Defense Industry Daily

Aerosonde 4.7 from
M80 Stiletto
(click to view full)

It has been a great week for Textron subsidiary AAI. At the end of February, they made a big breakthrough in the US military market, as their Aerosonde-G UAV became 1 of 3 platforms eligible to compete for up to $847 million in US Navy and its allied rent-a-drone contracts. Less than a week later, the firm is walking away with a $600 million sole win of US Special Operations Command’s MEUAS-II UAV services contract, displacing MEUAS incumbent Boeing and its ScanEagle.

The Aerosonde UAV is AAI’s most likely offering for MEUAS-II, but that can’t be confirmed yet…

RQ-7, Iraq
(click to view larger)

The only other candidate is AAI’s Shadow UAV, a runway-using drone in wide service with the US Army, USMC, and foreign customers. It can also be launched via catapult, the 200 version lacks the “go anywhere” deployability needed by special forces. A Shadow 400 variant can be recovered aboard ship, but required ship size may be an issue for Special Forces.

The previous MEUAS incumbent, Boeing’s ScanEagle, can be launched from naval platforms as small as Mk.V SEAL boats, from HMMWV jeeps, or from land-based sites, and is recovered using a portable Skyhook system. AAI’s Australian Aerosonde Pty Ltd. subsidiary makes their other UAS offering, and the Aerosonde’s catapult and net system means it can be launched and recovered from the same sorts of platforms as ScanEagle. Asked about this issue, AAI representatives could say only that:

“Before we can make any formal announcements about this award, we need customer approval. I will get in touch with you as soon as I can share more.”

If SOCOM has in fact chosen an Aerosonde model, the implicit endorsement of their award is another huge advance in the platform’s military competitiveness. Before 2012, Aerosonde had little presence in the global military market, and even their home country Australia had chosen AAI’s RQ-7B Shadow as its mid-tier UAV. With its technology validated by 2 huge American contracts, AAI’s Aerosonde UAVs can be expected to be a much more visible and competitive product in global tenders.

That’s good news for buyers, but less so for Boeing/Insitu’s ScanEagle. Their UAV has gone from the sole-source solution in 2 major American contracts, to forced competition in one and no position in the second. The firm’s ScanEagle UAV still has important advantages in its array of specialized variants, from sniper location to WMD/HAZMAT surveillance. Insitu has also stepped up with a larger RQ-21A Integrator UAV as a follow-on offering, and won a significant USMC contract with it. Even so, the MEUAS-II setback may leave Boeing and Insitu debating the need for further investment and upgrades in their core ScanEagle platform.

Contracts & Key Events

Mk.V launches ScanEagle
(click to view full)

August 9/18: Force Protection  AAI Corp., a subsidiary of Textron, is being contracted for the provision of force protection efforts in Afghanistan. The firm-fixed price contract has a value of $12.7 million. AAI will most likely use its Aerosonde as an advanced intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) solution in order to provide the US military with the capability to effectively execute a number of deployment operations and engineering support activities. The Aersonde is equipped for simultaneous day-and-night full-motion video, communications relay and intelligence in a single flight. It has an endurance of over 14 hours and can travel to a range of about 75 nautical miles. Work will be performed at Bagram Airfield and Kandahar Airfield, Afghanistan, and is expected to be completed by March 27th, 2019.

May 2/18: AAI Corp. is back in business Special Operations Command is contracting AAI Corp., Hunt Valley for the continuation of its MEUAS II-B services. The contract is valued at $120 million and provides for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) services on its mid-endurance unmanned aircraft systems. AAI Corp., a Textron subsidiary, so far has received similar contracts in 2012 and 2016. AAI Corp. manufactures the Aerosonde and the Shadow v2 UAV’s. Currently it cannot be confirmed which UAV will be chosen. However considering past purchases, one can assume that AAI’s Aerosonde will be the likely winner. The Aerosonde and the Shadow v2 are direct competitors to Boeing’s/Insitu ScanEagle UAV system.

March 6/12: AAI Corp. in Hunt Valley, MD won a 3-year Mid-Endurance Unmanned Aircraft System II (MEUAS II) contract to provide contractor-owned and operated intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance services in support of U.S. Special Operations Command. The value of the contract was approved up to $600 million, but actual spending will be based on task orders. The FBO.gov solicitation stated that:

“The required UAS ISR services require the contractor to conduct all planning, coordination, certification, installation, pre-deployment, deployment, logistics, maintenance, flying, and post-deployment efforts necessary to successfully conduct worldwide missions. The near real time feed of ISR product availability from 300 to 900 hours per site monthly into customer processing systems is required from world-wide locations. Offerors are expected to provide ISR using non-developmental contractor-owned and contractor-operated unmanned aircraft systems… Following contract award, the contractor shall deploy personnel and equipment to commence site operations within 120 days after receipt of order (ARO).”

Boeing’s ScanEagle had been operating under a 5-year MEUAS contract since May 2009, but the somewhat-imprecise wording of public statements and solicitations suggest that MEUAS-II will fully replace the old contract. Work will be performed in Hunt Valley, MD, and overseas. U.S. Special Operations Command Headquarters Procurement Division at MacDill AFB, FL is the contractor.

Americas

• The US Army is procuring protective netting kits in support of its MRAP vehicles. Navistar Defense will provide an unspecified amount of rocket propelled grenade netting kits as part of the awarded firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. The three-year contract with no option periods is valued at $29.58 million. The PG Net provides a lightweight solution used as an add-on protection on top of existing armor. It can be used to protect the entire vehicle or apply on specific locations where other types of armor are less effective. The mesh structure is not designed to stop the incoming RPG but to disable it by trapping it in-flight and thus preventing it from detonation. Navistar’s netting kit is similar to the Q-Net offered by QinetiQ. Work will be performed in Illinois and is scheduled for completion by August 4th, 2021.

• Raytheon is set to provide the US Air Force with technical support for its inventory of AMRAAM missiles. The contract modification has a value of $13.1 million and provides for technical services and analysis support. Over the years Raytheon’s family of AIM-120s has become world market leader for medium range air-to-air missiles. The AMRAAM’s advanced active guidance section provides aircrew with a high degree of combat flexibility and lethality. Its mature seeker design allows it to quickly find targets in challenging combat environments. Coupled with modern radars the missile’s guidance approach allows a fighter to launch and control many missiles at once, avoiding a dangerous fixation on one target. Work will be performed at the company’s location in Tucson, Arizona and expected to be completed by September 30th, 2020.

• The Navy is investing in a new Air Wing Training Facility. Straub Construction is being contracted to construct this new facility at Naval Air Station, Fallon at a cost of $16.8 million. The facility will be constructed using structural steel framing and a mix of reinforced concrete, including seismic upgrades. After its scheduled completion by August 2020, the facility will support a number of desk-style aircraft simulators where soldiers will train on platforms such as the Aegis combat system, the F-35 and E-2D. The facility will house F-35 Mission Rehearsal Trainers which are small scale simulators that use the same technology as ‘full-scale’ simulators but do not provide a full 360°-degree home display. NAS Fallon is home to TOPGUN and the virtual aegis combat system environment will train surface warfare officers to track and target air threats as part of the Navy’s general NIFC-CA capability.

• The Air Force’s OA-X trainer competition seems to gain traction again after a series of delays and mishaps. The Air Force plans to request proposals from a limited number of companies including Textron and Sierra Nevada Corp. The announcement follows the trainer experiment that was kicked off last year as means to study the feasibility of using an off-the-shelf platform as a low-cost solution for light attack and close-air support missions. Textron is competing with its AT-6 Wolverine and Sierra Nevada with its A-29 Super Tucano, jointly produced with Brazilian manufacturer Embraer. Earlier this year the second phase of the fighter experiment was cut short when a Super Tucano participating in the effort crashed near Holloman Air Force Base. One pilot died, and another was seriously injured. A formal solicitation is expected to be released in December, and a production contract will be awarded in the fourth quarter of FY 2019.

Middle East & Africa

• Reports suggest that the Iranian Air Force successfully overhauled yet another aircraft. IRGC military technicians spent about 25,000 man/hours of work on the French-made Mirage F1 fighter jet. The F1 performed its first flight in 1966. The F1 is built from aluminum alloy, with substantial use of honeycomb sandwich construction, and some use of steel and titanium. It is powered by a single SNECMA Atar 09K50 afterburning turbojet. The F1C was designed to be easy to maintain and quick to turn around between sorties. Iran acquired the F-1 after 24 Iraqi Air Force officers defected in 1991. After the airframes languished for years, the Iranian government commissioned a refurbishment and upgrade program named Project HABIBI in 2007. The Mirage now joins one overhauled American-made F-14 and F-5 jet, as well as 10 Russian-made Su-22s.

• Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) and Boeing are currently competing in being the lead vendor in one of Israel’s biggest defense procurement programs. The Israel Air Force is looking to modernize its fleet of tanker aircraft as means to maintain its air-superiority. IAI proposed to buy buying used Boeing 767 aircraft on the open market and converting them for airborne refueling of combat planes, however Boeing is reluctant to grant IAI permits to convert its planes to tanker configuration. Boeing has a clear interest in ousting IAI from the procurement program as it wants to push sales of its newly developed KC-46, which comes with a price-tag of $250-300 million. The Israel Air Force’s current tankers are used Boeing 707s converted by IAI in the early 1980s.

Europe

• The Bulgarian Ministry of Defense is issuing a tender for the general overhaul of two Mi-17 transport and four Mi-24V combat helicopters. The Mi-17 is a medium weight, single rotor helicopter. The aircraft construction primarily incorporates the airframe of a Mi-8 with the power train of the Mi-24, which provides an increase in performance and gross weight over the basic Mi-8. The aircraft is configured with 5-bladed main rotor system 70 feet diameter and uses wheeled landing gear. The multirole helicopter that can be armed with rockets, missiles and guns. The Mi-24V is equipped with a YakB four-barreled, 12.7mm, built-in, flexibly mounted machine gun, which has a firing rate of 4,000-4,500 rounds a minute and its four underwing pylons can accommodate up to 12 anti-tank missiles. The planned procurement has a total value of $22 million of which $6.6 million are earmarked for the Mi-17s and $15.3 million for Mi-24Vs.

Asia-Pacific

• Jane’s reports that the China Academy of Aerospace Aerodynamics (CAAA) can now offer an improved version of its Cai Hong 804C VTOL UAV. The particularity of this hybrid drone is the installation of 4 rotors on the tail beams attached to the wings, allowing it to take off and land vertically without the need for a track, or an ejection system. The updated vehicle features a redesigned composite airframe that boosts an increased wingspan, a maximum take-off weight of 60 lb. and a payload capacity of 8 lb. The UAV is equipped with an EO/IR ball turret that can detect and identify a tank-sized object at a maximum distance of 1.2 miles and 0.9 miles respectively. The UAV is equipped with an L-band datalink that enables it to transmit and receive data within a 62 miles line-of-sight distance, supporting a data transfer rate of up to 25.6 kbps for telemetry and 4 Mbps for imagery.

Today’s Video

• Watch: The opening of Aviadarts 2018

3BCT-101st, Iraq-
no Chavis turrets?
(click to view full)

Navistar subsidiary International Military and Government LLC (IMG) in, Warrenville, IL has won billions of dollars in MRAP program contracts, to produce several variants of its blast-resistant vehicles. The Category I MRUV vehicle’s role is similar to a Hummer’s, albeit with more carrying capacity and much more protection. That has become a staple for IMG’s entry, dubbed the “MaxxPro” by its manufacturer. Their collaboration with an Israeli firm who provides up-armored vehicles for the Marines successfully overcame lukewarm initial interest, but even successful survivors of Aberdeen’s tests where challenged to offer enough protection against the ERP class of land mines that began to appear in Iraq.

Nevertheless, the MRAP program became a production race – and Navistar did very well under those competitive terms. In the end the military’s desire for standardization of its fleets exerted something of a gravitation pull on the competition. A July 2007 order vaulted Navistar into 1st place for initial MRAP Program vehicles ordered, but the US Army is divesting many of its vehicles – creating opportunities for foreign buyers…

MRAP Competitors, Navistar Totals

Dash Ambulance
(click to view full)

Navistar ended up leading the initial MRAP competition, with the highest share of any competitor at 38.3%. Additional orders for Afghan-adapted vehicles ensure that this total has crept higher vis-a-vis their original competitors, but They’re still just one competitor among many, and beyond the MRAP competition, trucking rival Oshkosh’s M-ATV has now achieved very close production figures in the follow-on, single-award M-ATV program.

To date, Navistar has produced 7 MaxxPro variants under contract: the original MaxxPro, MaxxPro Air Force, the MaxxPro Plus with improved protection, MaxxPro ambulance (production orders were for the Dash variant), MaxxPro MEAP, the MaxxPro Dash for Afghan operations, and the MaxxPro Recovery Vehicle (MRV), for towing out stuck vehicles. The firm has also developed Cargo flatbed and Tractor (18-wheeler truck’s front end, but mine-protected) variants.

A number of these MaxxPro vehicles have also received independent suspension upgrades, in order to improve their off-road performance. The MaxxPro DXM upgrade kits are delivered through Boler’s Hendrickson subsidiary, and marry Hendrickson’s advanced engineered sub-frames, sway-bars, coil springs and shocks with GD AxleTech’s 5000 Series Independent Suspension Axle System.

Participants in the MRAP and related programs, and their vehicles, have included:

Manufacturer CAT I CAT II Notes Navistar MaxxPro
MaxxPro AF
MaxxPro Dash/ DXM
MaxxPro Plus
MaxxPro ambulance (Dash) MaxxPro
MaxxPro MRV recovery Top finisher in number of MRAP orders. BAE Systems RG-33
RG-33 SOCOM
Caiman
Caiman MTV RG-33L
RG-33 HAGA (ambulance)
Caiman
Caiman MTV-ambulance Won MMPV with RG-33L derivative. General Dynamics RG-31 Mk.5/ RG-31A2 RG-31 Mk.5E Partnered with BAE OMC, Canadian government CCC. Also received orders
before MRAP began. Force Protection (now GDLS) Cougar 4×4
Cougar ISS Cougar 6×6 Also received orders before MRAP began. Its Buffalo MRAP CAT-III is unique, and sole-source. Oskkosh Alpha
(w. PVI) Bushmaster
(w. Thales) No MRAP orders, but sole winner of related M-ATV program with its own
design. PVI Alpha
serve w. US Border Patrol Golan
(w. RAFAEL) Alpha failed MRAP testing; 2008 firm bankruptcy & fire-sale acquisition Textron M1117 ICV M1117 ICV Failed MRAP testing; no MRAP orders, but ASV variant widely ordered by Military Police and fire targeting units.

Based on awarded contracts, MaxxPro’s price per base vehicle is around $520,000 – $550,000. The vehicles must then be fitted with electronics, IED jammers, and other equipment. That can add hundreds of thousands of dollars to that base price, before they’re sent to the front lines. Announced production orders to date include:

• #001: 4 initial testing vehicles
  
• #002: 1,200 MRAP CAT I vehicles
  
• #003: 16 larger MRAP CAT II vehicles
  
• #004: 754 CAT I
  
• #005: 1,000 CAT I
  
• #006: 1,500 CAT I
  
• #007: 743 CAT I
  
• #008: 4 CAT I – not publicly announced
  
• #009: 822 CAT I MaxxPro Dash
  
• #010: 400 CAT I MaxxPro Dash
  
• #014: 1,050 CAT I MaxxPro Dash DXM with improved suspensions. Modification added 1,222 DXM retrofits.
  
• #015: 250 MaxxPro MRV recovery/tow variants
  
• #016: 175 CAT I MaxxPro Dash DXM with ECP I/II
  
• #018: 250 MaxxPro Dash Ambulance with DXM and ECP IV
  
• #019?: 471 MaxxPro Dash DXM with ECPs
  
• #020: ISS retrofit kits: 650 DXM Plus
  
• #021: 140 MaxxPro MRV recovery/tow variants
  
• #023: Full “rolling chassis” retrofits: 2,717

Total production is currently 8,779 vehicles. Beyond American buys, Navistar informs DID that their production totals include a 2009 order from Singapore for 15 MaxxPro Dash vehicles, and they have also announced a May 2010 order for a pool of 80 MaxxPro Dash vehicles to support “coalition forces” in Afghanistan, which has reportedly included Albania, Croatia, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Solvakia, and South Korea.

As the USA withdrew from Iraq and Afghanistan, they decided not to keep many of their MRAP vehicles. Quite a few Oshkosh M-ATVs and Navistar MaxxPros will still remain in the force, but many MRAPs of all types won’t remain. The question is where they end up. Some have been destroyed outright, in order to avoid paying to ship them home. A number of MRAPs, including MaxxPros, have been diverted to local government organizations in the USA. Giving mine-protected, heavily armored vehicles to entities like school districts and non-violent towns of under 10,000 people has caused no small amount of controversy, and citizen protests have even forced a small handful of local governments to cancel these “1033 program” giveaways, which are not centrally tracked or accounted for. Other MRAPs have been given or sold to foreign operators, reportedly including:

• Croatia: 40
  
• Hungary: 42
  
• Jordan: 100
  
• Pakistan: 22 deployed, 160 requested
  
• Slovakia: ??
  
• UAE: 3,375 requested

A Note on MRAPs

DID refers to the MaxxPro as the top finisher in the MRAP competition, despite greater sales by Oshkosh’s M-ATV (MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle).

That’s because the M-ATV wasn’t part of the initial MRAP program; instead, it’s a follow-on competition that aimed to bridge the gap to the future JLTV winner. Navistar’s MaxxPro competed, but Oshkosh won, and their M-ATV was also very popular. In June 2010, its order totals narrowly surpassed the Navistar MaxxPro’s. DID defines “MRAP orders” as orders placed under the original MRAP multi-vendor contracts, however, and considers the single-vendor M-ATV competition to be a separate but related effort.

MaxxPro Contracts & Key Events

MaxxPro MRV
(click to view full)

Unless otherwise specified, all contracts are issued to Navistar subsidiary International Military and Government LLC (now Navistar Defense LLC) in Warrenville, IL. Unless otherwise noted, the Marine Corps Systems Command in Quantico, VA buys MRAP vehicles on behalf of 2008 requests from the US Army (12,000 by 2008), USMC (2,225), Air Force (558), Navy (544), SOCOM (344), and production verification testing (100). Those numbers rose further, via additional awards in 2010 and 2011, but the US military

2018

August 8/18: More protection needed The US Army is procuring protective netting kits in support of its MRAP vehicles. Navistar Defense will provide an unspecified amount of rocket propelled grenade netting kits as part of the awarded firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. The three-year contract with no option periods is valued at $29.58 million. The PG Net provides a lightweight solution used as an add-on protection on top of existing armor. It can be used to protect the entire vehicle or apply on specific locations where other types of armor are less effective. The mesh structure is not designed to stop the incoming RPG but to disable it by trapping it in-flight and thus preventing it from detonation. Navistar’s netting kit is similar to the Q-Net offered by QinetiQ. Work will be performed in Illinois and is scheduled for completion by August 4th, 2021.

2015 – 2017

Afghan National Security Forces Contract

March 12/17: Navistar has been contracted more than $475 million by the US Contracting Command in order to produce and support 40 armored vehicles for Pakistan and to upgrade 1,085 armored vehicles for the United Arab Emirates. The vehicles destined for Pakistan later this year are the company’s MaxxPro Dash DXM Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle which features an armored wheeled vehicle with a V-shaped hull to deflect mine blasts. For the UAE, Navistar will provide the long wheel base MaxxPro MRAPs which are being acquired by the UAE under the US Excess Articles program and will be delivered in 2018.

February 19/17: Navistar Defense has been contracted $35 million by the US DoD to provide 40 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected MaxxPro Dash DXM vehicles. The deal supports foreign military sales for the government of Pakistan and work is expected to be complete by the end of October 2018. MaxxPro Dash DXM vehicles feature a V-shaped hull to deflect IED explosions away from the vehicle and are built to withstand ballistic arms fire and mine blasts. Pakistan will use the vehicles to protect troops against attacks from jihadist militants and other insurgents operating between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

September 11/15: US firm Navistar Defense has been contracted to supply the Afghan National Security Forces with nearly 2,300 mine resistant, ambush protected (MRAP) vehicles, based on the company’s 7000-MV platform, according to a company press release. The US Army Contracting Command handed the company a $369 million contract for the vehicles, which will bring the total number of Navistar vehicles sent to the Afghan government to nearly 9,000. The company has also exported the 7000-MV platform to Iraq. The new MRAPs will reportedly serve in a variety of roles, including ammunition, fuel and troop transport.

FY 2013 – 2014

Export requests: UAE (3,375), Pakistan (160); Support and upgrade contracts.

MaxxPro & Lonestar
(click to view full)

Sept 26/14: UAE. The US DSCA announces the United Arab Emirates’ official export request for the refurbishment and modification of 4,569 used Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicles:

• 729 Navistar MaxxPro Base
  
• 283 MaxxPro MRAP Expedient Armor Program (MEAP) without armor
  
• 264 MaxxPro Base/MEAP capsules without armor
  
• 29 MaxxPro Long Wheel Base (LWB)
  
• 1,085 MaxxPro LWB chassis
  
• 970 MaxxPro Plus
  
• 15 MaxxPro MRVs (MRAP Recovery Vehicles)
  
• 1,150 BAE Caiman Multi-Terrain Vehicles “without armor,” which are based on the FMTV truck chassis. Note that the V-hull is not “armor,” it’s an intrinsic part of the vehicle.
  
• 44 Oshkosh M-ATVs; they would be added to the UAE’s existing order for 750.
  
• Plus Underbody Improvement Kits, spare and repair parts, support equipment, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical documentation, Field Service Representatives’ support, and other US Government and contractor support.

They’re being sold as Excess Defense Articles (EDA) from US Army stock, pursuant to section 21 of the Arms Export Control Act, as amended. Notification for the sale from stock of the MRAP vehicles referenced above has been provided separately, pursuant to the requirements of section 7016 of the 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act, and section 516 of the 1961 Foreign Assistance Act. The estimated cost is up to $2.5 billion, which isn’t all that far from the cost of buying new.

To date, the UAE’s biggest patrol vehicle fleets have been its own Nimr design (1,700 total), which has also been exported within the region. Its Oshkosh M-ATV fleet (750) was second. This request would completely change the force’s configuration by adding 3,375 MaxxPros and 1,150 Caimans, giving the UAE a patrol vehicle fleet that is overwhelmingly protected against mines as well as weapons of urban unrest.

The principal contractors will be Navistar Defense in Lisle, IL (MaxxPro); BAE Systems in Sealy, TX (Caiman); and Oshkosh Defense in Oshkosh, WI (M-ATV). If the sales are concluded, implementation will require multiple trips to the UAE involving “many” US Government and contractor representatives for 3+ years to provide program support and training. Sources: US DSCA #14-26, “UAE – Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicles”.

DSCA request: UAE (3,375 MaxxPros of 4,569 MRAP vehicles)

Sept 19/14: Pakistan. The US DSCA announces Pakistan’s official export request for 160 Navistar Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles. That would certainly be an easy delivery from Afghanistan, for Excess Defense Article vehicles that the US Army was prepared to blow up rather than paying to ship them home:

• 30 MaxxPro Base DXM
  
• 110 MaxxPro Dash DXM
  
• 10 MaxxPro Dash DXM Ambulances
  
• 10 MaxxPro Recovery Vehicles with protection kits
  
• spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and equipment training, U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistical and program support.

The estimated cost is $198 million. These vehicles would be added to 22 MaxxPros (incl. 2 MRV recovery vehicles) that were already transferred under the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund. The country’s years-long civil war involving the Pakistani Taliban will certainly provide Pakistan with opportunities to use these vehicles.

The principal contractor will be Navistar Defense Corporation in Madison Heights, MI. The proposed sale will require about 2 US Government and 24 Navistar contractor representatives in Pakistan for a period of approximately 18 months. They’ll perform inspections and deprocessing of vehicles upon delivery; provide assistance in installation of vehicle accessory kits; provide fault diagnosis and repairs; perform corrective maintenance, to include accident and battle damage assessment and repairs; conduct operator and maintainer training; and conduct inventories and maintain accountability of USG provided material. Sources: US DSCA #14-32, “Pakistan – Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicles” | Gannet Military Times, “Source: Pakistan already has U.S.-made MRAPs, new deal in works” (April 2014).

DSCA request: Pakistan (160 MaxxPros)

Sept 12/14: Ambulance upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $44 million contract modification to buy MaxxPro Long Wheeled Base Ambulance Medical Equipment Set A-Kits, MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade Kits, and Spring Suspension System Kits. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2012 and FY 2014 US Army budgets.

Work is expected to finish by Aug 31/15, and will be performed in Lisle, IL. The US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI manages the contract (W56HZV-12-G-0006, PO 0002).

July 25/14: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $27.6 million contract modification for kits to upgrade MaxxPro Dash and long-wheel base ambulances to their final configuration. $21.7 million in FY 2012 and FY 2014 US Army budgets are committed immediately.

Work is expected to finish by May 30/15, and will be performed in Lisle, IL. The US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI manages the contract (W56HZV-12-G-0006, PO 001).

Dec 23/13: Support. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $6.9 million contract modification for MaxxPro field service support in the continental United States and overseas. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 US Army O&M budgets.

Work is expected to finish by Dec 31/14, and will be performed in Lisle, IL and Afghanistan. Bids were solicited via the Internet, with 1 received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-10-C-0011, PO 0086).

Nov 4/13: Support. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $7.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, covering MaxxPro M1235A3 Dash MSU (MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade) engineering, logistic and travel support for the acquisition of the contract data requirements list, and program and logistics support. The contractor shall include MSU content as well as variation in vehicle content for both the objective gunner protection kit manned turret and M153 CROWS remote-controlled weapon turret. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 US Army budgets.

Work will be performed in Lisle, IL, with an expected completion date of December 2014. One bid was solicited, with 1 received by the US Army TACOM in Warren, MI (W56HZV-10-C-0011). Note that the exact same award was announced on Oct 31/13.

October 24/13: AUSA. At AUSA, DRS and Navistar are showing off their privately-funded MaxxPro MCOTM (Mission Command on The Move) conversion for unit commanders and staff, which was built in partnership with DRS and Allison. That partnership’s OBVP Transmission Integral Generator has given the vehicle tremendous electrical generation capability from its Allison 3000 series transmission, with 60kW+ available to power carefully arranged command stations and screens within. That kind of on-board power removes the need for an additional generator vehicle, and drastically cuts set-up time.

A similar MaxxPro MICP is also built for communications, but it’s more of a rolling server closet. It would replace the current semi-mobile command post that’s deployed in a HMMWV shelter, plus a trailer with generator when taken outside the wire. Putting that into 1 MaxxPro that looks totally “normal” from the outside, and needs no trailer, makes the target a lot less obvious to enemies. In places like Afghanistan, where 7 gallons of fuel are needed to deliver 1 gallon for front-line use, eliminating vehicles also cuts fuel costs substantially. Beyond MCOTM and MICP:

“The Navistar Defense team is already exploring uses for the MaxxPro as a maintenance truck to weld and fix vehicles in the field; adding mortars to the back of the vehicle to produce an Offensive Weapon System; providing the vehicle architecture to support an Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance control; and adding a water reservoir body for use as a Non-Lethal Water Cannon for controlling large thermal incidents, like forest fires.”

Obviously, the goal of these efforts is to promote both exports, and possible upgrade/ conversion contracts from the US military. An “MRAP 3 study” done in fall/winter 2012 has reportedly left M-ATV and MaxxPro blast-resistant vehicles in the enduring fleet, with about 2,633 MaxxPro Dash DXM troop carriers and 301 MaxxPro DXM ambulances kept. Adding MICP and MCOTM vehicles to appropriate units would provide both short-term conversion contracts, and more vehicles in service as targets for ongoing support contracts. Sources: AUSA interviews; NAvistar, “Navistar Defense Encourages Customers to Think Beyond the Standard Vehicle at AUSA” | DRS “U.S. Army to Test DRS Technologies’ On-Board Vehicle Power System for Consistent Equipment Power on the Battlefield”.

AUSA 2013: MCOTM, MICP, and other interesting variant ideas

June 18/13: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives an $18.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, increasing the funds available for the MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade to $152.3 million. FY 2011 & 2012 Procurement funds are being used by Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0404, PO 0013).

June 3/13: Report. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives an $8.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, multi-year contract modification, for MaxxPro field services representatives. The cumulative total face value of this contract is now $49.8 million. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI manages the contract (W56HZV-10-C-0011, PO 0071).

Jan 7/13: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $10.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for MaxxPro maintenance services.

Work will be performed in Lisle, IL; Yuma, AZ; Aberdeen, MD; and Afghanistan; with an estimated completion date of March 25/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-10-C-0011).

FY 2012

MRV problems. Survavibility upgrades.

MaxxPro, Farah PRT
(click to view full)

Sept 24/12: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense LLC in Lisle, IL receives a $138.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy MaxxPro Survivability Upgrade Kits, Vehicle Emergency Egress Windows, and MaxxPro support services.

Work will be performed in Lisle and Springfield, OH, with an estimated completion date of Sept 13/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0404).

Sept 19/12: Survivability upgrades. Navistar Defense, LLC announces a maximum $282 million delivery order to provide more than 2,300 survivability upgrade retrofit kits for their MaxxPro Dash MRAP vehicles, plus parts and service. Work for the survivability upgrade will be done in Afghanistan beginning in December 2012, and is scheduled to be complete by July 2013.

Navistar says they have now delivered nearly 9,000 MaxxPro units in 9 major variants to all customers.

July 30/12: Spares. Navistar Defense in Lisle, IL receives a maximum $8.6 million fixed-price with economic price adjustment contract from the US Army for MaxxPro spares. Work will be performed in Illinois and Kentucky, using FY 2012 Army Working Capital Funds. There was 1 proposal with 3 responses. The date of performance completion is July 29/13. The Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime in Columbus, OH (SPM7LX-12-D-9007).

July 13/12: RPG nets. Navistar Defense in Lisle, IL receives a $59.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for 1,357 rocket propelled grenade net kits, which means QinetiQ’s Q-Net. Work will be performed in Springfield, OH, with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/12. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0201).

March 13/12: A $21.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for “the long wheel rolling chassis upgrade with independent suspension on the MaxxPro [MRAP] and transportation fixtures.” Vid. Jan 9/12 entry for the full explanation; this the installation work associated with its January order to upgrade 2,717 vehicles.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, with an estimated completion date of May 20/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received, by US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-12-C-0130).

Feb 20/12: Sub-contract. Boler subsidiary Hendrickson in Kendallville, IN and GD subsidiary AxleTech International in Oshkosh, WI get a sub-contract from Navistar Defense, LLC, to equip 2,717 MaxxPro Long Wheel Base (LWB) MRAP vehicles with independent suspension systems, per the $900 million Jan 9/12 contract.

Deliveries began in January 2012, and will be completed in October 2013. GD release.

Jan 24/12: A $109.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 650 MaxxPro DXM Plus kits. Orders #002-008 add up to 5,217 vehicles. These kits, plus the “rolling chassis” order, add up to 3,367 retrofits.

Work will be performed at the MRAP Sustainment Facility in Kuwait, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2012. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0020).

Jan 17/12: DOT&E – MRV issues. The Pentagon releases the FY2011 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The MaxxPro Dash ISS and MaxxPro MRV are both included, but get very different grades. While the MRV towing and recovery vehicle passed blast and live fire testing:

“…the Navistar MRV is not operationally effective and not operationally suitable for recovery operations on cross-country terrain. The Navistar MRV has poor mobility and poor combat towing to recover damaged MRAP vehicles in Afghanistan. The vehicle could not maneuver in soft sandy soil and had difficulty accelerating on hilly terrain. The Navistar MRV demonstrated 271 MMBOMF [Mean Miles Between Operational Mission Failure] versus its operational requirement of 600 MMBOMF. These problems should have been resolved… prior to the [Limited User Test]. The Navistar MRV is [only] capable of recovering and towing damaged MRAP vehicles on flat improved roads.”

The MaxxPro Dash ISS, on the other hand, is declared to be both operationally effective and reliable. Its figure of 1,259 MMBOMF was way above its operational requirement of 600.

Jan 9/12: An $879.9 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for the procurement of 2,717 MaxxPro “rolling chassis”; 10 engineering change proposals; and 25 contract data requirements lists, for MaxxPro MRAPs.

This is the 3rd step in commonizing the MaxxPro fleet. The first step was the addition of DXM independent suspension in February 2009, which has appeared on all orders after #0014. It was followed in March 2010 by 1,222 DXM retrofit kits. Now, the rolling chassis is the 3rd step, which upgrades most of the earlier MaxxPros with the latest vehicle capabilities. We asked Navistar, who explained that “rolling chassis” replaces the chassis base, adding the DXM independent suspension, a new MaxxForce 9.3 engine, and a 570 amp alternator and driveline. The crew cab is essentially lifted off the old chassis, and bolted on to a new one.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2013. All funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (M67854-07-D-5032, DO #0023).

Jan 9/11: Oshkosh control fight. Icahn’s proxy skirmish at Oshkosh turns into a war, with hard-hitting submissions to shareholders from both Icahn’s group and Board slate, and from Oshkosh’s existing management and Board. If Icahn gets his Board slate elected, spinoffs and a merger of Oshkosh Defense with Navistar become far more likely.

In that scenario, it’s likely that the Maxxpro would take a back seat to the M-ATV in the future firm’s lineup. Oshkosh 8-K | Oshkosh management’s SEC DEFA14A filing (see esp. pp. 38-44) | Icahn Group DFAN14A arguments.

Dec 20/11: A $133.7 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract for 514 field service representatives to support Navistar’s MRAPs. Queries to Navistar confirmed the contract’s size, and their response noted that it included supplies as well as personnel.

Work will be performed in Afghanistan and Kuwait (94%) and the United States (6%), and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/12. FY 2012 operations and maintenance appropriation funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0022).

Dec 19/11: $9.6 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for MaxxPro MRV recovery vehicle contractor support, esp. re: the contract data requirements list (CDRLs).

Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be complete by the end of February 2014, but all funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. The original contract was competitively procured (M67854-07-D-5032, Delivery Order 0015 under Modification 16).

Dec 6/11: Navistar/Oshkosh merger? Billionaire Carl Icahn owns 10% of Navistar, and 9.51% of Oshkosh, so his comments that the 2 companies should merge draws a lot of attention. He tells CNBC:

“I definitely think it would be a good merger. I think there would be a lot of synergy. I own stock in both and I think shareholders of both companies would benefit.”

Both Boards of Directors are maneuvering defensively around Icahn. Navistar agreed to put its Board up for election each year, but agreed not to propose his own slate of directors at the annual meeting. Things are a bit more open at Oshkosh, where Icahn is proposing Board slates, and has been increasingly critical of existing management.

FY 2011

Independent suspension systems.

MaxxPro Dash DXM
(click to view full)

July 15/11: A $142 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 140 MaxxPro Recovery Vehicles (MRVs), plus sustainment, spares and support. That brings total MRV orders to 315. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of November 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0021). See also Navistar release.

July 14/11: Boler subsidiary Hendrickson, and General Dynamics’ AxleTech International, announce 2 contracts from Navistar Defense, LLC to equip 471 MaxxPro blast-resistant vehicles (vid. June 13/11 entry), and 250 MaxxPro Dash ambulances (vid. May 4/11 entry), with independent suspension systems. Their DXM solution uses AxleTech’s 5000 Series Independent Suspension Axle System, and Hendrickson’s engineered sub-frame.

Production work began in June 2011 at Hendrickson in Kendallville, IN, and AxleTech in Oshkosh, WI. Deliveries will be complete in September 2011. GD-ATP.

June 13/11: Navistar Defense:

“Navistar Defense, LLC today announced that it received a $357 million delivery order for an additional 471 International MaxxPro Dash vehicles with DXM independent suspension. The order from the U.S. Marine Corps Systems Command follows last month’s delivery order for 250 MaxxPro Dash Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) ambulances.”

Subsequent events indicate that this is probably delivery order #0019.

May 16/11: An $18.6 million delivery order modification for installation of ambulance engineering change proposals (ECP) and Dash Phase IV ECPs on the recent order of 250 ambulances. Work will be performed in Afghanistan, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0018, mod #0001).

May 4/11: A $183.3 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 250 MaxxPro Dash Ambulance vehicles, with improved DXM independent suspensions. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0018).

This is the 1st order for the ambulance variant, which was unveiled in October 2010 at AUSA (vid. Oct 25/10 entry). These Maxxpros will serve alongside the similar Oshkosh M-ATV ambulances in theater, and will be supplemented by BAE’s heavier 6×6 RG-33 HAGA MRAP. These vehicles are a component in the Pentagon’s broad ‘Golden Hour’ initiative, which aims to begin providing life-saving care within the critical 1st hour of major trauma. See also Navistar Defense release.

April 28/11: Navistar Defense, LLC in Warrenville, IL received a $13.2 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for field service representatives (FSR) in Kuwait, to sustain operation of the MaxxPro Dash MRAPs in Afghanistan.

Work is expected to be completed by the end of November 2011, but all contracted funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0017).

March 4/11: Navistar Defense, LLC in Warrenville, IL receives a $32.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order to buy MRAP Recovery Vehicle contractor logistics support for spare parts, basic initial issue tool kits and training support. Work will be performed in Louisville, KY (96%), and Warrenville, IL (4%), and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0015 Mod 005).

Dec 9/10: A $123.4 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 175 CAT I MaxxPro Dash vehicles with improved DXM suspensions, plus MaxxPro Dash Engineer Change Proposal (ECP) Phase I & II kits; and support items including associated unique base issue items for the fleet; and independent suspension system deprocessing parts kits. The order raises Navistar’s total orders for the MaxxPro family to 8,014.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of June 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 31/10 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0016). See also Navistar release.

Nov 19/10: A $252.8 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for 250 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected recovery vehicles (MRV) and contractor logistics support (CLS). Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the fiscal year on Sept 30/11 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0015).

A blast-protected recovery vehicle makes a great deal of sense, in an environment where a leading cause of disabled vehicles is IED land mine explosions. Navistar originally unveiled the MRV/ wrecker variant in February 2009, and had competition in this area from BAE’s RG-33 MRRMV. See also Navistar release.

Oct 25/10: Navistar Defense, LLC announces 2 new variants at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Annual Meeting and Exposition: the MaxxPro ambulance kit, and the MaxxPro Tractor variant.

The ambulance kit will fit into any MaxxPro variant, and include a litter assist system that helps load stretchers. The MaxxPro tractor, meanwhile, is not a farm implement. It’s the truck half of a blast resistant tractor-trailer rig.

Oct 7/10: The Romanian Ministry of National Defence announces that the first 8 MRAPs have just been supplied to the 811th “Dragonii Transilvani” Maneuver Battalion and the 812th “Soimii Carpatilor” Maneuver Battalion, deployed in Zabul Province, Afghanistan.

These are the first of 60 vehicles provided by the USA, and the lot reportedly consists of 20 new and 40 refurbished MaxxPro Dash vehicles, with improved DXM suspensions. Romanian MND | defpro | Jane’s.

FY 2010

Too many MRAP options? IP issues among contractors.

MaxxPro Dash
(click to view full)

Sept 23/10: A $9.9 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order modification (M67854-07-D-5032, #0011) for field service representatives (FSRs)/instructors/mechanic services outside the continental United States (OCONUS) to sustain operation of the Dash vehicles in Afghanistan, and FSR/instructors inside the continental United States for replacement center training in Fort Benning, GA.

Work is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011, and all contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10.

Sept 23/10: A $13 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order modification (M67854-07-D-5032, #0014) that pays federal retail excise tax on 148 MaxxPro Dash vehicles being used in the continental United States for training purposes. Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10.

Sept 17/10: A $25.2 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order modification for instructor and field service representative (FSR) support in the United States (CONUS), outside the continental United States (OCONUS); The objective of the FSRs/instructors is to sustain operation of the Dash vehicles in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Navistar will also send more FSRs and instructors to Mine Resistant Ambush Protected University and CONUS Replacement Center Training.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of September 2011 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0011).

Aug 24/10: The US Congressional Research Service releases the latest version [PDF] of its report “Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected (MRAP) Vehicles: Background and Issues for Congress. Excerpts:

“As of June 28, 2010, more than 8,500 MRAPs had reportedly been shipped to Afghanistan, with over 3,500 of those being the newer M-ATVs. The Army has recently said that it will begin development of yet another MRAP version – the “Ultra-Lite MRAP” – which raises questions about possible vehicle redundancies. The Marines, although voicing support for the M-ATV program, have retrofitted a number of MRAPs with new suspension systems and reportedly are satisfied with the results. This apparent success calls into question not only if the Marines need all of the M-ATVs allocated to them by DOD but also if the Marines’ retrofitted suspension system might be a more cost-effective alternative for the other services… Among potential issues for congressional consideration are the status of almost 5,000 MRAPS in Afghanistan that are reportedly not being used because of their size and weight.”

In terms of overall budgets:

“Through FY2010, Congress appropriated $34.95 billion for all versions of the MRAP. In March 2010, DOD reprogrammed an additional $3.9 billion from the Overseas Contingency Operations fund to MRAP procurement. Congress approved an additional $1.2 billion for MRAP procurement, included in the FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-212). The full FY2011 DOD budget request of $3.4 billion for the MRAP Vehicle Fund has been authorized by the House (H.R. 5136).”

June 29/10: A $13.4 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order, modification #03 under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0014) to buy spare parts related to the order for 1,050 improved suspension MaxxPros. These include suspension system authorized stockage list parts, prescribed load list parts, battle damage assessment repair, and deprocessing; the DASH engineering change proposal (ECP) Phase III upgrade; the remote weapon station system upgrade; and unique collateral material/BII. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of January 2011.

June 14/10: A $60 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for spare parts to maintain the DXM off-road independent suspension system that is being retrofitted to the entire fleet of 1,222 MaxxPro DASH vehicles. The new DXM systems are provided by Hendrickson Truck Suspension Systems and AxleTech International.

Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be complete by the end of March 2011. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0013).

June 14/10: A $17.2 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for Navistar field service representatives in the Central Command area of responsibility. Work will be performed in Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq, and is expected to be complete by the end of June 2011.

May 28/10: Stolen IP? ATS litigation controversy. Armor Technologies, Inc. of South Africa launches the “MRAP Ripoff” web site, and issues a statement, after 3 years of litigation with Navistar. The ancillary web site details the company’s claims, which are summed up via these chosen excerpts from its statement:

“ATS believes it was tricked into transferring unique knowledge, technology and IP about mine-protected vehicles (MPVs) to Chicago-based Navistar Defense, during their relationship from March 2005 to January 2007… At issue is ATS’ belief that it has been hoodwinked into providing critical knowledge and technology on MPVs to Navistar, which before the start of its relationship with ATS in March 2005 had no such expertise… Navistar later claimed in the International Court of Arbitration that Plasan Sasa was the origin of the MaxxPro vehicle, but its own staff admitted to the court that the same team that worked with ATS on the ATS Oryx design, had secretly worked on MaxxPro simultaneously. Navistar can’t have it both ways: either the company illegally shared ATS’ knowledge with Plasan Sasa, which also had no previous MPV expertise, or it acted in exceedingly bad faith in terms of its agreements with ATS – which it then [summarily] broke once it had what it needed: the wherewithal to build a world-class mine-resistant troop carrier… In the meantime, Navistar has won U.S. Government tenders and funding… awarded tens of millions of dollars in U.S. Taxpayers’ money, and it is receiving lucrative foreign orders… none of which would have happened had the U.S. Government heeded its own policy not to do business with defense companies involved in related litigation… ATS’ matter has been taken up by the South African government, which in March [2010] formally requested an explanation from the U.S. Government on the matter.”

May 3/10: A $102.3 million firm-fixed- priced delivery order modification under a previously contract will buy various MaxxPro kits and parts to support operations in Afghanistan. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2010. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10 (M67854-07-D-5032, #0013). Parts include:

• 937 gunner restraints
  
• 3,251 120V wiring harnesses
  
• 5,722 rear ramp hydraulics, rear ramp hydraulic – non-reoccurring equipment (NRE)
  
• 3,251 rear ramp storage
  
• 2,630 fire support systems kits, fire support systems kits – NRE
  
• 5,716 air conditioning circulation switches
  
• 822 heating, ventilation, and air conditioning kits

March 15/10: A $178.3 million modification to delivery order #0013 under previously awarded firm-fixed priced contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for 1,222 independent suspension system kits and aluminum catcher plates for MaxxPro vehicles. MaxxPros use the DXM independent suspension solution provided by Hendrickson Truck Suspension Systems and AxleTech International.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of March 2011. Navistar release

Feb 16/10: Looks like the new suspension system worked. Navistar Defense, LLC in Warrenville, IL receives a $751.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0014. This order will also be used to buy 1,050 MaxxPro Dash vehicles for Afghanistan, with the new DXM independent suspension solution provided by Hendrickson Truck Suspension Systems and AxleTech International.

Other improvements reportedly include door and insulation upgrades, as well as the addition of an inclinometer to act as a level and measures side slope during vehicle operation. The higher center of gravity involved with V-hull vehicles can make them tippy, so that’s definitely something for the driver to watch.

Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and the contract is expected to be complete by the end of August 2010. The work is expected to add back 400 jobs at the company’s West Point, MS facility, following multiple layoffs in 2009 that had cut staffing to 120. All procurement funds will expire on Sept 30/12. This contract was competitively procured (M67854-07-D-5032 / D.O.0009). Since May 2007, Navistar says it has received orders for a total of 7,494 MaxxPro MRAPs. Navistar release | Daily Times Leader | Aviation Week Ares.

Dec 29/09: A $7 million firm-fixed-priced contract for “CAT III technical labor hour” work to support for the design and development of “the Maxxpro Dash vehicle independent suspension system,” later revelaed to be the Hendrickson/Axletech DXM. Work will be performed in Warrenville, IL, and is expected to be completed by the April 30/10 (M67854-07-D-5032).

The MaxxPro isn’t alone here. Oshkosh’s TAK-4 off-road independent suspension system has recently been used to retrofit MRAP vehicles from BAE Systems and Force Protection, in order to improve their mobility in Afghanistan’s rough terrain.

Nov 9/09: Navistar announces a 4-year System Technical Support (STS) contract worth up to $78 million to provide engineering support for its MaxxPro MRAP. Navistar’s STS award includes work to improve vehicle reliability, support combat issues encountered in theater, add new kits and hardware, as well as provide new vehicle enhancements. The STS award includes up to 143,000 annual labor hours, as well as parts, to be used within 12 months, with the option to renew the contract for 3 additional years.

FY 2009

MaxxPro variants. M-ATV loss.

MaxxPros: Tawillah, Iraq
(click to view full)

Sept 09/09: A $48 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for procurement of MRAP OCONUS field service representatives (FSRs), OCONUS senior instructors, FSR instructor/mechanics, and various contract data requirements lists.

Work will be performed in the United States and Iraq and will be completed in September 2010. Contract funds in the amount of $48 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

Aug 10/09: A $7 million firm-fixed-priced modification under contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0010) for the procurement of engineering change proposals and tire chains in support of MRAP MaxxPro Dash vehicles. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of December 2009. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

Aug 7/09: A $7.8 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0006). It adds vehicle modifications (engineering change proposals), ambulance sustainment parts, and ambulance head clearance retrofit kits for Category I MRAP vehicles.

Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of December 2009. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

Aug 6/09: An $8.6 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for MRAP OCONUS (Outside the CONtinental US) field service representatives (FSRs), new equipment training instructors, CONUS FSR instructors, and senior FSRs.

Work will be performed in the United States and Iraq, and will end at the end of September 2010. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, at the end of September 2009. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

July 16/09: A $21 million firm fixed priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #009) for additional initial sustainment items in support of 882 MaxxPro Dash vehicles.

Work will be performed at the Red River Army Depot in Texarkana, TX, and deliveries are expected to be complete by Nov 30/09. Contract funds in the amount of $687,470 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

July 10/09: A $71.1 million firm-fixed- priced delivery order modification under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #006) for the procurement of battle damage assessment and repair (BDAR) kits for its MaxxPro Base and MaxxPro Plus vehicle variants.

Work will be performed at the Red River Army Depot in Texarkana, TX and deliveries are expected to be completed by Aug 1/09. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The new requirements are sole source additions to the original contract.

June 30/09: Navistar announces its disappointment at their M-ATV loss, while reiterating their firms’ strong points for investors. The firm did not enter a MaxxPro variant, choosing a derivative of the MXT Husky instead.

June 19/09: A $6.4 million modification to a previous delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #004) for the procurement of MRAP field service representative mechanics, back ramp retrofit kits, and several contract data requirement lists outside the USA. Despite the order’s size, the Pentagon release states that: “Contract funds in the amount of $7,291,171 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.”

Work will be performed in West Point, MS and in Iraq, and work is expected to be complete in August 2010. The base contract was competitively awarded, and the new requirements are sole source additions to the contract.

June 18/09: A maximum $42.9 million firm-fixed-price, sole-source contract for sustainment spare parts in support of Army MRAP vehicles. Contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/09, but the contract will run until Nov 9/09. The Defense Logistics Agency Warren (DSCC-ZG) in Warren, MI manages this contract (SPRDL1-09-C-0088).

June 1/09: A $44.7 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previously awarded delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for the renewal of Field Service Representative services in the Iraqi and Afghan theaters of war.

Work will be performed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the final deliveries associated with this delivery order are expected to be completed by Sept 30/10. The Basic contract was competitively awarded and the new requirements were sole source additions to the contract.

April 27/09: A $16.5 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #004), for field service representatives for the Mine Resistance Ambush Protected vehicles in theater, Contract Data Requirement Lists (CDRLs), and ECP vehicle modifications.

Work will be performed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the final deliveries associated with this delivery order are expected to be complete by Aug 16/10.

Feb 25/09: Navistar Defense, LLC unveils 3 new MaxxPro variants at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Winter Symposium and Exposition. The MaxxPro Wrecker MRAP vehicle is designed to retrieve damaged or mission-disabled MRAPs, winching them out of trouble and towing them away. Since breakdowns usually involve mined areas, a high level of blast protection is very important.

Navistar also added the MaxxPro Cargo, and the MaxxPro Tractor for towing trailers under full protection. All 3 utility vehicles are built on the company’s International WorkStar platform, with a MaxxPro Dash cab and MaxxForce D 9.3L I6 engine.

Dec 17/08: Navistar Defense LLC in Warrenville, IL received an $8.9 million modification under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #009) Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) upgrades for Enhanced Maneuverability and associated Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) costs.

In English, it buys initial spare parts support packages for MaxxPro Dash vehicles, which have been modified for use in Afghanistan. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of May 2009.

Dec 10/08: Navistar continues to pull away from its MRAP competitors, via a $362.3 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 400 more MaxxPro Dash vehicles, which have been modified for service in Afghanistan. Manufacturing under this previously awarded indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0010) will be performed in WestPoint, MS and work is expected to be complete by the end of May 2009. Navistar will complete delivery of all 400 units while the testing and evaluation of vehicles for the MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV) program is underway.

Navistar’s release adds that delivery of the September 2008 order for 822 MaxxPro Dash vehicles is set to finish at the end of January 2009, a full month ahead of schedule.

Dec 4/08: A $53.6 million firm fixed priced modification to delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004: 754 CAT I MRAPS for $413.9 million) for spares and equipment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support the renewal of Field Service Representative contracts within the CENTCOM area of responsibility. Work will be managed in WestPoint, MS, and is expected to be complete in November 2009.

Nov 14/08: The US government issues a pre-solicitation notice for a subsidiary competition called M-ATV, essentially an “MRAP Lite” bridge buy to the JLTV. FBO pre-solicitation #W56HZV-09-R-0115. The MaxxPro Dash is likely to be a prime contender for the buy(s), which begins an expected order of just over 2,000 vehicles but could reach up to 10,000.

A subsequent Defense News article places M-ATV’s top weight at 12.5 tons empty, adding that the RFP still demands significant protection against conventional and EFP land mines. That’s likely to help the heavier MaxxPro Dash, while putting competitors like Force Protection’s 7-8 ton Cheetah at a disadvantage.

The RFP was issued in December 2008. A draft issued on Nov 25/08 stated that M-ATV would receive the same top-priority DX production rating employed by the original MRAP program, adding that the first vehicles are expected to be fielded in the fall of 2009.

UPDATE: By Q2 2009, Navistar had submitted its choice – but it wasn’t their Dash, it was a variant of their MXT light truck.

Nov 7/08: Another $24.8 million for 2 firm-fixed-priced delivery order modifications under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) The modifications would add gunner restraints, and cover funding costs associated with accelerated MRAP Category I production. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS.

See Sept 4/08 entry for the $752 million order for 822 of Navistar’s lighter MaxxPro Dash vehicles, whose design has been lightened and modified for the Afghan front. On Nov 6/08, Navistar announced that by working around the clock, they were able to meet the military’s request to deliver all vehicles one month ahead of schedule. Originally scheduled to be completed by the end of February 2009, the company has leveraged its extensive relationships with its supply base to provide deliver all units by the end of January 2009. The firm delivered 70 vehicles on Nov 4/08 – 2 weeks in advance of its already aggressive delivery schedule.

That extra commitment isn’t free; the MRAP contract is structured to compensate manufacturers for their extra costs if the government needs vehicles faster.

Oct 29/08: Navistar Defense LLC (ND) in Warrenville, IL received a $56.4 million firm fixed priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0007) for engineering changes and spares to support MRAP Category I vehicles currently in theater. Delivery order #0007 covered 743 MRAP CAT I vehicles.

Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS, and is expected to be complete by the end of November 2008. This contract was competitively procured.

Oct 29/08: Navistar Defense LLC (ND) in Warrenville, IL received $8.3 million for a firm-fixed-priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0006) to fund additional Maintenance Workshop Blocks to support MRAP Category I vehicles currently in theater. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of February 2009. This contract was competitively procured.

See also Dec 18/07, June 19/08, and Oct 7/08 entries re: delivery order #0006, which was for 1,500 vehicles.

Oct 24/08: Defense News reports that more mine-resistant vehicles could be in the order pipeline. The U.S. Army and Marine Corps reportedly plan to rapidly develop and buy a fleet of lighter 7-10 ton vehicles that offer better mine resistance than Hummers, but better off-road mobility than MRAPs. Afghanistan is seen as an especial focus for these vehicles.

Oshkosh’s Sandcat and Force Protection’s Cheetah vehicle are mentioned as potential candidates for that bridge buy. Other competitors are likely, and Navistar’s MaxxPro Dash must also be placed in this category given recent the MRAP orders for deployment of this lightened variant to Afghanistan (vid. Sept 4/08 entry).

Defense News places potential military demand at 2,000- 5,000 bridge buy vehicles – assuming that issues with JLTV issues don’t lead to the bridge becoming the road. Navistar may be covered either way, however; its partnership with BAE won one of the 3 JLTV development contracts.

Oct 7/08: A $35.9 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0006 under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several engineering change proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009.

See also Dec 18/07 and June 19/08 entries re: delivery order #0006, which was for 1,500 vehicles.

FY 2008

DynCorp support. MaxxPro Dash.

Tire Kicker
(click to view full)

Sept 4/08: A $752 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order for 822 MaxxPro Dash MRAP CAT I vehicles, under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0009). Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete in February 2009.

Pentagon references to “production vehicles with engineering change proposal upgrades for enhanced maneuverability” refer to the MaxxPro Dash, a new variant which is optimized for Afghan operations. The Dash variant is 16” shorter and has an 8″ smaller wheel base, giving it a smaller turning radius of 54 feet. It’s also up to 5,000 pounds lighter, but can accept add-on armoring that will increase its weight. These changes, and the use of Navistar’s MaxxForce D engine, also give it a higher torque to weight ratio for better off-road operations. See also Navistar release.

Navistar already had a strong presence in Afghanistan, as the main truck supplier to the Afghan National Army. Despite earlier Pentagon comments that tagged the BAE OMC/ General Dynamics RG-31 as the favorite for Afghanistan, all vehicles in this MaxxPro order are tagged for Operation Enduring Freedom, and as yet there are no corresponding orders for other MRAPs. DID’s spreadsheet also shows that the 15,771 vehicle program ceiling is now maxed out.

July 4/08: An $84.8 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0004) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009.

Aug 1/08: A $29.3 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0007) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009. Deliver order #0007 involved 743 MaxxPros.

Aug 1/08: A $27.4 million firm-fixed-priced modification to a delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0002) for sustainment items needed to support Category I MRAP vehicles in theater. This order will also be used to support several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in West Point, MS and is expected to be complete in April 2009.

July 8/08: A $27.7 million firm-fixed price contract for MRAP spare parts. Work will be performed primarily in Springfield, OH and Springfield, MO as well as locations across the USA, and is expected to be complete by Jan 29/10. One bid was solicited on June 26/08 from the manufacturer (W56HZV-08-C-0522). Read Navistar’s “Army Awards Navistar Defense Seven Contracts For Parts And Support:
Contracts Total $125 Million for MRAP Support,” which adds:

“Navistar has shipped more than 185,000 parts pieces to the military for use in Iraq and Afghanistan and has more than 100 field service representatives in theater.”

July 7/08: A $56.9 million firm-fixed price contract for an assortment of automotive parts, including wheels, axles, air conditioners, engines, compressors, generators, and transmissions. Work will be performed primarily in Springfield, OH, with limited production in various cities across the nation, and is expected to be complete by May 4/09. One bid was solicited on April 2/08 (W56HZV-08-C-0494).

July 7/08: A $21.4 million firm-fixed price contract for wheels and pneumatic tires. Work will be performed in Trenton, NJ and is expected to be complete by Jan 30/09. One bid was solicited on June 25/08 (W56HZV-08-C-0520).

MaxxPro CAT I
(click to view full)

June 27/08: A $15.1 million firm fixed price contract for 1,426 air conditioner compressors [NSN 4120-01-555-5459] option priced at $556.11 each; 1,500 condensers for refrigeration [NSN 4130-01-562-3925] option priced at $1,653 each; and air conditioner blowers [NSN 6105-01-562-3922] option priced at $4,378 each. Riding in an enclosed vehicle through 100/40 degree plus heat, while wearing layers of heavy equipment, requires air conditioning as a matter of necessity. At present, 59% of the total condenser and blower options are being exercised, and are considered part of the base award when calculating the contract totals above.

