis will be one contender in the assessment phase [but] no firm commitments have been made.” Other possibilities might include widening the current French/ German/ Spanish Talarion UAV project, or merging the UK’s stealthy Taranis UCAV project into the similar nEUROn consortium, which already includes France and Italy. A great deal depends on the specifications laid out for the new UAV. BusinessWeek.

Feb 1/10: +2 test. A $12.8 million cost plus fixed fee term contract to provide 2 MQ-9 Reaper test aircraft. They will support immediate and future development tests needs on the Reaper Increment I program. All funds have been committed by the 703rd Aeronautical Systems Group at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (FA8620-05-G-3028-005005).

December 2009: Hacked! Media reports reveal that MQ-1 Predator UAVs have had their surveillance footage intercepted, using an inexpensive satellite receiver and low-cost SkyGrabber software. The reason? No encryption between the UAV and its ground receivers. The Wall Street Journal adds that:

“The US government has known about the flaw since the US campaign in Bosnia in the 1990s, current and former officials said. But the Pentagon assumed local adversaries wouldn’t know how to exploit it, the officials said.”

Some reports added that retrofits are now underway to fix this problem, beginning with deployed UAVs. General Atomics confirmed to DID that the Reaper has used the same SATCOM setup as its Predators. See Wall St. Journal | Ars Technica | cnet | Defense Tech | John Robb’s Global Guerrillas | Flight International.

Hacked

Dec 7/09: US CBP. US Customs and Border patrol takes delivery of its first MQ-9 “Guardian” variant in Paldale, CA, as part of a joint program with the US Coast Guard to investigate UAVs for maritime patrol roles. Australia has already done similar work, as part of its Coastwatch program.

The Guardian has been modified from a standard MQ-9 with structural, avionics, and communications enhancements, as well as the addition of a Raytheon SeaVue Marine Search Radar, and an Electro-optical/Infrared (EO/IR) Sensor that is optimized for maritime operations. Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E) is expected to begin in early 2010 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL, and if all goes well, the UAV will be sent out on counter-narcotics operations beginning in spring 2010. General Atomics release.

These UAVs are bought by the Department of Homeland Security, not the Department of Defense. By 2014, US CBP has 11 MQ-9s, including 2 “Guardian” maritime patrol variants with the SeaVue radar.

US Customs & Border Patrol

Nov 19/09: The US DSCA announces [PDF] Italy’s official request for 2 more unarmed MQ-9 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), 1 Mobile Ground Control Station, plus maintenance support, engineering support, test equipment, ground support, operational flight test support, communications equipment, technical assistance, personnel training/equipment, spare and repair parts, and other related support. The estimated cost is up to $63 million. The contractors would be:

• General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. San Diego, California (UAV)
  
• Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems El Segundo, CA (surveillance/targeting turret)
  
• General Atomics Lynx Systems San Diego, CA (SAR radar)

Italy has already ordered 2 MQ-9s and 2 ground stations (vid. Feb 5/09, Aug 26/09), and its original Aug 1/08 DSCA request was for 4 UAVs and 3 ground stations. This request would raise the order limit to 6 UAVs and 4 ground stations.

DSCA request: Italy (2)

Nov 2/09: Seychelles. Voice of America quotes U.S. Africa Command spokesman Vince Crawley, who says several MQ-9 Reapers will be based in the Seychelle Islands (just north of Madagascar) by late October or November 2009. The UAVs will be based at the international airport in the capital Mahe, and are there at the request of the Seychelles government. AFRICOM says they will not be armed, which makes the MQ-9 Reaper an odd choice versus the MQ-1 Predator.

The request came after Somali pirates began extending their operations more than 1,000 km away from Somali shores. Two Seychelles-flagged vessels have been hijacked in 2009, and several others attacked in waters near the Seychelles and the Comoros Islands. India also has close relations with the Seychelles, and sent a warship to the area in May 2009. Voice of America | Stars and Stripes | Crossed Crocodiles.

Oct 28/09: Germany. In contrast to Italy’s buy, Germany leases Israeli Heron UAVs for use in Afghanistan. At least one report suggests that negative experiences with Foreign Military Sales rules tipped Germany away from an MQ-9 Reaper, which was the target of an Aug 1/08 DSCA request. Time will tell if Germany’s procurement policies bear that out.

Germany leases Heron UAVs instead

Oct 14/09: Losing my connection. Esquire Magazine’s “We’ve Seen the Future, and It’s Unmanned” article includes an excerpt covering MQ-9 operations that may raise a few eyebrows:

“During “lost link” episodes, when communication with the air crew is broken, the plane circles on a preset course and waits for direction. “We have to find it. It’s like hide-and-seek,” Dowd said. The week Gersten took command at Creech, a power surge hit the base and he lost contact with several Predators and Reapers over Afghanistan and Iraq. His crews told him this was nothing to worry about, and in fifteen minutes all the planes were back online. Two weeks later, another power surge hit Creech and he lost contact with more Predators and Reapers. Within a half hour, all were found. But systems so technology-dependent will be vulnerable to exploitation, whether through hacking or physical interruption of data – shooting down a satellite, perhaps, along its round-the-world journey. And in increasingly wired war zones, everyone will be fighting for bandwidth.”

See also Sept 13/09 entry, re: the forced shoot-down of an MQ-9 over Afghanistan.

Oct 10/09: France. Reports surface in the French media that France is considering an urgent purchase of 2 MQ-9 Reaper systems (4 MQ-9s, 2 ground stations) for use in Afghanistan at a cost of up to $100 million, because 2 of its 3 deployed EADS SIDM/ Harfang UAVs are grounded for repairs, and have had issues with human error and contractor support.

France has advanced UAV programs in development, in collaboration with other European countries, at the medium, heavy, and UCAV levels. A recent test of the jet-powered Barracuda UAV demonstrator in Canada, and ongoing progress on the multinational Talarion and nEUROn UCAV underscores the seriousness of those efforts, but they are not realistic fielding options. Assuming that France does not wish to lease a UAV service as the Australians, British, Canadians, and Dutch have done, the MQ-9 offers commonality with the American, British, and Italian contingents in theater, as well as a UAV with strong weapons options that set it apart from the rest.

A wild card in this situation is France’s reputation for pervasive industrial espionage, even during combat operations. With a number of advanced French-led UAV programs in development, it would certainly be possible to make very good use of full access to America’s most advanced serving UAV. Reuters || In French: Le Point magazine EXCLUSIF | France-Soir | Le Monde | TF 1.

Oct 9/09: Sensors. Northrop Grumman Space and Mission Systems Corp., of San Jose, CA, receives a $9.6 million contract to perform preliminary design for a scaled communications intelligence/ Airborne signals intelligence (COMINT/SIGINT) payload system for the MQ-9. At this time, $7.6 million has been committed by the 659th AESS/SYKA at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8620-08-C-3004).

FY 2009 MQ-9 at Kandahar
(click to view full)

Sept 30/09: Support. A $19.5 million contract to provide various MQ-9 Reaper equipment and items including aircraft supplemental spares, 30 day pack-up kits, and ground support equipment. At this time, the entire amount has been committed by the 703th AESG/SYK at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8620-05-G-3028, DO 0034).

Sept 23/09: Weapons. An AIM-9X Sidewinder advanced air-to-air missile fired from a U.S. Air Force F-16C fighter sinks a rapidly moving target boat in the Gulf of Mexico. The missile had received a software upgrade, allowing its imaging infrared seeker to engage land targets as well as other aircraft. This is the 3rd success of the missile in ground-strike mode, following tests in April 2008 (F-16 vs. maneuvering boat), and March 2007 (F-15C vs. moving armored personnel carrier).

This test is especially significant for the MQ-9, as the AIM-9X is one of its permitted weapons. More to the point, unlike helicopter-fired missiles such as the AGM-114 Hellfire, Sidewinders are specifically designed to deal with the cold and conditions found at high altitude, where helicopters do not fly. That makes the AIM-9X a very useful dual role option for Reapers that want to make full use of their 50,000 foot flight ceiling. Raytheon release.

Sept 13/09: Kill it. The USAF reportedly sends fighters to shoot down an MQ-9 over Afghanistan, after the UAV stopped responding to pilot commands. The Reaper would not have been a danger to anyone, but the Air Force is not willing to allow the UAV and its systems to fall into untrusted hands. See also Oct 14/09 entry. Popular Science | Aviation Week.

Rogue shot down

Aug 26/09: Italy. A $10.25 million modified contract for 1 year of Contractor Logistics Support for the Italian purchase of MQ-9 Reaper aircraft under the Foreign Military Sales program (q.v. Feb 5/09 entry). At this time $5 million has been committed by the 703th AESG/SYK at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8620-05-G-3028 0058030).

March 10/09: Weapons. The USAF announces that a series of GBU-38 JDAM drops have gone well, and they expect certification for the Reapers to use the 500 pound GPS-guided bombs soon. USAF 703rd Aeronautical Systems Group Commander, Col. Chris Coombs says that:

“Our next step is to add the GBU-39B Small Diameter Bomb which will further increase the types of target sets the warfighter can engage.”

The GBU-39 is a 250 pound glide bomb with similar GPS guidance, but its shape and fuze make it good at penetrating hardened bunkers or exploding in the open. The current launcher carries 4 bombs, and will be interesting to see if the GBU-39 ends up needing a smaller launcher for MQ-9 use.

Feb 5/09: The USAF is awarding a maximum $81.3 million firm-fixed-price contract to General Atomics Aeronautical Systems of San Diego, CA for 2 MQ-9 Reapers and 2 Mobile Ground Control Stations. Italy is the buyer, and $40 million has been committed. The 703 AESG/SYF at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH officially manages this Foreign Military Sales contract (FA8620-05-G-3028).

Per the Aug 1/08 entry, Italy’s DSCA request involved 4 MQ-9 UAVs, 3 Mobile Ground Control Stations, and 5 years of maintenance and other support. The approach taken by Britain’s RAF has been to secure the authorization and then buy UAVs at a gradual pace (See Sept 5/08 entry); Italy appears to be following that model as well.

Italy buys 2

Feb 3/09: Training. Members from the 432d Wing complete a successful test flight from Holloman AFB, New Mexico after flying an MQ-9 Reaper over Fort Irwin, California training air space using “remote split operations.” This approach, which is used extensively on CENTCOM’s front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan, involves Predator aircraft launched by crews at one location, while flown by crews from another location via satellite link.

Holloman AFB is the USAF’s preferred location for future MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1B Predator formal training units, which will move from Creech AFB near Las Vegas once Holloman is ready. Shephard report | USAF re: remote split operations.

Jan 29/09: Turkey. The Turkish newspaper Hurriyet Daily News reports that Turkey is looking to buy MQ-9 Reapers, and submitted a formal request in December 2008. The ultimate decision by the United States on whether to accept and present this formal export request to Congress through the US DSCA is expected in the next 6 months – and as of 2012, no such request had been published.

A refusal can be expected to have an impact on Turkish procurement policy. The Hurriyet article does not believe that Turkey’s membership n the F-35 program would be affected, but it does suggest that Turkey would step up existing efforts to diversify its weapon sources.

Nov 26/08: A firm-fixed-price, not-to-exceed $115.2 million contract for 16 “Global War on Terror” MQ-9 Reaper UAVs. At this time $52.9 million has been committed. This contract is managed by the 703 AESG/SYK at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8620-05-G-3028).

FY 2008 Mariner UAV
(click to view full)

Sept 5/08: UK. Britain’s Royal Air Force is set to expand its fleet of Reapers to 5 after Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) agreed to buy 2 more airframes from the US, and to replace the MQ-9 that crashed in April 2008. Shephard:

“According to DE&S’ Strategic UAV Experimental Integrated Procurement Team, which is heading up the UK’s Reaper procurement activities, the DSCA notice allows the UK to procure the aircraft in batches as required. Effectively this means that the UK has a further seven aircraft to draw on before it would have to go back through the Foreign Military Sales Process.”

Aug 18/08: Training. USAF Air Combat Command commander Gen. John D.W. Corley announces that Holloman AFB, NM, is the preferred potential location for an additional unmanned aircraft system Formal Training Unit (FTU). This is the first step that could lead to the initial stand-up of FTU operations for MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper combat operators, in 2009, pending a favorable environmental impact analysis.

The current MQ-1/MQ-9 FTU is at Creech AFB, NV. USAF release.

Aug 8/08: Performance problems. A US GAO decision denies Lockheed Martin’s bid protest over the BAMS maritime surveillance UAV contract – and cites ongoing performance issues with its key partner General Atomics as the reason. The GAO summary for Bid Protest B-400135 states that:

“Agency reasonably determined, in procurement for unmanned maritime surveillance aircraft, that awardee [DID: Northrop Grumman] had significant advantage over protester [DID: Lockheed Martin] with respect to past performance where: protester’s subcontractor [DID: General Atomics], responsible for approximately 50 percent of contract effort, had recent past performance history of being unable to resolve staffing and resource issues, resulting in adverse cost and schedule performance on very relevant contracts for unmanned aircraft; record did not demonstrate that protester’s subcontractor had implemented systemic improvement that resulted in improved performance; [in contrast] operating division of the awardee also had performance problems on very relevant contracts for unmanned aircraft, many had been addressed through systemic improvement; and overall performance of awardee’s team on most evaluated contract efforts was rated better than satisfactory, while the overall performance of protester’s team on 11 of 26 contract efforts was only marginal.”

The Lockheed Martin team’s BAMS entry was built around the Mariner UAV, an MQ-9 variant. The GAO decision then goes on to discuss these issues in more detail:

“In contrast, however, GA-ASI’s contract performance was a matter of great concern to the agency. Specifically, while recognizing that GA-ASI had demonstrated a willingness and ability to respond on short notice to evolving Global War on Terror (GWOT) warfighter requirements, the SSEB found that GA-ASI’s performance demonstrated: inadequate staffing, resulting in performance problems on SDD contracts for the MQ-9 Reaper (a second-generation, Predator B model) and the MQ-1C Extended Range/Multipurpose (ER/MP) UAS (a second-generation Predator model); unfavorable schedule performance on four of seven relevant GA-ASI contracts, including very relevant contracts for the MQ-9 Reaper, UAS ground control stations, MQ-1C ER/MP, I-GNAT Extended Range UAS (a version of the Predator with some differences for the Army), and MQ-1 baseline Predator; poor performance in meeting technical quality requirements on three of seven GA-ASI contracts, including contracts for the MQ-9 Reaper, MQ-1C ER/MP, and I-GNAT Extended Range UAS; and workload exceeded the firm’s capacity on five of seven GA-ASI contracts, including contracts for the MQ-9 Reaper, UAS ground control stations, MQ-1C ER/MP, I-GNAT Extended Range UAS, and MQ?1/MQ-9 maintenance support. In summary, the SSEB found the overall performance of GA-ASI on its very relevant contracts for the MQ-9 Reaper (most delivery orders), UAS ground control stations, MQ-1C ER/MP, and I-GNAT Extended Range UAS to be marginal.”

Aug 1/08: Italy. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Italy’s formal request to buy 4 MQ-9 UAVs, 3 Mobile Ground Control Stations, 5 years of maintenance support, engineering support, test equipment, ground support, operational flight test support, communications equipment, technical assistance, personnel training/equipment, spare and repair parts, and other related elements of logistics support.

The estimated cost is $330 million, and will not require the assignment of any U.S. Government or contractor representatives to Italy. That country already operates some of General Atomics’ MQ-1 Predator systems.

The principal contractors will be: General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. in San Diego, CA (UAVs); General Atomics Lynx Systems San Diego, California (lynx ground viewing radar); and Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems El Segundo, California (surveillance turrets).

DSCA request: Italy (4)

Aug 1/08: Germany. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Germany’s formal request to buy 5 MQ-9 UAVs, 4 Mobile Ground Control Stations, 1 year of maintenance support, engineering support, test equipment, ground support, operational flight test support, communications equipment, technical assistance, personnel training/equipment, spare and repair parts, and other related elements of logistics support.

The estimated cost is $205 million, and will not require the assignment of any U.S. Government or contractor representatives. The principal contractors will be: General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. in San Diego, CA (UAVs); General Atomics Lynx Systems San Diego, California (lynx ground viewing radar); and Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems El Segundo, California (surveillance turrets).

In the end, however, the Germans chose to lease IAI’s Heron-1 UAVs, and left its option to buy MQ-9s on the table. Germany will also operate up to 5 RQ-4 Eurohawk UAVs from Northrop Grumman for strategic reconnaissance.

DSCA request: Germany (5)

July 15/08: UK support team. General Atomics and Cobham plc announce a teaming agreement with Cobham plc to cover whole life support arrangements for Britain’s “GA-ASI products.” This teaming arrangement will initially focus on supporting the UK’s existing MQ-9 Reapers currently in operation with the Royal Air Force (RAF) over Afghanistan.

The MQ-9s are currently the British military’s only significant GA-ASI products. The release says that this arrangement “will develop support solutions that could be used by the UK MoD to offer increased flexibility and sovereignty over existing arrangements.” Immediate dividends will be small, but if competitors fail to match these kinds of arrangements, it could give General Atomics an important advantage as it seeks to sell more MQ-9s to Britain and offer other products like the derivative Mariner maritime UAV or other members of its signature Predator family. GA-ASI release | Cobham release [PDF].

Mantis UCAV
(click to view larger)

July 14/08: Mantis vs. Reaper? The UK Ministry of Defence operates MQ-9s, but it has also entered into a jointly funded 1st phase of the Mantis UAS Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrator program with BAE Systems. The mockup unveiled at the Farnborough 2008 air show shows a UCAV that’s clearly in the MQ-9 Reaper’s class, with up to 6 weapons pylons for Paveway IV laser/GPS guided bombs and Brimstone missiles. The design looks less like a high-altitude strike UAV, however, and more like the offspring of the USA’s A-10 “Warthog” battlefield support plane and Argentina’s IA 58 Pucara counter-insurgency aircraft.

BAE will work with the MoD and key UK industrial parties including Rolls-Royce (RB 250 turboprops for now), QinetiQ, GE Aviation, SELEX Galileo and Meggitt, and the design and manufacture of the twin-engine Mantis and associated ground control infrastructure are already underway. Assembly, vehicle ground testing and infrastructure integration testing will take place later in 2008, with first flight currently scheduled for early 2009. In the end, BAE would add Dassault to its team, and make Mantis the core of their Telemos future UAV’s bid to supplement or replace Britain’s MQ-9s. BAE release | Flight International | Defense Update | Defense News | Aviation Week | domain-B | WIRED Danger Room.

June 6/08: Weapons hot. A British MoD article states that the UK’s Reapers have crossed the line, and become weapons platforms as well:

“An RAF Reaper Unmanned Aerial Vehicle used its weapons system in support of coalition forces in Afghanistan for the first time this week. As with any other munitions this was carried out under strict Rules of Engagement… RAF Reapers are used predominately to provide Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance (ISTAR)… 39 Squadron, which is the RAF’s Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Squadron, was reformed in January this year and operates from Nevada in the USA as part of the USAF 432nd Wing. The Reaper aircraft are based in Afghanistan but are remotely controlled by satellite link from the USA… Although it’s an RAF Squadron, 39 Squadron is comprised of personnel from all three UK services; RAF, Royal Navy and the Army.”

UK – armed.

March 31/08: A firm fixed price contract for $28.9 million, to build, test, and deliver 4 MQ-9 UAVs. All funds have been committed (FA8620-05-G-3028 ORDER 0031).

USA buys 4

March 7/08: Jane’s Defence Weekly reports that Britain’s MQ-9 DSCA request has “not survived the planning round 2008 [PR08] process.” If true, there will be no further orders.

Jan 16/08: A firm fixed price contract for $16.2 million to build, test, and deliver one (1) MQ-9 Reaper along with containers, a 30-day pack-up kit, and initial spares. At this time $12.1 million has been committed (FA8620-05-G-3028-0041).

USA buys 1

Jan 3/08: The US DSCA announces the United Kingdom’s official request for “10 MQ-9 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) aircraft, 5 Ground Control Stations, 9 Multi-Spectral Targeting Systems (MTS-B/AAS-52), 9 AN/APY-8 Lynx Synthetic Aperture Radar/Ground Moving Target Indicator (SAR/GMTI) systems, 3 Satellite Earth Terminal Sub Stations (SETSS), 30 H764 Embedded Global Positioning System Inertial Navigation Systems, Lynx SAR and MTS-B spares, engineering support, test equipment, ground support, operational flight test support, communications equipment, technical assistance, personnel training/equipment, spare and repair parts, and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $1.071 billion.”

The principal contractors will be General Atomics’ Aeronautical Systems (MQ-9) and Lynx Systems (Lynx ground scan radar) subsidiaries in San Diego, CA, and Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems in El Segundo, CA (MTS-B/AAS-52).

Britain decided to stand up a Reaper flight in 2007, after early experience with 3 unarmed MQ-9s in Afghanistan proved positive. These aircraft would form the B Flight of a new UAV squadron, while A flight will comprise the existing RAF detachment within the UK-USAF Joint (MQ-1A) Predator Task Force located at Nellis AFB, NV. At present, the British say they are looking at the MQ-9 only as a high-end surveillance drone to complement their mid-range Watchkeeper Mk450 UAVs and short-range Deseert Hawk and RQ-11 Raven UAVs.

DSCA request: UK (10)

RAF MQ-9, Kandahar
(click to view full)

Nov 9/07: UK. The UK MoD publishes “Reaper takes to the air in Afghanistan,” confirming that the RAF’s first MQ-9 has been deployed and is performing surveillance missions in theater. The UAVs will be operated by personnel from the RAF’s 39 Squadron Personnel, which in addition to the RAF personnel also has Army and Navy personnel working in a number of functional areas. The release adds that:

“The Reaper capability is still being developed. Training will continue alongside operational missions and there will be a steady build up to a full UK capability. The Reaper UAV is currently unarmed. It is capable of being armed and the MOD is investigating arming options.”

Britian arranged to buy a 3rd UAV in 2007 as part of the UK’s Urgent Operational Request, and all 3 MQ-9s were delivered into theater in October 2007.

Nov 7/07: 1st bomb drop. The USAF confirms that the MQ-9A Reaper demonstrated its hunter-killer capability by dropping its first precision-guided bomb over the Sangin region of Afghanistan.

“[The UAV] was on the hunt for enemy activity when the crew received a request for assistance from a joint terminal attack controller on the ground. Friendly forces were taking fire from enemy combatants. The JTAC provided targeting data to the pilot and sensor operator, who fly the aircraft remotely from Creech Air Force Base, Nev. The pilot released two GBU-12 500-pound laser-guided bombs, destroying the target and eliminating the enemy fighters.”

Oct 28/07: Boom! The USAF reports that In Afghanistan, the MQ-9 Reaper conducted its first precision combat strike sortie, targeting enemy combatants in Deh Rawod with a Hellfire missile. The strike was reported as successful.

1st Reaper strikes

Oct 07: Initial operating capability reached.

IOC

Oct 1/07: Support. A $21.9 million contract modification for MQ-9 organizational maintenance support at Creech AFB, NV and deployed sites worldwide. This support includes aircrew duties/responsibilities, maintaining equipment in accordance with approved applicable AF technical engineering data, quality assurance, parts/supplies ordering and accountable and flying and maintenance schedule development.

At this time all funds have been committed. Air Combat Command AMIC/PKC in Newport News, VA manages this contract (FA4890-07-C-0009-P00006).

FY 2005 – 2007

US orders; Britain requests Reapers. MQ-9 w. Paveways
(click to view larger)

Aug 31/07: Support. A $65 million firm fixed price contract for various MQ-9 Reaper equipment and items including Aircraft Initial Spares, 30 Day Pack-up Kits, and Ground Support Equipment. All funds are already committed (FA8620-05-G-3028, Order 0034).

June 22/07: +4. A firm-fixed-price contract modification for $44 million to build, test, and deliver 4 MQ-9 UAVs AVs and associated equipment, to include initial spares, ground support equipment, and 30-day pack-up kits.

Solicitations began in January 2006, negotiations were complete in April 2007, and work will be complete by December 2009. All funds are already committed (FA8620-05-G-3028-0007, PO 0001).

USA buys 4

May 7/07: +4. A $59 million firm-fixed-price contract to build, test, and deliver 4 MQ-9 UAVs and associated equipment, to include initial spares, ground support equipment, and 30-day pack-up kits.

Solicitations began in January 2006, negotiations were complete in April 2007, and work will be complete by December 2009. All funds are already committed (FA8620-05-G-3028-0007).

USA buys 4

March 15/07: +2. A $43.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to build, test, and deliver 2 MQ-9 UAVs, 2 mobile ground control stations, and associated equipment to include initial spares, ground support equipment, pack-up kits, and Ku SATCOM antennas. At this time, $32.7 million has been committed. Work will be complete in December 2008 (FA8620-05-G-3028, order number 0024/no modification number at this time).

USA: 2

Sept 27/06: UK. The US DSCA announce’s Britain’s formal export request for 2 MQ-9 UAVs, 2 Multi-Spectral Targeting Systems (MTS-B) surveillance & targeting turrets, 2 AN/APY-8 Lynx Synthetic Aperture Radar (airborne), 1 Ground Control Station, 1 Mobile Ground Control Station, Ku-Band Communications spares, Lynx Synthetic Aperture Radar Spares, engineering support, test equipment, ground support, operational flight test support, communications equipment, and other forms of support and assistance.

The principal contractors will be General Atomics Aeronautical Systems in San Diego, CA; General Atomics Lynx Systems in San Diego, California; and Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems in El Segundo, CA (MTS-B). Implementation of this proposed sale won’t require the assignment of any U.S. Government or contractor representatives to the United Kingdom.

Instead, RAF 39 Squadron began operating out of Creech AFB near Vegas in January 2007, alongside the American Reaper force. Sources: DSCA.

DSCA request: UK (2)

Sept 22/06: Support. A $27.6 million cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification for 4 field compatible aircraft maintenance test stations, 2 MD-1A mobile ground control stations, 2 MD-1A fixed ground control stations, 5 MD-1B dual control mobile ground control stations, and non-recurring engineering per FY 2006 Predator MQ-1 and Reaper MQ-9 requirements. At this time, $20.7 million has been obligated. Solicitations began in June 2006, negotiations were complete September 2006, and work will be complete September 2008 (FA8620-05-G-3028 Delivery Order 0022)

Sept 22/06: Support. A $15.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 18 ground data terminals, ground support equipment, 2 remote split operation kits, 1 replenishment spares package kit, 1 initial spares package, and 2 primary Predator sitcom link modem assemblies per FY 2006 Predator MQ-1 and Reaper MQ-9 requirements. Solicitations began in June 2006, negotiations were complete September 2006, and work will be complete June 2010. At this time, $11.8 million has been obligated (FA8620-05-G-3028 Delivery Order 0010)

According to Pentagon documents, FY 2006 Predator UAV budgets were $153.8 million from the US Army, and $64.1 million from the US Air Force. These figures would not include supplemental funding budgets, which are intended for use to replace war materials and sustain equipment in the field.

MQ-9 trials
(click to view full)

May-September 2006: Australia. Australia’s government announces a September 2006 trial across Australia’s North West Shelf region, using a General Atomics MQ-9 Mariner Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) and an Armidale Class patrol boat. Australian DoD release | Spacewar | DSTO mini-site.

June 30/06: Upgrades. a $5.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for the retrofit of 5 MQ-9 Predator aircraft with upgraded landing gear for increased landing capacity, Hellfire/EGBU-12/Special Project A Payloads, and interim modem assembly capabilities. Also included in the cost of this effort is one lot of spares and system integration lab upgrade work.

Solicitations began April 2006, negotiations were complete June 2006, and work will be complete June 2007. All funds have been committed (F33657-02-G-4035/order #0028, modification #13).

Jan 25/06: +5. A $41.4 million fixed-price incentive firm contract to build, test, and deliver 5 MQ-9 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and associated equipment, to include initial spares, ground support equipment, pack-up kits, and Ku SATCOM antennas.

Solicitations began November 2004, negotiations were complete in December 2005, and work will be complete by March 2008. All funds are already committed (FA8620-05-G-3028 Order 0004).

USA buys 5

March 29/05: A $68.2 million cost plus incentive fee contract for the System Development and Demonstration (SDD) of the MQ-9 Hunter-Killer Aircraft. The effort includes options for the retrofit of 4 aircraft to the SDD configuration, along with communications and ground and flight test facility upgrades. At this time, $15.6 million of the funds have been committed (F33657-02-G-4035, Order 23).

MQ-9 Ancillaries Ikhana fire image
(click to view full)

The Reaper’s technical maturity and 3,000 pound payload limit make it a very attractive platform for testing advanced military surveillance payloads, even as NASA’s MQ-9 Ikhana is used to test advanced civil payloads for monitoring wildfires, etc. Tested payloads can be added to the MQ-9s arsenal of options, enhancing its value. Once tested, however, they can also be added to other platforms, from manned aircraft like the USA’s MC-12W Liberty King Air twin-turboprops, to other high-end UAVs, and even pending airships like the Army’s LEMV.

The following set of entries is meant to be illustrative of the payloads under active consideration, rather than being an exhaustive list of milestones & contracts.

Jan 22/14: Pandora EW. General Atomics and Northrop Grumman conduct the 2nd USMC demonstration of MQ-9s as electronic warfare platforms, using NGC’s Pandora low-power, wideband electronic warfare pod. They tested Pandora’s compatibility with the Reaper’s avionics and command and control architecture, including control of the Pandora pod’s operations, and tested the entire system’s integration into a Marine Command and Control (C2) network.

A Cyber/Electronic Warfare Coordination Cell (CEWCC) located at MCAS Yuma ran the pod and UAV, which supported a large aircraft strike package that included EA-6B Prowler jamming aircraft. General Atomics sees this as an important way to broaden the Reaper’s usefulness, in order to keep it from budget cuts. Sources: GA-ASI, “GA-ASI and Northrop Grumman Showcase Additional Unmanned Electronic Attack Capabilities in Second USMC Exercise”.

Feb 13/13: MALD-J EW. Raytheon Company and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. announce that they’re working to integrate MALD/MALD-J decoys onto the MQ-9 Reaper UAV. Ground Verification Test phase completed in November 2012 at GA-ASI’s Gray Butte Flight Operations Facility in Palmdale, CA. Integration is estimated to conclude in 2013.

The Reaper’s slow speed means that their use would need to be timed well, and arranged carefully so as not to make their mission obvious. On the other hand, the Israelis have made an art form out of using drones to provoke air defense batteries into using their radars and communications, then harvesting the emissions for analysis and counter-programming. Enough of that in advance, and the MALDs could just look like the big killer strike wave has finally arrived. Throw in MALD-Js for jamming, and the potential uses multiply further.

Aug 5/11: Missile Defense? The US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) announces a maximum $48.4 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to General Atomics Aeronautical in Poway, CA to develop and demonstrate “precision three-dimensional tracking of ballistic missiles from a long endurance, high-altitude unmanned air system.” General Atomics has confirmed the identity of the HALE test system as the MQ-9 Reaper UAV. Read “Ballistic Missile Tracking with UAVs: HALE, Well Met” for full coverage.

Jan 27/11: Gorgon Stare. The twin-pod Gorgon Stare payload for UAVs and aircraft is supposed to let troops cover square kilometers with surveillance, instead of looking through a soda straw, and had been slated for deployment on MQ-9s. But the left-wing CDI reveals that a recent testing report gave it a terrible rating.

The US Air Force has some disagreements with that assessment, but probably regrets their recent boasting to the Washington Post. So does Chuck Spinney, albeit for a different set of reasons.

Nov 1/10: ASIP-2. Northrop Grumman Space and Missions Systems Corp., San Jose, CA receives a contract modification which will “provide for a prototype sensor for the MQ-9 installed in a pod to support a limited flight demonstration of the ASIP-2 functionally. The contractor shall support the General Atomics effort to certify the pod for air worthiness on the MQ-9.”

ASIP is the Airborne Signals Intelligence Payload. This electronic eavesdropping pod from Northrop Grumman has been in testing for the RQ-4 Global Hawk, as well as aircraft like the U-2 and RC-12, but it is also within the Reaper’s payload limit. At this time, $5.4 million has been committed by the ASC/WINK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (FA8620-08-C-3004).

Oct 27/10: TRACER. Lockheed Martin’s tree-penetrating Tactical Reconnaissance and Counter-Concealment-Enabled Radar (TRACER) flies for the 1st time aboard NASA’s Ikhana MQ-9, because the Army Gray Eagle MQ-1C fleet that will eventually host the external unpressurized TRACER pods are all busy on operations.

TRACER is a dual-band synthetic-aperture radar (SAR), designed to detect vehicles, buildings and other man-made objects that are buried, camouflaged or concealed under trees and other foliage. The flight tests on Ikhana focused on the radar’s performance in the harsh environment of the unpressurized pod, as the TRACER system will eventually be installed on a variety of manned and unmanned aircraft. Lockheed Martin.

Dec 16/09: Gorgon Stare. The first 3 “Gorgon Stare” surveillance pods are reportedly slated to deploy to Afghanistan in March-April 2010, mounted on MQ-9 Reapers. Reapers can carry the 1,100 pound pods, MQ-1 Predators cannot, and this was reportedly one of the reasons for the USAF’s shift toward the Reaper as its future mainstay UAV.

Using a UAV for surveillance is often like looking through a soda straw. Gorgon Stare begins to fix this issue. Sierra Nevada Corp’s The ISR pod uses 5 high-zoom cameras and 4 infrared cameras to take pictures from different angles, then combines them into a larger picture. Tranche 1 pods can reportedly scan a 4km square area, provide 10 video images to 10 different operators at the same time, and support up to 12 independent ROVER/OSVRT queries, in contrast to an MQ-1 Predator’s one. The next 6 Tranche 2 pods will raise those numbers to 30 clips and 30 different operators by late 2010. By fall 2011, Gorgon Stare Tranche 3 will use 6 of each sensor type, expand the “stare” to 8 square kilometers from 4, and is expected to offer up to 30 ROVER queries, with up to 65 video images deliverable to up to 65 different operators. Gorgon Stare is designed to be platform-agnostic, and to integrate into the USA’s Distributed Common Ground System.

Ultimately, the USAF reportedly wants the Gorgon Stare system to become its standard sensor pod for wide-area, persistent surveillance – though the ARGUS-IS program is reportedly delivering a 92-feed, 1.8 gigapixel camera for Special Forces use, which would mount on the A160T Hummingbird VTUAV. See also DoD Buzz | Flight International | Gannett’s Air Force Times | LA Times | Popular Science | WIRED Danger Room.

Oct 25/07: Firefighter. As large wildfires rage around San Diego, CA, NASA’s “Ikhana” MQ-9 UAV helps out with an interesting new payload. The UAV carries special thermal-infrared imaging equipment that can look right through smoke and haze, and record high-quality imagery of key hot spots. The imagery is processed on board, downlinked, and overlaid on Google Earth maps at NASA Ames Research Center in Northern California. From there, the National Interagency Fire Center makes it available to incident commanders in the field, so they can assign their fire-fighting resources more intelligently.

Lest anyone think this doesn’t affect military customers, it’s worth noting that there are a lot of military facilities around San Diego. Abroad, potential customers like Canada and Australia face serious wildfire dangers within their vast territories. A UAV that promised to help with that civil problem when it isn’t deployed abroad becomes much easier to support as a military buy. Read: “NASA MQ-9 Imaging California Wildfires” for more.

Additional Readings & Sources Background: The Reaper Family

• General Atomics Aeronautical Systems – Predator B UAS. MQ-9.

• US Customs and Border Protection – Unmanned Aircraft System MQ-9 Predator B [PDF].

• US Customs and Border Protection – Guardian UAS Maritime Variant Predator B [PDF].

• Army Technology – IGNAT-ER Long Endurance Unmanned Air Vehicle, USA. The Predator’s precursor.

• General Atomics Aeronautical Systems – Predator UAS. MQ-1.

• General Atomics Aeronautical Systems – Gray Eagle UAS. MQ-1C.

• DID FOCUS – ER/MP Gray Eagle: Enhanced MQ-1C Predators for the Army. Also known as the ER/MP program.

Background: Reaper Ancillaries

• Raytheon – MTS-B Multi-Spectral Targeting System. Core system.

• GA-ASI – Lynx Multi-Mode Radar. Core system.

• WIRED Danger Room (Feb 19/09) – Air Force to Unleash ‘Gorgon Stare’ on Squirting Insurgents. Combines many smaller cameras into 1 very wide-area picture.

• DID – Expendable Wave: Raytheon’s MALD & MALD-J Decoys.

• Northrop Grumman – AN/APR-39 Radar Warning Receiver (RWR). The Pandora electronic attack payload used on MQ-9s in some exercises is a low-cost derivative.

• Raytheon – SeaVue Overland and Maritime Surveillance Radar. Used by the maritime Guardian/ Mariner variant.

• DID – UAV Data Explosion & Management.

Specific Countries

• Australia DMO – North West Shelf UAS Trial. Took place in 2006, using Mariner UAVs. Australia’s public-private CoastWatch service includes specified availability for certain military forces; the question was how to make UAVs a part of that. Nothing has come of it – yet.

• DID – Reap and Sow… The British RAF’s MQ-9 RPAS. The only armed MQ-9 operator, beyond the USA.

• DID – Apres Harfang: France’s Next High-End UAVs. MQ-9 Reapers will act as a bridge, after a long procurement saga. But they won’t be armed.

Official Reports

• UK Parliament House of Commons Defence Committee (March 11/14) – Remote Control: Remotely Piloted Air Systems – current and future UK use. Full Report, Volume 1 [PDF] | Volume 2.

• Pentagon, via WayBack (April 2012) – Department of Defense Report to Congress on Future Unmanned Aircraft Systems Training, Operations, and Sustainability [PDF].

• US GAO (Feb 28/12, #GAO-12-342SP) – 2012 Annual Report: Opportunities to Reduce Duplication, Overlap and Fragmentation, Achieve Savings, and Enhance Revenue. Electronic warfare is addressed, incl. UAVs.

• US GAO (Aug 8/08) – Bid Protest B-400135. Their decision highlighted flaws in MQ-9 performance and support.

News & Views

• PBS Nova – Rise of the Drones [YouTube].

• War Is Boring (Sept 29/14) – Air Force Drone Crews Got So Demoralized That They Booed Their Commander.

• Truthout (Nov 8/13) – How Europeans Are Opposing Drone and Robot Warfare: An Overview of the Anti-Drone Movement in Europe. Truthout is a left-wing publication; its review of the movement’s scope, its concerns, and of developments in specific countries, is valuable.

• James Hasik (June 20/12) – Affordably Unmanned: A Cost Comparison of the MQ-9 to the F-16 and A-10, and a Response to Winslow Wheeler’s Criticisms of the Drone.

• Alter Net, via WayBack (Oct 16/11) – America’s Secret Empire of Drone Bases: Its Full Extent Revealed for the First Time.

• US FBO.gov (April 30/10) – Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA), Solicitation Number: FA4890-10-R-0009. Note the expected number of MQ-1 vs. MQ-9 sorties to FY 2016, and how they change.

• USAF, via WayBack (Nov 13/09) – Unmanned aircraft crews strive to support warfighters. “We don’t show up on the battlespace and have 15 minutes of hold time to build our situational awareness,” [Col. Peter E. Gersten] said. “We have a high capacity to make sure that we have the exact, right target in our crosshairs. “Time is not our enemy,” he said. “We own time.”

• Esquire Magazine, via WayBack (Oct 14/09) – We’ve Seen the Future, and It’s Unmanned.

• Federal Computing Weekly, via WayBack (Oct 9/09) – Army shows Air Force the way on unmanned aerial safety. Automated take off and landing seems to be a better way to go, however injurious to pilot egos.

• USAF, via WayBack (Oct 15/07) – Putting a Reaper in the skies over Afghanistan, a chain of successes. The aircraft was fielded 2 years early.

• DID (Sept 26/06) – The Major’s Email: British Harrier Support in Afghanistan, Revisited. The Major’s complaints re: close air support, and the relative performance of American A-10s in theater, raise the need for an aircraft dedicated to the battlefield support niche. Could UAVs like the Reaper and/or Mantis fill that role?