Work will be performed at Dallastown, PA with an expected completion date of Aug 29/08. One bid was solicited with one bid received by the U.S. Army Tank & Automotive Command (TACOM) Life Cycle Management Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-08-C-0483).

June 27/08: Navistar Defence, LLC in Warrenville, IL received a $6.8 million firm fixed price contract for 2,000 pneumatic tire wheels [NSN 2530-01-555-5456, PN 2596798C91L]; 18 electric engine starters [NSN 2920-01-555-5458, PN 3610516C92[]; and 16 AC generators [NSN 6115-01-555-5460, PN 3819829C91].

Work will be performed in Trenton, NJ, and Belvidere, IL with an expected completion date of Aug 29/08. One bid was solicited with one bid received by the U.S. Army Tank & Automotive Command (TACOM) Life Cycle Management Command (W56HZV-08-C-0500).

June 19/08: International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, IL is awarded a series of contracts amounting to about $707 million.

The modifications cover both MaxxPro Category I MRAP support and spares, and also “engineering change proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities.” Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS under contract M67854-07-D-5032, and are expected to be complete August 2008. The contract modifications include:

• To delivery order #0002 (1,200 for $632.1 M), adds $29.5 million
  
• To delivery order #0004 (754 for $413.9 M), adds $84.8 million
  
• To delivery order #0005 (1,000 for $537.2 M), adds $146.8 million
  
• To delivery order #0006 (1,500 for $1.18 B), adds $211.6 million
  
• To delivery order #0007 (743 for $405.9 M), adds $234.3 million

June 10/08: A $28 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0005 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for the accelerated production of 1,000 MRAP Low Rate Initial Production vehicles.

Delivery order #0005 was for $509.2 million (now $537.2 million), and ordered 1,000 vehicles in October 2007. This is an infusion of funds to speed up production by covering added expenses like overtime et. al., rather than an order for another 1,000 vehicles. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and “work is expected to be completed by the end of April 2008.”

May 29/08: The Aug 14/07 entry notes that DynCorp had become Navistar’s in-theater MRAP support network. Now, a DynCorp International release confirms the figures involved:

“Navistar Defense LLC, a division of Navistar International, Inc., awarded DynCorp International (NYSE:DCP) a five year indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity Logistics Support Contract to provide field service support and training for its recently awarded Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle production contracts. DynCorp International’s Logistics Support Contract has a potential value of up to $500 million over five years with an initial award of $60 million to support deployments to Iraq.”

April 16/08: A $261.3 million for firm-fixed-priced contract modification under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for engineering change proposals to upgrade its MRAP low rate initial production vehicles. The government will procure several engineering changes to provide additional armor protection to increase the survivability of the MRAP Category I (CAT I) vehicles. The order also includes ambulance kits for the vehicles.

Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete in November 2008. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured. The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity.

March 14/08: A $405.9 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0007) for 743 Category I vehicles. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete November 2008. To date, they have received 5,214 orders under the MRAP program (5,198 CAT-I, 16 CAT-2), 36.9% of the vehicles ordered.

N.B. Amount corrected by DefenseLINK on March 18/08.

Jan 19/08: The NY Times reports that “a gunner was killed and three crew members were wounded” on this day in an IED land mine attack. The soldiers were riding in a MaxxPro MRAP. Read “Hopes for NY Times Reporting Questioned After MRAP Story” for more details.

Jan 10/08: Israeli firm Plasan Sasa announces a $200+ million order to supply Navistar’s International Military and Government, LLC with armoring systems for an additional 1,500 armored MRAP blast-resistant vehicles, to be delivered by the end of July 2008. The Plasan Sasa release says that this armor contract continues and builds on the US military’s June 2007 order for 1,200 MaxxPro vehicles, and notes their investment in US manufacturing facilities.

MaxxPro CAT-I, Iraq
(click to view full)

Dec 18/07: IMG had submitted a variant of its MaxxPro for the MRAP-II competition. It aims to field vehicles that can protect against EFP(Explosively formed Penetrator) land mines, which are more akin to instant tank shells being fired into your vehicle than they are to a conventional explosion. After initial tests, however, only 2 vendors received contracts for additional testing at Aberdeen: BAE Systems (RG-33) and the team of Ideal Innovations, Ceradyne, and Oshkosh (The Bull).

Dec 18/07: A $1.18 billion firm-fixed-priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0006) to purchase an additional 1,500 MaxxPro CAT-I MRAP Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) vehicles. This order also includes sustainment items needed to support the vehicles in theater, as well as several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of July 2008. This contract was competitively procured. Navistar release.

As this accompanying DoD release notes, the Marine Corps issued a number of MRAP orders on this day. Navistar’s IMG remains on top, and even widened its lead slightly. To date, they have received 4,471 orders under the MRAP program (4,455 CAT-I, 16 CAT-2), for 37.6% of 11,862 vehicles ordered.

Dec 7/07: The Rakkasans of the 3rd BCT, 101st Airborne Division in Iraq received 18 MaxxPro CATR-I vehicles. Sgt. Rian Terry, a welder in Co. B, 626th BSB, from Clarksville, TN:

“I like it. It feels safe with all the additional armor. It’s much roomier and easier to access equipment, especially with all your gear on.”

Pfc. Cedric Miller, a grenadier in Co. A, 1-187th Inf., from Blakely, GA, was more direct: “It’s an all-around good truck. We need more.”

American units preparing to receive MRAP vehicles send their maintenance Soldiers attend a 5-day, 40-hour course. During the course, drivers and vehicle commanders participate in both day and night, on- and off-road driving exercises, and obstacle course-like exercises where they maneuver through jersey barriers. Soldiers who complete the 40-hour training are operationally familiar with the equipment. It is up to the unit to make them tactically familiar.

Meanwhile, each battalion is assigned a field support representative and a team of mechanics to continue training the Soldiers. Having civilian representatives and mechanics at the battalion level gives the Soldiers subject-matter experts who are available during maintenance, but will allow the Soldiers to do the hands-on work. US Army

Dec 7/07: A $152 million firm-fixed-priced modification under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for Maxxpro “sustainment items” (spares) under the MRAP program. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete in February 2008.

Nov 28/07: A $24 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0004 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for procure field service representatives to provide support for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles in theater. Work will be performed in Iraq, and work is expected to be completed November 2008. Note our Aug 14/07 entry – this work will be done by Dyncorp.

Oct 30/07: $68.8 million attached to firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0005 under previously contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for Mine Resistant and Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicle sustainment items. The Government shall purchase MRAP University requirements including field service representative-instructors, instructional material, course outlines, and special tooling, and additional sustainment items. Work will be performed at Red River Army Depot in Texarkana, TX, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2008.

Oct 18/07: $509.2 million for firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0005 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for 1,000 MaxxPro MRAP CAT I Low Rate Initial Production vehicles. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete April 2008. This contract was competitively procured.

Navistar remains in the lead for MRAP orders to date, with 2,971 vehicles (2,955 CAT-I, 16 CAT-II) contracted to date, or 33.8% of the 8,746 MRAP CAT I/II vehicles ordered so far. Force Protection is currently in 2nd place with 30.9%, and BAE/Armor Holdings come in 3rd with 26.3%.

FY 2007

LRIP.

MaxxPro concept
(click to view full)

Sept 21/07: International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, Ill. received $7.2 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0002 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for field service representatives (FSRs) to serve in theater. The FSRs will provide support for MRAP Category I MaxxPro vehicles in Iraq. Work will be performed in Camp Liberty, Iraq, and is expected to be complete in September 2008.

Sept 13/07: International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, Ill. received a $71.5 million firm-fixed-priced modification to Delivery Order #0002 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for sustainment items and data requirements for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles in theater.

The US government is buying 1-Year Forward Deployment Blocks, 1-Year Maintenance Work Blocks, training, training materials, and several contract data requirement lists for International’s MaxxPro MRAP CAT I vehicles. Work will be performed in West Point, Miss., and the deliveries are expected to be complete in October 2007.

Aug 14/07: DynCorp International LLC announces that they have been selected by International Military and Government LLC to provide field-service support and training for its MRAP vehicles. This effectively makes them Navistar’s in-theater support network.

July 20/07: $413.9 million for firm-fixed-priced, delivery order #0004 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032), covering an additional 755 Category I (CAT I) Mine Resistance Ambush Protected (MRAP) Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) patrol vehicles. Work will be performed in WestPoint, Miss., and is expected to be complete by February 2008. Navistar release.

This contract places Navistar in the lead for MRAP orders to date, with 1,971 vehicles (1,955 CAT-I, 16 CAT-II) contracted to date, or 34.8% of the 5,621 vehicles ordered so far under the 7,774 vehicle MRAP program. Force Protection is currently in 2nd place with 31.7%, and BAE/Armor Holdings come in 3rd with 30.3%

MaxxPro CAT-I,
earlier version
(click to view full)

June 18/07: An $8.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0003 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for an additional 16 of the larger Category II MRAP JERRV squad vehicles. Note that this works out to about $530,000 per vehicle. Work will be performed in WestPoint, Miss., and work is expected to be complete by February 2008. The DoD release adds, mysteriously, that “Contract funds in the amount of $9,547,248 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.”

May 31/07: A $623.1 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #002) for 1,200 additional Category I (CAT I) Mine Resistance Ambush Protected (MRAP) Low Rate Initial Production vehicles. Work on the MaxxPro MPV contract will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by February 2008. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

Which leads us to the next question… will existing MRAP vehicles be enough? They may not, and ironically, International may have declined to submit an offering of its own that could have survived in the new environment.

Footnotes

fn1. A shaped charge ‘squishes’ and detonates when it hits, focusing the blast into a cone with a point that’s like a plasma torch – with a wallop behind it. The immense focused energy converges right on the armor, cutting through the steel and/or blowing chunks off the back in a spray of molten metal of fragments, killing the occupants and/or damaging machinery.

Cage armor can prevent some types of warheads from detonating, especially those with a piezo-electric ‘crush’ fuze. Those of you thinking that metal screens are not 100% certain to prevent warhead detonation, depending on the angle at which the piezo-electric crush fuze hit, and other warhead characteristics, are correct. In general, one can expect cage armor of any sort to turn only about 50-60% of rounds into duds.

The other option “cage armor” provides is to start that process away from the armor, so the shaped charge cone’s focal point is moved out in front of the armor it’s designed to penetrate. Instead of a precisely focused cutting/blasting point, you get an less focused blast. Depending on how big the warhead is, how far away the detonation is, and how strong the vehicle’s armor protection is, its occupants may or may not be saved.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Thanks to Navistar for working with DID to help verify vehicle totals.

• Navistar – MaxxPro Dash DXM.

• DID (Dec 16/13) – High Afghan Exit Costs Force US Military to Contemplate End of Era. Which includes getting rid of many MRAPs.

• DID (Oct 23/13) – Choices, Changes & Opportunities: Corporate Lessons from the Afghan R4D Exit. Understanding the difficulty helps to explain some aspects of subsequent decisions about the MRAP fleet.

• US Army (May 5/11) – ‘Golden hour’ initiative pays off in Afghanistan. Aeromedical units play a big role – but so does having nearby vehicles that can travel in dangerous areas, and carry initial medical facilities with them.

• Plasan Sasa (June 3/07) – Plasan Sasa Will Supply International Military and Government, LLC with Critical MRAP Vehicle Protection for the US Marines [PDF format]

• Navistar (May 31/07) – U.S. Marine Corps Awards $623 Million Contract for Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicles to International Military and Government, LLC

• Reuters (June 21/07) – U.S. Gen.: Iranian Weapons Still Flowing into Iraq. Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch: “What I try to do is stick to the facts. And I know that inside of my battle space, there are munitions clearly marked with Iranian markings, and I am losing many of my soldiers to EFPs… It is clear that the EFP technology and munitions is coming from Iran. We have to stop that.”

• USA Today (May 31/07) – MRAPs can’t stop newest weapon

• DID (Oct 6/06) – Dispatches from Afghanistan: Armored vs. Blast Resistant

• DID (July 21/06) – GD-RAFAEL’s Reactive Armor Equips US Military (updated)

Appendix A: The MRAP Story, and the MaxxPro Story

Dingo 2 (via CASR)

In 2005, military manufacturers began to plan for the end of the US military’s Hummer orders, and the associated battle to replace it with a new vehicle. By this time, land mines had already been the #1 killer in Iraq for some time, and a few manufacturers were also looking to break into the American market with solutions to this problem. The technology was not new; indeed, it had been in use for over 40 years. The US military had just been very slow to adopt it, aside from some limited orders the 101st Airborne had placed for South African RG-31 vehicles, limited purchases of Force Protection’s Cougar and Buffalo vehicles for Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams, and M1117 Guardian ASV armored cars for US military police units. Worse, the ASVs were produced in New Orleans. Hurricane Katrina interrupted production just as it was ramping up.

By 2006, 3 years into the war in Iraq, realization began to dawn that the Hummers and their blast-catching flat bottoms needed a supplement in theater now, rather than waiting for the Humvee’s successor. The US Army and Marines began taking a closer look at mine-resistant vehicles on the market, and key manufacturers began maneuvering for position.

The new Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected (MRAP) program would include a smaller Category I MRUV patrol vehicles that seated at least 6 people in total, including the driver and front seat. Category II JERRV vehicles would seat at least 10, and would be large enough to hold bomb-disposal robots and other useful gear.

The expected MRAP requirement quickly began to mushroom in size, as IED land mine attacks intensified on the front lines. A large July 2007 order came hot on the heels of US Secretary of Defense Gates’ request to Congress for an extra $1.2 billion in FY 2007 to fund an additional 2,650 MRAP vehicles, on the grounds that manufacturers were ramping up production more quickly than original forecasts. Meanwhile, key inputs such as steel and tires which might have become production bottlenecks were expedited under a DX rating that give the MRAP program priority over almost all other military programs. Sen. and VP-elect Biden [D-DE], who often heard responses re: lack of industrial capacity when he began asking why more MRAP vehicles weren’t in theater, found that his “put the money together, issue the contracts, and let’s find out” speech [MS Word], embodied in Amendment #739 to the FY 2007 military budget, became the US military’s go-forward plan.

Cougar at Aberdeen
(click to view full)

By the time the competition began Force Protection, whose v-hulled Cougar vehicles had catalyzed this realization with their performance in Iraq, was set with their Cougars for MRAP CAT I/II.

General Dynamics was already partnered with BAE OMC of South Africa and the Canadian government to offer the RG-31, which was already in service with airborne and SOCOM customers. Then they signed another deal with Force Protection to share production of Cougar vehicles.

BAE Systems was busy developing their RG-33 family, an update of their proven RG-31s that incorporated new technologies and lessons learned. Meanwhile, Armor Holdings, who supplied the US military’s FMTV medium trucks and up-armoring for its Hummers, worked on an up-armored design based on the FMTV. They would eventually be acquired by BAE in a multi-billion dollar deal, after establishing an MRAP order foothold for their “Caiman” vehicles.

Lacking ready designs or American plants, others chose partnerships as their path to market. Navistar’s truck-building competitor Oshkosh entered the fray with a pair of Partnerships, signing a deal with PVI for their new Alpha MRUV vehicle, and Thales Australia for the larger Bushmaster vehicle that was already serving with Australian forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Protected Vehicles, Inc. (PVI) also submitted the Golan, designed in partnership with RAFAEL and the Israeli military.

German firm KMW’s Dingo had also demonstrated front-line performance with German forces in Afghanistan, but their American partner Textron elected to offer their own M1117 instead, eliminating KMW before the competition had even started.

That left Navistar considering what to do.

MV 7000 as tanker
(click to view full)

Navistar subsidiary International Military and Government LLC (IMG, now Navistar Defense) didn’t have expertise in armored vehicles, but they did know trucks. The firm is used to substantial production numbers, and has a field maintenance network on the front lines. In addition to to being one of North America’s largest producers of civilian commercial trucks and mid-range diesel engines (161,000 vehicles in 2006), it is producing and supporting 2,781 vehicles for the Afghan National Army, and claims 9 additional contracts with the U.S. government for more than 1,000 units each. These contracts encompass include service trucks and buses that have been used in the Iraq reconstruction effort. Production facilities include Garland, TX; Springfield, OH; West Point, MS; Melrose Park, IL (diesel engines); and Tulsa, OK (buses).

The key for Navistar would be finding the right partner, with the aim of developing an armored MRAP-candidate vehicle based around IMG’s WorkStar 7000 truck chassis. In 2005, the firm contracted with South Africa’s Armour Technology Systems (ATS), which has design rights to several mine-resistant vehicles used in South Africa, and had also developed blast-resistant SAMIL armored cab solutions for South Africa’s trucks.

MTVR + PS armor
(click to view full)

During the course of that relationship with ATS, Navistar also opened relations with the Israeli firm Plasan Sasa, who had been designing and manufacturing up-armoring kits for the Marine Corps’ MTVR trucks for several years. That gave them a solid relationship with the MRAP competition’s key client. The Kibbutz Sasa firm also had experience developing full vehicles; its own light protected vehicle called the Caracal was under review by the US Marines for a different role. Navistar decided that they had found their partner – and in January 2007, they summarily canceled their agreement with South Africa’s ATS.

The question of what ATS knowledge may have been transferred or used by Navistar remains in the hands of lawyers, and also a PR campaign by ATS that publicizes its specific allegations of bad faith and unethical dealings.

The key characteristics of Navistar’s final vehicle contender are clearer. Unlike the HMMWV‘s auto-derived frame, IMG’s heavy-duty truck chassis would have the load capacity required to handle the weight of additional armor etc., without wearing out early. The final design positions a v-shaped crew compartment on top of that truck chassis, allowing maximum production commonality while using the compartment’s armoring and shape to channel blasts around the crew area. Extensive use of components from IMG’s trucks, including predictive maintenance features, would ensure that their entry was both producible in large numbers and maintainable in the field.

In return for this positioning, Navistar’s IMG received a test vehicle production contract for their vehicle – and nothing more. IMG/Plasan Sasa’s MPV was not featured among the early-stage orders [1st set | 2nd set] from the US military for low-risk designs, which went to rivals Force Protection (Cougar), BAE (RG-33, RG-33L), General Dynamics (RG-31), Oshkosh/PVI (Alpha CAT I), and PVI (Golan CAT II).

MaxxPro Dash & Plus
(click to view full)

Yet Navistar went on to become the winner in the initial MRAP competition, with the highest share of any competitor. So why was Navistar initially shut out?

One logical conclusion is doubts about its performance. The biggest downside to capsule-mounting a blast-resistant hull on top of a frame is the danger that a mine blast will separate the capsule from the frame, or (more likely) destroy the chassis and immobilize the vehicle in an ambush zone. Moving a v-shaped blast pan beneath the chassis reduces that danger, but that solution creates issues with ground clearance; and – since it offers less of a gap from the blast – with crew survivability.

What changed? Two things.

One was the Biden Amendment in the Senate, which accelerated funding for MRAPs, even as the desired number of vehicles for the FY 2007-2008 program rose again from 4,100 to 7,774 vehicles. At that volume, existing vehicle manufacturers would be very hard-pressed to deliver the required quantity in time. Which in turn lent a higher value to producibility, as long as the vehicles offered substantially better protection than a Humvee. Especially with the US Army reportedly looking for 17,000 blast-resistant vehicles of its own by 2010 – a number that would be borne out, and more, by subsequent events.

The second thing that happened was the testing at Aberdeen Proving Ground, which appears to have quieted doubts concerning IMG/Plasan Sasa’s design. Navistar received just the 2nd post-testing order to emerge from Marine Corps Systems Command, behind Force Protection’s early 1,000 vehicle order in April 2007. A May 31, 2007 report from Defense News claims that Navistar officials heard about their win from the offices of minority leader Sen. Trent Lott [R-MS] and Rep. Roger Wicker [R-MS], and Navistar spokesman Roy Wiley added at the time that “We did extremely well during the tests [at Aberdeen], and we are extremely pleased.”

Plasan Sasa does make composite armors for vehicles, and whatever it used apparently survived the trials at Aberdeen. Navistar would go on to produce its MaxxPro for MRAP orders, as well as the MaxxPro Air Force, the MaxxPro Plus with improved protection, a MaxxPro ambulance (production orders were for the Dash variant), the MaxxPro MEAP, the MaxxPro Dash for Afghan operations, and the MaxxPro Recovery Vehicle (MRV) for towing other vehicles out of danger zones.

In contrast, Navistar’s trucking competitor Oshkosh failed with both of its purpose-designed vehicles. The firm received 100 advance low-risk orders for the Alpha vehicle, which then failed testing and was removed from the competition. Despite its successful service on the front lines, the v-hulled Australian Bushmaster design never saw a single production order during the MRAP program. It would join Textron’s M1117 on the sidelines, until Oshkosh’s big win in the subsequent MRAP All Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV) competition.

Appendix B: MPV or APC to Face EFPs? (June 2007)

HMMWV, IEDed
(click to view full)

A May 31/07 USA Today article titled “MRAPs can’t stop newest weapon” explains the dilemma:

“The military plans to spend as much as $25 billion for up to 22,000 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles by 2009. Last month, Defense Secretary Robert Gates declared that buying the new vehicles should be the Pentagon’s top procurement priority.

But the armor on those vehicles cannot stop the newest bomb to emerge, known as an explosively formed penetrator (EFP).”

Stryker ICV with
Anti-RPG Slat Armor
(click to view full)

An EFP is just another type of land mine, where the explosives are arranged to shape a metal disk into a kind of instant high-caliber tank round as they detonate, launching it at nearby objects. This is not a new approach; the USA’s Sensor-Fuzed Weapon, a.k.a. “cans of whup-ass,” uses this exact approach but is dropped from an airplane so it can attack through the top, where armor is usually weakest. An EFP’s mode of operation when used as a land mine is a ballistic side attack rather than a conventional land mine’s explosion, which means a v-hull won’t necessarily offer much protection.

These weapons have also been among the land mines causing problems for heavier Stryker/LAV-III wheeled armored personnel carriers in Diyala Province. The Strykers lack the level of underbelly protection found in MRAP vehicles, and their “steel cage” armor designed to defeat [1] the shaped-charge warheads on anti-tank rockets will not stop large-caliber shells – or a reasonable imitation created by an EFP land-mine.

Iran has been heavily involved in shipping these weapons into Iraq for some time now, and training both Shi’ites and Sunnis to make them. A January 13, 2007 document from the USMC says that as the USA fields vehicles with MRAP-class protection against buried mines, Iraqi insurgents’ use of EFPs “can be expected to increase significantly.”

While the US has been testing new armor compositions designed to break up EFP slugs, there is a commonly-available solution on the market. It’s called “reactive armor,” and already equips American Bradley fighting vehicles, M1 tanks, and other armored platforms.

In a sense, it’s the reverse of the EFP concept – instead of using an explosion to create a killing weapon, it reacts with an outward explosion when hit. This either blows the rocket/ tank round/ or EFP projectile completely off-course, or tips it into an easily-absorbed ‘slap hit’ rather than the precise, focused strike required to penetrate steel.

The armor is manufactured in a cooperative venture between Israel’s RAFAEL and General Dynamics, and already has a strong production base. The only counter to it would be a anti-tank missiles that use a dual-warhead charge, like Russia’s AT-13 Metis or AT-14 Kornet. Some of these weapons even have remote-firing capability. That kind of equipment can only come from a state sponsor, however – a fact that sharply ups the ante on its use as a definitive act of war in theaters like Iraq or Afghanistan.

PVI/RAFAEL Golan
(click to view full)

There is already an MRAP contender designed from the outset to use this kind of armor to its maximum effectiveness. Protected Vehicles Inc. MRAP CAT II Golan vehicle was designed in conjunction with RAFAEL and the Israeli MoD’s Merkava tank project office. Unsurprisingly, it was also designed from the outset to carry reactive armor as an option, without changing its outward appearance. The result of this design feature is that the enemy can’t tell if reactive armor is present or not, and must therefore assume “yes” for all vehicles of its type.

The US military ordered 60 Golan vehicles for immediate deployment to the front lines back in March 2007, in addition to its order for test vehicles.

IMG APC Concept
(click to view full)

The interesting thing is, IMG had its own vehicle designed from the outset to use reactive armor. The “International APC” was a definite CAT II sized vehicle at 30,000 pounds curb weight. Based on an International MV-7000 heavy truck cab, the APC promised a vehicle equipped with explosive reactive armor from the get-go.

For whatever reason, IMG chose not to enter this vehicle in the MRAP competition. Their APC could never have won a CAT I MRUV order, of course, as the MaxxPro just did. What it might have offered is an additional purchase option for the US military, when EFP land mines begin taking their toll on MRAP vehicles fielded in theater.

Postscript: DID predicted that a number of MRAP vehicle manufacturers were about to start showing much more interest in reactive armor solutions for their vehicles. It’s always more difficult to integrate later, of course, rather than as a design-in option. Still, it was immediately available – and better than nothing. That prediction proved false, as the Army began development of anti-EFP metal armor/add-on kits instead.

KC-135: Old as the hills…
(click to view full)

DID’s FOCUS articles cover major weapons acquisition programs – and no program is more important to the USAF than its aerial tanker fleet renewal. In January 2007, the big question was whether there would be a competition for the USA’s KC-X proposal, covering 175 production aircraft and 4 test platforms. The total cost is now estimated at $52 billion, but America’s aerial tanker fleet demands new planes to replace its KC-135s, whose most recent new delivery was in 1965. Otherwise, unpredictable age or fatigue issues, like the ones that grounded its F-15A-D fighters in 2008, could ground its aerial tankers – and with them, a substantial slice of the USA’s total airpower.

KC-Y and KC-Z buys are supposed to follow in subsequent decades, in order to replace 530 (195 active; ANG 251; Reserve 84) active tankers, as well as the USAF’s 59 heavy KC-10 tankers that were delivered from 1979-1987. Then again, fiscal and demographic realities may mean that the 179 plane KC-X buy is “it” for the USAF. Either way, the KC-X stakes were huge for all concerned.

In the end, it was Team Boeing’s KC-767 NexGen/ KC-46A (767 derivative) vs. EADS North America’s KC-45A (Airbus KC-30/A330-200 derivative), both within the Pentagon and in the halls of Congress. The financial and employment stakes guaranteed a huge political fight no matter which side won. After Airbus won in 2008, that fight ended up sinking and restarting the entire program. Three years later, Boeing won the recompete. Now, they have to deliver their KC-46A.

Boeing’s KC-46A, and Its Team

KC-46A concept
(click to view full)

KC-46A Pegasus production takes place in 2 phases: the 767-2C, and then the militarized KC-46A modifications.

There are still a number of things we don’t know, though more details have emerged since Boeing won the competition. The first step is to build a 767 on the commercial production line with a cargo door and freighter floor, an advanced flight deck display borrowed from its new 787, body tanks, and provisions for aerial tanker systems. Initial Boeing graphics featuring upturned winglets on the wingtips are no longer part of the design, but Pratt & Whitney’s 62,000 pound thrust PW4062s remain their engine choice. This is the 767-2C, and it receives an FAA 767 amended Type Certificate.

The 767-2C is militarized in a separate finishing center by adding aerial refueling equipment, an air refueling operator’s station that includes panoramic 3-dimensional displays, and threat detection/ countermeasures systems. The resulting KC-46A receives an FAA 767 Supplemental Type Certificate given to substantially different variants, and must also receive USAF certification that clears the way for full acceptance.

Boeing’s refueling boom is derived from the KC-10’s AARB, but adds 3-D viewing and a slightly higher fuel offload rate of 1,200 gallons/min. The centerline and wing-mounted refueling pods will now come from Cobham plc’s Sargent Fletcher, who was also partnered with Airbus for this feature. Unlike the A330 MRTT’s systems, however, the KC-46A’s wing refueling pods still need to finish testing on the 776-2C. The USAF will buy 46 wing sets for its fleet, which will allow multi-aircraft (multipoint) aerial refueling when installed.

KC-46A cargo capacity lists as 65,000 pounds, in a mix of up to 18 cargo pallets, 114 passengers, and/or 58 medical stretcher slots.

Fielding a tanker built after the 1960s allows the USAF to include a number of new systems, which would be too costly to retrofit into the existing KC-135 fleet. The net effect is to make its KC-46As front-line refuelers. The cockpit and exterior lighting are night-vision compatible for covert rendezvous. Advanced communications and secure datalinks are big steps forward for the fleet, and their classified feeds will be used by specialized ESTAR and TCS systems designed to route the tanker away from threats. NBC (nuclear, biological, chemical) protection will allow the planes to operate in contaminated environments, while EMP hardening reduces the effects of high-frequency radiation bursts on all those new solid-state electronics. On a more prosaic level, radar warning systems, infrared defensive systems, cockpit armor, and fuel tank ballistic protection will all be welcome.

KC-46A Industrial Team

Boeing’s KC-X 1.0 Team

Boeing’s industrial team has slowly announced itself over many months since the award. American KC-46A content has been touted as high as 85%, with British firms picking up much of the balance. Boeing reportedly looked hard for supply chain savings in Round 2, though, in order to lose less money with its under-cost bidding strategy.

That KC-46A design is a big change from KC-X round 1, whose KC-767 Advanced used a 767-200ER fuselage; a 767-300F freighter wing, landing gear, cargo door and floor; and a 767-400ER’s flaps and flight deck (derived in turn from the 777). A new design fly-by-wire boom with remote viewing would expand the tanker’s effective refueling airspace, and offload more fuel. Engines would be 2 Pratt & Whitney PW4062s, with 62,000 pounds of thrust each, instead of the KC-767A/J’s 60,200 pound CF6-80C2s.

Some of the suppliers also changed, as Boeing progressed from the canceled KC-767 lease deal, to KC-X, to its final design in Round 2:

Boeing’s production line had also progressed. Near the end of the KC-X bidding, Boeing added civilian 767 orders to keep its production line going. That was enough to create a cushion if KC-X faced further challenges and issues, but the reality is that civilian 767 production looks set to end soon. The US military will soon become the 767 production line’s sole support.

KC-X: The Program

A March 2012 GAO report summed up the risk driving the KC-46A program, and the current state of the USAF’s tanker fleets:

“According to the Air Force, the national security strategy cannot be executed without aerial refueling… the KC-135 Stratotanker, is over 50 years old on average and costing increasingly more to maintain and support. With… more than 16,000 flight hours on each aircraft, the KC-135s will approach over 80 years of age when the fleet is retired as projected in the 2040 time frame. In 1981, the Air Force began supplementing its fleet of KC-135s with [59] KC-10s… that transport air cargo and provide refueling. Much larger than the KC-135, the KC-10 provides both boom and hose and drogue refueling capabilities[Footnote 4] on the same flight and can conduct transoceanic missions. The KC-10s now average about 27 years of age with more than 26,000 flight hours on each, and their service life is expected to end around 2045.”

The $7.2 billion October 2012 development cost estimate includes $4.9 billion for the aircraft development contract and 4 test aircraft, $0.3 billion for the aircrew and maintenance training systems, and $2 billion for other government costs and some risk funds. The total procurement cost estimate of $40.46 billion in base-year dollars buys 175 production aircraft, initial spares, and other support items as priced in contract options.

Cost estimates as of April 2014 are stable, with an estimated $1.6 billion to cover other government costs like program office support, test and evaluation support, contract performance risk, and other development risks. That includes the cost of test flights, which will sometimes feature operational military aircraft of various kinds to act as receivers.

An accompanying military construction estimate of $4.2 billion includes the projected costs to build aircraft hangars, maintenance and supply shops, and other facilities to house and support the full 175-plane KC-46 fleet at up to 10 main operating bases (McConnell AFB, KS is MOB1), 1 training base at Altus AFB, OK; and the Oklahoma City Air Logistics Complex depot.

The KC-46A Development Phase: Budgets, Splits, & Dates

KC-46 development

The Pentagon’s latest Selected Acquisition Report estimates a total KC-46A development cost of $5.615 billion, which would actually be $1.221 billion over the KC-X EMD phase’s original Target Cost of $4.394 billion. Fortunately for the USAF, they structured the contract so they can’t pay more than $4.7 billion, and the overall bid cost to the US government for development plus production remains below Airbus’ bid.

Here’s how it works:

• Up to the $4.898 billion ceiling, the contract split for amounts over the $4.394 billion base price is 60/40. The difference is $504 million, so the government would pay $302.4 million ($4.696 billion total), and Boeing would pay about $201.6 million.

• Costs above the $4.898 billion ceiling are all Boeing’s responsibility.

Current estimates show that there’s almost no chance of coming in under the ceiling. Boeing’s current cost estimate is $5.164 billion, which would raise its private liability for the cost increases to $467.5 million (201.6 + all 265.9 over the ceiling). If the government program manager is right, Boeing’s liability rises to $918.6 million (201.6 + all 717.0 over). The difference matters to Boeing, but the Pentagon doesn’t have to care which EMD Phase figure is correct, or how much higher EMD costs go. Their costs are set, at $4.7 billion, though actual dollars will be a bit higher due to inflation etc.

That’s if, and only if, the USAF doesn’t start asking for design changes. If they do, that would trigger a cycle of charges over and above the agreed contract.

As of December 2012, schedule planning looked like this:

Concurrence concerns

The USAF has maintained its Q4 FY 2015 (summer 2015) goal for a successful Operational Assessment and Milestone C decision, and this remains the official target. Success which would clear the way for 2 firm-fixed-price Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP) lots to deliver the initial 19 aircraft. Full-Rate Production options would follow beginning in FY 2017 as a firm-fixed-price contract with some adjustments for outside circumstances, and a not-to-exceed cap. The USAF will be assessing the possibility of breaking out the engines as a separate government procurement in FRP, instead of having Boeing provide them.

As Airbus predicted when the contract was awarded, however, Boeing has admitted to trouble meeting these development milestones. The schedule will need to be changed, but there’s no official replacement schedule yet.

The schedule may need to incorporate other changes as well. The Pentagon’s own DOT&E testers have doubted proclaimed Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) dates (Q3 FY 2016 – Q1 2017) for some time. Beyond technical issues that have slowed the new design, testing must avoid revealing significant problems.
Initial Operational Capability (IOC) was pegged for August 2017, with Full Operational Capability (FOC) expected by August 2019, but USAF Air Mobility Command is no longer giving official target dates.

The program as a whole is expected to end by 2028.

The KC-46A Production Phase: Risks & Numbers

KC-10 & F/A-18C

The current program calls for Boeing to begin delivering KC-46As to the USAF by 2015. Unfortunately, the KC-46A is too different from previous KC-767A models sold to Japan and Italy, so it will need its own development, testing, and certification time. That’s why Airbus and program skeptics have always doubted that Boeing could deliver 18 certified, fully developed and tested planes by 2017. Boeing disputes this, but the Pentagon’s own DOT&E office added weight to those concerns in its 2011 reports, which declared the KC-46A’s test program “not executable.” That continues to be a concern.

Beyond basic integration and certification considerations, a March 2012 GAO report cites 6 key technical risks to the program:

1. Weight limits. The KC-46A is close to its limit, and any more growth will start to take away fuel capacity, while increasing fuel burn rate. As of December 2013, Boeing remains confident that they will remain under the maximum take-off weight of 204,000 pounds.

2. New wing refueling pods. The KC-46’s pods will be redesigned to reduce buffeting of the aircraft’s wing, and change the way the refueling hose exits the pod. Still a technical risk as of December 2013.

3. 3-D display for the boom operator.

4. Threat Correlation Software. Used to help plot safe routes, along with the…

5. ESTAR software.

6. ALR-69 Radar Warning Receiver integration. Issues like figuring out precise placement, and antenna design, make fitting a large aircraft more challenging than many people expect.

Problems with these or other systems could delay the program further, and some of these issues could also make certification harder or longer. Even so, the actual risk that set the development program back wasn’t any of these. It was the need to redesign certain wiring sections for military-grade shielding requirements and mandatory separation distances.

Meanwhile, the USAF plans to respond to continued budget cuts by removing their existing KC-10 heavy refuelers entirely, adding tremendous risk by removing their inherent boom/hose versatility, and leaving no tanker alternative if the KC-135s develop a serious problem.

Fleet Risks

Over the longer term, plotting even a 3-year production delay against planned deliveries and KC-135 retirements never drops the medium tanker fleet much below present levels. The initial drop is slight, and the same final figure is reached in 2030 instead of 2027. On the other hand, RAND’s 2006 Analysis of Alternatives for KC-X highlighted a very different risk, which needs to be understood:

“The current (December 2005) assessment of the flight-hour life of the KC-135 fleet and the expected future flying-hour programs together imply that these aircraft can operate into the 2040s. It cannot be said with high confidence that this is not the case, although there are risks associated with a fleet whose age is in the 80- to 90-year range. It can also not be said with high confidence that the current fleet can indeed operate into the 2040s without major cost increases or operational shortfalls, up to and including grounding of large parts of the fleet for substantial lengths of time, due to currently unknown technical problems that may arise. The nation does not currently have sufficient knowledge about the state of the KC-135 fleet to project its technical condition over the next several decades with high confidence.”

In English, nobody knows if an airplane fleet that’s already 50 years old will remain safe, or avoid unforeseen mechanical or structural problems, because there’s no previous example of what they’re trying to do. Those kinds of sudden “age-out” problems recently grounded the USAF’s F-15A-D fleet for several months, and led to the unexpected retirement of almost 1/4 of the fleet. If anything similar happens to the KC-135, the USAF’s planned number of aerial tankers may not resemble its actual future fleet.

This risk, and the potential absence of the KC-10, is exactly why the KC-X program has been the USAF’s #1 priority. On the other hand, it’s an equally good reason not to trust the USAF’s own rosy projections for its future fleet size. The graph below shows how this kind of scenario could play out. In DID’s hypothetical example, we used actual data to the present day, plus all planned reductions in the USAF’s 2011 plan. Fleet problems lead to the forced retirement of 1/3 of the remaining fleet in 2021 over safety and cost-to-fix issues, followed by a second mechanical issue or budget crisis that grounds another 55 planes in 2029. The KC-10 fleet is not part of this calculus at all.

The USA’s looming fiscal entitlements crisis will begin to bite in earnest post-2020, and the pattern of cuts in the USA and in other countries shows a marked tendency to simply retire platforms with significant maintenance costs. KC-135 per-hour flight costs are already increasing, and a fleet that also needed expensive refits or fixes would be a prime target for future cuts. Here’s what this scenario looks like:

Finally, DID believes that there will be no KC-Y or KC-Z, so the timing of KC-135 problems and retirements isn’t critical. Any serious problems in the KC-135 fleet could create a similar end-point, even if the drops happened after 2030.

KC-46A Export Prospects

IAI’s KC-767 MMTT

Once the KC-46As do enter service, they will join Italy’s KC-767A (4) and Japan’s KC-767J (4) small KC-767 fleets. Both customers have experienced long delivery delays while Boeing has worked to iron out technical problems, and their KC-767s will have a number of key differences from the KC-46A. Japan’s boom-equipped KC-767s were delivered form 2008-2010, but Italy’s aircraft with hose-and-drogue systems were only accepted in February 2011.

That’s one option, if Boeing will produce the planes.

The KC-46A’s schedule and dwindling civil 767 production are problematic for export orders, because the USAF will be Boeing’s sole focus until the EMD Phase is done in 2017 – or later. Countries that need aerial tankers before 2019-2020 will need to look elsewhere. Boeing declined to bid on India’s aerial tanker RFP, for instance. There’s also a customer commitment issue. Should customers accept the KC-767A, which is certified and in service, or wait for the KC-46A, and hope it’s on time?

Airbus sees this lock-up as an opportunity to add to its A330 MRTT customer list, of course, signing customers like India, Qatar, and Singapore. Ironically, the other big beneficiary may by Israel’s IAI Bedek, whose inexpensive KC-767 MMTT conversion of used Boeing freighters already has customers in Colombia and Brazil.

As of June 2013, Boeing was reportedly pursuing prospects for up to 20 aerial tanker exports. If so, they have been quiet pursuits. The next big opportunity will be in South Korea.

KC-X: Contracts & Key Developments FY 2016 – 2018

 

Boom assembly

August 8/18: Competition Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) and Boeing are currently competing in being the lead vendor in one of Israel’s biggest defense procurement programs. The Israel Air Force is looking to modernize its fleet of tanker aircraft as means to maintain its air-superiority. IAI proposed to buy buying used Boeing 767 aircraft on the open market and converting them for airborne refueling of combat planes, however Boeing is reluctant to grant IAI permits to convert its planes to tanker configuration. Boeing has a clear interest in ousting IAI from the procurement program as it wants to push sales of its newly developed KC-46, which comes with a price-tag of $250-300 million. The Israel Air Force’s current tankers are used Boeing 707s converted by IAI in the early 1980s.

May 08/18: Can the KC-46 be delivered in time? Boeing’s KC-46 Tanker program hit another bump. Due to continuous cost overruns and schedule delays, the company has racked up more than $3 billion worth of pretax charges. Just last week Boeing disclosed another $81 million-pretax penalty on the program in its financial report for the first quarter of 2018. According to the terms of Boeing’s fixed-price development contract with the US Air Force, the company is responsible for any costs over the $4.9 billion award. Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson has been publicly dismissive of the company’s progress, telling lawmakers that the company has perhaps been too focused on its lucrative commercial business to give the tanker program the attention it deserves. In total, Boeing has 34 KC-46s in some stage of production, and the first four aircraft planned for delivery have already flown and are in storage. Despite company officials reassuring that all ‘required assets available’ obligations can be met, it is yet unclear if Boeing will be able to deliver all of the 18 certified KC-46s and nine refueling pods this year.

April 30/18: More delivery delays A new assessment carried out by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) has found that Boeing will be unable to deliver all 18 KC-46 Pegasus aerial refueling tankers this year and will only be able to do so in May 2019. Speaking on the new timeline after a visit to Boeing’s Seattle facility in March, Air Force Under Secretary Matt Donovan said the firm “were very pressurized to get this the last ten yards” to delivery, adding that first delivery “is not a contractual requirement,” and the original goal of April to June 2016 “was always an estimate.” Still, it’s “a psychological milestone, and it’s important to us.” He added that he had also seen software fixes that “will vastly improve” the refueling operations.

April 9/18: Milestone in the face of delays Boeing has scored another milestone in its KC-46 Pegasus tanker program, several weeks after Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson criticised the firm for delays to the program. The announcement made by Boeing on Wednesday said that the Pegasus completed the fuel on-load testing portion required for the FAA Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) by refueling another KC-46A in mid-air. The fuel transfer took place during a 3h, 40min-long flight on an undisclosed date, successfully transferring 66,200kg (146,000lb) of jet fuel and achieved the maximum fuel off-load rate of 1,200 gallons per minute. The KC-46 now has demonstrated the ability to receive fuel from three tankers in the USAF fleet: KC-46, KC-135 and KC-10 aircraft, Boeing says. It also has demonstrated refueling with other aircraft including the F-16, F/A-19, AV-8B, C-17 and A-10.

March 22/18: Wilson slams delays Boeing’s KC-46 Pegasus tanker program has come under fire after Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson took the firm to task during a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Tuesday, Flight Global reports. During the hearing, Wilson criticised the airframer over delivery delays of the aircraft to the USAF saying: “One of the frustrations with Boeing is they are much more focused on their commercial activity then getting this right for the Air Force, and getting these aircraft to the Air Force.” “We have asked them to get their A team on this to get these problems fixed and get the aircraft to the Air Force,” she added. The firm responded by saying that “there is no greater priority at The Boeing Company right now than the delivery of the KC-46,” however, did not guarantee that the first batch of tankers would be delivered by the second quarter of 2018. The USAF awarded Boeing a $4.9 billion contract in 2011 to modify the 767-2C commercial freighter into the KC-46A military tanker, but manufacturing and development issues have caused the firm to reportedly lose $2 billion.

March 2/18: EPT Testing Following a report released in January expressing concerns about the KC-46 Pegasus tanker aircraft, the US Air Force is working with the Pentagon’s operational test and evaluation office to dissuade these issues while maintaining the aircraft will keep to its milestones and schedules. One issue raised was that the aircraft did not meet the office’s standards for electromagnetic pulse testing—which took place in July at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland, and Edwards Air Force Base, California—however, this was because not all of the systems were online during the previous round of tests. The test showed that the tanker’s flight-critical and boom-refueling systems could withstand a 6-decibel electromagnetic pulse, but certain systems were uninstalled or deactivated before testing, according to the report. “The systems that were uninstalled or deactivated were not flight critical or required for aerial refueling operations,” the command said. There are no plans as of yet for additional EPTs.

December 27/17: FMS Contract-Japan Work is to begin on producing Japan’s first KC-46 tanker aircraft, following the $289 million USAF firm-fixed-price contract awarded to Boeing to deliver one unit to Tokyo. The contract provides for non-recurring engineering, integrated logistics support and one KC-46A aircraft and is a 100 percent foreign military sale (FMS) to the Japanese government. Work will take place in Seattle, Washington with delivery to the JASDF to take place by February 28, 2021. Once delivered, the KC-46 will add a significant boost to Japan’s aerial refueling capabilities, adding to the current fleet of four KC-767J tankers.

December 8/17: Milestone-First Flight Despite announcing delays to its delivery schedule on Tuesday, good news rocked the KC-46A Pegasus Tanker program as the first operational aircraft successfully carried out its maiden flight on the same day. Over the course of the 3.5 hour flight, test pilots took the tanker to 39,000 feet and performed operational checks on its systems before landing. The model used in the test is the seventh built for the program, with the previous models used for certification and testing and to date have racked up 2,200 flight hours and more than 1,600 “contacts” during refueling flights with F-16, F/A-18, AV-8B, C-17, A-10, KC-10 and KC-46 aircraft.

December 6/17: Delivery Delays Boeing has admitted that the planned delivery of the first KC-46 Pegasus tanker aircraft to the US Air Force (USAF) has been postponed. The firm had previously maintained, as recently as last month, that it was confident the tanker could be delivered by the end of the year, after missing the initial delivery deadline of August 2017. Now, Boeing say deliveries will now take place in 2018, and is contractually obliged to deliver 18 KC-46s and nine refueling pods by October 2018—14 months later than originally planned. Cost overruns for the program experienced by Boeing to date amount to approximately $2.9 billion pretax, or $1.9 billion after tax.

November 16/17: Despite testing issues and delivery delays, Boeing has been aggressively marketing its new KC-46A tanker aircraft to Middle East governments at this year’s Dubai Airshow. There is a high demand for aerial tankers in the region as the US Air Force’s (USAF) tanker fleet supports the Saudi Arabian-led aerial campaign in Yemen with air refuelling, and the airshow is being used by Boeing as an opportunity to get governments to augment their tanker capabilities or switch allegiances. But the US airframer will have its work cut out for them—rival Airbus has recently delivered its A330 tanker to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait.

November 1/17: Early test data gathered by the US Air Force (USAF) has led the service to be confident that a software solution could fix some deficiencies found in the Boeing KC-46 tanker aircraft. Speaking on the testing, Gen Carlton Everhart, commander of the USAF Air Mobility Command, said the reprograming could fix a high-frequency (HF) transmit as well as an “uncommanded boom extension”, although further testing will be required. The HF radio, which must be turned off to avoid electrical sparking between the boom and receiver, is now tolerable according to vendors, while the boom extension issue does not damage the aircraft.

October 16/17: A Boeing and US Air Force (USAF) test team has successfully completed the first mid-air refueling involving two KC-46A aerial tankers. The demonstration took place during a recent four-hour flight, during which the two aircraft transferred 38,100 pounds of fuel to each other at 1,200 gallons of fuel per minute. Manufacturer Boeing hailed the demonstration as a “milestone” that opens the door to additional certification and specification compliance testing. More than a dozen KC-46s will be delivered to the USAF next year and will begin replacing the service’s ageing fleet of KC-135s. So far, KC-46 test aircraft have had more than 1,300 contacts during refueling flights with a number of aircraft, including the F-16, F/A-18, AV-8B, C-17, A-10 and KC-10.

September 26/17: The US Air Force (USAF) has expressed concern that Boeing will face difficulties in meeting a contractual obligation to deliver 18 KC-46 tankers to the service on time. Testing conducted in 2016 found a series of “category one” deficiencies, including where its boom scraped the surface of the aircraft being refueled. The testing also found that the tanker is not detecting when it is missing the receptacle, making it impossible for a KC-46 pilot to communicate that the receiving aircraft has potentially been damaged, the USAF said. While the USAF still believes that Boeing will fix these deficiencies in time to deliver the first KC-46 in late spring of 2018 (with a contractually mandated “required assets available” deadline for 18 tankers following in October), the service did not commit to accepting the aircraft from Boeing if the problem was not fixed, and at this point the timeline for resolving the issue is yet to be determined.

September 21/17: The head of the USAF’s Air Mobility Command has revealed that deliveries of the KC-46A tanker from Boeing will likely take place next year, and it remains unknown whether the firm will meet the “required assets available” milestone scheduled for October 2018. Speaking at the annual Air, Space and Cyber conference near Washington DC, Gen Carlton Everhart said that the service had discovered severe flaws on the tanker, known as “category 1 deficiencies”. Among the most glaring, the tip of its boom has on occasion struck receiver aircraft outside their refuelling slipways. Unless Boeing resolve the issue quickly it could delay a scheduled 1 December delivery.

September 14/17: Boeing expects to deliver its KC-46A tanker to the US Air Force by December, but the service branch expects that this schedule will slip into spring 2018. Brig. Gen. Donna Shipton, Tankers Directorate program executive officer said that the manufacturer has made “steady progress, just slower than planned” to complete Federal Aviation Administration certifications and flight tests. In recent months, Boeing had projected first deliveries in March and later August of this year before its most recent target date of December. The USAF plans to buy 179 KC-46 tankers through 2027. Eventually, the service branch expects to replace 455 aging KC-135 Stratotankers and KC-10 Extender tankers in the fleet.

July 31/17: Electromagnetic testing of the KC-46A Pegasus tanker has been completed by a joint team involving Boeing, the USAF, and the Naval Air Systems command, moving the aircraft closer to its first delivery. Testing took place at Naval Air Station Patuxent, Md. electromagnetic pulse laboratory and the Benefield Anechoic Facility at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif, which aimed to assess whether the aircraft could safely operate when confronted by the electromagnetic fields generated by equipment like radar. A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report in March had deemed the tests as one of the two key risk factors that could keep Boeing from meeting its delivery goals. However, Boeing has stated that the timing of the electromagnetic tests would not push back other key milestones and that the company still intends to deliver the first KC-46A this year.

June 12/17: Delivery of KC-46A tanker aircraft to the USAF has been pushed back until Spring 2018,according to service officials.Manufacturer Boeing had initially scheduled the first deliveries for this September, but this has now been pushed back while the manufacturer acquires airworthiness certifications and complete a flight test program for the plane. The delay is not expected to add addition costs to the taxpayer.

June 2/17: A KC-46 Pegasus tanker aircraft has entered the Benefield Anechoic Facility (BAF) at Edwards Air Force Base to undergo testing. The tests in question are integral in order to demonstrate that the tanker meets Federal Aviation Administration certification requirements and Defense Department electromagnetic environmental effects requirements for systems. These tests include shielding effectiveness, emission control and high intensity radiated fields. The BAF is the largest anechoic chamber in the world, and provides a location where electronic warfare tests can be conducted without radio frequency interference from the outside world.

May 5/17: Boeing has reached an important milestone in bringing its KC-46 tanker programcloser to serial production, announcing that it now has has a total of six units ready for its testing program. The newest, of the planes, which is the second to be produced under a low-rate production order, conducted its first test flight on April 26, and future testing will be largely focus on ensuring that the tanker can stand up to electromagnetic fields—radars and powerful radio towers are capable of scrambling aircraft electronic systems if they are not carefully shielded. Boeing intends to eventually produce as many as 179 KC-46 tankers for the USAF.

March 29/17: Boeing has received a $59 million contract modification to continue production for the USAF’s KC-46 tanker aircraft. The deal will see the company provide interim contracting support, a temporary service conducted in lieu of organic capability for a predetermined time. The deal allows Boeing to defer investment in all or part of required support resources. Work is expected to be complete by March, 2018.

February 23/17: Boeing is taking some suppliers to court after they sold mislabeled chemicals that caused the maiden flight of the KC-46 tanker to be delayed by a month. Able Aerospace Adhesives and AlfaKleen Chemical Labs, both from California, are being sued in the sum of $10 million or more for the mix up, whose incorrect chemical damaged components in the jet’s refueling system, and time was lost by Boeing in order to to replace those damaged parts. The liquid provided was certified to meet MIL-PRF-680 Type III certification; it was, however, actually more acidic than required.

January 30/17: Boeing has won a $2.1 billion contract for the provision of 15 KC-46 aerial refueling aircraft to the US Air Force. The contract, awarded on Friday, is in addition to the initial $4.2 billion contract awarded by the USAF to develop and test the aircraft, and an earlier $2.8 billion award for 19 planes. So far, the fixed-price contract has incurred cost-over runs of $2.4 billion, including a recent $201 million after-tax charge that Boeing announced on Wednesday.

January 26/17: It seems likely that the KC-46A aerial tanker will not meet its aggressive delivery schedule, with manufacturer Boeing stalling deliveries to the USAF until late 2017. Boeing had already moved its delivery schedule from March to August. The revelations were found in an annual report by the DoD’s Director of Operational Test & Evaluation, which stated “execution of the current schedule assumes historically unrealistic test aircraft fly and re-fly rates.”

November 18/16: Boeing is eager to sell its KC-46A aerial refueling tanker to India. The Indian Air Force has yet to procure a capability to refuel its C-17 and P-8I aircraft, and New Delhi has eyed up the Pegasus to fill such a role. A laborious search has been underway to fill a six multi-role tanker capability soon to be vacated by their aging IL-76 aircraft. Earlier attempts to procure Airbus A 330 MRTT never came to fruition.

September 23/16: The US State Department has cleared the sale of four KC-46A aerial refueling tankers to Japan in what is estimated to be a $1.9 billion deal. All aircraft will come equipped with Northrop Grumman’s AN/AAQ-24(V) Large Aircraft Infrared Countermeasures (LAIRCM) system. Tokyo first announced its intention to purchase the new tankers last October, with the recent approval from the Pentagon moving it closer to becoming the aircraft’s first foreign customer for manufacturer Boeing.

September 22/16: Gen. Carlton Everhart, head of the mobility command of the USAF has said that the number of KC-46 tankers the service is set to procure by 2028 are not enough. 179 units of Boeing’s latest tanker will be delivered; however between 2028 and 2035, no KC-46s are scheduled for delivery, leaving a capability gap. To remedy the issue, Everhart suggested that the flying branch embark on a study this year for a new KC-Z aerial refueling tanker that will enter service in 2035, as well as looking into the possibility of developing a “KC-Y” tanker to fill the procurement gap.

August 22/16: Last week ended on an extremely good note for both Boeing and Lockheed Martin after the companies were awarded major multi-billion contracts by the USAF. For Boeing, an impressive $2.8 billion award was granted on Thursday as part of the low rate initial production of the KC-46A following the tanker’s Milestone C decision earlier this month. 19 aircraft will be produced alongside spare parts, engines and refueling pods. However, this was astronomically dwarfed on Friday when Lockheed Martin was handed a $10 billion deal for all future orders of the C-130J Super Hercules production program as well as any foreign military sales for the aircraft.

August 15/16: After a long wait, the KC-46A tanker has been cleared for production. The Milestone C approval was awarded by US Under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, Frank Kendall, following a series of stringent refueling tests of various USAF and Navy aircraft. Contracts are expected to be awarded to Boeing within the next 30 days for the first two low rate initial production lots, totaling 19 aircraft.

August 12/16: A long awaited low-rate initial production decision for the KC-46 tanker is to be made by the end of the month. Secretary of the USAF Deborah Lee James informed the media of the upcoming meeting “We believe that the aircraft has met all of the wickets that are required to meet milestone C, but of course that remains to be seen, so I’ll say stay tuned on that.” Flight testing of the aircraft wound up in July following a number of hardware and software fixes to the plane’s boom following aerial refueling problems.

August 9/16: Ground has been broken on the new $44 million KC-46A Pegasus sustainment campus at Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma. The facility will be responsible for all the maintenance, repair and overhaul operations required for the tanker. The first KC-46A are expected to roll into Tinker in 2018.

July 25/16: Boeing has announced the latest in an ongoing saga of cost overruns with the company taking a $393 million hit on the KC-46 tanker program. Well published issues such as the fault with the aircraft’s refueling boom have resulted in delays to the aircraft reaching an important program milestone prior to initial production. The charges are to be formally announced on July 27 and brings the total value of penalties to almost $1.9 billion. Don’t worry Boeing, the next round of drinks are on us.

July 20/16: Following the refueling of an A-10 Thunderbolt, the KC-46 has completed the last in a series of in-flight refueling tests necessary before its Milestone C production decision. A selection of Navy, USAF and USMC aircraft were chosen including the C-17, F-16, F/A-18 and AV-8B. The Milestone C decision to begin low-rate initial production is expected in August.

July 15/16: A KC-46A fitted with its brand new modified boom has successfully managed a mid-air refueling of a C-17 with the previous axial loading issues no longer present. The testing was carried out on July 12 and the USAF also refueled an F-16 on July 8. Refueling attempts with the F-16 earlier this year were successful, although a higher than expected axial load on the boom was detected. The higher load was again present during the initial attempt with the C-17 which necessitated installation of hydraulic pressure relief valves in the boom.

July 12/16: “Bypass surgery” has been carried out on the KC-46A to fix problems with the the flying boom on the tanker. A hardware fix has been implemented by adding two bypass valves to lighten the load on the boom. Boeing describing the modification as similar to that used on the US Air Force’s current KC-10 tankers.

June 6/16: Setbacks to the KC-46A tanker program have been compounded as Boeing has admitted that a software solution to fix the load issues on the flying boom was not robust enough and the company will have to modify the hardware itself. The plane was initially aiming to have a low-production order to deliver 18 tankers by next August. Issues arose during refueling trials with larger aircraft such as the C-17 military transporters which caused unacceptable stress loads along the axis of the boom.

May 31/16: Following close on the heals of the F-35’s delay in achieving initial operational capability (IOC), the KC-46A tanker will miss its scheduled Spring 2017 delivery to units. Instead, deliveries have been rescheduled for late summer or early fall of next year. The KC-46 tanker program was already on a tight trialing schedule as part of its Milestone C demonstration in June, but will now be pushed back until August.