• DID (March 21/05) – Air Force Requests $5.7B for 144 More Predators.

• DID (June 3/05) – General Atomics “Build It and They Will Come” Model.

The French ministry of defence has made provisions in its latest defence budget for the possible acquisition of four C-130 Hercules military transport planes from Lockheed Martin following on-going delays with a deal for the Airbus A400M. "We have to address th

Americas

• United Technologies Corporation (UTC) is reportedly in talks with potential buyers regarding its Sikorsky business, with Boeing, Airbus and Lockheed Martin all apparently angling for the sale. The maker of the Black Hawk helicopter, Sikorsky has been on the auction block for a while now, with a foreign buyer a href=”http://www.ft.com/cms/s/871c3e0c-c83b-11e4-8fe2-00144feab7de,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F871c3e0c-c83b-11e4-8fe2-00144feab7de.html%3Fsiteedition%3Duk&siteedition=uk&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.defenseindustrydaily.com%2F%3Fs%3Dsikorsky”>more likely as the Pentagon would likely not allow much more consolidation in the US helicopter market. Mexico recently requested three of the company’s UH-60M transport helicopters.

• As part of the Marine Corps’ F-35B trials currently taking place aboard USS Wasp, a F135 engine has been flown onto the ship to assess the aircraft’s ability to be repaired at sea. The engine uses a modular design to facilitate the swapping out of components, with this also making the entire engine transportable by a single MV-22 Osprey.

• General Atomics was awarded a production contract for eight additional MQ-9 Reaper Block 5 UAVs on Wednesday, with this $72.1 million contract following a similar $279.1 million order for 24 of the aircraft last month.

Europe

• Russia is reportedly seeking to develop a tracked version of its Pantsir anti-air system for use in the Arctic. The Defense Ministry has stated that it intends to possess a self-sufficient Arctic force by 2018, with the Kremlin becoming increasingly assertive in the region over recent months.

• Boeing has delivered the second of four upgraded AWACS aircraft to the French Air Force, with this resulting in the French fleet achieving Initial Operating Capability. The first of the four was delivered last July, with Boeing awarded the $323.9 million contract in January 2010.

• The French Navy has also successfully fired [French] the Missile de Croisière Naval aboard the lead FREMM frigate, the Aquitaine. Five FREMM frigates are scheduled to be delivered to the French Navy by 2019, with eight having been ordered to date. The French recently offered the Missile de Croisière Naval to Poland to equip its future fleet of submarines.

• One of the Mistral LHDs originally destined for Russia departed St. Nazaire on Wednesday for a third set of sea trials. The Sébastopol is one of two Mistrals at the heart of a diplomatic spat between Paris and Moscow, with negotiations having begun earlier this week.

Middle East

• Israel has requested 14,500 JDAM tail kits in a potential sale worth $1.9 billion. Israel previously ordered 3,000 upgraded JDAM kits in November last year, with these upgrades for the ultra-tightly coupled (UTC) capability, with that delivery set for November 2016.

• Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi travelled to Russia on Wednesday, reportedly to seek additional arms to fight IS. Iraq has bought significant quantities of Russian hardware in recent years, with the US also sending significant quantities to the beleaguered state. Al-Abadi is due to meet Putin on Thursday.

Asia

• India’s publicly-owned Hindustan Shipyard Ltd is reportedly seeking to partner with South Korea’s Hyundai Heavy Industries to construct warships for the Indian Navy. The warships potentially covered in the agreement include submarines and destroyers. HHI assembled South Korea’s Type-214 submarines and KDX-III AEGIS destroyers.

• India’s indigenous Astra missile reportedly missed out on a test scheduled for Monday owing to a technical problem with the SU-30MKI assigned to launch the missile. This news came alongside the crash of a Flanker on Tuesday, with this the third such crash involving the Russian-manufactured fighter in five years, raising concerns over reliability. The Beyond Visual Range air-to-air missile conducted a successful test last month, the latest in a series of live-firings.

• Singapore will equip the last of its Formidable-class frigates with French manufacturer Thales’ STIR 1.2 EO Mk2 radar and electro-optical tracking system. The system also equips the Royal Navy of Oman’s Al-Ofouq-class patrol vessels.

Today’s Video

• A JDAM destroying an artillery position…

B-2 drops JDAM
(click to view full)

Precision bombing has been a significant military goal since the invention of the Norden bomb sight in the 1920s, but its application remained elusive. Over 30 years later, in Vietnam, the destruction of a single target could require 300 bombs, which meant sending an appropriate number of fighters or bombers into harm’s way to deliver them. Even the 1991 Desert Storm war with Iraq featured unguided munitions for the most part. The USAF some laser and TV-guided weapons like Paveway bombs and Maverick missiles, but they were very expensive, and only effective in good weather. If precision bombing was finally to become a reality throughout the Air Force, a new approach would be needed. The Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) became that alternative, an engine of military transformation that was also a model of procurement transformation.

DID’s FOCUS articles offer in-depth, updated looks at significant military programs of record. This DID FOCUS Article looks at the transformational history of the JDAM GPS-guided bomb program, the ongoing efforts to bring its capabilities up to and beyond the level of dual-mode guidance kits like Israel’s Spice and Raytheon’s Enhanced Paveway, and the contracts issued under the JDAM program since its inception.[updated]

JDAM: A Timely History of Transformation JDAM family
(click to view full)

JDAM’s core concept goes back several decades. A group of researchers and engineers at Eglin AFB in Florida had been looking at a new way to guide a bomb to its target since the 1980s. This group came up with the idea of using inertial navigation systems (INS), which measure acceleration to compute distance and direction traveled from a known point, in order to guide a device to another pre-plotted point.

After the USAF’s review of the 1991 Desert Storm conflict and its subsequent findings, the technology was ready to be taken off the shelf. By that time, the USA had also built a robust Global Positioning System, with capabilities reserved only for military users. The GPS system itself was capable of unaided accuracy to within about 3 feet, no matter what the weather was like. The reaction times involved in guiding a bomb wouldn’t achieve 3-foot accuracy, and even 3 feet wasn’t quite as accurate as laser-guided weapons. Nor would the initial JDAMs be able to hit moving targets, as laser-guided weapons did. On the other hand, lasers could be blocked by fog, sand, etc., while JDAM’s INS/GPS guidance modes were impervious to weather.

MK80 Bomb Structure

Initial development work showed promise. Unfortunately, that only solved part of the problem. Laser and TV guided precision weapons were expensive. JDAM already had promise as one thing they weren’t: an all-weather weapon. To become more than a niche player, however, it would have to be something else its competition wasn’t: cheap.

A bit of luck helped the program along that path. The stepped up urgency around the JDAM program coincided with some of the 1990s military acquisition reform initiatives, which aimed to reduce the system’s immense bureaucratic weight. JDAM was one of just 7 pilot programs to receive special waivers that sidestepped a number of expensive and time-consuming regulations. The program took full and proper advantage. Roy Handsel, a project manager with the JDAM Squadron:

“Previously, companies dealing with the government were required to provide extensive cost data to justify prices. This complicated and labor intensive information gathering put many small manufacturing shops out of the running for government contracts. But with waivers … small businesses across America could be subcontracted … to produce the subassemblies that make up a JDAM.”

JDAM strike
(click to view full)

By the time they were done, JDAM was a tail kit that could be attached to existing Mk 80 family ‘dumb’ bombs, turning them into affordable precision weapons with a range of up to 15 miles, depending on their altitude and speed at the release point.

The JDAM program was accelerated in 1995, as low-rate initial production was moved up 9 months, to the latter half of FY 1997. All 22 weapons tested during this interval performed successfully, including overall Circular Error Probable (CEP) of 10.3 meters, significantly better than the program’s 13 meter requirement. JDAM was certified as operational capable on the B-2 in July 1997. Limited Initial Operational Capability was achieved on the B-52 in December 1998.

Then came Kosovo, aka. Operation Allied Force in 1999. JDAMs were used from B-2 bombers at rate that nearly equaled manufacturing capacity. Approximately 650 JDAMs, containing approximately 1.4 million pounds of high explosive, were dropped on military and infrastructure targets. The Joint Chiefs of Staff directed rapid acceleration of production, and soon F/A-18 Hornets were also formally authorized as JDAM-capable, with other aircraft certifications following as the program ramped up. The DoD eventually picked McDonnell Douglas to develop 87,000 of these tail kits over the program’s lifetime for the USAF and Navy – at just $18,000 apiece in then-year dollars, instead of the original $40,000 estimate.

Boom!
(click to view full)

Two years later, as the ruins of the World Trade Center were still smoking, the USAF was ready.

By mid-December 2001, the first 9 weeks of intense air strikes over Afghanistan had consumed about half of the 10,000 or so JDAM kits in inventory. Among the 18,000 munitions expended, half were precision-guided. Fully half of those were JDAMs, and they were put to very creative uses by Special Forces teams on the ground. From Bob Woodward’s book “Bush At War“:

“The Northern Alliance was trying to induce defections from the Taliban itself, but the CIA could come in and offer cash. The agency’s hand would often be hidden as the negotiations began — $10,000 for this sub-commander and his dozens of fighters, $50,000 for this bigger commander and his hundreds of fighters. In one case, $50,000 was offered to a commander to defect. Let me think about it, the commander said. So the Special Forces A-team directed a J-DAM precision bomb right outside the commander’s headquarters. The next day, they called the commander back. How about $40,000? He accepted.”

The JDAM kits’ price rose slightly with inflation etc. to about $30,000 each, but FY 2010 figures indicate a drop back to about $25,000. Their bargain basement price and proven performance have made JDAM a standout on both the battlefield and the procurement field. Pentagon documents give an official figure of less than 5 meters CEP (50% of bombs fall within 5m of target) when GPS is available, and less than 20 meters CEP using inertial navigation if GPS is absent or jammed.

As JDAM’s success gathers steam, the transformation it brought has spread beyond its associated programs. American weapons like the AGM-154 JSOW long-range glide bomb/cruise missile have incorporated aspects of JDAM technology, and the JDAM concept – whether implemented via Navstar GPS, Russia’s GLONASS, or other systems – can be expected to be a standard feature of future weapons around the world. China’s Lei Shi 6 glide bomb, France’s rocket-boosted AASM, Russia’s KAB-500S-E, South Africa’s Umbani/ Al-Tariq, and other foreign products are already competing directly with JDAM. In the dual-guidance LJDAM’s market segments, Sagem’s AASM, RAFAEL’s GPS/IIR Spice, and Raytheon/Lockheed enhanced Paveway variants have created an even more competitive environment.

JDAM: Program & Variants

According to Boeing, by 2012 over 230,000 JDAM kits had been bought by the USA and “more than 26″ allied countries. Conversations with Boeing, and DID research, indicate that the following platforms have been integrated to use JDAMs:

(click to view full)

Boeing would not confirm integrations beyond US military platforms, except to state that JDAMs have also been integrated with “earlier” F-16 and F/A-18 variants, and that that all F-15E Strike Eagle family variants are JDAM compatible. This includes the new stealth-enhanced F-15SE.

Excel
download

By early 2002, the Boeing JDAM production facility in St. Charles, MO was working 3 shifts around the clock; Boeing ramped up deliveries from 750 a month during winter 2001, to 2,000 per month in October 2002, and 2,800 per month by August 2003. Production was expected to increase to 5,000 per month with the addition of a new assembly line, and the need to replenish stocks drawn down by war on the Afghan and Iraqi fronts kept demand high. US orders have tailed off sharply, but JDAM’s popularity around the world ensures that the line won’t be closing any time soon. US budgetary requests have included both regular buys, and supplemental/”OCO” purchases to replenish wartime use:

In addition to Boeing, the core JDAM production team includes:

DID doesn’t cover the GFE items as part of this article; obviously, both items have applications that reach far beyond JDAM. The Joint Programmable Fuze System has a variable delay setting that may be programmed manually or from the cockpit, giving their attached bombs good versatility against a range of targets.

JDAM: Variants (click to view full)

The tail kit + a Mk.80 family weapon creates a JDAM. If a nose kit is added, other targeting modes like laser guidance can be added. To extend range, a wing kit can be attached to the main bomb body. Mixing and matching Mk.80 bomb bodies with the tail kit, plus some combination of optional nose or wing kits creates the full range of JDAM models. Completed JDAM weapons have designations that primarily reflect the size of the base bomb.

Sub-designations exist to distinguish USAF from USMC/USN weapons, but DID has left those out for simplicity. The big difference? Naval variants are “thermally protected,” which means they use explosives that are less likely to detonate if the ship they’re on is hit.

RAAF F/A-18B
with JDAM-ERs
(click to view full)

As the chart above shows, JDAM’s spreading popularity means is creating demands for new variants and add-ons, official or otherwise. While there’s no co-marketing agreement in place, European firm MBDA is already touting its own “Diamondback” kit as a potential add-on; Diamondback equips the Small Diameter Bomb, and was originally tested in 2000 with full JDAM versions.

In an odd turn of fate, JDAM’s popularity is even causing it to lose its “alternative” status, and emulate the very laser-guided weapons it was intended to supplant.

The LJDAM (Laser JDAM) kit adds a DSU-38 or DSU-40 laser guidance module to the standard JDAM INS/GPS kit. The combination improves accuracy to 1m CEP or less. It also allows the weapon to target moving objects, using GPS/INS to get the weapon into the vicinity, and laser guidance for the final strike. This combination creates a more versatile and standardized weapon set, and gives aircraft on station an option that lets them hit transient “pop up” targets of opportunity, without having to be within laser sighting range themselves. In exchange, of course, LJDAM costs more. LJDAM’s 1st combat use came in Iraq, in August 2008.

The closely related US Navy Direct Attack Moving Target Capability (DAMTC) weapon was first delivered in October 2008. It’s very similar to LJDAM, with some maneuvering enhancements, explosive materials optimized for naval use, and a few minor configuration changes.

SDB, in attack mode
(click to view full)

The 250 pound GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb program is a direct outgrowth of JDAM technology. It incorporates a more streamlined bomb shape and pop-out wings. These modifications give it a longer glide range, as well as performance against hardened targets equivalent to a 2,000 pound conventional bomb. The difference is an aircraft that can carry 8 GBU-39s in place of a single 2,000 pound GBU-31 bomb, dramatically expanding its capabilities.

JDAM: Contracts and Key Events JDAMs into B-1B:
Libya 2011
(click to view full)

Unless otherwise specified, contracts are awarded by The Headquarters 308th Armament Systems Wing at Eglin Air Force Base, FL. Unless otherwise specified, contracts are issued to Boeing subsidiary McDonnell Douglas Corp. in St Louis, MO.

DID doesn’t cover Joint Programmable Fuze contracts here. They are used in JDAM variants, offering variable detonation delay settings that may be programmed manually or from the cockpit, but they’re also used in other weapons.

FY 2014 – 2015

GBU-54 LJDAMs
(click to view full) Boom!
(click to view full)

May 21/15: Israel has requested 14,500 JDAM tail kits in a potential sale worth $1.9 billion. Israel previously ordered 3,000 upgraded JDAM kits in November last year, with these upgrades for the ultra-tightly coupled (UTC) capability, with that delivery set for November 2016.

March 2/15: New wing kits extend range, get new designation. Australia tests new wing kits called the JDAM ER (standing for extended range), tripling range from 24 miles to 72 miles. They were launched out of F/A-18s. The RAAF will purchase the kits later in 2015 pending additional certification tests.

Nov 24/14: Israel. Israel is buying 3,000 JDAM tail kits with “the ultra-tightly coupled capability,” using a maximum $82.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification. This isn’t Israel’s first buy (q.v. Dec 12/10 request, April 12/13).

Work will be performed at St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete by Nov 30/16. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center at Hill AFB, UT (FA8213-15-D-0002, DO 0001, MOD 02).

Israel: 3,000

July 7/14: Singapore. The US DSCA officially announces Singapore’s export request for JDAM and LJDAM kits, “to sustain its air-to-ground weapons stockpiles and to accommodate training expenditures.” The DSCA explains that beyond building their stocks on Singapore:

“Singapore maintains a large CONUS F-15SG training presence at Mountain Home AFB. A portion of these munitions are anticipated for use at this CONUS training facility, and will enable RSAF pilots to practice using GPS-guided munitions that will further refine their combat capability.”

The JDAMs could also be used by Singapore’s F-16C/Ds. Boeing in St. Louis is the prime contractor, and the estimated cost is $63 million for:

• 913 KMU-556B/B JDAM kits for Mk-84 2000 lb bombs
  
• 100 FMU-152A/B fuzes
  
• 300 DSU-40 Precision Laser Guidance Sets
  
• Containers, munition trailers, support equipment, spare and repair parts, test equipment, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, and other forms of support.

Sources: DSCA #14-18, “Singapore – Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) Kits”.

DSCA: Singapore request for JDAM/LJDAM

April 17/14: SAR. The Pentagon releases its Dec 31/13 Selected Acquisitions Report. For JDAM, program cost is going up because they’re ordering more:

“Program costs increased $788.0 million (+12.2%) from $6,441.8 million to $7,229.8 million, due primarily to a quantity increase of 30,758 tailkits from 181,830 to 212,588 (+$712.6 million) and associated schedule and estimating allocations (+$68.0 million).”

Orders up

April 1/14: R&D. A maximum $80 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract covers JDAM technical support for studies and analysis, product improvement, upgrades, integration (including, but not limited to, software integration, aircraft integration, and associated hardware) and testing. Work will be performed in Missouri with an expected completion date of March 31/19.

$4.3 million is committed immediately, using FY14 USAF and USN funding. This is a sole source acquisition by USAF Life Cycle Management Center/EBDK at Eglin AFB, FL (FA8681-14-D-0028).

Feb 27/14: A $49.8 million contract modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract for the full rate production of 3,500 Precision Laser Guidance Set (PLGS) units and 5,000 kits to convert the PLGS units from the DSU-38/B configuration to the DSU-38A/B for the USAF. These are the front ends used in LJDAMs (q.v. April 19/13), and it’s our guess that the key change involves retrofitting tougher sapphire lenses (q.v. Jan 17/13).

All funds are committed, using FY 2014 USAF ammunition budgets. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (57%); St. Charles, MO (17%); Cincinnati, OH (12%); Greenville, SC (5%); Minneapolis, MN (4%); Glen Riddle, PA (3%); Danville, VA (1%); and Georgetown, TX (1%), and is expected to be complete in February 2016. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-10-C-0030).

Jan 28/14: DOT&E Testing Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2013 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The JDAM is included, but only under systems like the F-35 that have been testing it. The MQ-9 continues to have issues:

“DOT&E rescinded the 2009 GBU-38 500-pound JDAM FDE plan in February 2013 due to lack of progress in maturing software capabilities to support an operational evaluation with the current MQ-9 OFPs. AFOTEC will test JDAM during FOT&E of the MQ-9 Increment One system.”

FY 2013

Lot 17 buys; Request and purchase from Israel; Foreign sales; Laser SDB-I; JDAM-ER production partner picked; South Korea competes with their KGGB. F-35A drops JDAM
(click to view full)

June 27/13: Lot 17. A $39.5 million contract option adds 1,601 JDAM tailkits to Lot 17 (q.v. Dec 21/12), split $14.9 million baseline funds plus $24.6 million supplementary (OCO) funds. This brings the total contract to $141.9 million. Pro-rating this cost per tailkit would give us 5,751 for FY 2013, though the American budget for that year is 4,678.

All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 Ammunition budgets. Work will be performed at Saint Charles, MO, and is expected to be complete by March 31/15. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/EBDK at Eglin AFB, FL manages the contract (FA8681-13-C-0063, PO 0006).

April 19/13: A $17.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for full rate production of Laser JDAM front ends. The total contract involves 1,496 DSU-38/B precision laser guidance sets and appropriate shipping containers for the US Navy (509/ $5.6M/ 31%), USAF (463/ $5.1M/ 29%) and the governments of Saudi Arabia (496/ $6.7M/ 38%) and Japan (28/ $375,970/ 2%). The buy will use Foreign Military Sale funds, as well as FY 2013 USAF and USN ammunition budgets.

Work will be performed in St. Charles, MO, and is expected to be complete in February 2015. US Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-10-C-0030).

LJDAM: USA, Saudi Arabia, Japan

April 12/13: Israel. A $65.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for 2,701 JDAM tail kits, which would only represent a part of Dec 10/12 DSCA request.

Work will be performed at St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be completed by March 31/15. The contract involves foreign military sales (FMS) to Israel, with the AFLCMC/EBDKI at Eglin AFB, FL acting as Israel’s FMS agent (FA8681-13-C-0093).

Israel

March 15/13: FMS. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $99.9 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee and indefinite-quantity/ indefinite-delivery contract for production assets (JDAM kits), spares, repairs and sustainment. The contract involves foreign military sales, but they won’t say to whom.

Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, until Jan 31/16, using foreign military sales funding. USAF Life Cycle Management Command’s EBDK at Eglin AFB, FL manages this contract, as an agent for its foreign customer (FA8681-13-D-0102).

Purchase – but by whom?

March 13/13: JDAM-ER. The Royal Australian Air Force became Boeing’s first JDAM-ER customer in 2011. Now, Boeing announces that they’ve picked Ferra Engineering in Australia to build the wing kits, after partnering with Hawker de Havilland to create them. The kit is reported to give this 500-pound laser/GPS dual-guidance weapon a range of up to 55 nm/ 102 km, when launched at high speed and altitude. By now, however, this is no longer a unique offering. In September 2012, South Africa’s Denel and the UAE’s Tawazun signed a partnership to take their similar but larger Umbani (“Al-Tariq”) GPS glide bomb concept to market around the globe.

Ferra was Boeing’s 2011 International Supplier of the Year, who also does work for the Boeing P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft, F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighter, and for Boeing’s Commercial Aviation Services group. Boeing.

Jan 17/13: DOT&E Testing Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2012 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The F-22A Raptor’s radar and sensors let it drop JDAMs and SDB-I bombs accurately and reliably, but the MQ-9 Reaper drone remains in limbo with JDAM, and hasn’t resolved and tested the fuzing and weapons envelope discrepancies identified in 2010. Meanwhile, the Laser JDAM’s glass lens covering took a real beating in Afghanistan, to the point that Boeing had to develop a sapphire lens instead.

The Navy’s DAMTC LJDAM gets the most coverage. It benefited from the sapphire lens switch, and reliability was 98%, but 3 operator errors and an unexplained miss knocked it down to 77%. Demonstrated accuracy was 5.8m CEP in self-lasing mode, but buddy lasing tests went poorly. DOT&E think test range and target limitations may be the difference, and isn’t overly concerned. They also cite the high cockpit workload of using LJDAM, but that’s the same problem faced by all laser-guided weapons. Apparently, targeting pod limitations are the common cause.

DOT&E is very critical of the dense wiring inside the DAMTC tail kit, which makes verifying fuze arming and function settings extremely difficult, especially at night. Workarounds are worse than the problem, and they’d like this issue fixed. Since DOT&E declared DAMTC operationally effective and suitable, however, their recommendation doesn’t have a lot of push behind it. It will be up to the US Navy.

Jan 14/13: KGGB competitor. South Korea’s Agency for Defense Development (ADD) and 20 defense firms, including LIG Nex1, have jointly developed the extended range, 500 pound Korea GPS-Guided Bomb (KGGB) with a 5-year, KRW 40 billion ($378 million) budget. The bombs include GPS/INS guidance and a wing kit, with a claimed range of 100 km at maximum launch altitude and speed. Cost is reportedly KRW 100 million each (about $97,600).

The KGGB is “designed to take out North Korean artillery positions concealed behind mountains.” The weapon’s big question is accuracy, depending on its allowed level of GPS M-code signal access. Then again, if the core problem is the artillery and rockets near Seoul, ground stations could be used to create fantastic GPS precision on top of a civilian signal.

This isn’t a JDAM modification – it’s a JDAM competitor. South Korea’s ADD is talking about using these bombs on old F-5 and F-4 fighters, which implies an integration method that doesn’t require rewiring the planes, or adding MIL-STD-1760 databus technology. That could make the KGGB attractive on the export market. The standard alternatives in the industry are to either rely on pre-programmed targets that are set before takeoff, or use a wireless link and a separate control pad for the pilot. Yonhap News | Chosun Ilbo | Korea Times.

Dec 21/12: Lot 17. A $118 million firm-fixed-price contract to procure JDAM Production Lot 17 Guided Vehicle kits. Work will be performed in St. Charles, MO until March 31/15 (FA8681-13-C-0063)

Dec 19/12: Laser SDB. An $8.9 million firm-fixed price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for Laser Small Diameter Bombs (LSDB) retrofits, LSDB guided test vehicles, storage/shipping containers; and production, engineering, integration and test support. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/13 (FA8656-13-C-0053).

The AFLCMC/PZJ at Eglin Air Force Base, FL is listed as the managing agency, but inquiries are directed to US SOCOM, who do not respond to questions. The is a GBU-53 SDB-II program underway top field a tri-mode GPS/laser/MW radar guided weapon, but a near-term laser retrofit would allow SDB-I capable aircraft and UAVs to begin attacking moving targets. SOCOM’s MQ-9 MALET/Reaper UAVs would be an obvious candidate, since the SDB’s all-weather versatility and precision strike design fit extremely well with SOCOM’s needs. Beyond US SOCOM, the USAF’s high-end F-22A Raptor would probably be the most immediate beneficiary of a Laser SDB.

Laser SDB-I

Dec 10/12: Israel. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Israel’s formal request to buy a variety of JDAM-related items, at an estimated cost of up to $647 million. The request includes 6,900 JDAM tail kits and their associated bombs, whose numbers match exactly. That’s significant, because IMI makes its own JDAM-certified MPR-500 bomb for hardened targets. The exact requests break down as:

• 1,725 MK-82 500 pound bombs
  
• 1,725 KMU-572 tail kits for MK-82s, creating GBU-38s
  
• 3,450 MK-84 2,000 pound bombs
  
• 3,450 JDAM Anti-Jam KMU-556 tail kits for MK-84s, creating GBU-31s
  
• 1,725 BLU-109 2,000 pound “bunker buster” forged casing bombs
  
• 1,725 KMU-557 tail kits for BLU-109s, creating the GBU-31v3/B
  
• 3,450 GBU-39s: 250 pound Small Diameter Bombs
  
• 11,500 FMU-139 Fuses
  
• 11,500 FMU-143 Fuses
  
• 11,500 FMU-152 Fuses

Plus spare and repair parts, support equipment, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical documentation, and other forms of US Government and contractor support. The principal contractors will be:

• The Boeing Company in St. Charles, MO (JDAMs, SDB-I)
  
• General Dynamics in Garland, TX (Bombs)
  
• Kaman Dayron in Orlando, FL (Fuzes)
  
• ATK in Edina, MI
  
• Elwood National Forge Co. in Irvine, PA
  
• KDI Precision Products in Cincinnati, OH
  
• Lockheed-Martin Missile and Fire Control in Archibald, TN
  
• Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ

Israel already has these weapons in inventory, and implementation of this proposed sale won’t require any additional personnel from the USA.

Israel request

FY 2012

DAMTC, JDAM-ER variants. GBU-54 LJDAMs, USMC
VFMA-122, Kandahar
(click for full picture)

July 16/12: DAMTC/LJDAM. A $22.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification exercises an option for 2,384 US Navy Direct Attack Moving Target (DAMTC, Laser JDAM variant) weapons, including shipping containers.

Work will be performed in St. Charles, MO, and is expected to be complete in February 2014. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages this contract (N00019-10-C-0030)

July 10/12: Australia’s JDAM-ER. Australia’s government announces that their Enhanced JDAM has completed its 1st round of testing, and provides details regarding this variant.

Australia’s JDAM-ER will have the Extended Range wing kit that boost range to over 40 miles, developed as part of a Capability and Technology Demonstrator (CTD) program by Australia’s DSTO and Boeing. That kit is likely to be available for international sale through the newly established Australian Military Sales Office.

Australia’s final bombs will actually be more like LJDAM-ERs, with dual-mode laser/GPS guidance, and a warhead designed for low collateral damage. The program began on Oct 19/05, with a contract for Australia’s “AIR 5409 Bomb Improvement Program.” Australian DoD | Boeing.

May 14-16/12: LJDAMs from B-1B. B-1 Lancer aircrews from Ellsworth AFB, SD employ GBU-54 Laser JDAMs against moving targets during the Combat Hammer exercise, from May 14 – 16. It’s the 1st operational release from this type of aircraft. USAF.

LJDAM on B-1B

May 10/12: A $24 million cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price contract for indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity for JDAM technical support, to include non-warranty induction and repair, annual software updates, mission planning support, studies, and analysis.

Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO by Dec 31/13. The AAC/EBDK at Eglin AFB, FL is the contracting activity (FA8681-05-D-0277, PO 0025).

March 12/12: DAMTC/ LJDAM. A $12.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 1,116 DAMTC laser/GPS guidance kits and appropriate shipping containers, plus 640 hours of production engineering and logistics support services. This is NAVAIR’s 3rd Low Rate Initial Production order for its Direct Attack Moving Target Capability (DAMTC).

Work will be performed in St. Charles, MO, and deliveries are expected to be complete in February 2013. This contract is managed by US Naval Air Systems Command, in Patuxent River, MD (N00019-10-C-0030). See also Boeing release.

Feb 14/12: Lot 16. Boeing receives an $111.4 million “predominantly firm-fixed-price contract” for 4,844 JDAMs. Work will be performed in St. Charles, MO, and is expected to be complete by May 2014 (FA8681-12-C-0160, PO 0002). When asked, Boeing said that:

“In 2011, the U.S. Air Force announced contract awards totaling $180 million for nearly 7,500 Lot 15 JDAM tail kits. Boeing received a $126 million contract from the U.S. Air Force on Nov. 30, 2011, and [this contract, too], for approximately 10,000 JDAM tail kits for Lot 16. Deliveries for these [Lot 16] tail kits will begin in May 2013 and continue through May 2014.”

Feb 12/12: MPR-500 JDAM. Israel Military Industries announces [PDF] that their Multi-Purpose Rigid 500-pound bomb has been certified with Boeing for use with the JDAM kit. It has more penetrating power and less fragmentation than the conventional Mk.82.

Israeli variant

Feb 3/12: Polish request. The US DSCA announces Poland’s official request for F-16 weapons, as well as a 5 year fleet support contract that includes associated equipment, parts, and training. The entire contract set could be worth up to $447 million, and includes up to “200 GBU-54 (2000 lb) Laser Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) Bombs”. Which doesn’t make sense, because the GBU-54 is a 500 pound weapon. What Boeing could say, was that:

“The GBU-56 Laser JDAM [DID: q.v. Sept 28/10 entry] includes the 2,000-pound MK-84 warhead and has been developed by Boeing. Final certification flight testing is planned by the USAF on behalf of our international customers and is expected to be completed within the next 12-18 months… you’ll need to contact the Dept. of Defense or DCMA for clarification on whether they meant GBU-54 or GBU-56.”

See “2012-02: Poland Requests F-16 Weapons, Support” for full coverage.

Poland & the GBU-56

Jan 30/12: An $8.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for another 700 precision laser guidance set kits. The US Air Force will receive them, and subsequent releases reveal that they’ll be used to maintain GBU-54 Laser JDAM inventory levels.

Work will be performed in Haifa, Israel (37%); Fort Worth, TX (32%); and St. Charles, MO (31%), and is expected to be complete in August 2012. $1.3 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-10-C-0030).

Dec 2/11: Lot 16. A $125.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for Production Lot 16: 4,977 JDAM Guided Vehicle tail kits of various types. This is actually a contract option, but it’s exercised as a separate contract. Work will be performed at St. Charles, MO, and is expected to be completed May 31/14 (FA8681-12-C-0160).

See also Boeing release, which states that a full-rate production decision on the Laser JDAM sensors is expected in “early 2012.”

Nov 30/11: UAE request. The US DSCA announces [PDF] the UAE’s official request to buy 4,900 JDAM kits for up to $304 million, which breaks out as:

• 304 GBU-54 Laser JDAM kits for 500 pound bombs, with 304 DSU-40 Laser Sensors
  
• 3,000 GBU-38v1 JDAM GPS/INS kits and BLU-111 500 pound bombs
  
• 1,000 GBU-31v1 JDAM GPS/INS kits and BLU-117 2,000 pound bombs
  
• 600 GBU-31v3 JDAM GPS/INS kits and BLU-109 2,000 pound Hard Target Penetrator bombs
  
• 4 BDU-50C inert bombs
  
• Plus fuzes, weapons integration, munitions trainers, personnel training and training equipment, spare and repair parts, support equipment, and other US government and contractor support.

The weapons are explicitly slated for the UAE’s F-16E/F Block 60 fleet, which may be slated to grow soon, and are designed to “help the UAE AF&AD become one of the most capable air forces in the region, thereby serving U.S. interests by deterring regional aggression. These munitions will be used to complement the normal war-readiness reserve stockpile of munitions and provide munitions for routine training requirements.”

UAE request

FY 2011

LJDAM production. Poland, UAE. Tornado ASSTA 3 test
(click to view full)

Aug 31/11: A $14.4 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 602 JDAMs, type unspecified (FA8681-11-C-0111, PO 0004).

May 16/11: Lot 15. Boeing in St. Louis, MO received a $9.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 389 MK-82 SAASM/AJ JDAMs under production Lot 15. In English, those are 500 pound JDAM bomb kits, with improved jamming resistance (FA8681-11-C-0111, PO 0003).

May 2/11: Lot 15. A Boeing release refers to:

“The U.S. Air Force announced a $92 million contract for more than 4,000 Lot 15 JDAM kits on March 14. This follows an $88 million contract awarded Jan. 14 for the first 3,500 tail kits in the same lot.”

The award does not list on DefenseLINK for March 14/11 or surrounding days, though the Jan 14/11 award is present and listed below.

May 2/11: LJDAM/DAMTC. US NAVAIR announces that the Navy’s Direct Attack Moving Target Capability (Laser JDAM) has successfully completed the 18th integrated test.

That was supposed to be the final test, but during the testing process, DAMTC made a configuration change to replace the current glass window with one made of sapphire, in order to improve resistance to weather and the elements. To ensure the change doesn’t create problems, 3 additional regression tests were added in July 2011. Operational testing is expected to begin in late summer 2011, with DAMTC slated to reach formal Initial Operating Capability on all F/A-18 family and AV-8B Harrier fighters by late winter 2012. Meanwhile, the weapons are already being used on the front lines.

March 16/11: LJDAM. An $8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification covers first article testing and 700 Low Rate Initial Production laser JDAM retrofit kits, as well as accompanying technical data. The Pentagon’s wording was very unclear, but a Boeing representative said:

“This contract is for the laser sensor kits that can be added to a conventional Mk 82 500-lb JDAM, which turns it into a [GBU-54] Laser JDAM. The sensor allows a conventional JDAM to have the flexibility to prosecute moving targets, relocatable targets and even maritime targets.”

This is LJDAM’s 1st major production order. Work will be performed in St. Charles, MO, and is expected to be complete in March 2012 (N00019-10-C-0030). See also Boeing release.

1st LJDAM production order

Feb 8/11: F-15K integration. The Chosun Ilbo quotes the South Korean ROKAF, who says it has integrated the 2,000 pound GBU-31 JDAM with its KF-16 fighters, as well as its F-15K “Slam Eagles.” After developing the software, the ROKAF successfully carried out 3 tests, and finished pilot training at the end of January 2011.

The report also mentions wing kits, which are absent from normal JDAMs – but not from the 2,000 pound JDAM Extended Range kit, which was being developed by Boeing and South Korea.

KF-16, F-15K… and JDAM-ER?

Feb 7/11: Tornado integration. EADS Cassidian discusses ongoing upgrades of German Luftwaffe Tornado strike/wild weasel aircraft to the ASSTA 3 (Avionics Software System Tornado Ada) standard. Adding Link-16 shared battlespace awareness via MIDS Low Volume Terminals are a key part of that upgrade, which also includes the latest generation radios, a digital video and voice recorder (DVDR), and the dual-guidance Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition (LJDAM).

LJDAM integration and launch behavior was verified during test flights in Vidsel, Sweden, in September 2010. In January 2011, Cassidian in Manching, Germany began the flight testing of a Tornado with an ASSTA 3 hardware and software configuration approximating that of series production. As of early February 2011, EADS Cassidian has already started to upgrade the first series aircraft in Manching, and deliveries are scheduled to start in mid-2012.

LJDAM on Tornado

Jan 14/11: Lot 15. An $88 million contract for 3,500 JDAM “Guided Vehicle kits”, or about $25,000 per kit. At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA8681-11-C-0111).

FY 2010

Lot 14. Singapore. LJDAM vs. Truck
(click for full picture)

Sept 28/10: LJDAM GBU-56. Boeing announces successful tests of the 2,000 pound MK-84 bomb with a Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition (Laser JDAM) kit. The tests took place in July 2010 at Eglin Air Force Base, FL. The first 2 of 7 planned tests were dropped from a USAF F-16 test aircraft, flying sub-sonic at 30,000 feet.

An existing JDAM becomes a Laser JDAM with the installation of the Precision Laser Guidance Set (PLGS). The MK-84 PLGS uses the same laser sensor as the 500-pound MK-82’s Laser JDAM kit, which has already been fielded as the GBU-54 with the USAF, US Navy, and internationally.

March 8/10: Lot 14. A $148.7 million contract for 6,565 JDAM guided vehicle kits, under production Lot 14. At this time, all funds have been committed (FA8681-10-C-0072, P00003).

This is the 3rd procurement of a 6-year contract that Boeing received in January 2008. The modification increases the overall value of this phase from $72 million to $229 million, and the overall agreement now has a potential total value of $1.3 billion with deliveries extending through 2015, if all options are exercised. See also Boeing release.

March 2/10: LJDAM/ DAMTC. Boeing announces an $11.4 million contract to supply Laser JDAMs for the U.S. Navy’s Direct Attack Moving Target Capability (DAMTC) initiative. The initial contract calls for the delivery of 23 smart bombs for testing and evaluation, and is expected to lead to a production contract in 2011. With follow-on options, total DAMTC deliveries could reach 11,000 units, and the total contract value could exceed $91 million.

The Navy already operates Laser JDAMs, as well as Lockheed Martin’s similar DMLGB kit, and Raytheon’s Paveway offerings which can include the dual-mode Paveway Plus. Boeing Weapons VP Debbie Rub says that their winning DAMTC offering will improve the Laser JDAM’s moving and maneuvering capability, in order to make it more useful against fast and/or maneuvering targets.

Nov 16/09: Singapore request. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Singapore’s official request for JDAM and LJDAM kits, plus support equipment, repair and return, tools and test equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, and other related support. The estimated cost is $40 million, and the request includes:

• 670 KMU-572B/B Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) Guidance Kits. These fit on 500 pound Mk82 bombs to create GBU-32 JDAMs, and the “B/B” means they include pin-lock actuators and SAASM (Selective Availability/Anti-Spoofing Module) capability.

• 670 DSU-38/B Precision Laser Guidance kits, to turn GBU-32 JDAMs into GBU-54v1/B LJDAMs. The Precision Laser Guidance Set consists of the LDSU-38 laser Seeker itself, and a wire harness fixed under the bomb body to connect the DSU-38/B with the JDAM guidance tailkit. For some reason, the DSCA announced this element twice.

• 670 KMU-572B/B Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) Guidance Kits for 500 pound GBU-28Bv1/B Paveway-II laser-guided bombs.

Singapore already has JDAM guidance kits in its inventory, and will not require the assignment of any additional U.S. Government and contractor representatives to Singapore.

Singapore request

Oct 28/09: Lot 14. A $72 million contract for Lot XIV JDAM production: 2,925 JDAM Guided Vehicle kits that are attached to the tails of ordinary 500 – 2,000 pound bombs, giving them inertial navigation system and GPS-based guidance (FA8681-10-C-0072).

Oct 8/09: LJDAM exports. Boeing announces Foreign Military Sales (FMS) contracts to provide Laser Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) to 2 unnamed international customers, as part of Aug 17/09’s $98 million contract. The weapons are scheduled for delivery in 2010. Dan Jaspering, Boeing director of Direct Attack Programs, adds that “There are more than 20 countries that have JDAM, and we expect many of them will adopt Laser JDAM within the next few years.”

Other recent developments include a recent Block 08 update to the weapon system’s software, to improve Laser JDAM’s effectiveness against targets that are turning, accelerating or decelerating. Boeing has completed 2 successful maneuvering target missions with the Block 08 software, which is expected to be fielded in 2010.

LJDAM orders

FY 2009

Lot 14. JDAM-ER. LJDAM test from A-10C
(click for full picture)

Aug 17/09: LJDAM. A $98 million cost plus fixed-fee contract to provide production of the Laser JDAM, and integration onto “various Foreign Military Sales aircraft platforms” throughout the life of the contract. At this time no funds have been obligated, which means funds will be spent as orders and tasks come in. The 680th ARSSG/PK at Eglin AFB, FL manages the contract (FA8681-09-D-0065).

Feb 27/09: GBU-31 JDAM-ER. Boeing signs an agreement with Times Aerospace Korea, LLC (TAK) to jointly develop a wing assembly that will create an 2,000 pound JDAM Extended Range (JDAM-ER) variant.

Under the teaming arrangement for this 40-month development program, Boeing and TAK will co-develop, test, and field a JDAM-ER wing kit to convert the 2,000-pound GBU-31 JDAM into a JDAM-ER. Boeing will provide support to help TAK improve its aerospace capabilities, including preparations for production of the JDAM ER wing assembly. Once development and flight tests are successful, TAK would become Boeing’s primary supplier of wing assemblies for all 2,000 pound JDAM-ERs sold around the world. Boeing’s release adds that as of March 31/09, “the baseline JDAM has been sold to the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Navy, as well as to 22 international customers.”

POSTSCRIPT: Boeing later tells DID that: “TAK management changes resulted in funding challenges and the co-development contract was mutually terminated. However, in March 2012, Boeing selected a development partner to complete the design…”

Dev: 2000 lb. JDAM-ER

Dec 12/08: Israel. The Jerusalem Post reports that the Israeli Air Force is considering JDAM-ER kits, one version of which is under development by Boeing and the Royal Australian Air Force. Their 500 pound JDAM-ER collaboration is expected to enter Australian service in 2010.

Dec 5/08: Lot 13. A firm fixed price, $106.9 million contract for Lot XIII JDAM production: 4,372 Joint Direct Attack Munition Guided Vehicle kits, for delivery in 2010 and 2011. At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA8681-09-C-0057). See also Boeing release.

This appears to be a higher number of JDAMs than the official FY 2009 budget request.

Nov 25/08: JDAM-ER. Boeing announces that its Joint Direct Attack Munition Extended Range (JDAM ER) successfully completed testing with HUG-upgraded Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) F/A-18s in August 2008, exceeding the RAAF’s range and accuracy requirements. Work at the Woomera Test Facility in South Australia was led by the Australian DoD, with support from Boeing. In addition to the firm’s prime integrator role, Boeing subsidiary Hawker de Havilland is the developer of the 500-pound JDAM ER’s wing kits.

Boeing’s JDAM-ER program manager Kevin Holt says that he expects JDAM-ER to move from the flight demonstration phase into Low Rate Initial Production beginning in calendar year 2010. That would turn out to be premature, with testing still ongoing in 2012.

Nov 14/08: LJDAM & A-10C. The USAF announces that an upgraded USAF A-10C has dropped the GBU-54 LJDAM in a successful test. The next step is operational testing to develop tactics and techniques for employing the weapon. If those tests continue to go well, Eglin AFB’s test team may have their feedback as early as January. The goal is to have the LJDAM/A-10C combination deployed on the front lines by early 2009.

A-10C L-JDAM

Nov 7/08: LJDAM to USN. NAVAIR delivers the first GBU-54 Laser JDAM to the fleet. (See May 18/07 entry). Additional flight tests and clearance activities on the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet are expected to begin later in 2008.

The USN also has the DMLGB program underway, in which Lockheed Martin is converting about 7,000 stockpiled laser-only Paveway guidance kits to dual laser/GPS-INS guidance.NAVAIR | Boeing release.

FY 2008

Germany, South Korea, UAE. F-22A drops JDAM
(click to view full)

Sept 17/08: #200,000. Boeing delivers the 200,000th JDAM tailkit to the USAF, just 10 years after JDAM guidance tailkit deliveries to the United States and allied countries began.

Boeing’s release adds that it is currently under contract to build an additional 11,670 JDAM tailkits for the United States and its allies in the coming years, with additional quantities in the planning stages.

200,000

Sept 15/08: LJDAM & B-52H. Airmen at Barksdale Air Force Base (AFB), LA, load a Boeing Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition (LJDAM) onto a B-52H aircraft for a demonstration flight. It was the first time the LJDAM had been carried and delivered from a B-52H. Boeing photo release.

B-52H L-JDAM

July 24/08: Germany orders LJDAM. Boeing announces that it has signed a contract with Germany for 500 lb. Laser JDAM kits, plus integration support to add them to that country’s Tornado aircraft. This is the first international sale of the LJDAM weapon system. Oddly, it was completed as a mere commercial contract, rather than a foreign military sale of weapons; as such, there is no disclosure requirement regarding costs or numbers.

Delivery of the kits is expected to begin in mid-2009, and the unknown order includes options for unspecified additional kits in 2009.

1st L-JDAM export

June 20/08: South Korean request. South Korea is requesting additional air-air missiles and precision attack weapons for its F-15Ks: 280 JDAM tail kits, 2 load/build trainers; plus AIM-120-C7 AMRAAMs, AGM-54G Mavericks, Paveway II/IIIs, and chaff. Read “South Korea Buying Weapons for its new F-15Ks.”

South Korea request

May 30/08: An $8.6 million contract modification for 300 JDAM High Data Rate Compact Telemetry Units, which are used to gather real-time JDAM weapon data during testing. This procurement also includes 100 HCTM Adapter Kits in support of Test and Integration activities. At this time all funds have been obligated (FA8681-07-C-0002 P00004).

Jan 10/08: Lot 12. A firm-fixed price contract for $115.6 million for 4,907 JDAM Lot 12 Guided Vehicle kits for existing 500, 1000, 2000 pound bombs. At this time all funds have been obligated. The 678 ARSS/PK at Eglin Air Force Base, FL issued the contract (FA8681-08-C-0001).

Jan 3/08: UAE request. The US DSCA announces the United Arab Emirates’ formal request for 200 GBU-31 JDAM tail kits, as part of a larger weapons request that also includes 224 of the Mk84 2,000 pound bombs they fit to. See full DID coverage.

UAE request

FY 2007

Lot 11. Israel. F-16I “Soufa”
(click to view full)

Aug 3/07: Israel request. The US DSCA announces [PDF] a formal weapons request from Israel that includes 10,000 JDAM kits. The request does not specify which bomb body sizes the tail kits are for, and the rest of the request involves bomb bodies and Paveway laser or laser/GPS kits.

See “Israel Looks to Replenish Bomb Stocks” for full coverage.

Israel request

May 29/07: IGAS anti-jam. Successful completion of developmental flight testing for the JDAM’s forthcoming Integrated GPS Anti-Jam System (IGAS) at the U.S. Naval Air Warfare Center, China Lake, CA. IGAS uses digital signal processing to significantly reduce the impact of GPS jamming.

During the program, testers released five weapons from a U.S. Navy F/A-18 under various mission and GPS jamming scenarios. All five weapons acquired and maintained their GPS coordinates while flying to their targets. Boeing will complete IGAS development in 2007, with deliveries planned to begin in 2008. Boeing release.

May 18/07: LJDAM. A $28.8 million firm-fixed-price contract to provide for Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition (LJDAM) Precision Laser Guidance Set (PLGS), quantity of 600 (400 USAF, 200 USN) “In response to a compelling and urgent operational need…”

This effort also involves the management, engineering and logistics support necessary for production qualification and performance verification of the non-development PLGS. At this time, $2.8 million have been obligated. Work will be complete June 2009. The Headquarters Air to Ground Munitions Systems Wing at Eglin Air Force Base, FL issued the contract (FA8681-07-C-0209). Boeing June 9/07 release.

March 19/07: JDAM-ER. Flying at 20,000 feet over the Woomera Prohibited Area in South Australia, a RAAF F/A-18B released a pair of 500-pound Mk82 JDAM Extended Range (JDAM-ER) weapons and scored a direct hit on their respective targets. The JDAM-ER uses Australian-designed and built modular wing kit developed by Hawker de Havilland, based on technology licensed by Australia Defence Science & Technology Organization. The ER wing kit provides more than three times the range of a baseline JDAM (i.e. over 45 miles) and is designed to be installed in the field as an addition to existing JDAM weapons.

The AIR 5425 JDAM ER test program is a joint effort with the Australian Defence Materiel Organisation, Hawker de Havilland Aerospace Pty. Ltd., and Boeing Integrated Defense Systems. The test team conducted the technology demonstration under the Australian Capability Technology Demonstrator Program, managed by the Australian Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO), but the design will be exportable to Boeing’s 16 international JDAM customers, some of whom have shown interest in this variant. MBDA’s Diamond Back wing kit is also designed to extend the range of JDAM weapons, and is used on the 250 pound Small Diameter Bomb variant. Boeing release.

Feb 6/07: Lot 11. A $20.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for another 784 JDAM production lot 11 Guided Vehicle kits. At this time, total funds have been obligated; work will be complete March 2009 (FA8681-07-C-0002/P00001).

Nov 14/06: Lot 11. A $296 million firm-fixed-price with cost reimbursement contract for 12,889 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) Lot 11 Guided Vehicle (GV) kits. At this time, total funds have been obligated. Solicitations began July 2006, negotiations were complete November 2006, and work will be complete March 2009 (FA8681-07-C-0002).

FY 2006

Lot 10. Pakistan, Norway.

JDAM: loading
(click to view full)

Sept 8/06: An $8.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 287 JDAM High Data Rate Compact Telemetry Units (HCTMs). The JDAM HCTMs are flight test instrumentation hardware, which is used to gather real-time JDAM weapon data during testing. Work will be complete September 2008 (FA8681-06-C-0058/P00004).

June 30/06: LJDAM. A 500 pound Joint Direct Attack Munition with a laser guidance add-on (LJDAM) bomb scores a direct hit from 4 miles away, when dropped by a U.S. Air Force F-16 flying at 20,000 feet over Eglin AFB, FL. Just to make things interesting, the target Armored Personnel Carrier (APC) was moving at 25 mph.

Boeing will complete its development of the 500-pound LJDAM in 2006. Initial production deliveries are planned to begin as early as 2007, giving it a weapon with capabilities similar to Israel’s existing Spice. A previous May 2005 test had also been successful. Boeing release.

June 30/06: Lot 10. A $28 million firm-fixed-price with a cost-reimbursement contract modification for an additional 1,288 lot 10 JDAM guided vehicle kits. At this time, total funds have been obligated. Negotiations were complete in June 2006, and work will be complete March 2008 (FA8681-06-C-0058/P00002).

June 28/06: Pakistan request. Pakistan requests 500 JDAM kits as part of a proposed $5.1 billion deal for F-16 C/Ds (Block 50/52), F-16 fleet upgrades, and weapons. Pakistan eventually buys all of those F-16s and upgrades. Read “$5.1B Proposed in Sales, Upgrades, Weapons for Pakistan’s F-16s” for full coverage.

Pakistan request

June 12/06: JDAM & F-22. The F-22 Combined Test Force team of The Boeing Company, Lockheed Martin, and the US Air Force successfully tested the F-22’s precision strike capabilities at White Sands Missile Range, NM. The F-22 flew at a speed of Mach 1.5 at 50,000 feet, released a 1,000 pound JDAM from a range of 24 nautical miles to destroy a ground target.

Note the extended range. The drop tested the Raptor’s Launch Acceptability Region (LAR) supersonic algorithm, developed by a Boeing collaboration of F-22, Phantom Works and JDAM engineers. It defines the area in the sky from which the pilot can release a weapon to successfully attack the desired target, factoring in navigation, weather, target and weapon information. Not to mention that range-boosting supersonic speed. See Boeing release.

F-22 supersonic drop

June 1/06: Integration. Boeing subsidiary McDonnell Douglas Corp. in St Louis, MO received a $70 million cost-plus fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price contract. This indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity basic contract is for aircraft integration with the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) weapon system. The Air Force can issue delivery orders totaling up to the maximum amount indicated above. Solicitations began January 2006, negotiations were complete in May 2006, and work will be complete April 2011. The Air Armament Center at Eglin Air Force Base, FL issued the contract. (FA8681-06-D-0021). As a reminder, the current US Air Force JDAM Fact Sheet notes that:

“JDAM is currently compatible with B-1B, B-2A, B-52H, F-15E, F-14A/B/D, F/A-18E/F, F-16C/D, F/A-22 and F/A-18C/D aircraft. Follow-on integration efforts are currently underway or planned to evaluate compatibility with the A-10, F-117, AV-8B, S-3, Joint Strike Fighter, and unmanned aerial vehicles.”

April 18/06: Super Hornet Hand-off. Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Demonstrates Network Capability in Multiple JDAM Drop. Boeing has successfully demonstrated the capability of an F/A-18E/F Super Hornet to provide targeting coordinates to other aircraft using the Raytheon APG-79 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar system.

During the test at the Naval Air Weapons Center at China Lake, Calif., an AESA-equipped F/A-18F created a long-range, high resolution synthetic aperture radar map and designated 4 closely-spaced stationary targets. The aircraft then data-linked 2 target designations to non-AESA equipped Super Hornets, which successfully delivered 4 JDAMs (2,000 lb.) “within lethal distance.” The targeting Super Hornet then used the AESA to provide highly detailed bomb damage assessments to confirm the hits. Boeing release.

March 3/06: Lot 10. A $240.6 million firm fixed price with cost reimbursement type for alternate disputes resolution contract for 10,000 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) Lot 10 Guided Vehicle (GV) kits. At this time, total funds have been obligated. Solicitations began in November 2005, negotiations were complete in March 2006, and work will be complete March 2008. The Headquarters Air to Ground Munitions Systems Wing at Eglin Air Force Base, FL issued the contract (FA8681-06-C-0058).

Feb 20/06: Norway order. Boeing reaches an agreement with Norway to provide the JDAM system to the Royal Norwegian Air Force (RNoAF) F-16s. The contract includes JDAM guidance kits, F-16 weapon system integration and operational support.

Boeing says that Norway is the 5th member of the European Participating Air Forces (EPAF) to select JDAM, and the 14th international customer. Boeing has produced more than 140,000 JDAM guidance kits from 1998 to February 2006, for the USA and for 14 international customers. Boeing release.

Norway

Feb 13/06: Support. A $45 million time and material, firm-fixed-price and cost-plus fixed-fee contract for technical support for the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) weapon system until the end of 2010. This includes non-warranty inductions and repair, annual software updates, mission planning support and studies/analysis. The Air Force can issue delivery orders totaling up to the maximum amount indicated above, but doesn’t have to spend the full amount. Solicitations began October 2005, negotiations were complete December 2005, and work will be complete by December 2010. The Headquarters Air Armament Center at Eglin Air Force Base, FL issued the contract (FA8681-05-D-0277)

Nov 1/05: GPS. Harris Corporation, best known for its success in the tactical radio market, announced that it has been awarded an $18.2 million follow-on contract by Boeing Integrated Defense Systems to provide Anti-Jam Global Positioning System (AJ GPS) modules for Boeing’s Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) program that turns conventional bombs into smart bombs.

The initial development contract was valued at approximately $3.9 million, bringing the total value of the program for Harris to more than $21 million since 2003. Full production and future options could increase the program’s value for Harris to more than $50 million by 2008.

Oct 25/05: Greece request. Greece requests 6 JDAMs as part of its F-16 C/D (Block 50/52) sale and weapons package. Greece would go on to buy those F-16s.

Greece request

Oct 19/05: JDAM-ER. Australia picks Boeing to provide the JDAM for the AIR 5409 Bomb Improvement Program. The contract covers Australia’s upgraded F/A-18A aircraft, and includes JDAM guidance kits, F/A-18 weapon system integration, and operational support. Numbers and figures were not disclosed. Boeing release.

Dev: Australia’s JDAM-ER

FY 2002 – 2005

Lot 8. HART. Singapore. F-15E: 5 targets
(click to view full)

Sept 20/05: HART Test. A low-cost, UHF network-capable weapon data link from Harris Corporation provided target updates in the successful demonstration of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet’s ability to engage moving land targets with Boeing’s JDAM at the Naval Air Warfare Center in China Lake, California. The inert weapon was delivered within two meters of the moving target, a radio-controlled panel-side truck. The 2-way link also demonstrated the ability of the weapon data link to transmit real-time weapon status back to the host F/A-18 aircraft during the JDAM’s free fall.

Harris’ Falcon II radio from its RF Communications Division and Improved Data Modem technology from Innovative Concepts, Inc. were used to create the two ends of the data linkage from aircraft to JDAM. See the Oct 21/03 entry for more background. Harris release.

Aug 23/05: Singapore. Singapore notifies the USA that it wants 150 JDAM kits as part of a $741 million complementary weapons order to go with its F-15SG Strike Eagles. The F-15SG order is finalized with a contract on Dec 13/06, clearing the way for the complementary weapon purchases.

Read “F-15E Strike Eagle Taking Off With Singapore Contract?” for full coverage.

Singapore request

Dec 2/04: #100,000. Boeing delivers the 100,000th JDAM Tail Kit. The original production estimate had been 87,000 JDAMs for the entire program.

100,000

March 01/04: Lot 8 & integration. Boeing Integrated Defense Systems announces 2 key JDAM contracts worth $857 million total.

The first contract, worth $642 million, is for more than 32,000 JDAM Lot 8 guidance kits for the U.S. Air Force and Navy. The kits will convert existing 500, 1000 and 2000-pound unguided free-fall bombs into cost-effective and capable air-to-surface “smart” weapons. The JDAM kits will be delivered by February 2006.

The second contract, worth $215 million, is a 5-year Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract for future integration of JDAM (and JDAM derivative weapons) on various foreign military sales aircraft. The first order issued on the contract was valued at $1 million. At the time, Boeing had 7 active international customers; integration is scheduled for completion by December 2008. Boeing release.

Oct 21/03: HART. Boeing announces a $121 million undefinitized contract for system development and demonstration of the Hornet Autonomous Real-time Targeting (HART) system. HART adds a precision guidance capability to Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) that enables aircrews to designate targets and deploy JDAM based on aircraft sensors, rather than depending on pre-planned coordinates or uploads.

HART builds on a previous DAMASK effort, and also aims to provide a production imaging seeker for the JDAM, which incorporates the capability to download an image from the aircraft’s targeting pod. It can also work with other sensors, as Boeing advertises that the aircraft’s AN/APG-79 AESA radar can be used to acquire and designate a target, and transfer a reference SAR radar image of the target to the JDAM. After release, the weapon compares the reference image to that in its sensor’s field of view, guiding it to the point designated in the target scene. The HART guidance kit includes an infrared sensor, a processor, and image-matching software.

Plans call for a low rate initial production decision on HART in late 2006, with initial operational capability expected in December 2007. Boeing would expect to produce approximately 600 units during Long Range Initial Production (LRIP) 1. Follow on production contracts would bring the total kits produced to 6000 through 2011. Boeing release.

HART SDD

Sept 13/02: Boeing announces a $378 million contract for an additional 18,840 JDAM kits by the JDAM Joint Program Office. The new contract is for a mix of GBU-31 (2,000 lb. warhead) kits and GBU-32 (1,000 lb. warhead) kits for both the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy to be delivered between October 2002 and March 2004.

The new contract will require Boeing to deliver kits to both the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy at a production rate of 2,800 kits per month by August 2003. In response, Boeing is expanding its production facility in St. Charles, MO. Boeing release.

May 14/02: An F-15E Strike Eagle releases 5 JDAMs at 5 different targets in a single drop. Boeing.

FY 1996 – 2001

Full rate production. 1st export: Israel. JDAM drawing

July 18/01: Alenia team-up. Boeing Company and Alenia Marconi Systems announce a teaming agreement under which Alenia will market JDAM throughout much of Europe and the Middle East. It may also assemble JDAMs and derivative weapons that its customers purchase commercially, rather than through the U.S. foreign military sales program.

Alenia eventually became MBDA as a result of Europe’s government-driven mergers. By 2012, the partnership was no longer operational. Boeing release.

April 04/01: Boeing announces a $235 million contract for the production of 11,054 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) kits. Boeing will deliver 10,382 JDAM kits to the U.S. Air Force. The U.S. Navy will receive 672 kits and has an option for an additional 1,150. The contract includes a $25 million option for an additional 1,150 kits. The U.S. Air Force Air Armament Center at Eglin Air Force Base, FL is the contracting agency.

The award follows the Milestone III decision by the Pentagon’s Defense Acquisition Board earlier in April 2001, allowing the program to enter full-rate production.

Milestone III/ FRP

Sept 29/2000: 500 pound JDAM. Boeing announces a $45 million award to engineer, manufacture and develop (EMD) a version of the JDAM for 500 pound Mk80 bombs. The weapon will be integrated in to the F-16, F/A-18, and B-2 bombers during the EMD period. Work is scheduled to be completed by the Boeing weapons facility in St. Charles, MO by December 2002.

500 lb. JDAM

June 1/2000: Israeli integration. First International JDAM Sale: Boeing to Integrate Weapon on Israeli F-16 Aircraft. Boeing release.

1st export

April 28/2000: McDonnell Douglas Corp. in Berkeley, MO received a $5.65 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract to provide for incorporation of Pin-Lock Tail Actuator System technology into the production effort for 8,163 Joint Direct Attack Munition kits. The Pin-Lock Tail Actuator System provides a more durable and accurate method of maneuvering the tail fins of the JDAM than the existing Friction Brake technology. Contract completion date was 31 March 2001.

Feb 24/2000: LRIP-4. A $162 million award for production of 7,247 JDAMs for the USAF, and 916 for the U.S. Navy. LRIP began in the spring of 1997; this is the 4th lot of low-rate initial production JDAM kits, and a decision on full-rate production is expected later in 2000. To this point, Boeing has received orders for approximately 16,000 kits of the 87,000 that the U.S. government has plans to procure.

Production of Lot 4 will begin in March 2001, and ramp up to a rate of 700 kits per month in the Boeing weapons facility in St. Charles, MO. Production is scheduled to run through February 2002. Boeing release.

April 2/99: LRIP-3. A $50.5 million face value increase to a firm-fixed-price contract to provide for low rate initial production of 2,527 Joint Direct Attack Munition kits. The work was complete by January 2001.

June 24/98: 1st JDAM delivered. Boeing Delivers First JDAM.

Delivery

April 30/97: LRIP-1. The USAF announced the decision to initiate low-rate initial production (LRIP) of JDAM, with the first production lot of 937 JDAM kits. MDC release.

Production begins

Oct 24/96: JDAM Guided Flight Tests Begin.

Additional Readings & Sources JDAM Family

• Boeing – Joint Direct Attack Munition

• Designation Systems – Boeing (McDonnell Douglas) JDAM: (GBU-29/B, GBU-30/B, GBU-31/B, GBU-32/B, GBU-34/B, GBU-35/B, GBU-38/B, GBU-54/B, GBU-55/B, GBU-56/B)

• GlobalSecurity.org – Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM). See also sub-pages, especially the JDAM program history.

• Wikipedia – Joint Direct Attack Munition

• Australian Air Power – The Agile Gliding Weapon. The The Kerkanya glide bomb, whose rights were acquired by Hawker de Havilland, and used as the basis for Australia’s JDAM-ER.

• Australian Air Power – JDAM Matures: Parts 1 and 2. Includes background covering HART, and Australia’s JDAM-ER.

Competitiors

• DID – France’s AASM Precision-Guided Bombs. Uses a rocket booster to extend range, and comes in GPS, GPS/IIR, and GPS/laser variants.

• Mectron – Armamentos Intelligentes. The Brazilian firm’s products include ACAUAN GPS/INS guidance kits.

• DID – The US Navy’s DMLGB Program. Lockheed Martin product, separate from Boeing’s DAMTC naval Laser JDAM.

• LIG Nex1 – KGGB. The South Korean firm’s strap-on glide-bomb kit creates an extended range GPS/INS weapon.

• RAF – Enhanced Paveway (II/III). Raytheon’s Laser/GPS in 1,000 and 2,000 pound weapons.

• DID – Paveway IV: British Dual-Guidance Bomb. A Raytheon UK Laser/GPS, just 500 pounds. The USA tried to block its exports to the Middle East in favor of American options, but eventually had to give in.

News & Views

• US Air Force Association (September 2006) – The JDAM Revolution

• US Air Force Link (March 17/06) – JDAM continues to be warfighter’s weapon of choice

• US Air Force Association (November 2003) – Precision: The Next Generation

• NASA Tech Briefs (March 2001) – Diamond back boosts range. Refers to MBDA’s Diamond Back wing kit.

• Air & Space Power Journal, Chronicles Online Supplement (July 26/00) – Expanding the Envelope – Stealth and Other Strike Roles. Discusses concepts of operations for the combination of JDAM-family bombs and stealthy aircraft like the B-2, F-22, and F-35.

E-3F AWACS
(click to view full)

The French Armee de l’Air is upgrading its E-3F AWACS radar aircraft, in a $460 million program.

The E-3 Sentry AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) aircraft is based on a militarized version of the Boeing 707-320B. It remains the world’s most widely used large-jet AWACS platform, in service with the USAF, Britain, France, NATO, and Saudi Arabia. Over the years, the world’s E-3 fleet has required improvements to keep its radars and electronics current with advances in technology. France received its 4 E-3F aircraft between 1991-1992, and undertook its own RSIP improvement program from 2002-2006. Now, they’ve set their E-3F fleet’s upgrade path to Block 40/45 capability. Which is being delivered at last, after the US government suddenly attempted to get in the way…

The AWACS Upgrade E-3F in
(click to view full)

The E-3 Block 40/45 is the most current variant – and the largest enhancement in the history of the U.S. Air Force’s E-3 AWACS fleet.

It includes new, open-architecture mission computing hardware and software, which shifts from mainframe-based computing to a set of networked servers and modern displays. This will provide the computing horsepower to automate some existing tasks, such as Automatic Air Tasking Orders and Airspace Coordination Order updates. It also makes future upgrades easier. Corresponding software/hardware upgrades replace existing buttons and switches with a point-and-click interface and drop-down menus. Upgraded radar equipment will be complemented by “multisource integration capability” that provides a coherent single picture from the radar, ESM emission detectors, Link-16, and other sources, providing a single picture view for detecting and identifying targets. Improved navigation and communications systems round out the upgrades, and may give some E-3s the ability to operate in less restricted airspace around the world.

Airworthiness testing of the USAF’s Block 40/45 upgrades began in June 2006, mission system testing began in April 2007, and testing finished in September 2008. Depending on government funding profiles, the Block 40/45 upgrades will be installed on the entire USAF fleet of 32 E-3 AWACS by 2016 – 2017. Nor is the USA alone. Britain is determining and inserting upgrades as part of its $1.2 billion through life maintenance program, NATO is in the middle of its own $1.32 billion mid-life upgrade, and the Saudis are making RSIP improvements.

Now France has formally contracted for its own Block 40/45 improvements. Each national AWACS baseline is slightly different, and so each Block upgrade set will differ slightly. Beyond the standard Block upgrades, French E-3Fs will add upgraded Identification Friend or Foe Interrogation, including Mode S and Mode 5 capability. Mode 5 IFF uses a much improved algorithm, and other performance improvements include encryption, range, and civil compatibility. It also adds “lethal interrogation” as a must-respond last chance, and has the ability to distinguish individual aircraft even when they’re close together. The further addition of Mode S assigns a discrete response ‘squawk’ which is unique to that aircraft. Together, they improve combat identification, and enable unrestricted flight in civilian airspace.

The overall French program is $466 million: $440 million for the contract, plus a $26 million reserve. Boeing’s share is $324 million. Air France Industries was to begin installing the enhancements at its Le Bourget Airport facility near Paris in 2012, but it took until June 2013 due to US government delays. The entire fleet was scheduled to complete this upgrade in Q3 2015.

Contracts and Key Events 2012 – 2014

US bureaucratic bungling gets in the way; 1st plane in, 1st modified plane comes out. E-3F MLU: Done!
(click to view full)

July 31/14: Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $17.9 million firm-fixed-price, incentive-firm modification for E-3F enhancements, covering full Mode 5 and Mode S-FAA radar capabilities for incorporation into the French Air Force mission and ground system suite. All funds are committed immediately, and the total cumulative face value of the contract is now $378.5 million.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA and is expected to be complete by June 30/17. USAF Life Cycle Management Center in Hanscom AFB, MA manages the contract (F19628-01-D-0016, DO 0067 Modification 25).

July 22/14: Delivery. Boeing formally delivers the 1st E-3F mid-life upgrade, following ground and flight tests at Avord Air Force Base and qualification by France’s DGA procurement agency. Sources: Boeing, “Boeing Delivers Upgraded French AWACS Aircraft”.

1st re-delivery

Feb 17/14: 1st complete. Boeing’s team has successfully completed the 1st of 4 Mid-Life Upgrades to France’s E-3F fleet. While this 1st E-3F+ aircraft undergoes ground and flight tests at Avord Air Base, the others will follow their upgrade rotation through AFI KLM E&M’s facility at Charles De Gaulle Airport in Paris. The DGA expects to validate the upgrade and deliver this 1st E-3F to the Armee de l’Air later in 2014. Sources: Boeing, “Boeing and Air France Industries Successfully Complete Major Modification of French AWACS Aircraft”.

June 17/13: 1st in. Boeing opens the 50th Paris Air show by announcing that subcontractor Air France Industries has begun upgrading the 1st E-3F’s electrical, mechanical and structural systems and mission hardware at its Le Bourget facility. Which is conveniently, the location for the air show.

The upgrades were supposed to begin in 2012, but US government foul-ups (vid. Sept 24/12 entry) delayed the program. Boeing.

April 19/13: Re-baselined. Boeing IDS in Seattle, WA receives an $11.4 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive-firm, cost-plus-fixed-fee re-baseline of the French mid-life upgrade delivery order 67 schedule, “due to impacts of the partial stop work order issued June 19, 2012.”

The total cumulative face value of the contract is now $354.1 million. Work will be performed at Seattle, WA, and is now expected to be completed by Dec 31/15. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/HBSKI at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA manages the contract (F19628-01-D-0016, DO 067 Modification 4).

Sept 24/12: US delays. Defense News covers France’s problems upgrading its E-3F AWACS fleet, thanks to bureaucratic bungling on the American side of the table. The problem is that the Pentagon ordered Boeing to stop work on the upgrade, because they needed to hold a review regarding technologies that might be too sensitive for export. Boeing already had staff in Paris, who need to be kept but cannot work. Overall costs: another $5 million.

The US government wants France to pay the extra $5 million. France already spent $10 million on a 2009 risk reduction study that looked at engineering and technologies, and the Pentagon didn’t make an issue of anything at that time. France says, not unreasonably, that if the Pentagon’s serial mistakes caused the problem, and they are the ones managing the program under Foreign Military Sale rules, then the Pentagon can pay for the extra costs. One French official made the blunt statement: “The credibility of FMS is in play.”

So is the schedule. Thanks to these delays, upgrades won’t start until mid-2013, a year late. That could make it tough to meet France’s Q3 2015 deadline.

2006 – 2011

DSCA request; Upgrade contracts; Through-life support contract. E-3F AWACS
(click to view full)

Oct 7/11: Separate upgrade. Air France Industries completes a EUR 50 million DGA contract from 2008, which brings their E-3Fs up to current ICAO civil aviation standards. Some communications upgrades, including satellite communications, were also added. France’s 4 E-3Fs received this preliminary upgrade between early 2010 and autumn 2011, and are all back in service now. French DGA.

Full Block 40/45 upgrades will begin in 2012, under a separate contract.

Sept 12/11: Air France and the French MdlD’s SIMMAD Aircraft Through Life Support Organization have renewed the through-life support contract for France’s fleet of 4 E-3F AWACS aircraft. This 5-year deal increment runs to Sept 1/16. Air France KLM won’t disclose costs, but says:

“Through life support covers the complete array of AWACS engineering support services… technical and documentary support for the aircraft and its mission-specific systems, painting, and heavy maintenance concurrently with Mid-Life Upgrade work, maintaining the related engineering resources, and providing IT and logistics support services. Two related projects will also by continued under the terms of the contract, namely the digitization of all technical documentation, and the integration of airworthiness monitoring into the AWACS computer systems.”

Through-Life Support continued

Jan 7/11: Air France Industries and KLM Engineering & Maintenance, which joined forces following the Air France/ KLM merger, announce a contract with Boeing Defense, Space & Security to install the E-3F’s modification kits.

The work will begin in 2012 in the AFI facility at Le Bourget, outside Paris, and will end when the 4th and last aircraft has been refitted. A team from Boeing will be on-hand throughout the program to oversee operations. AFI KLM E&M

Installation contract

Aug 20/10: Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems in Baltimore, MD receives a $9.8 million contract which will replace narrow band klystron power amplifiers with wide band klystron power amplifiers in Saudi Arabian and French E-3 AWACS fleets. At this time, all funds have been committed by the Electronic Systems Center’s HBSKI at Hanscom AFB, MA (FA8704-10-C-0007).

Jan 22/10: Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $323.9 million contract “which will provide the French airborne warning and control system mid-life upgrade.” At this time, the entire amount has been obligated by the 551 IA/PKA at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA (F19628-01-D-0016/DO 0067).

France will be the first country outside the USA to field Block 40/45 E-3 AWACS aircraft. See also Boeing release | Hanscom AFB Integrator Magazine.

E-3F upgrade contract

Sept 26/08: The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces [PDF] France’s request to upgrade 4 E-3F Airborne Warning and Control Systems (AWACS) Aircraft with Block 40/45 Mission Computing, Electronic Support Measures (ESM) and Radar System Improvement Program (RSIP) Interface, and Mode 5/S Identification Friend or Foe (IFF). In addition, this proposed sale will include related spare and repair parts, support equipment, publications and technical documentation, integration, personnel training and equipment, contractor engineering and technical support services, and other related elements of program support. The estimated cost is $400 million.

France will use this upgrade to maintain full interoperability and interchangeability with U.S. and other NATO coalition partners, and will have no difficulty absorbing the additional AWACS aircraft into its armed forces. Boeing Integrated Defense Systems in Seattle, WA will be the prime contractor, but implementation of this proposed sale will not require the assignment of any U.S. Government and contractor representatives to France.

DSCA request:

March 2006: Study. A risk reduction study identifies risks associated with the upgrade and transition. Source.

2004: Study. France decides to look at upgrading their E-3Fs from Block 30/35. They contracted with Hanscom AFB’s Electronic Systems Center to perform a feasibility study to identify what would be the new French AWACS mid-life upgrade for mission computing and air battle management.

The study was performed to compare the U.S. Block 40/45 system and the NATO mid-term system. After the study, the French concluded they wanted to pursue the U.S. Block 40/45, with French-specific requirements added/ retained. Source.

Late 1990s: France’s E-3F fleet receives upgrades such as electronic support measures that can detect and backtrack incoming radar beams and other electromagnetic emissions, a passive listening and detection system, and a radar system improvement program, which enhanced the capability to detect and track aircraft and missiles. This brings them to roughly Block 30/35 equivalent. Source.

Upgrade to Block 30/35

Additional Readings

• Boeing – E-3 AWACS

RFS Vladivostok,
DCNS concept
(click to view full)

In August 2009, Russian media reported that their country was planning to take a radical step, and buy a French BPC-210 Mistral Class amphibious assault ship (BPC/LHD) by the end of 2009. The outlet quoted the Chief of the Russian General Staff, Gen. Nikolai Makarov, who said that: “We are negotiating the purchase of one ship at present, and later planning to acquire 3-4 ships [of the same class] to be jointly built in Russia.” That plan eventually came true, with a contract for 2 ships, and a possible follow-on for 2 more.

France currently operates 3 Mistral Class LHDs, after buying a 3rd using economic stimulus funds. Unlike other LHD designs, the Mistral Class can’t operate fixed wing aircraft, and some observers in Russia and elsewhere classify at as an LHA. Regardless, it’s an important tool of power projection. Mistral Class ships can carry and deploy up to 16 helicopters, including attack helicopters like France’s Tiger or Russia’s Ka-50/52. Their main punch revolves around 4 landing barges or 2 medium hovercraft, however, which deliver armored vehicles, tanks, and soldiers to shore. Vessels of this class are equipped with a 69-bed hospital, and could be used as amphibious command ships.

Russia wants that kind of versatility – even as her neighbors fear it. After Russia’s annexation of Ukraine and the continued covert war in Eastern Ukraine, this contract became a major point of contention between Russia and NATO members.

Mistral’s Meaning: A Method to their Madness? Mistral LHD

The Russian order represented an extension of some larger trends, but it was still a sea change on several fronts: strategic, tactical, and industrial.

Strategic: For one thing, it’s the first major arms import deal since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. That, in itself, is a huge shift. The second big change is that Russia’s current defense procurement program through 2015 didn’t even envision the construction or purchase of large combat ships.

Clearly, Russian thinking is changing. The Pacific is becoming a critical strategic theater, and Russia has placed extra strategic emphasis on its influence networks in the Eastern Mediterranean. Mistral Class LHDs, designed for both a large helicopter aviation role as well as amphibious landing and support of troops, would go a long way toward improving Russia’s capabilities in these areas.

February 2011 reports had suggested that the first 2 ships would be deployed to the Pacific Fleet near Vladivostok, but it’s certainly possible to shift the ships to other theaters given enough time, infrastructure, and planning.

By 2014, with Crimea annexed, a civil war in the Ukraine, and the Middle East facing a modern production of the 30 Years’ War, Moscow was talking about basing the ships in their namesake home ports: RFS Vladivostok on the Pacific at Uliss Bay, near Vladivostok; and RFS Sevastopol in newly-annexed Crimea’s port of Sevastopol.

Ka-29K
(click to view full)

Tactical: Control of littoral regions, which includes large stretches of Russia’s coasts, zones like the Baltic Sea and much of the Black Sea, and influence along Middle Eastern coasts, depends heavily on helicopters and UAVs. Russian naval capabilities are limited in these areas, and during the recent war with Georgia, Russia failed to control the Georgian coast.

Russia’s Mistral Class ships will carry Ka-29K utility helicopters, and navalized Ka-52K Alligator coaxial scout/attack helicopters. Other possibilities include anti-submarine helicopters, radar-carrying airborne early warning helicopters, and UAVs.

When this potent aviation punch is combined with the ships’ troop landing capabilities, the new class offers Russia a whole new dimension of offensive and influence operations.

Industrial: The other aspect of the government’s changing thinking may well be industrial. Russia’s shipbuilding industry is clearly experiencing difficulties. Major shipbuilders have defaulted on commercial contracts, and fiascos like the Admiral Gorshkov refit for India have blackened the global reputation of Russian defense products. Any Mistral Class ship built in Russia would represent a naval project whose scale Russia hadn’t seen in well over a decade – which is why initial construction will take place in France. The fact that Russia was even discussing a Mistral buy indicated a certain lack of confidence in Russian shipbuilding.

On the other hand, this Mistral order may be an opportunity for Russian shipbuilding. If construction in Russia is preceded by training in France, as the first ships are built. If engineering and project management expertise are brought back to those shipyards from France to supervise the Russian portion. If infrastructure investments are made within Russia. If all of those things are done, the Mistral order could represent a key step forward in revitalizing Russia’s naval defense sector, following its decimation in the wake of the Cold War.

France, Russia, and the “Competition” HNLMS Rotterdam
(click to view full)

The foundations for Franco-Russian cooperation on a program of this size have been laid on several fronts over the last few years. France’s Thales already provides components for Russia’s front line military equipment, from tank gunnery sights to avionics and targeting pods for Russian-built fighters. Recent memoranda of understanding for cooperation in naval R&D (Thales) and defense R&D more generally (EADS) build on the 2006 MoU between DCN and the Russian government to develop technical, industrial and commercial co-operations between the Mistral’s builder and Russia’s naval defense industry.