May 9/16: Boeing has announced that they have developed a hardware and software fix for the KC-46A aerial tanker, allowing it to pass fuel to C-17 aircraft. The company encountered problems regarding a boom axial load issue during an earlier test to refuel the C-17, causing a setback to the already delayed flight test program. A “milestone C” decision on low rate production by the Pentagon is now expected in June after initially planned for April and now May.

April 29/16: April 29/16: Legislation being considered by the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) could see the last external link of the USAF’s F-117A Nighthawk fleet sent to the scrap yard. Retired since 2007, a fleet of the pioneering stealth aircraft have been kept in special climate controlled storage hangers in the event they were ever needed again. Now, Congress is considering removing those mothballed aircraft and having them scrapped and gutted for hard-to-find parts.

April 28/16: The forth and final test aircraft of Boeing’s KC-46A tanker program has made its maiden flight. While not kitted out for aerial refueling, the 767-2C aircraft will be used to conduct environmental control system testing for the program. The arrival of the latest tanker comes as Boeing scrambles to complete a “milestone C” review by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). A favorable review will unleash additional funds needed for the program, including a seven tanker production order, which the manufacturer had already begun producing out of its own pocket.

April 13/16: Despite development setbacks and a recent Milestone C demonstration hiccup, Boeing believes that it can deliver 18 operational KC-46 Pegasus tankers within six months instead of the original 14. The plan has been labelled “optimistic” in a new report by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO). While the GAO notes that most of the issues have been amended successfully, the recent problems seen in the aircraft’s centerline drogue system and wing aerial refueling pods may make this optimistic projection nothing but wishful thinking.

April 5/16: The otherwise fast pace of the KC-46A’s aerial refueling demonstration phase has started to run into difficulty. Testing on refueling of Boeing’s C-17 heavy cargo lifter has resulted in higher than expected boom axial loads, caused by two large aircraft flying in line. This bow-wave effect has subsequently caused the system to indicate that the loads were too high to begin passing fuel. Subsequent delays caused by the issues have resulted in scheduled trials of the A-10 attack aircraft being pushed back, and any further issues may impact a low-production rate decision due to be made at the end of May.

March 24/16: The Defense Contract Management Agency has expressed its “low confidence” in Boeing’s ability to deliver the KC-46A on time. Delivery of the tanker to the USAF is expected by August 2017 and is currently in the process of undergoing its Milestone C Demonstrations. Despite this, the agency now believes Boeing can only deliver the 18 KC-46As by March 2018, and there is a possibility that the new date might not be achievable either.

March 7/16: Boeing’s second KC-46A aerial refueling tanker has made its first flight. The aircraft will be used to test mission system avionics and exterior lighting before moving onto sharing the air refueling effort with the first KC-46. With a second fully configured tanker, Boeing can move through “receiver certification” for 18 aircraft types a lot more quickly. At present, the KC-46 has already demonstrated functionality with the Lockheed Martin F-16, Boeing F/A-18 and refueling from a Boeing KC-10.

February 26/16: Despite a successful start to the KC-46 Milestone C demonstrations, Boeing is still under pressure to keep to its tight window to have 46 of the tankers operational by August 2017. The original schedule is at present eight months behind after a number of setbacks, and leaves little room for error until the delivery deadline. While funding of the program and technical difficulties are not a contributing factor, it’s feared that the Air Mobility Command (AMC) won’t have sufficient time for the 767-2C-based tankers to declare initial operational capability on schedule.

February 24/16: The KC-46 is halfway through its six aerial contact tests as part of the program‘s “Milestone C” demonstrations. The tanker has now successfully demonstrated all three of its major fuel systems after being successfully topped up by another KC-10 aircraft. The February 16 test follows the refueling of a F-16 and F/A-18 over the last number of weeks, and keeps the program right on track for a low-rate initial production decision in May. The three remaining tests will involve probe-and-drogue testing with a US Navy AV-8B Harrier II jump jet, followed by boom refueling of a Fairchild Republic A-10 and Boeing C-17.

February 16/16: Testing of the refueling capabilities of the KC-46 tanker has hit another target with the successful refueling of an F/A-18 fighter. This follows its first ever refueling flight on January 24, where it successfully refueled an F-16. While the first test utilized the tanker’s refueling “boom,” a rigid, telescoping tube that an operator on the aircraft extends and inserts into a receptacle on the receiving aircraft for fuel transfer, the F/A-18 test was the program’s first usage of the KC-46’s hose and drogue system. Located on both the plane’s wing and centerline, the hose and drogue system enables the KC-46 to refuel smaller aircraft such as the F/A-18 with up to 400 gallons of fuel per minute. All tests are part of the program’s Milestone C demonstration before a low-rate initial production decision is made later this year.

February 11/16: An Israeli news source has reported that the US government has cleared the sale for two of Boeing’s newest KC-46A Pegasus aerial refueling tankers to Israel via the security assistance package. The Pentagon had originally put a pause on selling new aircraft to Israel, initially offering them older models. However, Israel has been insisting on the latest multi-mission tanker with the deal only approved upon the completion of the nuclear deal with Iran. The tanker sale could have become a point of contention for Tehran as its specs allow for a range of 7,350 miles with in-flight refueling. With an average price tag of $188 million each, the addition of Israeli system modifications will see each aircraft cost a quarter of a billion dollars.

January 26/16: The USAF and Boeing have reached an important milestone in the development of the KC-46 tanker after it successfully carried out a mid-air refueling of an F-16 jet. Prior to the refueling, both had checked a number of test points during the flight, with a successful demonstration necessary before Boeing can enter the plane into low rate production. The USAF has ordered 176 of the tankers to replace their KC-135 Stratotankers with the first eighteen of the tankers needed to be operational and ready to go by August 2017.

October 26/15: In a not unexpected decision, the Japanese Defence Ministry has opted to buy three KC-46A Pegasus tankers, marking the first international sale of the aircraft, which is still in development. The three new aircraft will bolster the JASDF’s fleet of four KC-767s, with each of the new aircraft thought to value $173 million. The KC-46As are slated for fielding in 2020, with the Boeing bid fending off competition from Airbus’ A330 MRTT. Elsewhere in the region, South Korea selected the Airbus design in July, signing a contract for four A330-MRTTs.

October 23/15: The KC-46A Pegasus tanker EMD-1 development aircraft has arrived at Edwards AFB for two weeks of work, including Ground Effects and Fuel Onload Fatigue tests. The latter involves learning more about how the aircraft operates when taking on fuel from another tanker, such as a KC-135 or KC-10, while Ground Effects testing collects data to incorporate into the aircraft’s simulator. The other development aircraft (EMD-2) deployed its refuelling boom for the first time in October, with EMD-1’s maiden flight in September.

October 12/15: The KC-46A Pegasus tanker has deployed its refuelling systems for the first time, including its boom, hose and drogue systems. The tanker performed its first flight in September, following a delay in August. Boeing is working towards an initial operating capability – which will see 18 KC-46A and support available for operations – by August 2017.

October 9/15: Two Air Force pilots have been cleared to fly the KC-46A Pegasus tanker, which performed its first test flight in late September. The pilots will be used for military certification of the aircraft, which is also required to pass FAA regulations. The Air Force is eventually scheduled to receive 179 KC-46A tankers under a contract awarded to Boeing in February 2011; the fixed-cost nature of the contract means that Boeing has been forced twice to absorb development costs, with the Air Force’s costs capped at $4.9 billion.

FY 2015

 

September 28/15: A fully-configured KC-46A tanker completed its first flight on Friday, a month later than scheduled owing to the chemical mix-up in early August. The program is a year behind schedule, the first flight is a rare positive sign for a program hit by cost spikes and schedule delays, with Boeing scheduled to deliver 18 aircraft in August 2017.

September 18/15: With Airbus walking away from the competition earlier this month, the Japanese Defense Ministry has reportedly selected the Boeing KC-46A to supply the country’s next generation refuelling tanker. Price negotiations are now scheduled, with the number of tankers the Defense Ministry plans to procure not yet determined. Boeing lost out in South Korea to the Airbus A330 MRTT in July.

September 17/15: The first KC-46A tanker is expected to fly on 25 September, following a year-long delay. The trouble-hit tanker has become a headache for Boeing, which has been absorbing increasing development costs through a firm-fixed contract signed in February 2011 which capped Air Force costs at $4.9 billion. The most recent setback resulted from an accident involving the insertion of chemicals into the aircraft’s refuelling system in early August, pushing the tanker’s schedule back by a month.

August 19/15: The mistake earlier this month involving the accidental insertion of chemicals into the fuel system of the KC-46A tanker has officially delayed the aircraft’s first flight by a month. The tanker will now see its first flight in late-September or early October, with the program’s original timetable calling for this flight to have taken place last year, with this pushed back to April and then again to late August, before this latest setback.

July 1/15: South Korea has selected Airbus’ bid to supply the country’s Air Force with four refueling tankers, beating competitors Israel Aerospace Industries and Boeing for the $1.07 billion program. The winning bid – the A330 MRTT – dashed Boeing’s hopes of securing its first export order for the KC-46A, which saw a strong dollar raise its bid price compared with a weakened euro for the European bid. The four tankers are scheduled for delivery in 2019.

June 10/15: NAVAIR has been slamming missiles into the side of its KC-46 tankers as part of Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division survivability testing at the Weapons Survivability Laboratory. The tests used – among other sensors – ten high-speed cameras to capture the impact of the test missiles, themselves specifically designed to inflict maximum possible damage to the aircraft. The Air Force intends to buy 179 of the tankers to replace approximately a third of the current tanker fleet, which consists principally of KC-135 Stratotankers.

April 24/15: Tinker Air Force Base (Oklahoma) has been named as one of four potential locations to base the Air Force’s fleet of new KC-46A refueling tankers, alongside Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base (North Carolina), Westover Air Reserve Base (Massachusetts) and Grissom Air Reserve Base (Indiana).

Jan 26/15: Flight test. Boeing conducted a flight test from Payne Field in Everett, Washington. The four-hour flight was uneventful, but well-documented.

Dec 10/14: spares. Boeing is awarded a not to exceed $84.5M undefinitized contract action modification (P00054) to previously awarded contract FA8625-11-C-6600 for 4,880 production support equipment items and 6 production spare parts. Work will be performed at Seattle, WA, and is expected to be completed by June 30, 2016. $9.5M in FY14 aircraft procurement funds and $32.2M in FY15 aircraft procurement funds are being obligated at the time of award.

Dec 03/14: wiring. Boeing Dennis Muilenburg told investors during a conference organized by Credit Suisse that wiring problems that had led to delays and charges (q.v. Sept 17/14) were now “resolved and closed out.”

Dec 01/14: Training. The USAF intends to finalize its Maintenance Training System (MTS) RFP in January 2015. The draft, released back in September, is found under solicitation IDN-KC-46-MTS.

Nov 24/14: Personnel. The Air Force Personnel center announces that the aircrew of 41 officers and enlisted members from the active force, Reserve and National Guard have been selected to staff initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E).

Nov 19/14: Schedule. The USAF publicly admits what KC-46A program watchers already know: Boeing is essentially out of schedule margin to deliver the 767-based KC-46As on time by 2017. The USAF is still describing the contract as “achievable,” but so many things have to go right that this isn’t a smart bet for outside observers. The USAF won’t really say anything else until disaster is certain, though, because the admission will make the service look bad (q.v. March 4/11). Sources: Reuters, “US Air Force sees challenges on Boeing KC-46 tanker program”.

Oct 16/14: Delays. Boeing finally admits that the KC-46A’s program schedule will have to be changed. They don’t know how many milestones will need adjustment, but they’re still holding to the idea that they’ll have 18 KC-46As delivered by August 2017.

Can they avoid proving Airbus’ March 4/11 prediction that Boeing would deliver late? It’s hard to see how Boeing’s on-time promise adds up now, given significant GAO and DOT&E concerns that the testing program as proposed is too compressed and can’t be executed (q.v. April 11/14, Sept 17/13). Boeing gets to try convincing Pentagon acquisition officials with an official submission early in 2015, and the USAF will then conduct its own “schedule risk assessment” to examine Boeing’s assumptions.

Most ways of speeding up programs involve spending more money, though that tends to have diminishing returns past a certain point. The program’s official cash reserve is expected to run dry in March 2015, but the USAF’s costs are capped, so it’s likely that Boeing will wind up spending more private funds on KC-46A development. Sources: Bloomberg, “Boeing Seeks Revised Schedule for U.S. Aerial Tanker”.

FY 2014

Competition in South Korea? Initial basing decisions; Boeing takes extra costs charge, announces delays.

Workers saluted

Sept 17/14: Flight delay. First flight for the KC-46A is in question due to the same wiring bundle technical issues that forced Boeing to take an additional $272 million Q2/14 charge on the program (q.v. July 23/14). USAF spokesman Ed Gulick:

“We are disappointed with Boeing’s current KC-46 production challenges and their inability to meet internal production milestones, but we do not see anything of great concern and are confident they will overcome the issues,” said Gulick in a statement to Puget Sound Business Journal. “The KC-46 program’s technical and cost performance are on-track; Boeing has met every contractual requirement to date.”

The baseline 767 has about 70 miles of wiring in the design, and the need for redundancy in certain systems pushes the 767-2C to 120 miles, including shielding requirements and mandatory separation distances for safety reasons. The redesign will address these issues, but it sideswipes plans for concurrent installation in the 4 test aircraft currently under construction. Given the program’s known issue with compressed test schedules (q.v. April 11/14), they had better be ready by April 2015. Sources: Aviation Week, “First Flight for KC-46 Tanker Platform Slips Further” | Puget Sound Business Journal, “Air Force ‘disappointed’ in Boeing tanker delays; issues cost Boeing millions”.

Sept 15/14: Training. The USAF issues a Draft Request for Proposal (DRFP) for the KC-46 Maintenance Training System (MTS) Program. It consists of various specific component trainers, e-learning materials, and Training System Support Center build-outs. Sources: FBO.gov, “KC-46 Maintenance Training System, Solicitation Number: IDN-KC-46-MTS”.

Aug 5/14: Basing. The USAF announces that the KC-46A’s MOB2 Air National Guard base will be Pease ANGB, NH, which beat Forbes AGS, KS; Joint-Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, NJ; Pittsburgh International Airport AGS, PA; and Rickenbacker AGS, OH.

Pease has apparently been the preferred alternative since May 2013, owing to its location in a region of high air refueling receiver demand and successful ANG-USAF partnership. This announcement follows the required environmental reviews. Sources: Pentagon NR-409-14, “Pease Air National Guard Base selected to receive KC-46A Pegasus aircraft”.

Basing: MOB2 ANG picked

July 23/14: Cost. During a Q2 analyst conference call, Boeing CEO Jim McNerney says that they’re absorbing a $272 million unexpected charge related to problems with KC-767 wiring harnesses:

“We bid the EMD (engineering manufacturing and development) contract for the tanker aggressively, with zero margin, with planned profitability in the production phase. Despite our disappointment in encountering these challenges, the issues are well understood, and no new technology is needed to solve them…. We have a wet fuel lab, a lighting lab, those have all been put in place to de-risk the program. We have a wet lab where we are running fuel through pumps and valves to validate that on the ground.”

Sources: Boeing, “Boeing Reports Second-Quarter Results and Raises 2014 EPS Guidance” | Puget Sound Business Journal, “Boeing: We can fix Air Force tanker problems without new technology”.

July 14/14: Cost. The KC-46A development phase could end up costing Boeing more than expected. That may concern Boeing executives, but the USAF won’t pay any more and doesn’t care:

“Defense Undersecretary Frank Kendall told reporters late on Sunday that Boeing was performing “satisfactorily” on the KC-46 tanker program, but several events – including water damage caused by a sprinkler malfunction at the company’s Everett, Washington plant – meant costs were higher than expected.”

Boeing says that they’ll be able to cut costs with their testing approach. We’ll see. Sources: Reuters, “AIRSHOW-Boeing may face higher than expected costs on KC-46 tanker”.

June 30/14: South Korea. Boeing confirms that they’ve formally offered South Korea the KC-46A tanker being developed for the USAF, rather than the KC-767 model that’s already in service with Japan and Italy. They tout the KC-46A’s quick-conversion main deck cargo floor, but in the face of North Korea’s WMD arsenal, and ability to target ROKAF bases with missiles, they make a point of mentioning that:

“Unique among tankers, the KC-46 can operate in chemical, biological and nuclear conditions, features cockpit armor for protection from small arms fire, and can also operate from a large variety of smaller airfields and forward-deployed austere bases.”

Sources: Boeing, “Boeing Offers Next-Generation KC-46 Tanker in Republic of Korea Competition”.

June 4/14: Infrastructure. The Ross Group Construction Corp. in Tulsa, OK wins a $17.5 million firm-fixed-price contract with options, to built the KC-46A Fuselage Trainer Flight Training Center and the Fuselage Trainer at Altus AF, OK. Option 4 for sidewalks and landscaping, and Option 5 for additional concrete parking stalls, are exercised at time of contract award. Altus AFB was recently chosen as the KC-46A’s main training base (q.v. April 23/14), and already operates in that capacity for the KC-135 fleet.

The estimated completion date is Oct 5/15. Bids were solicited via the Internet, with 7 received by the US Army Corps of Engineers in Tulsa, OK (W912BV-14-C-0015).

May 29/14: Infrastructure. MEB General Contractors in Chesapeake, VA wins an $8.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for construction services to alter the KC-46A apron fuels distribution system and supporting facilities at McConnell AFB, KC, and to relocate fuel vents/valves at the 3-bay hangar and 2-bay hangars.

All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 military construction budgets. Work will take place at McConnell AFB (KC-46A MOB1), with an estimated completion date of Dec 3/15. Bids were solicited via the Internet, with 2 received. The US Army Corps of Engineers in Kansas City, MO manages the contract (W912DQ-14-C-4010).

Flight Simulator

April 23/14: Basing. The Pentagon announces that McConnell AFB, KS will be is the KC-46A’s active duty-led MOB1 Pegasus main operating base. McConnell won because swapping in 36 KC-46As for 44 KC-135s involved the lowest military construction costs, and the base is located in a high-demand area. McConnell was also seen as “an ideal central location for the new KC-46A Regional Maintenance Training Center.” It beat Fairchild AFB, WA (2 KC-135 Sqns), Grand Forks AFB, ND (1 KC-135 Sqn), and Altus AFB, OK, all of whom will continue to operate KC-135s.

By default, Altus AFB, OK will continue in its FTU tanker training role, which it already performs for the KC-135. Advantages to keeping it in a training role include co-location with both tanker and heavy receiver aircraft for training purposes, and “considerably fewer” new construction requirements vs. McConnell. Altus will begin receiving KC-46A planes in 2016.

The Air National Guard MOB2 base (q.v. Jan 9/13) remains undecided, and will be picked in summer 2014. It will be 1 of Forbes Air Guard Station, KS (whose chances have probably dropped); Joint-Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, NJ; Pease Air Guard Station, NH; Pittsburgh International Airport Air Guard Station, PA; and Rickenbacker Air Guard Station, OH. The winner will begin receiving planes in 2018. Sources: Pentagon, “Air Force Announces Bases to House New Tanker Refueling Aircraft”.

Basing: MOB1 & FTU picked

April 17/14: SAR. The Pentagon finally releases its Dec 31/13 Selected Acquisitions Report [PDF]. The KC-46A has seen the Pentagon’s program costs go down:

“Program costs decreased $2,181.5 million (-4.2%) from $51,642.1 million to $49,460.6 million, due primarily to lower construction estimates based on site surveys of initial bases (-$715.4 million), funding reductions in FY 2015-2018 given stable program execution and no engineering change proposals to date (-$655.6 million), and the removal of construction planning and design funding from FY 2014-2024 budgeted elsewhere (-$268.8 million). Additional program cost decreases included the application of revised escalation indices (-$222.7 million), accelerating the procurement buy profile (-$157.7 million), and sequestration reductions (-$142.9 million).”

Cost decrease

April 11/14: GAO Report. The US GAO tables “KC-46 Tanker Aircraft: Program Generally on Track, but Upcoming Schedule Remains Challenging“. Flight testing is scheduled to begin in June 2014 for the 767-2C, and in January 2015 for the KC-46, but it will be a bit of a squeeze making that:

“The KC-46 program has made good progress to date—acquisition costs have remained relatively stable, high-level schedule and performance goals have been met, the critical design review was successfully completed, and the contractor is building development aircraft. The next 12 months will be challenging as the program must accomplish a significant amount of work and the margin for error is small. For example, the program is scheduled to complete software integration and the first test flights of the 767-2C and KC-46. The remaining software development and integration work is mostly focused on military software and systems and is expected to be more difficult relative to the prior work completed [which is generally on schedule]. The program’s test activities continue to be a concern due to its aggressive test schedule. Detailed test plans must be completed and the program must maintain an unusually high test pace to meet this schedule. Perhaps more importantly, agencies will have to coordinate to concurrently complete multiple air worthiness certifications. While efficient, this approach presents significant risk to the program. The program office must also finalize agreements now in progress to ensure that receiver aircraft are available when and where they are needed to support flight tests.”

The GAO and the Pentagon’s DOT&E group continue to believe that Initial Operation Test & Evaluation should be pushed back 6-12 months, in order to train aircrew and maintenance personnel and verify maintenance procedures. The USAF isn’t convinced yet, and knows that this move would delay the entire project for a similar period. Furthermore, the testing schedule itself is so concurrent that any problems found during test are almost certain to create delays to the program as a whole. One technical area that could still bite them involves “lingering instability in…. the centerline drogue system and wing aerial refueling pod,” but Boeing hopes to fix that before flight testing begins.

Finally, as of December 2013, the original $354 million program reserve budget has just $75 million (21.1%) left, leaving the program at risk of running out before testing begins. As long as the USAF doesn’t change the design, however, that’s Boeing’s problem.

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 KC-46 Tanker program comes in for praise in a couple of areas. One has to do with the “should-cost” method for the final product, which will reportedly save $6.8 billion over the total program, with $6.4 billion listed as already realized. The other area that drew praise was the program’s use of all 4 best practices for development programs: (1) identifying key product characteristics; (2) identifying critical manufacturing processes; (3) conducting producibility assessments to identify manufacturing risks; and (4) completing failure modes and effects analysis to identify potential failures and early design fixes. Boeing should be motivated to do all that, because their contract makes them fully responsible for any fixes required in early production aircraft.

Costs remain almost identical to initial estimates, so far. The bad news is that test boom production has been delayed by almost a year due to design changes and late parts, but Boeing hopes to have it ready in time for initial KC-46A flight testing in January 2015.

March 4-11/14: FY15 Budget. The US military slowly files its budget documents, detailing planned spending from FY 2014 – 2019. The KC-46A program’s revised totals are reflected in the article’s charts, and the USAF has worked hard to protect the program. What’s interesting is the program’s schedule. It hasn’t been changed officially, but Air Mobility Command isn’t giving an official Initial Operational Capability date.

Previous years had listed budgets for spares, but those have effectively been revised. A contractor service agreement for the initial planes will see also spares bought as part of the procurement budgets, until the USAF takes over all maintenance itself.

Feb 20/14: KC-46 Pegasus. USAF Gen. Mark Welsh announces that the KC-46A will be the “Pegasus”. Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James had approved the recommendation from Air Mobility Command boss Gen. Paul Selva earlier in the week. Sources: AFA Air Force Mag, “Introducing the KC-46A Pegasus” | Everett Herald, “Air Force dubs KC-46A tanker ‘Pegasus'”.

KC-46 Pegasus

Jan 16/14: Industrial. Boeing has begun assembling the 4th and final KC-46A test aircraft, and says that the program remains on track to deliver the initial 18 tankers to the Air Force by 2017. According to the current schedule, the 1st flight of a KC-46 test aircraft will take place at mid-2014 without its aerial refueling systems, followed by the first flight of a full KC-46A tanker in early 2015.

The first delivery of a production aircraft to the Air Force is planned for early 2016, but of course that depends on things going well during testing. Official reports to date have been skeptical, so no matter how things turn out, someone is about to be proved wrong. Sources: Boeing, “Boeing Starts Assembly of Final KC-46A Test Aircraft”.

Nov 5/13: Infrastructure. URS Group Inc. in Mobile, AL receives a $13 million firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery contract for architect-engineering services to support USAF KC-46 beddown in the continental United States. The 767 is closer in size to the KC-135, which means that it needs fewer infrastructure changes than the A330/ KC-45.

There will still be facilities and features to build (q.v. FBO.gov, Oct 2/13). Estimated completion date is Nov 14/18, with work location and funding determined with each order. Bids were solicited via the internet, with 57 received by the Army Corps of Engineers in Mobile, AL (W91278-14-D-003).

Oct 22/13: Industrial. Boeing announces that assembly of the 3rd aircraft and 2nd boom are underway. They sound confident that manufacturing of the initial batch of 4 aircraft remains on track to be completed by Q3 2014.

This would be good news for their USAF client, and would also help the company make its case in South Korea (q.v. Aug 7/13), where parliament is about to review whether to proceed with a competition for 4 tankers to be delivered in 2017-19. Sources: Boeing, Oct 22/13 release.

Oct 2013: Basing. Public hearings scheduled at the end of the month in Kansas and Oklahoma are postponed on October 11 because of furloughs at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) during the government shutdown. As of Oct 23, a new date for the hearings had not yet been released. Meanwhile the Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC) and the US Army Corps of Engineers are preparing infrastructure work: AFCEC | Industry Day | Sources Sought.

FY 2013

Design finalized after CDR; State of the program reports; Sequester threat; Basing competition; Training aids picked.

KC-46A and B-2
(click to view full)

Sept 17/13: Testing. KC-46A program executive Gen. John Thompson offers a bit of clarity regarding testing plans. The first 4 planes will be split between the commercial 767-2C baseline, which is set to fly in January 2014, and 2 fully converted KC-46A tankers, which won’t fly until June 2015. Civil certification is an important precursor to the military supplemental certification (q.v. May 31/13), and the 767-2Cs will eventually become KC-46As to support initial operational test and evaluation.

Thompson sounds very confident about the intensive testing schedule, but then, he needs to. Past GAO and DOT&E reports have flagged it as a program risk (q.v. Jan 17/13, Feb 27/13), and have even called the test plan “not executable” (Jan 17/12). Sources: NDIA Magazine, “Newly Designed KC-46 Aerial Refueling Tanker to Undergo Strenuous Testing”.

Sept 4/13: Boeing announces that the USAF has validated the final design elements of the KC-46A, concluded that it meets requirements, and frozen the plane’s configuration. That clears the way for production and testing.

Design is set.

Aug 7/13: South Korea. Yonhap reports that South Korea may acquire 4 aerial refueling tankers by 2019. It seems to be at the discussion level rather than a firm decision. If it proceeds, Boeing’s KC-46A and Airbus Military’s A330 MRTT are seen as the logical contenders, and the 2019 date makes the KC-767 a viable possibility.

The A330’s challenge is that, unlike Australia, South Korea’s zone of action doesn’t really need the A330’s range and size. That will make the extra expense problematic. It’s also worth noting that South Korea already has significant defense relationships with Israel’s IAI. That could create an opening for IAI’s much cheaper K-767 MMTT option, which is also on offer to Singapore. Sources: Yonhap News, “Air Force to acquire 4 aerial refueling tankers by 2019”.

July 10/13: CDR. KC-46A Weapon System Critical Design Review takes place, and is successful. Source: Boeing, Sept 4/13 release.

CDR

July 3/13: Sub-contractors. Fleet Canada Inc. in Fort Erie, ON receives its 1st order from Boeing, for sub-assemblies of the KC-46A Camera and Boom Fairings. The contract is issued as part of Boeing’s industrial offset requirements for various Canadian defense buys, including the C-17A airlifter and CH-47F Chinook helicopter. Fleet Canada.

June 26/13: production. Boeing announces that production of the first aircraft has begun. The USAF’s Critical Design Review (CDR) will start in July 2013, as announced last year. Beyond that, the company is forecasting the following milestones:

• First aircraft assembly: Nov. 2013-January 2014
  
• First flight: 2015
  
• First delivery: 2016
  
• Delivery of the first 18 aircraft by August 2017

June 16/13: Exports. Boeing told reporters that Boeing is engaged in talks with several export prospects in Asia and the Middle East, for a total of 20 potential units. The company’s defense and civilian arms are working together to be able to make the aircraft available for sales abroad by 2017. Bloomberg | DoD Buzz.

May 31/13: Certification process. Boeing will seek FAA certification in 2 phases: first there is one for the commercial 767-2C aircraft, then a supplemental one for the military modifications to the commercial aircraft.

In March 2012, the GAOlisted the fact that Boeing planned to pursue some parts of these 2 certifications in parallel as a risk factor. John Howitt, the program deputy manager, told AIN that this is addressed with joint technical planning and work, even though the 2 certifications are separate from an administrative perspective. Sources: AIN.

May 1/13: Training. Berkshire Hathaway company FlightSafety Services Corp. in Centennial, CO wins a $78.4 million fixed-price-incentive-firm and firm-fixed-price contract to design, develop, and build the KC-46 aircrew training system, including delivery of courseware and simulator-based training systems. FlightSafety will design and manufacture the KC-46, Boom Operator, and Part Task Trainers at its 375,000 square foot simulation facility in Oklahoma; the first device is scheduled for delivery in February 2016.

FlightSafety is no newcomer to this role, with operations at 15 U.S. Military bases that include Flight School XXI; Training systems for the KC-10 Extender, C-5 Galaxy, C-17 Globemaster, AFSOC’s HC-130P Combat King, and the V-22 Osprey tiltrotors; and Contractor Logistics Support for the T-6 JPATS and T- 37/38 trainers. The KC-46A contract pays $1 million initially, with the rest to be paid over time, including additional production and operations options that could raise its value beyond $78.4 million. Warren Buffett will be glad to hear that.

Work will be performed at Broken Arrow, OK and St. Louis, MO and is expected to be complete by 2026 if all options are exercised. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition, with 5 offers received by USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WNSK’s Simulators Division (FA8621-13-C-6247). See also USAF | FlightSafety International.

April 17/13: Sub-contractors. ITT Exelis announces a contract from Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) to supply its anti-jam N79 CRPA (Controlled Reception Pattern Antenna) GPS antennas, for use with Raytheon Navshield and Advanced Digital Antenna Production equipment on the KC-46A. Work will be performed in Bohemia, NY.

April 13/13: Restructure at peril. USAF AMC commander Gen. Paul J. Selva reiterates the KC-46A’s #1 priority status for the Air Force, and warns about the effects of restructuring this contract:

“…because we have a firm fixed-price contract for the development of that airplane, if we allow ourselves to get into the position where we don’t have the funds to pay for the initial development of the airplane, that contract gets reopened…. We’ll pay more…”

Probably. Boeing bid hundreds of millions of dollars below development cost to win KC-X, but 2 years into the contract, the US military’s ability to switch to Airbus is more limited. They’d have to delay their #1 priority program, while creating a lot of opposition in Congress. There are creative ways to charge more in total, and Boeing would be well placed to negotiate a few in any restructuring.

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. For KC-X, it’s pretty much steady as she goes, hewing more or less to previous plans.

Total reductions from FY 2014-2017 are around $182 million compared to FY 2013 plans, but a fixed-price contract is going to have to reach the agreed total regardless. Current budgets show just $3.173 billion allocated for RDT&E from FY 2011 – 2018, but the USAF is near-certain to owe $4.7 billion for the EMD phase.

April 7-10/13: Basing. As the USAF prepares to make decisions about where to base its KC-46s, communities are competing. The catch is that there are really 2 initial competitions, and they’re mutually exclusive (q.v. Jan 9/13 entry). Grand Forks Herald | Lawton Constitution | Wichita Eagle.

Feb 27/13: GAO Report. The GAO’s annual in-depth look at the KC-46 program is out. The good news is that after 28% ($1.4 billion) in development work, the program costs and schedule haven’t changed much. The CDR is still scheduled for July 2013, albeit with some risks. The USAF and Boeing are evaluated as managing the project well, and have added the ability to track progress toward key aircraft performance goals.

Concerns fall into 3 areas: financial reserves, weight, and software. The GAO is one of several agencies that think flight testing and certification will need to take about 6 months longer, and the boom refueling system is changing a bit, but those are secondary risks right now.

The development contract set aside about 7% ($354 million) in reserves, and 2 years into a 7-year development program, 79.6% of those reserves have been spent, leaving less than $72 million to cover an expected $3.5 billion in work. Some of the issues driving this spending aren’t resolved yet. As we explained above, the government’s costs won’t change if this problem isn’t solved, but GAO is worried about technical problems growing and creating schedule issues.

Projected weight is now expected to exceed the KC-46’s target weight, and each pound above target reduces fuel payload by 1 pound. Extra weight could also affect operating requirements for takeoff, mission radius, and landing. The program has a mitigation strategy in place, and further weight reduction initiatives can create tradeoffs in areas like durability and cost.

Software is a good news/bad news story. They’ve cut total software development by 40%, but code reuse will be less than planned (52% vs. 76%), which means new and modified software has doubled to 48% from 24%. That means more work overall and more testing, though program officials are claiming that schedules won’t be affected.

Feb 22/13: KC-135Rs retiring. After more than 50 years of service and 22,500 flying hours, the 1st operational re-engined KC-135R Stratotanker retires from service, and heads to AMARG’s “boneyard” at Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ. KC-135R #61-0312 first flew as a KC-135A on Aug 14/62, and was re-engined into a KC-135R on June 27/85.

This plane’s retirement is budget-driven, as 1 of the 16 scheduled KC-135 retirements in FY 2013. On the other hand, the KC-135 Program Office at Tinker AFB, OK used the Fleet Health Analysis Tool to pick the aircraft. Joey Dauzat, 97th Maintenance Directorate KC-135R sortie generation flight chief, discussed KC-135 usage patterns, which will become much more relevant if something happens to the KC-X program:

“[KC-135Rs] assigned to Altus Air Force Base fly approximately 1,820 sorties per fiscal year, which averages out to 91 sorties per aircraft…. Flight hours are approximately 7,030 hours per fiscal year, which averages out to 351 flight hours per aircraft. All sorties are required to have [refueling booms] on them, so every sortie flown is a boomer training sortie.”

Feb 2/13: A USAF presentation to Congress says that if sequestration takes effect, the KC-46A program may need to be restructured, along with the F-35 fighter and MQ-9 Reaper Block 5. Flight International.

Feb 2/13: High Usage. The USAF is planning to use KC-46As more intensively than their KC-135 counterparts. That makes sense on several levels: (1) As a way to save money by flying the more expensive-to-operate KC-135s less; (2) As a way to build in surge capability for the KC-46As if the KC-135 fleet has a problem; and (3) As a pre-conscious recognition that KC-X is probably the USAF’s entire future aerial tanker fleet.

The KC-135’s average of 2.5 aircrews per plane will rise to 3.5 aircrews for the KC-46A, adding about 60 full aircrews to the force, and costing about 11.2% more for KC-46A lifetime operations and maintenance because they will be flying more often. Total operations and support costs are now predicted to be approximately $103 billion, but the $10 billion or so rise would be offset by any savings from fewer flights of the more expensive KC-135Rs. USAF.

Higher usage planned

Jan 17/13: DOT&E testing. The Pentagon releases the FY 2012 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The USAF has bought 2 767-200s for live fire testing, and is planning the survivability assessment, including LAIRCM tests. They do have one major concern:

“The ALR-69A RWR [radar warning receiver] was selected as Contractor Furnished Equipment by Boeing; however, integration and performance on the KC-46A are high risk. DOT&E recently completed an assessment of the ALR-69A RWR on the C-130H1 and assessed it as not effective, but suitable, in a separate classified report dated October 22, 2012. Not only do these effectiveness problems require correction, but the system is required to improve its geo-location capabilities as compared to the demonstrated C-130J capability.”

DOT&E also has some technical issues with the overall testing plan. The 750 hours of operational testing over 5.5 months can establish effectiveness, but getting 76% confidence of suitability (maintainability) would need 1,250 hours. This was also pointed out in last year’s report, and it will need to be worked out one way or another.

Jan 9/13: Basing. The USAF announces KC-46A initial basing candidates, while stressing that losing bases will continue to operate KC-135s. The USAF doesn’t mention this, but the FTU training and MOB1 operating base awards are mutually exclusive: you can win one, but not both. There’s no overlap at all with the ANG’s MOB2 locations, so those have to be separate. Candidates include:

Formal Training Unit: Altus AFB, OK vs. McConnell AFB, KS. Altus already performs the FTU role for the KC-135. Winner begins receiving planes in 2016.

Active Duty Main Operating Base (MOB 1): One of Altus AFB, OK (KC-135 FTU); Fairchild AFB, WA (2 KC-135 squadrons resident); Grand Forks AFB, ND (1 KC-135 squadron resident), and McConnell AFB, KS (4 KC-135 squadrons resident). Winner begins receiving planes in 2016.

Air National Guard MOB 2: One of Forbes Air Guard Station, KS; Joint-Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, NJ, Pease Air Guard Station, NH; Pittsburgh International Airport Air Guard Station, PA; and Rickenbacker Air Guard Station, OH. Winner begins receiving planes in 2018.

Oct 16/12: Industrial. Boeing opens the KC-46 Boom Assembly Center on schedule at Boeing Field in Seattle, WA. Boom assembly marks the program’s shift to production from design activities, and the 1st fly-by-wire boom is scheduled to enter testing during Q3 2013 at Boeing Field’s System Integration Labs. Boeing.

FY 2012

Basing plans; Preliminary Design Review; Industrial decisions.

‘Paper airplane’ risks?
(click to view full)

Sept 12/12: Industrial. Boeing opens System Integration Lab 0 at Boeing Field, 3 weeks ahead of schedule. SIL 0 will be used to test commercial avionics and software for integration into the KC-46A Tanker. Another 3 SILs will open at Boeing Field and a 5th will open in Everett, WA by the end of 2013.

Boeing Field is also slated to house the program’s Boom Assembly Center, and the Finishing Center. The Finishing Center is scheduled to open in late 2013, and will be used to install military hardware and software onto the commercial 767-2C airframe. Boeing.

July 27/12: Sub-contractors. Eaton Corp. announces a supplementary contract from Boeing, which adds the aerial refueling pump system, the aerial refueling boom nozzle, and various airframe and aerial refueling system valves and fuel/ actuation components. See also June 18/11 entry.

June 13/12: Industrial. Boeing VP and KC-46 program manager Maureen Dougherty talks about moves Boeing is making since the announcement that it was closing the Wichita, KS facility. That closure creates added risk, but Boeing is sticking to its estimates and trying to offset it.

Three systems integration laboratories (SILs) will be located at Boeing Field in the southern part of Seattle, WA, but they won’t be operational until fall 2012. Flight testing, a full lab replica of the entire KC-46 fuel architecture, and the finishing center’s 2 workstations will also be there. They’ve also begun wind tunnel testing with Cobham regarding the shape of the plane’s refueling pods, a move that underlines the developmental nature of key items. Aviation Week.

May 14/12: Initial bases. The USAF decides that the KC-46A’s formal training unit (FTU) and first main operating base (MOB 1) will be led by active duty units, while MOB 2 will be led by an Air National Guard (ANG) unit. That may be one way to ease the transition. Many ANG pilots fly for commercial carriers, and many of those carriers already operate 767s.

Exact basing decisions will be based on location, capacity, environmental issues, and cost. The USAF plans to table a preferred base and shortlist for the active-duty FTU and MOB 1 in December 2012, so the environmental impact grind can begin and the base can begin receiving aircraft in FY 2016. The ANG-led MOB 2 is expected to get its preferred base and shortlist in spring 2013, and receive aircraft in FY 2018. USAF.

May 8/12: Sub-contractors. BAE Systems announces a contract from Boeing to develop and build the KC-46A’s Actuator Control Unit (ACU), which processes commands to control the aerial refueling boom.

Engineering and development work on the program will be conducted in Endicott, NY with manufacturing at the BAE Systems facility in Ft. Wayne, IN.

March 21 – April 27/12: PDR. Boeing’s KC-46 Tanker completes its Preliminary Design Review (PDR), confirming that it seems to meet system requirements and is ready to proceed with detailed design. In addition to the successful PDR, the Boeing KC-46 team has completed a System Requirements Review, Integrated Baseline Review, a PDR for the base 767-2C freighter, and Firm Configuration Reviews for the 767-2C and the KC-46A Tanker.

The program’s next major milestone is a Critical Design Review that will take place in the summer of 2013, and demonstrate that the KC-46A is ready for manufacture. Boeing.

PDR

March 27/12: Engine contract. Boeing formally signs a contract with Pratt & Whitney’s Military Engines division for up to 368 PW4062 engines (179 planes + 10 spares). It’s a private sub-contract, however, and the parties won’t discuss its value. Suffice to say that the cost of modern jet engines makes this a 10-figure contract, once all engines are ordered.

The 62,000 pound thrust PW4062 is the highest thrust model in Pratt & Whitney’s PW4000-94″ commercial engine family, which powers MD-11, early-model 747, and 767 aircraft. It’s offered for commercial freighter and military tanker applications. Pratt & Whitney.

March 26/12: GAO Report. The US GAO audit office releases report #GAO-12-366, “KC-46 Tanker Aircraft: Acquisition Plans Have Good Features but Contain Schedule Risk.” It cites “broad agreement that KC-46 schedule risk is a concern,” and especially cites overlap among development and production work. The USAF disagrees, citing FAA certification for the First Flight of the baseline 767-2C in June 2014, and promising 60% of FAA certification and military developmental flight testing before Milestone C production approval in August 2015. On the other hand, the GAO has usually been right about these risks, and the USAF has been wrong – most recently in the F-35 program.

Key information has been fed into other parts of this article, but this excerpt deserves especial attention:

“According to program officials, a change in system requirements, although unlikely… could increase the Air Force’s exposure to additional costs… the biggest risk to the KC-46 program is the Department’s ability to minimize changes to the contract… DOD has demonstrated limited ability to maintain stable requirements and limit changes to program technical baselines on previous complex weapon system programs, and that minimizing such change is essential to the success of the KC-46… any engineering or contract changes affecting system requirements or having the potential to impact program cost, schedule, and performance baselines must be approved by the Air Force Service Acquisition Executive in consultation with the Secretary and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force… Program officials maintain that… pricing will likely stay intact as long as the contract is not opened to negotiate modifications. […]

Boeing has to correct any deficiencies in the KC-46 discovered during the development program… on the four development test aircraft and all production aircraft… at no additional cost to the government. In addition, there is a special contract provision that requires each aircraft to demonstrate a certain fuel usage rate before the government accepts the aircraft. If any aircraft burn fuel above this rate, Boeing is required to propose a corrective action at no cost… if Boeing cannot meet the required usage rates, there are contract provisions allowing for a decrease in the amount paid to Boeing.”

March 7/12: Air Mobility Command chief General Raymond Johns at a House Armed Services Committee hearing:

“We continue to execute the program to cost and schedule baselines we established, along with Boeing.”

A Preliminary Design Review is scheduled later this month. Bloomberg.

March 7/12: Basing plans. From the USAF’s FY 2013 Force Structure Changes [PDF]:

The Air Force is currently developing requirements for the first two KC-46 bases, and expects to approve basing criteria in Spring 2012, identify candidate installations in Summer 2012, select preferred and reasonable alternatives by the end of calendar year 2012, and make final decisions in 2013.”

The Air Force expects aircraft deliveries to these first 2 bases in FY16. The next round of basing decisions is planned for FY14 at the earliest.

Feb 13/12: RDT&E budget. The Air Force asks for $1.8 billion in RTDE funds for fiscal year 2013 as part of the President Budget. This would be the peak of planned research and development spending on the program over 2011-2017, at 27% of the total. Air Force budget justification [large PDF].

Air Mobility Command (AMC/CC) has not yet determined an Initial Operational Capability (IOC) date, while Full Operational Capability (FOC) is expected approximately 24 months after IOC. The Air Force schedule as of December 2011 plans to reach Milestone C in Q4 FY15. These plans have been incorporated into the program briefing, above. See next entry below on the various risk assessments made about that schedule.

Jan 17/12: DOT&E doubters. When Airbus lost the contract, they placed 2 markers. One was that Boeing couldn’t deliver to their claimed price, and that has proven true (vid. Nov 27/11 entry), though their bid remains lower than Airbus. The other was that Boeing wouldn’t be able to make the delivery schedule, and the US Defense Department’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation’s FY 2011 Report adds weight to that belief. The report backs their position up with hard numbers, and bluntly concludes that “the KC-46 test program is not executable.”

To support that claim, DOT&E notes that military testing with past large aircraft averages under 30 flight hours per plane, per month. The Boeing/USAF TEMP schedule plans 42 FHPM, for flights that are “more specialized, higher risk, and more resource-intensive than FAA certification.” Worse, their planned 15% re-fly rate for military test items is even farther off; the 737-derivative P-8A, which is considered to be a successful program, has a current re-fly rate of 45%. Correcting to past averages adds 4 months to the 17-month testing schedule. DOT&E believes that even then, the 750 operational flight test hours aren’t enough, and 1,250 would be more realistic. That takes the testing schedule from 21 to 25 months.

Other serious omissions cited include no time for correction of discrepancies and/or deficiencies discovered during developmental testing, and no provision for the refueling boom control algorithm changes and/or procedural modifications that have been required for other new aerial refuelers. The report doesn’t say so, but the net takeaway is that Boeing is very likely to be late with its promised 2017 delivery. The USAF responded to Gannett’s Air Force Times with partial disagreement:

“The Air Force respects the opinions of the Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation, but does not agree with its assessment that the KC-46 test program is ‘not executable’… The Air Force does acknowledge that Boeing’s overall KC-46 program schedule is considered medium risk, in part due to its aggressive flight-test schedule.”

Jan 4/12: Wichita lineman, farewell. Boeing confirmed it’s going to close its Wichita, KS plant by the end of 2013. Wichita is currently the base for the company’s Global Transport & Executive Systems business, and its B-52 and 767 International Tanker programs. The facility also provides support for flight mission planning and integrated logistics.

Some of the 2,160+ Wichita jobs will be moved; others will be cut, beginning in Q3 2012. The move rankles hard in Kansas, as Boeing touted the jobs and state economic benefits if they won the tanker contract, and secured hard lobbying from state and federal representatives. Who now feel somewhat betrayed. The company counters that it isn’t entirely betraying those promises, as it spent more than $3.2 billion with approximately 475 Kansas suppliers in 2011, making it the 4th largest state in Boeing’s supplier network. That prominence is not expected to change, and the 24 Kansas KC-46A suppliers will still be providing elements of the aircraft as originally planned.

Once the Wichita plant closes, engineering work on the KC-46A will be placed at the Boeing facility in Oklahoma City, OK, instead. Work to convert 767s to KC-46 tankers will now be performed right on the 767 production line in Puget Sound, WA, copying a model first used with the 737-derived P-8A Poseidon sea control aircraft. Future aircraft maintenance, modification and support work will be placed at the Boeing facility in San Antonio, TX, which currently handles KC-135 and KC-10 maintenance and upgrade work. Boeing | NY Times | Congressman Mike Pompeo [R-KS-4, not happy].

Boeing closing its Wichita plant

Nov 27/11: EMD Overage rises again? Maybe. Media reports tout a figure of $500 million over maximum cost, but a breakdown says otherwise. The Pentagon’s latest Selected Acquisition Report reportedly gives a program manager’s estimate of $5.3 billion, which would actually be $1.2 billion over the KC-X EMD phase’s original target cost. Up to $4.9 billion, however, the government pays $600 million more, and Boeing pays $400 million. Costs above that are all Boeing’s responsibility. Boeing’s current estimate is $5.1 billion, which would raise its liability to $600 million (400 + all 200 overage). If the government program manager is right, Boeing’s liability rises to $800 million (400 + all 400 overage), while its overall bid cost to the US government for development plus production remains below Airbus’.

The SAR report in question appears to be an advance copy, as there has been no public release yet. It allegedly says that KC-46A engineering, manufacturing and development are “progressing well with no significant technical issues.” Given the figures above, that must be a relief to Boeing’s management. As for the Pentagon, it doesn’t have to care which EMD Phase figure is correct, since their costs are now known: $4.5 billion ($3.9 billion + $600 million). Above $4.9 billion total split costs, they aren’t paying for anything, and the estimate spread shows that there’s almost no chance of coming in under $4.9 billion. Bloomberg News.

FY 2011

Boeing wins round 2. Interim baseline review. Suppliers and components.

KC-X options
(click to view full)

Sept 13/11: Sub-contractors. AmSafe Industries, Inc. announces that it will supply 9g-rated barrier nets, and stationary and movable smoke barriers, specifically designed for the USA’s new KC-46A 767 aerial tankers. AmSafe is a global leader in this sort of technology; they’re also known as the makers of Tarian cloth armor that can stop enemy rockets.

Deliveries of the KC-46A internal barrier systems are expected to begin in 2015, and could be worth more than $45 million for all 179 planned aircraft.

Sept 13/11: Sub-contractors. BAE Systems’ Attendant Control Panel (ACP) for Boeing’s new civilian 737 interior will be migrating to the KC-46A. The touch-screen, networkable panel is designed to control a variety of interior functions such as lighting, drinking water, and waste tanks. Prices were not revealed. Work on the KC-46A tanker touch-screen cabin control systems will be conducted in Johnson City, NY, and Fort Wayne, IN. BAE Systems.

September 2011: Sub-contractors. Vol. 16, #4 [PDF] of Rockwell Collins’ internal Horizons magazine, whose “Refueling Innovation” article discusses their development of the KC-46A’s flight controls and refueling systems.

The stereoscopic Remote Vision System, which will display the refueling operation on both standard and 3-D screens, apparently drew on internal experience that included the Mars Rover, UAVs, and a remotely-operated bomb-disposal robot. Overall, the article cites ruggedization of components, and information fusion from the wide array of sensors and datalinks, as the 2 key engineering challenges. TSAS, which emerged from the latter challenge, is even being tested on Android OS smartphones and tablet computers.

Aug 24/11: IBR. The U.S. Air Force completes an interim baseline review (IBR) for the KC-46A.

IBRs provide mutual understanding of risks inherent in contractors’ performance plans and management systems, and outline what resources are needed to achieve program goals. This IBR had to be complete within 7 months of contract award, which would be Sept 24/11. The next major milestone is the Critical Design Review, which is scheduled to happen by September 2013. Aviation Week.

July 14/11: Politics. Sen. John McCain [R-AZ], the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, sends a letter to the Pentagon that calls Boeing’s KC-X EMD bid “completely unacceptable”. His issue is that any increases between KC-X’s EMD target cost (revealed as $3.9 billion), and the $4.9 billion ceiling cost are split between Boeing (40%) and the USAF (60%). The net result is that Boeing’s lowball bid costs taxpayers an extra $600 million beyond their bid, and Boeing itself $700 million. Even that reported bid price still leaves Boeing lower than Airbus’ overall price, however, which was $2 billion higher for the combined EMD phase and subsequent production of 13 initial jets.

On the other hand, the practice of lowballing bids in order to secure contracts, then raising the real costs afterward, is correctly seen as toxic. The result is grave difficulty in budget planning, as other programs are sacrificed or compromised in order to pay for widespread overcharges.

In fairness to Boeing, it’s worth going back to the original contract bids. Reports right after the February 2011 award had EADS Airbus bidding $3.5 billion for the EMD phase, while Boeing had bid $4.4 billion for the EMD phase alone. That means the USAF knew of about $500 million beyond its target costs from the outset, for an aircraft that had not been fielded or tested yet, and involved more development work than EADS’ offering. That means added risk of future increases, but the swiftness of these cost revisions strongly suggests that they were known beforehand. Actual costs for Boeing’s EMD phase are currently $5.2 billion, and the amount of the cost breach tends to lower confidence in Boeing’s ability to meet the contract schedule, a point that was also raised by Airbus after the award.

The question is whether Sen. McCain’s opposition will have any effect at this point in time. That may seem unlikely, but then, it also seemed unlikely when he opposed the original KC-767 lease deal post-9/11. McCain release | Bloomberg.

June 24/11: Costs. Bloomberg reports that Boeing’s KC-X bid is going to be $300 million over the KC-X cost ceiling, which it reveals as $4.9 billion. Because it’s a fixed-price contract, Boeing is solely responsible for those extra costs.

According to Bloomberg, a USAF statement from Lt. Col. Jack Miller said that the USAF was told after the contract award that: “it proposed a ceiling price that is less than its actual projected cost to execute the contract… There is no legal barrier that prohibits pursuing a below-cost proposal strategy and Boeing’s met all rules.”

Recall that the Feb 24/11 contract award said only that Boeing’s Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase contract was “over $3.5 billion.” Subsequent reports had Boeing’s EMD phase bid at $4.4 billion, vs. EADS Airbus’ $3.5 billion. On the other hand, the total bids for EMD + 4 planes, and another 14 planes of initial production, was reportedly $20.6 billion for Boeing, vs. $22.6 billion for Airbus – who called Boeing’s bid an “extreme lowball.” If Bloomberg’s report is true, we now have an idea what Boeing was willing to pay, in order to prevent Airbus from setting up a production line in America, and to keep the 767 alive as a military export and commercial option.

June 22/11: After months of refusing to divulge details, Boeing announces major suppliers for its KC-46A team, and confirms the tanker’s fuel capacity at 212,000 pounds, with an offload rate of 1,200 gallons per minute. The KC-46 Tanker team will include more than 800 suppliers in more than 40 states and support approximately 50,000 total U.S. jobs. Major suppliers have been added to the article’s industrial teams section.

June 19/11: Sub-contractors. Raytheon announces orders from Boeing supply digital radar warning receivers, and digital anti-jam GPS receivers, for the KC-46 tanker. Its AN/ALR-69A is an all-digital radar warning receiver designed to work with both fighters and large aircraft, and its technical architecture will speed up signal identification amidst cluttered environments.

The digital anti-jam GPS receiver, with its multielement controlled reception pattern antenna, integrates both reception and high performance digital anti-jam capabilities into a single product.

June 18/11: Sub-contractors. Eaton Corp. announces a Memorandum of Agreement with Boeing to supply hydraulic and fuel distribution subcomponents, cargo door electro-mechanical actuation systems, hydraulic system components, electrical sensing and control devices, and cockpit controls over the life of the KC-46A program.

June 7/11: KC-46A details emerge. Flight International reveals more about the KC-46A, while outlining what we still don’t know, 3 months after one of the largest contracts in USAF history.

For starters, it’s based on a cargo variant. At over 188,000 kg/ 414,470 pounds, the 767-2C’s maximum takeoff weight is about 20,000 pounds heavier than the 767-200ER, making it even heavier than the stretched 767-300ER that Boeing rejected for Round 1. The 2C is slightly stretched itself, at 6.5 feet longer than the 200ER, with a cargo floor and door. Beyond this, the winglets, 787-based cockpit large display system, auxiliary fuel tanks and provisions for tanker systems, and more powerful Pratt & Whitney 4062 turbofans are all known changes from the 200ER.

To find out if Boeing has made any other changes from the basic 767-200ER, outsiders will reportedly have to wait until Boeing completes a USAF system requirements review, and an integrated baseline review.

May 6/11: Sub-contractors. Marshall Aerospace announces that they had been picked in 2010 to supply the KC-46A’s integrated Body Fuel Tanks, and that Boeing’s win has resulted in an initial contract for the design, certification and manufacture of an initial batch of development tanks. They expect production orders for “more than 650” tanks to follow over a 15 year period, in order to equip the KC-X program’s 179 aircraft, with a total value exceeding GBP 100 million.

Marshall Aerospace has previous experience producing integrated Body Fuel Tanks for Boeing, including the 747, 777, and the 737-derivative P-8A Poseidon programs. Boeing has refused to discuss its Round 2 partners, but Marshall appears to have elbowed Round 1 partner Sargent Fletcher aside for this role.

March 11/11: Aviation Week outlines what we still don’t know about the KC-46A. We still don’t know the actual development phase price. We still don’t know the plane’s configuration, either, which makes it impossible to evaluate the likelihood that Boeing can deliver on time. Excerpts:

“Neither the U.S. Air Force nor Boeing have stated what exactly “over $3.5 billion” means for the KC-46A development contract… [Boeing tanker VP Jean] Chamberlain acknowledged on the company’s Feb. 24 telecon post-win that this is “concurrent development” meaning flight test and developmental activities are taking place as the first aircraft are being built…Thanks to the three-time restructured F-35 development program, the term “concurrent development” has become a bit of a dirty word among some in Pentagon circles… There are a few things we do know: Somehow Boeing is putting a digital 787 cockpit into an analog 767 aircraft and there is a modified KC-10 boom to meet the gallon-per-minute offload requirement. But, we don’t know what the design entails in terms of risk reduction on the platform or on the mission systems. Finally, we don’t even know officially that work has begun on this contract. Neither USAF nor Boeing will confirm.”

March 4/11: No protest. EADS North America chairman Ralph Crosby expresses disappointment at the press conference, but says that EADS could not have undercut that “extremely lowball bid,” submitted to keep Airbus from securing a US production site. The company “will not take any action that could further delay the already overdue replacement of the Air Force’s aging tanker fleet… Much is promised by our competitor, whom we congratulate. However, should they fail to deliver, we stand ready to step in with a proven and operating tanker.”

More precise figures come from the US AFA’s report of the conference:

“…Crosby revealed – based on an hour-long debrief from the Air Force last week – that the price difference between the companies’ bids was 10 percent. Boeing bid $20.6 billion and EADS $22.6 billion on initial development and initial production of their respective KC-46A and KC-45 tankers… He expressed doubt that Boeing will be able to deliver all 18 aircraft by 2017 as called for… because Boeing will not have its first flight-test-worthy KC-46A ready until 2015. [Crosby] also revealed that EADS’ estimated cost for engineering and manufacturing development on the KC-45 – which the company would have modestly revised from the existing design – was $3.5 billion, while Boeing bid $4.4 billion for EMD on its design, which has not flown.”

The fixed price contract means that if Boeing fails to deliver, most of the financial risk is theirs. That leaves the USAF with the operational risk, if they can’t hold Boeing to its performance commitments. Read: EADS North America | Reuters | US Air Force Association | Warner Robins Patriot.

March 3/11: Flight International:

“Newspaper Les Echos published a small article four days after the contract award noting that the USAF’s decision on tankers will make it “very difficult” for Paris to purchase the General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper unmanned air vehicle, which is competing against the EADS Talarion and a Dassault/Thales/Indra consortium offering the Israel Aerospace Industries Heron TP.”