Persistent reports from Russia indicated that the Mistral was not the only option Russia was investigating. Reports consistently cited Spain, where Navantia makes the BPE and related Canberra Class LHDs. These ships have a “ski ramp” up front that the Mistral lacks, and have the ability to operate STOL/STOVL fighters in addition to helicopters. The other country cited was the Netherlands. Royal Schelde’s Rotterdam Class is a more conventional LPD design with good helicopter capacity, but without a flattop deck.

In the end, it appears that these reports of interest served mostly as bargaining chips, in order to get better terms from the French for the ships that Russia had always wanted.

The Vladivostok Class LHDs Mistral Class LHD
(click to view – Francais)

Mistral Class ships are slightly smaller than contemporaries like Navantia’s BPE/ Canberra Class LHDs, or Italy’s Cavour Class aircraft carrier/LHDs, and lack the ski jump that gives their contemporaries fixed-wing aviation capability. Exercises off the American coast have demonstrated compatibility with heavy-lift helicopters in the front (#1) landing slot, however, and well deck compatibility with LCAC hovercraft as well as the conventional landing ships.

As such, the 21,300 ton Mistral Class “BPC” (Batiments de Projection et de Commandement) ships operate as helicopter carriers and amphibious assault transports, with secondary capabilities as command ships, and naval hospitals. Propulsion comes from 2 electric-powered maneuverable thruster pods, similar to those used on cruise ships, with 2 more bow thrusters for added maneuverability in tight situations. The Russian Vladivostok Class will include some unique features, but it will be strongly based on the Mistral Class.

Mistral Class vessels normally carry 450 equipped troops for up to 6 months, but can raise this figure to 700 troops or evacuees for short periods. Normal hospital capacity is 69 beds, with a fully-equipped operating room. That capacity can also be expanded in emergencies, by appropriating other ship spaces. The command post section is not expandable, but has workstations for up to 150 personnel.

Vehicle storage capacity is 2,650 square meters, accommodating an estimated 60 wheeled armored vehicles, or 46 vehicles plus 13 AMX-56 Leclerc medium tanks, or 40 tanks plus associated munitions. Russian T-90 tanks have roughly the same dimensions as a Leclerc.

To get those vehicles ashore, Mistral Class ships can carry a number of different landing vessels, including standard LCMs, American LCAC hovercraft, and France’s innovative L-CAT landing catamarans. A 2012 report suggests that Russia will become the 1st export customer for the 80t capacity L-CAT LCM, which can raise and lower its cargo floor to switch between high speed transport and on-shore unloading. Alternatives would involve the smaller Russian Project 11770 Serna LCU, or a modified Project 21280 Dyugon craft LCM with lowered masts.

Aviation Options Ka-31 AEW
(click to view full)

Mistral Class helicopter capacity is about 1,800 square meters, accommodating up to 16 machines with size “footprints” similar to the NH90 medium helicopter or Eurocopter Tiger scout/attack helicopter. The #1 landing spot, over the bow, has been tested with American CH-53E heavy-lift helicopters. It could accommodate most Russian helicopters for “lilly pad” operations, but the huge Mi-26 might be a stretch. Testing would be required, in order to know for sure.

Under current plans, Russia’s Vladivostok Class will carry Ka-52K Alligator coaxial scout/attack helicopters. The Ka-52s will add considerable attack punch, and their short range air-to-air missiles could make them extremely unpleasant for enemy fighters to tangle with.

They’ll also carry Ka-29TB utility helicopters, a slightly enlarged variant of the Russian “Helix family” design that’s optimized for troop transport and assault roles, with the ability to carry rockets and anti-tank missiles.

The Helix family is a larger set, however, with the slightly smaller Ka-27PL Helix operating as an anti-submarine helicopter, and the modified Ka-27PS available in a search and rescue role. The SAR role is necessary for any task force, and the Ka-27PL’s ASW role would be a useful capability. If Russia decided to add the Ka-31 Airborne Early Warning derivative on board, Vladivostok Class ships would be able to serve as true centerpieces of a naval task force.

Beyond those standard options, Russia’s UAV force is too nascent to factor in at this point, and indeed most of their operational UAVs are Israeli models. It would certainly be possible to operate Searcher II UAVs from a Mistral, but they aren’t armed, and could serve only in a reconnaissance role.

The key to any of these aviation capabilities is to add the necessary training and ancillary equipment investments.

Vladivostok Class: Weapons AK630 CIWS
(click to view full)

As noted above, the ship’s most important weapons will be its helicopters.

Beyond that, the Mistral Class is built to commercial standards, rather than naval combat standards, and currently carries very light defensive systems: 4 machine gun stations, a pair of 30mm guns, and a pair of manual Simbad twin-launchers for MBDA’s very short-range Mistral anti-aircraft missiles. Deployment in zones that feature anti-ship missiles, such as the 2006 evacuation off of Lebanon, requires protective escort ships.

The Vladivostok Class be be similarly armed. With respect to the transfer of French military technology, and especially questions raised about the SENIT-9 combat system and SIC-21 fleet command system, DCNS had this to say:

“A Russian combat management system will be installed on board in France. The communication system will integrate Russian communication equipment with French equipment. Some of these equipment will be installed and integrated with the French equipment, some Russian equipment will be installed in Russia. The radar is French. ESM(Electronic Support Measures, detects & pinpoints incoming radar emissions) is not planned on board. Only the pre-installation of the self-defence (A360, Gibkha) will be done in France. The installation will be done in Russia, after the delivery of the ship.”

AK-630 systems are Russian 30mm radar-aimed gatling guns used for close-in defense. Drawings from DCNS suggest that the Vladivostoks will carry 2 of these, along with 2 SA-N-10/ Gibkha 3M-47 quad-launchers fitted with 4 very short range SA-24 Grinch/ 9K338 Igla-S missiles. Four DP-65 anti-saboteur grenade launchers will also be scattered around the ship.

Other Russian Modifications Vladivostok launch

The Russian ships may include a number of changes, to the point of making them a variant class.

The biggest change appears to be an air wing of 30 helicopters, instead of 16, but that could be a mirage. Russian Ka-27/29/31 naval helicopters have smaller footprints than the Mistral’s base NH90, owing to their design, while the Ka-52 attack helicopter is comparable. Some natural increase to about 18 on board is possible, therefore, but the Russian official who gave that figure spoke of combined ship and land-based elements, in order to ensure fast rotation of the helicopters for repairs, or replace combat losses. Russian equipment doesn’t have an outstanding reliability record, and training will require set-asides, so a wing of 30 to deploy 16-18 helicopters is plausible.

Other helicopter-related changes include raised hangars to accommodate taller Russian coaxial designs. Changing overall ship height would change the ship’s balance, but squeezing other decks would change capacity for other key items. It will be interesting to see how the Russian design decides to cope.

Structurally, weather is the first priority. Operations within Russia’s Pacific and Northern fleets will require some hull strengthening to guard against ice damage, which may squeeze internal space a bit more, and parts of the flight deck will need more power for de-icing. The well deck door will reportedly close completely, eliminating the Mistrals’ top opening. Finally, drawings show a modified bridge structure with less protected forward visibility, and more and larger radomes around the ship to accommodate Russian equipment.

For Russian sailors, however, some of the Vladivostok Class’ most important features may be more basic: hot water to shower in, comfortable bunking quarters, etc. Given the state, age, and design philosophy of most current Russian navy vessels, we wouldn’t be surprised if the Russian Vladivostoks soon earn an unofficial sailor’s nickname with the word “Dacha” in it.

Contracts and Key Events 2014-2015

Will France cancel because of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine?

May 21/15: One of the Mistral LHDs originally destined for Russia departed St. Nazaire on Wednesday for a third set of sea trials. The Sébastopol is one of two Mistrals at the heart of a diplomatic spat between Paris and Moscow, with negotiations having begun earlier this week.

May 8/15: French newspaper Le Figaro has reported [French] that the French government may opt to scuttle the two Mistral-class LHDs originally built for Russia, with the French Navy having little desire [French] to integrate the ships into their own fleet. The French have held off delivering the two vessels, originally ordered in 2011, owing to Russia’s involvement in the Ukrainian conflict. Discussions between Russia’s Putin and France’s Hollande last month must have amounted to little, with the Russians previously pressing the French to make a decision on delivery by June.

April 14/15: Russian state defense export agency Rosoboronexport has stated that the French and Russian governments have two more contractually-stipulated months in the $1.5 billion Mistral contract to work out an agreement before Russia makes a decision based on the “terms and conditions set forth in the contract.”

March 4/15: 2nd ship to trials. France will soon have a second built-for-Russia Mistral class helicopter carrier on its hands. The first, the Vladivostok, is biding its time while France waits for a period during which Russia does not appear to be acting war-like against European allies. The second, the Sevastopol, should
start sea trials later this month.

Dec 11/14: negotiating tactics. Russia’s official TASS news agency relays a statement from “a high-rank source in the Russian defense sector” bearing the studied vagueness that is a trademark of Russian communications:

“The Navy has put construction of Russia’s own amphibious assault ships on a long-term program of shipbuilding for up to 2050 and these plans have been endorsed by the Defense Ministry. The document envisions (the emergence of) these ships, many such ships actually.”

Of course if Russia does want to do it alone they’re more than a decade away from having working ships, and if the Kremlin was confident in their own shipbuilding capabilities, they would not have gone to France in the first place. Russia obviously can’t come with an overnight homegrown substitute, but this is consistent with the overall messaging from Russia that they care, but not that much, and that they can operate with eyes set on a long term horizon. It sounds like the Russian are hedging to save face in case France does cancel the Mistral contract.

Sebastopol under construction

Dec 5-8/14: Politics. Jean-Yves Le Drian, in an interview discussing the French government’s ambiguous position, first repeated that ceasefire conditions needed to be fulfilled in Ukraine for the BPC delivery to proceed. Pressed by journalist Jean-Jacques Bourdin the defense minister finally said that the Russians had to realize that “one may never deliver [the ships].” A new ceasefire is supposed to start on December 9.

In past months French officials had stuck to postponing then at most freezing delivery until genuinely peaceful conditions could be observed in Ukraine. Given that fighting redoubled since the September ceasefire, France has little choice but to start making firmer declarations. Some, but not all, politicians from the UMP and FN right-wing parties have have criticized the (left-wing) government for its contractual wobbling.

All along, Russia’s official response had been to downplay any delivery delay as long as France would eventually fulfill its contractual obligations. But Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also used starker language in a press conference held on December 5:

“We have already had enough of this issue, it’s not our problem, it’s the problem of France’s reputation. And next, the contract must be strictly fulfilled.”

On December 6 President Hollande met with his Russian counterpart. Putin said that Mistrals had not even been discussed, an assertion that strains credulity. By Monday Presidential aid Yuri Ushakov said that it would suit Russia if France returned their money.

Sources: BFM TV [Le Drian, video in French] | Elysee statement, Sept. 23/14 [in French] | ITAR-Tass [Lavrov] | BBC [ceasefire] | Slate.fr [French internal politics] | ITAR [accepting a refund].

Nov. 28/14: Theft aboard Mistral #2. The public prosecutor in Saint Nazaire, the French port where the Sevastopol is under construction, told French media that computing hardware and communications software from Thales had been stolen aboard the ship. There was no confidential information on the equipment. The theft happened between November 18 and 25 and is under investigation. Source: Ouest France [in French].

Nov. 21/14: Sevastopol launch and DCNS liability. The 2nd Mistral ship was launched from its dry dock in Saint Nazaire, one month later than expected. Though Coface, France’s export insurance agency, is covering the contract, DCNS is reportedly exposed to a gap of about €200 million that the company is trying to get the government to pay if they end up blocking the sale. That’s about a whole year worth of profit for the state-owned shipbuilder. Source: L’Opinion [in French].

Nov. 14/14: Vladivostok MMSI. Activist website “No Mistral for Putin” – yes, there is a website for that – is outraged that the Maritime Mobile Service Identity showed the ship under Russian flag for about a day. DID was not witness to this and can’t corroborate.

Uliss Bay, 1908

Sept 3/14: Politics. French President Francois Hollande issued a statement that RIA Novosti quoted as follows:

“The [French] security council has studied the situation in Ukraine. It is difficult. Russia’s recent actions in eastern Ukraine violate the principles of European security. The president of the republic stated that despite prospects for ceasefire, which is yet to be achieved and put into practice, present circumstances do not allow the delivery of the first helicopter carrier by France.”

The Russian military actually started training on the ship in June 2014, but the statement leaves lots of room to deliver the warship on Nov 1/14, or slightly later. With that said, other reports cite unnamed sources who say that the French are trying to figure out how to avoid added contract cancellation penalties, on top of the state-insured cost of refunding the 2-ship contract if it’s terminated. Pressure has been building on France, and the potential loss of equal or greater missile defense and attack helicopter competitions in Poland may be introducing new complications. Sources: Bloomberg, “France Said to Weigh Cost of Ditching Russia Mistral Deal” | Deutsche Welle, “France changes tack on Mistral warship delivery to Russia” | RIA Novosti, “France Puts Off Delivery of First Mistral-Class Helicopter Carrier to Russia” | Russia Today, “France says it cannot deliver Mistral warship to Russia over Ukraine” | Washington Post, “France backs off sending Mistral warship to Russia in $1.7 billion deal”.

Aug 5/14: Ka-52Ks ordered. IHS Jane’s reports that Russia has ordered its 32 Ka-52K helicopters for use with its Vladivostok Class LHDs. The order isn’t a surprise, it was just a question of when the contract would be placed. See “Russia’s Ka-52 Alligator Scout-Attack Helicopters” for full coverage.

32 Ka-52K helicopters

July 30/14: First Deputy Prime Minister Dmitiry Rogozin tells ITAR-TASS that if the 2nd Mistral ship is held up, Russia will pursue full contract penalties, then build an aircraft carrier on its own. Not only did they delivery INS Vikramaditya to India, but “…now we have shipyards with dry docks in Crimea and they presuppose ability to build ships of this class.”

That may be true, but standing up a new project of this scale in a new shipyard isn’t trivial, and creates both extra costs and cost ovverruns. India ended up paying $2.9 billion for Vikramaditya, which was modified from the pre-existing Admiral Gorshkov. If one somehow assumed that Russia could build a new one for just $2 billion, which strikes us as unlikely, it would still be more than double the cost of a Vladivostok Class ship. ITAR-TASS, “Russia to build own aircraft carrier if France annuls Mistral supplies — deputy PM”.

July 27/14: Basing. Russia seems to be changing its mind, and now plans to deploy a Mistral ship with the 5th Squadron in the Black Sea, where its focus would project into the Eastern Mediterranean:

“The Russian navy said during Sunday’s Navy Day celebrations that a French-made Mistral-class carrier will become the flagship of its budding Mediterranean Fleet, while Western leaders continue to pressure Paris into withholding the delivery of the warships…. A navy spokesman told Interfax on Sunday that the second ship has “every opportunity” to become the flagship of the Mediterranean Fleet by 2016…. The Black Sea Fleet’s admiral, Alexander Vitko, said Sunday that …. “We have begun the construction of new naval stations and airfields”… adding that new aircraft for the fleet have already been flown in…. Looking further ahead, the Black Sea Fleet will receive 20 new vessels by 2020, Vitko said…”

RFS Sevastopol’s delivery is expected in 2015, so the article’s assertion that meeting this basing schedule would force RFS Vladivostok to be deployed in Crimea is wrong. Sources: Moscow Times, “Second Mistral Warship to Head Russia’s Mediterranean Fleet”.

July 22/14: France will still deliver RFS Vladivostok on schedule, despite criticism from the USA, UK, and other NATO countries. Indeed, President Hollande hits back at Britain for allowing so many Russian oligarchs and their finances in London, while continuing to export military equipment themselves. With respect to the sale, Hollande says:

“For the time being, a level of sanctions [“level 3″] has not been decided on that would prevent this delivery…. Does that mean that the rest of the contract – the second Mistral – can be carried through? That depends on Russia’s attitude”

Since level 3 sanctions against the entire Russian economy are extremely unlikely no matter what, Hollande is essentially saying that the sale will go through. Sources: Bloomberg, “Hollande Threat to Cancel Russia Mistral Warship May Be Empty” | EurActiv, “Hollande: Delivery of second Mistral warship depends on Russia’s ‘attitude'” | Moscow Times, “Under Fire, France Stands by Mistral Warship Sale to Russia” | RIA Novosti, “France Must Adhere to Mistral Contract Instead of Blackmailing Moscow – Russian Lawmaker” | RIA Novosti, “UK Continues Exporting Arms to Russia Despite Call for New Sanctions” | Voice of America, “France Criticized for Warships Contract with Moscow” || UK Parliament, “MPs call for tightening over arms exports for external repression” | Moscow times, “Cameron: Selling Mistral to Russia Is Now Unthinkable; Hollande Disagrees” | The Telegraph, “French lash out at British ‘hypocrisy’ over Russian oligarchs” .

July 17/14: MH17. Russian-backed separatists, who fight alongside Russian special forces units in Ukraine’s civil war, use an SA-11 missile to destroy a Malaysian Airlines 777 flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur. The plane it hit while flying at 33,000 feet, and all 298 people on board are killed.

MH17 shot down

June 5/14: Politics. Germany steps in and defends France’s willingness to honor their contract with Russia. Chancellor Angela Merkel:

“The question of exports to Russia falls under [EU sanctions] stage three. About when to trigger stage three, if there is more destabilisation we have agreed, also myself bilaterally with the US President, that if [Ukrainian] elections take place we won’t trigger stage three. We see elections have taken place successfully….”

Poland has added their voice to public opposition, which may well cost France a major air and missile defense contract there. Regardless, French President Hollande is holding to the same position Germany is articulating, promising that the Vladivostok would be delivered in October 2014. Meanwhile, the article quote an anonymous EU diplomat asking why France should pay a price, when UK oil firm BP has just signed a major deal with Rosneft. All very predictable. Sources: EU Observer, “Germany backs France on Russia warship contract” | Le Monde, “La Pologne opposée a la vente de Mistral a Moscou” | Vice Magazine, “Why Is France Building Warships For Russia?”.

May 29/14: Politics. Eliot Engel [D-NY], Ranking Member of the US House Committee on Foreign Affairs, writes to NATO’s Secretary General, urging the alliance to buy France’s 2 Vladivostok (Mistral) Class LHD ships as a pooled asset, instead of selling them to Russia. He’s joined by Rep. Michael Turner [R-OH, Chair of the US delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly], and Rep. William Keating [D-MA, ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging threats].

The idea makes sense on paper, because it fills a critical military gap. But the lawmakers’ obliviousness to France’s position, and to the reality of European defense budgets, is stereotypically American – in a bad way. It doesn’t help that the USA is reportedly about to try fining France’s Bank Paribas $10 billion for violating sanctions against Sudan and Iran. They’re guilty, but rightly or wrongly, France is less likely to listen to American offers under these circumstances. More to the point, any offer of this nature needs to be serious, and come with serious financial backing. Hope is not a plan. Sources: House Committee on Foreign Affairs Democrats, “Engel: Stop Sale Of French Warships To Russia” | The Economist, “The fine on BNP Paribas: How much is too much?” | Les Echoes, “Quand l’Amérique perd la raison”.

Feb 26 – March 18/14: Crimea annexed. Massive street protests force Ukrainian President Yanukovych to flee, shortly after he signs treaties that abandon relationships with the EU and tie Ukraine to Russia. Yanukovych signed with a metaphorical economic gun to his head, but the guns quickly become real as Russian troops without identifying markings begin capturing Crimea’s Parliament building, key airports, etc. On March 18/14, Russian President Vladimir Putin formally annexes Crimea into Russia, including the key naval base of Sevastopol, after a hurried referendum takes place in that region.

Very limited American sanctions draw open and public disdain from Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, and Europe’s response is equally weak despite its bluster. France provides Exhibit B in this farce, and validates Russia’s confidence that European governments can be had.

In the interview with France’s TF1 channel, French foreign minister Laurent Fabius warns Russia against further “escalations” in Ukraine, which at this point would involve invasion and annexation of eastern Ukraine. “If Putin carries on like this, we could consider canceling the sales [of the Mistral ships],” he says. By the next day, he’s backtracking, saying that “What is being envisaged is the suspension of these contracts [not cancellation – suspension until when?] but … that would only be in the event of us moving to a third level of sanctions and we are not there yet…” Getting to that level would, of course, involve a consensus within the EU that won’t happen, along with financial sanctions against Russian oligarch assets imposed by a British government that’s showing no inclination to do so. Putin’s speech proclaiming Crimean independence says that Russia has no further intentions in Ukraine, which seems to rule out escalation anyway. Meanwhile, Rogozin decides that it’s France’s turn as the target of his Twitter account:

“France is starting to undermine confidence it is a reliable provider in the very sensitive sector of military and technical cooperation…. All those political waves around the referendum in Crimea will soon subside, but our countries will have to continue working together…”

One presumes that traditional diplomatic cables and notes are reserved for countries one actually respects. Sources: Russia’s state-run RIA Novosti, “France May Scrap Russian Warship Deal Over Ukraine Crisis” | Canada’s CBC, “Vladimir Putin defends Crimea vote in Moscow speech” | CNN, “Ukraine cries ‘robbery’ as Russia annexes Crimea” | Der Spiegel, “Ticking Timebomb: Moscow Moves to Destabilize Eastern Ukraine”.

Crimea annexed by Russia

Feb 11/14: Infrasructure. Russia has begun expanding the naval facilities at Uliss Bay, near Vladivostok, to house their new ship. Things look a lot better than they did in 1908, but it’s still going to be a lot of work. A 1.6 km berth will be created by extending the naval base’s quay to 2,700 meters, access roads and railways will be upgraded, they’ll “drastically” modernize the ammunition loading site, and existing water, electricity and communications systems will all get replaced.

Pacific Fleet commander Rear Admiral Sergei Avakyants said that basic infrastructure will be finished by October 2015, while the base will be ready to host the ships by the beginning of 2018. If they’re lucky, the construction standard will be better than the Olympic facilities in Sochi. Sources: RIA Novosti, “Russia Begins Construction of Mistral Ship Base”.

2013

Construction. Schedule. STX St. Nazaire
(click to view full)

Oct 4/13: A “high-ranking defense industry official” adds some precision to Vladivostok’s final delivery date, telling RIA Novosti that it’s Nov 1/14. Sources: RIA Novosti, “Russia to Receive First Mistral Warship in November 2014″.

June 26/13: Sub-contractors. RIA Novosti reports that Baltiisky shipyard has floated out the Valdivostok’s stern, for towing to France on July 8/13 and an expected arrival at the main shipyard in on July 25/13. Vladivostok is scheduled for structural completion and float-out at Saint-Nazaire, France on Oct 15/13.

June 18/13: More for France. Russia’s Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov tells reporters that stern construction for the first-of-class Vladivostok was being moved from the Severnaya Verf shipyard in St. Petersburg to the shipyard in Saint-Nazaire, France for completion. It became clear to the Russians that their own shipyard wasn’t going to meet the deadline, and “we won’t take risks so as not to delay the contract”.

The Russians are hoping to move the completed ship to Russia as early as October 2013, in order to install Russian weapons, combat system, communication equipment, etc., and prepare the ship for delivery in 2014. The 2nd ship, Sevastopol, is scheduled for 2015 delivery, so Severnaya Verf will need to get it together fast. RIA Novosti.

June 17/13: Keel laying. The keel is officially laid for the future RFS Vladivostok. Source.

May 5/13: Industrial. South Korea’s STX group reportedly plans to sell its 66% stake in the St. Nazaire shipyard. The French state holds the other 34%. The South Koreans appear to have decided that the Vladivostok contract, and a December 2012 contract to build a large cruise ship for Royal Caribbean, aren’t enough for long-term success.

In order to sell, of course, they need a buyer. State nationalization is one option, but what does that really do for French politicians? Sources: Liberation, “Les chantiers de Saint-Nazaire entre deux eaux”.

March 17/13: Naval Recognition offers additional background concerning the new Vladivostok Class weapons and modifications from the initial Mistral design.

Jan 24-26/13: Taking fire. Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin criticizes the Mistral Class while addressing a meeting of the Academy of Military Science:

“It’s very odd that ships for offloading a landing force, floating in our latitudes won’t work in temperatures below 7 degrees (Celsius)….”

That would be very odd if it were true, given that France often experiences temperatures below 7C. Rogozin didn’t explain the source of his remark, but the fact that he made it is instructive. It came hard on the heels of industrial criticisms from Military-Industrial Commission Deputy Head Ivan Kharchenko, who told a meeting of defense companies that:

“We have been discussing the absurdity of this earlier decision. It was the initiative of Serdyukov and it’s not the only damage he has inflicted to the government and the industry…”

Russia’s alternative domestic options for fielding a naval amphibious force aren’t exactly clear to outside observers, and Kharchenko did hedge by saying that it’s impossible to backtrack on the 2-ship Mistral deal now. Cancellation costs would be lethal, but ships #3 & 4 aren’t protected by a full contract, and a hostile trend appears to be gaining strength. Vladimir Putin campaigned hard in military-industrial cities during the last election, and these criticisms of the Vladivostok Class come on the heels of a turn away from an Iveco joint venture to produce wheeled armored vehicles in Russia. RIA Novosti | Rossiyskaya Gazeta’s RBH | UPI.

2012

Preliminary design review passes; 1st keel laid; Ka-52K helicopter modifications; Russia ordering L-CATs?; Project cut from 4 to 2? CNIM’s L-CAT

Dec 21/12: Just 2? Russia’s Vedemosti newspaper reports that Russia may cancel the 2nd pair of Mistral ships, quoting an unnamed “government source” and citing cost as an issue. It’s just an unconfirmed report at this point, but if it is true, cost is likely to be a secondary consideration. Much depends on the outcome of all the political reshufflings, now that defense minister Serdyukov has been fired and replaced by former emergencies minister Sergei Shoigu.

OSK United Shipbuilding Corp. says that they have not received any instructions from Russia’s defense ministry concerning the cancellation of ships #3 & 4. Both reports could be true, of course. The initial report said “may” cancel, and there’s no finalized contract in place to demand immediate notification. Lenta.RU via RusNavy | RIA Novosti.

Nov 23/12: L-CATs? Russia’s Ambassador to France, Alexandre Orlov, seems to announce that Russia will become the 1st export customer for France’s innovative landing catamarans:

“We signed a contract on the purchase of two Mistral Class ships. The first is already under construction in Saint-Nazaire, the second will follow. We also discussed the construction of two Mistral LHDs in Saint-Petersburg, Russia. Everything is on schedule. There are also additional contracts. We will buy small french boats that will be aboard the Mistral LHDs, they are landing catamarans…”

The only landing catamarans qualified for this class are France’s new EDA-R (L-CAT) vessels. They can carry up to 80t at up to 18 knots, if the central cargo platform is raised. Once the vessel reaches shore, that platform is lowered, and its cargo can walk or drive off. This performance approaches the capabilities of American options like LCAC/SSC hovercraft, at significantly lower cost. Navy Recognition.

Oct 23/12: STX France tells the Vzglyad newspaper that they’ll launch the Vladivostok’s hull in September 2013, before moving the ship to Toulon for outfitting. Commissioning dates are currently planned for 2014 and 2015, which could be a bit optimistic is there are delays integrating the ships’ Russian electronics and weapons, or delays in testing and crew preparation. RusNavy.

Oct 1/12: Keel-laying. Baltiysky Zavod shipyard places its 1st hull section of the Vladivostok on slipway “A”, where it’s formally accepted by STX France.

The shipyard is building hull sections for the 1st 2 ships, and metal cutting began on Aug 1/12. Metal cutting for ship #2, Sevastopol, is scheduled to begin in May 2013. RusNavy.

Keel-laying: Vladivostok

Sept 19/12: Air wings. Naval Recognition relays a report from Russia’s Izvestia newspaper, stating that each Vladivostok Class ship will have a combined air wing of 30 Ka-52K and Ka-29 helicopters. The unnamed Defense Ministry source is quoted as saying that:

“These will be air wings comprising carrier-based and land-based elements to ensure fast rotation of the helicopters for repairs or replacement due to combat losses.”

Aug 9/12: Ka-52K changes. Oboronprom confirms that Russia will build the navalized Ka-52K Alligator helicopter, which also prompts speculation about the changes involved. Past displays have shown folding rotor blades and folding wings, as well as the standard anti-corrosion treatments.

Navy Recognition says that the Ka-52K will also include a modified version of the MiG-35 fighter’s Zhuk-A AESA radar in the nose section, and will be able to carry Kh-31 Krypton or Kh-35 Kayak anti-ship missiles. Those missiles weigh in at over 600 kg/ 1,300 pounds each, however, which could make them challenging weapons for the helicopter to carry. Navy Recognition | Voice of Russia.

July 17/12: DCNS provides an update part-way through the project’s detail Design phase, which is expected to run into September 2012. While the design modifications are being finalized, STX shipyard in Saint Nazaire has begun building hull blocks for areas that aren’t likely to change. The first 100-tonne block will be delivered in September 2012 and laid down in early 2013, marking the formal beginning of block assembly in the shipbuilding dock.

Russia’s OSK shipyards will participate as a subcontractor, building 12 aft hull blocks for the ships. 2014 and 2015 are confirmed as the targets for delivery. DCNS.

April 2012: Successful completion of the Preliminary Design Review, which outlines DCNS’ revised design to take Russian concerns and needs into account. Detailed design studies were launched immediately afterwards. Source.

Variant’s PDR

2011

From framework to contract for 2 ships; Joint shipyard deal; Preliminary contract for ships #3 & 4. FS Mistral
(click to view full)

Dec 2/11: RIA Novosti reports that Russia’s United Shipbuilding Corporation and the Baltiisky Zavod shipyard signed a RUB 2.5 billion ($80 million) contract to build hulls for the Navy’s 3rd and 4th Mistral LHDs, with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in attendance.

Subsequent news leads one to question if RIA Novosti made an error in reporting on a sub-contract related to ships #1 & 2. The shipyard will be doing hull work for those 2 ships, and the amount tracks better with the expected level of Russian content.

Most people think of the ship’s hull as being a majority of a ship’s cost, but that’s not so. Russian defense officials had previously said Russia would account for 80% of labor inputs in building the 3rd and 4th warships, but that doesn’t mean anything close to 80% of the cost, most of which involves on-board equipment and ancillaries. Different relative levels of manufacturing automation can also produce a figure of 80% labor input, without producing 80% of cost or value in basic construction. Time will tell.

Contract re: ships 3 & 4?

Nov 30/11: Russia’s ITAR/TASS quotes an unnamed DCNS official:

“Russia made an advance payment several weeks ago, and the construction works are about to start… The first Mistral ship will be supplied to the Russian Navy in 2014 and the second in 2015,”

See: RIA Novosti | UPI.

Sept 3/11: Navalized Alligators. While discussing a $4+ billion Russian contract with state-controlled Oboronprom for 140 military helicopters by 2020 (no type breakdown), General Director Andrey Reus confirms that the 1st navalized Ka-52K Alligator attack/scout helicopter shipment for use on Russia’s new Mistral LHDs will finish by the end of 2012. RIA Novosti | Voice of Russia.

July 1/11: RIA Novosti quotes Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov, and Navy commander Adm. Vladimir Vysotsky, as they discuss the buy’s training & industrial angles. Serdukov:

“We will send to France 70 people, who will be charged with servicing those ships… At the same time, we will train two Mistral crews in Russia.”

Vysotsky:

“The purchase of Mistral shipbuilding technology will help Russia to grasp large-capacity shipbuilding. It is important for construction of ships like the future ocean-going class destroyer and later an aircraft carrier…”

June 22/11: Latvia asks for help. Latvia’s Defense Minister Artis Pabriks reportedly says that:

“If these helicopter carriers appear in the Baltic Sea, Latvia will ask France and NATO in general for military and political support… The size of this support should be adequate to restore the balance of forces in the region.”

June 20/11: South Korea’s STX, who builds Mistral ships at its St. Nazaire facility, announces a $1 billion deal with Russia’s state-owned United Shipbuilding to build a shipyard in St. Petersburg, Russia. STX Group will undertake engineering, procurement and construction on a lump-sum, turnkey basis. Agence France Presse | KOMEC | NASDAQ | Reuters.

Joint shipyard deal

June 17/11: France & Russia have reportedly agreed on a full contract for the Mistrals, to be signed by June 21/11, but key questions remain unanswered in public reports. Accounts conflict, but the bulk of reports place the contract at EUR 1.12 billion billion for 2 Mistral-class assault ships from STX in France, to receive final outfitting by naval shipbuilders in Russia. DCNS will be the prime contractor, and will also integrate the operations and communication systems. Shipbuilding will be subcontracted to the STX shipyard at Saint-Nazaire in western France, who has further sub-contracted Russian shipbuilder OSK for part of the hull. Deliver is slated for 2014 and then 2015.

The total project cost appears to be EUR 1.7 million for these 2 ships, with an option for another 2 ships that would be assembled in Russia. The sale of these 2 ships to Russia represents more than 1,000 full-time jobs in France over a period of 4 years.

The unanswered questions revolve around the transfer of French military technology, esp. the SENIT-9 combat system and SIC-21 fleet command system. State-controlled United Shipbuilding Corp. spokesman Roman Trotsenko told Rossia 24 television that Russian industries will produce about 40% of the first 2 ships, which could suggest significant insertions of Russian technology. On the other hand, he also said that the command and control system would come from France.

The US House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R-FL-18], blasted the sale, arguing that it threatened regional security even as Russia was becoming more threatening toward its neighbors. DCNS | STX Europe | Moscow Times | RIA Novosti op-ed | Voice of Russia | Expatica France | Radio France International | MarineLog | US House Foreign Affairs Committee statement.

Contract for first 2 ships

June 14/11: RIA Novosti reports that the governments of Russia and France signed a protocol of intent for the Mistrals, but not a final contract, on June 10/11.

It adds that electronics continue to be an issue. France is reportedly not comfortable delivering the Mistral’s NATO-standard SENIT-9 naval tactical data system with a production license, and doesn’t want to include its SIC-21 fleet command system at all.

May 27/11: At a G8 press conference, French President Sarkozy discusses the Mistral sale. He portrays the Russian situation as stable with the end of the Cold War, and the sale of a ship like the Mistrals as normal within the current relationship. Key excerpts:

“…la Russie est un grand pays avec des matières premières. L’Europe a beaucoup de technologies, nous avons tout à construire ensemble… Voilà, donc, soit on est ami, soit on ne l’est pas. Mais si on est ami, si on est partenaire et si on est allié, je ne vois vraiment pas pourquoi on ne devrait pas avoir des projets ensemble… Vous savez il y a une chose dont je suis sûr, si ce n’est pas nous qui les avions construit, d’autres, y compris en Europe, auraient été heureux de les construire. Je pense notamment à nos amis espagnols.”

May 3/11: RIA Novosti notes that former senior Navy official Nikolai Borisov (“internal reasons”) and first deputy defense minister, Vladimir Popovkin (to head Roskosmos) eere relieved of their duties in late April 2011, and quotes an unnamed Russian defense ministry source as saying that:

“New representatives will take part in the next round of Russian-French Mistral talks… At the moment, they are receiving the necessary documentation on the contract… The replacement of the negotiation team is just a technicality… The negotiation process has made great progress, and the sides are well aware of each other’s stance. The question now is whether France will sell Russia ships with all systems and equipment.”

March 15/11: France’s Le Figaro reports that Mistral negotiations are starting to produce friction within the French government, who see allied pressure continuing and issues with Russia over price and technology transfer. An excerpt:

“Aujourd’hui, la France serait prêt à vendre à la Russie presque toute la technologie qui équipe le Mistral, l’un des fleurons de la marine nationale… Mais le Mistral possède des technologies sensibles sur lesquelles seule la France a autorité. Selon les informations obtenues par Le Figaro, Paris aurait ainsi accepté de céder les systèmes de communication et de commandement. Avec leurs codes. Or l’un des systèmes de communication ultrasophistiqués du Mistral, Sinik 9, est un dérivé direct de Sinik 8, celui qui équipe le Charles de Gaulle ! Même le directeur des chantiers navals de Saint-Nazaire a reconnu qu’il existait «un risque» lié aux transferts de technologie… Paris et Moscou ont encore quelques semaines pour trouver un compromis. Mais à Paris, cette histoire finit par mettre mal à l’aise les plus fidèles partisans de l’accord, qui commencent à trouver le prix à payer bien cher.”

To summarize: according to Le Figaro’s sources, Russia has pushed through an important change in the intergovernmental agreement, replacing French “assistance” in technology transfer to Russia with a “guarantee” of technology transfer, involving almost every one of the Mistral’s systems. For instance, France has reportedly agreed to transfer the Sinik 9 control & communications system to Russia, which builds on the Sinik 8 system installed on the nuclear aircraft carrier FS Charles de Gaulle. This is seen as a risk, and when coupled with price and diplomatic issues, even the sale’s supporters are beginning to question the price. Le Figaro [in French] | RIA Novosti.

March 3/11: Russia’s Kommersant business daily reports that Russia and France have deadlocked on price negotiations, but official Russian sources deny it. Which they would anyway. France is expected to put forward the final commercial proposal on March 15, and the 2 sides are reportedly over $250 million apart.

Time may reveal the truth. According to reports, the deputy chief of the Russian Navy, Vice Adm. Nikolai Borisov, signed a EUR 1.15 billion protocol with France in December 2010: EUR 980 million for the 2 ships built by STX in France, plus EUR 131 million in logistics expenses and EUR 39 million in crew training expenses. Construction licenses and technical documentation to build the next 2 ships at Admiralty Shipyards in Russia would add EUR 90 million, bringing the total to EUR 1.24 billion.

Russia reportedly says that Borisov had no authority to sign the document, and did it without consulting with Rosoboronexport and the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation. They want the entire deal for EUR 980 million. In response to the Kommersant reports, however, the spokesman for the Russian prime minister downplayed the seriousness of the situation, while acknowledging differences. Dmitry Peskov told Ekho Moskvy radio that “Mistral contract working problems really exist, which is quite natural for such a large scale project.”

To add to the uncertainty, First Deputy Defense Minister Vladimir Popovkin tells the Military-Industrial Courier that the Mistral contract involves: “two ships built by France’s DCSN and the licenses for construction of two additional ships in Russia for at least 1.5 bln euros,” adding that the ships would include all the original navigational and other technical equipment, including the SENIT 9 naval tactical data system. ITAR-TASS | RIA Novosti || defpro | South Africa’s TNA | UPI.

Feb 9/11: Basing & helicopters. Itar-Tass reports that Russia will use 2 of the Mistral ships in the Pacific Fleet, including protecting the South Kurile Islands, which are disputed territory with Japan. An “informed source at the Defence Ministry” is quoted as saying that:

“Considerable appropriations will be made for improving the infrastructure of military compounds and garrisons of the 18th Artillery Division in the Eastern Military District, which are deployed on the islands of the Kurile Ridge. The division stationed in the South Kurile Islands has not undergone any organisational changes during military reform in Russia… We plan to replace the division’s weapons and hardware that have expended their service life with one ones.”

As for the ships’ complement and design, Helicopters of Russia Holding Company Deputy Director-General Andrei Shibitov says that:

“Ship versions of the Ka-27K, Ka-29K and Ka-52K helicopters will be used. Their number on each ship will be determined by the Defence Ministry.”

Another Russian official states that using those coaxial rotor helicopters will require a slight elevation of the ship’s deck, to ensure enough clearance height in the hangars. Use in northern latitudes will also require some reinforcement within the ship, in order to make it more survivable against threats like ice. This is not expected to require a major redesign.

Basing plans: Pacific Fleet

Feb 8/11: RIA Novosti relays reports from Kommersant that state-run arms exporter Rosoboronexport will represent Russia in direct talks with France’s DCNS from now on.