The French do make another choice, at first, but costs and delivery times eventually do force them back to the MQ-9. See “Apres Harfang: France’s Next High-End UAV” for full coverage.

Feb 28/11 – March 1/11: Debriefing session with EADS North America. Meanwhile, the government and Northrop Grumman/EADS still have not reached a legal agreement on the canceled KC-45 contract. Aviation Week.

KC-46A concept
(click to view full)

Feb 24/11: Boeing wins Round 2. The “KC-46A” win surprises many aerospace analysts, who expected an EADS win based on leaks that EADS had scored better in the USAF’s models, and expectations they could price their planes lower. The Pentagons says that both candidate aircraft met all required criteria, but Boeing’s adjusted price was over 1% less than Airbus’. That meant the USAF did not consider various “non-mandatory” bonus criteria, which could only have made a difference of up to 1%.

Note that these are adjusted prices. Rep. Norm Dicks [D-WA], for example, claims credit for successful pressure to change the USAF’s costing model from 25 years of expected fuel costs to 40 years, which he boasts cost Airbus “billions of dollars” in the respective calculations.

As a result, Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a fixed price incentive firm contract valued at “over $3.5 billion” for the KC-X Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase, which will deliver 18 of their KC-46A aircraft by 2017. The ASC/WKK at Wright Patterson AFB, OH, will manage this contract (FA8625-11-C600). A newly opened assembly line in Everett, WA will build the tankers, including all the military modifications to the airframe, right alongside commercial 767 airliners, rather than shipping 767s elsewhere for military modifications. This approach was pioneered by the 737-based P-8A Poseidon sea control aircraft program, and will now be extended to the KC-46A.

By comparison, the Feb 29/08 award to EADS & Northrop Grumman (FA8625-08-C-6451) would have involved 4 test KC-45 aircraft for $1.5 billion, plus 5 production options for up to 64 aircraft at up to $10.6 billion. Over 18 aircraft, that leads to a “base plus averaged” total of $3.819 billion. US DoD | Boeing release | Boeing feature w. video | EADS North America || Agence France Presse | Bloomberg | Chicago Mag | CNBC | DoD Buzz | Defense News | Flight International | Seattle Post Intelligencer.

Boeing wins KC-X EMD with 767-based KC-46A

Feb 14/11: The Pentagon releases its FY 2012 budget request, which includes $877.1 million in development funding for the KC-X program. The FY 2011 request for $863.9 million is still in play as well, however, thanks to the 111th Congress’ failure to pass a FY 2011 budget.

The 112th session of Congress is dealing with the FY 2011 budget as H.R. 1, and could explicitly delete KC-X funding if its disagreements with the USAF run deep enough. The other option would be more passive, and involves continuing all FY 2011 spending at FY 2010 levels. A “2010 Redux” option would be a problem for KC-X, because that would give the program just $14.9 million to work with. On the other hand, a passive approach by Congress would allow to USAF to “reprogram” some funds from elsewhere into KC-X, whereas an explicit rejection would not.

Feb 10/11: Final Bids. Boeing and Airbus delivery their final KC-X bids. Airbus | Boeing | Flight International.

Final bids

Feb 8/11: Turbulence ahead for EADS. The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reports that Daimler plans to sell its stake in EADS when a consortium agreement expires in June 2012, in order to focus on its car manufacturing business. If they do, the move will have large ripple effects, which is why the news has provoked meetings at the highest levels of Germany’s government.

Daimler already dropped its stake in EADS from 22.5% to 15%, in a 2007 deal brokered by the government with a German bank consortium. Germany has since tried but failed to find a long-term German investor to take over the banks’ 7.5% stake, in order to keep the long term German-French shareholder balance at 22.5% each. The banks agreed to extend the current arrangement to 2013, and France’s Lagardere media group is looking to sell its own 7.5% stake at some point after 2012, but Daimler’s planned departure revives that issue of shareholder balance as a near-crisis. A German replacement firm with deep enough pockets, technical expertise, and enough of an interest in aerospace may not exist. Deutsche Welle.

Jan 31/11: WTO on Boeing. The World Trade Organization releases preliminary information its decision re: Boeing subsidies (DS 353), the other end of the trade dispute that has already seen a ruling concerning Airbus. The release took place to the 2 companies. A full public report will not be available for a couple of weeks – which matters, because accounts differ.

Boeing implies that the WTO rejected most claims, leaving only $2.6 billion in subsidies. They contrast this with the June 2010 decision that found $20.4 million in illegal Airbus subsidies: $15 billion in launch aid, $2.2 billion in equity infusions, $1.7 billion in infrastructure, and roughly $1.5 billion in R&D support, with $4 billion in illegal launch subsidies that must be restructured.

Airbus, in contrast, points to $5 billion of illegal subsidies to Boeing in this decision, with additional figures to be determined in later stages of this dispute, plus over $2 billion in illegal state and local subsidies that Boeing will receive in the future, and an expected WTO ruling that Washington State and the City of Everett must stop subsidizing Boeing. Airbus adds that they believe the WTO will find that Boeing subsidies were more distorting than Airbus’ loans, and float a $45 billion damages figure. Time will tell, but this sentence in Airbus’ statement is certainly clear:

“Taking the cases together, the WTO will be seen to now have specifically green-lighted the continued use of loans in Europe and commanded Boeing to end its illegal R&D cash support from NASA, DoD and the US taxpayers.”

Look for this case to continue, though the emergence of competitors in Russia and China could lead to negotiations, in hopes of setting global standards around subsidies. WTO DS 353 | Airbus | Boeing | Boeing WTO mini-site | Flight International | NY Times | Seattle Post-Intelligencer. See also Sept 15/10 entry.

WTO ruling on Boeing unfair subsidies

Jan 27/11: Italy. The Italian Air Force’s accepts the 1st of 4 delayed Boeing KC-767A tankers at Pratica di Mare AB near Rome. This KC-767 is registered as MM 62229, and will now enter a series of evaluations and other activities before being placed into operational use. There have been a number of issues with Italy’s tankers, so their acceptance is important to Boeing. Flight International.

Jan 19/11: During in-flight testing between an EADS MRTT tanker plane destined for Australia’s RAAF, and a Portuguese air force F-16 fighter, the refueling boom loses 1 of its 2 stabilising fins, making the device uncontrollable. The incident resulted in the detachment and partial loss of the refuelling boom from the MRTT, and the pieces fell into the sea. Fortunately, the plane itself made it back in one piece.

Airbus is investigating the mishap, and at least they have a flying platform to test, but the timing could hardly be worse. Australian DoD | Flight International | Reuters.

A330 refueling accident

KC-30 & F-16s
(click to view full)

Dec 13/10: Team EADS. Britain’s 1st A330 MRTT performs the type’s 1st fuselage-mounted hose-and-drogue aerial refueling dry contacts, using an F/A-18 Hornet fighter. Airbus Military. The 1st wet refueling took place on Jan 21/11, transferring over 6 tonnes of fuel at an altitude of around 15,000 feet, and at speeds from 250 – 325kt. AirTanker.

Cobham’s belly-mounted 805E FRU (Fuselage Refueling Unit) is part of the proposed USAF KC-45’s 4-point refueling system, which shares the 2 removable digital underwing hose-and-drogue refueling pods with FSTA aircraft, but also adds a fly-by-wire ARBS boom for UARRSI dorsal receptacles. Both the belly-mounted FRU and underwing hose-and-drogue refueling pods share the same modular architecture, and all 4 systems are controlled from the Remote Aerial Refueling Operator (RARO) console in the cockpit.

Dec 1/10: Delay. USAF Lt. Gen. Mark Shackelford, the military deputy from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition says that the final KC-X award will take until 2011, instead of being announced in November 2010. The USAF release adds:

“Air Force officials have said the KC-X source selection process will continue despite a mistake in November, where a limited amount of identical source selection information was provided to both KC-X offerors concerning their competitor’s offering… The information concerned was limited to a single page of non-proprietary data on a CD that did not include any offeror-proposed prices… Air Force officials have analyzed the information that was actually accessed by one of the offerors and have taken steps to ensure that both competitors have equal access to this information.”

Nov 21/10: Breach. A USAF error sends the wrong documents back to EADS and Boeing, giving them material from the other firm’s bid, The data sent by computer disk reportedly included pricing information, and both sides did the right thing and contacted the USAF immediately. Defense News | The Telegraph.

Protoccol breach

Oct 19/10: Tanker analysis. Iris Independent Research releases their KC-X competition white paper, “9 Secrets of the Tanker War.” One entirely unsurprising conclusion: KC-X’s 179 planes are it, and there will be no similar-sized KC-Y or KC-Z buys for at least 2 decades, if ever.

Given demographic and fiscal realities in the USA, that strikes us as a very safe prediction. Iris release | Full paper [PDF] | DoD Buzz.

Oct 6/10: No Antonov. The US GAO dismisses US Aerospace’s KC-X protest, leaving just Boeing and EADS. The core of the decision revolves around whether the bid was late, hence ineligible. The ruling that it was late offers an effective primer on bid delivery planning:

“In partially dismissing USAI’s protest, we concluded that, while many of USAI’s complaints were potentially relevant to the protester’s proposition that its messenger was understandably confused as to the location for submitting USAI’s proposal, such complaints did not support USAI’s allegations of intentional agency misconduct… it was USAI’s decision – not that of the Air Force – to have its messenger arrive at Wright-Patterson AFB entry gate 19B with less than an hour remaining before proposals were due; it was USAI’s decision not to seek advance agency approval for its messenger to be admitted to the AFB; and it was USAI’s decision not to confirm in advance the precise location of, and directions to, the building at which proposals were to be received. Based on our review of the protest allegations and the record submitted, we concluded that USAI’s allegations of intentional agency misconduct were insufficient to warrant further consideration…”

See: GAO statement | GAO B-403464 decision | Washington Post.

Oct 6/10: Team EADS. Airbus Military obtains A330 MRTT military certification from Spain’s Instituto Nacional de Tecnologia Aerospacial (INTA), which follows the European Aviation Safety Agency’s (EASA) civil Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) awarded earlier in 2010. The first 2 A330 MRTTs conducted more than 280 flights as part of the certification process, in addition to another 170 by A310 demonstrator aircraft.

As one can see by the number of flights involved, certification is an under-appreciated roadblock in the military delivery process. Fortunately certification in one jurisdiction makes subsequent certifications either much easier or unnecessary, depending on a jurisdiction’s standards and decisions. The INTA certification clears the way for Airbus Military to deliver Australia’s KC-30As, later in 2010, but the USAF would insist on its own certification process. Airbus Military | Agence France Presse | Australian Aviation | The Australian | Le Figaro [in French] | Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

FY 2010

Round 2 RFP and bids. WTO dispute.

AN-70
(click to view full)

Sept 15/10: Early reports leak out that the WTO is about to find that Boeing’s aircraft have also been the recipients of illegal subsidies. Since Boeing had been pushing the subsidy point hard in Congressional debates, a finding of that sort would be significant. It will certainly make for a more difficult argument on Boeing’s part, both because the political argument becomes less clear, and because the USAF’s decision to exclude WTO issues from the competition becomes more defensible. Boeing remains on the offensive, arguing that:

“If today’s reports are accurate that some $3 billion of the EU’s claims were upheld by the WTO… the ruling… confirms that European launch aid to Airbus stands as the single largest and most flagrant illegal subsidy in the aerospace industry. Nothing in today’s public reports on the European case against the U.S. even begins to compare to the $20 billion in illegal subsidies that the WTO found last June that Airbus/EADS has received (comprised of $15 billion in launch aid, $2.2 billion in equity infusions, $1.7 billion in infrastructure, and roughly $1.5 billion in targeted research support). Nor are there seemingly any violations requiring remedy approaching the scale of remedy required of Airbus/EADS… Neither do the public reports suggest that Boeing’s traditional market based approach to financing new aircraft development will need to change; a distinct contrast…”

WTO cases DS 353 (vs. Boeing) and DS 316 (vs. Airbus) | Boeing | EADS North America | European Union | Agence France Presse | The Australian | Bloomberg | India’s Economic Times | Reuters | London Telegraph | UPI.

Sept 14/10: Team EADS. A pair of Australian KC-30A tankers hook up and transfer fuel at 1,200 gallons per minute through the A330’s boom. That figure meets the USAF’s maximum requirement, something Boeing has yet to do in the air. EADS North America Chairman Ralph D. Crosby, Jr. also went on the offensive with regard to fuel economy:

“In any likely Air Force operational scenario, Boeing’s concept tanker will cost 15% to 44% more, measured on the basis of fuel burned per gallon of fuel delivered.”

See: EADS KC-45 Now | Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Aug 4/10: No Antonov. US Aerospace/ Antonov is disqualified for late submission. Aviation Week quotes Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell:

“The proposal was late and by law we are not allowed to consider it. We are considering two proposals and U.S. Aerospace is not one of those being considered.”

The magazine adds that:

“According to an industry executive, the company’s messenger arrived at the Wright-Patterson AFB gate at 1:30 p.m. July 9 (30 minutes before the deadline) and was denied entry, given bad directions and told to wait by Air Force personnel. As a result, the Air Force stamped the proposal received at 2:05 p.m.”

On Aug 2/10, U.S. Aerospace filed a bid protest with the Congressional Government Accountability Office, citing “unreasonable” conduct by the USAF. The firm’s bid had reportedly revolved around an “AN-112” based on the 4-engine AN-70 turboprop transport.

July 13/10: Team EADS. The Hill reports that the KC-X bid cost EADS North America $75,000 in final printing costs alone.

July 9/10: Team Boeing. Boeing delivers its KC-X v2.0 bid. Its release mentions that its design will contain cockpit displays from the 787 Dreamliner, which may not be a change from the first round.

July 9/10: Antonov?!? US Aerospace announces that it has submitted a joint KC-X bid with Antonov at $150 million per plane, following SEC notification of an agreement with Antonov and intent to bid on July 1/10. That agreement would give US Aerospace lead contractor status and final American assembly rights only under a KC-X contract, while Antonov would be the technical lead and manufacture components.

Unlike the March 19-22/10 UAC/ IL-96 hoax, this report has much more backing behind its assertion of a bid. The question is whether it makes any more sense, or would even qualify under Round 2’s mandatory criteria. Reports indicate a bid based on the modernized AN-124-100 “Ruslan” super-heavy transport, which would offer heavy airlift options that beat the C-17 hollow, but terrible operating efficiency as an aerial tanker. Reports of a custom designed “AN-112” make even less sense, given the years-long development and certification timelines. Unlike Ilyushin, Antonov doesn’t even have a base civilian airframe in the right size category. Defense News may have the answer that explains the hype:

“…a May 24 SEC report filed by U.S. Aerospace signals it is in financial trouble. A number of factors “raise substantial doubt about the company’s ability to continue as a going concern,” the firm told federal regulators.”

See: US Aerospace re: bid submission | US Aerospace re: agreement | Defense News | The DEW Line | UPI.

July 8/10: Team EADS. EADS North America delivers its KC-X v2.0 bid, one day before the extended deadline, and highlights key members of its Round 2 industrial team. EADS.

July 8/10: WTO. The World Trade Organization has put off a ruling on the EU’s subsidy complaint against Boeing (case DS 316) from July 16/10 until mid-September 2010. As the Wall Street Journal put it: “While the panel is likely to find that the U.S. has provided improper subsidies, it isn’t known if the WTO will be as severe on Boeing as it was on Airbus.” Meanwhile, the delay leave EADS very exposed in the political battles over the US KC-X contract. The EU is unhappy:

“The time lag between this case, and the United States’ case against support to Airbus (DS 316) has constantly increased over the six years this dispute has been running and the gap is now at nearly a year. It creates the wrong impression that Airbus has received some WTO incompatible support, whereas Boeing has not. Only when we have received both panel reports will both sides have a more complete picture of the dispute… We now expect the Panel to issue its interim report in DS 353 without any further delay.”

EADS Airbus’ CEO Tom Enders said he was “surprised and disappointed” by “the last minute announcement of yet another delay,” and appears to question the capability of the WTO to play a meaningful role in the global trade order:

“We have said time and again that the complexity, interconnectedness and industrial significance of the Boeing and Airbus cases would strain the capabilities of the WTO. Since these cases were filed, the world has changed. In aviation, the previous duopoly marketplace is increasingly being populated by government-sponsored players, leaving Boeing and Airbus as those that, by any objective measure, benefit least from government support. The ongoing struggle of the WTO to address the world as it was in 2004 (the date the cases were filed) raises the question whether it can succeed in its basic mission to create a climate for a negotiated settlement on the basis of fair market rules in the interest of both the industry and the employees on both sides of the Atlantic.”

See: WTO cases DS 316 and DS 353 | EU release | Airbus release | Agence France Presse | India’s Business Standard | Seattle Post-Intelligencer | UK’s Telegraph.

June 30/10: WTO. Boeing hails the public release of a World Trade Organization ruling on Airbus subsidies (case DS 317), which will be a lobbying point in the current KC-X competition. Airbus has its own take, of course, and the WTO also has a case involving Boeing – but it hasn’t ruled on that one yet. A columnist in Boeing’s hometown of Everett, Washington even thinks the ruling could ultimately help both Boeing and Airbus, which have seen state-owned competitors enter the marketplace in recent years. WTO | Boeing | Airbus | Everett Herald op-ed.

WTO ruling on Airbus unfair subsidies

June 7/10: WTO. Boeing teams with AgustaWestland in the US Presidential Helicopter competition. Finmeccanica’s subsidiary has produced several Boeing helicopters under license in England and Italy (WAH-64 Apache, CH-47 Chinooks), and now Boeing will return the compliment with the AW101. The license will give Boeing full intellectual property, data and production rights, making its version of a Presidential AW101 bid a Boeing aircraft, built by Boeing personnel, at one of its U.S. facilities. This decision is likely to create several ripples. Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute points out that:

“Boeing’s bid could create some embarrassing moments for both itself and Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin spent years arguing that the AgustaWestland airframe was superior… By the same token, Boeing is engaged in a bitter dispute with Airbus concerning European aircraft subsidies, and [the AW101 has received them]…”

See: Boeing | Finmeccanica [PDF] | AgustaWestland | DoD Buzz | Lexington Institute.

June 7/10: Team Boeing. Finmeccanica subsidiary DRS announces a teaming agreement with Boeing for work on its KC-X “NewGen Tanker” offering. DRS will collaborate with Boeing on the console design and then manufacture the Aerial Refueling Operator Station (AROS), and will also provide the interconnect design and associated cable sets to integrate AROS into the Tanker. All this is contingent on a contract win, of course.

June 3/10: Team EADS. EADS says it has American partners for its KC-X bid, but won’t name them “because we don’t want to put them under pressure.” Defense News.

May 19/10: The House Armed Services Committee takes the first step toward introducing WTO subsidy rulings to the competition, as part of its recommended FY 11 defense budget (H.R.5136). The modified bill reportedly requires the Pentagon to submit an interim report, discussing the impact of government subsidies on the KC-X competition, at the instigation of Rep. Adam Smith [D-WA]. The implicit message in that name is lost on nobody. See: Congressional Quarterly | The Hill | Politico | bNet op-ed.

May 13/10: U.S. Senator Sam Brownback [R-KS] and Congressman Todd Tiahrt [R-KS] hold a bi-partisan press conference announcing the introduction of the bi-cameral Fair Defense Competition Act (H.R.5298 and S.3361). The bill attracts 39 co-sponsors in the House, and its Senate counterpart attracts 3.

These bills would require the Department of Defense to consider World Trade Organization (WTO) decisions for military acquisitions. Specifically, they would require the Pentagon to add the cost of illegal subsidies onto the price of a competitor’s bid proposal, following a ruling by the WTO. The WTO has already ruled that Airbus’ aircraft were built using illegal subsidies. A ruling on Airbus’ complaint concerning Boeing is pending, but would not come in time to affect the KC-X competition.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer says that Boeing lobbyists have been lining up legislators for these measures, and Boeing itself is making rather unlikely noises about not bidding over subsidy-related issues. See also: Defense News | ABC affiliate KAKE-10 | US NPR | Reuters | Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

May 12/10: Team Boeing. Rockwell Collins announces that it is part of Boeing’s Round 2 aerial tanker team, with negotiated terms to deliver the same flight deck technology it supplies for the 787 Dreamliner, along with the KC-767’s Communication, Navigation, Surveillance/Air Traffic Management (CNS/ATM) systems, aircraft networks, and other electronics.

May 8/10: A Minneapolis Star Tribune article provides a glimpse into Boeing’s PR offensive on the ground. Part of it involves a trailer with simulators for the KC-767’s new boom, and associated fighters, for some members of the public.

Ralph Crosby, EADS NA
click to play video

April 20/10: EADS back in. EADS North America announces that it intends to submit a proposal for the KC-X aerial tanker RFP based on the KC-45 tanker, a version of the A330 MRTT/ KC-30B design that won the original contract. The US unit of the European aerospace giant plans to submit the proposal on July 9/10, the last day of the Pentagon’s extended deadline.

The company said it is continuing discussions with potential US partners, but apparently the European defense firm is willing to go it alone, if need be. The company reiterated its earlier promise to build a Mobile, AL manufacturing line for global A330F sales, and KC-X finishing work, if it gets the contract.

April 1/10: Boeing issues statement critical of Pentagon’s decision to extend the RFP deadline if EADS agrees to bid:

“We are deeply disappointed with EADS-Airbus efforts to further delay this vital warfighting program and tilt the U.S. procurement process in its favor. EADS-Airbus has been fully engaged in the competition for four years and was always expected to provide the vast majority of its team’s work content…We do not see a legitimate reason for EADS’s bid deadline extension request, and we believe an extension that favors any individual competitor does not further the goal of ensuring fair competition.”

March 31/10: A group of US senators sends a letter to President Obama criticizing EADS Airbus division for receiving “billions of dollars in illegal subsidies.” The senators urge the president not to extend the KC-X RFP deadline:

“Finally, having relied on illegal subsidies to buy market share in the commercial aerospace market, Airbus now seems intent on further using subsidized aircraft to significantly increase its present in the U.S. defense market. This is unacceptable. We urge you to move forward on the Air Force tanker competition without delay.”

The letter was signed by US Sens. Patty Murray (D-WA), Sam Brownback (R-KS), Chris Dodd (D-CT), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), and Michael Bennet (D-CO).

March 31/10: Bid extension. The Pentagon announces that if EADS wishes to bid, they will grant a 60-day extension instead of the 90 days requested. This would move the deadline from May 10/10 to July 9/10. Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell also said that:

“Given that this plane is long overdue, and we do not want its delivery date to slip later than it already has, we are prepared to compress our bid evaluation period to stay as close to the original award schedule as possible so as to still award the contract early this fall… [but we have no] willingness to change any of the plane’s military requirements or the way bids will be evaluated.”

Boeing and some of its supporters in Congress group of US senators criticized the decision. Boeing statement | US Senators’ letter to President Obama (Seattle PI blog) | DoD statement | Reuters

March 22/10: Russians. A Reuters report suggests that John Kirkland, the Los Angeles-based attorney who told various news media that UAC would announce a joint venture and enter the bidding for KC-X, may have been the victim of a scam.

Kirkland sent Reuters copies of letters on what appeared to be letters on “OOO UAC” letterhead, saying that high-level Russian approval of a bid was imminent, but subsequent examination showed contained several grammatical mistakes in Russian. UAC vice-president Alexander Tulyakov drove the final stake in when he told Reuters that:

“John Kirkland is not a UAC representative and we have had no communications with him… We have had no discussions whatsoever with any party about the possibility of producing air tankers for the U.S. air force.”

March 19/10: EADS in, Russians in?!? EADS requests a 3-month extension of the May 10/10 bidding deadline, because it is re-considering a bid submission without Northrop Grumman. The firm’s main foothold in the American market is its successful UH-72A LUH helicopter program, but without an established A330F production line, EADS had previously considered its American base too shallow to handle a contract this big. The Pentagon is reportedly receptive to a bid extension, citing previous examples like BAMS UAV, VH-71 helicopter, Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) II, and LOGCAP IV, among others.

The same day, Russia’s state-owned United Aircraft Corp. reportedly drops a double-surprise. The first surprise is that the firm is supposedly set to sign a joint venture with a small American aerospace firm to market Russian-designed aircraft, including promises that the JV will be announced on March 22/10.

The second surprise is that the firm reportedly intends to bid a tanker version of its IL-96 4-engined, wide body jetliner for the KC-X competition. The IL-96 is civil certified, and can be fitted with Pratt & Whitney engines, but it faces significant disadvantages, despite a price tag that could be as low as half that of a base 767 or A330 airframe. The most prominent obstacle is that the key partner is a state-owned Russian firm. While relations are better than they were in Cold War days, the USA is a long way from trusting Russia as any sort of reliable ally – and the reverse is also true. Congressional opposition to any win would be measured on the Richter scale. Other issues include expected higher operating costs from a 4-engine jet, the low esteem in which Russian airliners are held, and the fact that under 50 IL-96s have been built so far.

Given the expected $100 million cost of a bid, the effort would appear to be quixotic at best, unless the USAF changes it mind and decides to reimburse bid costs. Aviation Week | Bloomberg | Chicago Tribune | CNN | Deutsche Welle | The Hill | McClatchy Newspapers | Politico | Pravda | Reuters | Seattle Times | Wall St. Journal | Washington Post.

March 11/10: As one might expect, political rumbles continue across the Atlantic, with veiled and not-so-veiled threats of a trade war, or retaliation in the defense field. EU release | Aviation Week Ares roundup | Defense News.

March 11/10: EADS out. Aviation Week reports that EADS did not feel confident enough yet in its American footprint, to bid for the KC-X project. Its main beachhead in the USA at the moment is the $3.5 billion UH-72A Lakota Light Utility Helicopter program, which is going well but is an order of magnitude smaller than KC-X.

March 11/10: Team Boeing. Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc. announces that they’ve come to terms as part of Boeing Round 2 KC-767 NewGen Tanker Supplier Team. Upon a contract award from the United States government to Boeing, Spirit will build the Boeing tanker’s forward fuselage section in Wichita, KS.

March 8/10: NGC out. Northrop Grumman has apparently bowed out of the KC-X v2.0 RFP, leaving Boeing as the only bidder. The move is not unexpected, given the requirements and the estimated $100 million cost to bid, but it will create longer-term political issues for the program. The European Union is already issuing rumbles about protectionism, and an early blast from Sen. Sessions [R-AL] may be indicative on the domestic front:

“The unjustifiable overhaul of the Request for Proposals – which went far beyond the narrow problems raised by the GAO – completely abandoned the idea of a game-changing tanker in favor of a smaller, less capable plane. Of the 14 major changes to the solicitation, 12 favored Boeing’s smaller, older aircraft. In the end, the process was skewed, and no one can fault a private company for declining to participate in a government competition engineered to guarantee its failure… American taxpayers… could now be on the hook for the most expensive sole-source contract in history.”

Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn said the Pentagon was disappointed, but does not intend to change course. Boeing’s ardent backer Rep. Norm Dicks [D-WA], soon to be head of the House Appropriations’ defense sub-committee, advocates scrapping the bidding process now and negotiating a contract directly, while suggesting an increase in production from the program’s 15 KC-767s per year to 20-25 tankers per year. Northrop Grumman statement | EADS statement | Aviation Week | DoD Buzz | Miami Herald | Politico | Seattle Times | Washington Post early report | Agence France Presse early report | UK’s Daily Telegraph | Sydney Morning Herald | Seattle Post-Intelligencer reactions roundup.

March 5/10: Team Boeing. Boeing announces its RFP v2.0 offering. The new 767 “NextGen” aircraft add a modified version of the new 787 Dreamliner’s flight deck, with its larger displays and other design improvements. Engines will still be Pratt & Whitney’s PW4062s, but the fly-by-wire refueling boom looks different, and so do the wings. Aviation Week attempted to clear up Boeing’s exact offering, but:

“Boeing officials declined to comment on whether the wings, the doors and floors and flaps were being pulled from other commercial models [DID: as in the previous KC-X entry]. They declined interview requests as well…”

The 3rd thing Boeing’s official release emphasized was a pointed reference to the flight control computers that may have been a major cause of Air France Flight 447’s A330 crash over the Atlantic in 2009, with all hands lost:

“The Boeing NewGen Tanker will be controlled by the aircrew, which has unrestricted access to the full flight envelope for threat avoidance at any time, rather than allowing computer software to limit combat maneuverability.”

See also: Boeing | Pratt & Whitney | Aviation Week | DoD Buzz.

Feb 24/10: Final KC-X v2.0 RFP is out. Most of the changes made were narrow and technical, and do not change the structure of the competition. The need for a microwave landing system was scrapped, and Large Aircraft Infrared Countermeasures missile defense systems will now be provided by the government as a separate item, certain items had specifications defined more tightly, etc. Proposals will be due within 75 days of the request, and there will be another 120 days after that for government evaluation.

Price remains the key factor, based on the draft proposal’s weighting system. The development contract is a fixed price incentive deal, with the contractor responsible for 40% of any overruns up to 125% of the contract value, and all overruns beyond that. Production lots 1-2 are fixed price. Lots 3-5 will see a new price negotiated, with the contractor responsible for only the first 2.5% of price inflation. Re-negotiation would happen again for Lots 6-13, but this time the contractor would only be responsible for the first 1% of price inflation.

While these provisions protect manufacturers from spiraling commodity costs, they also allow the USAF to make changes later, so long as they’re willing to pay for them. RFP solicitation on FedBizOpps | US DoD press release | DoD presentation [PDF] | Boeing statement | Northrop-Grumman statement | Seattle Post-Intelligencer rounds up politician reactions in USA | AvWeek reports that NGC is “96-98% unlikely” to bid | Aviation Week article collection | Gannett’s Air Force Times | Government Executive magazine | Miami Herald | Washington Post | Reuters: tanker chronology.

Final KC-X v2.0 RFP

Feb 22/10: Dual buy? Flight International’s Stephen Trimble looks for clues to the funding behind a new lobby group called “Build Them Both.” As one might guess, the group favors a dual-source, accelerated buy contract for the KC-X competition, with both firms receiving contracts but annual orders being determined by production readiness, pricing, and the needs of specific theaters. This was the essence of the late Rep. John Murtha’s position.

Feb 8/10: Dual buy? House Appropriations Defense subcommittee chair John Murtha [D-PA], Capitol Hill’s #1 proponent of a KC-X split buy, dies of complications associated with intestinal surgery. A Washington Post blog reports that Rep. Norm Dicks [D-WA], one of EADS Airbus’ most avid foes on Capitol Hill, is likely to succeed Murtha as chair of the subcommittee, and North West Cable News asks the obvious question.

Jan 6/10: At a Pentagon press conference, Press Secretary Geoff Morrell discusses the KC-X v2.0 RFP, among other matters:

“…we are shooting to have the RFP out hopefully by the end of the month, if not early next month. We’re in the process right now of reviewing the comments that were provided… I think we’re still on schedule to get this out in the next few weeks. …no final decisions have been made yet about the RFP, but I think it is safe to say at this point that there will be changes to the draft… We’ve gotten feedback, some of it quite helpful. Some of – some of this we just have realized ourselves. And so I think the team is in the process of correcting mistakes and altering the acquisition strategy a bit, and that will be reflected in the final request for proposal which will likely go out in the – in the next couple or few weeks.

I would add one thing, and that is that whatever changes are being made should not be construed as any attempt to favor anybody. It is — what is being done is we are trying to make the RFP as fair and as transparent as possible, while at the same time providing the taxpayers with the best value for their money and the warfighters the best — the best plane to support their operations… we hope that when this happens that we will have a full and hardy and thorough competition between multiple bidders.”

Jan 4/10: Leeham News offer their 2010 Outlook for Boeing and Airbus, which includes discussion of the KC-X competition:

“We also believe there is a strategic argument, as well as a political one, that supports buying both airplanes because there are simply different mission requirements. But the Pentagon is adamant that it will not split the order… Winning the contract is also critical to the Airbus strategy of establishing a commercial A330-200 production base in the US… Airbus pledged to build the A330-200F [in Mobile, AL] and expectations are that the A330P will follow. But no tanker contract, no US plant. And this is why we believe Boeing and its supporters are fighting so hard to block a tanker award to Northrop. This, we believe, is more important to Boeing than winning the tanker contract, though we also acknowledge Boeing wants the contract on its own merits.

“…The [A330] MRTT is running about 18 months behind schedule for delivery to launch customer Australia. About six months was due to customer change orders, according to the RAAF and EADS. The balance rests with developmental issues.

“…Because of the need for a 787 production Surge Line (see 787 discussion below), the current 767 line will be relocated to the aft part of the bay it now occupies. A Lean production line will be implemented, reducing unit costs by about 20%. Relocation begins this year and will be completed next year… If Northrop stays in, we still think Boeing will submit only a KC-767 proposal… We remain concerned that Boeing has yet to deliver the KC-767 to Italy, now some four years late. We are told problems remain with the centerline hose-and-drogue system… [and] that issues remain with the wing-mounted refueling pods, though Boeing says these have been fixed. Although Boeing intended to deliver the first of four tankers to Italy last year… that this still has not happened indicates all is not well. Since the US tanker is similar to the Italian tanker, we remain skeptical about the program… Boeing is still not forecasting any dates concerning these remaining milestones [for Italy].”

Dec 1/09: Northrop Grumman’s President and Chief Operating Officer Wes Bush sends a letter to Department of Defense undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics Ashton Carter. As written, it says, the terms of the KC-X RFP imposed a structure that, in Northrop Grumman’s opinion, favors smaller planes like Boeing’s, and:

“…places contractual and financial burdens on the company that we simply cannot accept… As a result, I must regrettably inform you that, absent a responsive set of changes in the final RFP, Northrop Grumman has determined that it cannot submit a bid to the department for the KC-X program.”

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman replied that both manufacturers wanted changes that would favor them, and contends that:

“The Department has played this right down the middle… [we] cannot and will not change the warfighting requirements for the tanker to give advantage to either competitor… The department wants competition but cannot compel the two airplane makers to compete.”

Alabama’s Republican governor Bill Riley has a different take:

“The Obama administration has corrupted the tanker selection process with a blatantly unfair competition… The question is why is this RFP so radically different than the one Northrop Grumman won last year?”

A final RFP is expected in January 2010, but each program has hundreds of suppliers across the USA. Refusal to submit would trigger a very large political battle in Congress, one focused on the acquisition process itself. It remains to be seen whether it is possible for a single-winner tanker process to successfully obtain American Congressional approval and funding for its choice, in the face of a transatlantic competitor whose American partners saw billions of dollars in concrete business snatched away, and a domestic heavyweight with its own deep supplier and congressional networks. Northrop Grumman’s Letter [PDF] | Agence France Presse | Bloomberg | NY Times | Politico | Reuters | Wall Street Journal | Aviation Week | Defense News.

Nov 25/09: Flight International reports that one of Australia’s KC-30Bs refueled a pair of Spanish EF-18A Hornet fighters at the same time, using its hose-and-drogue refueling system.

Nov 10/09: Aviation Week headline: “Boeing, Northrop Sour On KC-X Draft RFP.”

Nov 10/09: One of Australia’s KC-30B/ A330 MRTTs performs the 1st fuel transfers with its all-digital 905E hose and drogue system, using its left and right under-wing pods to transfer more than 9,200 lbs of fuel to a “NATO” (likely Spanish) F/A-18 fighter. The first of Australia’s 5 KC-30Bs will be delivered to Australia in mid-2010. EADS release.

Nov 2/09: The Lexington Institute’s Loren Thompson writes that the EADS/Northrop Grumman bid has become a question, rather than a certainty:

“Last week, one of the two teams competing to provide the Air Force’s future aerial-refueling tanker launched an unusual campaign to overturn the service’s strategy for buying the plane. Northrop Grumman and its European partner Airbus signaled that they don’t believe they have a plausible chance of winning under the proposed terms, and began building the foundation for a formal protest. What’s unusual about the move is that competitor Boeing hasn’t been all that happy with the revised tanker solicitation either, but Northrop has elected to pursue an aggressive strategy that is sure to anger its Air Force customer. Here’s why Northrop is willing to take that risk…”

Oct 29/09: Sen. John McCain [R-AZ] sends a letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Pentagon acquisition czar Ashton Carter, and USAF Secretary Michael Donley, asking questions about the KC-X v2.0 source selection process. He asks about the use of fuel usage rates and construction needs, but not full probable lifecycle cost, in the cost calculations, asks if any of the requirements considered mandatory in Round 1 were discarded RFP v2.0, wonders if the pricing requirements in the draft RFP would “…not favor mostly smaller airframes, and asks how the proposed pass/fail rating can “provide for an assessment of relative developmental and integration risk among the offerings.”

The final v2.0 RFP was supposed to be released around the end of November 2009, but delays out to January 2010 are reportedly a possibility. Aviation Week.

Oct 21/09: Team EADS. An A330 MRTT equipped with the ARBS in-flight refueling boom passes fuel to an in-flight aircraft for the first time. A Royal Australian Air Force KC-30B flew a 4:30 test flight, with more than 3,300 pounds of fuel transferred to 2 Portuguese Air Force F-16s during 13 contacts. Other systems tested included the boom’s fly-by-wire stability and 3-D vision system. EADS | Australian Defence Magazine.

Oct 2/09: Sen. Jeff Sessions [R-AL] says he will introduce an amendment to the FY 2010 Senate defense spending bill (amendment 2610 to S. 1390, currently before the Senate Armed Services Committee). When introduced, it would block the use of funds for the U.S. Air Force’s KC-X competition, unless the service agrees to disclose pricing data about Boeing’s proposal in 2008 to rival Northrop Grumman, just as Northrop Grumman’s data was disclosed to Boeing after Boeing’ asked for an explanation of its loss. Sen. Sessions release | Aviation Week | See also Sept 29/09 entry.

Oct 1/09: KC-10. In a stunning upset, Northrop Grumman beats Boeing for a 10-year, $3.8 billion contract to service the global KC-10/KDC-10 tanker fleet. Boeing subsidiary McDonnell Douglas built the planes, modified them, and had serviced them since their induction in the 1980s. By all accounts and metrics, service quality was high – which is why some analysts see the loss as symptomatic of deeper problems in Boeing’s relationship with the USAF.

FY 2009

Draft RFP 2.0.

KC-46A & B-1B
(click to view full)

Sept 29/09: Major procurement error. As legislators connected with Boeing push the USAF regarding the recent WTO ruling, Northrop Grumman puts out a statement of its own, citing issues with the process:

“Northrop Grumman continues to be greatly concerned that its pricing information from the previous tanker competition was provided by the Government to its competitor, Boeing. Access to comparable pricing information from Boeing has thus far been denied by the Pentagon. With predominant emphasis placed on price in this tanker re-competition and Northrop Grumman again proposing its KC-45 refueling tanker, such competitive pricing information takes on even greater importance. It is fundamentally unfair, and distorts any new competition, to provide such critical information to only one of the bidders. The company will continue to work with its customer to fully resolve this issue.”

The USAF had provided this data to Boeing after Boeing had lost, as part of the USAF’s requested debriefing. The Pentagon has dismissed Northrop Grumman’s claim on the basis that the disclosure to Boeing was in accordance with regulations, and that “the data in question are inaccurate, outdated and not germane” to the new bid, which is a different competition. Clearly, Northrop Grumman continues to disagree; if the impasse continues, the question may become whether the GAO disagrees during a future appeal. Northrop Grumman | Aviation Week | recent Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Protoccol breach

Sept 29/09: Alabama’s Press-Register puts out an editorial supporting a split-buy and speeded-up production, which legislators like House Appropriations Committee Chair John Murtha [D-PA] continue to support:

“With a defense contract potentially worth $40 billion at stake, expect both sides to fight over every clause and nuance they think might favor their opponent. Right now, Boeing and Northrop have 60 days to comment on the draft guidelines; this is only the first stage of the contest… By the time the lawyering and politicking are over, at least a few years will have elapsed. So here’s one more plea for a split contract.”

Sept 25/09: The USAF releases the KC-X v2.0 draft RFP, re-starting the competition. The KC-X Round 2 RFP remains structured as a “winner take all” competition, and retains its target number of 179 aircraft, will full-rate production of 15 per year beginning by the 3rd year (Lot 3 of up to 13). Each contender will provide a fixed-price proposal to develop and deliver 4 Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) planes, followed by the first 64 aircraft and necessary spares. It will also submit an upper limit on the price of the remaining 111 tankers, and 5 years of initial support.

Assuming that legal and political delays don’t get in the way, first production delivery is now planned for 2015, with Initial Operational Capability in 2017. More information on the RFP’s evaluation structure can be found in the section “KC-X RFP v2.0: The New Structure.”

Next comes the 60-day comment period, after which the formal RFP can be expected. The bidders will then have 60 days after that final RFP release to submit their bids, and the government will have 120 days to evaluate them. A decision is currently expected in mid-2010. FedBizOpps RFP #FA8625-10-R-6600 | USAF RFP release presentation | DoD briefing re: competition, incl. Slides [PDF] and Q&A session | USAF | Boeing statement | Northrop Grumman statement | Agence France Presse | Aviation Week and AVWeek Ares re: selection process | Aviation Week re: people involved | Business Week | CBS WKRG in Pensacola, FL | Government Executive | The Hill | Leeham News & Comment aviation analysts | Military.com | Nextgov | Seattle Post-Intelligencer analysis | WSJ: Boeing brings flight simulator to Capitol Hill.

Draft RFP to restart KC-X

Sept 25/09: The USAF’s last serving KC-135E aerial tanker touches down at Davis-Monthan AFB near tucson, AZ, after its final flight. All remaining KC-135s are now KC-135Rs. USAF release.

KC-135E retires

Sept 16/09: US Secretary of Defense Gates says that he is giving the new leaders he’d installed at the Air Force the final say in the $40 billion tanker deal. This is a reversal from the Round 1 arrangements after the GAO ruled that the USAF had not followed its own criteria, and the US Department of Defense took over direct management of the program. On the other hand, it does put the USAF on the firing line instead of the DoD, in order to absorb any initial hits in what’s sure to be an intense political fight.

Other reports add that the revised KC-X proposal is due “in a few weeks.” USAF | Boeing statement | Defense News | Government Executive magazine | Inside Defense | Agence France Presse | Business Week | NY Times | Reuters | Seattle P.I. offers analyst’s view.

Sept 15/09: Aviation Week reports that keeping the existing KC-135 fleet in the air will become increasingly expensive:

“…at AMC, planners are wrangling with how to keep the KC-135s flying until as late as 2043… outgoing AMC chief [Arthur] Lichte points out that maintenance crews sometimes work 7 hr. for every hour of KC-135 flight. “Every year we don’t get tankers, it is costing us $55 million right off the top,” Lichte says. “When you get out to about 2018 and 2020, what started out as about $2 billion a year to maintain the KC-135 fleet goes all the way up to $6 billion… we continue to do everything we can to make sure don’t have an Aloha Airlines where the skin peels back or a TWA 800 [type incident] where frayed wires cause an explosion in the fuel tank… In total, aging-related costs are expected to add at least $17.8 billion to the price of maintaining the KC-135 for 40 years.”

The increase in projected maintenance costs is attributable mostly to fuselage skin and wiring checks, and corrosion issues which are already a significant contributor (30%-50%, by some reports) to depot maintenance costs. Meanwhile, access to KC-10 replacement parts is a worry, and the KC-10 boom control unit is becoming unreliable and should be replaced.

KC-135 costs rising

Sept 15/09: Flight International reports that KC-X Round 2 may see a supplier shakeup on the Boeing side:

“Boeing officials are determined to set “aggressive price targets” for selecting suppliers and even manufacturing locations… Boeing’s quest for cost-savings has also reopened the 777’s engine supplier to competition… all three certified engines – the GE90, Pratt & Whitney PW4000 and Rolls-Royce Trent 800 – will be considered if Boeing decides to offer the KC-777. However, engines that have not been certified on the 777, such as the GEnx family, have been ruled out. “We don’t think there’s enough time for a certification programme,” Lemaster says… If Boeing decides to propose the KC-767 in the next round, the structures and control systems will come from the same aircraft type, Lemaster says.”

Sept 14/09: US Ar Force Secretary Michael Donley says the WTO’s ruling will have no effect on the USAF’s process, as Airbus’ counterclaim is still pending, and so is the EU’s expected appeal.

A day later, 47 American politicians send a letter to President Obama that says: “Buying Airbus tankers would reward European governments with Department of Defense dollars at the same time that the U.S. Trade Representative is trying to punish European governments for flouting international laws.” Mobile Press-Register | Seattle Post-Intelligencer | Reuters via Forbes | Business Week | Seattle P.I. re: letter | Seattle P.I. offers contrasting views re: finer points of WTO trade dispute.

KC-X past & candidates:
Boeing Slide
(click to view full)

Sept 14/09: In a briefing at the Air Force Association’s 2009 Air & Space Conference and Technology Exposition, Boeing officially acknowledges that the Boeing 767 and 777 are both potential KC-X candidates. They also launch their own web site, UnitedStatesTanker.com, to promote their “KC-7A7” tanker bid. Boeing release | Boeing briefing [PDF]

Sept 8/09: EADS chief executive Louis Gallois tells the French newspaper La Tribune that: “Our objective is to be in the [KC-X] competition. We are totally determined to be in the running, unless it appears that the request for proposal is biased.” Source.

Sept 4/09: The World Trade Organization issues an interim ruling that the $4 billion in aid Airbus received from European governments to develop the A380 super-jumbo passenger jet constituted illegal subsidies.

Technically, the WTO ruling could empower the U.S. to levy tariffs either against Airbus or other European imports, equal to the amount of the improper subsidies. Legally, the EU is expected to appeal the ruling, Airbus has complaints of its own on tap, and any firm action remains years away. Business Week | bnet.

July 9/09: Stephen Trimble of Flight International highlights a recent podcast interview with Boeing tanker spokesman Bill Barksdale, which seems to show a lot of enthusiasm and prep work at Boeing around the KC-777. Excerpt:

“BARKSDALE: The 777 as a tanker is just so much more capable than anything it’s got as a peer. And I know that sounds like a bit of bravado, but… I’ll give you a couple of examples. If you compare them, the 777 would provide – deliver – however you want to say it – 23% more fuel than the KC-30. It could carry 44% more payload – more cargo – in the back. And it also would carry about 42% more passengers in the back as well. So those are very generic, very general kinds of numbers… If the air force really wants to go in that direction, the Boeing company has spent a lot of time in the last year preparing for that, knowing that we have a real, true, large tanker that, like I said, is comparable in size to the KC-30. And, yet, you get so much more for your money.”

June 16/09: Northrop Grumman CEO Ronald D. Sugar, and EADS CEO Louis Gallois, issue a joint statement re-affirming their joint commitment to the KC-45 Tanker team.

June 15/09: Bloomberg reports that Boeing is preparing to submit a KC-777 for KC-X v2.0, but a DoD Buzz story clarifies. It turns out that Boeing is preparing to offer a KC-777 option if the revised requirements put a premium on cargo capability or fuel offload amounts, but the firm hasn’t made a decision and won’t until the RFP comes out. The firm had considered a KC-777 before the initial KC-X RFP as well, but the RFP’s lack of extra points for exceeding USAF specifications led Boeing to go with its smaller, cheaper, and more fully developed KC-767 instead. DoD Buzz adds:

“Still, a Boeing 777 bid raises all sorts of questions. Given the problems Boeing has had reducing the vibrations afflicting its refueling pods on the 767, and the enormous technical and engineering challenges of refitting the 777, can the company get a plane in shape in time to fill the Air Force’s first tranche of 179 planes?… But it may be that Boeing is largely conceding the first tranche of planes to Northrop and aiming for the larger follow-on buy.”

The DoD Buzz report adds rumors that Northrop Grumman may walk if the revised RFP is seen as weighted in Boeing’s favor – again, a parallel with the firm’s rumblings before the initial KC-X RFP was issued:

“…there are rumors that Northrop is weighing its commitment to the tanker program, which has cost the company financially and politically. Two sources have told me that Ron Sugar, the company’s CEO, will walk away from the competition should the new RFP appear weighted too heavily in Boeing’s favor. This could, of course, be part of the company’s gaming efforts to ensure that the Air Force does include analysis such as best value as it makes its choice. Meyers made clear, as does his colleague Janis Pamiljans in the video below, that the Air Force must include “best value” as a key component of the service’s tanker analysis.”

June 9/09: The USAF’s role in KC-X v2.0 is still up for debate. Military.com’s DoD Buzz reports that Defense Secretary Robert Gates is still deciding whether the Air Force would lead the renewed competition, or whether it would remain with the Office of Secretary of Defense. Either way, however, Gates said that former Raytheon lobbyist and current Deputy Defense Secretary Bill Lynn would take a “very close interest” in the program.

May 27/09: The Project on Government Oversight NGO explains some of the hidden variables behind decisions about who should run the program:

“…this isn’t only a debate over who will be ultimately responsible for the program, but that it will also determine how much this program will be impacted by the new Weapons Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. One of the major revisions to the Senate’s initial version of the bill in the Senate Armed Service committee’s mark-up was changing language that would require the newly established Director of Independent Cost Assessment to conduct independent cost assessments for all major defense acquisition programs (MDAPs) to only those programs where the Under Secretary for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (AT &L) is the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA)… But as a result of this change in mark up, if DoD chooses to give the Air Force management of the tanker program, there will be no mandatory role for the new Director of Independent Cost Assessment to provide oversight and implement policies and procedures to make sure that the cost estimation process is reliable and objective. One can’t help but wonder how much DoD had the tanker program in mind when requesting this change to the legislation.”

April 6/09: US Defense Secretary Gates announces his FY 2010 budget recommendations, which will include a KC-X RFP in summer 2009.

April 6/09: The Lexington Institute raises warning flags about the new acquisition process:

“Despite Obama Administration rhetoric about openness in federal contracting, the new and improved tanker selection process has all the transparency of the FBI’s witness protection program. The performance requirements for the future tankers were blessed by the Pentagon’s Joint Requirements Oversight Council with almost no input from industry, and now the acquisition strategy is being crafted in much the same way. If you were planning to spend $100 billion over the next 30 years on a new aircraft fleet, wouldn’t you want to check with the only two qualified suppliers to determine whether your terms and specifications were reasonable? We have been here before… Many of those problems could have been avoided if the industry teams had been kept informed on how the selection process was unfolding… The current buildup to a re-competition is being carried out with even greater secrecy.”

At this point, with Northrop Grumman and its suppliers believing that a huge contract was taken away from them, and Boeing treating the lobbying as a life-or-death issue, the impact may be tangential. The political reality is that lack of transparency can make the process worse, but even perfect transparency won’t remove the fundamental political bottleneck.

March 17/09: NGC endorses split-buy. A Northrop Grumman release offers figures from a KC-135 Economic Service Life Study, and claims that for each KC-45 that enters service, USAF operating costs would drop by $7 million per year, assuming replacement of 2 KC-135s with each A330 MRTT inducted. It adds:

“Congressmen John Murtha (D-PA) and Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) commented recently the only way to get badly needed tankers to our warfighters quickly is through a dual procurement acquisition process… According to Northrop Grumman analysis, a dual procurement scenario could replace the capability of the entire Air Force KC-135 fleet by the year 2022 – seven years sooner than best case single procurement strategy. Dual procurement eliminates the need to re-skin the KC-135 aircraft.

By procuring 24 aircraft per year from two contractors rather than 15 per year from a single source, as is the current Air Force budget plan, the service could save $7.2 billion in tanker Operating and Support (O&S) costs between 2012 and 2022 compared to the O&S costs associated with a single procurement strategy. Through dual procurement, the Air Force saves $10.2 billion in tanker O&S between 2012 and 2029, compared to the O&S costs associated with a single procurement strategy. [Our product is better, but]… if Congressmen Murtha and Abercrombie are correct the only way to get tankers to the warfighter quickly is through a dual procurement strategy, Northrop Grumman will support the effort.”

The crunch, of course, is that 9 more aircraft per year, at about $200 million each, adds $1.8 billion per year to actual spending. That’s another $19.8 billion from 2012-2022, or $30.6 billion from 2012-2029. The difference between those figures, and projected savings over the same time period, must come from somewhere. That means either expansion of the overall military budget, or dollars taken from other military programs. Both options are unlikely, and difficult.

March 13/09: An Inside the Air Force article entitled “Report: KC-135 Maintenance Could Reach $3 Billion Per Year by 2040” says that KC-135 maintenance costs will escalate by almost 50% over the next 30 years, and cost twice as much as new tankers. The KC-135 Economic Service Life Study claims that it will end up costing the Air Force more than FY2000$ 103 billion to operate and maintain the KC-135s between 2001-2040. Source.

March 11/09: Reports surface that the Obama administration will propose a 5-year delay to the USAF’s aerial tanker program, as US OMB recommendations leak to the general press. The Pentagon is not bound by those recommendations, and US Secretary of Defense Gates is quoted as saying that:

“In the days to come, any information you may receive about budget or program decisions will undoubtedly be wrong because I intend to wait until the end of our review process before making any decisions.”

Assuming that the documents really do propose a 5-year delay to the KC-X program, it is not clear whether this is a classic “Washington Monument” move, proposing a cut that the weight of Congress interests are almost certain to reverse, or a genuine decision within a zero-sum set of budget decisions. In Washington, of course, it could even be both. Washington Post | Seattle Post-Intelligencer | Seattle Times | Grand Forks Herald | Bloomberg News | MSNBC | Agence France Presse.

March 11/09: Democratic Party congressmen John Murtha [D-PA] and Neil Abercrombie [D-HI] begin publicly proposing the split-buy idea that has been floated quietly in the background for several months now. Reuters | Reuters Update.

Feb 26/09: Military.com’s DoD Buzz reports that a Pentagon Joint Requirement Oversight Council met today to consider the new KC-X requirements:

“From what little I have heard about the requirements, it seems pretty clear that the Air Force has compressed and simplified the requirements to avoid the likelihood of another award protest but has not changed its mind about what capabilities are needed… But Rep. Jack Murtha’s plan to split the buy – and avoid what would seem to be an otherwise unavoidable second protest – would seem to allow both companies some breathing room… the Air Force’s opposition may be at an end – at least for the initial purchase.”

Murtha [D-PA] has been at the center of ethical investigations over his career, but he remains a powerful member of the Democratic Party. He chairs the House Appropriations Committee’s Defense Subcommittee.

Feb 25/09: USAF Transportation Command leader Gen. Duncan McNabb testifies to a joint hearing of the House Armed Services Committee’s Seapower and Air and land forces subcommittees. He reiterates KC-X as the USAF’s top priority, and says that further delays in replacing the KC-135 fleet would add significant risk to the U.S. military’s ability to quickly move troops and firepower rapidly to the globe’s combat zones. Reuters, via Forbes.

Jan 29/09: The US government’s Office of Management and Budget submits a list of potential defense program cuts in its guidance to the US Defense Department. One of the suggestions is reportedly a 5-year delay of the KC-X program. The Pentagon is not bound by these suggestions, but the recommendations will become news in March 2009, igniting controversy and lobbying. Source.

FY 2008

Boeing protest; cancellation.

Sept 22/08: Sen. Richard Shelby [R-AL] fires a broadside in a Washington Times op-ed:

“Two months from Election Day, politics seem to be everywhere we turn. However, one place we should not see politics is in our Department of Defense (DoD) acquisition process. The process to select the new Air Force tanker fleet has become so politicized that DoD allowed parochial and business interests to keep the Air Force’s top acquisition priority from the pilots who need it. The long fight over the tanker contract proves that the acquisition process is fundamentally and significantly flawed… Politics just cancelled a competitively awarded contract, solely because Boeing was not the winner. Defense acquisition policy has been stated: If it is not a Boeing plane, DoD is not going to buy it.”

Sept 18/08: A Washington Post story reports that:

“John Young, the undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, said in an interview at the Pentagon yesterday that under the tanker proposal from Northrop Grumman and its partner European Aeronautic Defence & Space, developing the first 68 aircraft would have cost $12.5 billion, compared with $15.4 billion under Boeing’s plan.”

Sept 10/08: The Pentagon announces that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has canceled the competition for the $35 billion Air Force tanker contract:

“It has now become clear that the solicitation and award process cannot be accomplished by January. Thus, I believe that rather than hand the next administration an incomplete and possibly contested process, we should cleanly defer this procurement to the next team… It is my judgment that in the time remaining to us, we cannot complete a competition that will be viewed as fair and competitive in this highly-charged environment… I believe the resulting cooling-off period will allow the next administration to view objectively the military requirements and craft a new acquisition strategy for the KC-X as it sees fit.”

Cancellation

Sept 3/08: Gen. Lichte of USAF Air Mobility Command says that he expects a protest after the final round 2 RFP is released. He hopes it doesn’t happen. But:

“I mean this is a lot of money, I understand the business nature of this. But I don’t understand how at some point you stop and say, this company wins, and this company loses, or this company is successful and this company is not. I don’t know how we get through something like that. With the poisonous nature of all the comments that are out there right now, I don’t know how we make peace with everybody to say, okay let’s go forward.”

He also said that he does not want a split buy…

“However, if you were to tell me that was the only way to get out of [the current situation] then I’d take it… We need a new tanker now. I don’t care which one it is. And we need to get on with this quickly.”

Military.com | Agence France Presse | AP | CBS | Reuters.

Aug 14/08: Jerry Cox is a former procurement policy counsel in the U.S. Senate, and now holds the title of managing director of The Forerunner Foundation. At, least according to the article byline in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer for “Tanker choice in mathematical terms“. The core claim of the article is as follows:

“The Air Force knows a tanker accomplishes nothing by flying from Point A to Point B, so what really matters is the ratio of delivery. How many gallons will the plane deliver for every gallon it burns? That’s a tougher problem, but it’s hardly trigonometry. Northrop showed the Air Force it can deliver almost two pounds for every pound it burns, while Boeing delivers only 1.6 pounds. That’s a 22 percent edge for Northrop, and the numbers hold up, regardless of the trip length.”

What the newspaper did not mention is that Cox also heads up a lobbying firm called Potomac Strategy Associates. DID spoke to Jerry Cox, however, and he told us that his PSA has not been employed by any firm in conjunction with the aerial tanker competition.

Aug 11/08: Aviation week reports that Boeing is strongly considering a refusal to bid as its response to the revised KC-X RFP.

That response would leave the field open to EADS/Northrop Grumman in a formal sense, but the political weight of that kind of protest move would force the Pentagon to think long and hard before signing a contract under those circumstances. Until Boeing makes a firm decision, of course, its bid team must continue working full speed ahead.