“Kommersant speculates that the removal of the USC from the talks could be the result of the company’s aspirations to acquire a status of an “independent dealer” on the lucrative arms exports market. Rosoboronexport, backed by the Russian Defense Ministry, has almost monopolized Russia’s arms exports and apparently does not want new players to bite into its share in enormous profit…”

USC removed from talks

Jan 25/11: Agreement signed. Neither Russia nor France are transparent about sale details, but published estimates of the sale price revolve around RIA Novosti’s report of around EUR 1.37 billion euros ($1.9 billion) for the first 2 ships. One of the reasons for that vagueness may involve the nature of the deal. Rosoboronexport head Anatoly Saikin says the agreement is only a framework, without firm deadlines or costs: “A contract is still a long way off. Only an intergovernmental general agreement has been signed.”

Despite Saikin’s cautions, reports place the 1st Russian Mistral’s delivery in December 2013, and there is general agreement that it would be 80% built in France and 20% in Russia. The 2nd ship will reportedly use 40% Russian components. The 3rd and 4th ships will be built in Russia, with 80% Russian workshare. Noted cruise ship builder STX Europe estimates its Saint-Nazaire yard’s work share at 2.5 million man-hours.

In America, meanwhile, Sen. John McCain [R-AZ] said:

“I strongly oppose France’s sale of the Mistral to Russia… This ship is a threat to some of America’s friends and NATO allies, and I worry that this decision could set a troubling precedent within NATO of advanced weapons sales to the Russian government.”

See: French President | Agence France Presse | Le Figaro | ITAR-TASS | Moscow News | Moscow Times | Pravda | RIA Novosti | La Tribune | UPI || Outside reactions: Bloomberg | AFP | Civil Georgia | Expatica France re: Lithuania | Trend in Azerbailjan | China’s Xinhua.

Framework, but not a contract

Jan 12/11: Basing, New Shipyard. Russian media reiterate reports that their 1st Mistral Class ship will be based in Vladivostok with the Pacific fleet, while the 2nd will be based at Severomork on Russia’s northern Peninsula. The Severomorsk ship will reportedly require special piers and additional anti-submarine and air defence systems on site. These basing choices lessen the communication of direct threat to Baltic countries like Latvia, or Black Sea countries like Georgia, while the ships are being built n France. There is no word on where the final 2 ships would be based, though the Baltic and Black Sea fleets would be logical possibilities.

What’s new, is a quote from a Russian navy spokesman that “a decision has been adopted to build Mistral Class vessels at a new shipyard to be constructed on the Kotlin Island near St. Petersburg, but still under the structure of the large Admirality Naval yards.” That’s a shift away from Sergei Pugachyov’s United Industrial Corporation Baltiisky Zavod shipyard, marking the latest in a string of setbacks for the financier. Barents Observer | Moscow Times.

2010

International controversy; Tech transfer issues; Planned helicopters; French-Russian JV. FS Tonnerre [BPC 2],
during sea trials
(click to view full)

Dec 24/10: Russia’s ITAR-TASS reports that Russian President Dmitry Medvand French President Nicolas Sarkozy:

“…made a joint statement, which reads, “Russian President Dmitry Medvedev informed French President Nicolas Sarkozy that a consortium of the French company DCNS and the Russian United Shipbuilding Corporation won an international tender for the delivery of two helicopter ships to the Russian Defense Ministry announced on October 5.” Two helicopter ships will be built jointly at first, and another two will be built in the future, the statement said.”

Key industrial players will be France’s DCNS and STX of France, and of course Russia’s United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC). See also: Voice of America.

Dec 9/10: During a visit to Moscow, French Prime Minister Francois Fillon says of the Mistral deal that:

“There is no question about the technology transfer, no problem regarding technology transfers… We are discussing the price and Vladimir Putin is not the easiest person to talk to about this question.”

Nov 1/10: USC-DCNS consortium Agreement.

Russia’s state-controlled United Shipbuilding Corporation and France’s state-controlled DCNS sign an agreement, setting up a consortium to build “military and civilian ships.” Noises are being made about building Arctic supply ships and icebreakers, and Russian firms are also becoming a bigger presence at events like Euronaval 2010, but the initial focus is likely to be Russia’s order for Mistral Class helicopter carriers.

DCNS Chairman Patrick Boissier added that it is also ready to compete in all military tenders. Beyond the Mistral, Russia will need to build corvettes and frigates very quickly, in order to avoid having key regional fleets in the Black Sea and beyond rust out to almost nothing. RIA Novosti | RIA Novosti op-ed | AP | China’s Xinhua.

Consortium

Sept 21/10: Competition? Russia’s Interfax news agency quotes an unidentified senior Russian Navy official as saying the ship tender would be a mere formality “formed in such a way as to practically predetermine the victory of the French ship” while getting the best price, adding that Russia and France had already agreed on the parameters of the rumored deal.

Construction terms appear to have followed the French proposals, with 2 ships built in France and 2 in Russia, rather than the 1 and 3 pattern Russia had been asking for. If true, that would leave the issue of technology transfers and cost as the biggest unanswered questions. The figure of EUR 600 million (about $765 million) is mentioned in reports, but that’s much too low for 4 Mistral Class ships. It’s about right for DCNS’ share of a deal for 4 ships, however, if the French are building 2, and key electronics and weapons are being provided by Russia. Voice of Russia | Agence France Presse via Defense News | Reuters via Malaysia Star.

Sept 13/10: Competition? UPI reports that despite an apparently open tender, Russia and France are still conducting exclusive talks regarding DCNS’ Mistral Class LHDs. It also quotes an ITAR-TASS report where Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov told them that the Kremlin was “expecting the detailed financial conditions” from France to push the deal to its final stages. UPI.

Aug 20/10: Competition. Russia’s amphibious ship purchase becomes an open tender competition, assuming that other governments allows their shipbuilders to participate. Ouest France reports that the key sticking point was France’s refusal to include the Mistral’s combat system and NATO C4I systems.

Navantia makes the Spanish BPE, and its counterpart the Canberra Class LHD for Australia. It’s larger than the Mistral, and features a “ski jump” on deck that can help it launch fixed wing UAVs and short or vertical takeoff fighters. Russia’s neighbors would likely consider it even more destabilizing than the Mistral Class, but Spain’s commitment to NATO has never been strong, and the country currently faces depression-level unemployment. Political interference will probably be low, but the combat and C4I systems could easily become the subject of pressure from other NATO states, and Navantia’s dependence on exports within NATO would give that pressure weight.

Damen Schelde makes a slightly different kind of ship with a much more conventional profile, but its Rotterdam/ Johann de Witt Class LPDs are considered to be excellent examples of their type, and very good value for money. The firm also worked with BAE on the UK Royal Navy’s new Bay Class LSDs. These “Enforcer Series” ships are all smaller than Mistral, but the firm is also designing a 28,000t Zuiderkruis Class Joint Support Ship. Political approval may be an issue with the Dutch, however; their Parliament is divided, weapons exports are challenged, and Russia’s invasion of Georgia did not sit well there.

Other contenders may include Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems and their MHD 200 LPH (Landing Platform, Helicopter) concept. Time will tell. See Defense News | Information Dissemination | Ouest France [in French] | Reuters.

July 26/10: Tech Transfer. In an interview with Ekho Moskvy radio, Russian Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky said the Mistral purchase hinged on the “transfer of key, fundamental technologies,” or it would be pointless. Russia’s political leaders may or may not share that view. More to the point, NATO countries are likely to have limits on what they will or will not transfer. UPI.

July 23/10: French President Nicolas Sarkozy tells shipyard workers at STX that:

“Avec nos amis russes, vous allez fabriquer les deux BPC. Le contrat, on est en train de le négocier, mais la decision de le faire, elle est certaine.”

In other words, the French yards will build 2 ships, and though the contract is still under negotiation, the decision to go ahead is a done deal.

The same MdlD release also places the cost of FS Dixmude [BPC 3] at about EUR 300 million, but any Russian ships will have additional costs from 2 sources. One is any Russian electronics and weapons, which will have to be integrated with the rest of the ship. That will take time, and costs money, unless Russia opts for some export variant of the ship’s native French electronics and weapons. The other source of added costs is tied to reports that Russia wants to strengthen the ships’ hulls at Russian shipyards after construction, so they’ll be able to cope with the ice around its northern ports. French Ministère de la Défense.

July 5/10: Helicopters. A RIA Novosti report may provide some insights into the new ships’ helicopter complements [DID: links added]:

“Vyacheslav Kovalyov, the first deputy director of the Kumertau Aviation Production Enterprise… added that the Russian Air Force was planning to buy the Ka-52 Alligator, Ka-226 Hoodlum helicopters and a new modification of the Ka-27 helix helicopter, the Ka-27M, the development of which is now in its final stage. A high-ranking source in Russia’s United Industrial Corporation (OPK) confirmed that the country’s Air Force was going to buy up to 100 Ka-class helicopters, including some 70 Ka-27M choppers, to equip Mistral ships.”

June 21/10: Software. RIA Novosti reports that Parametric Technology Corporation (PTC), headquartered in Massachussets, USA, intends to participate in software development if Russia orders the Mistral Class, creating links that bridge exportable French ship systems with Russian counterparts. PTC VP Paul Grenet cites 20 years of firm experience working with DCNS, and similar work done for past French warship sales to Brazil and Morocco:

“The same warship for a national navy or for export has certain differences due to secrecy and national security… PTC specializes in the development of export options that are compatible with the standards of a customer.”

PTC is headquartered in the USA, but its global offices include Moscow and St. Petersburg.

May 26/10: A RIA Novosti report outlines the shape of the Mistral deal, while repeating past reports that Russia is also in discussions with Spain and the Netherlands. According to the Barents Observer translation, however, negotiations with the French are in their final stages.

As reported, the deal would see the first ship built entirely abroad. Russian shipbuilders would participate in manufacturing ships 2 & 3, and the 4th ship would be built entirely in Russia. Minister of Defense Anatoly Serdyukov appears to be trying to allay concerns over Georgia by saying that the first 2 ships will be deployed in the Northern and the Pacific Fleets. This will not make NATO members like the Baltic states feel any better.

April 20/10: Rosoboronexport’s Russia is quoted as saying that Russia has made the political decision to purchase the Mistral-class warships, and expects that the agreement with France will be signed by the end of 2010. Time will tell. Defense News.

Feb 10/10: NATO waffles. NATO spokesman James Appathurai offers an official alliance view:

“The Secretary General has said he does not consider Russia a threat and he hopes Russians don’t think of NATO as a threat. He takes it for granted, of course, that any arms sale would fully respect international rules and conventions, but the anxieties of some allies are, of course, real and they are understandable for historical reasons, geographic reasons and so this is the context which has to be taken into account.”

When closely parsed, it offers no firm position.

Feb 9/10: Lithuania cites EU. NATO and European Union member Lithuania weighs in publicly on the Mistral sale, as the Minister of National Defence pledges to raise the issue at the next EU Defence Ministers meeting. Mr. Dainius Zalimas, Law Adviser to the Minster, adds this statement:

“We think that the said sale is inconsistent with criteria II, III, IV, V and VI of Article 2 of EU Council Common Position 2008/944/BUSP that describe common rules of export control of military technology and equipment. Therefore, the execution of the sale may violate the principle of solidarity of member states which has been embedded in the Treaty of the EU and the responsibility of member states to ensure that the national policy must be in line with the position of the Union as it has been stipulated in Article 29 ( former 15) of the Treaty.”

Feb 8/10: Approval? Widespread media reports say that France has approved in principle the Russian request for 1 ship, and expects to decide in the “next few weeks” whether to approve the sale of 3 additional Mistral Class LHDs to Russia. The DGA’s head of international development, Jacques Lajugie, reportedly added that if Russia were to buy the Mistral, France would expect at least the first 2 units to be built in French yards. Russia has sated a preference for 1 ship from France, and 3 built in Russia’s less-than-reliable shipyards under the state-run United Shipbuilding Corporation.

The deal is somewhat controversial in Russia, where industrial groups see the move as a declaration of non-confidence in Russia’s own shipbuilding industry, and a diversion of money to foreign industries. The issue has also become a topic of concern in Washington over the ships’ potential uses against allies like Georgia, with Senators writing letters, and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates expressing his “deep concern” directly to French officials. Since the ships do not use American military technologies, there is currently no legal mechanism that would allow the USA to hold up the sale. Diplomatic concerns are being expressed nonetheless. A U.S. diplomatic official reportedly said that:

“We have a lot of questions for the French. Mr Gates made it clear that a lot of people are very worried about this – not just in Washington, but among other NATO allies like Britain and in the east too.”

See: Radio France International | RIA Novosti | Russia Today | CNBC | Defense News | Daily Mail, UK | NY Times | Georgian Daily: Part 1 | Part 2 | Reuters | Scotland on Sunday | Washington Post.

Jan 31/10: On Georgia’s mind. Information Dissemination reports that Eutelsat’s cancellation of Georgia’s First Caucasian Channel stems directly from this proposed sale:

“Gia Chanturia, general director of the Georgian Public Broadcasts was in Paris this weekend seeking answers from Eutelsat and French government officials. He is unlikely to like what the French tell him, because my sources both in Washington, DC and Paris have confirmed that Moscow has made cancellation of the First Caucasian Channel by Eutelsat a condition of the Mistral sale… As we watch Russia leverage their unequal national power to influence France, keep an eye on eastern European countries like Poland. This will get bigger than Russia, Georgia, and France before it is all over, and the potential for long term consequences in Eastern Europe is not trivial.”

2009

Negotiations; FS Mistral visits; New foreign options? Ka-52 on FS Mistral
(click to view full)

Dec 23/09: Wider talks? UPI reports that Russia is also considering amphibious ships from Navantia in Spain, and Damen Schelde in the Netherlands. Russian navy chief Vladimir Vysotsky was quoted as saying:

“Yes, we are holding talks, and not just with the French, but with the Netherlands and Spain, about the acquisition of a ship of this class.” …But observers say the 650-foot Mistral is still favored to win the contract.”

See also Foreign Policy Magazine: “Russia’s New Arms Dealers.”

Nov 27/09: FS Mistral visit. During the FS Mistral’s visit to St. Petersburg, Russia, the amphibious assault ship holds a “cross deck” exercise with Russian Navy helicopters. They include landings by a Ka-29 utility helicopter with a French officer on board, as well as landings using a Ka-27 Helix anti submarine warfare helicopter and the first deck landing for the Ka-52 scout/attack helicopter, which also simulates a refueling on the flight deck. French Navy [in French].

Oct 3/09: Russia Today provides an update on the Mistral controversy in Russia. Negotiations are underway, but buying ships from abroad does not sit well with many in Russia. On the other hand, senior officials openly acknowledge that Russian shipbuilding is in crisis, and it could not build an LHD itself.

Sept 19/09: Russia’s RIA Novosti confirms that talks are underway, quoting Defense Ministry official Vladimir Popovkin. Popovkin is not making any commitments, however, telling Ekho Moskvy radio that “We are holding talks, but no purchases have yet been made.” RIA Novosti adds that: “A Russian source close to the negotiations hinted on Tuesday that technical bilateral discussions should be completed soon.”

Sept 15/09: A RIA Novosti report lays out the expected process for any Mistral ship buy:

“We are holding technical consultations, which are expected to be completed by the end of September. The results will be reported to Russia’s military-industrial commission in order to determine the viability of the purchase… The officers [who recently inspected a French ship of class in Toulon] were shown the interior of the ship and provided with technical data.”

A decision is expected some time in October 2009, if all goes as planned.

Aug 26/09: Intent. RIA Novosti reports that Russia is planning on a EUR 300-400 million contract by the end of 2009 to buy a French Mistral Class amphibious assault ship (LHD). The outlet quotes Chief of the Russian General Staff Gen. Nikolai Makarov, who said that: “We are negotiating the purchase of one ship at present, and later planning to acquire 3-4 ships [of the same class] to be jointly built in Russia.”

Additional Readings The Ships and Equipment

• DCNS – Mistral Family LHD. Its inability to operate fixed-wing aircraft has caused some to classify it as an LHA instead, alongside offerings like South Korea’s Dokdo Class, but distinct from US Wasp Class or Spanish Juan Carlos/ Canberra Class LHDs.

• Naval Technology – Mistral Class – Amphibious Assault

• Russia – United Shipbuilding Corp. In Russian.

• Naval Technology – CNIM – Landing Craft and Multipurpose Patrol Craft. Makers of the L-CAT.

• YouTube – EDA-R / L-CAT (Landing Catamaran). Enthusiast video, very good at showing the key features.

• DID – Russia’s Ka-52 Alligator Scout-Attack Helicopters

• RIA Novosti (Infographic) – The Kamov Ka-52 Alligator/ Hokum-B

• Aviastar – Ka-27. Includes variants.

• Air Force Technology – Ka-27/28 and Ka-29 Helix Multirole Naval Helicopter, Russian Federation

Other News

• DID – Russia’s Military Spending is Jumping – But Can Its Industry? The Mistral buy is closely related to many of the issues explored here.

• Vice Magazine (June 7/14) – Why Is France Building Warships For Russia? Article mirrors the points made here, with additional data re: the overall French shipbuilding industry.

• Foreign Policy Magazine (Jan 6/10) – Russia’s New Arms Dealers

• Information Dissemination (Nov 25/09) – Wanted: Big Amphibious Ships

• Le Figaro, via WayBack (Sept 7/09) – Vente de Mistral à la Russie : les dessous d’un marchandage

• Information Dissemination (Aug 27/09) – Thoughts on the Russian Mistral

End Notes

• = DCNS itself refers to the Mistral Class in its marketing materials as an LHD. A Navantia-sponsored IDS study referred to the Mistrals as LHAs, and so have several Russian media reports. DID will generally use the manufacturer’s designation unless there is a compelling reason not to, hence the references to Mistral-derivative ships as LHDs.

The US Marine Corps' (USMC) six F-35B Lightning II aircraft have commenced the first phase of shipboard operational testing (OT-1), landing aboard the amphibious assault ship, USS Wasp.

The US Navy has launched its latest joint high speed vessel (JHSV 6), the future USNS Brunswick, at the Austal USA Shipyard.

Defence technology company QinetiQ has launched its ViewFinder combat management system, after completing successful trial on the UK Royal Navy's Duke Class Type 23 Frigates.

BAE Systems has received a contract to manufacture and deliver five Bofors 40 Mk4 Naval Guns for the Brazilian Navy's 500T Macae-class patrol vessels.

Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP

B-52 Stratofortress bomber doing what it does best.

The photographs in this post were taken during a combined live fire demonstration in Wadi Shadiya, Jordan, May 18.

They show a B-52H from 2nd Bomb Wing, from Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, drop some 500-lb GBU-38 JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munition) bombs during the “monumental military demonstration” that was the final event of Exercise “Eager Lion” a recurring multinational exercise designed to strengthen military-to-military relationships, increase interoperability between partner nations, and enhance regional security and stability.

Noteworthy, the two B-52 Stratofortress bombers that marked the first participation of strategic bombers to Eager Lion, performed a 30-plus hour, 14,000 mile nonstop mission to the U.S. Central Command area of operations.

They coordinated the attack with Jordanian JTACs (Joint Terminal Attack Controllers) and, after the attack run, overflew the range escorted by two Royal Jordanian Air Force F-16s.

In addition to 5,000 U.S. servicemen, the two-week yearly exercise saw the participation of Jordanian forces as well as contingents from 16 other countries for a total force of about 10,000 troops.

The exercise was held among five sites across Jordan and based on the scenario of a friendly contingent committed to the aid of an allied nation under threat by an aggressive neighbor. Along with the U.S. Air Force strategic bombers, Jordanian tactical planes and U.S. Army helicopters of the 185th Theater Aviation Brigade’s aviation task force, EOD (explosive ordnance disposal) teams, Seabees and patrol craft were used to perform port security in Aqaba, Jordan’s only coastal city, while a Marine crisis-response force out of Kuwait took part in the drills, practicing non-combatant evacuation operation (NCO) by means of MV-22 tilt-rotor aircraft in the north.

Image credit: U.S. Marine Corps

 

Related articles

• U.S. Air Force pilot reaches 9,000 flying hours on the B-52 Stratofortress bomber
• This impressive set of photographs will bring you aboard a U.S. Air Force B-52 strategic bomber
• 50 years ago a B-52 lost its tail over New Mexico. But managed to land.
• Operation Allied Force: B-52 Stratofortress bombers involvement in the Air Campaign over Kosovo
• Photo from the cockpit: B-52 bomber drops a live stealthy Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile
• Three U.S. B-52 strategic bombers have deployed to the UK
• Dutch F-16s intercepted U.S. B-52 bombers over Europe. And took some awesome photographs

The System Design Authority is part of Maritime Platform Systems, which itself is part of the Ships Operating Centre within the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) and Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) organisation.

The European Defence Agency and the Egmont Institute are proud to announce that the 2015 EDA-Egmont PhD prize has been awarded to Mr. Andrea Gilli for his research work on armaments cooperation.

The EDA-Egmont PhD prize was created in 2013 to stimulate research in the field of European defence, security and strategy. The prize rewards research work undertaken as part of a PhD thesis carried out at a recognised academic institution.

The 2015 was awarded to Andrea Gilli, Post-doctoral Fellow, Center for Security Studies, Metropolitan University Prague, for his thesis entitled “Unipolarity, Technological Change and Arms Manufacturing: Industrial Alliances in the European Defense Industry”.

“Tackling the issue of armaments cooperation, which is not just highly political but also very technical, takes daring on the part of a young PhD candidate – Andrea Gilli has succeeded brilliantly”, Prof Sven Biscop of Egmont, Jury Chair, underlines. “His dissertation is most enlightening and very readable, for academics and practitioners alike. Unlike many dissertations about European topics, Gilli does not attempt to bring a good news show. Instead he demonstrates why armaments cooperation is most difficult where intuitively one would expect it to be most evident. From that dour lesson, policy implications can be drawn and a way for the future charted. A well-earned doctorate, to which the jury unanimously added the 2nd EDA-Egmont Prize”.

Eight thesis were submitted for the EDA-Egmont Prize. The award jury, chaired by Prof Sven Biscop, was composed of Mr. Jorge Domecq, EDA Chief Executive; General Patrick de Rousiers, EU Military Committee Chairman; Dr Antonio Missiroli, EUISS Director; Prof Jolyon Howorth, University of Bath / Yale University; Dr Hilmar Linnenkamp, Adviser SWP; and Prof Richard Whitman, University of Kent.

“The EDA-Egmont PhD prize is meant to boost innovative research in the field of European defence and security”, EDA Chief Executive Jorge Domecq stresses. “This year’s winner will not only be awarded a €2000 grant but will also have the opportunity to share his views with high-level executives during the upcoming EDA Annual Conference on 16 November, effectively bridging the gap between research and European policy-making mechanisms”, he adds.

 

More information

• European Defence Agency

  eric.platteau@eda.europa.eu / +32 (0)2 504 2823

• Egmont Institute
  s.biscop@egmontinstitute.be / +32 (0)2 213 40 23

 

In addition, to the plenary session, there were two panels at this year’s MCIS conference. The second, on the role of military and political instruments in ensuring regional and global stability was the more interesting of the two. The main speaker was Andrey Kartopolov, the head of the Main Operations Directorate of the Russian military’s General Staff. Kartapolov focused on the threats posed to Russia by NATO.

He started by reminding the audience that NATO was founded to stop the spread of Communism in Europe. But after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact in 1991, the new Russia sought to become close to the West. The Russian government made unprecedented concessions to the West, including removing its troops from Europe and handing over its military bases to the countries of Eastern Europe. The west took this as a demonstration of Russian weakness, rather than an offer of peace and partnership. The US wanted to be the sole superpower and chose to ignore Russian interests. Washington saw Russia as a source of cheap resources that it would like to control. In order to achieve these goals, the US has consistently sought to weaken Russia’s influence in the international system and in the post-Soviet space.

NATO has brought its military infrastructure up to Russia’s borders. As a result, the entire territory of European Russia is under the threat of NATO air attack, with the time it would take NATO assets to reach critical Russian infrastructure having been cut in half. This is why a number of military facilities in the Baltic States, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria have been modernized to NATO standard since 2008. Furthermore, NATO is organizing military equipment storage bases on the territory of a number of East European states. This will allow NATO to rapidly deploy its first response forces near our borders and also decrease the amount of time it will take for additional forces to be transferred from the continental US and from Britain. Support agreements signed with Finland and Sweden have legitimized the presence of NATO forces on the territory of these countries and will allow the use of their infrastructure for the transfer of coalition forces to northern Europe.

NATO has increased its military strength in recent years, as the US has provided modern arms to its East European allies, including JASSM LRCMs. This will allow NATO to attack targets deep in Russian territory while avoiding Russian air defenses.

At the same time, the US is still trying to convince Russia that its strategic missile defense systems do not present a threat to Russia while refusing to take into account that Standard-3 missiles could in the future be capable of intercepting Russian ICBMs. Furthermore, the vertical launchers used by missile defense systems could also be used to launch Tomahawk missiles.

Since the start of the crisis in Ukraine, NATO activity has become strongly anti-Russian in its nature. Under the banner of countering Russian expansion, the alliance has systematically expanded its military presence on Russia’s borders. At the present time, NATO has instituted a constant rotational presence of military forces in Eastern Europe, including up to 30 combat aircraft, at least 300 pieces of armor, and more than 1500 US military personnel. US and other NATO navies have almost constant ship presence in the Black Sea, while the frequency of reconnaissance aircraft flights have doubled compared to 2013. Since January 2015, there have been regular flights by Global Hawk UAVs over the Black Sea and in March they were expanded to include flights over Ukrainian airspace.

NATO exercise activity increased by 80% in 2014. Exercises such as Baltops and Sabre Strike were carried out next to Russia’s borders and were openly anti-Russian in their nature. During these exercises, the NATO forces group in the Baltic region included 10,000 personnel, 1500 pieces of armor, up to 80 aircraft, and around 50 combat ships. Five US strategic bombers were also involved, deploying from airfields in the UK.

In the aftermath of the Wales summit, NATO is planning additional increases in force structure for next year, including a rapid response force of 30,000 personnel and a spearhead force of 5,000 personnel that can be ready to deploy in 2-7 days. AThe deployment of these forces will be organized by six command centers that will be established in the Baltic States, Poland, Romania, and Bulgaria.

Kartapolov’s conclusions regarding NATO’s activity and intentions highlighted US efforts to turn NATO into an instrument designed to contain Russia and ensure US global dominance. He also highlighted that bringing NATO infrastructure to Russia’s borders will allow its air attack forces to penetrate deep into Russian territory, while reducing their response time, and in the future may allow the US to counter Russian strategic deterrence forces.

Kartapolov noted that Russia will have to take measures in response and argued that instead of mindlessly expanding NATO to include new members that were not ready for membership and placing members’ armed forces next to Russia’s borders, NATO should have been focusing on more significant threats (such as Islamic extremism and terrorism).

In good Soviet tradition, Kartapolov concluded his speech with a slide showing a citation from a speech by President Putin, in which he states that “Russia is not looking to start a military standoff with the West or to threaten anyone. But we will not allow anyone to use the language of force against us and will stand up for our national interests using all of the means at our disposal.”

In addition to General Kartapolov, there were several other speakers on the panel. Here are highlights from some of their remarks:

Jean Pierre Chevenement — French Special Representative on relations with Russia

• The crisis in Ukraine could have been avoided. Maintaining a frozen conflict is not in anyone’s interest, but will only help extremists.
• Need to declare Ukraine’s neutrality.
• Need to follow UNSC rules in order to avoid a new Cold War.

General Rivera — Head of Cuban military intelligence

• Color revolutions and hybrid warfare have become state policy for some countries.
• The US is still fighting against Cuba through subversion.
• Other Latin American states don’t interfere in each other’s affairs.

General Yao Yunzhu — Director of China-US Defense Relations Center

• Cold War legacies are still with us.
• New security mechanisms are needed to maintain stability in the world.
• US alliance networks in Asia-Pacific have become a de facto security architecture in the region.
• Asia needs a security architecture that includes China. China wants an inclusive security partnership, rather than alliances.
• The balance of nuclear forces prevented an active war during the Cold War period.
• The desire for absolute security on the part of any state will upset strategic stability.
• Missile defense upsets the balance of deterrence and could lead to future arms races.

Americas

• The Marine Corps has begun testing its F-35Bs aboard USS Wasp (LHD-1), with these tests set to last two weeks. Six of the aircraft are being tested for specific abilities as part of Operational Testing (OT-1); these include digital interoperability between aircraft and ship systems, something particularly sensitive given the aircraft’s recent software problems. The USMC decided to push ahead regardless of 2B software issues, with the intention of hitting IOC in July.

• Raytheon has further complicated the Air Force’s $1 billion 3DERLL radar program by appealing a federal judge’s decision last week to allow the Air Force to re-evaluate bids. The company previously filed a lawsuit when the Air Force tried to re-open the competition as a result of challenges by competitors Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin.

• The Air Force is planning on launching two X-37B Orbital Test Vehicles into orbit on Wednesday, which will see the testing of a plasma-based propulsion system previously reported here. This will be the fourth X-37 mission, with the mission also testing materials for NASA. The the third mission lasted 674 days, with no information on how long this latest will last.

• The Navy has laid down the keel of SSN 789 at Huntington Ingalls Industries. The Virginia-class fast attack sub is the newest of the class, following on the tails of the Colorado, which was laid-down in March. This new boat – the sixteenth – will be named the Indiana. Navy leader have been pushing for the Virginia-class to possess more firepower.

• On Tuesday the Army awarded LockheedMartin a $30 million modification to convert 200 ATM-114Q-6 Hellfire training missiles to ground-attack missiles (AGM-114R-9B-1), with the work set to last two years. Also on Tuesday the Navy awarded Whiting Turner Contract Co a $30.3 million contract to construct a power and propulsion high bay test facility at Philadelphia Navy Yard. The work is expected to run until November next year.

• The aircraft of the Navy’s Naval Air Arm in one graphic.

Europe

• Airbus has ordered software checks on the A400M aircraft following the crash of one of the aircraft earlier this month during a test flight. The company announced that it has released a notice to A400M customers asking them to inspect the aircraft’s Electronic Control Unit, which help control its Europrop International TP400-D6 turboprop engines. Europe’s largest defense project, the aircraft has been grounded by many users following the crash which killed four people. The aircraft has been ordered by eight nations.

• Russia will close [Russian] NATO’s supply line through its territory to Afghanistan. The rationale given is the end of provisions given under UN Security Council Resolution 1386, which cleared international troops to operate in the country, with this resolution expiring at the end of 2014. Although the number of NATO troops operating in the country is reduced from the number at the peak of the conflict and the use of Russia’s Ulyanovsk as a transit hub has subsided considerably, this closure will complicate the logistical resupply of the thousands of troops and support personnel remaining. The principle supply line is now through Pakistan. Russia threatened to close the supply line before in 2011, in an attempt to pressure NATO to limit its missile defense coverage.

Asia

• On Tuesday the Australian Defense Ministry announced a $61.4 million contract with Harris Corporation’s Australian subsidiary for tactical radio support, which will see the company maintaining 15,000 radios previously sold through various follow-on contracts in addition to an original 2010, $112 million contract.

• India is planning on deploying its SU-30MKI fighters to Britain later year, with a potential deployment to the US pencilled in for next year. The fighters will be accompanied by Il-78 refuelers, with the jets scheduled to take part in joint exercises with the Royal Air Force in July and August. If they head to the US, the Flankers may take part in the Air Force’s Red Flag exercise.

• However, one of the Indian Air Force’s Flanker fleet went down on Tuesday, with the pilots ejecting safely. The Indian fleet of SU-30MKIs has been plagued with reliability issues, with the entire fleet grounded in October last year following a similar crash.

Today’s Video

• Jumping out of a CH-47…

F-35B: off probation
(click to view full)

The $382 billion F-35 Joint Strike fighter program may well be the largest single global defense program in history. This major multinational program is intended to produce an “affordably stealthy” multi-role fighter that will have 3 variants: the F-35A conventional version for the US Air Force et. al.; the F-35B Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing for the US Marines, British Royal Navy, et. al.; and the F-35C conventional carrier-launched version for the US Navy. The aircraft is named after Lockheed’s famous WW2 P-38 Lightning, and the Mach 2, stacked-engine English Electric (now BAE) Lightning jet. Lightning II system development partners included The USA & Britain (Tier 1), Italy and the Netherlands (Tier 2), and Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Turkey (Tier 3), with Singapore and Israel as “Security Cooperation Partners,” and Japan as the 1st export customer.

The big question for Lockheed Martin is whether, and when, many of these partner countries will begin placing purchase orders. This updated article has expanded to feature more detail regarding the F-35 program, including contracts, sub-contracts, and notable events and reports during 2012-2013.

The F-35 Lightning II Fighter Family F-35 Family Variants: Door A, B, or C? Figure 1: F-35 Variants.

The above table illustrates the key differences between the baseline F-35A, the Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing (STOVL) capable F-35B, and the catapult-launched F-35C naval variant. Additional explanations follow.

The F-35A CTOL F-35A, doors open
(click to view full)

The F-35A is sometimes called the CTOL (Conventional Take-Off and Landing) version. It’s the USAF’s version, and is expected to make up most of the plane’s export orders. It’s also expected to be the least expensive F-35, in part because it will have the largest production run. The USAF currently estimates its average flyaway cost after 2017 at $108.3 million, but early production models ordered in FY 2012 will cost over $150 million.

Its main difference from other versions is its wider 9g maneuverability limits, though its air-air combat flight benchmarks are only on par with the F-16. Canard equipped “4+ generation” adversaries like the Eurofighter, and thrust-vectored fighters like the F-22A, MiG-35, SU-35, etc., will still enjoy certain kinetic advantages. The F-35 hopes to mitigate them using its improved stealth to shrink detection ranges, the lack of drag from weapons in its internal bays, and its current electronic superiority.

The second major physical difference between the F-35A and the rest of the Lightning family is its internal 25mm cannon, instead of using a weapons station for a semi-stealthy gun pod option. The USAF removed guns from some of its planes back in the 1960s, and didn’t enjoy the resulting experiences in Vietnam. It has kept guns on all of its fighters ever since, including the stealthy F-22 and F-35. Many allies wanted the 27mm Mauser cannon installed instead, as it’s widely believed to offer the world’s best combination of firing rate and hitting power. In the end, however, ammunition standardization benefits involving 25mm land and sea platforms trumped pure performance.

The 3rd difference is that the F-35A uses a dorsal refueling receptacle that is refueled using an aerial tanker boom, instead of the probe-and-drogue method favored by the US Navy and many American allies.

The F-35A was the first variant to fly, in 2009. Unfortunately, it looks like it won’t reach Initial Operational Capability (IOC) until 2017 or 2018.

The F-35B STOVL (Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing) F-35B features
(click to view full)

The F-35B is expected to be the most expensive Lightning II fighter variant. According to US Navy documents, even planes bought after 2017 are expected to have an average flyaway cost of $135 million each. It will serve the US Marines, Royal Navy, other navies with ski-ramp equipped LHDs or small carriers, and militaries looking for an “expeditionary airplane” that can take off in short distances and land vertically. To accomplish this, the F-35B has a large fan behind the cockpit, and nozzles that go out to the wing undersides. Unlike the F-35A, it will use a retractable mid-air refueling probe, which is standard for the US Navy and for many American allies.

Those capabilities gives the plane a unique niche, but a unique niche also means unique challenges, and the responses to those challenges have changed the aircraft. In 2005, the JSF program took a 1-year delay because the design was deemed overweight by about 3,000 pounds. The program decided to reduce weight rather than run the engine hotter, because the latter choice would have sharply reduced the durability of engine components and driven life cycle costs higher. Weight cutting became a focus of various engineering teams, with especial focus on the F-35B because the weight was most critical to that design. Those efforts pushed the F-35B’s design, and changed its airframe. The F-35B gives up some range, some bomb load (it cannot carry 2,000 pound weapons internally, and the shape of its bay may make some weapons a challenge to carry), some structural strength (7g maneuvers design maximum), and the 25mm internal gun.

The F-35B completed its Critical Design Review in October 2006, and the 2nd production F-35 was a STOVL variant. Per the revised Sept 16/10 program plan, the USMC’s VMA-332 in Yuma, AZ must have 10 F-35Bs equipped with Block IIB software, with 6 aircraft capable of austere and/or ship-based operations, and all aircraft meeting the 7g and 50-degree angle of attack specifications, in order to declare Initial Operational Capability.

Flight testing began in 2009, and IOC was expected by December 2012, but flight testing fell way behind thanks to a series of technical delays. By 2013, the first operational planes were fielded to the USMC at Yuma, AZ. The USMC is currently aiming for a 2015 IOC, but it would involve just Block 2B software loads that will limit the F-35B’s combat capability. Even then, the Pentagon’s 2012 DOT&E report isn’t grounds for software schedule optimism. Planes with full Block 3 initial combat capability are unlikely to be fielded before 2018.

The F-35C carrier-based fighter USN F-35C
(click to view full)

The F-35C is instantly recognizable. It features 30% more wing area than other designs, with larger tails and control surfaces, plus wingtip ailerons. These changes provide the precise slow-speed handling required for carrier approaches, and extend range a bit. The F-35C’s internal structure is strengthened to withstand the punishment dished out by the catapult launches and controlled crashes of carrier launch and recovery, an arrester hook is added to the airframe, and the fighter gets a retractable refueling probe. According to US Navy documents, average flyaway costs for F-35Cs bought after 2017 will be $125.9 million each.

The US Navy gave up the internal gun, and the aircraft will be restricted to 7.5g maneuvers. That’s only slightly lower than the existing F/A-18E Super Hornet’s 7.6g, but significantly lower than the 9g limit for Dassault’s carrier-capable Rafale-M.

The F-35C is expected to be the US Navy’s high-end fighter, as well as its high-end strike aircraft. This means that any performance or survivability issues will have a disproportionate effect on the US Navy’s future ability to project power around the world.

The F-35C will be the last variant designed; it passed its Critical Design Review in June 2007, and the first production version was scheduled to fly in January 2009. The F-35C’s rollout did not take place until July 2009, however, and first flight didn’t take place until June 2010. Initial Operational Capability was scheduled for 2014, but looks set to slip to 2019.

F-35s: Key Features F-35 Variants
(click to view full)

Stealth. The F-35 is designed as an ‘affordable stealth’ counterpart to the F-22 Raptor air dominance fighter, one that can share “first day of the war” duties against defended targets but can’t perform air-air or air-ground missions to the same standard. The F-35 has a larger single engine instead of the Raptor’s twin thrust-vectoring F119s, removing both supercruise (sustained flight above Mach 1) and super-maneuverability options. The F-22A is also a much stealthier aircraft from all angles, and independent analysis & modeling has concluded that the F-35’s stealth will be weaker from the sides and the rear. Even so, the F-35 is an improvement over existing ‘teen series’ fighters and even beats Generation 4+ options like the Eurofighter, Rafale, and JAS-39 Gripen.

Engine. The F-35 was set to offer interchangeable engine options. That has been an important feature for global F-16 and F-15 customers, improving both costs and performance, and providing added readiness insurance for dual-engine fleets. Pratt & Whitney’s lobbying eventually forced GE & Rolls-Royce’s F136 out of the F-35 program, and made their F135-PW-100 engine the only choice for global F-35 fleets. A special F-135-PW-600 version with Rolls Royce’s LiftFan add-on, and a nozzle that can rotate to point down, will power the vertical-landing F-35B.

The US military had better hope that an engine design problem never grounds all of their fighters. While they’re at it, they should hope that maintenance contracts somehow remain reasonable in the absence of any competitive alternative.

F-35’s APG-81
AESA Radar
click to play video

Sensors. The Lightning II will equipped to levels that would once have defined a high-end reconnaissance aircraft. Its advanced APG-81 AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) radar is smaller and less powerful than the F-22A’s APG-77v1; but still offers the strong AESA advantages of simultaneous air-air and air-ground capabilities, major maintenance & availability improvements, and secure, high-bandwidth communications benefits. The F-35 also shares a “sensor fusion” design advance with the F-22, based on sensors of various types embedded all around the airframe. This sensor set is even more extensive than the F-22’s. Both planes will be able to perform as reconnaissance aircraft, though the F-35 will have superior infrared and ground-looking sensors. Both aircraft will also have the potential to act as electronic warfare aircraft.