Aug 6/08: New draft RFP. The USAF has issued a new draft of its RFP, and appears to be adopting an approach of minimum required compliance. On the surface, there are 2 major changes. Fuel costs over a plane’s 40-year lifetime will be considered, and full credit will now be given for exceeding the stated requirements in key areas like cargo capacity, fuel offload, et. al. Neither was true under the old RFP. The catch is that different levels of importance are being assigned to various types of costs, with development and production cost estimates weighted more heavily than long-term projections for maintenance and fuel costs. The second major change around exceeding performance limits simply makes the USAF’s original evaluation approach the competition’s officially announced approach, instead of a violation of the competition’s terms.

Under those terms, Boeing is likely to lose again – which may trigger a follow-on protest upon the release of the revised RFP. The planned time line for moving forward is as follows:

• Aug 6-13: DoD officials will take a week to discuss elements of the draft with Northrop-Grumman and Boeing. Expect a lot of back and forth over the terms of the RFP, including efforts by members of the (currently recessed) Congress.

• Mid-August: DoD plans to issue the final RFP amendment, with just 45 days for renewed submissions. Note that this time frame would make an airframe switch very difficult, due to the hundreds of pages of documentation, cost information, and design work required.

• Early October 2008: Renewed submissions due.

• October to late November: Discussions with the companies about their proposals.

• Early December: Final proposal revisions for “best, final” offer.

• Early January 2009: Decision made and announced. If Boeing wins, the existing contract is canceled and a new one is signed. If Airbus/NGC win again, the current stop-work order is lifted.

It’s important to note that the US DoD’s desired schedule, and what politics, appeals, et. al. actually end up dictating, may end up being 2 different things. On a political level, however, introducing the revised RFP when Congress is in recess, and not issuing a decision until after the elections, will help to lower elected representatives’ political leverage. What it will not do is provide full insulation, since the decision is certain to be an important election issue in some states. The first days in a new Congress’ term also tend to provide some political insulation for issues of this type, since members are busy with other things. Nevertheless, it can also be a double-edged sword. Exceptions do occur if the issue in question is a big enough priority for enough elected representatives. In that case, the first days of a term can also be the stage for dramatic political actions whose fallout would be considered much more carefully later in their term.

See also: KC-X RFP, revised draft | US Armed Forces Press Service |

blog*&par=RSS">Boeing statement et. al., via CNBC | NGC statement via MarketWatch | CQ Politics | Politico re: guerilla marketing | Leeham Companies LLC | Defense News | Aviation Week | Bloomberg | Business Week | Christian Science Monitor | Agence France Presse | Money Times of India | Seattle Post-Intelligencer | Seattle Times | Mobile Press Register | Birmingham News | Pensacola News Journal.

July 9/08: Let Round 2 begin. American Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announces that the KC-X competition will be re-opened, with at least one important difference: the Air Force won’t be running it. Meanwhile, Northrop-Grumman has been ordered to stop work on its contract.

Undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics John J. Young Jr. will be in charge of the acquisition, and will appoint an advisory committee to oversee the selection process. , and a modified request for proposal could be issued before the end of July 2008, with a decision expected by year’s end.

Boeing’s statement welcomes the news, and claims that life-cycle costs including fuel will now be considered in the competition:

“However, we remain concerned that a renewed Request for Proposals (RFP) may include changes that significantly alter the selection criteria as set forth in the original solicitation. As the Government Accountability Office reported in upholding our protest, we submitted the only proposal that fully met the mandatory criteria of the original RFP… we will also take time to understand the updated solicitation to determine the right path forward for the company. It’s encouraging that the Defense Department intends to take steps …that, among other things, fully accounts for life-cycle costs, such as fuel…”

The new competition will be challenging for all concerned, especially since it adds an element missing from the last round: European expectations, raised by the initial win, could create larger trade and defense industry ramifications if the new competition is perceived to be biased against Airbus’ offering. Meanwhile, political involvement and pressure within the USA is guaranteed to be intense, and every item from the selection criteria onward can expect contestation. US DoD | Boeing release | Northrop Grumman release | Alabama Press-Register | Montgomery Advertiser | Seattle Times | WIRED Danger Room | CNBC | Hartford Courant | AP | Aviation Week: L

Americas

• The Air Force is working on the next operational resiliency phase for one of its satellites. Lockheed Martin Space Systems is being awarded a $32.0 million contract modification for work on the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) Satellite Vehicle 4. The AEHF system is a series of four military communication satellites which will entirely replace the current in-orbit Milstar system. The main function of the AEHF spacecraft in geostationary orbits will be to provide secure, survivable and near-worldwide satellite communications. Advanced EHF satellites will provide at least 10 times greater total capacity, and offer channel data rates 6 times higher, than current Milstar II communications satellites. They’ll offer 24-hour low, medium, and high data rate satellite connectivity from 65 N to 65 S latitude, worldwide. AEHF SV-4 was initially expected to launch in spring 2017. The total cumulative face value of the contract is $9,2 billion. Work will be performed at the company’s location in Sunnyvale, California, and is expected to be completed by end of January 2021.

• The US Army is contracting Mnemonics Inc. for the production of Remote Activation Munition Systems. The firm-fixed-price contract has a value of $38.31 million and provides for both the M152 and Mk152 systems. The RAMS was initially developed for Special Operations Forces as a replacement to for the M122 Remote Demolition Firing Device. It is a secure, radio-controlled system designed to remotely control demolition charges. The operator has the capability to destroy, delay and disrupt an enemy while avoiding direct contact. RAMS consists of a transmitter and two types of receivers, an electric output to initiate blasting caps and an explosive output to initiate C4 or other items directly. Work locations and funding will be determined with each individual order. Work is scheduled for completion by August 2021.

• The US Navy is further investing in its submarine launched nuclear ballistic missile capability. Lockheed Martin will provide a variety of services to support the fiscal 2019 Trident II missile production at a cost of $22.28 million. The Trident II D5 was first deployed in 1990. The US and UK respectively are investing in the Trident II D5 LE Program, which is intended to extend the service life of the weapon system until 2042, to match the hull life of the Ohio-class submarine. Under the program a further 108 missiles are being purchased, in order to meet long-term inventory requirements. The LE program involves updating the missile’s electronics, guidance and reentry systems. Lockheed Martin has managed has managed all of the US submarine-launched ballistic missile/ fleet ballistic missile (SLBM/FBM) programs since the first-generation Polaris. Work will be performed at the company’s location in Sunnyvale, California, and is expected to be completed by date September 2023.

• The Air Force is now in possession of a completely refurbished fleet of C-5M Super Galaxy transport planes. The US Air Force Air Mobility Command began a program to modernize the C-5s in 1998 after a study concluded the decades-old aircraft had 80% of their service life remaining. AMP is the first step. Its main purpose is to equip the aircraft to fly in civil airspace by the most direct routes, at the most advantageous altitudes, with the most efficient fuel usage and cargo loads. AMP is also trying to reduce the number of devices and wires in the planes, to reduce costs and improve reliability. RERP’s core improvement is the addition of modern F138-GE-100 jet engines, derived from General Electric’s CF6-80C2s that power many commercial airliners. The C-5 is capable of carrying two 78-ton M1A1 main battle tanks or helicopters and other large equipment intercontinental distances. Over the years Lockheed Martin upgraded a total of 52 C-5s with new engines, avionics and diagnostic systems, which will keep the airlifters flying until the 2040s.

Middle East & Africa

• The Afghan Air Force is re-adding the first refurbished Mi-17V-5 helicopter to its fleet. The helicopter was repaired by the Slovakian Tren?ín Aircraft Repair Corps, which won the tender as part of a NATO Support and Procurement Agency competition in 2016. Designed to transport cargo inside the cabin and on an external sling, the Mi-17V-5 is one of the world’s most advanced helicopters. It can also be deployed in troop and arms transport, fire support, convoy escort, patrol, and search-and-rescue (SAR) missions. The helicopter can fly in tropical and maritime climates, and desert conditions. The helicopter is armed with Shturm-V missiles, S-8 rockets, a 23mm machine gun, PKT machine guns and AKM sub-machine guns. It features eight firing posts for aiming the weapons. According to the company this was the first general overhaul of the Mi-17V-5 helicopter in the EU and NATO area.

Europe

• Jane’s reports that France is determined to export its SCALP cruise missile to Egypt, despite the US blocking the sale of essential components. French Defense Minister Florence Parly said during a recent press conference that “in this case, we will not be able to lift the US opposition to the sale of SCALP missiles [to Egypt]. The only thing we can do is for MBDA to make some investment in research and development to be able to manufacture similar components that are not covered by ITAR.” The SCALP is a long-range, air-launched, stand-off attack missile designed and developed by France-based MBDA Systems. The missile is capable of engaging the targets precisely in any weather conditions during day and night. The long range and low attitude combined with subsonic speed make the Storm Shadow quite stealthy. The French government is convinced that it can build the missiles with a reasonable delay. The International Trade in Arms Regulation (ITAR) agreement may also affect Egypt’s purchase of 12 additional Rafale jets from France. According to reports, the Egyptian government will not sign for the new aircraft unless the SCALP missiles are included.

Asia-Pacific

• Reports suggest that China is now in possession of a new hypersonic test vehicle, which is able to achieve speeds Mach 5.5 for over six minutes. Designated Starry Sky 2 the flight vehicle reached an altitude of 30km and undertook several maneuvers. The wedge-shaped vehicle is being developed by the China Academy of Aerospace Aerodynamics, the fuselage is designed to improve its supersonic lift-to-drag ratio by using the shock waves generated by its own flight as a lifting force. The hypersonic vehicle was first carried by a solid-propellant rocket and then separated as its own propulsion system took over. The US tested an experimental “waverider” from 2010 to 2013 that was designed to reach Mach 6. China’s defense budget this year amounts to $175 billion, significant amounts of which are invested in R&D operations as means to catch-up to US, Russian and European technologies.

Today’s Video

• Watch: Japan’s Acquisition, Technology & Logistics Agency reveals railgun research

AEHF concept
(click to view full)

The USA’s new Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellites will support twice as many tactical networks as the current Milstar II satellites, while providing 10-12 times the bandwidth capacity and 6 times the data rate transfer speed. With the cancellation of the higher-capacity TSAT program, AEHF will form the secure, hardened backbone of the Pentagon’s future Military Satellite Communications (MILSATCOM) architecture, with a mission set that includes nuclear command and control. Its companion Family of Advanced Beyond-line-of-sight Terminals (FAB-T) program will give the US military more modern, higher-bandwidth receiving capabilities, and add more flexibility on the front lines. The program has international components, and partners currently include Britain, Canada, and the Netherlands.

This article offers a look at the AEHF system’s rationale and capabilities, while offering insight into some of the program’s problems, and an updated timeline covering over $5 billion worth of contracts since the program’s inception.

The AEHF Program Program Status and Budgets

The decline in GAO program coverage creates some challenges in making apples to apples comparisons, but the trends are clear. Like a number of American satellite development programs, AEHF has been cited for cost overruns and schedule slips. Part of the reason involves the US National Security Agency’s failure to furnish key cryptography requirements and specifications, and mechanical and construction difficulties were also involved.

Yo-yoing constellation size played a role of its own in program total changes, while creating cost spikes for individual satellites. Satellites 5 & 6 are expected to cost almost double the average for SV 1-3, owing to a production line that was interrupted and restarted because the decisions to add more satellites came after a gap of 4 years. That was too late to keep the production line from closing temporarily, and re-starts are difficult and expensive.

Note that USAF budgets do not include the US Army’s small participation, contributions from international partners, or RDT&E funding beyond FY 2014:

Past and Future

C4ISR Future?
(click to expand)

The AEHF partnership program currently involves 4 operational and 2 reserve satellites, and includes Britain, Canada, and the Netherlands.

AEHF began as a program in April 1999, and development began in September 2001. The production decision was made in June 2004, and the original intent was to launch the first satellite in late 2007. NSA delays in providing key cryptographic requirements ended up being very expensive, and other technical difficulties also pushed the program back. First launch didn’t take place until August 2010.

Along the way, the AEHF program’s size has yo-yoed. In December 2002, optional satellites 4 and 5 were deleted from the program, with the intention of making AEHF only an interim bridge to the larger Transformational Satellite Network (T-SAT) and its ultra-high bandwidth laser interlinks. As TSAT faltered, however, the AEHF bridge became the destination.

The first indication of shifts in the program came when the Pentagon’s April 2008 Selected Acquisition Reports confirmed that the program had expanded to add AEHF-4. The TSAT successor program was restructured, but in June 2009, Secretary of Defense Gates finally lowered the boom and confirmed that the Pentagon intended to kill TSAT, leaving Advanced EHF satellites as the military’s main future guarantors of secure, hardened bandwidth. In response, the US military expanded and internationalized the Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS), restored AEHF SV-5 to the hardened constellation, and eventually added a 6th AEHF satellite in April 2010.

The 5th and 6th satellites are currently planned as a reserve that will replace the first 2. Even so, the USAF is considering a 7th and 8th satellite, as it works through an Analysis of Alternatives for its “Resilient Basis for SATCOM (RBS) in Joint Operations” study. The exact nature of the AEHF Follow-On will be informed by this protected MILSATCOM AoA.

Down here on Earth, the companion FAB-T (Family of Advanced Beyond-line-of-sight Terminals) development effort aimed to create a family of software-defined radios that could become a common terminal for the next generation of High Data Satellite Communications, including AEHF, Wideband Gapfiller, and other future satellite systems. It’s aimed at aircraft, and the NSA’s poor handling of its cryptographic challenges has contributed to the overall program’s delays and cost overruns. A limited production contract is expected by mid-2014.

Beyond Boeing’s FAB-T, a number of vendors are developing and fielding SATCOM solutions that are compatible with AEHF, for use by land and naval assets.

Launch Plans and Dates

The Process
click for video

AEHF Space Vehicle-1 (SV-1) launched in August 2010, almost 3 years later than originally planned, but slightly earlier than some 2010 reports had expected. It encountered serious propulsion problems, which left it well short of its operational orbit, but ground control found some timely workarounds the eventually got the satellite to its orbital plane. The flip side is that instead of conducting on-orbit testing in August 2010, the USAF had to wait until November 2011. Meanwhile, AEHF SV-2 and SV-3 were ready, but SV-1’s technical failure and delayed on-orbit tests left them on hold.

AEHF SV-2 was slated for launch in May 2011, but was eventually launched on May 4/12.

AEHF SV-3 missed its January 2012 window. A full launch schedule meant that the launch ended up taking place on Sept 18/13.

AEHF SV-4 is still expected to launch in Q3 (spring) FY 2017, which tracks with the 4-year delay before the additional order.

SV-5 was supposed to follow in 2018, and SV-6 in 2020, but they’ve been shifted to a reserve role instead. Despite the US military’s exploding demand for bandwidth, they’ll be used as end-of-life replacements for SV-1 and SV-2, or as an emergency replacement option for any AEHF satellite that malfunctions or is destroyed.

The AEHF Satellites

Advanced EHF satellites will provide at least 10 times greater total capacity, and offer channel data rates 6 times higher, than current Milstar II communications satellites. These new hardened and crosslinked satellites are designed to be very hard to jam, while surviving shocks that can include EMP radiation surges from atmospheric nuclear blasts. They’ll offer 24-hour low, medium, and high data rate satellite connectivity from 65 N to 65 S latitude, worldwide.

Each Advanced EHF satellite employs more than 50 communications channels via multiple, simultaneous downlinks. To accomplish their goal of 10x capacity and 6x channel data of existing Milstar II satellites, Advanced EHF adds new higher data-rate transmission modes:

Each satellite uses than 800 ASICs (chips) delivered by Honeywell Aerospace in Plymouth, MN, and BAE Systems of Arlington, VA. These customized chips benefit from general advances in chip density and speed since the existing MILSTAR constellation was built, which means reduced weight. Each AEHF payload includes:

• 25 computers
  
• Almost 1 million lines of software code
  
• 70 unique monolithic microwave integrated circuit (MMIC) chip designs – almost 18,000 total MMICs
  
• More than 50 unique integrated microwave assemblies and hybrid designs – over 13,000 total.

AEHF is X-band capable for high-bandwidth data rates, in addition to the Milstar low data rate and medium data rate modes that ensure backward compatibility. The crosslinks eliminate the need to route messages via terrestrial systems, which cuts some of the latency associated with satellite links.

Bandwidth is already a significant constraint in theater, and these higher data rates will allow more transmission of tactical military communications into remote areas, to include real-time video, battlefield maps, and targeting data.

The AEHF Satellites: Contracts & Key Events

Payload testing
(click to view full)

The Pentagon DefenseLINK summaries of awarded AEHF contracts were unusually informative, providing a commendable level of insight into the program and its challenges. Note, especially, the effects of key delays from NSA re: cryptography in the early years. We’ve also broken out the AEHF’s FAB-T terminals that will connect the military to the AEHF network and other satellites. Though the satellites and terminals are intertwined on many levels, and some cryptography-related contracts may mention neither but apply to both, separation of these contracts adds more clarity.

As of January 2013, Lockheed Martin is under contract for 6 satellites.

Unless otherwise specified, the USAF Headquarters Space and Missile Systems Center in Los Angeles, CA has issued the following requisitions under contract #F04701-02-C-0002:

Satellites FY 2014 – 2018

SV-4 launch prep.

NGC on AEHF FY 2018

August 7/18: After delay – SV-4 moves ahead The Air Force is working on the next operational resiliency phase for one of its satellites. Lockheed Martin Space Systems is being awarded a $32.0 million contract modification for work on the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) Satellite Vehicle 4. The AEHF system is a series of four military communication satellites which will entirely replace the current in-orbit Milstar system. The main function of the AEHF spacecraft in geostationary orbits will be to provide secure, survivable and near-worldwide satellite communications. Advanced EHF satellites will provide at least 10 times greater total capacity, and offer channel data rates 6 times higher, than current Milstar II communications satellites. They’ll offer 24-hour low, medium, and high data rate satellite connectivity from 65 N to 65 S latitude, worldwide. AEHF SV-4 was initially expected to launch in spring 2017. The total cumulative face value of the contract is $9,2 billion. Work will be performed at the company’s location in Sunnyvale, California, and is expected to be completed by end of January 2021.

FY 2015

May 22/15: Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $735 million support contract for the Air Force’s Advanced Extremely High Frequency Satellites, Milstar and Defense Satellite Communications System III. The company was awarded a similar contract for the latter two in 2009.

Dec 27/13: SV-4 launch prep. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co., Sunnyvale, CA receives a $116.1 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification for AEHF SV-4 (q.v. Dec 15/10) launch operations, including support to integrate the satellite into the launch rocket. Launch preparation activities begin at launch minus 12 months, and include an early orbit operations rehearsal campaign alongside the physical preparations.

$2 million in USAF FY 2014 missile procurement funds are committed immediately. Work will be performed at Sunnyvale, CA, and El Segundo, CA, and is expected to be complete July 31/19. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center, PKJ, Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA, is the contracting activity (F04701-02-C-0002, PO 0548).

Satellites FY 2013

SV-5 & SV-6; SAR is sort of good news; Canada begins using AEHF.

Encapsulation
(click to view full)

Sept 18/13: AEHF-3 launch. A Delta V 531 rocket blasts off from Cape Canaveral, and successfully launches AEHF-3. The satellite will spend the next 110 days thrusting to raise its orbit, followed by about 60 days of on-orbit testing. It’s ULA’s 40th mission with the Atlas V EELV.

AEHF-3 was encapsulated in its 5m diameter fairing on Sept 11/13. Sources: ULA | USAF Los Angeles AFB | Lockheed Martin.

AEHF-3 launched

Sept 16/13: IOC Delay. Inside Defense Reports that the USAF is citing Software Development Difficulties as the reason for delaying AEHF’s Initial Operational Capability designation by a year. Source: Inside Defense, “Air Force Delays Key AEHF Milestone One Year, Citing Software Development Difficulties”.

IOC delayed

Sept 12/13: Netherlands. Lockheed Martin reveals that in July 2013, the Dutch tested engaging AEHF-1 and AEHF-2, exchanging voice and data communications with the U.S. and Canada by connecting to the AEHF-2 satellite, crosslinking with AEHF-1, then downlinking to the U.S. Navy terminal in San Diego and a Canadian terminal at Shirley’s Bay, Ontario. They also completed their first local AEHF call from ship to shore, using international versions of the Navy Multi-Band and SMART-T terminals. Source: Lockheed Martin, Sept 12/13 release.

June 20/13: Canada. A U.S.-Canada team has successfully communicated with the USAF’s 4th Space Operations Squadron at Schriever Air Force Base, CO, using AEHF-1 satellite and a SMART-T terminal variant to exchange data from a location near Ottawa, Canada. Follow-on tests involved multiple Navy Multi-Band IP variant terminals exchanging data over AEHF networks.

Canada is the 1st international partner to reach this point, and will continue testing for several months as their forces move toward initial operational capability. Britain and the Netherlands are scheduled to complete their first terminal connections by the end of 2013. Lockheed Martin.

May 24/13: SAR. The Pentagon finally releases its Dec 31/12 Selected Acquisitions Report [PDF], and AEHF is a good news story. Not completely good news, given the raised costs for these satellites thanks to the production gap, but $500 million is always nice:

“Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) Satellite – The AEHF program is comprised of two subprograms, Space Vehicles 1-4 and Space Vehicles 5-6. Only the Space Vehicles 5-6 subprogram had selected cost changes in the December 2012 SAR. AEHF Space Vehicles 5-6 – Subprogram costs decreased $510.4 million (-14.6%) from $3,488.2 million to $2,977.8 million, due primarily to a reduced estimate to reflect program efficiencies for production and launch operations for Space Vehicles 5-6 (-$507.1 million). The savings were applied to higher Air Force needs.”

SAR: good news, sort of

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.

For AEHF, the 2014 budget continues to reduce annual funding through FY 2017, but the block buy of SV-5 and SV-6 is on track. That budget is $2.59 billion maximum, based on $227 million in FY 2011 for long lead time parts, an unfinalized contract with a $2.199 billion maximum for production and launch, and $164 million for potential Engineering Change Orders (ECOs).

There are a few important changes, beginning with having SV-5 and SV-6 “replace AEHF-1 and AEHF-2 at the end of their useful life,” instead of launching to address the US military’s exploding demand for bandwidth. The program has also extended. Instead of terminating in 2018, the budget suddenly adds advance procurement in FY 2016 – 2017, and a big FY 2018 spike for 2 clones of SV-5/6. AEHF SV-7 and SV-8 are really just placeholders so far, as the USAF works through an Analysis of Alternatives for its Resilient Basis for SATCOM (RBS) in Joint Operations study. The exact nature of the AEHF Follow-On will be informed by the protected MILSATCOM AoA.

Jan 3/13: SV-5/6. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co., Sunnyvale, CA receives a $1.937 billion contract modification for AEHF Space Vehicle 5 and 6 “Production Launch Operations.” When we add ancillary and long-lead item contracts announced to date, the total so far for SV-5 and SV-6 comes to $2,469.2 million, or about $1.235 billion per satellite:

• Jan 3/13: $1,936.5 (main)
  
• Sept 17/12: $43.0 (crypto)
  
• June 25/12: $249.0 (antennas)
  
• May 10/12: $13.5 (parts)
  
• Dec 5/11: $167.2 (long-lead)
  
• Nov 16/11: $60.0 (long-lead)

As noted above, the need for a production line restart created a huge cost increase. Work will be performed in Sunnyvale and El Segundo, CA, and is expected to be complete by Jan 24/22. Note that substantially the same announcement was made on Dec 28/12 (FA8808-12-C-0010).

SV-5 & SV-6 main contract

Satellites FY 2012

AEHF-1 and 2.

AEHF-2 launch
(click for video)

Sept 24/12: AEHF-2 ready. The satellite completes its on-orbit testing successfully. Testing began with single-satellite testing, followed by a period of crosslink testing between AEHF-1 and AEHF-2, and culminating with testing in the operational Milstar constellation. USAF.

Sept 17/12: SV-5/6. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $43 million contract modification for AEHF SV-6 Crypto Availability KI-54D. Decoded, that means they’ll produce/order and then install the satellite’s “black box” encoding/ decoding module for secure communications.

Work will be performed Camden, NJ and El Segundo, CA (Northrop Grumman, sub-contractor), and is expected to be complete by Oct 16/15 (F04701-02-C-0002, PO 0544).

Aug 10/12: AEHF-2 on-orbit. AEHF-2 arrives at its geostationary orbit test location and altitude. Unlike AEHF-1, this one went smoothly: 4 Liquid Apogee Engine burns to get above the densest Van Allen radiation belts, deployment of the solar arrays, then 47 Hall Current Thruster burns over an 85-day period. Payload activation and about 2 months of on-orbit testing are next. USAF.

June 25/12: SV-5/6. Lockheed Martin in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $249 million firm-fixed-price contract for AEHF SV-5 and SV-6 antennas and flight materials. That kind of hardened bandwidth in space doesn’t come cheap. Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA, and will be complete by Nov 1/12 (FA8808-12-C-0010, PO 0001).

May 10/12: SV-5/6. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $13.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for Space Vehicle 5/6 production. Specifically, they’ll supply a gimbal mechanism and beam select switch parts.

Discussion with Lockheed Martin confirms that this is for AEHF. Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA until Dec 30/13 (FA8808-12-C-0010).

Feb 27/12 – May 4/12: AEHF-2 delivery & launch. Lockheed Martin delivers AEHF-2 to the Air Force on Feb 27/12, after keeping it in storage since the end of 2010. The satellite was scheduled for launch on April 27/12 from Cape Canaveral, using an Atlas V rocket. Encapsulation took place on April 21/12 at the Astrotech Space Operations facility in Titusville, FL, but the launch date slipped to May 4/12.

The launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station was successful. AEHF SV-2 will take about 110 days to fly to its final orbit, followed by about 120 days of on-orbit testing, before it is transferred to the 14th Air Force for Satellite Control Authority. USAF | ULA | Lockheed Martin | Dutch MvD [in Dutch].

AEHF-2 launch

Dec 5/11: SV-5/6 lead-in. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $167.2 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification, to buy more AEHF SV-5 & SV-6 long lead time materials. This comes on top of the $60 million Nov 16/11 announcement, and includes the basic long-lead parts for Lockheed Martin’s electronic boxes and core structure, and for Northrop Grumman’s payload. These parts have a 24-week (about 6 month) lead time, and will support the coming SV 5/6 production contract.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (F04701-02-C-0002, PO 0528).

Dec 2/11: Support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $312.2 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification for AEHF satellite program engineering support from Dec 1/11 to Dec 31/14.

Work will be performed at Redondo Beach, CA, and could include “on-orbit anomaly resolution and investigation” (vid. AEHF-1’s tribulations), flight and payload software sustainment after on-orbit tests are done, Networked AEHF System Tested tool sustainment, mission control familiarization, and development test. They’ll also provide hardware, software, training and logistics support, technical order maintenance, system security and information assurance engineering, support for AEHF and Milstar combined constellation integration transition and test activities, coordination with the Milstar O&M contractor, satellite database updates for Milstar and AEHF, and on-site technical support for satellite operations at Schriever AFB, CO, and Vandenberg AFB, CA. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center’s Military Satellite Communications Systems Directorate in Los Angeles, CA manages the contract (F04701-02-C-0002, PO 0454).

Nov 16/11: SV-5/6 lead-in. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA received a $60 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-award-fee contract modification for AEHF SV-5 & SV-6 long lead time materials. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center’s Military Satellite Communications Systems Directorate in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (F04701-02-C-002, PO 0525).

Nov 3/11: AEHF-1. The USAF announces that AEHF SV-1 has completed initial activation of its communications payload, and has begun on-orbit testing. This included successful deployment of the payload wings, the Gimbal Dish antennas, and the Advanced Anti-Jam Nulling antennas, as well as log-ons and data communications using communication terminals located at Schriever AFB, CO, and M.I.T/Lincoln Labs, MA.

A combined team of Air Force, Aerospace Corp., Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman personnel have worked on activation, and SMC MILSATCOM Systems Director Dave Madden believes that by the end of November, they’ll have enough data to make a decision on whether or not to launch AEHF SV-2 in April 2012.

Oct 25/11: The USAF announces that AEHF-1 has finally reached its designated orbital slot, 14 months after launch. The process required approximately 500 thruster burns, but they still expect to get the required 14 years of mission life from the satellite, even though onboard fuel is directly correlated with mission life. Other US satellites have lasted longer than expected in orbit, so it’s hard to evaluate the USAF’s expectation without knowing the before/after confidence intervals, safety margins, etc. Time will tell.

The next step is a 4-month detailed test and checkout phase of all spacecraft systems, which is actually the most critical on-orbit phase. If the satellite’s other systems are performing as expected, the Space and Missile Systems Center plans to transfer satellite command authority to USAF Space Command’s 14th Air Force in early 2012. USAF.

Huge save: AEHF-1 makes it!

Oct 4/11: AEHF-1. The Space & Missile systems Center at Los Angeles AFB says that AEHF-1 is going to be a bit late to its orbital slot. It will arrive in late October instead of today, “while maintaining the safety of the vehicle and conserving on-board fuel.” Burning the Hall Current Thrusters to make up for the Liquid Apogee engine’s problems has a price, as fuel is the main determinant of satellite lifespan in orbit. The MILSATCOM Systems Directorate says that when they achieve the desired orbit, AEHF-1 will maintain the same expected capabilities they were estimating back in June.

Satellites FY 2011

AEHF-1 not where it should be. SV-4. Cost increases; layoffs.

AEHF-1 recovery award
(click for video)

Sept 30/11: Support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $9.8 million cost plus award fee contract modification to extend AEHF sustaining engineering support by 2 more months, from Sept 30/11 through Nov 20/11. Support is provided for MilStar and AEHF satellite operations at Schriever Air Force Base, CO and Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA, and includes on-orbit anomaly resolution and investigation, flight and payload software sustainment, Networked AEHF System Tested Tool sustainment, support for mission control segment Increment 5 familiarization and development test, mission control segment Increments 4 and 5 software maintenance, and on-site technical support.

The USAF Missile Systems Center Military Satellite Communications Systems Directorate in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (F04701-02-C-0002, PO 0519).

June 14/11: Layoffs. Layoffs at Lockheed Martin Space Systems. This branch of the firm employs around 16,000 employees in 12 states, but intends to shed 1,200 employees by year-end, including a 25% cut in middle management to reduce impacts elsewhere. LMSS’ Sunnyvale, CA; Pennsylvania; and Denver, CO sites will be hardest hit, and the firm’s release says that it’s pushed in part by several of their major programs moving beyond the labor-intensive development phase.

Space Systems says it will offer “eligible” salaried employees an opportunity for a voluntary layoff, plus career transition support for all affected employees. Lockheed Martin.

Layoffs

June 13/11: Studies. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $17.7 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification, extending AEHF’s capabilities insertion study. As Lockheed Martin’s engineers contemplate ways to improve future AEHF satellites and meet growing military bandwidth needs, they will be performing capability/requirements tradeoffs for systems, technology assessments, development of design alternatives, risk assessments, and cost and schedule analysis (F04701-02-C-0002, PO 0500).

May 9/11: Changes. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $21.3 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification to develop AEHF program software changes in 3 areas. Absent further specifics, the award has been placed in this section.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA, and King of Prussia, PA. At this point, $19 million has been committed by the USAF Space and Missiles Center, SMC/PKJ in El Segundo, CA (F04701-02-C-0002, P00483).

April 15/11: The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 30/10 includes the “significant cost changes” in AEHF program – both satellites and terminals. The satellite section reads:

“Program costs increased $1,065.1 million (+8.6 percent) from $12,448.9 million to $13,514.0 million, due primarily to a revised procurement estimate to fully fund the fifth and sixth satellites (+$1,620.7 million) and an extension of interim contract support due to the launch delay for the first satellite (+214.5 million). These increases are partially offset by an estimating decrease due to an acquisition strategy change from full funding to a block buy for the fifth and sixth satellites (-$798.5 million).”

SAR – cost increases

April 7/11: AEHF-1. The USAF’s Space and Missile systems Center provides an update on AEHF-1 progress, as they work to move it into an operational orbit after it fell short upon launch. Today, AEHF-1 crosses the 20,000 km/ 12,427 mile perigee mark.

SMC says orbit-raising is successfully continuing as planned. Phases 1 & 2 using hydrazine thruster phase are complete, and the satellite is now using its AEHF’s Hall Current Thruster electric propulsion system. The goal is to reach geosynchronous orbit in late summer 2011. If they do, it would cap as remarkable effort, and a very nice recovery for the joint government and contractor team. On the other hand, fuel reserves are the #1 determinant of how long a geosynchronous satellite can remain effective, and AEHF-1’s fuel reserves will be much lower than planned. See also Nov 16/10 entry for more details. USAF SMC (no URL).

March 22/11: AEHF-1. AEHF-1 crosses the half-way mark to geosynchronous orbit, with its perigee climbing above 17,893 km/ 11,174 miles altitude. USAF SMC (no URL).

Dec 15/10: SV-4. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $1.31 billion contract modification for SV4, the 4th AEHF satellite, SV4 unique systems engineering, a system level factory test, system database management functions, systems level support equipment, and program management. At this time, $1.236 billion has been obligated (FO4701-02-C-0002; PO0448).

See also Sept 10/09 and July 18/06 entries, which raise total SV-4 contracts to $1.604 billion. USAF release.

SV-4 main contract

Dec 14/10: AEHF-1. In response to questions about AEHF-1’s orbital problems, the USAF Space and Missile Systems Center says they’ve briefed senior Air Force leaders, who are considering initiating a Safety Investigation Board. They will also present their investigation briefing to selected Congressional Staff Members later in December 2010. Based on the current costs for AEHF-1/2/3, the unit cost per satellite is about $1.7 billion, and the USAF is reviewing its options concerning contractor financial responsibility and/or penalties.

Under current plans, AEHF-1 is looking at a 9-month delay, reaching its test/check-out orbit on Aug 11/11, instead of Nov 10/10.

Nov 16/10: AEHF-1 may have launched successfully, but a propulsion system problem prevented a series of 3 liquid apogee engine burns, so it didn’t reach its operational mission orbit. Los Angeles AFB discusses the new plan to fix this, which involves 4 major stages:

The 1st Parking Burns stage used 3 of the 6 reaction engine assemblies, or REAs, to quickly raise the perigee altitude to reduce drag and attitude disturbances. The 5 pound thrusters brought the orbit to a perigee altitude of 1,156 km and an inclination of 19.9 degrees on Sept 7/10. Apogee altitude remained at 50,000 km, per plan.

The 2nd stage was a series of 6 REA Apogee Burns, to more efficiently raise the perigee path to 4,712 km, and lower inclination to 15 degrees. It was completed on Sept 22/10.

The 3rd stage involves firing 2 high-efficiency hall current thrusters (HCTs), for as long as 12 hours around the apogee altitude. These burns will continue every orbit, centered on apogee, and this stage is planned to last between 7-9 months. It began on Oct 20/10, with a 9 hour burn during AEHF-1’s 100th apogee. Meanwhile, the satellite has managed to deploy its solar arrays, and pass operational readiness checkouts.

The 4th and final stage will require a near-continuous firing of the HCTs to adjust to the final mission orbit, lasting about 3 months. Los Angeles AFB.

AEHF-1: We have a problem

Nov 9/10: Support Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $49 million contract modification for AEHF sustainment engineering support from Oct 1/10 to Sept 30/11. At this point, $9 million has been committed by the AFSMC/MCSQ in El Segundo, CA (F04701-02-C-002; P00427).

Oct 28/10: Testing. Lockheed Martin announces the end of Intersegment System Testing (IST) for the 2nd AEHF satellite in Sunnyvale, CA, completing pre-launch verification for the new eXtended Data Rate (XDR) high-bandwidth service. XDR offers a 10-fold increase in system capacity, coverage and network connectivity, allowing applications such as real-time video, and voice and data conferencing. Completion of IST for AEHF-2 caps an extensive suite of interoperability tests with new XDR-capable user terminals, which demonstrating protected anti-jam communications at data rates up to 8 Mbps using agile satellite spot beams.

The 2nd AEHF satellite has completed all testing, and will be placed in storage in November 2010. The 3rd AEHF satellite is currently progressing through thermal vacuum environmental testing at the Lockheed Martin facility in Sunnyvale, CA.

Satellites FY 2010

AEHF-1

AEHF-1 highlights
(click for video)

Aug 16/10: Studies Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $16 million contract to study AEHF enhancement options, and all funds have already been committed. With the demise of AEHF’s T-SAT successor, AEHF enhancements become a critical opportunity for the bandwidth-constrained US military (F04701-02-C-0002, P00443).

Aug 14/10: SV-1. The USAF’s 45th Space Wing launches AEHF-1 from Pad 41 in Cape Canaveral, FL, on board a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket. USAF | Dutch MvD | ULA | Lockheed Martin | Florida Today, incl. video | Spaceflight Now.

AEHF-1 launch

August 10/10: SV-1. AEHF-1 is encapsulated into the Atlas V rocket. The launch has been delayed again, until Aug 14/10.

July 16/10: SV-1. Los Angeles AFB announces that, the Lockheed-Martin/Air Force AEHF team has continued a long-standing tradition, and signed a piece of the flight thermal blanket for the AEHF-1 satellite in preparation for launch. The satellite was shipped on May 24/10, and is currently at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL being readied for launch.

July 14/10: SV-1 launch slips. The USAF announces that:

“The Atlas V launch of the first Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellite from SLC-41 at the cape has been delayed 10 days from 30 July to 10 August. This delay was necessary to provide engineers more time to perform confidence testing on a launch vehicle component associated with releasing the fairing support structure. Processing on both the launch vehicle and satellite continues nominally to a new launch date of 10 August. This slip in the AEHF-1 launch is not expected to impact other launches in the manifest.”

See USAF | Lockheed Martin | United Launch Alliance | Florida Today, incl. video | Spaceflight Now.

May 25/10: SV-1. Lockheed Martin delivers the 1st new AEHF secure broadband communications satellite (SV-1) to the USAF, for a planned July 30/10 liftoff.

As of this date, Lockheed martin says that SV-2 has completed Final Integrated System Test, and is now preparing for Intersegment testing. SV-3 has now completed acoustic testing. Lockheed Martin.

AEHF-1 delivered.

April 14/10: Testing. Lockheed Martin announces that it has completed all factory testing of the first AEHF satellite, which means it’s ready for delivery to Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL for a September 2010 liftoff aboard an Atlas V rocket.

The 2nd AEHF satellite (SV-2) is in the midst of its final performance test known as Final Integrated System Test which will verify all spacecraft interfaces, demonstrate full functionality and evaluate satellite performance. The 3rd AEHF satellite, SV-3, is gearing up for acoustic testing.

April 1/10: The Pentagon releases its April 2010 Selected Acquisitions Report, covering major program changes up to December 2009. AEHF makes the list, owing to procurement shifts in the wake of TSAT’s cancellation:

“Program costs increased $2,510.3 million (+25.3%) from $9,938.6 million to $12,448.9 million, due primarily to a quantity increase of two satellites from four to six satellites (+$2,623.7 million). This increase was partially offset by decreases due to an adjustment to the cost estimate (-$20.0 million), Congressional general reductions (-$19.2 million), a contractor to civilian personnel conversion (-$11.8 million), and the application of revised escalation indices (-$53.9 million).”

SAR – to 6 satellites

March 30/10: GAO Report. The US GAO audit office delivers its 8th annual “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs report. With respect to the AEHF, it’s a bit behind the curve in listing only 4 satellites in the program for its figures, but it does acknowledge them in its commentary. Excerpts include:

“The AEHF program has overcome the technical problems that have delayed the first satellite’s launch by almost 2 years and increased the cost of the program. Defective satellite parts were replaced and the satellite successfully completed system-level environmental testing… Three satellites have been added to the program in recent years… The cost of the fourth satellite is significantly more than the estimated $952 million (then-year dollars) cost of the third satellite because there is an estimated 4-year break in production and some electronics components are no longer manufactured. Program officials do not anticipate significant technical challenges, but integrating, testing, and requalifying the new components will require time and money… design specifications for the first three satellites will remain unchanged for satellites four through six, which will be clones except for obsolete parts. The program office estimates the cost of satellites five and six will be about $1.6 billion and $1.7 billion (then-year dollars), respectively, with estimated launch dates in 2018 and 2020.”

Oct 7/09: Studies. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA received a $21.6 million contract for AEHF satellites that will perform a 50% design adequacy assessment for the mission control segment and continue preparation for the preliminary design review as well as study the impacts on strategic command requirements. At this time, $4 million has been obligated (F04701-02-C-0002, P00383).

Satellites FY 2009

Beyond TSAT.

Sept 17/09: No TSAT. What Now? During a media roundtable with USAF Space Command’s Space and Missile Systems Center Commander, Lt. Gen. Tom Sheridan, he explains the way forward in the absence of TSAT. AEHF-4 and WGS F5/F6 have been added, but that will not make up the gap in space-based bandwidth. Meanwhile, the need for high bandwidth anywhere is exploding, thanks to the skyrocketing number of UAVs and other surveillance and/or remotely-operated platforms.

Efforts are now underway to look at the overall gap created by TSAT’s removal, determine the military’s overall priorities among military wideband (WGS), hardened (AEHF), or other bandwidth options, and figure out how that gap might be covered a piece at a time. New solutions will be an option, and so will the possibility of adding new technologies to existing platforms like AEHF.

If this doesn’t sound like a firm plan, it’s because there isn’t one yet. The current foci involve figuring out customer priorities, and finding near-term funding that would retain a number of TSAT personnel and engineers. Success in retaining these people is expected to ensure that they can bring their experience with next-generation technologies to help generate new options, and then analyze alternatives.

TSAT dead – long live AEHF!

Sept 14/09: Training. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $6.1 million contract to develop training material for increment 7, train the trainer for subject matter experts at Fort Gordon, and train international partners for the Advanced Extremely High Frequency Satellite program. At this time, $324,048 has been committed by the SMC/PKA in El Segundo, CA (F04701-02-C0002, P00353).

Sept 10/09: SV-4. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company receives a $22 million contract for advance procurement of long-lead parts for AEHF Satellite Vehicle 4. At this time, $11 million has been committed (F04701-02-C-0002, P00379).

Sept 10/09: SV-1. Lockheed Martin announces that AEHF-1 has entered final testing at the company’s Sunnyvale, CA facilities, following successful completion of all spacecraft environmental testing. The Lockheed Martin-led team is now executing the final integrated spacecraft and system test procedures necessary to prepare the vehicle for flight. Over a 75-day period, the satellite will go through a series of factory tests to verify all spacecraft interfaces, demonstrate full functionality and evaluate satellite performance.

AEHF-1 was originally scheduled for launch in 2007, but the current release sets the bar for delivery at early 2010, and launch at an unspecified time in 2010. The 2nd and 3rd AEHF satellites are also progressing through final integration and test activities, and are currently on track for launch in 2011 and 2012 respectively.

March 31/09: GAO Report. American GAO auditors look at the AEHF program, as part of their 7th annual “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” report:

“For the second straight year, technical problems with satellite components resulted in a delay of the first launch. This latest delay is almost 2 years. Further, the program office estimates that the fourth AEHF satellite could cost more than twice the third satellite because some components that are no longer manufactured will have to be replaced and production will have to be restarted after a 4-year gap…

During system-level environmental testing of the first satellite, the program office identified six components with workmanship or design problems. Five of these components will need to be removed from the spacecraft for repair, and one will need a software fix. Once all components are repaired and reinstalled, the spacecraft will undergo environmental testing a second time to assure all components are working properly. Continued problems with integration and testing have led to additional schedule delays. The launch of the first satellite has slipped almost two years – from November 2008 to as late as September 2010. The launch of the second satellite was delayed from August 2009 to around June 2011, and the third satellite is now planned for launch in 2012. Due to these delays, initial operational capability has slipped 3 years – from 2010 to 2013.”

Feb 27/09: SV-4 lead-in. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA receives for $175 million for “the congressionally mandated advance procurement of long-lead parts in FY08 and FY09 for the Advanced Extremely High Frequency Satellite Vehicle four.” At this time $104.5 million has been committed (F04701-02-C-0002, POO347).

See also the $119.2 million July 18/06 contract. Each contract may not spend its full amount, but issued contracts to date now total $294.2 million.

Feb 27/09: Sub-contractors. Northrop Grumman delivers the payload module for AEHF-3. They are 22 days early, marking 3 consecutive early deliveries to the Lockheed Martin’s Sunnyvale, CA facilities (2007, 2008, 2009). Their payload module consists of the complete set of processing, routing and control hardware and software that handle the satellite’s communications, including critical features that protect against interception or jamming.

Lockheed Martin now will begin mating the payload module with its A2100 satellite bus and other space vehicle components, to be followed by environmental and acceptance testing of the completed satellite. NGC release.

Dec 30/08: TVAC issues. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA received a $7.2 million modifications, authorizing Lockheed to perform 2 additional thermal vacuum (TVAC) cycles on the AEHF Space Vehicles 2. As the Dec 16/08 entry notes, AEHF-1 is already facing problems due to TVAC related anomalies.

The US Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), Military Satellite Communications Systems Wing at El Segundo, CA manages this contract (F04701-02-C-002, P00343).

Dec 30/08: Studies. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA received a $9.9 million modification to provide feasibility studies. These studies will center on extending the AEHF system in the Military Satellite Communications Program, which appears to bode ill for the $20+ billion TSAT program that was supposed to surpass AEHF. At this time, all funds have been obligated.

The US Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), Military Satellite Communications Systems Wing at El Segundo, CA manages this contract (F04701-02-C-002, P00340).

Dec 16/08: TVAC issues. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $252 million Change Order that will implement additional vehicle-level Thermal Vacuum (TVAC) testing for AEHF-1. The DefenseLINK release adds that:

“The first Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellite is undergoing a significant amount of rework on mission critical unit’s dues [sic] to anomalies.”

At this stage, anomalies are very bad news. Additional TVAC testing suggests that the problem affects the satellite’s ability to survive and operate in the vacuum and wildly varying temperatures that a space satellite must endure.

Testing fail forces contract

Nov 17/08: The latest Pentagon Selected Acquisitions Report finds the AEHF program on the announcements list again:

“Program costs increases $2,576.6 million from $5,645.3 million to $9,938.6 million (+35.0%) to reflect cost increases which have resulted in a critical Nunn-McCurdy unit cost breach currently undergoing certification review.”

This is slightly confusing, as the April 2008 announcement set costs at $7.36 billion – rising from $6.42 billion because they had added a 4th AEHF satellite to the program.

SAR – major cost breach

Satellites FY 2008

Cost increases.

Antenna test
(click to view full)

Sept 16/08: Sub-contractors. Northrop Grumman Corporation announces that they have integrated all electronic units for AEHF-3’s payload module. The equipment includes approximately 20 electronics units that offer a complete set of radio frequency, processing, routing and control hardware, plus approximately 500,000 lines of software code.

NGC is currently under contract to provide 3 communications payloads to AEHF prime contractor Lockheed Martin in Sunnyvale, CA, and has delivered the first 2 on or ahead of schedule. This integration with Lockheed Martin’s A2100 satellite bus leaves the firm on track to maintain that record.

July 18/06: SV-4 lead-in. A $119.2 million modification to a cost plus award fee, cost-plus fixed-fee, cost-plus incentive-fee, firm-fixed-price contract with Lockheed Martin Space Systems Corp. of Sunnyvale, CA (F04701-02-C-0002, P00315). The modification covers long-lead parts for the 4th AEHF Satellite, and is an unfinalized contract whose exact numbers will be adjusted later. At this time $59.6 million has been committed.

April 7/08: Cost increases for the AEHF satellite and FAB-T terminal programs land them both on the Pentagon’s latest Selected Acquisition Reports release. The total increase is about 14.5% for the program as a whole, but the biggest increase is easy to understand – they added a satellite:

“[AEHF] Program costs increased $940.5 million (+14.6 percent) from $6,421.5 million to $7,362.0 million, due primarily to a quantity increase of one satellite from three to four satellites (+$946.0 million). Congress appropriated advance procurement for Space Vehicle 4 (SV-4) in the fiscal 2008 Appropriations Act. The Department added SV-4 Full Procurement in fiscal 2010, with a launch capability targeted in fiscal 2014.”

SAR – to 4 satellites

Feb 28/08: Testing. Lockheed Martin announces successful acoustic testing of the first Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) military communications satellite at its Space Systems facilities in Sunnyvale, CA. This test is designed to duplicate the sound and vibration levels expected during launch into orbit.

Lockheed Martin Space Systems and payload supplier Northrop Grumman Space Technology can now proceed with thermal vacuum testing, which tests performance in the enormously wide temperature extremes found in space. AEHF-1 will be shipped to the Air Force in late 2008 in preparation for launch aboard an Atlas V launch vehicle.

Satellites FY 2007

AEHF-1 meets EEVL.

P&P integration
(click to view full)

June 18/07: Lockheed Martin announces that it has successfully integrated the AEHF’s spacecraft propulsion core structure and the payload module. The core structure contains the integrated propulsion system as well as panels and other components that serve as the structural foundation of the satellite. The payload module consists of spacecraft electronics as well as the complete set of payload processing, routing and control hardware and software that perform the satellite’s communications function.

The successful integration allows the team of Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA and payload supplier Northrop Grumman Space Technology in Redondo Beach, CA to begin system level environmental and acceptance testing in preparation for launch in mid-2008. Lockheed Martin release.

June 1/07: Sub-contractors. Raytheon Co in Marlborough, MA received a $27.1 million3 firm-fixed-price contract for production, test, and delivery of 9 Extremely High Frequency (EHF) Satellite Communications Follow-On Terminal Communication Groups P/N: G752718-2 and 17 ship Antenna Groups P/N: G674898-1 (seven Radar Reducing Cross Section and ten Non-RRCS variants). This contract includes an option which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $38.3 million.

Work will be performed in Largo, FL (61.8%); Marlborough, MA (36.8%); and Saint Pete, FL (1.4%), and is expected to be complete by May 2009. This contract was not competitively procured; it was synopsized as a sole source procurement via the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command E-commerce web site on July 5, 2006. The Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command, San Diego, CA issued the contract (N00039-07-C-0001).

Feb 28/07: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Littleton, CO received a $108 million firm-fixed-price contract to launch AEHF-1 using an Atlas V Launch Vehicle under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program. At this time, total funds have been obligated and work will be complete February 2009. The Headquarters Space and Missile Systems Center at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA issued the contract (FA8816-06-C0004).

AEHF-1 launch contract

Dec 28/06: SV-1. Lockheed Martin Corp. Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA received a $7.8 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification for the use of a commercial payload processing facility to test, integrate, and fuel the Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellite in preparation for launch. This modification replaces the use of a government facility with a commercial facility that meets program requirements for floor space sufficient to support simultaneous mechanical and electrical launch processing operations. At this time, $1 million has been obligated. The Headquarters Military Satellite Communications Systems Wing at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA issued the contract (F04701-02-C-0002/P00214).

Dec 22/06: SV-3. Lockheed Martin announces that it has delivered the flight structure for the 3rd AEHF satellite ahead of schedule. The flight structure, which is based on the A2100 geosynchronous spacecraft, will now be sent to Lockheed’s Mississippi facility for integration with its propulsion subsystem.

Over the next several months, a team of engineers and technicians at Lockheed Martin’s Mississippi Space & Technology Center, an advanced propulsion, thermal, and metrology facility located at the John C. Stennis Space Center, will integrate the spacecraft’s propulsion subsystem, which is essential for maneuvering the satellite during transfer orbit to its final location as well as conducting on-orbit operations and repositioning maneuvers throughout its mission life. See Lockheed Martin release.

Oct 19/06: Crypto. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $7.7 million cost-plus-award fee contract modification. This undefinitized contract action involves integration of the NSA-developed top secret key translation element into the AEHF system, and authorizes Lockheed Martin to start working the system design and test program changes required. The modification will develop, test and integrate the required hardware/software in to the AEHF mission control segment.

At this time, $4.5 million has been obligated. This work will be complete June 2019. The Headquarters Military Satellite Communications Systems Wing, Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA issued the contract (F04701-02-C-0002/P00212).

Oct 4/06: Changes. Lockheed Martin Space and Missiles in Sunnyvale, CA received a $7.6 million cost-plus-award fee contract modification for software and hardware changes to the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellite system. The changes are necessary to develop and maintain backward compatibility with the predecessor Milstar communications satellite system, and are part of a series of modifications necessary to ensure this compatibility. The Headquarters Military Satellite Communications Systems Wing at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA issued the contract (F04701-02-C-0002/A00013).

Satellites FY 2004 – 2006

Schedule slip. AEHF-1, 3.

AEHF model test
(click to view full)

April 19/06: Testing. Lockheed martin engineers perform a successful modal survey for AEHF. It is designed to ensure that launch and other sources of vibrations such as reaction wheels, solar arrays and various deployable and steerable mechanisms will not affect the critical mission of the communications payload. The successful test was performed by a team of engineers at Lockheed Martin Space Systems, facilities in Sunnyvale, Calif. and included 292 accelerometers, 508 accelerometer channels and six shakers mounted to the structure and surrounding ground surface. Lockheed Martin release.

April 14/06: Lockheed Martin, Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $454.9 million cost-plus fixed-fee, cost-plus award-fee contract modification for the implementation of the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) Satellite Communication System Program re-plan, which started in late 2004.

The re-plan was necessary due to delayed delivery of government-furnished information assurance products, added payload component testing, and replacement of critical parts that were disqualified for space flight. The effort includes development of emulators, additional testing associated with integrating multiple incremental deliveries, and additional months of non-recurring development. The resulting AEHF first launch date of April 2008 is consistent with the revised Acquisition Program Baseline approved in March 2005. This work will be complete May 2010 (F04701-02-C-0002/P00136).

Major SDD increase

Jan 12/06: SV-3. Lockheed Martin Corp. Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $491.2 million cost-plus-award-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price contract modification. This is a modification of the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellite contract to add satellite vehicle #3 (SV3) as envisioned and permitted by a clause in the contract. This action includes the main SV3 contract, and introduces the option for Launch and Operations support.

The Launch and Operations Support option associated with this modification is planned to be exercised beginning in FY 2009 to support an FY 2010 launch, and the acquisition of SV3 will complete the AEHF program of record unless the T-SAT program is deferred or canceled (in which case AEHF SV4 & SV5 will be launched). Work on this contract, which takes the total amount of AEHF expenditures announced on DefenseLINK to $4.276 billion, is expected to be complete in May 2011 (F04701-02-C-0002, P00156).

AEHF-3 contracts

March 7/05: SV-3. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $78.2 million cost-plus award-fee, cost-plus fixed-fee, firm fixed-price contract modification to provide for the advance procurement of long-lead parts for AEHF Satellite Vehicles #3 (SV3) in FY05 (F04701-02-C-0002, P00102).

Dec 21/04: The U.S. Air Force announces that the AEHF program has suffered a 1-year schedule slip, and cost growth of about 20%. The first launch of the 3 planned satellites is now slated for April 2008 rather than 2007 [Source]. In its release, the USAF cites:

“…unavoidable delays and cost growth due to delayed delivery of information-assurance [signal-encryption] products, and the resulting delay of terminals required for satellite command and control… replacement of critical electronic parts and added payload component testing…”

Program slips

Aug 4/04: Spares. Lockheed Martin Corp. Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA and Northrop Grumman Space Technology in Los Angeles, CA received a $32.55 million cost-plus award-fee contract modification for spare critical components to be used, if necessary, in factory by the contractor during assembly and test and of Advanced Extremely High Frequency (EHF) satellites.

Originally, 5 AEHF satellites were to be built, which ensured that there would be enough spare parts to avoid delays during production because the first satellites could use parts from satellites being assembled later. For this reason, the original AEHF plan did not include production spares. In November 2002, 2 of the Advanced EHF satellites were cancelled and the 3rd satellite was delayed one year, which meant there were no longer adequate numbers of spare critical parts to prevent production delays. Work will be complete by January 2009 (F04701-02-C-0002, P00083).

May 18/04: Crypto. Lockheed Martin Corp Space Systems and Northrop Grumman Space Technology received a $149 million contract modification which incorporates within-scope changes resulting from Revision to the KI-54 Cryptographic Interface Control Document (ICD).

The KI-54 ICD “black box” encryption device was modified by the NSA’s (National Security Agency) contractor, which meant the AEHF team was required to redesign the Host Accessory Logic Application Specific Integrated Circuit (HAL ASIC) in the AEHF communication payload. This effort was captured in Phase 1. In Phase 2, the AEHF contractor team will receive a 4 month program extension to identify and mitigate the risks and modifications to the whole satellite associated with this redesign. Locations of performance are: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Sunnyvale CA (51%) and Northrop Grumman in Los Angeles, CA (49%). This work will be complete in September 2008 (F04701-02-C-0002, P00061).

Dec 22/03: Changes. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space in Santa Maria, CA received a $15 million cost-plus award-fee contract modification. This technical change will provide two different connection modes to allow MPE to communicate with Army and Air Force terminals and adapt to different terminal and network changes, as Option 5 of an analysis Study that defines Mission Planning Element (MPE) versus Terminal Functionality into the AEHF baseline. This work will be complete by September 2008 (F04701-02-C-0002, P00042).

Satellites FY 2002 – 2003

SDD contract; increase.

older AEHF concept
(click to view full)

Aug 8/03: Crypto. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $78.5 million cost-plus award-fee, cost-plus fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price contract modification. It provides for an in-scope change to Incorporate KI-54 Interface Control Document (ICD) Revision F-Phase 2 impacts. The KI-54 ICD is a “black box” encryption device for military communications passing through AEHF. A two-phase approach was initiated to evaluate the KI-54 ICD Revision F changes. Phase I focused on the effort to redesign the HAL ASIC. Phase 2 focused on identifying and mitigating the AEHF system level impacts associated with the HAL ASIC redesign, as defined in Phase 1, such that the 4-month HAL ASIC PDR slip will not result in a launch delay. This work will be complete by September 2008 (F04701-02-C-0002, P00046).

July 23/03: Changes. Lockheed Martin Corp. Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA and Northrop Grumman Space Technology in Los Angeles, CA received a $16 million contract modification for the following:

(1) Provide capability to assign any single uplink transmission security (TRANSEC) key to any beam;
(2) Provide capability to blank 2nd key contiguous bandwidth within any one permute group in multiples of wideband channels for every hope of the date frame. The blanking timing error shall be factory selectable and upload able from mission control segment (MCS);
(3) Allow extra high data rate users to acquire high gain earth coverage, reposition medium resolution coverage area (beam shared and full-time) and high-resolution coverage area beams without using super high gain earth coverage (SHGEC) uplink resources;
(4) Provide capability for all users to acquire and communicate in the same coverage requests, and the SHGEC which is only used for communications and time tracking terminals acquiring or communicating in any particular beam will do so using only one uplink TRANSEC key that is currently configured to that beam;
(5) Allow for permute group 0 group to support wideband channels.

This work will be complete in September 2008 (F04701-02-C-0002, P00043).

June 13/03: Changes. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $5.2 million contract modification to provide for in-scope changes to modify the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) Payload. The technical change ensures backward compatibility with MILSTAR satellite operations. Specifically, it will provide users the capability to fence the necessary payload resources to process Rapid Reconfiguration Order Wire (RROW) streams, and the capability to control the fenced RROW XC2 stream processing payload resources as any other fenced resource, including sub-fences and sub-sub-fences, via command and access control protocol. The change will impact multiple specification documents including the Mission Planning Element of the Mission Control Segment, the Configurable Onboard Router in the Digital Processing Subsystem and the payload software. This work will be completed in September 2008 (F04701-02-C-0002, P00031).

Payload I&T
(click to view full)

May 27/03: Changes. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space in Sunnyvale, CA received a $10 million cost-plus-award-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed contract modification. This is an in-scope change to redesign the host accessory logic circuit (ASIC) in response to a specification upgrade for the KI-54 cryptographic device. This effort will ensure secure communication capability by providing an improvement to the host accessory ASIC within the AEHF digital processing subsystem. This work will be complete January 2004 (F04701-02-C-0002, P00034).

May 22/03: SDD. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. received a $9 million contract modification as an amendment to the existing system development and demonstration (SD&D) contract that was definitized April 15, 2001. The purpose of this amendment is to increase the contract value from $2.63 billion to $2.64 billion. This increase is the result of an engineering change proposal to implement a new AEHF System alternate key management plan (AKMP). The effort is within scope of the existing contract, and is necessitated by requirement/design changes that meet National Security Agency (NSA) security requirements that have been validated by Air Force Space Command. The system keys can’t be produced until the NSA approves the AKMP, and these changes must be implemented to avoid possible impact to the launch schedule. The locations of performance are Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space in Sunnyvale, CA, and TRW Inc. Space and Electronics Group in Redondo Beach, CA. This work will be complete June 2008 (F04701-02-C-0002, P00029).

May 22/03: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA is being awarded a $498 million firm-fixed-price contract modification. This is an amendment to the existing letter contract for the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) System Development and Demonstration (SD&D) phase. The purpose of this amendment is to increase the not-to-exceed from $2.698 billion to $3.196 billion, as a result of the FY 2002 appropriation act decrease of $70 million and the loss of $30 million in international partner funding. Also, the not-to-exceed increase includes effort necessitated by the recent revision of the National Security Agency’s KI-54 encryption Interface control document, revision D in the amount of $46 million. This action provides for satellites replacement and upgrade of the associated ground command and control segment, and the necessary sustainment. The period of performance for this effort will span approximately 10 years.

Lockheed Martin Corp. will perform this effort at TRW Inc. Space and Electronics Group in Redondo Beach, Los Angeles, CA (46%), and Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space, Sunnyvale, CA (28%) and other locations (F04701-02-C-0002, P00007).

Major SDD increase

Nov 16/02: The Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) National Team, comprised of Lockheed Martin in Sunnyvale, CA, and TRW Inc. in Redondo Beach, CA, are being awarded a $2.698 billion (not-to-exceed) firm-fixed-price and cost-plus award fee contract for the System Development and Demonstration (SDD) phase of the AEHF satellite communication system program. This effort includes production of two satellites, plus replacement and upgrade of existing military satellite communication (MILSATCOM) ground command and control segment components to support AEHF and associated sustainment.

Solicitation for this sole source contract began in October 2000, negotiations were completed November 2001, and work will be complete in December 2011. The contractors will perform this effort in Sunnyvale, CA (45%), and Redondo, CA (55%). The Space and Missile Systems Center at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA issued the contract (F04701-02-C-0002).

AEHF SDD contract: includes AEHF-1 & 2

FAB-T Terminals and Ground Control

FAB-T (Family of Advanced Beyond-line-of-sight Terminals) is designed to provide a family of software-defined radios that use a common open architecture to link to different satellites, and enable information exchange between ground, air and space platforms. It is envisioned as a common terminal for the next generation of High Data Satellite Communications using AEHF, Wideband Gapfiller, and other future satellite systems. Aircraft involved include bombers like the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber and B-52 Stratofortress, specialty platforms like the RC-135 Rivet Joint, E-4 NAOC, E-6 Mercury/TACAMO, et. al., and key UAV types like the RQ-4 Global Hawk and MQ-1/9 Predators.

The FAB-T family includes software-defined radios, antennas and associated user interface hardware that will provide a powerful system capable of hosting a multitude of transmission “waveforms” to accommodate data rates in excess of 300 megabits per second.

FAB-T Increment 1 will begin as a terminal for the AEHF and older Milstar satellite systems.

FAB-T Increment 2 will develop terminals to support Wideband Global SATCOM satellite operations on surveillance aircraft including key UAVs, with other platforms to follow.

Fortunately, FAB-T also is the first survivable Software Communications Architecture (SCA)-compliant communications system. Because its implementation will be software based, rather than hardware based, future upgrades that improve performance or extend the standard can be implemented without the time-consuming and expensive process of disassembling equipment and adding new electronics. These “future proofing” modifications can be made to any SCA-compliant radios if it is deemed necessary, even those outside the AEHF/FAB-T program.

Evolution Toward Competition

E-6B Mercury
(click to view full)

While FAB-T was initially a Boeing program, Raytheon steadily won orders for AEHF-compatible terminals from every service, finally displacing Boeing in 2014.

FAB-T was initially a 6-year, $279 million system design and development contract in 2002, and it expanded to become an SDD/EMD and production program worth over $3.6 billion. Program activity was managed by Boeing’s Battle Management/Command, Control and Communications (BMC3) & Strategic Systems business segment in Anaheim, CA with key support from Boeing Satellite Systems of El Segundo, CA. Principal team members at the time included:

• Boeing (Lead contractor, systems engineering and integration, system and terminal architecture, software development, test and evaluation, integrated logistics support and communications engineering)

• Harris Corporation’s Government Communications Systems division in Melbourne, FL (integration of terminal and antenna hardware)

• L-3 Communications’ Communications Systems West division in Salt Lake City, UT (development of the modem processor)

• Northrop Grumman’s Mission Systems (not specified, but acquired TRW whose Command, Control and Intelligence Division in Fairfax, VA was working on AEHF waveform management)

• Raytheon (related SMART-T terminals for USA, Canada and the Netherlands)

• Rockwell Collins’ Government Systems Division (not specified)

• ViaSat, Inc.’s Communications Systems Group in Carlsbad, CA (communications security module hardware and information security)

In September 2012, the USAF had run out of patience, and gave Raytheon a second crack at things with a limited FAB-T development contract. Raytheon had already managed to win a number of service-specific contracts for AEHF-compatible terminals from various branches of the US military (Army SMART-T, Navy MBT, STRATCOM MMPU) so their own development has been faster and less expensive than Boeing’s by a couple orders of magnitude.

Bu June 2014, Raytheon had become the USAF’s FAB-T CPT supplier as well, displacing Boeing and fielding the 1st set of FAB-T terminals onto command aircraft: the 4 national command post E-4Bs based on the 747, and the 16 E-6B Mercury Block IIs used as STRATCOM mirrors and “Looking Glass” theater command planes.

The USAF has deferred moves to equip its B-2A and B-52H bomber fleets, and its RC-135 Rivet Joint electronic eavesdropping jets. If they decide to go ahead, the contracts will be the subject of new competitions.

FAB-T & Ground Control: Contracts and Key Events FY 2012 – 2014

USAF gets annoyed, funds parallel design efforts; Raytheon wins FAB-T CPT competition, displacing Boeing.

E-4B mission
click for video

Aug 12/14: Raytheon VP and GM for Integrated Communication Systems Scott Whatmough says that they’ll be done FAB-T CPT testing by the end of 2014 (q.v. June 2/14). He adds that the B-2A Spirit stealth bomber would be a particularly challenging future addition, as its antennas are different from the B-52H or RC-135. Furthermore:

“It was a classified program when it was being developed and they came up with a very unique mechanical packaging concept for all of their electronics. Turns out no other aircraft ever adopted it, so it has a unique mechanical packaging.”

Sources: C4ISR & Networks, “Raytheon: FAB-T qualification testing done by year’s end”.

June 2/14: FAB-T contract. Raytheon in Marlborough, MA receives a $298 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for 84 FAB-T Command Post Terminals (CPT), which will equip E-4B NAOC and E-6B Mercury Block II command post aircraft, as well as some ground and mobile locations. After FAB-T reaches Milestone C, Phase 2 production contract options for Low-Rate Initial Production and beyond will open up for Raytheon, expanding the contract considerably.

It’s a sharp blow to Boeing, but not entirely unexpected. On the other hand, it’s not the absolute end. Buying FAB-T terminals for USAF B-2 and B-52 bombers, RC-135 SIGINT/ELINT aircraft, or other planes, would require another procurement process.

Work will be performed in Marlborough, MA and Largo, FL, with the Florida location serving as the assembly point. USAF FY 2013 through 2019 budgets will fund FAB-T buys over time, with just $31,274 committed immediately. Two bids were solicited and two received. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/HNSK at Hanscom AFB, MA, solicited 2 bids, and received 2 (FA8705-13-C-0005, PO 0002). Sources: Pentagon DefenseLINK | Raytheon, “Raytheon awarded $298 million for US Air Force FAB-T satellite terminal program” | Defense News, “Space Fence, FAB-T Awards Show an Emboldened DoD”.

Raytheon wins FAB-T CPT

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 AEHF program is included, but the entry isn’t long and focuses on Mission Control Segment Increment 5 (MCS i5), which controls both Milstar and AEHF satellites.

The USAF hasn’t deployed the full AEHF MCS capability, so no conclusions can be drawn until testing is done in 2014. DOT&E did say that MCS i5 demonstrated improved reliability, dependability, and maintainability compared to i4, and was also more secure.

Jan 27/14: FAB-T situation. Raytheon VP of integrated communications systems Scott Whatmough has told reporters that the USAF is expected to award the FAB-T production contract by the end of March 2014. Raytheon is hoping to beat development contract holder Boeing, using its own privately-developed, AEHF-compatible receiver terminal.

The FAB-T program was most recently projected to cost $4.67 billion, a 48-percent increase from the original estimate of $3.17 billion, but the coming production order is expected to include just 84 FAB-T systems instead of the program’s 246. The bomber fleet installations have been put aside, and production systems will only be used in airborne and land-based command posts. Sources: DoD Buzz, “Pentagon May Award FAB-T Contract in March”.

Aug 1/13: Ground System. USAF Space Command accepts Mission Control Segment Increment 5 (MCS i5) for operational use as the Milstar and AEHF ground segment. It can support Low Data Rate and Medium Data Rate communications over a combined constellation of Milstar and AEHF satellites, and high-bandwidth Extended Data Rate (XDR) for command and control and some tactical communications. Sources: Pentagon DOT&E FY 2013 Annual Report.

July 1/13: FAB-T competition. Raytheon Network Centric Systems in Marlborough, MA receives a $34 million contract modification to continued development and testing of air (E-4B, E-6) and ground fixed and transportable command post terminals with presidential and national voice conferencing. The systems are a parallel project award under the Family of Advanced Beyond line-of-sight Terminals (FAB-T) program – q.v. June 19/13 and Sept 10/12 entries.

Work will be performed at Marlborough, MA, and is expected to be complete by October 2013. Fiscal 2012 Research and Development funds are being obligated at time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center/HNSK, Hanscom Air Force Base, MA manages the contract (FA8307-12-C-0013, PO 0013).

June 19/13: FAB-T situation. Aviation Week reports progress on Raytheon’s competing FAB-T development contract (q.v. Sept 10/12).

Next month, Raytheon plans to complete work, including delivery of developmental terminal models for the E-4B and E-6B command post aircraft, and Presidential voice communications. The firm has just completed a critical design review (CDR), and an October 2013 test will involve satellite communications. The goal is a production-ready system by September 2014, and they’re basing their work on related AEHF-compatible wins like the US Army’s SMART-T (q.v. Oct 4/12), US Navy’s Multiband Terminal (MBT), and the USAF’s Minuteman Minimum Essential Emergency Communications Network Program Upgrade (MMPU, q.v. Dec 30/11).

Boeing hasn’t stopped working. Their CDR took place in 2012, and they’re now in the final stages of system level functional qualification. Demonstrations have taken place with AEHF and Milstar control systems, and flight tests are scheduled for this summer. Beyond FAB-T, one imagines that Boeing would like to win the upcoming Global Aircrew Strategic Network Terminal (GASNT) competition. Of course, so would Raytheon. Aviation Week.

Oct 4/12: SMART-T. Raytheon in Marlborough, MA receives a $164 million firm-fixed-price contract to create AEHF secure, mobile, anti-jam, reliable, tactical (SMART-T) terminals.

FAB-T isn’t the only game in town when it comes to AEHF-compatible terminals for sending and receiving data, and this is one of several service-specific contracts for AEHF-compatible terminals that don’t need all of FAB-T’s functionality, but may need other capabilities. See also Sept 19/11 entry.

Work location will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Sept 28/15. The bid was solicited through the internet, with 1 bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command in Fort Monmouth, NJ (W15P7T-12-D-0071).

Sept 10/12: FAB-T competition. About 10 years after losing the FAB-T contract, Raytheon Network Centric Systems in Marlborough, MA receives a $70 million firm fixed price contract for development, testing and production of FAB-T engineering development models of air (E-4B NAOC, E-6B TACAMO), ground fixed and transportable Command Post Terminals with Presidential and National Voice Conferencing (PNVC).

The location of the performance is Marlborough, MA. Work is to be complete by July 2013. The AFLCMC/HSNK at Hanscom AFB, MA manages the contract (FA8307-12-C-0013).

FAB-T becomes competitive

Dec 30/11: STRATCOM MMPU. Raytheon Network Centric Systems in Marlborough, MA receives a $9.4 million cost-plus-award-fee, firm-fixed-price, time-and-materials and cost reimbursement contract to upgrade the Minuteman Minimum Essential Emergency Communications Network Program to support AEHF constellation communications. The LM-30 Minuteman III ICBM is the land-based leg of the US nuclear weapons triad.

Work will be performed in Marlborough, MA, and is expected to be complete 12 months after receipt of order. The USAF ESC/HNSK at Hanscom AFB, MA manages the contract (FA8726-08-C-004, PO 0080).

FY 2010 – 2011

SAR shows program cost growth; Milstar ground control compatibility; Other firms producing AEHF-compatible terminals.

Older Milstar II

Sept 19/11: SMART-T. Raytheon announces that they have fielded the first AEHF Secure Mobile Anti-jam Reliable Tactical Terminal (SMART-T) satellite communications solution to the U.S. armed services, using Raytheon’s eXtended Data Rate (XDR) waveform hardware and software modification.

SMART-T is compatible with EHF and AEHF satellites, and AEHF increases the data rate by a factor of 4x. Through 2015, Raytheon will field 364 AEHF SMART-T terminals to the U.S. armed services, 19 systems to Canada, and 7 to the Netherlands.

August 2011: Testing. Boeing successfully demonstrates high-data-rate transmissions between FAB-T and an AEHF test terminal, using the low probability of interception, low probability of detection extended data rate (XDR). XDR will be used for, among other things, nuclear command and control.

The testing covered XDR re-key, XDR text communications, dual FAB-T log-on with the AEHF payload, and interface with the AEHF Satellite Mission Control Subsystem. More than 50% of system integration tests are done, and system qualification testing is due to start in 2012. Note that Boeing’s Oct 3/11 release refers to Paul Geery as its FAB-T VP and program manager.

July 18/11: Testing. Boeing updates progress. The FAB-T EMD program has completed 90% of hardware qualification testing, 97% of all system software through-code and unit testing, and approximately 30% of systems integration and test. Boeing has conducted platform and payload integration testing through over-the-air low-data-rate tests and risk-reduction flight tests, and April 2011’s RC-135 Rivet Joint flight test of a Block 8 terminal was the 2nd in a series of airborne terminal tests, on the 1st operational program to be integrated.

Boeing is working toward the LRIP (low-rate initial production contract) for the Nuclear Command and Control Network Communications System, and completing qualification of the Block 8 third-generation hardware and high-data-rate waveform software. John Lunardi is currently Boeing’s FAB-T vice president and program director.

April 15/11: The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 30/10 includes the “significant cost changes” in AEHF program – both satellites and terminals. The FAB-T section reads:

“Program costs increased $630.9 million (+15.8 percent) from $3,981.9 million to $4,612.8 million, due primarily to complexities with software integration and challenges with hardware qualification (+$260.1 million), higher manufacturing costs due to loss of learning and production inefficiencies (+$258.9 million), and other increases due to the schedule stretch-out (+$134.7 million), partially offset by decreases in other support costs (-$32.7 million).”

SAR – cost increases

April 6/11: SDD. Boeing in Huntington Beach, CA receives a $271.2 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification. It covers “the new estimated cost completion” amount for FAB-T’s System Development and Demonstration, and “provides increment funding aligned with Continuing Resolution authority.”

Work will be performed at Huntington Beach, CA, and Salt Lake City, UT. Hanscom AFB’s Electronic Systems Center, MA manages the contract (F19628-02-C-0048, PO 0219).

Major SDD Increase

Jan 26/11: Testing. A successful demonstration of over-the-air, low-data-rate communication between an orbiting Milstar satellite and the a 3rd generation (Block 8) FAB-T terminal, passing voice and data communication using the FAB-T’s low-data-rate software and its newly developed large aircraft antenna.

The system in question demonstrates why this kind of backward compatibility matters: it’s a Nuclear Command and Control Network Communications System. The team of Boeing, L-3 Communications, Rockwell Collins and ViaSat, Inc. will conduct more terminal integration, software testing and flight testing activities before building this system.

Boeing’s System Integration and Testing Lab in Huntington Beach, CA includes 12 FAB-T systems with connections to 3 antennas, allowing simultaneous over-the-air operation. 2011 will feature in-depth FAB-T system integration tests, now that over 80% of the hardware qualification testing and nearly 65% of the FAB-T software qualification testing is complete. The program is scheduled to enter flight testing in Q1 FY 2013 (fall 2012), and exercise its low rate initial production option in Q3 FY 2013 (summer 2013). USAF.

Oct 6/10: B-52s. Boeing in Wichita, KS received a $12.4 million contract modification for a future beyond line of sight (BLOS) communication capability on the B-52 heavy bomber, using AEHF-compatible BLOS terminals. At this time, $10 million has been committed by the ASC/WWVK at Wright Patterson AFB, OH (FA8107-05-C-0001; PO 0058).

This contract is part of the B-52 CONECT program.

Aug 3/10: AEHF & Milstar. Lockheed Martin announces that a joint company/USAF team has successfully transitioned the Milstar satellite constellation’s ground control system to the new AEHF Mission Control Segment (MCS). The AEHF MCS is now performing day-to-day operation of the USAs existing Milstar satellite constellation, leaving MCS ready to support deployment of AEHF-1 in August 2010. Lockheed Martin.

July 8/10: Integral Systems, Inc. in Columbia, MD receives a $13.4 million contract modification, extending the contract for the command and control system-consolidated (CSS-C) program for a year (from Sept 30/11 – Sept 30/12), due to launch delays on AEHF Space Vehicles 1, 2 and 3. At this time, no money has been committed; this contract just authorizes the funds if needed (F04701-01-C-0012, P00170).

CCS-C has been an overall money-saver for the USAF, migrating tracking, telemetry, and command and control from mainframe systems to cheaper and more flexible commercial client/server computing options. The USAF says that CCS-C sustainment costs are just 25% of the previous Satellite Control Network Command and Control Segment. After a competitive system ‘fly off’, in March 2002 Integral Systems Inc. (ISI) of Columbia, Maryland was awarded the CCS-C development/ sustainment contract. ISI/CCS-C employs approximately 130 people, and operates 2 software development laboratories in Maryland and Colorado.

Jan 4/10: FAB-T changes. Boeing in Huntington Beach, CA received a $34.3 million contract to implement the following changes to the functionality available for the Family of Advanced Beyond Line-of-Sight Terminals Increment 1: Contractor Technical Requirements Document (CTRD) update version 9.2; Simple Key Loader 6.0 interface to data set manager (DSM) for DSM flash control station profiles; and implementation of auto broadcast features on the Extended Data Rate (XDR) capability. At this time, $500,000 has been obligated. The 653 ESW/PK at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA manages the contract (F19628-02-C-0048-P00180).

Dec 1/09: Support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA received a $39.5 million contract to provide sustainment for the AEHF satellite ground segment from Dec 1/09 – Sep 30/10 (F04701-02-C-0002, P00399).

Oct 21/09: Canada. Rockwell Collins announces a 5-year, USD$ 52.3 million contract to provide the Canadian Forces with AEHF-compatible Single Channel Anti-jam Manportable (SCAMP XDR-IPV, Extended Data Rate International Partners Variant) terminals. The Foreign Military Sale contract will be executed through the U.S. Army’s Communications-Electronics Command Group (CECOM).

Rockwell Collins’ SCAMP terminals provide worldwide secure, jam-resistant, covert, voice and data communications. They offer communication for a wide variety of applications and users. The terminals feature Extended Data Rate (EDR) capability that delivers data rates comparable to high quality, Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) modems.

SCAMP for Canada

Oct 14/09: Testing. Boeing Launch Services of Huntington Beach, CA received a $21.8 million contract modification to provide engineering development models for the Family of Advanced Beyond-Line-of-Sight Terminals (FAB-T) to allow for operational testing with production representative terminals. FAB-T terminals will connect soldiers or military platforms like planes, ships, et. al. with the AEHF constellation. At this time, $1.3 million has been obligated. The 653 ESW/PK at Hanscom Air Force Base in Massachusetts manages the contract (F19628-02-C-0048, P00171).

FY 2006 – 2009

FAB-T PDR, CDR.

June 26/09: AMACS antenna. Raytheon announces a successful test of their Advanced Multiband Communication Antenna System (AMCAS), developed for the U.S. Air Force. AMCAS is an extremely low-profile antenna that extends only 8 1/2″, and attaches to the aircraft’s metal skin rather than requiring complex in-fuselage installations. That configuration reduces drag, and minimizes time out of service during upgrades.

During the test, the AMCAS antenna communicated with the Milstar satellite’s medium data rate waveform, but it has been developed for use with FAB-T.

Oct 28-30/08: A successful system-wide Critical Design Review (CDR) for the FAB-T family. The Boeing Terminal Test team established log on, downlink, and uplink connections with a Milstar 6 satellite, as a first step toward implementing AEHF’s Extended Data Rate (XDR) waveform.

Formal qualification testing will now take place to validate the terminals’ interoperability and satellite interfaces, and Boeing expects to begin deliveries of engineering development modules to the Air Force in 2009 for FAB-T Increment 1. Flight testing of these modules is currently planned for mid-2009. Boeing release.

FAB-T CDR

Sept 16/08: Testing. Boeing announces that it has delivered its FAB-T Increment 2 prototype to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Lincoln Laboratory in Lexington, MA, ahead of schedule. The lab will use it to continue developing the DVB-S2 based communications waveform.

Waveforms define how radios, satellites, et. al. communicate. The Lincoln Lab’s efforts will define a waveform used for airborne intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance readout over Ka-band military satellite communications. That waveform can then be incorporated in air, ground, maritime, and space communications equipment as required, as long as they have the required hardware or are software-defined and SCA-compatible.

Sept 4/08: Changes. A $16.7 million cost plus award fee contract modification to Boeing of Anaheim, CA to update new platform requirements and Advanced EHF (AEHF) system interface. At this time, $7 million has been committed by the Air Force Materiel Command,’s Electronic Systems Center, 653d ELSG/PK at Hancom AFB, MA (F19628-02-C-0048, P00146).

July 28/08: Changes. A $53.4 million modification to Boeing in Anaheim, CA, in order to update new platform requirements and FAB-T’s AEHF system interface. The Electronic Systems Center of Air Force Materiel Command manages the contract (F19628-02-C-0048 P00143).

April 9/08: Changes. Boeing received a modified contract for $25 million to incorporate Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) 0035, Strategic Networks, into the Family of Advanced Beyond-Line-of-Sight Terminals (FAB-T) Increment 1 program. At this time $9.25 million has been obligated, and the contract amount will be finalized later. Hanscom AFB, MA issued the contract (F19628-02-C-0048/P00141).

April 7/08: Cost increases for the AEHF satellite and FAB-T terminal programs land them both on the Pentagon’s latest Selected Acquisition Reports release:

“[FAB-T] Program costs increased $454.8 million (+14.4 percent) from $3,167.4 million to $3,622.2 million, due primarily to a revised cost estimate resulting from analysis by the OSD Cost Analysis Improvement Group (+$348.8 million). Costs also increased due to a net quantity increase of 6 terminals from 216 to 222 terminals (+$44.7 million), adjustments in real and predicated escalation (+$26.6 million), an increase in initial spares (+$25.5 million), and a net stretch-out of the procurement buy profile (+$9.2 million).”

SAR – cost increases

Feb 15/08: Changes. Boeing of Anaheim, CA received a contract modification for $49.8 million. This undefinitized contract action to incorporate Engineering Change Proposal 0034, “New Platform Requirements and Advanced EHF System Interface Changes,” into the Family of Advanced Beyond-Line-of-Sight Terminals. At this time $17 million has been obligated. 653 ELSG/PKX at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA issued the contract (F19628-02-C-0048/P00138).

Feb 1/08: Testing. Northrop Grumman Corporation announces that it has demonstrated compatibility between the AEHF military communications satellite with user ground terminals using the new Extended Data Rate (XDR) waveform and protocols. Other future satellite communications programs, including the Transformational Satellite Communications System (TSAT) and the Enhanced Polar System, will also use XDR waveforms.

Earlier testing in May 2006 had already verified the backward compatibility of Advanced EHF with legacy terminals using Low Data Rate (LDR) and Medium Data Rate (MDR) waveforms. This latest demonstration included all 3, as 84 test objectives were demonstrated including links the U.S. Army’s Warfighter Information Network-Tactical terminal (WIN-T), the international variant of the Secure Mobile Anti-Jam Reliable Tactical Terminal (SMART-T), and Lincoln Laboratory’s Advanced Universal System Test Terminal (AUST-T).

Tests were conducted using a U.S. Army user terminal as well as a terminal configuration to be used by international partners, and included participants from the U.S. Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center, Northrop Grumman, the Joint Terminal Engineering Office, Lockheed Martin, the U.S. Army WIN-T program, the Lincoln Laboratory, and Raytheon (terminal manufacturer).

Jan 16/08: STRATCOM. Raytheon Network Centric Systems, Inc. of Marlborough, MA received a contract for $37.5 million. The firm will perform a Minuteman Minimum Essential Emergency Communications Network Program upgrade to support communications via AEHF satellite constellations. To give you an idea of just how serious that is, the Minuteman-III fleet is the USA’s set of land-based nuclear missiles. The upgrade will provide an improved terminal operator control function, add an AEHF and address other system improvement for the MMP. At this time $15.2 million has been obligated. The Electronic Systems Center, AFMC at Eglin Air Force Base, FL issued the contract (FA8726-08-C-0004).

Sept 14/07: Changes. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Corp. of Sunnyvale, Calif. received a contract modification for mission software improvements amounting to $16.9 million. Element 1 covers a change order to modify the Mission Planning Element of the AEHF’s ground software, which models the AEHF’s communication plan, to accurately model and support both current and new AEHF terminals. Element 2 of these modifications will allow the Mission Planning Element to distribute transmission security keys for terminals using the Ultra High Frequency (UFO/ MUOS) Follow-On Enhanced Extremely High Frequency (E/EE) or Interim Polar satellite systems. Finally, 2 increments of the Mission Planning Element software being developed in parallel will be combined to create efficiencies in software development and maintenance.

Taken together, these software improvements will also mitigate the risk of incompatible planning tools between the United States and its International Partners in future coalition operations. At this time $8,470,148 has been obligated.

Sept 4/07: Testing. Boeing announces the first time that its FAB-T system acquires an operational Milstar satellite and completes downlink data transmissions. The Low Data Rate test meets program schedule commitments and lays the foundation for uplink tests and other interoperability assessments later in 2007. The test, conducted from Rockwell Collins’ FAB-T Systems Integration Laboratory, used Boeing, RCI, ViaSat and L-3 Communications integrated hardware and software products. Boeing release.

June 26/07: Changes. Integral Systems, Inc. in Lanham, MD received a $5.8 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification. It modifies the Command and Control System-Consolidated (CCS-C) effort to support the Wideband Gapfiller Satellite (WGS) Program Operations Readiness, add training, and incorporate changes to the system/Subsystem Specification (SSS) to clarify development requirements for the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellite program.

The CCS-C program provides an upgraded capability to command and control the Air Force’s communication satellites, including the Defense Satellite Communication System, Milstar, Advanced Extremely High Frequency, and Wideband Gapfiller Satellites (N.B. now also called Wideband Global SATCOM, but this was the language of the US DefenseLINK release). At this time, $2 million has been obligated, and work will be complete in June 2010. The Headquarters Military Satellite Communications Systems Wing in Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA issued the contract (F04701-01-C-0012/P00118).

March 26/07: Recognition. Boeing announces that their joint replan of the FAB-T program in conjunction with U.S. Air Force Space Command has earned the USAF’s Agile Acquisition Transformation Leadership Award. Approximately 300 of the program’s 700-plus requirements were changed, along with detailed schedule re-phasing for development, test, delivery and installation. Boeing claims that the replan delivered new capability, while ensuring that “strategic nuclear command and control connectivity remains uncompromised.”

The award, presented in February 2007 to the Space Command’s FAB-T Alpha Contracting Team at the annual Acquisition Leaders Forum in Atlanta, Ga., recognizes the joint government-industry effort for completing a significant replan of the FAB-T program in a record 10 weeks during the summer of 2006. The award also acknowledges skill in acquisition program management and leadership bringing about acquisition process transformation. Boeing release.

Feb 13-17/07: CDR. Team Boeing successfully completes a an external Critical Design Review (CDR) for FAB-T, paving the way for deliveries to begin. The CDR follows the recent delivery of a Block 4 software-defined radio to the U.S. Air Force, and successful Preliminary Design and Integrated Baseline reviews. Initial FAB-T deliveries will begin in December 2008.

A CDR needs to demonstrate that the program’s requirements are defined and understood to a point that gives the review board confidence in the team’s ability successfully execute a production contract. In this case key requirements included a survivable command and control capability for the next generation AEHF satellite constellation, plus demonstrated compatibility with the Extremely High Frequency Low Data Rate (EHF LDR) waveform, which forms the basis for future Advanced EHF (AEHF) waveforms and block upgrades. SCA-compliant EHF LDR compatibility also provides a base for hosting new waveforms being developed for the T-SAT (Transformational Satellite Communications) program. Boeing release.

Dec 11/06: Sub-contractors. ViaSat, Inc. finalizes a $35 million dollar subcontract modification with Boeing Integrated Defense Systems. This award adds additional technical requirements to the ViaSat FAB-T subcontract, and extends ViaSat product development and support through 2011. See ViaSat press release. To date, ViaSat has completed two major FAB-T program deliveries. Acceptance testing on the Prototype phase is complete and has been delivered to the U.S. Air Force as part of the Boeing team FAB-T terminal delivery. Boeing has also taken delivery of the FAB-T engineering development model hardware and software.

Nov 28/06: Mission planning. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $51 million cost-plus-award fee contract modification. This modification of the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) MILSATCOM Systems Wing contract provides for transition from legacy Milstar ground control and mission planning equipment to new AEHF equipment. This realignment is necessary to account for delays in the delivery of new command post terminals, and the need to reduce the operational impact of the transition. This realignment also includes a program decision to upload the final planned increment of satellite software capability before launch rather than afterward, to avoid an interruption to future operations. The effect of these decisions is to extend the turnover date by 7 months for additional preparation and tests, though the launch date remains unchanged. At this time, $8 million have been obligated. Work will be complete May 2010.

Oct 17/06: Boeing has successfully completed a Preliminary Design Review for the FAB-T program, a key milestone. Attended in Anaheim, CA by more than 150 Boeing, senior government and industry officials, the four-day review included presentations from systems, software and hardware teams. Part of the key criteria were that Boeing and its industry team had to show that they had successfully incorporated schedule and requirement changes that are part of the program’s new baseline. See release.

FAB-T PDR

Sept 27/06: Changes. Boeing Co. C3 Networks in Anaheim, CA received a $465.9 million cost-plus award fee contract modification. This modification will incorporate Engineering Change Proposal 0020 replan into the Family of Advanced Beyond-Line of Sight Terminals (FAB-T) increment 1 program. FAB-T terminals will connect soldiers or military platforms like planes, ships, et. al. with the AEHF constellation. The ECP 0020 replan addresses changes necessary to implement an executable program within cost and schedule objectives that will support AEHF requirements.

Specifically, the replan addresses the following: program overruns; requirements deferrals and accelerations; requirements deletions; pending requirements changes that will enable FAB-T to meet external requirements from concurrently evolving systems e.g., the AEHF payloads; and the INFOSEC module for FAB-1. The replan also includes the option to support government interoperability testing. Work will be complete December 2011. The Headquarters 653d Electronic Systems Wing at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA issued the contract (F19628-02-C-0048/P00095).

NB. The DefenseLINK release adds that “at this time, $1,761,770 have been obligated,” – which makes little sense as it is 4 times larger than the contract award. We’ve asked PA POC Monica Morales at (781) 377-8543 to clarify.

FY 2002 – 2005

SDD contract.

March 10/05: Crypto issues. The NSA (National Security Agency) issued modified handling instructions during development, integration and testing of the FAB-T modem processor group, because of delays in their Cryptographics Verification and Design Verification testing of the ACTS cryptographic devices. In order to comply with the modified ACTS handling guidance, Boeing in Anaheim, CA received a $10.5 million cost-plus award-fee Undefinitized Contract Action (UCA) for Contract Change Proposal (CCP)-0011: ACTS (Security Chip) Handling procedures. This guidance requires physical security and emanation protection of the test facility, and will limit contact with the test equipment to personnel with appropriate clearances. The Headquarters Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA issued the contract (F19628-02-C-0048, P00051), which is expected to end in September 2008.

Dec 21/04: Program slips. The U.S. Air Force announces that the AEHF program has suffered a 1-year schedule slip, and cost growth of about 20%. The first launch of the 3 planned satellites is now slated for April 2008 rather than 2007 [Source]. In its release, the USAF cites:

“…unavoidable delays and cost growth due to delayed delivery of information-assurance [signal-encryption] products, and the resulting delay of terminals required for satellite command and control… replacement of critical electronic parts and added payload component testing…”

Program slips

Dec 8/04: Changes. The Boeing Co. in Anaheim, CA receives a $42.5 million cost-plus award-fee contract modification for Family of Advanced Beyond Line-of-Sight Terminals (FAB-T), ECP 0011: Incorporated of additional Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) COMSEC/TRANSEC System (ACTS) chip and keying material delays into the FAB-T baseline; and update of FAB-T and AEHF baseline specifications. This contract modification incorporates both the most recent ACTS-related delays and synchronization with the maturing AEHF specifications. These modifications will be incorporated into 16 AEHF Engineering Development Models of terminals for the B-2, B-52, E-4, E-6, and RC-135 aircraft and for ground-fixed and ground-transportable command post terminals. At this time, $10 million has been obligated and work will be complete by September 2008. The Headquarters Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA issued the contract (F19628-02-C-0048, P00040). The DefenseLINK release adds that:

“ACTS chip and ACTS keying material delays have occurred since FAB-T contract F19628-02-C-0048 award, driving schedule delays in both the AEHF and FAB-T schedules. In addition, AEHF system-level and inter-segment specifications have matured through working groups involving the government, Boeing, and the AEHF system contractor team.”

Aug 24/04: Changes. Boeing Co. in Anaheim, CA receives a $20.2 million cost-plus award-fee contract modification to bring FAB-T into line with changes in the AEHF specification. At this time, $2.1 million of the funds have been obligated, and work will be complete by December 2007. The Headquarters Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA issued the contract (F19628-02-C-0048, P00028). The DefenseLINK release openly acknowledges that:

“At the time the FAB-T contract F19628-02-C-0048 was signed, the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) specifications referenced in the contract were not complete and/or mature. Since that time, the (AEHF) system design and specifications have been maturing through working groups involving the Government, Boeing and the AEHF system Contract Team…”

Aug 04/04: PDR. The Boeing team announces completion of “a highly successful Preliminary Design Review (PDR) in Anaheim,” which included both systems-level and software reviews. See release.

Sept 24/02: The U.S. Air Force’s Electronic Systems Center (ESC) at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA announced Boeing as the prime contractor for a 6-year, $273 million contract to design and develop the first increment of FAB-T. See release.

SDD contract

April 29/02: The Boeing Space and Communications Family of Advanced Beyond Line-of-Sight Terminals (FAB-T) team announces the delivery of their proposal. Boeing Space and Communications (S&C) is leading one of two industry teams competing for a 6-year, $279 million system design and development contract, which will be managed by the MILSATCOM Terminals Office at Electronic Systems Center, Hanscom Air Force Base, MA.

The proposal submitted by the Boeing team represents the first increment of the multi-phase program, where the winning team will have sole responsibility for a 6-year period of performance upon award in late June 2002. At the time of release, the initial design period is expected to be followed by the low-rate initial production phase in 2007, and the production phase in 2008. The system is expected to be fully operational by 2009. See release.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Lockheed Martin – Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF)

• GlobalSecurity.org – Milstar 3 / Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF). The US Military Satellite Communications Systems Wing (MCSW), Space and Missile Systems Center informed DID that the Milstar-3 reference is not currently correct, which is why you don’t hear it. AEHF is (now?) described as a follow-on system.

• Lockheed Martin, via WayBack – Advanced Extremely High Frequency Ground Station

• Boeing – Family of Advanced Beyond Line-of-Sight Terminals (FAB-T)

 

Related Ground Systems

• Raytheon – Secure Mobile Anti-Jam Reliable Tactical Terminal (SMART-T)

• US Army PM WIN-T – SMART-T

• Raytheon – Navy Multiband Terminal

• US Navy – NMT Navy Advanced Extremely High Frequency Multi-band Terminal

 

News & Views

• Northrop Grumman (Oct 24/13) – Customized Integrated Circuit Deliveries Bolster Northrop Grumman’s Production of Fifth and Sixth Advanced EHF Communication Payloads

• NDIA National Defense, via WayBack (September 2010) – Army Under Pressure to Bring Broadband to the Battlefield. Discusses JTRS rather than AEHF, but illustrates the wider trends and pressures.

• The Register, via WayBack (Dec 18/08) – US delays Royal Navy satellite comms project: Only 31 months late. The UK’s sub-based Naval Extremely High Frequency/Super High Frequency Satellite Communications Terminals appear to have the same problem as AEHF.

• Aviation Week (April 6/08) – USAF Plans First AEHF Launch. At the time, it was to be early in 2009. It wouldn’t actually launch until Aug 14/10.

• Military Information Technology, via WayBack (June 13/05) – Network of Nations. Describes the U.S. military’s role as a satellite communications supplier to allies in Iraq.

• C4ISR Journal, via WayBack (January 4/05) – First Launch of Advanced Communications Satellites Slips. About the AEHF.

• American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics (AIAA) Industry Insights, via WayBack. (January 2002) – Military satellites: The next generation. By Marco Caceres of The Teal Group.

• Crosslink Magazine, via WayBack (Winter 2001/2002) – Future U.S. Military Satellite Communication Systems. Excellent overview and very informative graphics. Covers planned systems to 2010 – note how plans changed.

• TelecomWeb ViaSatellite.com articles, via WayBack. The page died in 2006, but see esp. “The Military Sector: Doing Business With The Decisionmaker” [Part I | Part II]. Part I describes current US satellite programs and trends, while Part II focuses more on the doing business aspect.

Trident II D5 Test Launch
(click to view full)

Nuclear tipped missiles were first deployed on board US submarines at the height of the Cold War in the 1960s, to deter a Soviet first strike. The deterrence theorists argued that, unlike their land-based cousins, submarine-based nuclear weapons couldn’t be taken out by a surprise first strike, because the submarines were nearly impossible to locate and target. Which meant that Soviet leaders could not hope to destroy all of America’s nuclear weapons before they could be launched against Soviet territory. SLBM/FBM (Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile/ Fleet Ballistic Missile) offered shorter ranges and less accuracy than their land-based ICBM (Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile) counterparts, but the advent of Trident C4 missiles began extending those ranges, and offering other improvements. The C4s were succeeded by larger Trident II D5 missiles, which added precision accuracy and more payload.

The year that the Trident II D5 ballistic missile was first deployed, 1990, saw the beginning of the end of the missile’s primary mission. Even as the Soviet Union began to implode, the D5’s performance improvements were making the Trident submarine force the new backbone of the USA’s nuclear deterrent – and of Britain’s as well. To ensure that this capability was maintained at peak readiness and safety, the US Navy undertook a program in 2002 to replace aging components of the Trident II D5 missile called the D5 Life Extension (LE) Program. This article covers D5 LE, as well as support and production contracts associated with the American and British Trident missile fleets.

D5 Life Extension Program

By the time the latest D5 version was deployed, the existence of the Soviet Union itself was in doubt. The previous year, the Soviet’s Eastern European client states began to fall, symbolized by the destruction of the Berlin Wall. Then the Soviet Union itself began to crumble, with various Soviet republics rebelling against the central government in 1990. In 1991, a failed coup attempt against Soviet reformer Mikhail Gorbachev brought Boris Yeltsin to power, who promptly dissolved the Soviet Union.

The end of the Soviet Union and the easing of the Soviet first strike threat did not end the need for a nuclear deterrent. States like Russia and China still have them, North Korea is the first nuclear-armed rogue state but will not be the last, and non-state actors remain a potential threat, given instability in key countries like Pakistan. The US nuclear deterrent got smaller, but it did not go away – and as it became smaller, the importance of the Trident fleet rose. Especially given Britain’s use of the same missiles as its sole nuclear deterrent.

The Trident C-4 has been in service since 1979, but the D-5 Trident II is more recent. Its 1st firing on March 21/89, from the USS Tennessee, almost ended the program. Fortunately, fixes were made in an environment of “tell the truth, only the truth, tell it quickly…” A set of 7 successful test-launches from 1989-1990 saved the program, bringing its funds back from escrow. As of January 2013, it has had a remarkable 143 consecutive flight test successes since that initial launch.

Trident II D5

First deployed in 1990 and scheduled for operational deployment until 2042, 12 of the USA’s 14 SSBNs have been outfitted with Trident II D-5 missiles, and the other 2 were scheduled to be back-fitted as opportunity permits.

The Trident II D5 LE Program is intended to extend the service life of the weapon system until 2042, to match the hull life of the Ohio-class submarine. Under the program, 108 additional missiles [PDF] are being purchased, in order to meet long-term inventory requirements.

The LE program involves updating the missile’s electronics, guidance and reentry systems. In particular, the Mk6 LE guidance system is a replacement for the aging Mk6 guidance system, which used 1980s technology that isn’t in production any more. The Next Generation Guidance (NGG) program aims to develop the Mk6 LE as a modern replacement that can achieve the same or better performance as the guidance systems that are breaking down. This requires development of precision instruments, sensors, and radiation hardened architectures, in order to adapt the underlying commercial technologies for use in a must-not-malfunction nuclear weapons system.

The prime contractor [PDF] for the Trident II D5 program is Lockheed Martin, who has managed all of the US submarine-launched ballistic missile/ fleet ballistic missile (SLBM/FBM) programs since the first generation Polaris. Charles Stark Draper Labs is the inventor of the guidance system.

Contracts and Key Events

1989-03-21: Avoid this.

These entries cover overall support and surveys of the American and British Trident fleets, Trident LE efforts, associated testing, and production of new materials and missiles. It does not cover work on the launcher systems rather than the missiles themselves, unless it’s a multiple-items contract that also includes missile work. Unless otherwise noted, the US Navy’s Strategic Systems Programs in Arlington, VA issued the contracts. As one might expect with such secretive work, many of the contracts are sole-source or non-competed.

Note that despite the recent article improvements, materials before FY 2007 may not be fully up to date.

FY 2014 – 2018

 

SSBN design 101
click for video

August 7/18: Keeping up the production The US Navy is further investing in its submarine launched nuclear ballistic missile capability. Lockheed Martin will provide a variety of services to support the fiscal 2019 Trident II missile production at a cost of $22.28 million. The Trident II D5 was first deployed in 1990. The US and UK respectively are investing in the Trident II D5 LE Program, which is intended to extend the service life of the weapon system until 2042, to match the hull life of the Ohio-class submarine. Under the program a further 108 missiles are being purchased, in order to meet long-term inventory requirements. The LE program involves updating the missile’s electronics, guidance and reentry systems. Lockheed Martin has managed has managed all of the US submarine-launched ballistic missile/ fleet ballistic missile (SLBM/FBM) programs since the first-generation Polaris. Work will be performed at the company’s location in Sunnyvale, California, and is expected to be completed by date September 2023.

May 18/18: Trident will continue to deter Lockheed Martin Space Systems will continue its support activities for the Trident II program. The awarded cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification worth $40.1 million provides for Trident II (D5) missile production and deployed system support. Nuclear tipped missiles were first deployed on board US submarines at the height of the Cold War in the 1960s, to deter a Soviet first strike. Over the years the missile system evolved. The old C4s were succeeded by larger Trident II D5in 1990. Since then the missiles have been the backbone of US and UK submarine forces. The current Trident II D5 Life-Extension program intends to extend the service life of the weapon system until 2042, to match the hull life of the Ohio-class submarine. Under the program, 108 additional missiles are being purchased, in order to meet long-term inventory requirements. Work will be performed at multiple locations including Sunnyvale, California and Rockford Illinois. Work is expected to be completed by September 2022.

March 29/18: Common Missile Compartment Replacement Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. of Sunnyvale, California is being awarded a contract valued at over $10 million. This modification refers to a 2016 contract between the US Navy and Lockheed Martin for a Common Missile Compartment Replacement for Ohio Class submarines, a missile service unit, a X-Link Pod Refresh and Strategic Weapons Systems Ashore efforts. The common missile compartment, being designed for the Ohio and Vanguard submarine replacement vessels, will house submarine-launched ballistic missiles in quad-packs aboard future U.S. and United Kingdom missile boats. The common missile compartment carries the UGM-133 Trident II nuclear missile, one of the most advanced submarine-launched atomic missiles in the world. The Strategic Weapons Ashore facility at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station provides long-term shore-based testing capabilities to proof modernized submarine missile systems. This installation will play an important role in the upcoming US Navy program to replace the Ohio-class nuclear ballistic missile submarine. Work will be performed in Cape Canaveral, Florida, with a completion date of December 31, 2020.

March 21/18: Missiles & Support The US Navy has exercised an option to a previously awarded contract to Lockheed Martin’s Space Systems division for additional Trident II (D5) missile production and deployed system support. Awarded by the Navy’s Strategic Systems Programs, the contract is valued in excess of $522 million. Work will be carried out at multiple locations across the US, including Magna, Utah, Sunnyvale, California, and Cape Canaveral, Florida. Contract completion is scheduled for September 30, 2022.

March 2/18: Guidance System Charles Stark Draper Laboratory has been awarded a $132.9 million contract modification for the Trident (D5) MK 6 guidance system. The agreement, awarded by US Navy, will see the production with failure verification, test, repair and recertification of inertial measurement units, electronic assemblies, and electronic modules. Work will take place in Minneapolis, Minnesota, Clearwater, Florida, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Pittsfield, Massachusetts, with a scheduled completion time for January 30, 2021.

January 30/18: Contract Modification-Systems Integration General Dynamics Mission Systems received last Thursday an $8.3 million US Navy contract modification for services in support of US Navy and British Royal Navy fire control and weapon control systems on ballistic and guided missile submarines. The agreement also includes missile fire control for the Columbia-class and UK Vanguard-class Common Missile Compartment Program development—the integration of the UGM-133 Trident II nuclear missile with the common missile compartment program—through first unit UK production, and the delivery of a strategic weapon interface simulator. Work will take place mainly at Pittsfield Massachusetts, as well as other locations across the US and in the UK, with a scheduled completion date set for September 2023. Anticipating further work on submarines for the Navy, General Dynamics plans to invest some $2 billion into its shipyards over the coming years, with $1.7 billion going into its Electric Boat yard in Connecticut—where 12 Columbia subs will be produced. Employment at the firm is also at its highest in 25 years, with 16,200 currently employed at its Electric Boat operation.

September 03/17: The US DoD has awarded a $418.6 million US Navy contract modification to Lockheed Martin for renewed procurement of Trident II (D5) missile production, D5 life extension production, and D5 deployed systems support. Work will take place at several locations throughout the US with an estimated completion date of Sept. 30, 2022. Production will also support missile production for the British Royal Navy, of which $66.6 million in funding will be obligated for the effort.

September 25/17: General Dynamics Electric Boat has landed a $5.1 billion US Navy contract to commence development work on the Columbia-class nuclear ballistic missile submarine. Announced last Thursday, the award includes component and technology development, missile tube module and reactor compartment bulkhead prototyping and manufacturing efforts, and United Kingdom Strategic Weapon Support System kit manufacturing—which is covered under a foreign military sale—for the Columbia class ballistic missile submarines. Work will be conducted at several US locations and is scheduled for completion by December 2031. 12 Columbia-class submarines are planned by the Navy, and will replace the current fleet of Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines. The first vessel, the Columbia, is expected to be completed by 2031 at a cost of $10.4 billion counting research and engineering costs. The expected cost of follow-on vessels has been floated at over $5 billion a piece. The vessels will support the US Navy and British Royal Navy’s Trident II D5 submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM) system.

August 22/17: Lockheed Martin Space Systems has won a $21.9 million US Navy contract modification for support of the Trident II D5 submarine launched ballistic missile. Work will be split between Sunnyvale, Calif., Cape Canaveral, Fla. and other locations across the US with a completion date expected by Sept. 30 2017. The Trident II D5 is the submarine-launched ballistic missile deployed by both the US and British Royal Navy, and is the sole nuclear weapon system deployed by the UK.

August 16/17: The US DoD has awarded General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems a $9.7 million contract modification for the continued work on submarine fire control systems of US and British Royal Navy vessels. Under the terms of the deal, General Dynamics work remit will include maintenance for the Attack Weapon Control System on SSGN guided missile submarines and missile fire-control development for the future US Columbia-class and British Dreadnought-class ballistic missile submarines. Both vessels will replace the US Ohio-class and British Vanguard-class submarines currently in operation by both navies, and will share a Common Missile Compartment for the Trident II and other weapons such as cruise missiles. The Columbias and Dreadnoughts are projected to start entering service in the late 2020s and phase out the older models.

June 26/17: Electric Boat has been awarded a $203 million contract modification to conduct work for the joint US Navy-UK Common Missile Compartment program. The work order calls for the design, testing, and delivery of missile tubes for the Trident II D5 submarine launched ballistic missile used by the US and British navies and will be installed on both navies’ replacement ballistic missile submarine classes, the Colombia and Dreadnought. Work will take place at Groton, Conn., Newport News, Va., and several other sites with completion scheduled for October 2017.

May 4/17: The US Navy has awarded Lockheed Martin a $64.6 million contract—with the potential to increase to $94.1 million—for engineering on the Common Compartment Strategic Weapons System. The contract includes testing of a special test vehicle, maintenance and the integration of the Trident D5 II SLBM to the system. Britain will contribute $1.9 million to the program in order to continue their collaboration on the Trident missile, despite the issue causing some controversy there over the missile’s cost and questions as to whether Britain should keep it’s undersea nuclear deterrent. However, with future upgrades, the Trident II is likely to remain both Washington and London’s main SLBM onboard both the US Ohio-class and the British Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarines until 2040.

February 17/17: Lockheed Martin has been contracted by the DoD for Trident II ballistic fleet missile production and deployed system support. The $540 million contract modification supports production efforts for the US.Navy and the British Royal Navy, who deploy the missile on their Ohio-class and Vanguard-class submarines respectively. Lockheed Martin received roughly $453 million in weapon procurement funds from the Navy, plus an additional $50.7 million from the Royal Navy. The company also received $36 million in fiscal 2017 operation and maintenance funds, which are set to expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

January 31/17: A US Navy contract has tasked Charles Stark Draper Laboratory with Trident D5 MK 6 guidance system production. Valued at $53 million, work carried out under the deal will include the performance of several services for the submarine-launched ballistic missile including failure verification, testing, repairs, recertification of inertial measurement units electronic assemblies, and electronic modules. The Trident II D5 program will replace the current Polaris and Poseidon systems currently used by the US and UK armed forces.

January 25/17: US media has confirmed that a British Trident submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) fired from HMS Vengeance off the coast of Florida last year did veer off course. Citing a US defense official, CNN also reported that the inert missile triggered its automatic self-destruct sequence once the test was in jeopardy. Since the story broke on Sunday, the UK government has come under increased pressure to release details on the test, which occurred weeks before last June’s Parliament vote on the program’s $49.5 billion renewal. PM Teresa May initially refused to comment on whether she knew about the test before the vote, before confirming that she had been briefed on a range of nuclear issues, including Trident, on taking office from David Cameron in June, 2016.

January 23/17: UK PM Teresa May has come under fire following news that ministers covered up a failed test of the Trident nuclear deterrent weeks before a crucial Commons vote on the future of the £40 billion program. Previous tests have been publicized by the Government. Details of the test, which happened last July, still remain undisclosed to the public, and opposition MPs are calling for an inquiry into the incident.

July 19/16: Lockheed Martin has won a $21 million US Navy contract to provide Trident II D5 missiles to the service. The latest submarine-launched fleet of ballistic missiles, Trident II follows the Polaris, Poseidon and Trident I C4 programs. Trident was first deployed in 1990 and is currently deployed on board US Ohio-class and British Vanguard-class submarines.

Sept 19/14: Production. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $146.3 million fixed-price-incentive, cost-plus-incentive-fee, and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for new Trident II (D5) missile production, D5 Life Extension development and production, and D5 Deployed Systems Support. $128.1 million is committed immediately, including $48.5 million from Britain. Options could raise the contract to $828.4 million if exercised.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (35.12%); Magna, UT (16.55%); Kings Bay, GA (8.26%); Cape Canaveral, FL (7.57%); Culpeper, VA (4.51%); Silverdale, WA (4.43%); Bloomington, Minnesota (4.32%); Kingsport, TN (2.51%); El Segundo, CA (1.59%); Lancaster, PA (1.57%); Oakridge, TN (1.44%); and other various locations less than 1% each (12.13%). Work is expected to be complete by Nov 30/19. US Strategic Systems Programs in Washington Navy Yard, DC manages the contract (N00030-14-C-0100, PZ0001).

D5 & LE missile production

Sept 19/14: Infrastructure. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $34.2 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for all facilities, equipment, and processes required for successful activation and support of a Trident II (D5) missile storage facility at Camp Navajo, AZ, plus design and delivery of specialized support equipment for D5 missile movement and storage. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 US Navy weapons budgets.

Work will be performed at the following locations: Cape Canaveral, FL (38.29%); Oakridge, TN (30.13%); Magna, Utah (10.48%); Sunnyvale, CA (10.02%); Merritt Island, FL (4.45%); Rensselaer, Indiana (1.85%); Arlington, WA (1.26%); Bangor, WA (1.01%); St. Mary’s, GA (0.60%); Tullahoma, TN (0.51%); St. Augustine, FL (0.42%); Jacksonville, FL (0.37%); Poway, CA (0.31%); and other various locations (less than 0.10% each, 0.3% total); work is expected to be completed by Sept 30/19. US Strategic Systems Programs in Washington Navy Yard, DC manages the contract (N00030-13-C-0100, PO 0012).

July 1/14: FY15 Long-lead. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA received a $20 million unpriced-letter contract for long-lead materials, labor, planning and scheduling necessary to support FY 2015 Trident II D5 missile production.

Work will be performed at Sunnyvale, CA, with an expected completion date of Sept 30/19. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 US Navy weapons budgets. This contract was a sole source acquisition pursuant to 10 USC. 2304(c)(1) by US Strategic Systems Programs in Washington Navy Yard, DC (N00030-14-C-0100).

April 25/14: Navigation. The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory Inc. in Cambridge, MA receives a maximum $283.1 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive, and cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for the ongoing Trident (D5) MK 6 Guidance System Repair Program. This includes failure verification, test, repair and recertification of inertial measurement units, electronic assemblies, and electronic modules.

All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 US Navy funds and funds from Britain ($40 million). Work will be performed in Pittsfield, MA (42%); Minneapolis, Minn. (29%); Clearwater, FL (22%); Cambridge, MA (6%); and Terrytown, NY (1%), with an expected completion date of April 30/17. This contract is a sole source acquisition pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1). Strategic Systems Program, Washington, D.C. manages the contract (N00030-14-C-0001).

April 1/14: UK Support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $21.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, level of effort, completion type contract to provide the United Kingdom (UK) with Trident II engineering and technical support services and deliverable materials.

All funds are committed immediately. Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (76.4%); Cape Canaveral, FL (12.5%); Coulport, Scotland. (4.4%); Aldermaston, England (3.3%); St. Mary’s, GA (2%); Silverdale, WA (less than 1%), Campbell, CA (less than 1%), Denver, CO (less than 1%), other US cities (less than 1%); and Italy (various cities less than 1%), with an expected level-of-effort completion date of March 31/15 and deliverable items completion date of June 30/16. This contract was a sole-source acquisition pursuant to 10 USC. 2304(c)(4). The US Department of the Navy’s Strategic Systems Programs Office manages the contract (N00030-14-C-0028).