These sensors are connected to a lot of computing power, in order to create single-picture view that lets the pilot see everything on one big 20″ LCD screen and just fly the plane, rather than pushing buttons to switch from one view to another and trying to figure it all out. As part of that sensor fusion, the F-35 will be the first plane is several decades to fly without a heads-up display. Instead, pilots will wear Elbit/Rockwell’s JHMDS helmet or BAE’s HMSS, and have all of that information projected wherever they look.

Maintenance. The F-35 has a large number of design features that aim to simplify maintenance and keep life cycle costs down. Since operations and maintenance are usually about 65% or more of a fighter’s lifetime cost, this is one the most important and overlooked aspects of fighter selection.

Stealth aircraft have always had much higher maintenance costs, but the F-35’s designers hope that new measures can reverse that trend. Some of the plane’s stealth coatings are being baked into composite airplane parts, for instance, in the hope that customers will need fewer “Martians” (Materials Application and Repair Specialists) around to apply stealth tapes and putties before each mission. Technical innovations like self-diagnosing aircraft wiring aim to eliminate one of the toughest problems for any mechanic, and the fleet-wide ALIS information and diagnostic system is designed to shift the fleet from scheduled maintenance to maintenance only as needed.

Despite these measure, March 2012 operations and maintenance projections have the F-35 at 142% O&M cost, relative to any F-16s they’ll replace. It remains to be seen if the advantages of F-35 innovations manage to fulfill their promise, or if projections that they’ll be outweighed in the end by increased internal complexity, and by the proliferation of fault-prone electronics, come true. That has certainly been the general trend over the last 50 years of fighter development, with a very few notable exceptions like the F-16, A-10, and JAS-39.

Pimp My Ride: Weapons & Accessories Initial hopes – changed
(click to view full)

The F-35’s internal weapon bay gives it the ability to carry larger bombs and missiles, but the price is that F-35s can carry just 2 internal air-to-air weapons, instead of a maximum of 8 on the F-22A. As the F-35 variant table (Fig. 1) shows, development, testing, and software issues have also combined to give initial F-35 fleets a very narrow set of weapons. The initial operational set that comes with Block III software has about the same weapon options as the single-role F-22A.

That’s expected to change, eventually. A large order base, and a wide international client base, will provide considerable incentive for manufacturers to qualify their weapons for the F-35. MBDA has already pledged a compatible version of its long-range Meteor air-air missile, for instance, and Britain wants to add MBDA’s SPEAR medium-range strike missile as soon as possible. Other manufacturers can be expected to follow. Norway is already developing its stealthy Joint Strike Missile with the F-35 as its explicit target, including the ability to fit the missile into the plane’s internal bays. Denmark’s Terma has turned their 25mm gun pod into a multi-mission pod that can accept a variety of sensors and equipment. Lockheed Martin’s Israeli customer is already incorporating its own electronic counter-measures systems in their F-35i, and they are certain to push for a range of Israeli weapons, including the Python-5 SRAAM(Short Range Air-to-Air Missile) and various other smart bombs and missiles.

The bottlenecks will be two-fold.

The 1st bottleneck is American insistence on retaining all source codes, and having Lockheed Martin perform all modifications at their reprogramming facility. Unless Lockheed produces a full development environment workaround, dealing with the growing queue of requests can easily become a problem. The firm’s new Universal Armament Interface could offer the foundation for a way forward, if they decide to take it. The other question involves conflict-of-interest issues, in which Lockheed Martin or the US government decides to use the bottleneck as a way of shutting competitors out of a potential export market. These kinds of concerns have already led to pushback in Australia, Britain, and Israel.

The 2nd bottleneck involves testing resources. The F-35 testing program has fallen significantly behind schedule, and IOCs for some versions have already slipped by 5-6 years. Test time required to qualify new equipment is going to be a very secondary priority until 2018-2019, and even the few customers buying their own Initial Operational Testing & Evaluation (IOT&E) fighters are going to need them for their assigned training roles.

The F-35 Family: Controversies and Competitions See me, hear me?
(click to view full)

The program’s biggest controversies revolve around 3 issues: effectiveness, affordability, and control. A 4th issue, noise, isn’t significant yet, but could become so.

Effectiveness: When the F-35 Lightning II is compared with the larger and more expensive F-22A, the Raptor is a much stealthier aircraft, and its stealth is more uniform. The F-35’s design is optimized for “low-observable” stealth when viewed from the front, with less stealth to radars looking at it from the sides, and less still when targeted from the rear. It also lacks the Raptor’s supercruise (sustained flight above Mach 1) and super-maneuverability thrust-vectoring options, which work with stealth to help the F-22 engage and disengage from combat at will. Lockheed Martin claims that the F-35 design is optimized for trans-sonic acceleration, but testing results question those claims, and the Raptor can cruise without afterburners at the F-35’s theoretical maximum speed. That’s important, because fuel usage skyrockets with afterburners on, limiting total supersonic time for fighters like the F-35.

These relative drawbacks have led to questions about the F-35’s continued suitability against the most modern current air defense threats, and against the evolved threats it can expect to face over a service lifetime that’s expected to stretch until 2050 at least.

F-35 EO DAS
click for video

Where the F-35 does come out ahead is internal carriage space. F-35A/C variants will offer larger capacity internal bays for weapons, allowing a wider selection of stealth-preserving internal ordnance. The price is that slight bulges were added to the production F-35’s underside profile in order to accommodate that space, making them less stealthy from the side than the original X-35 designs.

Sensors are another F-35 advantage. All F-35s also boast more embedded sensors than the F-22, with an especial advantage in infrared and ground-looking sensors. Though this feature has yet to be tested in combat, the F-35’s all-aspect Distributed Aperture Sensors (DAS) reportedly allow 360-degree targeting of aircraft around the F-35. If that works, the inertial guidance and datalink features of modern infrared missiles like the AIM-9X Sidewinder and AIM-132 ASRAAM can already take full advantage of it.

Which customers can live with these relative disadvantages as an acceptable trade-off, and which will be badly hurt by them? Will the F-35 be a fighter that’s unable to handle high-end scenarios, while also being far too expensive to field and operate in low-end scenarios? Even if that’s true, could countries who want one type of multi-role fighter still be best served by the F-35, as opposed to other options? That will depend, in part, on…

F-35 commonality
(click to view full)

Affordability: The F-35 family was designed to be much more affordable than the F-22, but a number of factors are narrowing that gap.

One is cost growth in the program. This has been documented by the GAO, and statements and reports from the US DoD are beginning to follow the same kind of “rising spiral of admissions” pattern seen in past programs.

The 2nd is loss of parts commonality between the 3 models, which the GAO has cited as falling below the level required to produce significant savings. In March 2013, the JSF PEO placed the figure at just 25-30%.

A 3rd is production policy. The US GAO in particular believes that the program’s policy of beginning production several years before testing is complete, only adds to the risks of future price hikes and operating cost shocks. It also forces a lot of expensive rewaork to jets that are bought before problems are found. Part of the rationale for accepting concurrency risks and costs involves…

The 4th factor: lateness. The program as a whole is about 5-7 years behind its ideal point, relative to the replacement cycle for fighters around the globe. F-35 program customers thus find themselves in the unenviable position of having to commit to a fighter that hasn’t completed testing, and doesn’t have reliable future purchase or operating costs, while buying the expensive way from early production batches. The program office hopes to drop the flyaway price of an F-35A to $90 million by 2020, but current Pentagon budget documents list an average production cost of $105-120 million per F-35A-C, from 2017 to the end of the program.

Control: This has been a big issue in the past for customers like Britain and Australia, and has now become an issue for Israel as well. Without control over software source codes, integration of new weapons and algorithms can be controlled by the whims and interests of American politicians and defense contractors. On the other hand, America sees wider access to those fundamental building blocks as a security risk. Arrangements with Britain and Australia appear to have finessed this debate, without removing it.

Noise: The F135 engine’s size and power are unprecedented in a fighter, but that has a corollary. Environmental impact studies in Florida showed that the F-35A is approximately twice as noisy as the larger, twin-engine F-15 fighter, and over 3.5 times as noisy as the F-16s they’re scheduled to replace. That has led to noise complaints from local communities in the USA and abroad, and seems likely to create a broad swathe of local political issues as customers deploy them. In some countries, it may add costs, as governments are forced to compensate or even to buy out nearby homeowners affected by the noise.

Each customer must weigh the issues above against its own defense and industrial needs, and come to a decision. In-depth, updated DID articles that address some of these issues in more detail include:

• The F-35’s Air-to-Air Capability Controversy. A comprehensive look at the issue, and its consequences.

• F-35: I am Fighter, Hear Me Roar. Noise could become a serious political issue for the F-35.

• The Great Engine War II The Pentagon finally canceled GE/RR’s F136 alternative engine project to rely entirely on Pratt & Whitney’s F135, over the objections of its GAO auditors.

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: The Program 1st British F-35B
(click to view full)

Is the F-35 an industrial program for a fighter, or a fighter with an industrial program? Beyond the initial competition between Lockheed Martin’s X-35 and Boeing’s X-32, the Joint Strike Fighter was envisioned from the outset as a program that would make sense using either interpretation. A wide set of consortium partners and national government investments would form an interlocking set of commitments, drawing on a wide range of global industrial expertise and making the program very difficult for any one party to back out of or cancel.

The JSF program is ‘tiered,’ with 4 possible levels of participation based on admission levels and funding commitments for the System Design & Development (SDD) phase. All Tier 1-3 nations have also signed MoUs for the Production Phase. This is not a commitment to buy, just the phase in which production arrangements are hammered out – subject to revision, of course, if that country decides not to buy F-35s. Consortium partners and customers to date include:

• Tier 1 Partners: The USA (majority commitment), Britain
  
• Tier 2 Partners: Italy; The Netherlands
  
• Tier 3 Partners: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Turkey
  
• Security Cooperative Participants status: Israel (20-75), Singapore.
  
• Exports: Japan (42).

Italy has expressed an interest in a Lockheed-Martin Final Assembly and Check Out (FACO) plant for European orders, and Fellow Tier 1 partner Britain is examining a FACO of its own for BAE. The Netherlands, meanwhile, wants to be a center for engine sustainment and heavy maintenance. The Dutch have signed an agreement with Italy to help each country get what it wants; Norway was added to that agreement in June 2007.

Lightning II official rollout
(click to view full)

The first test aircraft, an F-35A model AA-1, had its formal rollout on July 7/06. The F-35’s forced redesign for weight reasons has led to F-35 AA-1 being a unique airframe used to validate design, manufacturing, assembly and test processes. A total of 23 test aircraft will be built for various purposes (15 flight, 7 non-flight, 1 radar signature), but the exact order of build for the variants involved has shifted several times.

The testing phase was originally supposed to end in 2013, but is now officially scheduled to continue until 2018. Funding for the first sets of production-model aircraft is approved, parts fabrication began in June 2007, and component assembly began later in 2007. F-35As have already been delivered to the USAF – a sore point with the US Congress’ Government Accountability Office, which believes this dual-track approach overlapping testing with production increases project risks. Production will continue to ramp up year-to-year, and by the time the F-35 is expected to reach Full-Rate Production, the program intends to build 240 F-35s per year.

To do that, they’ll need orders. So far, only the USA, Israel, and Japan have placed orders for production F-35s that go beyond training & test aircraft.

Delays in fielding the initial set of test aircraft, fewer than expected flights, and questions about that ambitious ramp up schedule have reportedly led the Pentagon to re-examine these schedules. Development is now expected to last into FY 2019 or later.

Industrial Innovation F-35B JSF Cutaway
by John Batchelor
(click to view full)

At present, F-35 production is led by Lockheed Martin, with BAE and Northrop-Grumman playing major supporting roles, and many subcontractors below that.

BAE Systems is deriving substantial benefits from Britain’s Tier 1 partner status, and Northrop Grumman is responsible for the F-35’s important ‘center barrel’ section, where the wings attach to the fuselage, and also provides many of the aircraft’s key sensors.

F-35 main production and final assembly is currently slated to take place in Lockheed Martin’s Fort Worth, TX plant. To cut F-35 production cycle time, the team produces major sections of the aircraft at different feeder plants, and “mates” the assemblies at Fort Worth. This is normal in the auto industry, but it’s a departure from the usual fighter-building process.

AF-1 center barrel
(click to view full)

The precise tolerances required for a stealthy fighter, however, are much more exacting than even high-end autos. In order to avoid subtly mismatched seams, which become radar reflection points, parts need to fit together so precisely that some machines are compensating for the phases of the moon!

Even the best machines won’t do any good if the various components aren’t already an excellent fit. To cope, Manufacturing Business Technology reports that the JSF manufacturing team has turned to an integrated back-end IT system. It begins with 3D engineering models (Dassault Systemes CATIA CAD), and extends into production management, where the company has rolled out a manufacturing execution system to handle electronic work instructions, workflow and process modeling, serialized parts data, quality records tracking, etc. (Visiprise).

This combination has enabled greater use of techniques like automated drilling, even as other software (Siemens PLM, TeamCenter) enables product record management and electronic collaboration around designs. On the back-end, the team uses a custom system it calls Production & Inventory Optimization System (PIOS) for manufacturing resources planning and supply chain management; it began using ERP software (SAP) in January 2008 for financials, and may eventually use it to handle supply-chain functions too.

This ‘digital thread’ has been very successful for the team, with part fits showing incredible precision, and successful coordination of plants around the end schedule for key events like the Dec 18/07 F-35B rollout. The system’s ultimate goal is to cut a plane’s production cycle time from the usual 27-30 months to about 12 months, and shrink a 15-20 day cycle to just 6-8 days from order creation to printed & matched manufacturing orders.

Testing, Testing F-35C weapon carriage
(click to view full)

The F-35’s development and testing program was originally supposed to end in 2013. Current estimates involve a 2018 finish for all 3 models, with Block 3F software installed and a smaller set of integrated weapons than initially planned.

The F-35’s development schedule has steadily slipped, and a combination of development and production difficulties left Lockheed Martin significantly behind their planned testing schedule. The company has made a point of highlighting testing progress in 2012, as they finally got ahead of the annual curve:

F-35 JSF family: Testing statistics
(click to view full) Excel
download

Staying ahead of planned testing points and flights is laudable, but it doesn’t guarantee that the fighter itself is ahead of where it should be on the development curve. Bringing test points forward from future years can keep the numbers even. It won’t solve issues like late software delivery, which is preventing F-35s from fulfilling a number of planned testing points, and makes any combat related testing useless. The F-35s will also need changes in a number of areas, from their horizontal stabilizers to the F-35B’s complex system of lift fans and doors. Those changes will require further testing afterward, adding more test points to the program each time an issue is found. The table below outlines key issues as of 2012, and both of these testing-related datasets are available for download by subscribers:

F-35 JSF family: DOT&E’s key 2012 findings
(click to view full) F-35 JSF: Programs by Country Joint Strike Fighter
(click to view full)

The F-35 is a multinational program, and one of its challenges involves keeping all of the program’s partners moving forward. Each partner has its own issues, and increasingly, its own timeline.

Since early-production fighters can add 50-100% to the cost of full-rate production planes, most of these timelines are determined by how cost-sensitive each customer is.

Home Base: The American Program

In many ways, the American F-35 program sets the tone for all others. Countries that want the F-35, like Japan, are already seeing price hikes because of American decisions to slow initial F-35 production. Current per-plane costs are over $120 million, with initial spares and training infrastructure added on top of that. That price is expected to come down, but it requires volume orders. That means someone has to spend the money, and right now, that someone is the USA.

This leaves the United States on the horns of a dilemma.

One nightmare scenario is a fate similar to the high-end F-22A Raptor, which was initially supposed to field 1,000 fighters, but ended up producing just 183 thanks to spiraling development costs, unexpected upgrade costs, and production costs that never benefited from full economies of scale. Cuts led to continued high prices, which led to more cuts. That scenario would spell disaster for other F-35 customers, who would end up paying far more per plane than they had expected. Some would then defect, driving up prices again for the countries who remained.

The other nightmare scenario for the USA involves significant problems discovered in testing, which then require costly and extensive retrofits to the 400+ F-35 fighters that will be produced before the test program ends. This parallel test/production model has been the subject of heavy criticism from the US government’s GAO auditors. It’s a form of “political engineering” designed to make cancellation too expensive for politicians, even if it leads to sharply higher final costs, or hurts the future fleet.

F-35A
(click to view full)

American purchase decisions can be described as a balancing act between these nightmares. If they spend too much money ramping up production, other countries are more likely to buy as prices drop, but the USAF could be on the hook for a huge retrofit bill that it can’t afford. If they throttle their efforts back too far in order to avoid retrofit risk, it makes defections by existing JSF partners more likely, and hurts the fighter’s chances of landing export sales.

Lockheed Martin has tried to thread this needle by getting multiple JSF consortium members to commit to a joint buy, in order to create a big enough pool of secure orders to drive down purchase costs for everyone. So far, they’ve been unable to get the signatures they need.

Excel
download

Meanwhile, past and planned American F-35 budgets for all variants are graphed below, with an Excel download as a bonus. Note that R&D forecasts aren’t yet published as a single figure beyond FY 2013:

USAF: F-35A
(click to view full) USN: F-35B & F-35C
(click to view full) Australia (Tier 3) The legacy roster
(click to view full)

Australia was originally going to replace its long-range F-111 fighter-bomber and F/A-18 AM/BM Hornet fighter fleets with a single fleet of 100 F-35A aircraft. Current plans for the F-35 are less clear. A change of governing parties hasn’t shifted Australia’s long-term commitment to the F-35A yet, but rising costs could do so.

In November 2009, the Government approved funding for Phase 2A/B (Stage 1) to acquire 14 F-35As, at a cost of about A$ 2.75 billion. In October 2010, they formally submitted a Partner Procurement Request (PPR) to the US Government, and expect a FY 2012 order for 2 initial F-35As, for delivery in 2014-15. Those 2 planes will remain in the United States for testing and pilot training. The next 12 planes would have been based in Australia, and their Year of Decision will now be 2014-15, which may also cover the Stage 2 buy of 58 planes (TL: 72). Deliveries of operational fighters aren’t expected until 2017-2019 now, which means that RAAF F-35As won’t be flying in Australia until around 2020. The AIR 6000 Phase 2C decision to add another 24 F-35s or so, and raise Australia’s total buy to 96+, won’t happen until 2018-19 at the earliest.

As of 2014, The Royal Australian Navy will begin receiving Canberra Class LHD ships that could deploy F-35Bs, but at present there are no plans to host fighters on board. If those plans change, the AIR 6000 Phase 2C decision is the likely inflection point.

The inflection point for a single fighter fleet has already passed. In May 2007, delays to the F-35 program pushed the RAAF to buy 24 F/A-18F Block II Super Hornets as an interim capability. Those aircraft have all been delivered now, and 12 of them are set to convert to EA-18G Growler tactical jamming fighters. F-35 delays may push Australia to order more Super Hornets, and the hard reality is that each new Super Hornet bought probably subtracts an F-35A from future orders.

Britain (Tier 1) RN CVF Concept
(click to view full)

Britain is the only Tier 1 partner outside the USA, and they have invested about $2 billion equivalent in the F-35’s development. They took delivery of their 1st IOT&E training and test aircraft in July 2012.

Britain’s original plan involved buying 138 F-35B STOVL planes for deployment on land and on their new aircraft carriers, but that will now shrink to an undetermined number.

The UK MoD has also switched back and forth between the F-35B and the catapult-launched F-35C. The F-35C’s range and weapon capacity give it significant time-over-target advantages in a Falkland Islands kind of scenario. On the flip side, the F-35B can fly from forward operating bases in situations like Afghanistan, allowing fewer planes to generate more sorties in the same time frame. The determining factor that switched Britain back to the F-35B was the cost of modifying its aircraft carriers.

Canada (Tier 3) CF-18, 20-year colors
(click to view full)

In July 2010, Canada committed to buy 65 F-35As as its future fighter force, with an envisioned budget up to C$ 9 billion for the fighters, plus C$ 7 billion for 20 years of support. All without a competition. That decision has been beset by controversy ever since, and the Conservative Party government claims that they aren’t committed to buy the F-35A yet. On the other hand, they haven’t made any substantive concessions, or meaningful changes to their plans, aside from promising that if F-35 costs continue to rise, Canada will just buy fewer planes within its budget.

Canada will probably sign a contract by 2015, which would make it too expensive for any successor governments to cancel the program. If the Conservative Party government doesn’t sign a contract before the next election, they had better win again. Otherwise, the conduct of this acquisition program has so antagonized the opposition Liberal and NDP parties that the F-35 buy will be a priority target for cancellation.

In November 2012, the first cracks appeared in the government’s stone wall. The Public Works ministry took over the lead role from DND, and said that the military’s original statement of requirements would be suspended while the government reviewed fighter options. Read full coverage, including industrial participants, over at “Canada Preparing to Replace its CF-18 Hornets.”

Denmark (Tier 3) Danish F-16 MLU
(click to view full)

Denmark is a consortium member, but they threw their F-16 fighter replacement order open to competition in 2007. The F-35A was competing against Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet and Sweden’s JAS-39E/F Gripen, but an April 2010 decision delayed the competition. The Danes reportedly have about 30 operational F-16s in 2013, with another 15 stored in reserve.

The F-16 replacement process has started again as promised, with EADS’ Eurofighter Typhoon added to the mix of invitees. A decision to buy 24-32 fighters is now expected by June 2015.

Italy (Tier 2) CVH Cavour
(click to view full)

Italy has made significant investments in JSF development, and the country intends to host a European Final Assembly and Check-Out (FACO) production line in Cameri, near Milan.

The navy’s ITS Cavour aircraft carrier will need at least 22 F-35Bs to replace its AV-8 Harrier fighters, but Europe and Italy’s slow-motion fiscal calamity makes the rest of its buy far less certain. The original plan involved 131 F-35s for the Army and Navy, but a February 2012 decision has scaled plans back to 90 fighters. The Italians are still discussing whether to buy a mix of F-35As and F-35Bs for the air force, but cost pressures are likely to push the Aeronautica Militare toward F-35As.

Given Italy’s rising borrowing costs, and the air force’s modern fleet of 96 Eurofighter Typhoons, further cuts in Aeronautica Militare F-35 purchases would be a reasonable expectation.

The Netherlands (Tier 2) Dutch F-16s,
Afghanistan
(click to view full)

The F-35 is the Ministerie van Defensie’s choice, but instability in successive Dutch governments has prevented a clear decision. The Netherlands plans to buy up to 85 fighters, and as one of the two JSF Tier 2 partners, they want to place a European maintenance hub in the Netherlands. Industry benefits figure heavily in their decision, and participation in the JSF program was structured as a payback scheme. That has sometimes created a strained relationship between the government and participating firms.

Cost is a serious issue. A September 2009 media report revealed that Saab submitted a bid for 85 ready-to-fly JAS-39NL Gripen fighters, at a reported cost of EUR 4.8 billion. In contrast, a December 2010 report to the Dutch Parliament placed the expected purchase cost of 85 F-35As at EUR 7.6 billion, and the government has said that if costs continue to rise, the only change will be fewer fighters bought.

Costs have risen, even as budgets shrank. A 2012 Rekenkamer report revealed that the MvD was admitting a ceiling of just 56 F-35As, given their EUR 4.05 billion budget. That isn’t enough for their current responsibilities, and their notional EUR 68.6 million/ $89 million per plane figure is significantly less than the Pentagon’s post-2017 average cost projection of $108 million – which allows just 48 Dutch F-35As. Throw in the 21% Dutch Value Added Tax, and the real number could be as low as 33-38 F-35As.

Keeping its F-16s flying until the required 2027 date is expected to cost another EUR 335 million, and must be figured into the total cost, even if it comes from a separate budget item. A slip to 2029, or another fighter option that took that much more time, brings that total added cost to EUR 515 million.

Finally, F-35 maintenance and operating costs are expected to be higher than either the current F-16s (+42% American projection), or the Gripen. That affects the number that can be kept flying under future budgets. The 2012 Rekenkamer report says that estimates for 30 years of F-35A operations & maintenance, exclusive of fuel, have risen from EUR 2.9 billion for 85 planes in 2001, to EUR 14.2 billion. Buying 68 aircraft only drops this estimate to EUR 13.2 billion, and that non-linear drop makes it likely that O&M costs for a fleet of 42-48 F-35As, over 30 years, would be well over EUR 200 million per-plane.

A final decision is scheduled for 2015, but successive coalition governments have been pushing through contracts for initial F-35 test aircraft, as a way of entrenching their country’s commitment. A July 2012 vote left only the center-right VVD and Christian Democrats supporting an F-35 buy, and after the elections, a coalition with the opposition PvdA Labour party changed the process for reaching that 2015 decision. Whether it will change anything else remains to be seen.

Norway (Tier 3) RNoAF F-16,
off to Libya
(click to view full)

Norway picked the F-35A in November 2008, after a competition that Wikileaks documents suggest was a sham. Parliamentary opposition finally caved in July 2011, and purchases began in 2012. They will buy 46-52 F-35s, with an initial 4 training aircraft slated to begin delivery in 2015. Another 42-48 planned fighters are slated to begin turning into contracts as of 2017, and the program’s official overall cost currently lists as NOK 60 billion/ $FY12 10 billion. Basing will be at Orland AB, with a satellite forward operating base up north at Evenes.

As part of their program, Norway’s Kongsberg is developing a stealthy, sub-sonic Joint Strike Missile (JSM/NSM) that will be able to hit ships or land targets, and can be carried inside the F-35A/C weapons bay. Its positioning as an internally-carried cruise missile will be unique, and Australia has already indicated interest. At present, however, there’s no firm date for integration.

Read “F-35 Lightning II Wins Norway’s (Fake) Competition” for full coverage.

Turkey (Tier 3) TuAF F-16s
(click to view full)

Turkey had talked about ordering up to 100 F-35A fighters, as the long-term replacement for its 240-plane F-16 fleet. beyond the program’s industrial benefits, they also have a geopolitical rationale. Turkey’s main rival, Greece, has been crippled by its fiscal situation, and is not an F-35 program participant. They’re unlikely to field any fighters with technology beyond their existing F-16s for quite some time, and Turkey wants an edge. The Turks are also beginning to project influence into Central Asia, have neighbors in Syria, Iraq and Iran that bear watching, and are stoking a growing level of friction with Israel, an F-35 customer.

In the near term, a combination of new buys and upgrades will ensure a long life for Turkey’s F-16s. Current plans still involve 100 F-35s, and 2012 saw the first contract – but by January 2013, Turkey was postponing its purchase of 2 training and test aircraft. The overall program is expected to cost around $16 billion.

Israel (Security Cooperation Partner) Israeli F-16C
(click to view full)

With 326 F-16s in the IAF (224 F-16A-D, 102 F-16i), Israel is the largest F-16 operator outside of the United States. Their commitment to regional superiority made them the first country outside the USA to commit to a production F-35 buy in October 2010, with a contract for 20 “F-35is” and options to raise that number to 75 planes. The F-22 Raptor had been their preferred choice, but America refused to export it.

The Israelis got some concessions from Lockheed Martin and the US government, including the ability to insert their own ECM(Electronic Counter Measures) defensive equipment. Their F-35i will also carry compatible communications equipment and some avionics, and the Israelis are expected to push for early integration of their own weapons, like RAFAEL’s Python 5 short-range air-to-air missile and Spice GPS/IIR guided smart bomb. F-35i system development contracts began in August 2012.

Read “Israeli Plans to Buy F-35s Moving Forward” for full coverage.

Singapore (Security Cooperation Partner) RSAF F-16D
(click to view full)

Singapore expects to replace its 74-plane F-16 fleet with F-35s, but they have a lot of timing flexibility. A program of significant fleet upgrades to F-16V status is expected to begin within the next year, giving them a plane that’s more advanced than USAF F-16s. Their new fleet of 20 high-end F-15SGs are already more advanced than the USAF’s Strike Eagles, and their combined fleet size and quality is expected to keep them comfortably ahead of their neighbors for a while.

In the nearer term, their fleet of about 34 upgraded F-5S/T fighters will need replacement. Singapore is reported to be about to announce an order for 12 F-35Bs, as part of a larger export approval request that could go as high as 75 planes. Their alternative would be to order more F-15SGs as F-5 replacements, and wait until it was time to begin replacing their F-16s. An order of 12 Strike Eagles would cost less, and would offer a much wider array of capabilities until about 2025 or later. F-35Bs would offer more risk, and would enter service much later, in exchange for stealth and the ability to take off and land from damaged runways.

Exports: Beyond the Program Team

Japan F-4EJ “Kai(zen)”
(click to view full)

The F-22 Raptor had been Japan’s preferred choice, but America refused to export it. In December 2011, therefore, Japan picked the F-35A over Boeing’s F/A-18E Super Hornet International, and the Eurofighter Typhoon. The F-35A was said to have the best capabilities, based only on mathematical analysis of the paper submissions Japan received. It eked out a narrow “Gilligan win” on overall cost by offering dorsal aerial refueling and finishing 2nd in both sub-categories, and was even with the others in terms of maintenance contracts offered. The only major category it lost was domestic industrial participation, but the winning Eurofighter bid had cost issues with that aspect of its submission.

The JASDF has an approved Foreign Military Sale request for 42 F-35As, and has committed to 4 so far. This set of 42 F-35As will replace its fleet of 91 upgraded F-4 “Phantom Kai” fighters. Eventually, Japan will also need to replace about 213 F-15J Eagle air superiority fighters with at least 100 new planes, but the F-35 will have to compete for that.

Past fighter orders from Japan have involved extensive license production. So far, reports and documents indicate that Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. will be involved in work on F-35 aircraft bodies, Mitsubishi Electric Corp. on mission-related avionics, and IHI Corp. on F135 engines.

Read “Japan’s Next Fighters: F-35 Wins The F-X Competition” for full coverage.

Future Sales Opportunities F-15 Silent Eagles
Boeing concept
(click to view full)

Lockheed Martin continues to promote the F-35 in the international market, but its priority is securing production orders from the countries that are already part of the JSF consortium.

South Korea’s F-X-III fighter competition is probably the F-35’s biggest near-term export opportunity. The F-35 is competing against Boeing’s stealth-enhanced F-15SE Silent Eagle and the Eurofighter Typhoon for that 60-plane order.

A number of Middle Eastern countries are shopping for fighter jets, including the UAE, Oman, and Qatar. Kuwait is expected to join them soon. So far, the F-35 hasn’t featured prominently in reporting about these competitions. It isn’t a contender in Oman, and the UAE’s focus appears to be fixed on either France’s Rafale or the Eurofighter Typhoon.

In Europe, Belgium and Portugal will need to replace their F-16s pretty soon, but political and fiscal woes make such buys unlikely. Eastern European countries either have medium-to-long term commitments in place, or are too small and poor to be likely F-35 customers. Lockheed Martin’s brightest hope beyond its existing consortium partners is probably Spain. Like Italy, Spain will eventually need to either buy the F-35B as its only real option to replace the AV-8 Matadors (Harriers) on the Juan Carlos I, or downgrade the ship to a helicopter and UAV carrier. Europe’s slow-motion collapse has pushed its fiscal difficulties close to their limit, however, and there are no Spanish plans at present for an F-35 buy.

The F-35 has been promoted to India, especially as a naval fighter option for its new carriers. It was not a contender for India’s M-MRCA buy, however, and prospects for a future sale seem dim due to competition from a range of existing naval (MiG-29K, Tejas naval) and air force (SU-30MKI, SU-50i FGFA) program commitments.

F-35 Contracts & Decisions

LRIP = Low Rate Initial Production. Unless otherwise noted, US Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) in Patuxent River, MD manages these contracts.

FY 2013 – 2015

F-35A & F-22A,
Eglin AFB
(click to view full)

May 20/15: The Marine Corps has begun testing its F-35Bs aboard USS Wasp (LHD-1), with these tests set to last two weeks. Six of the aircraft are being tested for specific abilities as part of Operational Testing (OT-1); these include digital interoperability between aircraft and ship systems, something particularly sensitive given the aircraft’s recent software problems. The USMC decided to push ahead regardless of 2B software issues, with the intention of hitting IOC in July.

March 26/13: Singapore. AOL Defense is reporting that Singapore will order 12 F-35Bs within 10 days, while others take a more measured tone. Agence France-Presse cite Singaporean sources as saying they’re in the final stages of evaluating the F-35, which tracks with statements by Defence Minister Dr Ng Eng Hen. Even so, the plane’s very incomplete capabilities mean that part of Singapore’s evaluation is just paper and promises at this point. Singapore’s RSIS points out that the country has traditionally been cautious in its defense buys, restricting themselves to proven platforms.

Singapore’s fleet of about 34 upgraded F-5S/T fighters were bought in the 1970s, and they do need replacement. The RSAF’s alternative would be to order more F-15SG Strike Eagles as F-5 replacements, and wait several years before ordering F-35s. The Strike Eagles would cost less at present, and would offer a much wider array of weapons until about 2025 or later. F-35Bs would offer more risk, and would enter service much later than F-15SGs, in exchange for better stealth, and the ability to take off and land from damaged runways. Either way, a DSCA-approved export request would be required before any order can be placed. The most we can expect within 10 days is a State Department announcement. AOL Defence | AFP | Reuters | Eurasia Review.

March 26/13: UK. The Ministry of Defence announces that RAF Marham, which had hosted Tornados until the fighters were retired to save on support costs, will become Britain’s main base for F-35s. It will also act as a support center, performing depth maintenance. RAF | BBC.

March 25/13: Engine. Bloomberg reports that Rolls-Royce was an average of 160 days late with its F135-PW-600 LiftFan engine parts deliveries in 2012. Subcontractor errors were part of the problem:

“There have been issues such as corrosion on some of the gears and some undersized holes,” Jacqueline Noble, a spokeswoman for the defense agency, said in the [emailed] statement [to Bloomberg]. While London-based Rolls-Royce and its subcontractors have made progress, the need to fix fan parts that don’t meet specifications “is still a concern,” she said.”

March 25/13: Japan LRIP-8. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $40.2 million fixed-price-incentive (firm-target), contract to provide long lead-time parts, materials and components required for the delivery of 4 Japanese F-35As, as part of Low Rate Initial Production Lot 8. See also June 29/12 entry.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to be complete in February 2014. All funds are committed immediately, and this contract was not competitively procured by US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD, who is acting as Japan’s agent through the FMS process (N00019-13-C-0014).

March 21/13: Netherlands. The 2 Dutch IOT&E F-35As are already slated to go into storage until 2015, because the jets aren’t fit for purpose yet (q.v. Feb 11/13). Now Reuters reports that the Dutch are looking to cut their planned order of 85 F-35As by 17-33 planes. On the surface, this isn’t exactly news, as the MvD was known to be looking at a 56 plane order (-29 aircraft) when the Oct 24/12 Rekenkamer report came out. Reuters gives a figure of 52-68 planes and a budget of EUR 4.5 billion, but full replacement of the RNLAF’s reduced fleet of 68 F-16s with F-35As doesn’t square with that budget. A “defense source close to the talks” is quoted as saying that an F-35A order could drop as low as 33-35 planes (-50 or more aircraft), based on Rekenkamer estimates.

That can’t be welcome news to the F-35 program, which expects to have foreign orders making up half of production after LRIP Lot 8 in 2014 (q.v. March 12/13). For the RNLAF, Defense Aerospace cites Dutch Parliamentary documents which size their operational F-16 fleet at just 24 / 68 planes, due to maintenance issues and lack of spare parts. That’s a bit of a crisis; meanwhile, the larger question is whether 24-35 fighters is even close to adequate for future needs.

The new coalition, sworn into office in November 2012, expects to finalize a new defense policy and fighter purchase plans later in 2013. Defense Aerospace reports that the Dutch Parliament’s Standing Committee on Defence has already scheduled presentations from Boeing (F/A-18 Super Hornet family) and Saab (JAS-39E/F Gripen), and the Eurofighter consortium has told the publication that they’re keeping an eye on developments. Reuters | Defense Aerospace.

March 20/13: Australia. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives an unfinalized, not-to-exceed $9.8 million modification for Australian-specific non-recurring support activities. It includes ALIS equipment and sustainment and logistics support, and will be bought under the LRIP Lot 6 contract. $4.9 million is committed immediately.

Australia was set to buy 2 F-35As for IOT&E preparation under LRIP Lot 6. The timing of their follow-on buy of 12 F-35As may be uncertain, but this contract seems to indicate that they’ll buy the 2 IOT&E jets (see also March 5/13). Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in January 2019. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-C-0083).

March 13/13: Denmark. The Danes pick up their fighter competition as promised, following their announced hiatus in April 2010. Invited bidders include the same set of Lockheed Martin (F-35A), Boeing (Super Hornet), and Saab (JAS-39E/F) – plus EADS (Eurofighter), who had withdrawn from the Danish competition in 2007. The goal of a 2014 F-16 replacement decision has been moved a bit farther back, and now involves a recommendation by the end of 2014, and a selection by June 2015.

The Flyvevabnet are reported to have 30 operational F-16s, with 15 more in reserve, out of an original order of 58. Past statements indicate that they’re looking to buy around 25 fighters as replacements, but there are reports of a range from 24-32, depending on price. Danish Forsvarsministeriet [in Danish] | Eurofighter GmbH | Saab | JSF Nieuws.

March 12/13: Issues & allies. JSF PEO Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher C. Bogdan, USAF, offers a number of important pieces of information at the Credit Suisse/McAleese defense programs conference in Washington, DC. One is that he hopes to have unit cost, including the engine, down to $90 million by 2020 – about 10% lower than current Pentagon estimates beyond 2017. Allies “need to know where their money is going”, especially since orders after LRIP-8 (2014) are expected to be about 50% allied buys. Unfortunately there’s an issue with IOT&E processes, which has been left unaddressed until the issue became a source of buying uncertainty:

“Adding insult to injury, the JSF program office classified all documents as “U.S. only,” which upset partner nations. Even if they are all buying the same aircraft, each country has its own air-worthiness qualification processes and other administrative procedures that require they have access to the aircraft’s technical data. JSF officials are working to re-classify the documentation, Bogdan said.”

Regarding Operations & Support costs, which are over 2/3 of a weapon system’s lifetime cost: “If we don’t start doing things today to bring down O&S now, there will be a point when the services will see this aircraft as unaffordable.”

Most of those costs trace back to design, so changes at this point are possible, but difficult. One design and support issue is that the 80% commonality between variants envisaged at the program’s outset is now closer to 25-30%. That means more expensive non-common parts due to lower production runs, larger inventories for support of multiple types in places like the USA and Italy, more custom work for future changes, etc. Information Dissemination | National Defense.

March 11/13: GAO Report. The GAO releases its annual F-35 program report: “Current Outlook Is Improved, but Long-Term Affordability Is a Major Concern“. Some manufacturing indices like labor hours per jet delivery rate are getting better, but operations and maintenance costs are a serious problem, and F-35 acquisition funding requirements average $12.6 billion annually through 2037.

There’s much, much more. It’s difficult to summarize this report, and worth reading it in full.

March 9/13: Cost sensitivity. Reuters gets their hands on an advance draft of a GAO report, which looks at the F-35’s sustainment and purchase costs. The GAO’s estimate to refurbish produced F-35s to incorporate fixes required by discoveries during testing? $1.7 billion. That’s a lot, but it’s a decision that touches on the next area they examine: what happens if some countries don’t buy, or the USA buys fewer?

Current American plans will average $10.6 billion per year until 2037 [DID: it turns out to be $12.6 billion]. Average costs have already climbed from $69 million to $137 million, and would rise by another 9% if the USA dropped its orders from 2,443 – 1,500 (to $150 million). They would rise by 6% (to $145 million) if all 8 foreign partners cut their planned 697 orders, but the USA kept its own. The combination? More than additive, at 19% (to $163 million).