Dec 19/13: Support. BAE Systems receives a 3-year, $171 million contract to continue providing engineering and integration support to the US Navy’s Trident II D-5 submarine-launched ballistic Missiles. The company has supported the US Navy’s program for more than 50 years, through the Polaris, Poseidon, and Trident lifecycles. They’re also involved to some degree in the US/UK Common Missile Compartment program.

BAE Systems’ support for the Fleet Ballistic Missile program is performed in Kings Bay, GA; Bangor, WA; Mechanicsburg, PA; Norfolk, VA; and the Washington, DC area. Sources: BAE, “Maintaining the U.S. Navy’s Fleet Ballistic Missile Program under a $171 Million Contract”.

Dec 12/13: Support. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA receives an $112.9 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract. They’ll perform Trident II Underwater Launcher System and Advanced Launcher Development Program Support, technical engineering services to support the CMC Development and Prototyping effort, and other specialized technical support. The maximum dollar value, including the base period and one option year, is $220.3 million.

ULS/ AL: Includes ongoing support for the TRIDENT II D-5 and the SSGN underwater launcher subsystem, Engineering Refueling Overhaul shipyard support, spares procurement, US and UK launcher trainer support, Vertical Support Group E-mount and shim procurement, Nuclear Weapons Safety and Security Review, Missile hoist overhaul, underwater launch technology support, US and UK SSP Alterations and non-compliance report projects, gas generator refurbishment, and case hardware production.

CMC: Assess and analyze technologies and concepts to support the selection of a preferred system concept, which includes the identification of critical cost and risk impacts as a result of immature launcher technologies and/or immature requirements.

Specialized: Technical support of TRIDENT II D-5 Missile tube closure production, technical engineering services, and tactical hardware production efforts for the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.

All funds are committed immediately, using a combination of US Navy FY 2014 procurement, R&D, and O&M budgets, and British funds ($11.5 million). Work will be performed at Sunnyvale, CA (78%); Kings Bay, GA (7%); Bangor, WA (6%); St. Charles, MO (5%); Gardena, CA (2%); Camarillo, CA (1%); and Los Angeles, CA (1%); with an expected completion date of Sept 30/18. This contract was a sole source acquisition in accordance with 10 U.SC 2304(c)(1), managed by the US Strategic Systems Programs in Washington, DC (N00030-14-C-0011).

Dec 11/13: Interstate Electronics Corp., Anaheim, CA receives a $47,401,675 cost-plus-incentive fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee, level of effort, completion type contract for specialized technical support for Trident II flight test operations and data acquisition, systems engineering, post-mission processing and analysis, instrumentation refreshes, and strategic weapons system training program support. The maximum dollar value, including the base period and 2 option years, is $177.3 million.

Funds from a number of different budget lines are committed, ranging from FY 2012 – 2014. Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA (55.5%); Cape Canaveral, FL (25%); Newark, CA (3.2%); Bremerton, WA (3%); Kings Bay, GA (3%); Norfolk, VA (3%); Washington, DC (3%); Silverdale, WA (2%); Austin, (1.3%); San Jose, CA (less than 1%); Huntsville, AL (less than 1%); Sunnyvale, CA (less than 1%); and El Segundo, CA (less than 1%); with an expected completion date of Sept 30/16. This contract was a sole-source acquisition pursuant to 10 U.SC 2304(c) (5). The Department of the Navy, Strategic Systems Programs Office, Washington, DC manages the contract (N00030-14-C-0006).

Dec 6/13: Navigation. Lockheed Martin, Mission Systems & Training in Mitchel Field, NY receives a $58.8 million cost-plus-incentive fee, cost-plus-fixed fee contract for United States and United Kingdom D-5 navigation subsystem engineering support services. This contract provides for US and UK fleet support, US and UK trainer systems support, OH-class SSBN engineered refueling overhauls, US and UK SSI4 trainer system, SSBN-R strategic weapon training system and training system development, UK successor support, software modernization and Linked Autonomous Programmed Navigational Operational Trainer modernization. The maximum dollar value, including the base period and 1 option-year, is $114.2 million.

Funds are committed from a number of FY 2014 budget lines, and from the UK ($6.9 million). Work will be performed in Mitchel Field, NY (97%), Clearwater/Oldsmar, FL (2%) and Manassas, VA (1%), with an expecteDCmpletion date of April 2017. This contract was a sole-source acquisition in accordance with 10 U.SC 2304(c)(1), managed by the US Navy’s Strategic Systems Programs in Washington, DC (N00030-14-C-0002).

March 29/13: UK Support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives an $18.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide engineering/technical support for the UK’s Trident II Missile Systems. This includes: UK FBM Program efforts; deliverable materials; and on-site technical support in Britain.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale CA (72.9%); Cape Canaveral, FL (12.3%); Coulport, Scotland and Aldermaston, England (10.3%); St. Mary’s, GA (2.7%); other US sites (0.8%); Silverdale, WA (0.7%), and Poway, CA (0.3%), and is expected to be complete by by March 2015. All funds are committed immediately, and the UK’s FMS agent will be the US Navy’s Strategic Systems Programs in Washington, DC (N00030-13-C-0034).

Nov 5/13: Production. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives an initial $8.4 million fixed-price-incentive, cost-plus-incentive-fee, and cost-plus-fixed-fee modification to a previously awarded un-priced letter contract. Options could push it as high as $803.2 million for new Trident II D5 missile production, D5 life extension development and production, and D5 deployed systems support. The funding breakdown, subject to availability, is:

• $673.4 million FY 2014 Navy procurement
  
• $60.8 million FY 2014 Navy O&M, all of which expires on Sept 30/14
  
• $23.1 million FY 2014 RDT&E
  
• $6.5 million FY 2014 Navy other procurement
  
• $35.7 million British government

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (34.31%); Brigham City, UT (21.55%); St. Mary’s, GA (9.49%); Cape Canaveral, FL (5.59%); Silverdale, WA (5.25%); Pittsfield, MA (3.23%); Kingsport, TN (2.81%); Gainesville, VA (2.09%); El Segundo, CA (1.84%); Clearwater, FL (1.74%); Lancaster, PA (1.67%); Inglewood, CA (1.57%); Camarillo, CA (0.75%); Santa Fe Springs, CA (0.62%); Oakridge, TN (0.57%); Arlington, WA (0.5%); St. Charles, MO (0.36%); Joplin, MO (0.36%); Defew, NY (0.34%); Hollister, CA (0.33%); Diamond Springs, CA (0.33%); Santa Ana, CA (0.28%); Miamisburg, OH (0.27%); Bethel, CT (0.24%); Orlando, FL (0.24%); Colorado Springs, CO (0.22%); Torrance, CA (0.20%); Wenatchee, WA (0.19%); Santa Clara, CA (0.14%); Englewood, CO (0.14%); San Diego, CA (0.12%); San Jose, CA (0.12%); Santa Cruz, CA (0.12%); Simi Valley, CA (0.11%); Simsbury, CT (0.10%); and other various locations of less than 0.10% each (2.21%), and work is expected to be complete in December 2014. If options are exercised, all work will continue to November 2018. The US Strategic Systems Programs in Washington, DC manages the contract (N00030-13-C-0100, PZ0001).

D5 & LE missile production

FY 2013

Missile contract; Reentry body contract; Guidance systems contract.

Launch!
click for video

Sept 13/13: FY 2014 long-lead. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co., Sunnyvale, Calif., is being awarded a $15.2 million un-priced letter contract for FY 2014 long lead Trident D5 materials and associated labor, planning, and scheduling. All funds are committed immediately. Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA, and the contract is expected to be complete by Sept 30/18. This contract is a sole source acquisition in accordance with FAR 6.302-1 and 10 U.S.C.2304c1 (N00030-13-C-0100).

March 7/13: Navigation. Charles Stark Draper Laboratories, Inc. in Cambridge, MA receives a sole-source $257.8 million to provide Trident II (D5) Guidance System Strategic Program Alteration (SPALT) materials including: labor and consumable material to meet requirements for the guidance system on-going SPALT of MK6 MOD 1; test and procure data package assemblies; and circuit card assembly materials with electronic components.

All contract funds are committed immediately, with $15 million expiring on Sept 30/13, at the end of FY 2013. Work will be performed in Pittsfield MA (84%); Cambridge, MA (7%); Clearwater, FL (5%); Terrytown, NY (2%); El Segundo, CA (1%) and other (1%); and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/16 (N00030-13-C-0007).

March 7/13: Program Support. Aero Thermo Technology, Inc. in Huntsville, AL receives a $6.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide guidance systems, technical, analytical and program services to support the TRIDENT II SLBM. This contract contains options, which could bring the contract total to $20.7 million.

The US Navy and Air Force will conduct closely coordinated strategic ballistic missile technology development and application programs based on recommendations of the U.S. Strategic Command, Defense Planning Guidance, and Nuclear Posture Reviews. Work will be performed in Huntsville, AL, and is expected to be completed Dec 3/13, or Dec 31/15 if all options are exercised. $1.4 million is committed immediately, and $3.9 million will expire on Sept 30/13, at the end of the current fiscal year. (N00030-13-C-0013).

Dec 21/12: Production. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. (LMSSC), Sunnyvale, CA receives a $592.2 million fixed-price-incentive, cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification to perform additional work such as Trident II D5 Deployed Systems Support, D5 Life Extension Development and D5 Life Extension Production. $550 million is committed immediately, leaving $42.2 million to be spent as needed, plus another $1.082 billion in options to cover D5 Missile Production and additional support for deployed missiles. That creates a maximum contract total of $1.675 billion, if all options are exercised.

Work will be performed in Chandler, AZ (0.151%); Sunnyvale, CA (39.075%); El Segundo, CA (0.672%); Torrance, CA (0.322%); Camarillo, CA (0.245%); Santa Fe Springs, CA (0.240); San Jose, CA (0.174%); Modesto, CA (0.077%); Huntington Beach, CA (0.071%); Simi Valley, CA (0.041%); San Diego, CA (0.035%); Poway, CA (0.018%); Santa Ana, CA (0.014%); Santa Maria, CA (0.013%); North Hollywood, CA (0.013%); Santa Clara, CA (0.011%); Milpitas, CA (0.011%); Campbell, CA (0.009%); Upland, CA (0.004%); Pawcatuck, CT (0.117%); Simsbury, CT (0.049%); Cape Canaveral, FL (14.915%); Clearwater, FL (0.987%); Merritt Island, FL (0.044%); Titusville, FL (0.013%); Cocoa, FL (0.008%); St Mary’s, GA (12.246%); Atlanta, GA (0.049%); Rockford, IL (0.095%); Pittsfield, MA (2.466%); Elkton, MD (0.407%); Jackson, MI (0.148%); Joplin, MO (0.150%); St. Charles, MO (0.120%); Las Vegas, NV (0.334%); East Aurora, NY (0.079%); Miamisburg, OH (0.188%); Lancaster, PA (0.802%); Harrisburg, PA (0.082%); Bristol, PA (0.020%); Valencia, PA (0.015%); West Warwick, RI (0.002%); Kingsport, TN (1.247%); Oakridge, TN (0.247%); Round Rock, TX (0.022%); Brigham City, UT (11.356%); Salt Lake City, UT (0.093%); Gainesville, VA (3.544%); Fairfax, VA (1.381%); Silverdale, WA (7.242%); Poulsbo, WA (0.169%); Wenatchee, WA (0.103%); and Arlington, WA (0.064%), and is expected to be complete by Dec 30/17 – or April 30/18 if all options are exercised.

Technically, $291.1 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year on Sept 30/13, but more than that is already committed for payment. The contract was not competitively procured in accordance with FAR 6.302-1 and 10 U.S.C. 2304c1 (N00030-12-C-0101, PZ0001).

D5 LE & Missile Production

Dec 17/12: Support. Excelis Inc., Colorado Springs, Colo., is being awarded a $15.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide professional, technical, programmatic, and operational engineering services to September 2016. $4,371,011 will be obligated at the time of award, and this contract contains options which could extend performance to March 31/16, and raise its value to $44.4 million. Their work will support of Navy Reentry Systems programs, including:

• Reentry Body (RB) systems assessment, vulnerability, and nuclear safety and surety support
  
• RB Life extension studies and analysis
  
• Support for the development of refurbished reentry systems
  
• Support for Strategic Systems Program’s declassification review program
  
• support for Nuclear Weapons System Safety
  
• Support to weapons facilities manager

Work will be performed in Colorado Springs, CO (95%); College Park, MD (2%); and various locations throughout the continental USA (3%). This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2304c1 by the Strategic Systems Program, in Washington, DC (N00030-13-C-0016).

FY 2012

Missile orders; SHIPALT kits; Mk6 LE work; Support contracts; Common Missile Compartment integration

British firing
click for video

Sept 28/12: Support. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $76.8 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive, cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to support the Trident II fleet, which could rise as high as $111 million with options. This will include:

1) Ongoing SSBN/SSGN fleet support including engineering refueling overhaul shipyard support, spares (SSP), SSP alterations and non-compliance report projects for the USA & UK, launcher trainer support for the USA & UK, vertical support group e-mount and shims, nuclear weapons safety and security review, missile hoist overhaul, underwater launch technology support, gas generator refurbishment, and case hardware.

2) Specialized technical support includes missile tube closure production, technical engineering services, and tactical hardware production efforts for the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty

3) New designs. Technical engineering services and analysis to support the USA & UK’s Advanced Launcher Development Program and Common Missile Compartment concept development and prototyping. This work will support the military’s efforts to pick a preferred system concept, including both critical costs, and clear awareness of risks from immature launcher technologies and/or immature requirements. The technology development phase for the next-generation launcher will be based on those conclusions.

The contract was not competitively procured. Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (79%); Kings Bay, GA (10%); Silverdale, WA (10%); and Camarillo, CA (1%), and will run to Sept 30/15. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procure in accordance with l0 U.S.C. 2304c1, and 10 U.S.C. 2304c4. The Strategic Systems Programs, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N00030-13-C-0010).

Sept 27/12: CMC integration. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a sole-source $51.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for engineering efforts to support next-generation SSBN programs. The firm was deemed to be the only company that could integrate the TRIDENT II Missile and Reentry Strategic Weapon System subsystems into the CMC, and design an updated missile service unit that will be compatible with both current and new submarine fleets. With options, this contract could rise to $52.2 million.

Work will be performed in Cape Canaveral, FL (50%); Sunnyvale, CA (34%); Syracuse, NY (10%); Magna, UT (2%); Washington, DC (1%); yet to be determined locations (2%); and other locations of less than 1% (1% TL); and will run until Dec 31/17. Strategic Systems Programs, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N00030-12-C-0058).

Sept 27/12: D5 LE. Charles Stark Draper Laboratories, Inc. in Cambridge, MA receives a $113.1 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for a wide variety of engineering and R&D services, which could grow to $304.6 million if all options are exercised. Work can include:

1) Trident II support. That includes specialized tactical engineering services, logistics services, fleet support services, test equipment, and guidance SSP alteration services to test, guidance subsystems maintenance and fixes; test equipment, and related support equipment.

2) Trident D5 MK6 MOD 1. Test and evaluate engineering development units and preproduction units systems to verify performance, and document items for flight tests, qualification, and production support.

3) R&D related to TRIDENT II D-5 guidance and reentry systems, including specialized technical knowledge and support for hypersonic guidance (ballistic missiles fly at well over Mach 5), navigation and control applications utilizing an integrated avionics computer and Global Positioning System.

Work will be performed in Cambridge, MA (69%); Pittsfield, MA (19%); El Segundo, CA (10%), and Clearwater, FL (2%), and the contract run through FY 2015 to Sept 30/15. The contract was not competitively procured. Strategic Systems Programs, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N00030-13-C-0005).

July 3/12: Long-lead. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $12.2 million unfinalized contract to provide the long lead time material for FY 2013 Trident II D5 missile production, as well as the required labor, planning, and scheduling.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA., and is expected to be complete by Sept 30/17. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302.1 and l0 U.S.C. 2304c1 (N00030-12-C-0101).

June 5/12: Navigation. Boeing in Huntington Beach, CA received a $10.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide TRIDENT II (D5) navigation test equipment upgrades. They’ll upgrade test equipment for theodolites; offer drift test station binnacle overhaul kits and necessary contingency replenishment items and program plans; perform electrostatically supported gyro container power supply strategic systems programs alteration (SPALT); and work on resolver replacement, network board SPALT, and TR-C5 A/C 1/6 software SPALT. Options could bring the contract’s total value to $15.6 million.

Work will be performed in Huntington Beach, CA (96.4%), and Heath, OH (3.6%), and is expected to be complete by June 30/15. This contract was not competitively procured by US Strategic Systems Programs in Washington, DC (N00030-12-C-0026).

May 31/12: Testing. Lockheed Martin reminds us that the US Navy’s 4 successful Trident D5 test flights from April 14-16/12, from the submerged USS Maryland in the Atlantic Ocean, bring the total number of successful Trident flight tests to 142 since design completion in 1989.

Thankfully, there have been no operational flights to provide data.

April 25/12: D5 LE. Charles Stark Draper Laboratories, Inc. in Cambridge, MA receives a $236.7 million firm-fixed-priced, fixed-price-incentive, cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to produce modified Trident II (D5) Missile guidance systems.

Work will be performed in Pittsfield MA (42.2%); Cambridge, MA (26.7%); Clearwater, FL (22.3%); El Segundo, CA (7.2%); and Tarrytown, NY (1.6%). Work will run to Sept 30/16, the end of FY 2016. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-12-C-0005).

April 2/12: UK support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives an $18.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide engineering and technical support for the UK’s Trident D5 Missile Systems.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (70.8%); St. Mary’s, GA (13.3%); Coulport, Scotland & Aldermaston, England (9.3%); Cape Canaveral, FL (2.8%); Cocoa, FL (2%); Silverdale, WA (0.5%); and other various location in the United States (1.3%), and will run to March 31/13. The contract was not competitively procured (N00030-12-C-0024).

Dec 15/11: Multi-year contracts. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA receives almost $1.2 billion in cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee, fixed-price-incentive contract modifications, associated with the support and production of Trident II D5 missiles. $321.4 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12, but work will run to April 30/17.

The $427.4 million deployed systems support (DSS) contract involves various forms of engineering and operational support, including trainers and training, spares and repairs, flight test analysis and range support, safety assurance including Nuclear Weapon Security; and development, production and installation of special projects.

The unfinalized but not-to-exceed $772.2 million award for TRIDENT II D5 production includes missile bodies, re-entry bodies, D5 instrumentation systems and support equipment, components and requalification activities as part of D5 life extension requirements, and alternate release assembly production.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (65.92%); Cape Canaveral, FL (10.33%); St. Mary’s, GA (7.18%); Bangor, Silverdale, WA (7.15%); Brigham City, UT (2.20%); Torrance, CA (1.01%); Pittsfield, MA (0.76%); Poulsbo, WA (0.75%); Clearwater, FL (0.26%); San Jose, CA (0.24%); Elkton, MD (0.10%); Chandler, AZ (0.08%); East Aurora, NY (0.07%); Gainesville, VA (0.07%); Lancaster, PA (0.06%); Rockford, IL (0.02%); and various other locations (3.79%). These contracts were not competitively procured (N00030-12-C-0100, PO 0001).

Multi-year production & support contracts

Dec 9/11: Support. BAE Systems in Rockville, MD receives a $58.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to provide Systems Engineering Integration support for the TRIDENT II D5 Strategic Weapon System (SWS) Program, the SSGN Attack Weapon System (AWS) Program, and the Common Missile Compartment (CMC) Program. Options could bring the contract’s total value to $123.3 million.

Work will be performed in Rockville, MD (70%); Washington, DC (20%); St. Mary’s, GA (5%); Bangor, WA (4%); and Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria, United Kingdom (1%), and is expected to be completed Sept 30/12, or Sept 30/13 if the options are exercised. $38.3 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. This contract was not competitively procured (N00012-C-0009).

Dec 2/11: D5 LE. Charles Stark Draper Laboratories, Inc. in Cambridge, MA receives a $120.8 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive, cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification. They’ll provide Trident II D5 Guidance System micro circuit wafers, and Strategic Systems Programs alterations materials.

Work will be performed in Pittsfield, MA (83.5%); Cambridge, MA (7%); by Honeywell, Inc. in Clearwater, Fla. (5%); Terrytown, NY (2.4%); El Segundo, CA (1.1%); and other places yet to be determined (less than 1%), and is expected to be complete on Dec 31/15. This contract was not competitively procured, and contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year (N00030-11-C-0014, PE0003).

Dec 2/11: Support. Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems – Marine Systems in Sunnyvale, CA, received an $83.2 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide FY 2012 support for the TRIDENT II D-5 launchers, submarines, and next-generation development efforts. This contract contains options, which could bring its total value to $123.1 million.

Northrop Grumman will provide services to help with existing SSBN/SSGN Underwater Launcher Systems; Engineering Refueling Overhaul shipyard support; spares procurement; United States and United Kingdom launcher trainer support; Vertical Support Group E-mount and shim procurement; TRIDENT II D-5 missile tube closure production; Launcher Initiation System (LIS) Critical Design Review and Nuclear Weapons Safety and Security Review; TRIDENT II D-5 missile hoist overhauls; underwater launch technology support; U.S. and U.K. Strategic Systems Programs alterations and non-compliance report projects; gas generator refurbishment and case hardware production; LIS Trainer Shipboard Systems Integration Increment 11 conversion; and ancillary hardware and spares.

Technical engineering services and container production restart efforts for the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty will also be included, as will technical engineering services to support the Advanced Launcher Development Program and Common Missile Compartment concept development and prototyping efforts for the U.S. and U.K.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (80%); Bangor, WA (10%); and Kings Bay, GA (10%); and will end with the fiscal year on Sept 30/12, whereupon $45.3 million of these funds will expire; or it will end on Sept 30/14 if all options are exercised. The contract was not competitively procured (N00030-12-C-0015).

Dec 2/11: Support. Interstate Electronics Corp. in Anaheim, CA receives a $43 million cost-plus-incentive fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide FY 2012 and 2013 United States and United Kingdom Lead System Integrator support. An option would add a year, and bring the contract value to $85.8 million.

Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA (77.2%), and Cape Canaveral, FL (22.8%), and will end on Sept 30/12, whereupon $37 million in contract funding expires; or on Sept 30/13 if the option is picked up. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-12-C-0003).

Nov 25/11: Fire control. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems, Inc. in Pittsfield, MA receives a $96 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee, fixed-price incentive contract to provide FY 2012 and FY 2013 engineering support to United States and United Kingdom Trident II SSBN Fire Control Subsystems, Ohio Class SSGN Attack Weapons Control Subsystem, and the Common Missile Compartment for the USA and UK’s next-generation nuclear missile submarines. This contract contains options which could bring its total value to $225 million over almost 4.5 years.

Work will be performed in Pittsfield, MA, and could run to April 14/16 with all options exercised. $35.1 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. This contract was not competitively procured by the US Strategic Systems Programs in Washington, DC (N00030-12-C-0006).

Oct 26/11: Components. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a not-to-exceed $64.5 million cost-plus-incentive-fee completion contract modification. It exercises Trident II LE contract line item number 0030 for: 12 flight control electronic assemblies; 2 active inert missile (AIM) flight control electronic assemblies; 12 command sequencer assemblies; 12 interlocks package assemblies; 2 AIM interlocks package assemblies; and 12 missile inverters.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (53.5%); Bloomington, MN (15.2%); El Segundo, CA (12.4%); Albuquerque, NM (11.5%); Clearwater, FL (3.7%); Camarillo, CA (2.5%); and Middletown, PA (1.2%). Work is expected to be complete by Sept 30/14 (N00030-11-C-0100).

Oct 17/11: Support. Lockheed Martin MS2 in Mitchel Field, NY receives a $40 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide FY 2012-13 U.S. and U.K. TRIDENT II (D5) Navigation Subsystem Engineering Support Services. This contract contains options which could bring it to $94.6 million, if they’re all exercised.

Specific work includes U.S. and U.K. Fleet Support, U.S. and U.K. Trainer Systems Support, next-generation Ohio Replacement Program Support, Engineering Refueling Overhaul Support, and Navigation Subsystem studies.

Work will be performed in Mitchel Field, NY, (99.8%) and Manassas, VA (0.2%), and is expected to be complete by March 31/14. $30.7 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. The contract was not competitively procured by the Strategic Systems Programs in Washington, DC (N00030-12-C-0002).

FY 2011

Missile orders; SHIPALT kits; Mk6 LE work; Support contracts; 3D Design software.

Sept 21/11: D5 LE. Cadence Design Systems, Inc. in San Jose, CA receives a $7.4 million firm-fixed price, 5-year software license and support for their commercial electronic design automation software tools. Cadence’s electronics design tools will be used as part of the D5 MK6 Life Extension Guidance System program.

This contract was sole-sourced, and the Pentagon describes the suite as “compatible with collected historical data and utilized for present efforts.” Work will be performed in San Jose, CA, and is expected to be completed by September 2016. The US Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division in Crane, IN (N00164-11-G-GM23).

March 28/11: Support. Boeing in Huntington Beach, CA received a $31.1 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-plus incentive contract to maintain, repair, and rebuild TRIDENT II D5 navigation equipment. This contract contains options which could bring its total value to $64.1 million.

Work will be performed in Huntington Beach, CA (89%), and Heath, OH (11%), and is expected to be complete Sept 30/14. $16.1 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-11-C-0002).

March 1/11: Testing. USS Nevada (SSBN 733) successfully launches an unarmed Trident II D5 missile off the coast of southern California, completing a 3.5 year long submarine refueling and overhaul certification process. The launch certifies the readiness of both the SSBN crew and the operational performance of the submarine’s strategic weapons system, before it becomes available for operations again. Nevada was commissioned in 1986 as the eighth Ohio-class fleet ballistic missile submarine.

US Navy Strategic Systems Programs (SSP) oversees the demonstration and shakedown operation (DASO) certification process, and more than 150 SSP employees and special guests were invited aboard US Military Sealift Command’s test range ship USNS Waters (T-AGS 45). This test marked the 135th consecutive successful test flight of the D5 missile since 1989. USN SW Region Navy Compass | Lockheed Martin.

Feb 15/11: UK Support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $7.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification to the United Kingdom technical services contract in support of the TRIDENT Strategic Weapons System, providing for “Collaborative Replacement Material Experiment Two.” We have no idea what that means, and don’t expect to be enlightened.

Work will be performed primarily in Sunnyvale, CA, and is expected to be complete by March 31/14 (N00030-10-C-0026, P00003)

Feb 14/11: Budgets. The Pentagon releases their FY 2012 budget request, and Pentagon documents indicate that the Trident D5 LE program may increase its budget in 2012. The FY 2012 request is for $1.398 billion ($88.9 million RDT&E and $1.309 billion procurement), a 17.8% jump compared to a FY 2011 request of $1.188 billion, which rose slightly from a FY 2010 request of $1.115 billion. The funds will go to:

“Funds the D5 Missile Life Extension Program replacing missile motors and other critical components, and production support (including flight test instrumentation and additional re-entry system hardware).”

Feb 10/11: D5 LE. Charles Stark Draper Laboratories, Inc. in Cambridge, MA receives a $57.7 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive contract for Trident II (D5) Guidance System micro circuit wafers and “strategic systems programs alteration repair equivalent units”.

Work will be performed in Clearwater, FL (44.9%); Pittsfield, MA (29.9%); El Segundo, CA (13.6%); and Cambridge, MA (11.6%); and is expected to be complete by June 30/13. This contact was not competitively procured (N00030-11-C-0014).

Dec 27/10: D5 LE. Charles Stark Draper Laboratories, Inc. in Cambridge, MA, is being awarded a $494.3 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for Trident II D5 work: guidance system tactical engineering support, guidance applications program, and life extension development.

Work will be performed in Cambridge, MA (82%); Pittsfield, MA (11%); Clearwater, FL (2%); and El Segundo, CA (5%). Work is expected to be complete by Sept 20/16, and $84 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured by US Strategic Systems Programs in Arlington, VA (N00030-11-C-0005).

Dec 10/10: Lockheed Space Systems Company in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $920.8 million fixed-price-incentive, cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide Trident II (D5) missile production and deployed system support.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA; Bangor, WA; Kings Bays, GA; and Cocoa Beach, FL, and is expected to be complete by April 30/16. The contract funds will be drawn from multiple fiscal years – $44 million in FY 2009 weapon funds, and $304.7 million in FY 2011 O&NM funding, all of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year on Sept 30/11. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-11-C-0100).

Missile production

Dec 9/10: Support. L3/ Interstate Electronics Corp. in Anaheim, CA receives a $28.2 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for specialized technical engineering services to operate, maintain and repair the TRIDENT II D5 test instrumentation subsystems, plus spares and related support equipment in support of the U.S. TRIDENT II D5 weapon systems.

Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA (80%); Cape Canaveral, FL (13%); Arlington, VA (5%); Austin, TX (1%); Los Angeles, CA (0.5%); and Sunnyvale, CA (0.5%), and is expected to be complete by Sept. 30/11. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-10-C-0009, P00012).

FY 2010

Missile orders; SHIPALT kits; Mk6 LE work; Support contracts.

Aug 3/10: Support. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems & Sensors in Mitchel Field, NY won a $11.8 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide: Trident II D5 strategic systems programs shipboard systems integration; Strategic weapon system navigation subsystem; Systems design and development; and Electrostatically supported gyro navigator refresh. This contract contains options which could bring the total contract value to $230.1 million.

Work will be performed in Mitchel Field, NY (35.4%); Huntington Beach, CA (27.9%); Oldsmar, FL (14.8%); Phoenix, AZ (14.2%); Cambridge, MA (7.2%); and Eagan, MN (0.5%). The contract is expected to end on July 30/15. This contract was competitively procured, with 2 offers received (N00030-10-C-0018).

July 7/10: Long-lead. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received an $11.3 million fixed-price incentive, cost-reimbursable, incentive contract to provide long-lead materials for the FY 2011 follow-on production of the Trident II D5 missile system.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA, and is expected to be complete Sept 30/15. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-10-C-0101).

April 9/10: Testing. Teradyne in North Reading, MA received a $10.6 million, 5-year firm-fixed-price commercial basic ordering agreement for procurement of Teradyne Spectrum 9100 testers, which are used for the development of test program sets (TPSs) for Trident fire control, missile, and guidance electronic modules that are being redesigned as part of the D5 Life Extension program.

The TPSs will also be used for production testing of modules and for service life evaluation. The proposed acquisition is for additional testers, spare equipment, instrument calibration, training, and maintenance contracts that are required to maintain the necessary tester availability.

Work will be performed in North Reading, MA and is expected to be completed by April 2015. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division, in Crane, IN manages the contract (N00024-09-C-6317).

March 29/10: UK Support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $17.7 million cost plus fixed fee contract to provide technical services that support Britain’s TRIDENT Strategic Weapons System.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (70.69%); Cape Canaveral, FL (12.54%); St. Marys, GA (2.58%); Bremerton, WA (0.81%); and other locations inside and outside the United States (13.38%). Work is expected to be complete by March 31/11. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-10-C-0026).

March 22/10: D5 LE. Lockheed Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $24.1 million modification under a previously awarded contract (N00030-07-C-0100) for the procurement and testing of Trident II D5 missile commonality parts needed for the life extension program. The total contract value after this award is $1.2 billion (see March 28/07 entry).

Lockheed Martin will perform the work in Bloomington, MN (93.24%); Sunnyvale, CA (4.15%); Fairview, NC (2.46%); Marionville, MO (0.10%); and Clearwater, FL (0.05%), and expects to complete the work by May 31/12. Contract funds in the amount of $11 million expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

Feb 2/10: D5 LE. Charles Stark Draper Laboratory in Cambridge, MA received a $131.1 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for the Trident II D5 MK6 life extension guidance system. This contract is to procure long lead materials and circuit card assemblies to support the delivery of 20 MK6LE guidance systems.

Draper Lab will perform the work in Bloomington, MN (59%); Clearwater, FL (22%); Cambridge, MA (15%); and Pittsfield, MA (4%), and expects to complete it by June 30/15. This contract is a sole source acquisition by the US Navy’s Strategic Systems Programs in Arlington, VA (N00030-10-C-0015).

Dec 28/09: Testing. Lockheed Martin announces that the US Navy conducted a test flight of a Trident II D5 missile from the USS Alaska (SSBN 732) in the Atlantic Ocean. The test, conducted Dec 19/09, marks the 130th successful test flight of the Trident II D5 missile since 1989.

The Navy launched the missile as part of a Demonstration and Shakedown Operation (DASO) to certify USS Alaska for deployment, following a shipyard overhaul period. For the test, a missile was converted into a test configuration using a test missile kit produced by Lockheed Martin that contained range safety devices and flight telemetry instrumentation.

Dec 14/09: Chips. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems received a contract from Charles Stark Draper Laboratory to produce integrated circuits for the Trident II D5 submarine-launched ballistic missile program. This is a 3-year contract with a total potential value of $110 million including the pre-priced options.

The contract is part of the Trident II D5 LE program. General Dynamics is also providing circuit card assemblies for the Trident II D5 missile and guidance systems. The principle subcontractor to General Dynamics for the wafer foundry services is Honeywell International and work will be performed at its Plymouth, MN facility.

Dec 8/09: Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA received a not-to-exceed $851 million cost-plus-incentive-fee/ cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide support for production of Trident II D-5 ballistic missiles as well as maintenance of deployed D-5 and C-4 missiles.

Under the contract, Lockheed Martin is providing D5 missile hardware production support and reentry system hardware, as well as operations and maintenance to support the readiness and reliability of missile systems deployed aboard the US Navy’s Trident II Ohio-class SSBNs. The contract also continues the D5 LE effort, which updates electronic components to support the extended service life of the Ohio-class SSBNs

Mature D5 production efforts will transition to a fixed-price-incentive contract in fiscal year 2011. Lockheed Martin expects to complete the work by Dec 30/13. Contract funds in the amount of $284,965 will expire at the end the current fiscal year. The contract was not competitively procured (N00030-10-C-0100).

Missile Production

Dec 4/09: Support. Charles Stark Draper Laboratory in Cambridge, MA received a $133.3 million modification (#P00003) under a previously awarded cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract (N00030-09-C-0008) for the Trident II D5 guidance system tactical engineering support and guidance applications program. Specific tasks include:

• provide tactical engineering support;
  
• provide Mk6 LE field support services;
  
• develop a strategic guidance application program;
  
• develop a GPS receiver design approach;
  
• provide support for the Extended Navy Test Bed (ENTB) and ENTB derivative reentry body experiments (ENTB [PDF] is a special Trident reentry body used to test performance of the missile’s reentry vehicle guidance using GPS); and
  
• assess maintaining the accuracy of the existing reentry systems.

The contract modification increases the total contract value to $290.7 million. Work will be performed in Cambridge, MA (73%); Pittsfield, MA (21%); El Segundo, CA (4%); Clearwater, FL (1%); and Andover, MA (1%). Work is expected to be complete by Sept 30/11.

Dec 4/09: D5 LE. Charles Stark Draper Laboratory in Cambridge, MA received a $109.7 million modification under a previously awarded cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for guidance system repair and delivery of Trident II D5 Mk6 LE pre-production units, to support 3 planned proofing test missile flights.

The modification increases the total contract value to $547.6 million. Work will be performed in Cambridge, MA (82%) and Pittsfield, MA (18%) and is expected to be complete by Sept 30/12 (N00030-08-C-0010, PO 0009).

Nov 24/09: Support. Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors in Mitchel Field, NY received a $62.9 million cost-plus incentive fee/ cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide navigation subsystem engineering support services to the US and UK fleet of Trident II D5 ballistic missiles. The contract contains options, which if exercised, would bring its cumulative value to $141.4 million.

Under the contract, Lockheed Martin will provide fleet support, strategic weapon system shipboard integration support and trainer, trainer systems support, sea-based strategic deterrent support, engineering refueling overhaul support, and navigation subsystem studies.

Lockheed Martin will perform the work in Mitchel Field, NY (95.4%); Oldsmar, FL (3.6%); Baltimore, MD (0.4%); Moorestown, NJ (0.4%); Eagan, MN (0.1%); and Manassas, VA (0.1%). The company expects to complete the work by Dec 31/11, or Sept 30/13 if all options are exercised. Contract funds in the amount of $30.1 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year (N00030-10-C-0002).

Nov 16/09: Support. L3 Interstate Electronics Corp. in Anaheim, CA received a $39.2 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide data acquisition, processing, and analysis for Trident missile flight test missions of the United States and United Kingdom. This contract contains options, which if exercised, would bring the contract value to $49.4 million.

L3 Interstate Electronics will perform the Trident flight test data work in Anaheim, CA (50%); Austin, TX (20%); Ascension Island (10%); Cape Canaveral, FL (10%); and St. Croix, US Virgin Islands (10%), and expects to complete it by Sept 30/10, or September 2012 if all options are exercised (N00030-10-C-0009).

Oct 23/09: Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co in Sunnyvale, CA receives an $853.3 cost-plus-incentive-fee/ cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPIF/CPFF) unfinalized contract to support Trident II D5 missile production, and deployed systems (C4 and D5). The contract type will be CPIF/CPFF for this contract only, and mature production efforts will transition to fixed-price-incentive in FY 2011.

The place of performance is to be determined, pending finalization of the award. Work is expected to be complete in Dec 30/13. Only $284,965 will expire at the end the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/09. The contract was not competitively procured (N00030-10-C-0100).

Missile production

FY 2009

Incremental changes: Missile orders; SHIPALT kits; Mk6 LE work; Support contracts.

Sept 30/09: Support. Boeing in Anaheim, CA received a $28.8 million contract modification, exercising an option to provide the following efforts for the TRIDENT II (D5) navigation subsystem:

• Engineering support services, and problem investigations for U.S. and U.K.-owned electrostatically supported gyro navigator (ESGN) navigation inertial equipment;
  
• Modification, refurbishment, and repair of US and UK ESGN instruments and components;
  
• TRIDENT II (D5) shipyard overhaul field engineering;
  
• US Fleet documentation, surveillance program, and training;
  
• US/UK stable platform housing refurbishment.

These options increase the total contract value to $62.6 million. Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA (84%) and Heath, OH (16%), and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/12. $1.3 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, which is more or less immediately (N00030-09-C-0002).

Aug 31/09: Support. General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT received a $30.9 million contract modification to add new procurement CLIN(contract line item numbers). The new tasks will include:

• Produce and install the NAVSEA ship alteration kits, for the SSP shipboard integration Increment 1, MK98 MOD 6/7 fire control system
  
• Conduct investigations and resolution of problems associated with TRIDENT I and TRIDENT II submarine launched ballistic missile programs
  
• Provide strategic weapon systems technical engineering support.

This is follow-on work from the base contract, vid. June 20/08 entry. Work will be performed in Groton, CT (68%); Silverdale, WA (14%); Kings Bay, GA (14%); and North Kingstown, RI (4%), and is expected to be complete Aug 4/10. $1.25 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/09 (N00030-08-C-0031).

April 9/09: Support. Boeing in Anaheim, CA received a $33.9 million cost plus incentive fee, cost plus fixed fee contract to provide the following efforts for the TRIDENT II (D5) Navigation Subsystem:

• Engineering support services, and problem investigations for U.S. and U.K.-owned electrostatically supported gyro navigator (ESGN) navigation inertial equipment
  
• Modification, refurbishment, and repair of US and UK ESGN instruments and components
  
• TRIDENT II (D5) shipyard overhaul field engineering
  
• US Fleet documentation, surveillance program, and training
  
• US/UK stable platform housing refurbishment.

Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA (90%) and Heath, OH (10%), and is expected to be complete in June 2012. $25.4 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/09. The contract was not competitively procured (N00030-09-C-0002).

March 31/09: D5 LE. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $63.6 million modification under a cost plus incentive fee contract for the Trident II D5 Life Extension (LE) SPALT(SPecial Products ALTerations) Production.

Work will be performed in CA (46.20%); MA (18.57%); MN (15.01%); NM (6.25%); GA (6.11%); FL (5.29%); PA (0.77%); SC (0.53%) and other locations (1.40%), and is expected to be complete by Sept 30/14. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-07-C-0100, P00027).

March 30/09: UK Support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $21.3 million cost plus fixed fee contract to provide for technical services in support of Britain’s TRIDENT Strategic Weapons System.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (75%); Cocoa Beach, FL (10%); Hudson, NH (2%); St. Mary’s GA (1%); Groton, CT (1%); Bremerton, WA (.5%); other US locations (.5%); and other UK and Italian locations (10%), and is expected to be complete by March 31/10. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-09-C-0018).

Jan 30/09: D5 LE. The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. in Cambridge, MA received a $146.2 million cost plus incentive fee contract for a Trident II D5 MK6 LE Guidance System.

Work will be performed in Clearwater, FL (35%); Plymouth, MN (27%); Bloomington, MN (16%), Cambridge, MA (12%); and Pittsfield, MA (10%), and is expected to be complete by December 2011. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-09-C-0011).

Dec 5/08: Support. Charles Stark Draper Laboratories in Cambridge, MA received a $157.3 million cost plus incentive fee, cost plus fixed fee contract for services supporting the TRIDENT II (D-5) weapons system. Services will include:

• Specialized tactical engineering services, logistics services, fleet support services, and guidance repair services to test, repair and maintain guidance subsystems, test equipment, and related support equipment;
  
• Research in the application of technologies to support TRIDENT II (D-5) Guidance and Reentry Systems;
  
• Failure verification, test, repair and re-certification of Inertial Measurement Units P/N 5807000, Electronic Assemblies P/N 6285900, electronic modules and MK 6 Guidance System related components;
  
• Design, analysis and test of service life related upgrades of Inertial Measurement Units P/N 5807000, Electronic Assemblies P/N 6285900, electronic modules and MK 6 Guidance System related components.

Work will be performed in Cambridge, MA (72%); Pittsfield, MA (21%); Clearwater, FL (3%); El Segundo, CA (3%); and Andover, MA (1%), and is expected to be complete Sept 30/09. $91.2 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/09. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-09-C-0008).

Dec 1/09: Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $720.1 million modification to a cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide TRIDENT II (D5) and TRIDENT I (C4) missile subsystems. Specific tasks may include:

• Missile body, re-entry body, D5 instrumentation systems and support equipment production (D5 only);
  
• D5 Production Continuity Hardware (D5 only);
  
• Components and requalification activities in support of D5 life extension requirements;
  
• Critical components in support of D5 life extension requirements;
  
• Field Processing;
  
• Engineering and operational support services;
  
• Training material development and maintenance;
  
• Trainer design and operational support;
  
• Spares and integrated logistics support;
  
• Flight Test Analysis and Range Support;
  
• Safety Assurance including Nuclear Weapon Security (NWS);
  
• Missile and support equipment repair;
  
• Flight Test Planning and Flight Test Data Acquisition and Processing (D5 only);
  
• Development, production and installation of SPALTs/PADs/Sers [Special Projects Alterations, POMF (POLARIS Missile Facility) Alteration Documents, and Support Equipment Requirements];
  
• Develop and produce an Alteration Release Assembly;
  
• Develop an Enhanced Telemetry System;
  
• Technical services in support of the C4/D5 Ballast System and Test Instrumentation Mast program;
  
• Technical services in support of all requirements associated with TRIDENT I (C4) related to asset dispositions and disposal.

In addition to TRIDENT II (D5), and TRIDENT I (C4) missile subsystem requirements, there is also a requirement to:

• Provide storage and maintenance for the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile, Nuclear (TLAM-N) at the Strategic Weapons Facilities;
  
• Perform processing and provide technical services in support of the SSGN Attack Weapon System (AWS) at SWFLANT;
  
• Provide TRIDENT SWS(Strategic Weapons Systems) Missile Training;
  
• Develop technology applicable to global strike objectives that integrates with existing TRIDENT missile and/or the platform, and the missile processing and TRIDENT operations infrastructure;
  
• Provide Options for Flight Test Data Acquisition and Analysis for the Air Force and the Missile Defense Agency.

Work will be performed in California (42%); Georgia (11%); Utah (16%); Florida (9%); Washington (8%); Virginia (3%); Tennessee (2%); New Jersey (1%); Massachusetts (1%); Illinois (1%); Maryland (1%); other (5%), and is expected to be complete in September 2012. $285.5 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/09 (N00030-08-C-0100, PZ0001). See also March 26/08 entry.

Missile & components production, D5 LE, Services

Nov 19/08: Fire control. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems in Pittsfield, MA received a $52.3 million contract modification for FY09-FY11 US and UK TRIDENT II (D5) fire control system (FCS) work, and US SSGN attack weapon control system (AWCS) support. These efforts include:

• US/UK weapon control systems (WCS) and weapon control training system (WCTS) operational support
  
• US/UK WCS operational support
  
• US/UK WCS and navigation system repair and return (R&R)
  
• FCS software 344 (Mk 6 life extension) development
  
• US/UK Mk 98 Mod 8/9 FCS development
  
• Engineered refueling overhaul service
  
• Mk 98 Mod 4, 5, 6 and 7 FCS updates
  
• AWCS training unique
  
• Strategic weapon system training unique.

Work will be performed in Pittsfield, MA, and is expected to be complete on April 1/11. $25.8 million will expire at the end of current fiscal year, on Sept 30/09 (N00030-08-C-0041, P00013)

Nov 12/08: D5 LE. The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory receives a $117.4 million contract modification for Trident II (D5) guidance system repair, guidance system parts, and MK6 LE work. This modification increases the total contract value to $298.3 million.

Work will be performed in the following locations: Cambridge, MA (43%), Pittsfield, MA (38%), El Segundo, CA (12%), Clearwater, FL (5%), and Andover, MA (2%) and is expected to be completed by 30 Sept. 2011. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-08-C-0010, P00006).

FY 2007 – 2008

Missile orders; SHIPALT kits; Mk6 LE work; Support contracts.

Sept 17/08: Support. Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors in Mitchel Field, NY receives a $35 million modification to a previously awarded cost plus incentive fee, cost plus fixed fee contract (N00030-08-C-0002), exercising options to provide U.S., and U.K. Trident II (D5) Navigation Subsystem Engineering Support services, and Engineering Refueling Overhaul Support. The options increase the contract value to $112.1 million.

Work will be performed in Mitchel Field, NY, and work is expected to be complete in September 2011.

July 18/08: Support. Aero Thermo Technology Inc. in Huntsville, AL receives a $5.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide technical, analytical, and program research and development services to support the TRIDENT I and TRIDENT II Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM) program, and the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile guidance system requirement. This contract contains options, which if exercised, will bring the total contract value to $32.5 million.

Work will be performed in Huntsville, AL (59%); Nashville, TN (20%); Honolulu, Hawaii (18%); and Colorado Springs, CO (3%), and is expected to be complete in December 2008 (December 2012 with options). This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-08-C-0030).

June 20/08: Support. General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT received a $13.7 million contract modification to:

• Produce and install the Naval Sea Systems Command Ship Alteration (SHIPALT) kits for the Strategic Systems Programs Shipboard Integration (SSI) Increment 1, MK98 MOD 6/7 Fire Control System;
  
• Conduct investigations and resolution of problems associated with TRIDENT I and TRIDENT II Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile programs, Ohio Class Submersible Ship Guided Nuclear requirements, Attack Weapon System (AWS) Trainer requirements and Advanced Weapons Systems Development requirements;
  
• Provide Strategic Weapons Systems (SWS) technical engineering support.

Work will be performed in Groton, CT (68%); Silverdale, WA (14%); Kings Bay, GA (14%); North Kingstown, RI (4%), and is expected to be complete in May 2012. $1.4 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/08. This contract was a sole source award (N00030-08-C-0031).

March 26/08: initial FY 2008. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $19.3 million unpriced letter contract to provide Long Lead Material (LLM) required for FY 2009 follow-on production of the TRIDENT II (D5) Missile System. This unpriced letter contract will be definitized on/about Oct 1/08 as a cost reimbursable, multiple incentive contract with incentives on cost and performance.

Work will be performed in locations yet to be determined, and is expected to be complete in September 2012. The contract was not competitively procured (N00030-08-C-0100).

March 21/08: UK Support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $15.5 million cost plus fixed fee contract to provide for technical services in support of Britain’s TRIDENT Strategic Weapons System.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (74.47%); Cape Canaveral, FL (17.37%); St. Mary’s, GA (1.35%); Silverdale, WA (0.73%); Jenkintown, PA (0.34%); Indianapolis, IN (0.05%); Broomfield, CO (0.03%) ; Herndon, VA (.02%); other U.S. locations to be determined (0.32%); and locations to be determined in the United Kingdom and Italy (5.32%), and is expected to be completed March 2009. The contract was not competitively procured (N00030-08-C-0019).

March 4/08: Support. Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Sensors in Mitchel Field, NY received a $21.3 million modification under a previously awarded cost-plus-incentive fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to exercise options to provide U.S. TRIDENT II (D5) navigation subsystem engineering support services requirements. Specific efforts include U.S. Strategic Weapon System shipboard integration support and U.S. trainer shipboard integration support. The options increase the contract value to $80.1 million.

Work will be performed in Mitchel Field, NY, and is expected to be complete in April 2010 (N00030-08-C-0002).

Nov 21/07: Support. Northrop Grumman Space Mission Systems Corp. in Van Nuys, CA received an $8.3 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide for U.S. and U.K. TRIDENT Flight test data collection, planning, support, and refresh of the radars used to collect the data.

Work will be performed in Los Angeles, CA (37%); Arlington, VA (7%); Van Nuys, CA (2%); Huntington Beach, CA (4%); Pleasant Hill, CA (2%), and Huntsville, AL (1%), and is expected to be complete in September 2008. $4.4 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was a sole source acquisition (N00030-08-C-0005).

Nov 19/07: Support. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems in Pittsfield, MA is being awarded a $91.3 million Strategic Systems Programs contract for FY 2008 through FY 2009 work. The contract is a cost plus incentive fee contract (incentives on cost, performance, and schedule) awarded based on a sole source acquisition. The funding profile is as follows:

• $2,978,000 FY2007 UK (3.3%)
  
• $9,973,000 FY2008 UK (10.9%)
  
• $35,613,891 FY2007 OPN (39%)
  
• $2,327,403 FY2008 SCN (2.5%)
  
• $27,865,698 FY2008 O&M, USN (30.5%)
  
• $9,096,830 FY2008 OPN (10.0%)
  
• $3,467,739 FY2008 WPN (3.8%).
  
• $27,865,698 of FY2008 O&M, USN funding which would expire at the end of the current fiscal year on Sept 30/08.

Specific work will include: U.S. and U.K. operational support, repair, installation, and checkout; Mod 6/7 development and production; Mod 8/9 development; Engineered Refueling Overhaul Support; Training Unique Development; AWCS; Auxiliary Systems Tech Refresh; AWCS Mod 0 updates; Conventional TRIDENT Modification development; and Mk 6 Life Extension development; from Oct 1/07 through April 2/11. Work will be performed in Pittsfield, MA (N00030-08-C-0041).

Oct 16/07: Support. Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Sensors in Mitchel Field, NY received a $58.7 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide FY 2008 U.S. and U.K. TRIDENT II (D5) Navigation Subsystem Engineering Support Services requirements. Specific efforts include U.S. and U.K. Fleet support, Strategic Weapon System Shipboard Integration support, modifications to Trident II (D5) backfit navigation computer software and hardware, U.S. and U.K. trainer systems support, engineering refueling overhaul support.

Work will be performed in Mitchel Field, NY, and is expected to be complete in April 2011. $30.7 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/08. This contract was awarded based on a sole source acquisition (N00030-08-C-0002).

Sept 28/07: Support. L3/Interstate Electronics Corp. in Anaheim, CA received a $59.6 million cost- plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for specialized technical engineering services to operate, maintain, and repair the TRIDENT II D5 Test Instrumentation subsystems, spares, and related support equipment in support of America’s TRIDENT II (D5) missiles. It includes operation and maintenance of the Launch Area Support Ship (LASS) Flight Test Support System, the M250 Test Missile Radio Frequency set, and M240R Data Recording System (DRS). The contractor will also monitor and provide recommendations/updates to the formal training materials, documentation, and hardware/software utilized in the Strategic Weapons System (SWS) training program.

Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA, and is expected to be complete in May 2009. This contract was awarded based on a sole source acquisition (N00030-08-C-0006).

Sept 10/07: Support. Boeing in Anaheim, CA received a $21.4 million contract modification, exercising options for TRIDENT II (D5) Navigation Subsystem work. Specific efforts include:

• Engineering support services and problem investigations for U.S. and U.K. owned Electrostatically Supported Gyro Navigator (ESGN) navigation inertial equipment;
  
• Modification, refurbishment, and repair of U.S. and U.K. ESGN instruments and components
  
• TRIDENT II (D5) shipyard overhaul field engineering
  
• U.S. Fleet Documentation, Surveillance Program, and training.

Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA, and is expected to be complete in September 2010. This contract was awarded based on a sole source acquisition (N00030-07-C-0002).

March 12/07: UK Support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $14.2 million cost plus fixed fee contract to provide for technical services in support of Britain’s TRIDENT Strategic Weapons System.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (69.94%); Cape Canaveral, FL (18.64%); Helensburgh, Scotland, UK (8.6%); St. Mary’s, GA (1.05%); Silverdale, WA (0.67%); Herndon, VA (0.22%); Indianopolis, IN (0.21%) and other yet to be determined sites (0.67%), and is expected to be complete in March 2008. This contract was procured on a sole source basis (N00030-07-C-0028).

March 28/07: Long-lead. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA won a $20.5 million unpriced letter contract to procure Trident II D5 long lead time materials. Work will be performed at various locations and is yet to be determined for this undefinitized effort, and is expected to be completed by September 2011. This contract is a sole source procurement (N00030-07-C-0100).

Jan 9/07: FY 2007. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co’s Space and Strategic Missiles division in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $654.9 million cost-plus-incentive-fee/ cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for Trident II D5 and Trident I C4 nuclear sea-launched ballistic missiles (N00030-06-C-0100, PZ0001).

The Trident C-4 has been in service since 1979, but the D-5 Trident II is more recent. First deployed in 1990 and scheduled for operational deployment until 2042, 12 of the USA’s 14 SSBNs have been outfitted with Trident II D-5 missiles, and the other 2 will be backfitted as opportunity permits.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, Irvine, Torrance and Santa Ana, CA (33.42%); St. Mary’s, GA (15.76%); Brigham City, UT (15.76%); Cape Canaveral, FL (11.89%); Silverdale and Nepoulsbo, WA (10.5%); Gainsville, VA (2.34%); Kingsport, TN (1.65%); and miscellaneous sites throughout the U.S. (9.3%). Contract funds in the amount of $247.6 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, and work is expected to be complete by September 2010.

Missile production

Nov 27/06: D5 LE. The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory in Cambridge, MA received a $195.75 million contract for tactical engineering support re: the Mk 6 guidance system used on American and British Trident II D-5 nuclear missiles. Contract funds in the amount of $76.6 million will expire at the end of current fiscal year, and this contract contains options which would bring its cumulative value to $201.9 million if exercised.

Work will include repair and recertification of Mk 6 guidance systems, including pendulous integrating gyroscopic accelerometers, inertial measurement units, electronic assemblies, inertial measurement units electronics, repair parts, test equipment maintenance, and related hardware; deliver a product and process improvement study to investigate approaches to reduce life-cycle cost and improve performance of the Fleet Ballistic Missile Guidance System program; and employ its personnel and facilities in the conduct of various important technical studies including the Guidance Application Program and the Radiation Hardened Application Program. It will be performed in Cambridge, MA (64%); Pittsfield, MA (23%); Andover, MA (5%); El Segundo, CA (3%); Clearwater, FL (3%); and Woodland Hills, CA (2%), and is expected to be complete September 2007 (N00030-07-C-0001).

FY 2005 – 2006

Missile order; Rocket motors; R&D and work on improved guidance; support contracts.

June 1/06: UK support. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company in Sunnyvale, CA received a $12.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for technical services that support Britain’s TRIDENT strategic weapons systems. Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA, and is expected to be complete in March 2007. This contract was not competitively procured (N00030-06-C-0038).

April 6/06: Rocket motors. Alliant Techsystems received a $76 million contract from Lockheed Martin to produce solid propulsion systems for all three stages of the US Navy’s Trident II D5 missile. Under the terms of the contract, ATK will continue to supply Trident solid propulsion systems to Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company in Sunnyvale, CA through 2010.

April 5/06: Support. Charles Stark Draper Laboratory in Cambridge, MA received a $26.9 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to provide repair and recertification of MK-6 guidance systems, including pendulous integrating gyroscopic accelerometers, inertial measurement units, electronic assemblies, inertial measurement units electronics, repair parts, test equipment maintenance, and related hardware. Work will be performed in Cambridge, MA and is expected to be complete September 2006 (N000-30-06-C-0002).

Dec 22/05: FY 2006. Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Sunnyvale, CA received an $869 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-plus-award-fee contract from the US Navy to provide funding for fiscal 2006 Trident II D5 Missile Production and Deployed System Support.

Work on this FY 2006 Trident II D5 production & sustainment contract will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (39%); Magna, UT (12%); Kings Bay, GA (11%); Cocoa Beach, FL (12%); Bangor, WA (8%); Gainesville, VA (3%); Kings Port, TN (1%), Rockville, MD (1%), Lancaster, PA (2%); and other locations (11%), and is expected to be complete by September 2009 (N00030-05-C-0100, Mod. No. PZ0001).

Missile production

Dec 12/05: D5 LE. The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory (CSDL) in Cambridge, MA received a $101.1 million modification to previously awarded cost-plus-incentive-fee contract (N00030-05-C-0007) to develop all the system software and algorithms, system sensors, gyroscopes, and accelerometers for the MK6 LE system. CSDL will also build all the system test beds and integrate all the subsystems produced by the subcontractors (General Dynamics, Raytheon, Honeywell, Dynamics Research Corp.) into the final MK6 LE proof of concept model.

Nov 16/05: Support. BAE Systems Applied Technologies in Rockville, MD is being awarded a $62.5 million cost plus fixed fee and cost-plus incentive-fee-of-effort contract. This contract provides for System Integration Support for the Trident II D5 Fleet Ballistic Missile (FBM) Program in implementing interface control programs and performing special technical investigations such as the following:

• Modify and update system test procedures;
  
• Perform configuration management and alteration control via documentation, drawings and technical manuals;
  
• Provide logistics, engineering and material control support; and
  
• Provide maintenance support data system installation and support for the strategic weapon system, including materials.