Here’s the thing. The GAO is calculating averages, but all F-35 partners including the USA, have a limited window of safe remaining life for their fighter fleets. That forces them to place earlier orders, which can cost a lot more than “average over all production” estimates. They’re also more price sensitive to production cuts, since fewer planes per year are being built at this stage. A design that isn’t done testing adds another disincentive, and the combination of unready planes and spiraling costs for near-term buys can force quite a few cancellations and reductions. Each cancellation may be minor in the long term, but it’s a larger cost hike in the short term, which ensures that the long term production figure never arrives.

One response just starts production earlier, and lets the main partner eat most of the concurrency costs. So, was the $1.7 billion concurrency cost worth it, in order to speed up the purchase schedule and production ramp-up by 5-6 years? That’s an individual judgement. Reuters | IBT.

March 6/13: DOT&E OUE. The POGO NGO gets its hands on a copy of the Pentagon’s Operational Utility Evaluation for initial F-35A training, dated Feb 15/13. While DOT&E cautions that you can’t draw any meaningful conclusions from a system this immature, some of their observations and trends are relevant and concerning.

Not training ready. To begin at the beginning, current F-35s aren’t even close to suitable for new-pilot training, and are very marginal even for experienced pilot training. This situation, and the long list of accompanying flight restrictions, is normal for an aircraft mid-way through its testing phase. What’s different is that continued program delays would leave the US military unable to stream new pilots to its production aircraft.

Touch screens. A notable but less urgent design deficiency involves the touch screen display, which may need to be used less. Using it to control radios, for instance, is a bad idea, especially at high Gs and under stress. To duplicate this feeling, have a jumpy 3-year old grab and flail at your arm while you’re trying to operate a computer mouse. MIL-STD-1472G already prohibits this sort of thing as a sole option, and voice recognition is intended to fix the problem. Until it’s ready, of course, we won’t know if it has its own issues.

Visibility. The most serious deficiency remains technical problems with the pilot’s ambitious Helmet-Mounted Display, coupled with a designed-in lack of rear visibility that HMDS needs to overcome using the plane’s embedded sensors. The visibility is poor in order to improve stealth vs. a full bubble canopy; and also to keep design commonality with the STOVL F-35B, which mounts its lift fan and doors behind the pilot. The OUE’s experienced F-16 and A-10 pilots were universal in their criticism, saying that poor to no rear visibility made basic tasks like keeping formation more challenging, and was a deficiency in combat situations.

It’s also a maintenance risk, of course, since all associated systems must be working or the planes will be at a large combat disadvantage. The likely result? Either lower readiness rates, higher maintenance costs, or both. Those are both areas where the F-35 remains behind the curve, with potentially dire fiscal consequences. POGO summary | Full Report [PDF]

March 5/13: LRIP-6. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $72.2 million unfinalized LRIP Lot 6 contract modification. It buys F-35A support equipment for Luke AFB’s Pilot Training Center 1. It also covers associated Data Quality Integration Management supplier support tasks, and all other sustainment data products for the USAF and the governments of Italy and Australia. The contract is split-funded by the USAF ($55.0M/ 76.2%); Italy ($10.3M/ 14.3%); and Australia ($6.9/ 9.5%).

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in August 2014. $36.1 million is committed immediately (N00019-11-C-0083). This brings total LRIP-6 contracts to $5.674 billion.

March 1/13: Return to flight. The Pentagon lifts the grounding order on its F-35 fleets, after inspecting fleet engines. The engine in question belonged to a plane used for flight envelope expansion testing, and had been operated for an extended time at high temperatures.

“Prolonged exposure to high levels of heat and other operational stressors on this specific engine were determined to be the cause of the crack [as opposed to high-cycle fatigue, which would force a redesign].”

The engineers believe no redesign is needed. Pentagon | Reuters.

Grounding lifted

Feb 28/13: Block 8 long-lead. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $333.8 million fixed-price-incentive (firm-target), advance acquisition contract, covering early equipment buys for 35 LRIP Lot 8 planes: 19 USAF F-35As ($155.2M/ 46%), 6 USMC F-35Bs ($85.4M/ 26%), and 4 USN F-35Cs ($27.5M/ 8%); plus 4 F-35B STOVLs for Britain ($45M/ 14%), and 2 F-35As for Norway ($20.7M/ 6%). All contract funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to be complete in February 2014. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 (N00019-13-C-0008).

Feb 27/13: Unhappy relationship. F-35 PEO Executive Officer Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan criticizes some important decisions, such as concurrent testing and production, and he’s also unhappy with the vendors. There’s some back-and-forth in the news reports regarding production cost, which he pegs at about $120 million for a Lot 5 F-35A with engine, and whether cost reductions per lot have been adequate. His AuBC interview also includes this remark, which got less attention but is more important:

“The real big elephant is how much it costs over the life of this plane to maintain it, and sustain it…. I think today, looking at what we have, the cost to maintain and sustain this plane is too high…. What I’ve told Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney is “you have yet to earn the right to become the product support integrator for the life of this program.” So what I’ve done is, I’ve tried to take pieces of the life cycle, and I’ve tried to introduce some competition [from domestic and foreign companies]….”

The decision to use only 1 engine also comes into play, as he describes the 6 month negotiations to finalize the F135 engine LRIP Lot 5 contract (vid. Feb 6/13 entry), which began shortly after their F136 competitor had been eliminated:

“Now, you would think a company like Pratt & Whitney that was just given the greatest Christmas gift you could ever, ever get for a company would act a little differently…”

In truth, the full tone of Gen. Bogdan’s remarks isn’t fully captured in written reports. He’s adopting classic crisis management recommendations, acknowledging known problems rather than being dishonest, placing them in context when he can, then promising to fix what’s left and deliver a successful jet. The comments in Australia were made shortly after the DOT&E report (vid. Jan 13/13). They’re aired a month or so later in the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s “Reach for the Sky” documentary on the program, just before Australia submits a formal request to buy another 24 Boeing Super Hornet family fighters. Center for Public Integrity | Fox News | TIME | AuBC’s Reach for the Sky.

Feb 22/13: Engine. A crack in an F135-PW-100 engine blade grounds the entire F-35 fleet. The fault was found in an F-35A, but this part of the engine is common to all 3 variants. No one wants to have a blade break off inside and destroy the engine or the plane on its way out the back, hence the grounding.

These kinds of problems aren’t unheard of during testing, but the incident raises 2 big questions. One is the Pentagon’s flawed policy of ordering operational planes during the testing phase, which multiplies the cost of fixes during a fiscal crunch. The other involves the DoD’s decision to have just 1 engine manufacturer for the F-35, unlike its existing fighter fleets. Imagine exactly this sort of fleet-wide grounding, when the F-35 is the main fighter of all 3 armed services. DoD | Reuters.

Engine problems ground the whole fleet

Feb 13/13: Australia. Australian MP Dennis Jensen [Lib-Tangney, near Perth] chronicles the key assertions, decisions, and official reassurances made in Australia concerning the F-35, most of which have turned out to be somewhere between inaccurate and untrue. It’s a sobering account of how far program timelines and costs have gone awry, and effectively eviscerates the credibility of official ADF and DoD analysis.

The former defense research scientist also has the brass to point out that while the military has been busy missing the mark, independent analysts like Air Power Australia laid down key cost and performance markers that are now being vindicated by official reports.

Jensen is a long-time critic of the F-35. His 2009 guest article for DID focused on the F-22 as a better solution for Australia, and one wonders if he still has that view in light of recent events. His skepticism concerning the F-35 has remained, as evidenced by his March 2012 release, “Joint Strike Fighter lemon“. That release goes a step beyond most political releases, whose authors aren’t likely to confront a senior air force officer with step by step analysis of hypothetical 8 vs. 8 air combat engagements. Australian parliamentary transcript | JSF Nieuws has added sub-headers for easier reading.

Feb 13/13: Lot 6 Engines. United Technologies’ Pratt and Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT receives a $65 million cost-plus-incentive-fee modification to a previously awarded advance acquisition contract for ongoing sustainment, operations, and maintenance to LRIP Lot 6’s F135 engines. This contract combines purchases for the USMC ($43.8M / 69%); the USAF ($17.8M / 26%); and the US Navy ($3.3M / 5%). $55.3 million in FY 2012 and 2013 contract funds are committed immediately, and $11.8 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13.

Efforts include labor and materials required to maintain and repair F135 propulsion systems; sustainment labor consisting of fleet and material management, sustaining engineering, and joint services technical data updates; and material required to support fielded propulsion systems and support equipment after unit and depot activations at production, training, and operational locations.

Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT (54%); Indianapolis, IN (31%); and Bristol, United Kingdom (15%), and is expected to be complete in December 2013 (N00019-12-C-0090).

Feb 12/13: F-35B flying. The Joint Strike Fighter Program Office clears the F-35B variant to resume flight operations. Within the fleet, all affected hoses have been inspected, and the ones that are out of tolerance will be replaced beginning in about a week. F-35Bs with properly crimped hoses can resume flying now. Yuma Sun.

F-35B cleared to fly

Feb 11/13: Dutch IOT&E. Minister of Defence Mrs. JA Hennis-Plasschaert sends a written brief to Parliament, covering recent developments with the F-35. It outlines the recent American DOT&E report, and also discusses developments in Canada, where the F-35 decision is under review. With respect to their own order, the first Dutch F-35 is ready, and the 2nd will arrive in summer 2013, but the project’s lateness has started to affect the RNLAF.

The original plan was to use their IOT&E jets with Block 3 software for testing and tactics development from April 2012 – August 2014, and pay EUR 27.1 million. Because the program is so far behind on Block 3 software delivery, per DOT&E, the Dutch will have to store their jets in the USA at their own expense until 2015, run their IOT&E from 2015-2018, and pay EUR 47 – 55 million. All on top of buying their jets several years earlier than they needed to, which raised their cost by many millions of euros.

Turkey was probably thinking of these kinds of issues when they postponed their planned IOT&E buy in January. JSF Nieuws has excerpts from the letter, which has not yet been published on the government’s web sites, and also showed us the full copy.

Dutch IOT&E

Feb 6/13: The Pentagon’s F-35 Joint Program Office and Pratt & Whitney announce an agreement in principle regarding the final engine contract for LRIP Lot 5’s planes.

An unfinalized version of that contract was announced on Dec 28/11, and the new contract is reportedly about $20 million lower than the $1.122 billion quoted at that time. Even with that reduction, adding the engine contract to other fighter-related Lot 5 announcements would give an average Lot V flyaway cost across all types of around $170 million per plane. It’s important to note that the engine contract includes things besides fighter engines, but even with no engines at all, Lot V announcements sum to a cost per fighter of $137.5 million.

Final engine figures and divisions won’t be forthcoming until the official Pentagon announcement. Note that some media reports don’t match up with the 32 planes known to be in Lot V (vid. Dec 14/12 entry). American Machinist | Reuters.

Feb 5/13: Britain’s switch costs. The British House of Commons Defence Committee says that the government’s shift from the F-35B STOVL to the F-35C and back cost the country GBP 100 million (vid. section 2, #14 & 15). Most of that money was spent on budgets related to Britain’s new carriers, and the committee faults the government for rushed work on the October 2010 SDSR.

That is quite a lot of money to waste, and it’s true that after the Conservative/ Lib-Dem coalition took power, there was a strong push to get the SDSR out the door in a short period of time. These kinds of decisions are very complex, and the committee faults the Ministry for going along with this recommendation, without really understanding the changes involved.

The Ministry’s defense is that their CVF/ Queen Elizabeth Class carriers had been touted as “future proof”, able to include catapults if that became necessary during the ships’ lifetimes. That proposition was put to the test early with the F-35C switch. The Ministry’s retrospective conclusion is blunt, and discomfiting on its own terms: “It is not my belief that [the carriers] were genuinely designed for conversion, or that the contract allowed them to be designed for conversion.” One wonders, then, why they were touted that way. UK Commons Defence Committee Acquisitions Report | Flight International.

Britain’s type-
switching costs

Feb 2/13: A USAF presentation to Congress says that if sequestration takes effect, F-35 order will be reduced (duh). They add that the program may need to be restructured, too, along with the KC-46A aerial tanker and MQ-9 Reaper Block 5. That would make a few allies grumpy. Flight International.

Jan 31/13: Personnel. AviationWeek reports that Tom Burbage, the executive vice president and general manager of program integration for the F-35, will retire in March 2013, after 32 years at the firm. He had been appointed in that position in 2000.

Jan 30/13: DOT&E – Pilot views. Flight International interviews both experienced pilots and Lockheed Martin personnel, in the wake of the turning & acceleration performance downgrades announced by DOT&E’s 2012 report. One experienced pilot flatly says that those performance figures put the F-35 Lightning in the same class as the 1960s-era F-4 Phantom fighter-bomber, rather than modern high-performance fighters. The Lightning does retain some kinetic strengths, but the overall picture isn’t encouraging when examined closely.

Then a Lockheed test pilot with broad experience takes up the gauntlet, to say that the F-35 is actually kinetically better than other 4+ generation fighters. Some of his fellow test pilots question those claims. Read “The F-35’s Air-to-Air Capability Controversy” for in-depth coverage of this issue.

Jan 30/13: Japan problem. If Japan wants to make parts for all F-35s, they’re going to have to do something about one of their “3 principles” on arms exports. Those restrictions won’t allow exports to communist countries, countries subject to arms export embargoes under U.N. Security Council resolutions, or countries involved in or likely to be involved in international conflicts. Unfortunately, many potential F-35 customers, especially in the Middle East, fall into the 3rd category.

We’re sure Israel would be perfectly happy to simply have all of the affected parts made in Israel instead, but this is going to be a wider issue. The program could always go to a “second supplier” arrangement for all Japanese parts, and Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said maintaining consistency with the ban is “under discussion within the government.” Asashi Shimbun.

Jan 30/13: Industrial. Lockheed Martin says that there are 88 F-35s of all versions in various stages of completion on the program’s production lines. When it’s delivered, AF-41 (a USAF F-35A) will become delivery #100.

Jan 28/13: Fueldraulic fault found. Flight International reports that the failure of an F-35B’s Stratoflex fueldraulic line has been traced to a failure to properly crimp it. The F-35 Program Office says that Stratoflex, Rolls-Royce and Pratt &Whitney, have “instituted corrective actions to improve their quality control processes and ensure part integrity.”

The same problem was found on 6 other aircraft, and all 7 will need to be fixed. Until a Return to Flight plan is approved, however, all 25 F-35Bs will remain grounded.

Jan 18/13: F-35B grounded. The F-35B fleet is grounded, after a fueldraulic line (q.v. DOT&E report) fails and forces the pilot to abort a takeoff. There was no danger, and the pilot simply moved his airplane off of the flight line after it happened.

The F-35A and F-35C fleets are unaffected. Bloomberg | Defense News | Flight International.

F-35B Grounded

Jan 13/13: DOT&E Report. The Pentagon’s Department of Operational Test & Evaluation submits its 2012 report, which includes 18 pages covering the F-35. The fleet continues to work through significant technical challenges, which isn’t unusual. What is unusual is the steady stream of deliveries that will have to be fixed later, in order to address mechanical and structural problems found during testing. A summary of the key statistics & challenges can be found above, in the Testing section, but 2 issues deserve special mention.

One issue is software, which may be more important to the F-35 than it is to any other fighter aircraft. Unfortunately, the software development program is late, and is straining to fix and test issues across several developmental versions. Block 1.0 software capability is only 80% delivered, and the Block 2A software for training is under 50%. Block 2B, which adds rudimentary combat capabilities for serious training, was under 10% as of August 2012. Test resources and personnel are both limited, so this problem is likely to get worse.

The other issue is weight. The F-35 was designed with little margin for weight growth, but new capabilities and fixes for testing issues often add weight. One frequent consequence is higher costs, as very expensive but lightweight materials are used to save an extra pound here and there. Another consequence reduced performance, as seen in the F-35B’s drop to 7.0 maximum Gs after its aggressive weight reduction effort. A third consequence involves ruggedness and survivability. The F-35B faced a suspension of structural fatigue life stress testing in 2012, after cracking was discovered in several places. Even this pales in comparison, however, to the fleet-wide problem created by saving just 11 pounds in all variants. Without fuelstatic flow fuses and Polyalphaolefin (PAO) coolant shutoff valves, DOT&E estimates that these flammable substances make the F-35 25% less likely to survive enemy fire. DOT&E report [PDF] | Lockheed Martin re: 2012 testing | Reuters | TIME magazine. | Washington Post.

Jan 5/13: Turkey. The Turkish SSM procurement agency decides to postpone its initial buy of 2 training and test aircraft, which were supposed to be part of the Lot 7 order (q.v. Sept 27/12 entry). The SSM cites capabilities that are behind scheduled expectations and not ready for full training, and cost concerns, while reaffirming Turkey’s long-term commitment to 100 F-35As.

The Pentagon DOT&E report is quite specific about the plane’s delivered software being unsuitable for any combat-related training or test. Block 2B software would be required for that at least, but the program has yet to deliver parts of Block 1, and the Block 2A software on current planes is also just a partial implementation. In light of that information alone, Turkey’s decision to wait seems prudent. Why incur higher costs from an earlier production lot, if the plane isn’t going to be fully useful in its intended test and training role? Turkish SSM [in Turkish, PDF] | AFP | Washington’s The Hill magazine | Turkish Weekly.

Turkey postpones planned IOT&E buy

Dec 28/12: LRIP-6. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $3.678 billion unfinalized modification to the low rate initial production lot 6 advance acquisition contract. It covers 29 American planes: 18 F-35As, 6 F-35Bs, and 7 USN F-35Cs, plus “all associated ancillary mission equipment.” LRIP-6 contracts total $5,729.6 million, and include:

• March 20/13: $9.8 (support for Australia)
  
• March 5/13: $72.2 (support infrastructure for USA, Australia, Italy)
  
• Feb 14/13: $65.0 (engine maintenance)
  
• Dec 28/12: $3,677.9 (USA 29: 18 F-35A, 6 F-35B, 7 F-35C)
  
• Dec 28/12: $735.4 (support, unfinalized)
  
• Dec 6/12: $386.7 (long-lead)
  
• March 12/12: $38.6 (F-35A long-lead)
  
• Feb 9/12: $14.6 (F-35B long-lead)
  
• Jan 6/12: $194.1 (engines)
  
• Aug 8/11: $535.3 (38 long-lead: USA 19 F-35A, 6 F-35B, 7 F-35C; Italy 4 F-35A, Australia 2 F-35A)

Long-lead items contracts can include JSF partner and foreign buys, since the material buys are basically the same. Main contracts for customers outside America are often announced separately, which explains why some are missing from the Dec 28/12 announcement. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in February 2015. $1.839 billion is committed immediately (N00019-11-C-0083).

LRIP Lot 6 main

Dec 28/12: LRIP-6 support. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $753.4 million unfinalized modification to the LRIP-6 advance acquisition contract, for one-time sustainment and logistics support. This modification also includes site stand-up and depot activation activities, Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) hardware and software, training systems, support equipment, and spares.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in December 2015. $375.2 million is committed immediately (N00019-11-C-0083).

Dec 28/12: LRIP-6 & 7 support. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $374.5 million unfinalized modification to the LRIP-6 advance acquisition contract. It covers initial spares in support of 60 F-35s from LRIP Lot 6 and LRIP Lot 7: 37 F-35As, 12 F-35B STOVL, and 11 F-35Cs.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in November 2015. Contract funds in the amount of $374,495,232 is committed immediately (N00019-11-C-0083).

Dec 28/12: Studies. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $48 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract to perform engineering, programmatic, and logistics tasks supporting investigations or studies covering various systems in the F-35 Lightning II.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to be complete in December 2015. $7.2 million is committed at the time of award. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 (N00019-13-D-0005).

Dec 28/12: LRIP-5 support. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $17.1 million unfinalized modification the LRIP Lot 5 contract. This modification buys initial air vehicle spares for LRIP-5 F-35As.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in November 2015. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13 (N00019-10-C-0002).

Dec 14/12: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $127.7 million fixed-price-incentive-fee and cost-plus-incentive-fee modification, finalizing the F-35’s LRIP Lot 5 contract for 32 planes. This contract also includes funds for manufacturing support equipment; 2 program array assemblies; ancillary mission equipment, including pilot flight equipment; preparation for ferrying the aircraft; and redesign to change parts with diminishing manufacturing sources.

Some news reports place the contract’s figures at $3.8 billion, but a review of past contracts, and conversation with Lockheed Martin, show that the entire LRIP-5 is actually $6.459 billion so far. The distribution also differs from Reuters’ report: it’s 21 F-35As, 4 F-35Bs, and 7 F-35Cs. Past awards, in millions, include:

• Dec 14/12: $127.7 (finalize)
  
• Aug 6/12: $209.8 (spares)
  
• Apr 13/12: $258.8 (add 1 F-35B, 1 F-35C for USA)
  
• March 12/12: $56.4 (support of delivery schedule)
  
• Dec 28/11: $1,122.3 (30 engines – unfinalized)
  
• Dec 27/11: $485 (production requirements, incl. some tooling)
  
• Dec 9/11: $4,011.9 (initial 30: 21 F-35A, 3 F-35B, 6 F-35C)
  
• Sept 27/11: $187 (system engineering & sustainment support)

$598.2 million in long-lead time item contracts were omitted ($522.2 million on July 6/10, and $76 million on Dec 8/10); Lockheed Martin informs DID that they were superseded by the Dec 9/11 contract for a different number of planes. So $6.459 billion is the entire LRIP-5 set so far, including planes, spares/support and tooling/ manufacturing investments (PNR). The engines, support, and PNR pieces are still unfinalized and in negotiations. For the planes themselves, the announced figures add up to about $4.398 billion ($4,011.9 + 258.8 + 127.7). That’s an average of $137.45 million per plane without engines.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be completed in October 2014. All contract funds were committed on award, and $112.9 million will expire on Sept 30/12 (N00019-10-C-0002).

LRIP Lot 5 finalized

Dec 6/12: LRIP-6 lead-in. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $386.7 million contract modification for the LRIP Lot 6 Advance Acquisition Contract. This will ease some of Lockheed Martin’s cash flow concerns, and funds ground maintenance activities; depot activation activities; ALIS operations and maintenance; reliability, maintainability and health management implementation and support; supply chain management; action request resolution; activities to provide and support pilot and maintainer initial training; and procurement of replenishment spares and depot level repairs in support of flight operations.

Work will be performed in Eglin AFB in Orlando, FL (35%); and in Ft. Worth, TX (25%); El Segundo, CA (8%); Warton, United Kingdom (5%); and various locations throughout the United States (27%); and is expected to be complete in October 2013. $193.3 million is committed immediately, $58,378,517 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-11-C-0083).

Nov 30/12: Reuters reports that the US government and Lockheed Martin have reached a preliminary $3.8 billion deal for 32 F-35s: 22 F-35As, 3 F-35Bs, and 7 F-35Cs. A deal would safeguard that contract from any sequestration cuts, but engines and some other items would still need to be bought separately.

Lockheed spokesman Michael Rein quoted a 14% reduction in labor costs from LRIP Lot 4 to Lot 5, and said that the overall cost would be lower in total. That second assurance is important, because materials costs are subject to inflation. He also said that Lot 5 aircraft would be over 50% less expensive than LRIP-1’s $220.8 million figure, which doesn’t square with the $118.8 million average cost of the reported Lot 6 deal. F-35B/C aircraft will push the price up, however, so Lot 1 vs. Lot 5 isn’t an apples to apples comparison.

Lockheed Martin has delivered 48 F-35s so far (19 development, 29 LRIP), and is pushing to meet its goal of 30 delivered in 2012. Near-term funding for Lot 6 remains a concern, however (q.v. Oct 25/12 entry).

Nov 20/12: 1st Front-Line Squadron. Marine All Weather Fighter Attack Squadron 121 (VFMA-121), formerly an F/A-18 Hornet squadron, is re-designated as the world’s first operational F-35 squadron, of any type. For now, the “squadron” is just 3 F-35Bs, but that will grow. They will be part of the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, AZ. MCAS Yuma.

1st F-35 Squadron

Nov 22/12: Canada. Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose tells Canada’s House of Commons that Canada’s “review of options will not be constrained by the previous statement of requirements.” That seems minor, but it isn’t. DND’s requirements had been crafted to make the F-35 the only available choice, per the department’s standard pattern. Breaking that lock opens up other options like the Eurofighter, Super Hornet, etc.

Subsequent reports that Canada has canceled the F-35 are premature. Much will depend on the people picked to conduct the review of options. See “Canada Preparing to Replace its CF-18 Hornets” for full coverage.

Nov 16/12: ALIS. Reuters reports that ALIS is at 94% of final capability, but a changing computing landscape has bitten it. A Navy “Red Team” hacked into the ALIS system. ALIS reportedly includes both classified and unclassified data streams, and the 2001 specifications didn’t require separating them to prevent intrusions. That kind of failure to plan for computer attacks doesn’t reflect especially well on all concerned, and it was reportedly all the Navy team needed.

Lockheed Martin was surprised by the result, but say that they’ve developed a “fairly straightforward fix” that did not require major adjustments to ALIS. The bad news? The political exercise of choosing F-35 suppliers in nearly every U.S. state, and beyond the USA, increases general exposure to cyber attacks.

The latest version of ALIS has been in use at Edwards AFB, CA for several months. It’s also scheduled to be used by the Marines at Yuma, CA this year, and by Nellis AFB, NV when Lockheed delivers 4 F-35s for testing within the next month or 2. Meanwhile, The Pentagon is looking to compete ALIS operation, and F-35 maintenance, beyond Lockheed Martin, in an attempt to drive down rising Operations & Maintenance cost projections. Reuters.

Nov 5/12: Affordability. USN Rear Adm. (ret.) Craig Steidle pens an op-ed in Aviation Week. Steidle was the 2nd director of the JSF Program Office, from August 1995 – August 1997. He writes:

“…as the program moved on, the focus on affordability atrophied. Both the government and contractor were at fault. What began as a core pillar didn’t evolve into a culture… In 2008-10, I had the privilege to chair several Independent Manufacturing Review Team (IMRT) assessments of the F-35 program… The kind of cost-avoidance program that should have encompassed lean and producibility initiatives and other affordability improvements did not exist, nor was it asked for. The statements of work that we reviewed did not incorporate cost reduction. Difficulties were to be expected, but resolving development issues had diverted attention from cost control.”

He does say that the current F-35 program leadership has made progress, adding that the F-35 will have “a system performance beyond our initial expectations.” Time will tell.

Oct 30/12: Dutch delay. Instead of trying to gather a majority among the second-tier parties, the Dutch VVD and its largest opponent, the PvdA Labour Party, elect to form a national unity coalition with 79/ 150 seats.

They don’t agree about the F-35, but they do agree that the recent Rekenkamer report requires a full reconsideration of Dutch defense policy and commitments by the end of 2013. Once that’s done, there’s reportedly some language about a “competitive” evaluation of alternatives in 2014, leading to a contract in 2015 as planned. The parties agreed that the 2014 evaluation will include operations and support (O&S) costs, while a 2nd agreement will create a forensic inquiry into why Parliament wasn’t informed of the 390% cost explosion between 2001 and 2012 for 30 years of F-35 O&S (q.v. Oct 24/12 entry).

Depending on the exact wording of the coalition agreement, and on how vigorously the PvdA asserts itself, those agreements may just be a stalling tactic toward lock-in, and a drastically reduced fighter fleet with much smaller responsibilities. There are a number of ways to blunt the accuracy and impact of an O&S assessment, and true competition in 2014 requires a specific procedure. The forensic inquiry will put the MvD in the spotlight, and the VVD party is also at risk, but the VVD would not have accepted a suicide pact. The best bet is an inquiry that mirrors the recent farce in Canada: bureaucratic stonewalling, and refusal of responsibility by all parties. In the meantime, more contracts let to Dutch firms could have the effect of raising termination costs if the country pulls out of the F-35 program. Atlantic Sentinel | defense-aerospace.com

Oct 26/12: EVM penalty. The Pentagon is withholding $46.5 million from Lockheed Martin over Earned Value Management system deficiencies, subtracting 5% of periodic billings against the LRIP-4 and LRIP-5 contracts, and Israel’s F-35i development contract.

Lockheed Martin’s EVM certification at Fort Worth, TX was yanked in October 2010. They have a corrective plan to return to full EVM compliance, but haven’t restored their certification yet. Bloomberg.

Oct 25/12: LMCO 10-Q. Lockheed Martin’s 10-Q filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission says that they are still working to restore the Defense Contracting Management Agency’s (DCMA) earned value management system (EVMS) at the Fort Worth, TX facility. Relations with the US government are actually quite tense overall, and the firm mentions the ongoing failure of contract restructuring negotiations to tie fees to milestones. Not to mention disagreements between contractor and government assessments for the milestones that already exist. Then there’s the issue of payment risk hanging over the program:

“The development portion of the F-35 program is expected to continue into 2017 and currently has approximately $530 million of incentive fees remaining… While our customer has delayed funding for LRIP Lot 6 until the LRIP Lot 5 contract is negotiated, we and our industry team have continued to work in an effort to meet our customer’s desired aircraft delivery dates for the LRIP Lot 6 aircraft. As a result, we have approximately $400 million in potential termination liability exposure as of September 30, 2012. If we are unable to obtain additional funding by year-end, the potential termination liability exposure is estimated to be $1.1 billion and our cash exposure would be approximately $250 million… In the quarter ended September 30, 2012, 12 LRIP Lot 3 aircraft were delivered to the U.S. Government. We have received orders for 95 production aircraft, of which 26 have been delivered through the quarter ended September 30, 2012.”

Lockheed Martin received a $489.5 million contract for Lot 6 long-lead parts on June 15/12. It isn’t clear if those funds have been released, or are being held up over negotiations. See: 10-Q SEC filing | Reuters.

Oct 24/12: Dutch Report. The Dutch Rekenkamer national auditing office releases their report covering the proposed F-35 buy. A decision to buy or reject the F-35A must be made by 2015, per earlier agreements with the US government and Lockheed Martin, but the F-35A IOT&E and arrival of operational Block 3 software will take until 2019, which means another round of testing after 2019. Initial Operational Capability (IOC) would wait until 2022, and it would be at least 2027 (a 6-year slip from 2021) before the Dutch could retire their F-16s.

The bottom line is that even in a study that confined itself to unaudited figures provided by the Dutch government and industry, it’s clear that the planned EUR 4.05 billion Dutch buy won’t be able to afford 68 F-35s, let alone the 85 planned. The MvD is now talking about just 56 planes, and extrapolation using the report’s own charts and Pentagon figures suggests a figure closer to 42-48 F-35As. As the Rekenkamer points out, it isn’t possible to execute the Luchtmacht’s current responsibilities with those numbers. Which means the Netherlands will need to rethink and reduce its long-term defense and alliance commitments. Operations & support (O&S) projections, exclusive of fuel, add even more weight to that conclusion. The 30-year figure has risen from the initial 2001 figure of EUR 2.9 billion for 85, to the 2012 figure of EUR 14.2 billion. It only drops to EUR 13.2 billion at 68 aircraft, and that non-linear drop makes it likely that O&M costs for a fleet of 42-48 F-35As, over 30 years, would be well over EUR 200 million per plane.

Option #2, which involves withdrawing from the testing phase, gets a negative recommendation. The Rekenkamer thinks it wouldn’t make operational or financial sense, since monies “saved” would just create new costs later in the F-16 fleet. They’re almost certainly correct.

Option #3 would involve withdrawing from the F-35 program before 2015, and buying another fighter off the shelf. This could expose the government to termination claims, with Dutch firms filing claims against major F-35 contractors under US Federal Acquisition Regulations, who will go to the US government for payment, who would go to the Dutch government under the JSF program’s 2010 MoU (pp. 28, 117). The Rekenkamer believes that taking this option would also require a reconsideration of the Luchtmacht’s medium-term responsibilities, since it would require operating the F-16 fleet for longer.

That last conclusion may not be correct. The most likely alternative that could offer more fighters, the JAS-39E/F Gripen, isn’t scheduled to enter Swedish service until 2023. Which would push full retirement of the Dutch F-16s beyond 2027. The Swiss are getting leased JAS-39C/Ds as a bridge to their 22 JAS-39Es, however, and Saab could conceivably make the Dutch a similar offer that let them retire the Luchtmacht F-16s in 2027 as planned. The Eurofighter or Rafale would offer similar or greater costs compared to the F-35A, but either aircraft could be delivered and operational several years earlier than the F-35A or the JAS-39E/F. DID’s estimate is that a 2015 contract signing could give the Dutch a Rafale/ Typhoon IOC of 2018, and full retirement of Dutch F-16s by 2022-23. “Uitstapkosten Joint Strike Fighter,” incl. links to full reports [all in Dutch] | JSF Nieuws [in Dutch] | DID thanks VNC Communication for their assistance.

Dutch F-35 report

Oct 19/12: Engines. United Technologies’ Pratt and Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT wins an $81.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for services and materials for the preliminary design, detailed design, and engine performance testing in support of the F135 Fuel Burn Reduction Program. The objective of the program is to demonstrate a 5% mission weighted fuel burn reduction in a F135 experimental engine configuration.

Competition can produce the same kinds of benefits, of course, but the Pentagon has chosen not to do that.

Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete in July 2016. This contract was competitively procured via Broad Agency Announcement, and 3 offers were received by the US Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Lakehurst, NJ (N68335-13-C-0005).

Oct 9/12: Italy. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX received a $28.6 million advance acquisition contract modification, buying long lead-time parts, material and components required to protect the delivery schedule of Italy’s 4 F-35As in LRIP Lot 7 (FY 2013).

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be completed in June 2013. Note that El Segundo is Northrop Grumman’s work, and Warton is BAE’s (N00019-12-C-0004).

Sept 27/12: LRIP-7 Engine lead-in. United Technologies’ Pratt & Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT receives an estimated $89.2 million for long-lead components, parts and materials associated with the 37 engines in LRIP Lot 7. The rest of the contract will follow, but initial purchases involve:

• USAF: 19 F135-PW-100 base model ($38 million, 43%)
  
• Italy: 3 F135 CTOL ($6 million, 7%)
  
• Norway: 2 F135 CTOL ($4 million, 4.5%)
  
• Turkey: 2 F135 CTOL ($4 million, 4.5%)
  
• US Navy: 4 F135-PW-100 Carrier Variant ($35.2 million, 39% for US/ USMC)
  
• USMC: 6 F-135-PW-600 Short Take-off and Vertical Landing with Roll Royce’s LiftFan
  
• Britain: 1 F135 STOVL ($2 million, 2%)

Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT (67%); Bristol, United Kingdom (16.5%); and Indianapolis, IN (16.5%), and is expected to be complete in September 2013. This contract was not competitively procured (N00019-12-C-0060).

FY 2012

F-35A armed test
(click to view full)

Sept 26/12: LRIP-3 changes. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $25.9 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification to add authorized concurrency changes for USAF F-35As in LRIP Lot 3. Many concurrency changes are going to involve software, but they can also involve mechanical changes. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to span multiple years (N00019-08-C-0028).

Sept 26/12: Simulators & RCS. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $79.9 million advance acquisition contract modification to buy 6 F-35 Lightening II Full Mission Simulators, and a radar upgrade at Hill AFB, UT to support of F-35 radar cross section testing.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in April 2015. $716,700 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-10-C-0002).

Sept 20/12: Sub-contractors. Northrop Grumman Corporation enters into a long-term agreement (LTA) with Denmark’s Terma A/S, worth more than $95 million through 2019. The LTA covers production of 34 unique F-35 Lightning II composite components, including doors, panels, skin assembly, and straps through 2019.

This is actually an extension of a partnership that began in 2006. Terma A/S has been producing F-35 components since the LRIP-1 order in 2007. NGC.

Sept 12/12: Dutch Elections. Elections leave the pro-JSF coalition slightly ahead in some respects, but the VVD (+10 seats) and CDA (-8 seats) end up needing 22 more votes to have a 76-vote majority in favor of the F-35. Support from Geert Wilders’ PVV, plus the Christian Democratic leaning CU and SGP, could get them to 77. Wikipedia.

Sept 6/12: Japan’s 4, for much more. More cost hikes for Japan, as Defense Ministry officials cite “lower production efficiency” as the reason its first 4 F-35As will soar again to YEN 15.4 billion (about $195 million) per plane. As a result, the ministry is looking to find the full YEN 30.8 billion, in order to cover the 2 fighters planned for the FY 2013 budget request. The Japan Times.

Aug 28/12: Israel. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Ft. Worth, TX receives a $206.8 million cost-reimbursement contract modification to pay for Phase I Increment 1, of Israel’s F-35i System Development and Demonstration. This modification includes the development of hardware and software, from the initial requirements development to the Preliminary Design Review (PDR). In addition, a hardware-only post PDR will continue through finalized requirements, layouts, and build to prints, including production planning data.

Note that Pentagon contract announcements are often for the 40-50% of the total expected costs, in order to get work underway. As such, previous figures of $450 million to add Israeli radio, datalink, and electronic warfare systems could still be true. Work will be performed at Fort Worth, TX (60%); Los Angeles, CA (20%); Nashua, NH (15%); and San Diego, CA (5%), and is expected to be complete in May 2016. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD will manage this effort, on behalf of its Israeli Foreign Military Sale client (N00019-12-C-0070).

F-35i SDD begins

Aug 7/12: LRIP-5. United Technologies subsidiary Pratt & Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT receives a $9.6 million contract modification to LRIP Lot 5/ FY 2011 fixed-price incentive and cost-plus-incentive contract line items. It funds part of the cost of 2 F135 engines, plus associated engineering assistance to production, a mock-up engine, slave modules for engine depot test cells at Tinker Air Force Base, initial stand-up repair capabilities at Hill Air Force Base; and additional contractor logistics support. Support will take place at the Fort Worth, TX, and Palmdale, CA, production sites, and at Eglin AFB, Yuma AFB, Nellis AFB, and Edwards AFB.

Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT (67%); Bristol, United Kingdom (17%); and Indianapolis, IN (16%), and is expected to be complete in February 2014.Funding will be released as needed (N00019-10-C-0005).

Aug 6/12: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $209.8 million contract modification for initial spares to support 32 F-35 LRIP Lot 5/ FY 2011 fighters.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in June 2015 (N00019-10-C-0002).

June 20/12: LRIP-7 Norway. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $20.1 million advance acquisition contract to provide long lead-time parts, material and components required for Norway’s 2 F-35As ordered in LRIP-7/ FY 2013.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%). Work is expected to be complete in June 2013. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 (N00019-12-C-0004).

July 2-5/12: Netherlands. A parliamentary majority opposed to buying the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter has emerged in the Netherlands. Despite lobbying from the MvD, and 2 planes ordered already, the issue came to a vote, and the motion to withdraw from the program was upheld.

Because the government has technically dissolved, this vote doesn’t pull the Netherlands out yet. What it does say is that unless the VVD and SDA parties can form a majority in the next election, the Dutch F-35 buy is in serious danger. The cost of ending the country’s Tier 2 participation in the program could hit EUR 1 billion. Then again, if reported figures regarding Saab’s JAS-39E/F Gripen offer are true, Dutch government budgets could still come out ahead. Industry may be less happy.

June 29/12: Japan. Buy 4, for more. Officials from Japan’s defense ministry say that they have agreed to terms for their first 4 F-35As. Delayed American orders for 179 planes mean that Japan’s planes will reportedly cost 9.6 billion yen (about $120 million) each, up from the original plan of $110 million. That makes the Japanese contract a good bellwether for the real base cost of an F-35A in the near future.

Fortunately for the Japanese, the overall contract remained at the expected YEN 60 billion (about $752.4 million). The cost of the 2 simulators and other equipment dropped to YEN 19.1 billion ($240.83 million) from the expected YEN 20.5 billion. Read “Japan’s Next Fighters: F-35 Wins The F-X Competition” for full coverage.

Japan: 4 of 42

June 15/12: LRIP-6. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $489.5 million advance acquisition contract to provide long lead-time parts, material and components required for the delivery of 35 LRIP-6 fighters. The order involves 19 USAF F-35As, 3 F-35As for the government of Italy, 2 F-35As for the government of Turkey, 6 USMC F-35B STOVL(Short Take-Off Vertical Landing) fighters, 1 F-35B for Britain, and 4 F-35Cs for the US Navy.

This contract also funds long lead-time efforts required for the addition of a drag chute to Norway’s F-35As, which will be ordered as part of LRIP-7 in 2013. Drag chutes are especially useful when landing in cold climates, where runways and tires may fail to provide the same level of traction.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%); and is expected to be complete in June 2013. This contract was not competitively procured, pursuant to US FAR 6.302-1, by US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD (N00019-12-C-0004).

June 15/12: Norway OK. Norway takes the next step, and formally authorizes the purchase of 2 F-35A fighters, which are intended for delivery in 2015. They will be based in the United States as part of a joint partner training center, which almost certainly means Eglin AFB, FL. The 2 aircraft authorized today are expected to be joined by a second pair in 2016. They are to be followed by up to 48 additional aircraft orders from 2017, which will be based at Orland AB and Evenes FOB in Norway.

This is not a contract yet, but one can be expected in FY 2013. Meanwhile, American support for internal F-35 integration of the JSM strike missile allows Norway to begin preparing it for deployment.

The overall cost of Norway’s F-35’s procurement phase is estimated at NOK 60 billion/ $FY12 10 billion in real terms. This is very good news for Lockheed Martin, which is working through a 2-month long extended strike by its machinists, and a harsh US GAO report concerning the F-35’s progress. Norwegian MoD | Business Insider | Fort Worth Star-Telegram | WFAA Dallas.

Norwegian go-ahead

June 14/12: Norway. Norway’s Storting (parliament) approves a significant increase in defense spending, with the F-35 purchase playing a central role. The country will also be making investments in modernizing and adding CV90 tracked armored vehicles, and purchasing UAVs.

Overall, Norway will see a budget increase of 7% by 2016. Monies spent of the Afghan deployment will be continued and redirected, while “significant” supplementary funds will be added for the F-35 purchase. Source.

June 14/12: US GAO Report. Congress’ Government Accountability Office delivers a report on the F-35 program. Key excerpts from GAO-12-437: “Joint Strike Fighter – DOD Actions Needed to Further Enhance Restructuring and Address Affordability Risks” :

“The new program baseline projects total acquisition costs of $395.7 billion, an increase of $117.2 billion (42%) from the prior 2007 baseline. Full rate production is now planned for 2019, a delay of 6 years from the 2007 baseline. Unit costs per aircraft have doubled since start of development in 2001… Since 2002, the total quantity through 2017 has been reduced by three-fourths, from 1,591 to 365. Affordability is a key challenge… Overall performance in 2011 was mixed as the program achieved 6 of 11 important objectives… Late software releases and concurrent work on multiple software blocks have delayed testing and training. Development of critical mission systems providing core combat capabilities remains behind schedule and risky… Most of the instability in the program has been and continues to be the result of highly concurrent development, testing, and production activities. Cost overruns on the first four annual procurement contracts total more than $1 billion and aircraft deliveries are on average more than 1 year late. Program officials said the government’s share of the cost growth is $672 million; this adds about $11 million to the price of each of the 63 aircraft under those contract.”

June 13/12: Infrastructure. R.L. Reed, Inc. in Las Vegas, NV wins an $11.1 million firm-fixed-price contract, to build an F-35A aerospace ground equipment facility at Nellis AFB, NV. Work is expected to finish by Dec 10/13. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 15 bids received by The US Army Corps of Engineers in Los Angles, CA (W912PL-12-C-0010).

June 4/12: Support. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives an $111.6 million cost reimbursement contract modification, which adds more funding for recurring support activities such as initial training, aircraft maintenance operations, stand-up of sustainment capability at specified locations, technical data management, and sustaining engineering for the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force.

Work will be performed at Eglin AFB, FL (60%); and in Fort Worth, TX (15%); El Segundo, CA (5%); Warton, United Kingdom (5%); Orlando, FL (5%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%). Work is expected to be complete in October 2012, but $45.2 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-10-C-0002).

May 31/12: Norway JSM. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $19.8 million contract modification, funding a Joint Strike Missile (JSM) Risk Reduction Study for the Norway Ministry of Defence. Efforts include physical fit checks, wind tunnel tests, engineering analysis, and designing and building of an emulator and adapter to determine next steps in integrating the JSM into the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

These monies will be applied to the fixed-price-incentive-fee, firm target F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter LRIP-4/ FY 2010 contract. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (70%); Arnold AFB in Tullahoma, TN (20%); and Kongsberg, Norway (10%); and is expected to be complete in May 2014 (N00019-09-C-0010).

May 7/12: LRIP-4 Concurrency. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $237,740,000 fixed-price-incentive-fee, firm target contract modification to the LRIP-4/ FY 2010 contract, in order to raise the limit for government-authorized changes to the plane’s configuration baseline hardware or software. This modification increases the concurrency cap for the USAF’s and Netherlands’ F-35As; USMC’s and Britain’s F-35Bs; and US Navy F-35Cs.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to span multiple years, but $222.6 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. This contract modification combines purchases for the Navy ($153.2M/ 64.5%); USAF ($69.4M/ 29%); the United Kingdom ($8.2M/ 3.5%); and the Netherlands ($6.9M/ 3%), under contract N00019-09-C-0010.

May 10/12: Britain. Britain’s government confirms long-standing rumors that it would abandon the F-35C and its associated catapult modifications to 1 carrier, returning to the ski-jump deck and F-35B STOVL variant. That will mean reversions and changes to the carriers’ evolved design and lighting, some of which were described in the Jan 25/12 entry. Aircraft are less affected. The UK had already ordered and paid for an F-35B test plane, before the switch to the F-35C. Those flights will now continue, and F-35B flight trials are scheduled to begin from a British carrier in 2018.

A DSTL report has explained some of the capabilities Britain would lose by abandoning the F-35C, but the government justifies their decision by saying that the F-35C’s improved capabilities and compatibility with American and French carriers would come at too steep a cost. Staying with the F-35C, they say, would delay Britain’s return to carrier capability from 2020 – 2023 or later, cost nearly GBP 2 billion to modify 1 of their 2 carriers, and leave the Royal Navy with no carrier capability if their converted ship needs maintenance. In contrast, the F-35B will be compatible with the US Marines and with Italy, and gives Britain the option of taking its 2nd CVF carrier out of strategic reserve, and using it when the primary carrier is out of service for long refits or maintenance dockings. UK MoD.

Britain back to F-35B

May 3-9/12: Australia. Australia’s Defense Force will delay buying 12 new F-35As by 2 years (Project AIR 6000, Phase 2A/B, Stage 2), and delay the 4th Australian squadron (Phase 2C) by one more year, under the Labor Party government’s deficit-reduction plan.

They’ve committed to buy 2 initial F-35As for delivery in 2014-15, but those 2 will remain in the United States for testing and pilot training. The next 12 planes would have been based in Australia. Their Year of Decision will now be 2014-15 for the next 12, which may also cover the Phase 2B buy of 58. Delivery of those planes isn’t expected until 2017-2019 now, which means that RAAF F-35As won’t be flying in Australia until around 2020. The AIR 6000 Phase 2C decision to add another 24 F-35s, and raise Australia’s total buy to 96, won’t happen until 2018-19. Australian DMO Project page | Australian Aviation | Australian Aviation follow-up | The Australian | Bloomberg | Canada’s Globe & Mail.

Australia delays

May 1/12: Japan. May 1/12: The US DSCA formally announces Japan’s official request for an initial set of 4 Lockheed Martin F-35As, with an option to buy another 38 and bring the deal to 42 aircraft. “The Japan Air Self-Defense Force’s F-4 aircraft will be decommissioned as F-35’s [sic] are added to the inventory.”

The estimated cost is $10 billion, which works out to $238.1 million per plane. Until a set of contracts are signed, it’s hard to split that accurately between purchase and support costs, and long support deals can add a lot to costs. Japan is also interested in considerably more local assembly than most of F-35 buyers, which is likely to add a number of unique costs of its own. Read “Japan’s Next Fighters: F-35 Wins The F-X Competition” for full coverage.

Japan request

April 24/12: LRIP-2 Concurrency. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $68.3 million modification to the previously awarded cost-plus-incentive-fee F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) LRIP-2/ FY 2008 contract, to raise the limit for government-authorized changes to the plane’s configuration baseline hardware or software. This contract combines purchases for the USAF ($37.7M/ 55.2%) and the US Navy ($30.6M/ 44.8%)

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to span multiple years. (N00019-07-C-0097)

April 24/12: LRIP-3 Concurrency. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $45.9 million modification to the previously awarded cost-plus-incentive-fee LRIP-3 contract, to raise the limit for government-authorized changes to the plane’s configuration baseline hardware or software. This contract combines purchases for the US Navy ($37.5M/ 77.8%) and the United Kingdom ($10.2M/ 22.2%).

At this point, both navies were still committed to the F-35C. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX and is expected to span multiple years (N00019-08-C-0028)

April 13/12: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $258.8 million not-to-exceed undefinitized modification to the LRIP-5/ FY 2011 contract adding 1 USAF F-35A and 1 USN F-35C. The modification includes undefinitized line items, which will be finalized as fixed-price-incentive-firm contract line items.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%); and is expected to be complete in February 2014. Funds will be released as needed (N00019-10-C-0002).

April 3/12: F-35 schedule & costs. Aviation Week’s Bill Sweetman takes a deep look into the Pentagon’s latest Selected Acquisition Reports, which was released on March 30/12. Excerpts:

“Another three-year slip to initial operational test and evaluation, the culmination of system development and demonstration, which now is due to be complete in 2019 – the target date is February but the threshold date is October… it appears that the main culprit is software and hardware, mainly in terms of… sensor fusion and emission control – that take place in the fighter’s main processor banks… In what follows, I’m going to use average procurement unit cost (APUC)… recurring flyaway is the lowest cost, but neither the US nor anyone else can put an aircraft on the ramp for that money. And all numbers are base-2012… The APUC for the F-35A in 2013-14 is $184-$188 million, versus $177m (2009 dollars) for the last F-22s. And that is at a much higher production rate.”

Most ominously for the F-35’s future cost structure:

“Although the basis of the numbers has been changed, the SAR still compares the F-35A with the F-16, and shows that the estimated CPFH [DID: Cost Per Flight Hour] for the F-35A has gone from 1.22 F-16s in the 2010 SAR to 1.42 today – versus 0.8 F-16s, which was being claimed a few years ago. Where is that operations and support money going to come from?”

SAR: dates slip, O&M rises

April 2/12: The Future of Stealth? A Japan Today article goes straight to the main military point at stake: the future effectiveness of stealth technologies:

“As more nations develop stealth fighters, then the use of radar as the main target acquisition device will be taken over by infrared, wake tracking, electro-optics, and radio/electronic chatter detection – thereby side-stepping radar stealth features – in short order.”

It’s a bit more complex than that, especially given the fact that stealth tends to be optimized for certain frequencies, so radars will still play a role. Still, the falling cost of high-bandwidth networking, and the need for a counter to stealth technologies, does suggest a range of countermeasures over the coming decades.

March 30/12: Infrastructure. Small business qualifier Head, Inc. in Columbus, OH receives a $17 million firm-fixed-price contract to build 5 vertical landing pads and associated supporting taxiways at Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, SC, which will base F-35Bs.

Work is expected to be complete by August 2013. This contract was competitively procured via the Navy Electronic Commerce Online website, with 12 proposals received by Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southeast in Jacksonville, FL (N69450-12-C-1758).

March 20/12: Infrastructure. Harper Construction Co., Inc., San Diego, CA wins a pair of firm-fixed-price task order under a multiple award construction contract, to build the 2-story aircraft maintenance hangars at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, AZ. The buildings will include a high bay space for F-35Bs, crew and equipment space, administrative space and Special Access Program Facility areas for the Automatic Logistics Information System (ALIS) fleet maintenance program.

Task order 003 for the south hangar is $33.2 million, and a planned modification could increase the contract to $35 million (N62473-10-D-5406, 0004).

Task order 004 for the north hangar is $36.7 million, and a planned modification could increase the contract to $38.6 million (N62473-10-D-5406, 0004).

Work is expected to be complete by May 2014, and 9 proposals were received for each task order by US Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southwest in San Diego, CA

March 12/12: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $56.4 million cost reimbursement contract modification, adding funding for support efforts necessary to meet F-35 LRIP Lot 5’s requirements and delivery schedule.

Work will be performed in Eglin Air Force Base, FL (60%); Fort Worth, TX (15%); El Segundo, CA (5%); Warton, United Kingdom (5%); Orlando, FL (5%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%); and is expected to be complete in May 2012. $18.7 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-10-C-0002).

March 12/12: LRIP-6. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $38.6 million modification to the previously awarded low rate initial production Lot 6 advance acquisition contract to provide additional funding for the procurement of long lead items for F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter low rate initial production conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) aircraft for the USAF, and for the governments of Italy and Australia.

Work, which will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, is necessary to protect the delivery schedules of CTOL aircraft planned for delivery through January 2015 (N00019-11-C-0083).

March 9/12: Reprogramming Lab. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $24.1 million cost-reimbursement contract modification to develop a data farm for the Joint Strike Fighter US Reprogramming Laboratory at Eglin AFB, FL. It will take feeds from the lab’s existing equipment, and store software and data from the F-35’s mission data testing.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (95%), and Orlando, FL (5%), and is expected to be complete in November 2014. Contract funds will be released as needed (N00019-02-C-3002).

Feb 23/12: Turkey. Turkish Defence Minister Ismet Yilmaz says that they’re sticking to plans to buy 100 of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jets for $16 billion, but could change those numbers or the timing of their orders, depending on how negotiations go.

Turkey’s development phase payments have reportedly hit $315 million so far. Reuters.

Feb 15/12: Italian cuts. Italian Defense Minister Giampaolo Di Paola tells a joint defense committee of both houses of parliament that Italy is cutting its planned F-35 purchases from 131 to 90, as part of a range of military austerity measures. A review had indicated 1/3 fewer planes would do, but given Italy’s needs all of those cuts are almost certain to be air force jets.

Di Paola said that Italy had spent EUR 2.5 billion/ $3.3 billion on the program so far. Bloomberg.

Italy cuts

Feb 9/12: LRIP-6. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $14.8 million contract modification, to buy long lead items for the USMC’s LRIP-6/ FY 2012 buy of F-35B fighters. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is necessary to protect the delivery schedules of STOVL aircraft planned for delivery through December 2014 (N00019-11-C-0083)

Jan 6/12: LRIP-6 engines. United Technologies subsidiary Pratt & Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT receives a $194.1 million advance acquisition contract with fixed-price line items for long lead components, parts, and materials required for the delivery of 37 LRIP Lot 6 engines. They will equip the USMC (6 F-135-600s with LiftFan, $84.7M/ 43.6%); USAF (18 F135-100s, $54.9M/ 28.3%); USN (7 F135-100 naval, $37.1M/ 19.1%); Italian Air Force (4 F135-100s, $11.6M/ 6%); and Royal Australian Air Force (2 F135-100s, $5.8M/ 3%); and associated spares.

Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT (64%); Bristol, UK (25%); and Indianapolis, IN (11%), and is expected to be complete in September 2012. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 USC. 2304c1 (N00019-11-C-0082).

USN F-35C & F/A-18E,
jet blast testing
(click to view full)

Dec 28/11: LRIP-5 engines. Pratt & Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT receives a $1.122 billion unfinalized, not-to-exceed contract modification for LRIP Lot V’s engines. The contract includes both fixed price incentive and cost plus incentive contract line items, and covers 21 F135 engines for the USAF’s F-35As ($520.7M / 46.3%), 3 F135 LiftFan engines for the USMC’s F-35Bs ($387.1M / 34.5% is the figure given), 6 F135s for the Navy’s F-35Cs ($166.7M/ 14.9%), plus the usual support and spares for the US and F-35 Co-operative Partners ($47.8M Co-operative Partner Participants/ 4.3%). A total of $358.6 million is committed immediately.

One wonders if the USN & USMC figures were transposed, but the finalized contract will offer more clarity. Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT (67%); Bristol, United Kingdom (16.5%); and Indianapolis, IN (16.5%), and is expected to be complete in February 2014 (N00019-10-C-0005).

Dec 27/11: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $485 million not-to-exceed cost-plus-fixed-fee unfinalized contract modification, with $131.5 million obligated at time of award. The contract covers LRIP Lot 5 production requirements, including special tooling/special test equipment, and subcontractor technical assistance. This contract combines purchases for the USAF ($186.7M/ 38.5%); the US Navy ($186.7M/ 38.5%); and JSF Cooperative Partner participants ($111.5M/ 23%).

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (30%); El Segundo, CA (20%); Wharton, United Kingdom (20%); Turin, Italy (15%); Nashua, NH (8%); and Baltimore, MD (7%); and is expected to be complete in December 2013 (N00019-10-C-0002)

Dec 27/11: LRIP-4. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $253 million cost-plus-incentive-fee and cost-plus-fixed-fee modification to finalize the previous LRIP-4/ FY 2010 support contract. This contract covers the US Navy ($140.3M/ 55.5%), the USAF (89.1M/ 35.2%), and the JSF “Cooperative Program participants” ($23.6M/ 9.3%).

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%); and is expected to be complete in May 2014. $169.7 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-09-C-0010).

Dec 20/11: Japan win. Japan’s Ministry of Defense announces that Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II has won the F-X competitive bid process for 42 planes. The initial contract will be for 4 F-35A jets in Japan Fiscal Year 2012, which begins April 1/12. Deliveries are expected to begin in 2016. Read “Japan’s Next Fighters: F-35 Wins The F-X Competition” for full coverage.

Japan win

Dec 9/11: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $4.0119 billion fixed-price-incentive, firm target, FPIF contract modification for 30 LRIP Lot 5 fighters for the USAF (21 F-35As, $2.644 b/ 65.9%); the US Navy (6 F-35Cs, $937.3M/ 23.3%) and the US Marine Corps (3 F-35Bs, $426.2M/ 10.6%). In addition, this modification funds associated ancillary mission equipment and flight test instrumentation for those aircraft, and flight test instrumentation for the United Kingdom ($4.1M/ 0.1%). All efforts will be contracted for on a FPIF basis, with the exception of work scope for the incorporation of certain specified concurrency changes that will be contracted for on a cost-sharing/no-fee basis.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (67%); El Segundo, CA (14%); Warton, United Kingdom (9%); Orlando, FL (4%); Nashua, NH (3%); and Baltimore, MD (3%), and is expected to be complete in January 2014 (N00019-10-C-0002).

LRIP Lot 5 main

Additional Readings & Sources Aircraft Background

• DID FOCUS Article – F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: 2009-2010. At present, there is no coverage for 2011.

• DID FOCUS Article – F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: Events & Contracts 2007-08

• DID FOCUS Article – F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: SDD Contracts & Events FY 2006.

• F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program site. For other news that includes testing results and other areas not covered by contracts, see the news section.

• JSF Program Office – JSF Production, Sustainment and Follow-on Development MoU [PDF], update 4.

• Lockheed Martin – F-35 Lightning II. Includes sections covering topics such as Earned Value Management, testing, partnerships, manufacturing, etc.

• Air Force Technology – JSF (F35) Joint Strike Fighter, International

• Aerospaceweb – F-35 JSF Weapon Carriage Capacity. Good discussion of the 3 versions and their specific limiting factors.

• JSF UK Industry Team site.

• UK Parliamentary Defence Committee. An important source of information re: Tier 1 partner Britain’s future participation in the F-35 program.

• Pratt & Whitney – F135. The F-35’s current engine.

• DID – The F136 alternative engine was eventually terminated, over the objections of the government’s GAO auditors.

• Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine (May 15/08) – X to F: F-35 Lightning II And Its X-35 Predecessors.

Aircraft Ancillaries

• DID – You Can Track Your F-35s, At ALIS’ Maintenance Hub. Possibly the F-35’s most important ancillary system.

• Martin Baker – US16E – JSF. The plane’s ejection seat. See the “F-35 Program: Ancillary and Sub-contracts” section’s Nov 12/07 entry for further details that explain why this was such a challenging design.

• Lockheed Martin Code One magazine (Q2 2006) – The New Front Office: A Whole New View For Joint Strike Fighter Pilots. Describes the new cockpit and its related technologies.

• Vision Systems International – F-35 Gen II HMDS. Helmet Mounted Display System.

• Siemens – F-35 Case Study. Involves their FiberSim product, which helps with the design & coordination of composite parts.

• Fighter Country – Hundreds of F-35 aircraft suppliers coordinate with Teamcenter

Official Reports

• US GAO (March 11/13, #GAO-13-309) – Current Outlook Is Improved, but Long-Term Affordability Is a Major Concern.

• Pentagon OT&E (Feb 15/13) – F-35A Joint Strike Fighter: Readiness for Training Operational Utility Evaluation [PDF]

• Pentagon OT&E (Jan 17/13) – FY2012 Annual Report: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter [PDF].

• Dutch Rekenkamer Audit Agency (Oct 24/12) – Uitstapkosten Joint Strike Fighter,” incl. links to full reports [all in Dutch].

Other Perspectives

• War Is Boring (Jan 1/14) – Is the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter the New F-4?

• Vanity Fair (Sept 16/13) Will It Fly? A long look at the F-35 program, and at issues with key components.

• ELP (July 19/13) – UPDATE – F-35 Gun Concerns. Links back to USAF Col. Charles Moore’s 2007 essay “The Need for a Permanent Gun System On the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter” [PDF], which includes analysis of front-line fighter gun use. An email from POGO’s Winslow Wheeler reiterates that the F-35A’s 25mm cannon has just 180 rounds, compared to the F-16’s 510 x 20mm or the A-10’s 1,174 x 30mm rounds, and references inherent gun pod accuracy issues from in Vietnam and Desert Storm.

• Offiziere.ch (March 6/13) – Jet Fighter Influence: How Lockheed’s Public Relations Efforts Keep the F-35 Sold. Offers a glimpse at Lockheed Martin’s lobbying beyond Washington, including mutually-referencing paid-for groups.

• US National Public Radio (Jan 3/13) – The F-35 Fighter Jet: The Cost And Controversy

• AOL Defense (Nov 27/12) – Will Stealth Survive As Sensors Improve? F-35, Jammers At Stake

• Aviation Week Ares (April 3/12) – JSF – SAR Discloses Another Three-Year Slip.

AN/TPS-75
(click to view full)

The US Air Force’s AN/TPS-75 radar has been in service since 1968. Threats have evolved, and they want to replace it as their main long-range, ground-based radar for detecting, identifying and tracking aircraft and missiles, then reporting them through the Ground Theater Air Control System. The US Marines are considering a similar move, to replace their own AN/TPS-59s. Hence the USA’s Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DELRR, pron. “Three Dealer”).

3DELRR is intended to provide up to 35 radars for long-range surveillance, air traffic control, and theater ballistic missile detection. It will correct AN/TPS-75 shortfalls by being easier to maintain, thanks to AESA technology, and by detecting and reporting highly maneuverable and/or stealthy targets. Its improved resolution may even allow it to classify and determine the type of non-cooperative aircraft that cannot or do not identify themselves – a trait that allows faster engagement of hostile planes, and reduces the odds of friendly fire incidents. As long as the program itself can avoid friendly fire from the USA’s budget wars.

3DELRR: Mission & Program

The FBO.gov solicitation for 3DELRR defines its purpose as follows:

“The primary mission of the 3DELRR will be to provide long-range surveillance, control of aircraft, and theater ballistic missile detection. The 3DELRR will provide air controllers with a precise, real-time air picture of sufficient quality to conduct close control of individual aircraft under a wide range of environmental and operational conditions. In the case of theater missile defense operations, the new radar will have the capability to detect, track, and disseminate target information to respective command and control nodes such as the USAF Control and Reporting Center to disseminate for warning and engagement. Similarly, the joint targeting process will benefit from trajectory information provided by the 3DELRR, which will include launch and impact location. The 3DELRR will correct current radar system shortfalls by providing the capability to detect and report highly maneuverable, small radar cross section targets as well as discriminate the type of a non-cooperative aircraft. It will also mitigate most of the sustainability and maintainability concerns which plague the current system.”

Once the Technical Development Phase was complete, the USAF initially intended to award the System Design & Development (SDD) to the winning team around 2011, but a combination of budget cuts and new procurement philosophies forced a shift.

(click to view full)

By September 2011, that shift had become pronounced. By March 2012, the entire acquisition plan had changed, all the way through development of the operational system (EMD), and initial production & fielding (LRIP). The design and development award didn’t take place until 2014.

2012: A Change in Plans Old Plan, New Plan

Click here for the full-size graphic of plan changes.

Instead of awarding a Technology Development (TD) Phase 2 contract to either Sensis or Lockheed Martin, with built-in options to take the radar all the way into production, a contract around the end of FY 2012 threw the competition open again, awarding 3 fixed-price TD contracts worth $106 million in total.

That fixed-price type contract approach continued in the next 2 phases, then a single contractor was chosen in the project’s 3rd competition, and given a contract to take the project beyond Milestone B into production and fielding. That winning choice was based on “lowest price technically acceptable” criteria, rather than “best value.”

In sync with that shift, one of the TD Phase’s goals was to understand the cost/capability tradeoffs. Most cost is always tied up in design, which is to say in specifications. The Requirements Analysis in SOW Para 1.9.19 tried to reorder or change specifications, in order to eliminate requirements that drive high costs but don’t change the radar’s capabilities enough. The Army saw the cost drivers as “Mobility, Accuracy, False Alarms, Surveillance Volume, and Range,” but they were prepared to be surprised by industry offerings.

That decision pushed the competition toward existing designs and technologies, given the need for assured costs inherent in a fixed-price bid. Northrop Grumman certainly hoped so, as they believe that their existing USMC G/ATOR battlefield radar solution could be upgraded to handle 3DELRR as well. The Marines could then take advantage of the program, replacing existing AN/TPS-59 radars with the same technology used by their shorter-range G/ATOR companion.

Once this new “TD Review E” was done, a final specification allowed final Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) Phase bids to be solicited from any qualified source, not just the TD Phase 2 winners.

These decisions were significant, because they opened the door for Raytheon to win.

The Milestone B decision to begin EMD development of the final 3DELRR system didn’t take place until Q1 FY 2015, and was delayed by a GAO protest. The Critical Design Review is expected in after a winner has been picked, instead of at the end of a single-contractor TD Phase.

The single EMD winner is expected to continue development into the end of 2017 (Q1 FY 2018), and the fall Milestone C decision that authorizes Low-Rate Initial Production. A new twist was introduced in early 2013 as the program office went beyond the EMD-LRIP scope of its RFP, and added a full rate production option that could raise the program’s value to $1.3 billion in total sales over the next 10 years.

Initial Operational Capability with the USAF is now tagged at fall 2019 (Q1 FY 2020).

Contracts and Key Events

Unless otherwise noted, contracts for the 3DELRR program are awarded by the Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA.

2014 – 2015

Raytheon Wins; GAO challenge.

May 13/15: Raytheon has further complicated the Air Force’s $1 billion 3DERLL radar program by appealing a federal judge’s decision last week to allow the Air Force to re-evaluate bids. The company previously filed a lawsuit when the Air Force tried to re-open the competition as a result of challenges by competitors Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin.

May 13/15: Raytheon suffered a setback this week, with a federal judge freeing the Air Force to re-evaluate bids for the 3D Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DERLL), with the company initially winning the lucrative contract in October last year. Raytheon filed a lawsuit against the Air Force when it tried to open up the competition through re-evaluating its original decision, with competitors Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman protesting the initial contract award. The value of the program could reach $1 billion, with the Air Force planning to buy sixty of the new radar systems.

Jan 21/15: Air Force Reconsiders.
Reuters quoted a source indicating that the Air Force was to take some form of corrective action in a renewed consideration.

Oct 21-22/14: GAO Protests. The USAF confirms that Northrop Grumman has formally issued a protest against the USAF’s 3DELRR award to Raytheon. The next day, Lockheed Martin confirms that they are also filing a protest.

That halts the program until the challenge receives a ruling, which could take up to 100 days. In order to succeed, the challengers need to show that either Raytheon’s radar isn’t technically acceptable, that it wasn’t the lowest priced – or that something in the process went awry, ensuring that that competitors were treated differently or criteria weren’t applied fairly. Sources: See DID’s GAO Primer | Defense News, “Northrop Challenges 3DELRR Contract Award” | Reuters, “UPDATE 1-Lockheed Martin challenges contract to Raytheon”.

Oct 6/14: Raytheon wins. Raytheon is on quite the radar streak lately, adding the USAF’s 3DELRR to its naval AMDR win. Raytheon IDS in Sudbury, MA receives a $19.5 million fixed-price-incentive-firm contract for 3DELRR’s initial EMD (engineering, manufacturing and development) phase. This base contract includes the purchase of 3 radar systems, and $11 million in FY 2014 USAF RDT&E budgets are committed immediately. Options could bring the total initial EMD contract to $71.8 million for 6 radars, plus product support.

Production orders for the other 29 can follow after that, but it’s also worth noting that 3DELRR is one of the first programs under the DoD’s Better Buying Power initiative to be designed for exportability.

Raytheon’s 3DELRR solution is a C-band radar that builds on their investments in gallium nitride (GaN) electronics, which offer better performance than conventional GaAs circuits at similar power levels. While radars like UHF/VHF are emphasized for detection of stealthy targets within the atmosphere, Raytheon says that they picked the C-band for “increased flexibility because that portion of the spectrum is relatively uncongested.” It should work fine against ballistic missiles, and the ability to avoid spectrum frequency conflicts with potential export customers may also become a selling point.

Work will be performed at Sudbury, MA and Andover, MA and the current contract award is expected to be complete by Oct 31/18. Their sub-contractor Saab Defense (formerly Sensis) will also benefit, and will add about 100 jobs at its DeWitt, NY facility. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition, with 3 offers received by the USAF Life Cycle Management Center’s Theater Battle Control Division at Hanscom AFB, MA (FA8730-15-C-0004). See also Raytheon, “Raytheon awarded contract to build new U.S. Air Force radar” | Syracuse.com, “Raytheon, Saab Defense of DeWitt win U.S. Air Force radar contract worth up to $1.3 billion”.

Raytheon wins EMD

FY 2012-2013

TD Phase 2. EMD-LRIP-FRP RFP; Demonstrations by Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon. ATREX Twilight zone…
(click to view full)

Aug 26/13: NGC. Northrop Grumman announces that they completed their 3DELRR demonstration back in July. They refer to it as “The U.S. Air Force system variant of the Department of Defense AN/TPS-80 radar…” but unlike the USMC’s current G/ATORs, this S-band radar uses Gallium Nitride transmit/receive modules. That technology is in the USMC’s plans, and the development work may pay off for the Marines, just as all the work on the USMC’s TPS-80 G/ATOR would offer dividends to the USAF.

As one might expect, given their design’s lineage, Northrop Grumman also touts “successful system ambient air cooling under extremely hot operating conditions,” as well as the radar’s well-developed system self-test and calibration capabilities. Sources: Northrop Grumman Aug 26/13 release.

July 29-30/13: Lockheed & Raytheon. Lockheed Martin and Raytheon announce that they’ve completed their 3DELRR radar demonstrations.

Lockheed Martin’s radar detected required targets of opportunity launched from the Syracuse airport and surrounding areas. They even hired additional test aircraft, in order to perform more advanced performance detection and tracking scenarios.

Raytheon’s C-band offering with GaN-based electronics was put through the same basic tests, and also demonstrated integration into the Air Force’s next-generation Command and Control system. Gallium Nitride electronics can get more performance from the same power inputs, which is an exceptionally helpful feature for radars. The flip side is that they cost more than conventional Gallium Arsenide electronics. Raytheon has made significant investments in GaN, and hopes to reap a competitive advantage by moving farther down the cost curve and higher up the performance curve than its rivals. Sources: Lockheed Martin July 29/13 release | Raytheon July 30/13 release.

March 29/13: Iterating through drafts. The program office is requesting participating contractors to review draft Revision F of their Technical Requirements Document (TRD), which supports Revision B of the draft RFP introduced in January. Sections L and M of this latest revision, reflecting instructions to offerors and evaluation factors for award, respectively, will be posted later. The TRD is available for parties under a Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement. So far, this looks in line with the plan they announced 2 months ago. FBO.gov.

March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” for 2013. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish.

For 3DELRR, the GAO estimates the total program cost at $FY13 2.1131 billion: $771.1 million RDT&E, plus $1.3421 billion for 35 systems and associated gear. The program still hopes to start system development by December 2013 (Q1 FY 2014), with Full Operational Capability still scheduled for late 2019 (Q1 FY 2020).

Cost & schedule estimates

March 27/13: NGC. Northrop Grumman touts a recent demonstration, in which a G/ATOR radar with some software modifications tracks 5 NASA ATREX suborbital rockets fired from Wallops Island, VA. The rockets release chemical tracer clouds into the high altitude jet stream, in order to exercise mind control through tinfoil hats help scientists study the jet stream’s flow 60-65 miles above the earth.

Northrop Grumman is touting G/ATOR’s ability to evolve into 3DELRR’s requirements (q.v. Readings), and this announcement is part of that campaign. The question that Northrop Grumman wouldn’t/ couldn’t answer for us involves whether the radar tracked the rockets as they were launched and boosting (easier technical problem, classic counterfire/ air defense, and Wallops is also a major radar test site), or picked up the rockets in mid-flight at high altitude (harder/ higher-power problem, classic BMD). NGC | NASA.

Jan 24/13: Draft RFP reshaped. In Industry Day briefing materials [PDF], program manager Lt. Col. Brian McDonalds explains that the scope of RFP R2278 (first released in June 2012) now includes Full Rate Production. With this new approach, the EMD+FRP RFP is expected to be finalized by July 2013, with an award in March 2014.

This resets the counter on draft revisions, with the most current material again dubbed Revision A. FRP would be contracted as Fixed Price Incentive Firm (FPIF) with 6 priced options. 3 radars would be delivered during EMD, 3 others during LRIP (FY18-FY20), and 29 at the full rate pace (FY19-FY24). Requirements are expressed in TRD Rev E, another iteration to Ref F is expected by the time the request is final.

The program office acknowledges that funding remains uncertain, and that there’s a lot of work ahead in order to finalize the new RFP terms without blowing the schedule.

August 20/12: TD Phase 2. All 3 firms receive firm-fixed-price contracts for continued 3DELRR technology development, and a Preliminary Design Review and Capability Demonstration for their radar prototypes. The contracts run until Nov 20/13.

Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Liverpool, NY receives $36 million (FA8707-12-C-0018).

Northrop Grumman’s Electronic Systems Division in Linthicum Heights, MD receives $34.8 million (FA8707-12-C-0019). NGC release.

Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Sudbury, MA receives $35.2 million (FA8707-12-C-0020).

Sensis is no longer part of the competition as a lead, but Raytheon had been producing their AESA, so they could be included in the Raytheon team.

TD Phase 2

June 20/12: EMD-LRIP RFP. Air Force Materiel Command posts solicitation R2278 for the next stage of the program.

March 6/12: New approach. At an Industry Day, the 3DELRR program lays out its new program approach. It’s driven by $80 million in budget cuts over the next 5 years and, they say, by the readiness of current technologies. The 3DELRR Program Office is planning for a Defense Acquisition Board in late April 2012, and an initial set of contracts to develop AESA radars with Gallium Nitride transistors is expected by the end of FY 2012.

The 3DELRR program has also been selected as a “designated system” to participate in the Defense Exportability Features Pilot Program. Focusing on exportability tends to keep costs down, and successful exports will produce both economic and military benefits. See details, above. FBO.gov, incl. Presentation [PDF] | USAF.

New plan

FY 2009-2011

Technology Development; Review is positive. Sensis prototype
(click to view full)

April 2011: Tech review. An independent review team reports that 3DELRR successfully demonstrated its 8 critical technologies in a relevant environment during its initial prototyping effort. That’s a good sign; many Pentagon weapons programs don’t get to this point until late in System Design & Development/ EMD. Source: GAO.

Jan 6/11: Sensis. Sensis Corp. announces that its 3DELRR full-scale prototype have successfully completed testing, achieving all TD phase milestones after a development period of 19 months.

Sensis founder and CEO Jud Gostin was the principal system architect for the Marines’ AN/TPS-59. Raytheon IDS is responsible for the development and production of the team’s Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA). Moog Inc.’s Space and Defense Group, a leader in precision motion control solutions, is producing, testing and integrating the team’s 3DELRR’s motion control subsystems.

Jan 21/11: The USAF offers a program update:

“The Air Force plans to buy 35 new radars to replace the existing TPS-75s. As the 3DELRR is intended to be a joint materiel solution, the Marine Corps is also contributing to its development and looking at the system for future production buys. In fact, the earliest origins of the 3DELRR program can be traced back to the Marine Corps-led Highly Expeditionary Long Range Air Surveillance Radar (HELRASR) that was discontinued in the Fiscal Year 2008 budget cycle.

In February, two 20-month contracts for the initial technology development phase of the 3DELRR, which were awarded to Lockheed Martin Corp. and Sensis Corp., will conclude…. “We anticipate release of the RFP to occur at or near the end of March 2011,” said Major McDonald. “It will be a full and open competition with a single contract award…. if the government elects to exercise all options, the value could approach $740 million.”

Sources: USAF, “Long-range radar program moving forward”.

Dec 16-17/10: LMCO. Lockheed Martin completes the 2nd and final demonstration under its May 2009 3DELRR contract, following an initial demonstration of critical technology elements in March 2010, and a Preliminary Design Review in October 2010.

During the demonstration, Lockheed Martin unveils a functioning system prototype to USAF and Marine Corps officials, to prove the radar’s maturity. The firm says that their radar “addresses 100 percent of 3DELRR requirements, including critical extended air surveillance reach for early warning from threats, such as aircraft and ballistic missiles.” Lockheed Martin.

Dec 21/09: Sensis. Sensis announces that it has completed the System Requirements Review (SRR) for the US Air Force’s 3DELRR program. During SRR, the U.S. Air Force, along with industry organizations, conducted a comprehensive review of the Sensis 3DELRR systems engineering, integration and test processes against overall systems requirements to ensure that the program meets U.S. Air Force requirements.

Oct 29/09: RFP. The Air Force launches the THREE-DIMENSIONAL EXPEDITIONARY LONG-RANGE RADAR Solicitation Number: R2278 formal solicitation for 3DELRR.

3DELRR: LMCO concept
(click to view full)

May 12/09: The US Air Force awards [PDF] a firm-fixed-price $24.9 contract to Lockheed Martin in Liverpool, NY to provide radar engineering and design support to the government during the technology development phase of 3DELRR program. The Lockheed Martin team includes BAE Systems, Computer Sciences Corp., and ManTech. At this time, $9.9 million has been obligated (FA8722-09-C-0003). See also Lockheed Martin release.

May 12/09: The US Air Force awards [PDF] a $21.9 million firm-fixed-price contract to Sensis Corp. in East Syracuse NY to provide radar engineering and design support to the government during the technology development phase of 3DELRR program. The Sensis team includes Raytheon and Moog. At this time, $9.9 million has been obligated (FA8722-09-C-0001). See also: Sensis news release.

TD contracts

Additional Readings

Readers with corrections, comments, or information to contribute are encouraged to contact DID’s Founding Editor, Joe Katzman. We understand the industry – you will only be publicly recognized if you tell us that it’s OK to do so.

• US FBO.gov (Oct 29/09, #R2278) – Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar. Very long-running solicitation, last update was March 2013. See esp. the March 2012 Industry Day slide presentation [PDF].

• USAF Electronic Systems Center – Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar [dead link].

• GlobalSecurity.org – Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar.

• Lockheed Martin – Three Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DELRR).

• Northrop Grumman – Three-Dimensional Long-Range Radar (3DELRR) See also this 2012 snapshot re: G/ATOR for 3DELRR.

• Raytheon – Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DELRR).

• Microwave Journal (July 2009) – Lockheed Martin to Develop Long-range Radar for US Air Force.

The US Navy has selected Northrop Grumman's voyage management system (VMS), version 9.3, for installation onboard SSN and SSGN nuclear powered submarines.