The contract also contains option effort to plan for and participate in strategic weapon system testing during submarine overhaul, refit and backfit; and to provide

• Tomahawk Land Attack Missile-Nuclear (TLAM-N) support
  
• Advanced Systems’ Studies
  
• Strategic Weapon System Underwater Launch Technology Sustainment
  
• Trident II D5 Life Extension Systems Engineering, and
  
• Trident Submarine Operation and Employment Studies.

Work will be performed in Rockville, MD (78.58%), Kings Bay, GA (11.78%); Mechanicsburg, PA (2.83%); San Diego, CA (5.96%), and Bangor, WA (0.85%); and and is expected to be complete by September 2006. Contract funds in the amount of $44.6 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year (N00030-06-C-0006).

Nov 16/05: Fire Control. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems (GDAIS) in Pittsfield, MA received an $8.3 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to provide Trident II weapon control systems operational support and weapon control system repair and return. Work will be performed in Pittsfield, MA, and is expected to be complete by September 2006. Contract funds in the amount of $4 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year (N00030-05-C-0051).

Nov 15/05: Support. The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory (CSDL) in Cambridge, MA received $130.6 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, elements of which will also be subcontracted out to various other firms. The contract encompasses the following efforts:

• Providing tactical engineering support (TES) for the US and UK Mk6 Guidance System
  
• Providing tactical engineering support (TES) for the Trident II D5’s Guidance System Test Equipment
  
• Providing tactical engineering support for investigation, evaluation, and development of Strategic Programs Alteration (SPALT) plans and/or special studies for the Mk6 Guidance System.

CSDL will subcontract to the following companies:

• Dynamics Research Corp. (DRC) in Andover MA to maintain and operate the centralized engineering database for the Mk6 guidance system, and perform various product improvement tasks related to the Mk6 guidance system test equipment;
  
• General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems (GDAIS) in Pittsfield MA, to provide field-engineering support at Strategic Weapons Facility Atlantic and Strategic Weapons Facility Pacific;
  
• Raytheon Company Electronics Systems Division in El Segundo, CA to provide test equipment maintenance and support, fleet support, stellar camera development, and electronic factory support;
  
• Honeywell International, Inc. in Clearwater, FL, to provide storage assessment testing on Trident guidance systems inertial instruments; and
  
• Litton Systems in Woodland Hills, CA, to provide for the development of the alternate pendulous integrating accelerometer.

CSDL’s work will be performed in Cambridge, MA, and work on this contract is expected to be complete in September 2006. Contract funds in the amount of $73.7 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year (N000-30-06-C-0003).

Nov 14/05: Navigation. The Boeing Co. in Anaheim, CA received a $14.2 million cost-plus-incentive-fee letter contract to provide for Trident II Subsystem Fiber Optic Gyro Navigator Design Investigations and Test System Design. Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA and is expected to be complete by October 2007. The contract was not competitively procured (N00030-05-C-0063).

Sept 29/05: Fire Control. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems in Pittsfield, MA received a $28.3 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to provide Trident II Mk98 MOD 6/7 Strategic Weapons Systems Development and Production. The Mk98 mod 6/7 is an updated fire control system for the SSBN 726 Ohio Class nuclear ballistic missile submarines and their Trident II nuclear missiles. Work will be performed in Pittsfield, MA and is expected to be complete by December 2009 (N00030-05-C-0051).

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.

• DID (Dec 9/09) – Up to $851M to Lockheed Martin for Trident Ballistic Missile Support.

• DID (Dec 6/09) – $243M to Draper Laboratory for Trident II D5 Guidance System Support.

• DID (Nov 24/09) – Up to $141.4M to Lockheed Martin for Trident Navigation System Support.

• DID (Nov 16/09) – Up to $49.4M to L3 for Trident Missile Test Data Acquisition and Analysis.

• DID (Jan 11/09) – US Spending $654.9M to Maintain Trident SLBMs.

• DID (Nov 27/06) – $197.5M to Refurbish Mk6 SLBM Guidance Systems.

• DID (April 6/06) – Trident D-5 SLBM Maintenance: Rocket Motors, Guidance.

• DID (Dec 22/05) – $869M for USA’s FY06 Trident D-5 Nuclear SLBM Production and Support.

• DID (Dec 15/05) – $101.1M to Develop the MK6 LE – So, What’s That?

• DID (Nov 18/05) – $215.6M for Trident II Missile-Related Contracts.

• DID (Sep 29/05) – $28.3M for Trident II SLBM Fire Control System.

C-5 Galaxy
(click to view full)

When it was introduced, back in 1970, the C-5 Galaxy was the largest plane in the world. It also has the highest operating cost of any US Air Force weapon system, owing to extremely high maintenance demands as well as poor fuel economy. Worse, availability rates routinely hover near 50%. To add insult to injury, the Russians not only built a bigger plane (the AN-124), they sold it off at the end of the Cold War to semi-private operators, turning it into a commercial success whose customer list now includes… NATO.

Meanwhile, the USA still needs long-range, heavy load airlift. The AN-124’s commercial success may get its production line restarted, but the C-5 has no such hope. Boeing’s smaller C-17s cost more than $200 million per plane. That’s about the cost of a 747-8 freighter, for much higher availability rates than the C-5, and a longer lifespan.

Sunrise? Sunset?
(click to view full)

What’s the right balance between new C-17s and existing C-5s? The US Air Force believes that the right balance involves keeping some of the larger C-5s, and thought they could save money by upgrading and renewing their avionics (AMP) and engines (RERP). Their hope was that this would eliminate the problems that keep so many C-5s in the hangar, cut down on future maintenance costs, and grow airlift capacity, without adding new planes. Unfortunately, the program experienced major cost growth. In response, the C-5M program wound up being both cut in size, and cut in 2. The C-5A and C-5B/C fleets are now slated for different treatment, which will deliver fewer of the hoped-for benefits, in exchange for lower costs and lower risk.

The C-5’s AMP-RERP The Problem: Less Than Reliable

C-5 Refuels from KC-135
KC-135 = 707 airliner!
(click to view full)

From Air Force Magazine:

“The Galaxy also has major problems, as was glaringly apparent during one particular C-5’s trip from Dover to Europe. As it readied for takeoff, an engine warning light appeared in the cockpit. The flight crew taxied the airplane back to the apron, the passengers got off, and maintenance crews investigated. After the problem was fixed and the passengers had reboarded, the aircraft headed out again, but another warning light came one – this time during the takeoff run.

Five more times, the C-5 attempted to leave, and each time there was a glitch.

Airborne at last, the heavily laden giant lumbered up to cruising altitude, but, some 100 miles out over the Atlantic, yet another warning light came on – this time, a landing gear door seemed ajar. The airplane returned to Dover for yet another repair. The C-5 finally reached its destination in Europe – but more than 18 hours late.”

Stories like this also help to explain why the C-5 has the highest operating cost of any Air Force weapon system. The programs designed to address these cost & reliability problems are called AMP (Avionic Modernization Program) and RERP (Reliability Enhancement & Re-Engining Program). To keep them straight in your head, think of AMP as amping up the Galaxy’s electronics for the modern era, and RERP as putting a bit more roar in its engines.

C-5s are currently assigned to:

• Dover Air Force Base, Delaware (USAF, C-5B)
  
• Travis AFB, California (USAF)
  
• Lackland AFB, Texas (USAF)
  
• Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio (USAF)
  
• Martinsburg Air National Guard Base, West Virginia
  
• Memphis ANGB, Tennessee
  
• Stewart ANGB, New York; and
  
• Westover Air Reserve Base, Massachusetts

Changing the C-5: AMP

Before: C-5 cockpit
(click to view full)

AMP is the first step. Its main purpose is to equip the aircraft to fly in civil airspace by the most direct routes, at the most advantageous altitudes, with the most efficient fuel usage and cargo loads. The new avionics systems will allow the aircraft to comply with reduced vertical separation mandates, and also provides an architecture flexible enough to meet future communications, navigation, surveillance (CNS) and air traffic management (ATM) requirements. AMP is also trying to reduce the number of devices and wires in the planes, to reduce costs and improve reliability. All told, 12,000 wires are removed, and 4,000 are installed, during a C-5 AMP.

The program has displayed a philosophy of making its additions using as much commercial equipment as possible, rather than insisting on all-militarized systems. Riding on the development work spurred by changing commercial requirements, rather than funding development on its own, is a change for USAF procurement, but they get a very modern system that way. In addition to the substitution of digital “glass cockpit” computer screen displays, key Global Air Traffic Management avionics include:

• Future Air Navigation System (FANS) data link
  
• Aeronautical operational communications (AOC) data link
  
• VHF com, 8.33-KHz spacing
  
• Multimode receiver (MMR) with protected ILS, VOR, microwave landing system (MLS) and marker beacon
  
• Dual, embedded inertial navigation system (INS)/GPS
  
• Identification, friend or foe (IFF)/Mode S transponder
  
• Traffic alert collision avoidance system II (TCAS II), Version 7, (added earlier)
  
• Enhanced ground proximity warning system (EGPWS)
  
• Backup air traffic control (ATC) data link printer, and
  
• Versatile Integrated Avionics (VIA) software system, with six primary “partitions” or applications, such as: flight management, com/nav/surveillance/identification (CNSI), com management, display services and all-weather flight control.

Even after all these efforts, however, the AMP’s digital avionics offer only minor reliability improvements to the aircraft as a whole. What they will do, is allow the aircraft to operate with fewer restrictions in civil airspace.

They also lay the required foundation for the major improvements expected in the follow-on Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining Program (RERP). Many of the RERP phase’s improvements, which will make a much bigger difference to the C-5’s reliability rates, require the rewiring and improvements made during the AMP phase, in order to work properly. As USAF Mobility Division Chief for Global Reach Programs Colonel Brunderman notes:

“AMP puts a digital backbone into the aircraft. It replaces a lot of legacy analog dial systems that are no longer supportable and are getting unreliable and puts them into a digital format. AMP also allows the aircraft to interface with the digital controls on the new engines that come in the RERP phase.”

Changing the C-5: RERP

TF39 on C-5
(click to view full)

RERP’s core improvement is the addition of modern F138-GE-100 jet engines, derived from General Electric’s CF6-80C2s that power many Boeing 747s (including the President’s Air Force One), 767s, Airbus 300 and 310s, and other commercial aircraft. The full 2-part upgrade aims to lift the C-5’s mission capability rate from the present level of 55-60% to better than 75%. Lead contractor Lockheed Martin also claims the combined AMP and RERP upgrades will reduce the Air Force’s total ownership cost fleet-wide by 34% over the C-5M’s remaining life span.

These new CF6 engines deliver more than 50,000 pounds of thrust each, allowing the C-5Ms to carry more than 270,000 pounds, and to take off and land in distances as short as 5,000 feet. In comparative terms, they deliver 22% more takeoff thrust, achieve 30% shorter takeoff distances, enable 58% faster time-to-climb to cruising altitude (an important metric in dangerous environments, where getting above 15,000 feet makes you a lot safer), and have a 99.98% departure reliability rate in commercial service, providing a 10-fold improvement in reliability and maintainability over the C-5 fleet’s existing TF39 engines.

In 2002, Lockheed Martin awarded GE a $126 million contract to provide CF6-80C2 engines for the C-5M SDD phase. Following a successful SDD phase, the production phase could have called for upwards of 500 F-138 engines, plus service support, at a potential value of $2.6 billion to GE over the life of the multi-year program. In practice, the narrowing of the RERP program to just 42 aircraft means orders for about 170-190 F138 engines.

The C-5s’ RERP phase will also install full-authority digital engine controls (FADECs) that improve their performance and fuel efficiency, updated fault monitoring and recording systems, and much else. Work will cover hydraulic, fuel, fire suppression and pressurization subsystems as well as auxiliary power units, air conditioning systems, landing gear and the airframe.

After: C-5M cockpit
(click to view full)

After completing the entire modernization program, the C-5s will be renamed the C-5M Galaxy aircraft. The 2 new configurations (C-5 AMP, C-5M) will also create follow-on contracts to modify training devices, etc. to the new standards.

The first test C-5M flew on June 19/06, and the first production C-5M flew in September 2010. The production rate goal for C-5Ms is an 8-month turnaround on the modernization, which translates into 11 converted aircraft per year at peak production.

The Air Force planned to “RERP” 2 C-5Bs and 1 C-5A to verify the hoped-for performance and reliability boost. A production decision on the re-engining program was expected in FY 2007, but did not take place until February 2008. In the end, the C-5A fleet was excluded from the RERP phase altogether. Some were even excluded from the AMP phase, which means the overall C-5 fleet will shrink.

The C-5 AMP/RERP Program

Note that figures after 2015 involve fleet sustainment and modernization, which won’t really stop until the planes are retired from service.

C-5 Upgrade Programs: Budgets

Decisions, Decisions: The C-5 Gamble

C-5 over Atlantic City
(click to view full)

The initial C-5 program delivered 80 aircraft. A 2nd construction program in 1981-1986 delivered 50 more; 4 have been lost in crashes, for a total fleet of 126. Each C-5 aircraft can carry 265,000 pounds of cargo for 4,000 miles (roughly double that of the newer C-17A), or 125,000 pounds for 8,000 miles. Its hinged nose can even be raised to make loading or unloading easier, and the Galaxy’s ability to lift even the heaviest main battle tanks into theater made it a critical part of the trans-oceanic air bridge that would reinforce Europe or Korea in the event of an enemy attack. During the 2003 run-up to Operation Iraqi Freedom I, C-5s proved their worth again as they removed logistics bottlenecks in Europe.

If results and cost projections had been more positive, up to 112 total C-5A, C-5B and C-5C aircraft would have gone through the 2-phase AMP/RERP upgrade, which is currently scheduled to begin in 2008 and continue through to 2014. The C-5Ms would then be expected to serve until 2040. The key is that word “if”. As the US Air Force Association explains:

“The C-5 Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining Program, or RERP, has been the catch-22 of mobility for several years. If the upgrade works, USAF won’t need more new C-17s. If it waits and then the RERP doesn’t work, the C-17 line will be closed, leaving no strategic lift option.”

The twin questions facing the program remain cost, and effectiveness. USAF acquisition executive Sue Payton told a Senate committee in late 2007 that per-aircraft costs for C-5 AMP/RERP had ballooned to $146.7 million. In contrast, Lockheed Martin business ventures vice president Larry McQuien stood by the company’s $83 million price commitment, and said that even if additional Air Force costs like training, spare parts, support equipment, and unanticipated repairs were thrown in, the per-aircraft price would not exceed $118 million.

Officially, the Air Force won that argument. Per USAF estimates, Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne declared the C-5 program to be in breach of Nunn-McCurdy notification provisions. That law requires the US military to notify Congress if a program is more than 15% over its baseline budget, and rejustify it if the increase is over 25%.

The USAF estimate was significantly more than a 25% increase, and some senior officials began to have second thoughts.

If RERP’s stated objective is to boost the overall reliability of about 100 C-5s by 10 percentage points, goes the thinking, that equates to adding 10 aircraft to the fleet. If the cost to complete the program is $16-17 billion, that’s over $1.6 billion per extra plane. Of course, one reply may add, the 10% readiness increase happens now – but what if the real difference is that without AMP/RERP, readiness rates continue to get worse, or sudden structural issues surface? What if half-way through their remaining airframe life, worsening issues with engines, wires, maintenance etc. mean that only 20% of the unmodified C-5s can fly? That would create a much higher future readiness gain for the modernization program, but those cost-benefit scenarios become more complex to calculate, involving probability estimates, the value of having certainty, plus capacity tradeoffs and load pattern analysis. How many replacement aircraft would be required to replace lost C-5s, and what would that cost?

Heavy Metal

In the end, the USAF and Department of Defense separated the C-5s into 62 C-5 AMP-only aircraft, and 49 C-5M AMP/RERP aircraft. Further cuts appear to have reduced the C-5A+ AMP buy to just 79 planes total, leaving 27 C-5 AMPs and 52 C-5Ms.

The estimated cost of the new program drops to just $7.5 billion, but C-5A+ aircraft would be expected to show only minor readiness improvements, and maintenance of their engines will be a growing issue as the fleet ages. Lean Six Sigma initiatives and performance-based maintenance contracts will be used to try to address the readiness gap. Whether they will be successful remains an open question.

If not, studies were undertaken to see if the C-5 has a future as a civilian cargo aircraft, after all. With that low readiness rate, however, it’s unlikely.

Contracts & Key Events

Swiftly flow
the years…
(click to view full)

Unless otherwise noted, all contracts are issued to Lockheed Martin in Marietta, GA by the USAF’s Headquarters Aeronautical Systems Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH. Note that the collection of entries becomes less complete before 2006.

FY 2014-2018

IOC achieved.

C-5M
(click to view full)

August 7/18: Ready to Lift The Air Force is now in possession of a completely refurbished fleet of C-5M Super Galaxy transport planes. The US Air Force Air Mobility Command began a program to modernize the C-5s in 1998 after a study concluded the decades-old aircraft had 80% of their service life remaining. AMP is the first step. Its main purpose is to equip the aircraft to fly in civil airspace by the most direct routes, at the most advantageous altitudes, with the most efficient fuel usage and cargo loads. AMP is also trying to reduce the number of devices and wires in the planes, to reduce costs and improve reliability. RERP’s core improvement is the addition of modern F138-GE-100 jet engines, derived from General Electric’s CF6-80C2s that power many commercial airliners. The C-5 is capable of carrying two 78-ton M1A1 main battle tanks or helicopters and other large equipment intercontinental distances. Over the years Lockheed Martin upgraded a total of 52 C-5s with new engines, avionics and diagnostic systems, which will keep the airlifters flying until the 2040s.

October 25/17: Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $14.7 million US Air Force (USAF) contract to enhance the automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast out system, among other parts of the communications system on the C-5. Work to be undertaken include C-5 communications, navigation, surveillance/air traffic management engineering and manufacturing development program and incorporates the automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast out technology. Work will be completed at Marietta, Ga., and is expected to be completed by September 25, 2019. Lockheed’s C-4 Galaxy has been in service since 1970 and is one of the world’s largest transport aircraft.

July 16/14: #21 delivered. C-5M Super Galaxy #87-0044 leaves Marietta, GA as the 3rd C-5M destined for Travis AFB, CA. Sources: Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine, “Travis No. 3”.

June 30/14: #20 delivered. A C-5M Super Galaxy leaves Marietta, GA for Travis AFB, CA. Aircraft 85-0010 was delivered 28 days ahead of the contracted schedule. Sources: Lockheed Martin, “Another C-5M Goes West”.

June 18/14: RERP-6: Convert 11. A $222.9 million fixed-price C-5M RERP contract modification pays to modify a total of 11 C-5 aircraft, using the appropriate kits. This brings the Lot 6 total to $882.3 million for materials and installation (q.v. Oct 31/12, Oct 21/11)

All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 and FY 2014 USAF aircraft budgets. Work will be performed at Marietta, GA and is expected to be complete by Jan 10/17. USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WLSK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0200).

May 8/14: RERP-7 kits. Lockheed Martin in Marietta, GA receives a $508.9 million fixed-price modification for C-5 RERP Lot 7 kits.

All funds are completed immediately, using USAF FY 2014 aircraft procurement funds. Work will be performed at Marietta, GA, and is expected to be complete by May 2018. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WLSK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8625-07-C-6471 P00201).

May 8/14: #19. C-5M Super Galaxy #87-0042 leaves Marietta, GA as the 1st C-5M destined for Travis AFB, CA. The C-5Ms will be flown by active duty crews from the 60th Air Mobility Wing, as well as crews from Air Force Reserve Command’s 349th AMW Associate unit at Travis AFB. Sources: Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine, “First Super Galaxy For Travis”.

April 26/14: Basing. The USAF announces that half of the 439th Airlift Wing’s C-5 fleet at Westover ARB, MA will be cut, with 8 of their C-5Bs transferred fto JB San Antonio-Lackland, TX beginning in 2015. Westover will receive 8 upgraded C-5M Super Galaxys, but they’ll still lose 59 full-time enlisted personnel and 275 drilling Reservists. Sources: Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine, “Westover Basing Decision”.

April 2/14: #18. USAF Lt. Gen. Brooks L. Bash, the vice commander of Air Mobility Command, personally flies C-5M #87-0040 from the Lockheed Martin facility in Marietta, GA, to Dover AFB, DE. It’s the last C-5M delivered to the base, which has been the type’s sole destination so far. Sources: Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine, “Last Super Galaxy To Dover”.

March 25/14: #17. C-5M Super Galaxy #87-0020 leaves Marietta, GA for Stewart ANGB, NY for internal paint and insulation blanket restoration. After getting the touch-up, the aircraft will be flown to Dover AFB, DE. Sources: Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine, “Super Galaxy Number 17”.

March 25/14: Avionics. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Marietta, GA receives a sole-source $84.3 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract. It funds the EMD development program for the C-5 fleet’s Core Mission Computer/Color Weather Radar program. These upgrades are envisaged as retrofits to the entire AMP/ RERP fleet.

$11.2 million in FY 2013 USAF aircraft budgets are committed immediately. Work will be performed at Marietta, GA, and is expected to be complete by March 31/17. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WLSK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8625-14-C-6596).

March 4-11/14: Budgets. The US military slowly files its budget documents, detailing planned spending from FY 2014 – 2019. The C-5 program gets the main C-5M budget zeroed out from FY 2016 – 2019. It’s not quite as big a change as it seemed, because some of the upgrades are being broken out as their own programs, but it’s still a total reduction of about $194.5 million from FY 2016 – 2019. See the charts above.

The C-5’s mission computer has to be replaced. It has reached capacity, and can’t even handle basic additions like the flight management system (FMS); weather radar; and basic requirements for using civil airspace past 2020: ADS-B Out, and identification, friend or foe (IFF) mode 5. The new mission computer will handle these and other upgrades.

A new color weather radar replaces the current AN/APS-133s, which have such serious problems with obsolete parts that they threaten to become unserviceable.

They also want to fix the bathrooms, but that isn’t just convenience. Not only is the current system unreliable, it leaks liquid sodium hypochlorite, causing severe corrosion and burnt wires in the landing gear control panels. Not a great outcome, so they’re going to replace them a commercial product using FY15 funding.

Feb 21/14: IOC. USAF AMC declares Initial Operational Capability for the C-5M. Lockheed Martin has delivered 16 planes, and the aircraft has passed its Qualification Test, Operational Test and Evaluation, stand-up of required spares and maintenance facilities at Dover AFB and other locations, and stand-up of enough trained aircrew and maintenance personnel.

The program is far enough along that the Pentagon’s DOT&E no longer features them in testing reports.

C-5M IOC

Dec 23/13: #16 delivered. Tail number 87-0036 is ferried to Dover Air Force Base, DE. It’s the 16th C-5M delivered, and the 6th delivered in 2013. Is it us, or did that recent set of rapid-fire deliveries seem a bit compressed? Sources: Lockheed Martin, “Sweet Sixteen”.

Dec 12/13: #15 delivered. The latest C-5M is off to Dover Air Force Base, DE. Lockheed Martin is still touting that the plane “exceeds a mission capable rate of 80 percent,” which is a big improvement if it’s true. Sources: Lockheed Martin, “Home for the Holidays”.

Dec 5/13: #14 delivered. Lockheed Martin flies its latest delivery to Stewart Air National Guard Base, NY for internal paint restoration, before C-5M #86-0017 heads to its permanent home at Dover AFB, DE. Sources: Lockheed Martin, “Another Super Galaxy Delivered” | Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine, “Super Galaxy Delivered”.

Nov 21/13: #13 delivered. Lockheed Martin delivers tail number 85-0004 to the 436th Airlift Wing at Dover Air Force Base, DE. Sources: Lockheed Martin, “Baker’s Dozen!”.

FY 2013

 

Lt. Col. Mike Semo,
C-5M Pilot
click to play video

Sept 19/13: #12 delivered. Lockheed Martin delivers C-5M #85-0003 to the USAF at its Marietta, GA plant. Maj. Gen. Wayne Schatz Jr., Director of Strategic Plans, Requirements, and Programs at Air Mobility Command headquarters, flies the aircraft to Stewart ANGB, New York, where it will undergo internal paint restoration before returning to its permanent home at Dover AFB, DE. This aircraft has recorded more than 19,000 flight hours.

Lockheed Martin says that they’re on track to deliver 52 C-5Ms by 2017. Sources: Lockheed Martin, “Make it a Dozen!” | Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine, “Super Galaxy No. 12”.

Sept 5/13: Training. A $21.3 million contract modification for a C-5M RERP aircraft maintenance system trainer and a flight control system trainer at Travis AFB, CA, plus associated spares. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2012 procurement funds. The buy seems minor, but the 2012 report from the Pentagon’s testing department (q.v. Jan 17/13) cited a lack of dedicated training systems as a problem for the fleet.

Work will be performed in Marietta, GA, with an expected completion date of Aug 31/16. Fiscal 2012 aircraft procurement funds in the amount of $21,318,495 are being obligated at time of award. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center at Wright Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0224).

June 21/13: #11 delivered. The eleventh C-5M Super Galaxy leave Lockheed Martin’s Marietta, GA facility for Dover AFB, DE. Sources: Lockheed Martin, June 21/13 release.

June 18/13: Software. A $27.9 million indefinite-delivery /indefinite-quantity contract with cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price, and cost-reimbursement-no-fee portions. Lockheed Martin will support C-5 software and the software integration laboratory, offer engineering support, and provide an emergency operational flight plan.

$21 million in FY 2013-2016 Operations and Maintenance DPEM Software funds in the amount are committed for Task Orders 0001 and 0002. Work will be performed at Marietta, GA, and is expected to be complete by by June 20/16. This award is a result of an electronic solicitation with 1 bidder, from the USAF Life Cycle Management Center/C-5 Galaxy Center at Robins AFB, GA (FA8525-13-D-0004).

April 28/13: Waste. Congressionally-mandated waste continues. USAF training hours are cut and squadrons stop flying, in order to maintain aircraft that cannot fly and pay people in Congressional districts to do meaningless work. The USAF isn’t the only service with this problem, but it’s a sharp one for the C-5 fleet. From the New Hampshire Foster’s Daily Democrat:

“Parked around the airstrip at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland are more than a dozen massive C-5A Galaxy transport planes. There is no money to fly them, repair them or put pilots in the cockpits, but Congress rejected the Air Force’s bid to retire them…. crews will tow the planes around the Texas tarmac a bit to make sure the tires don’t rot, then send them back into exile until they can finally get permission to commit the aging aircraft to the boneyard…. Fifteen of the C-5A Galaxy aircraft are at Lackland, where crews are getting in some flights now preparing for the retirement, while 11 are at Martinsburg, W.Va., and are flown [sic] by the Air National Guard there.”

April 25/13: Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Marietta, Ga., was awarded a modification on contract for C-5M Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining Program (RERP). The value of this contract modification is $45.7 million, increasing the total contract value from $3.647 billion to $3.693 billion. The contract modification is for C-5M RERP Lots 3, 4, and 5 Rapid Repair and Response legacy repair efforts.

Work will be performed in Marietta, GA, and is expected to be complete by Oct 29/14. $14.8 million in FY 2011 through 2013 Aircraft Procurement funds are committed immediately by the USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WLSK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0182).

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.

FY 2014 is the last major year of funding at $1.217 billion. That will drop to $334.7 million in FY 2015, when C-5M budgets will almost end completely. The last aircraft scheduled for delivery in Q1 FY 2017.

Jan 31/13: Support. A $16 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee and cost reimbursement contract for replenishment spares and repairs in support of the C-5’s AMP and RERP programs.

Work will be performed in Marietta, GA, and expected to be complete by Jan 31/14. The AFLCMC/WLKB at Robins AFB, GA manages this sole source acquisition, using FY 2013 dollars (FA8525-13-D-0001).

Jan 17/13: DOT&E report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2012 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The C-5M is included, and it still isn’t “operationally suitable”. In fact, the office had recommended last year that C-5M wasn’t ready to proceed to IOT&E testing. It went anyway, and:

“The aircraft’s ability to conduct the strategic airlift mission is hindered by deficiencies in the Automatic Flight Control System, by problems with the Embedded Diagnostics System (EDS) and built-in test (BIT) functionality, by inadequate support equipment, and by a lack of dedicated training systems. Deficiencies in several aspects of C-5M support functions, identified before the 2010 OT&E began, had a significant effect on suitability, specifically the maintainability of the aircraft.”

As one might imagine, the USAF has an “extensive” correction action plan. Diagnostic false alarm rates remain “very high,” which risks sabotaging the entire mission availability rationale for the entire C-5M program. There’s also a problem with training, since C-5M specific aircrew and maintainer training devices are just becoming available, forcing the USAF to use 1 simulator, plus on-aircraft training when possible. That doesn’t help readiness, either, and the USAF plans to buy more training devices in FY 2013.

OFP 3.5 basic flight & operating software helped with some of the airspeed control issues, but the plane still isn’t reliable in critical situations like final approach, or “gusty or turbulent” conditions. The Air Force plans to begin operational testing of OFP 3.5.2 in August 2013. At least the thrust reversers got their heating blankets to prevent ice-up, then got strengthened gears to make sure they stayed retracted. It works, but they need to be inspected more often.

Nov 30/12: RERP. A $9 million contract modification for the C-5 RERP. Work will be performed in Marietta, GA until July 31/15 (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0184).

Nov 29/12: C-5A-M Support. A $56.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-reimbursement- no-fee, firm-fixed-price, time and materials contract for the C-5 sustaining engineering and technical support services. It covers all C-5s in service, including the C-5Ms, which are becoming a significant enough presence to matter. Work will be performed in Marietta, GA until Nov 30/12 (FA8525-13-D-0003).

Nov 21/12: A $38.5 million contract modification for procurement of 2 optional C-5 RERP plus-up spare engines, and the engine kits effort. Work will be performed in Marietta, GA, and is expected to be complete by Dec 15/14 (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0161).

Note the purchase order number, this is similar to but distinct from the Nov 19/12 order.

Nov 19/12: RERP. A $38.3 million contract modification to buy 2 spare C-5 RERP RFI engines and RFI engine kits.

Work will be performed in Marietta, GA, and is expected to be complete by May 30/14. The AFLCMC/WLSK at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH manages the contract (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0160).

Oct 31/12: RERP Lot 6. A $489.4 million contract modification for C-5 RERP Lot 6 kits. It’s added to the $160 million advance procurement (vid. Oct 21/11) for these 11 aircraft kits, and the installation and spares contracts are still pending beyond the current $659.4 million.

Work will be performed in Marietta, GA, and the contract will run until July 17/15 (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0140).

Oct 19/12: RERP Lot 5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics in Marietta, GA receives a $221.8 million contract modification for the C-5 RERP Lot 5 Installation effort, involving 11 aircraft. That boosts the total cost of publicly-reported RERP-5 contracts to $1,000.5 million, or about $91 million per plane, including spares.

Work will be performed in Marietta, GA, and is expected to be complete by Oct 29/15 (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0166).

FY 2012

79th & last C-5 AMP delivered; All-C-5M fleet?; Cracks sapping fleet capacity; C-5M testing issues.

#5 departs
(click to view full)

July 20/12: #5 delivered. Lockheed Martin delivers the 5th production C-5M, and 8th overall, to Robins AFB, GA.

June 29/12: Un-cracked. Cracks at the C-5 cargo floor’s bulkhead end fittings had restricted its cargo carrying capabilities to a maximum of 80%, lowering its advantage over platforms like the C-17. In response, the US Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) developed a more stress and corrosion-resistant aluminum alloy, and a new die forging process, under the Durable C-5 Structural Improvements Program. Some C-5s are already being refitted at the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center, GA. US AFRL:

“The reshaped end fittings provide an optimised design that is less prone to cracks, and also offers multiple benefits for the revamped C-5 aircraft, which includes a 25% overall cost savings, an 80% reduction in fabrication time, and a 60% increase in service life of the fittings… methods employed earlier… insufficient, as the replacement fittings provided to the aircraft often cracked during the machining process, and also had a shorter lifespan than the original parts.”

April 30/12: Last C-5 AMP. Lockheed Martin announces that it has delivered the 79th and final C-5 AMP plane to the USAF. The planned program total had been cut from 111 to 80, but a C-5 crash dropped the number by one.

Last C-5 AMP delivered.

April 15/12: Link for savings. The USAF discusses its Mobility Mission Linking, or MML, program, which aims to make up for the inconvenient positioning of current C-5 wings in Texas and the USA’s east coast. When most missions are in Southwest Asia, it can mean up to 11 flight hours per mission with no cargo on-board. By linking multiple stops and eliminating the transit from Texas, MML expects to save 3.5 million gallons of fuel and $12 million between FY 2012- 2016. USAF.

April 12/12: All C-5Ms? A USAF story makes an interesting statement:

“The C-5 has long been known as the “Air Force’s largest airlifter.” In the future, Air Mobility Command officials say the goal is to have all C-5s become C-5Ms that would further strengthen the airframe’s worldwide airlift capabilities.”

There are 2 ways to do that. One way is to modernize the remaining 27 C-5 AMP aircraft at a later date, bringing the C-5M fleet to 59. the other way is to retire the lower-readiness, lower-capability, more expensive to operate C-5 AMPs early, leaving the USAF with just 52 C-5Ms as the entire fleet. In a coming era of budget cuts, which seems more likely?

April 7/12: Gannett’s Air Force times reports that Dover AFB will be the 1st base to convert to an all-C-5M fleet, after its last C-5B leaves for conversion in June 2012.

Feb 1/12: RERP #11 begins. Lockheed Martin inducts the 11th C-5 RERP aircraft to the Super Galaxy production line. Aircraft 86-0017 has accumulated more than 18,000 flight hours and more than 4,300 full-stop landings.

Jan 17/12: DOT&E test report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2011 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The C-5M RERP is listed as 1 of just 3 USAF programs that met their reliability targets, though a subsequent March 2012 DoD DT&E and SE Annual Report lists C-5M reliability at just 66%, instead of the 75% target that must be met in FY 2016. In the interim, the C-5M is proceeding fairly well, but still has some issues to work on.

The 2010 operational test identified problems with engine thrust reversers (restricted use in flight makes emergency descents and some tactical patterns very difficult), autopilot (too aggressive in cruise operations & turbulence, doesn’t always maintain commanded airspeed), and the Environmental Control System (autopilot problems killing bleed air supply and dropping cabin temperature under 50F/ 10C). Operational testing of the fixes was scheduled to begin in January 2012, in conjunction with operational testing of the plane’s new Block 3.5 software set.

While the C-5M was deemed operationally effective, it wasn’t given an “operationally suitable” rating. That will require testing to eliminate a very high false alarm rate and poor fault diagnosis in the plane’s built-in-test equipment, and the delivery of C-5M aircrew and maintainer training devices. The C-5M is also susceptible to unspecified “information assurance” (data security) problems, but the risk was deemed to be low.

Nov 18/11: RERP Lot 5. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Marietta, GA receives a $13.4 million firm-fixed-fee contract modification for C-5 RERP FRP-5 items required to meet the field needs of its 11 C-5M aircraft. That’s on top of the $602.4 million in Oct 21/11 FRP-5 orders. One firm was solicited and one firm submitted a proposal to the ASC/WLSK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (FA8625-07-C-6471).

Oct 21/11: RERP Lots 4-6. Lockheed Martin Aeronautical Systems in Marietta, GA receives 4 C-5 RERP program contract modifications, worth around $890 million total. All are firm-fixed-price, with economic price adjustments if the cost of key metals etc. rises. They are:

For C-5 RERP Full Rate Production, Lot 4 (FRP-4, FY 2011), $126.7 million to finish C-5M conversion and install the 28 enhanced engines on FRP-4’s 7 aircraft (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0102). They’re Production Lot 4 RERP kits, but they’re installed in the same fiscal year that produces FRP-5.

For C-5 RERP FRP-5 (FY 2012), $518.9 million to build the FRP-5 RERP kits for 11 C-5s (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0107), and $83.5 million to buy initial spares for those planes (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0104).

For C-5 RERP FRP-6 (FY 2013), $160 million for advance procurement of items whose production lead time is more than 12 months, so they’ll be ready when the FRP-6 build contract for another 11 C-5 RERP kits is issued next year (FA8625-07-C-6471, PO 0103).

FY 2011

Civilian C-5s?

C-5 in RERP
(click to view full)

Sept 29/11: RERP #9P in. Lockheed Martin inducts the 9th C-5 for full C-5M conversion. Tail 0045 was the last C-5B produced for the USAF. It has accumulated nearly 18,000 flight hours, and more than 4,200 full-stop landings.

Sept 25-26/11: Non-stop. A C-5M Super Galaxy from the 436th Airlift Wing at Dover AFB, DE, flies direct to Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, passing over the Atlantic and Europe en route. Traditionally, C-5s stop in Germany to refuel the plane and rest the crew, then finish the rest of the flight the next day. For this flight, a KC-135R aerial tanker based in Britain refueled the plane.

There’s a balance between proving out new routes, for use if needed, and using routes that don’t place a routine strain on resources. While the C-5M is capable of these missions, it remains to be seen whether they will become the norm. Another pathfinding example took place on June 5-6/11, as a C-5M crew flew an arctic route to Afghanistan over Canada, Russian, and Kazakhstan, with a KC-135R refueling over northern Canada. USAF AMC.

Aug 17/11: Training. Lockheed Martin announces a $5.8 million base contract from FlightSafety Services Corp. The scope of work includes managing hardware, software and courseware, maintaining simulator certifications to Air Force specifications, and overseeing the operations of the C-5 Aircrew Training System (ATS) program.

C-5 ATS helps train C-5 pilots, flight engineers, loadmasters and maintenance engine run personnel, and the contract will apply to all C-5 variants. Lockheed Martin will manage the Lackland AFB, TX C-5 Training Systems Support Center and formal training unit, and provide support for the other 6 training locations: Dover AFB, DE; Travis AFB, CA; Martinsburg ANG Base, WVA; Memphis ANG Base, TN; Stewart ANG Base, NY; and Westover Air Reserve Base, MA. The contract includes 4 more 1-year options, which could bring this contract up to 5 years and $30 million.

Aug 4/11: RERP #8P in. C-5B tail number 85-0003 becomes the 8th aircraft inducted into modernization production. That number is expected to rise to 10 by the end of 2011. Lockheed Martin.

July 18/11: RERP #3P flies. The 3rd production C-5M Super Galaxy takes its first flight at the Lockheed Martin facility in Marietta. Aircraft 0005 is assigned to Dover AFB, DE, and will be flown by both active duty and reserve airlift wings. Lockheed Martin.

April 27/11: Sub-contractors. Small business qualifier Thomas Instrument in Brookshire, TX receives a maximum $9 million firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for C-5 aircraft gearbox assemblies.

The contract runs to March 2015 and is managed by the US Defense Logistics Agency Aviation at Robins Air Force Base, GA (SPRWA1-11-D-0009).

April 12/11: RERP #2P delivered. Lockheed Martin completes delivery of the 2nd production C-5M at Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Marietta, GA. The plane will undergo internal paint restoration at Stewart Air National Guard Base, NY, before traveling to its home base at Dover. Lockheed Martin.

Feb 15/11: An $8.9 million contract modification for the C-5 RERP Lot 4 readiness spares package, part 2, for Dover and Travis Air Force Bases. At this time, all funds have been committed (FA8625-07-C-6471; P00076). This contract and modification number was also announced on March 7/11, where it did not say that all funds had been committed.

Feb 14/11: FY 2012 Budget. The Pentagon releases its FY 2012 budget request, and the USAF details its major programs [PDF]. FY 2011 was the last year for C-5 AMP funding, at $627.7 million requested. In FY 2012, the C-5M RERP program would receive $851.9 million to convert 7 aircraft (up from 5 in FY 2011; note that conversions are done using the previous year’s production) and buy 11 equipment sets for installation in FY 2013, as well as $9.4 million to get USAF maintenance depots ready for C-5Ms, and $500,000 for an AMP/RERP compliant Aircrew Training System (ATS) and a Maintenance Training Device (MTD). Other USAF budget documents [PDF] add that:

“In FY 2012, the F-35, RQ-4 Global Hawk, and Light Cargo Aircraft have large initial spare requirements in preparation for fielding. Other initial spares programs with large requirements include MQ-9 Reaper, C-5 Airlift Squadrons, Light Cargo Aircraft, CV-22, and EC-130H COMPASS CALL aircraft. In FY2012 some programs, including Global Hawk, MQ-9, and C-5 began budgeting for initial spares in Budget Activity 06 instead of Budget Activities 01 through 05.”

The C-5 RERP is the largest of them all, with $116.175 million in spares. That’s not entirely surprising, given the number of new engines involved. The Pentagon doesn’t include the C-5 in its handout of costs by weapon system, but the C-5 AMP/RERP seems to add up to around $978 million in FY 2012.

Jan 28/11: A $20.6 million contract modification to provide interim contract support for the C-5 RERP Program. At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA8625-09-D-6485 0008).

Jan 19/11: RERP #5P in. Lockheed Martin announces that the 5th C-5 aircraft has been inducted into the RERP process, to be transformed into a C-5M by the end of 2011.

Nov 30/10: An $8 million contract for C-5 fleet sustaining engineering efforts required to resolve technical, supportability, or efficiency issues. Money will be committed as needed by the WR-ALC/GRSKA at Robins Air Force Base, GA (FA8525-11-D-0003).

Nov 18/10: Training. A $23 million contract modification for Phase 3 of the C-5M RERP’s AMS (aircraft maintenance systems) trainer and flight trainer program. At this time, $14.3 million has been obligated (F33657-02-C-2000; P00227).

Nov 15/10: RERP #1P delivered. The 1st production C-5M leaves Stewart Air National Guard base in Newburgh, NY and arrives at its duty station of Dover AFB, DE. The C-5M planes flying to date have all been pre-production planes from the system development stage. defpro | Mid-Hudson News | NY State.

Nov 8/10: A maximum $29.2 million contract for C-5M AMP program sustainment support. Delivery orders will be issued as needs arise by the Warner-Robins Air Logistics Center at Robins Air Force Base, GA (FA8525-11-D-0001).

Oct 22/10: RERP Lot 4 k+s. A pair of C-5M RERP awards from the USAF, for current production, worth $387.9 million. See also Jan 11/10 entry.

A $326.9 million contract modification for C-5M RERP full-rate production Lot 4 materials and fabrication of material required to modify the 7 seven Lot 4 aircraft. At this time, all funds have been committed (FA8625-07-C-6471; P00041).

A $61 million contract modification for spare parts to cover the 7 C-5M aircraft from FRP Lot 4 production. At this time, all funds have been committed (FA8625-07-C-6471; P00058).

Oct 19/10: RERP Lot 3i/5a. A pair of C-5M RERP awards from the USAF, worth $278.6 million.

The first is a a $115.7 million contract modification for C-5M RERP low rate initial production Lot 3 installations. At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA8625-07-C-6471).

The second is a $162.9 million contract which covers C-5M RERP full-rate production Lot 5 advance procurement of critical materials and equipment, such as aircraft engines. At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA8625-07-C-6471).

Oct 4/10: Civil C-5s? Aviation Week reports that both Lockheed Martin and elements in the USAF are re-thinking the decision to terminate RERP for the C-5A fleet, if money allows – and even looking at placing some C-5s in the civilian market:

“Lockheed Martin says it needs long-lead funding in Fiscal 2014 to avoid a gap in the modification line after the last C-5B is upgraded, and to keep prices agreed upon with major suppliers… [including] General Electric for the new CF6-80C engines. “As the aircraft proves itself, we are talking to the Air Force about the benefits of a single fleet,” says Lorraine Martin, Lockheed Martin vice president for C-5 programs… The Air Force also operates 59 C-5As, but plans to retire 22 in 2011-12 because of excess strategic airlift capacity. Congress directed the Air Force to study the potential for placing the retired aircraft with the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) or international coalition partners. A report will be submitted soon… A Defense Acquisition Board decision on full-rate production [of C-5M RERP planes] is set for Oct. 7.”

Barring some sort of government financing agreement that would tip the scales, C-5As and their $82+ million RERP upgrade costs would have to compete against new-build civilian BC-17s at about $225 million, in order to become a preferred option for would-be civilian carriers who wanted to compete with Antonov’s partners in the outsize cargo market.

Sept 20/10: Infrastructure. Soltek Pacific Construction Co. in San Diego, CA wins a $6.4 million firm-fixed-price task order under a multiple award construction contract (N62473-08-D-8615, #0014) to build a C-5 Squadron Aircraft Operations and Maintenance Facility at Travis Air Force Base, CA. The task order also contains one planned modification which if issued, would increase the cumulative task order value to $7.5 million.

Travis AFB is home to the 60th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron, which services and supports AMC C-5s. Work will be performed in Fairfield, CA, and is expected to be complete by October 2011. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southwest in San Diego, CA received 4 proposals for this task order.

FY 2010

C-5 AMP cut from 112 – 92; C-5M RERP operational; RERP gets low-rate production approval

DSRV-1 loading
(click to view full)

Sept 19/10: RERP #1P flies. The first production C-5M takes off from Lockheed Martin’s Marietta, GA facility. It is slated for formal delivery on Sept 30/10, and will arrive at its new home Dover AFB, DE in November 2010.

Note that this is not the 1st C-5M, as there were 3 initial planes built in the system development phase, and they are already operational.

July 29/10: Training. CAE USA, Inc. in Tampa, FL receives $10.6 million contract to purchase 7 C-5 AMP training devices and 5 C-5M RERP program training devices for the C-5 aircrew training system. The simulators will be used by USAF Air Material Command, US Air National Guard, and USAF Reserve Command. CAE will begin by upgrading a C-5 WST(Weapon System Trainer) currently located at Stewart Air National Guard Base (ANGB) to the new C-5 AMP configuration. The other C-5 WST, located at Dover AFB, DE and already upgraded by CAE to the AMP configuration several years ago, will now be upgraded to the RERP configuration using new engine performance simulation software and a new aerodynamics model.

A month later, a CAE release says that the contract includes options to upgrade additional C-5 and C-5 cockpit procedures trainers, which could bring total value to more than $50 million. At this time, $10.6 million has been committed by the GHMKA at Hill Air Force Base, UT (F8223-10-R-3000/2).

June 8/10: RERP #3P in. Lockheed Martin inducts its 3rd C-5 Galaxy strategic airlifter into the RERP production line at Marietta, GA. The company has already delivered 3 initial C-5M aircraft, which Lockheed Martin says passed testing with “the highest rating possible.” The 1st production C-5M is scheduled for delivery to Dover AFB, DE later in 2010, and this 3rd production C-5M is expected to be ready in about a year (mid-2011).

Current Air Force plans call for Lockheed Martin to deliver 52 total C-5Ms (modification of 49 C-5Bs, 1 C-5Cs, and 1 C-5A) by 2016. Lockheed Martin.

June 7/10: A $5.7 million contract for C-5M RERP low rate initial production, and related expenses. At this time, the entire amount has been committed by the 716th AESG at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8625-07-C-6471).

April 2/10: Training. FlightSafety Services Corporation of Centennial, CO received a $34.8 million contract for C-5 aircrew training system operation, maintenance, and support. At this time the entire amount has been obligated by the 508th ACSS/PK at Hill Air Force Base, UT (FA8223-10-C-0007).

April 1/10: SAR – C-5 AMP cut. The Pentagon releases its April 2010 Selected Acquisitions Report, covering major program changes up to December 2009. The first-stage C-5 AMP program is mentioned, confirming a cut from 112 aircraft to 92 aircraft:

“Program costs decreased $200.2 million (-14.3%) from $1,405.3 million to $1,205.1 million, due primarily to a quantity decrease of 20 aircraft from 112 to 92 aircraft (-$112.9 million), and decreases in other support costs and initial spares associated with the quantity decrease (-$73.3 million). There was also a decrease for prior year actuals for kit buys and installations (-$12.6 million).”

SAR change

The force mix would then become 20 unmodified C-5As, 42 C-5A+ AMP aircraft, and 59 C-5M AMP/RERP aircraft. Future disposition of the unmodified C-5As is not clear, but they could easily slip into the neverland of sitting in hangars at all times, eating maintenance dollars the whole time but not flying, while Congress refuses to allow the USAF to retire them. They would not be alone in this status.

March 30/10: GAO ASP. The US GAO audit office delivers its 8th annual “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs report. It covers only the full C-5M RERP program, which it describes as mature, stable, and in production, albeit at 66% higher per-unit costs than the original baseline. The remaining program is not completely free of risk, however:

“While the Air Force is expected to spend $3.4 billion less under the restructured program, ultimately, less than one-half of the aircraft will be modernized at a much higher unit cost. Further changes to the program are possible based on whether the program exercises future contract options and the mobility capability study. Program officials have indicated that if options for lots [4] through [7] of the C-5 RERP production contract are not exercised by the dates required in the contract, the remaining lot four through seven negotiated not to exceed prices become invalid for all future options. Consequently, officials indicated that future work may need to be renegotiated and if so, it would lead to a substantial increase in the negotiated prices. In addition, DOD is currently studying its future mobility capabilities requirements with the results expected in December 2009. The study may or may not affect the number of C-5s that require the RERP modification.”

March 16/10: Infrastructure. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Marietta, GA receives a $6.2 million contract. Lockheed Representatives clarify that it will fund the data, support equipment, and spares needed to stand up 5 different Air Logistics Center C-5 AMP maintenance depots, for components manufactured and repaired by GE aviation.

At this time, the entire amount has been obligated. 716 AESG/PK, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (F33657-98-C-0006, P00231).

Feb 19/10: An $86.2 million contract which will provide for the C-5M RERP. At this time, $23.2 million has been committed by the 716th AESG/SYK at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8625-09-D-6485).

Feb 9/10: C-5M operational. USAF Air Mobility Command announces that the C-5M Super Galaxy has completed 4 months and 1,300 hours of operational test and evaluation, releasing the aircraft for use in worldwide operations.

OT&E began on Oct 1/09, and required the cooperation of USAF Air Mobility command, Air Materiel Command, and the Air Reserve Command. Aircrews from the 436th and 512th Airlift Wings flew a mission that included cold weather operation testing at Eielson AFB, Alaska. They also flew nonstop flights from Dover AFB, DE, USA to Incirlik Air Base, Turkey, without refueling, bypassing traditional C-5B fuel stops at Rota Naval Air Station, Spain. USAF AMC announcement | Lockheed Martin release.

The USAF estimates that these direct flights saved more than 365 hours vs. the same mission with a C-5B (N.B. 289 of those are on the ground), and approximately 186,000 gallons of fuel.

Jan 11/10: RERP LRIP-1. Lockheed Martin announces $343.3 million in ongoing funding through a recently issued Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM), authorizing Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) associated with the C-5 RERP program. That funding supports LRIP RERP production support for 15 aircraft, including installation on 3 aircraft, material and fabrication for 5 aircraft, and long-lead funding for 7 aircraft.

Production of the C-5M Super Galaxy began on Aug 18/09, and that first aircraft is slated for delivery to the USAF in September 2010. Three test C-5Ms have already been delivered to the USAF, and current USAF plans call for 52 fully-modernized C-5Ms by 2016.

Jan 5/10: Training. A $6.3 million contract to fund C-5 RERP engine maintenance training devices, integration efforts, and a contract change proposal. At this time, $3.9 million has been committed (33657-02-C-2000, P00207).

Nov 6/09: A $143.2 million contract that will provide C-5 AMP sustainment support. The 330 SW at Robins Air Force Base in Georgia manages the contract (FA8525-06-D-0001, P00013).

FY 2009

1st RERP begins; C-5A+ #50 delivered; GAO cites C-5 AMP shortfalls, risks.

C-5M takeoff
(click to view full)

Aug 18/09: RERP Production begins. Lockheed Martin has produced 3 C-5M test aircraft, but today the 1st C-5 Galaxy (USAF serial number 83-1285) flies into Marietta, GA from Dover AB, DE, for induction into the C-5M RERP production line. This aircraft was also the first C-5B to come off the original production line in 1985. RERP modernization is expected to take 13 months, eventually declining to 8 months for subsequent aircraft as production ramps up.

The 3 C-5Ms produced for the test program are already being put to work. Lockheed Martin cites a recent mission from Dover AFB, DE that flew non-stop and unrefueled from Dover to Incirlik, Turkey, while carrying 90,000 pounds of cargo on 36 standard military cargo pallets. The crew was able to complete the round trip in 2 days versus the normal 3, and saved 30,000 pounds of fuel by eliminating an en-route stop. Lockheed Martin release.

May 28/09: +6 AMP. A $7.3 million modification will install AMP kits and the consolidated load panel in 6 aircraft, under firm-fixed-price terms. Time-and-material charges will apply to rapid response and repair for potential aircraft issues that are discovered during kit installation. At this time, the entire amount has been committed (F33657-98-C-0006, P00223).

April 29/09: C-5A+ #50. Lockheed Martin announces the 50th C-5 AMP delivery, to Air Force Reserve Command’s 433rd Airlift Wing at Lackland AFB, TX, completing AMP modifications to the C-5B fleet.

The AMP installations are taking place at Dover AFB, DE and at Travis AFB, CA, and the fleet-wide AMP modifications are scheduled to be complete in the second quarter of 2014. Modification of the C-5A fleet continues at Travis AFB and at Dover AFB, DE. Current plans call for the entire 111-aircraft C-5 fleet to receive the AMP modifications. A majority of those aircraft will be C-5As, but they are not receiving the additional C-5M RERP modification, which is dependent on the AMP work being done first.

April 22/09: Loading practice. The US Air Force discusses cooperative efforts with the Marine Corps to figure out exactly how to load the newest UH-1Y Hueys and AH-1Z Viper attack helicopters into the C-5:

“…the Marines have been working with Air Force representatives for three months to find the best method of transporting their helicopters to the fight. According to John Buchanan, 60th APS cargo operations manager, they tried to use a C-17 Globemaster III first but found they had to strip too many parts off the helicopter. So the next logical step was to test the C-5 capability.”

The UH-1Y/AH-1Z’s 4-bladed rotor doesn’t fully fold, which makes even the C-5 has been a challenge. At one point in the loading process, clearance for the UH-1Y helicopter is down to 3 inches.

March 31/09: A $13.3 million modification to the indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity RERP contract, to cover an undisclosed contract change. The entire amount has been committed (F33657-02-C-2000, #P00175).

March 30/09: GAO ASP. The US government’s GAO audit office issues GAO-09-326SP: “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs.” The C-5 AMP and RERP sections describe the technologies as mature, but note that:

“The AMP was fielded with waivers to 14 specification requirements [that affect operational requirements]. The C-5 RERP will address 4… Other deficiencies and waivers may be addressed in a new modernization program slated for fiscal year 2010. The AMP is addressing some diminishing manufacturing source problems with the navigation system and backup integrated processor.

According to the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, the AMP is partially mission capable, however, not operationally suitable. About 250 deficiencies, including software issues related to autopilot disconnects, were found during testing… A total of 37 deficiencies will be corrected in C-5 RERP and an additional 6 deficiencies will be fixed if the RERP Operational Flight Plan 3.4 software build is fielded. In addition, 73 more deficiency reports have been corrected or are being corrected as part of a sustainment contract software build that will be released in March 2009…

[RERP] Operational testing is expected to begin in August 2009. However, the Air Force does not plan to provide a low-rate initial production aircraft for operational testing… because one will not be available until September 2010… [There is a risk of] design changes, revised production processes, and rework…”

March 2/09: LAST SDD C-5M. Lockheed Martin delivers the 3rd fully modernized C-5M aircraft to the U.S. Air Force.

Feb 27/09: An $8.4 million contract modification for “the C-5 Reliability Enhancement and Re-engineering Program estimate at completion growth and cost overrun.” At this time $6.4 million has been obligated (F33657-02-C-2000, P00172).

Feb 9/09: SDD C-5M #2. Lockheed Martin delivers the 2nd of 3 fully modernized developmental test C-5M AMP-RERP aircraft to the U.S. Air Force. Following a brief ceremony at the company’s Marietta, GA facility, the C-5M flew to Dover AFB, DE.

To date, the company’s release says that it has also completed 40 out of 111 C-5A AMP aircraft.

Feb 6/09: RERP Lot 3. A $299.8 million fixed-price economic price adjustment contract, exercising options for Lot 3 of the C-5M RERP program. At this time $25.3 million has been committed. (FA8625-07-C-6471, #P00011). See also: Lockheed Martin release.

Feb 6/09: A maximum $86.2 million indefinite-delivery /indefinite-quantity contract for interim contractor support activities around the C-5 RERP program. This contract supports the Super Galaxy during familiarization and Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E). At this time $25.3 million has been committed (FA8625-09-C-6485).

Dec 9/08: 1st SDD C-5M. Lockheed Martin delivers the first fully modernized C-5M to the U.S. Air Force at Warner Robins Air Logistics Center, Robins AFB, GA.

The aircraft is the first of 3 developmental test C-5Ms to be delivered, with the other 2 to be delivered to Dover AFB, Delaware, in February 2009. All three aircraft successfully completed developmental testing in August 2008. Current Air Force plans call for Lockheed Martin to deliver 52 modernized C-5Ms. Lockheed Martin.

1st C-5M

Nov 3/08: A firm fixed price contract modification for $6.1 million, exercising a USAF option for installation of 5 C-5 Avionics Modernization Program (AMP) Kits in its Aircraft. At this time all funds have been obligated (F33657-98-C-0006, Modification P00215).

FY 2008

RERP program cut from 112 to 49.

C-5 & CH-53E Heli
(click to view full)

Sept 24/08: Infrastructure. Kinsley Construction Company Inc in York, PA won a $26.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for a follow-on project, involving the 167th Airlift Wing’s Base conversion from C-130 to C-5 Aircraft. Work will be performed in Martinsburg, WVA, with an estimated completion date of April 2010. Proposals solicited were two-phase design build source selections, and 3 proposals were received by the National Guard Bureau in Buckhannon, WVA (W912L8-08-C-0016).

Sept 17/08: 1st C-5A into AMP. Lockheed Martin announces the induction of the first U.S. Air Force C-5A into the AMP program, adding that:

“There are 111 C-5s to be modified through AMP with 42 production airplanes completed to date. The AMP installations are taking place at Dover AFB and Travis AFB and are scheduled to be completed in second quarter 2014. The C-5 AMP fleet has flown more than 9,400 sorties and 40,000 operational flight hours.”

Some C-5Bs have already begun AMP work. The C-5A fleet was re-winged in the 1980s, extending its structural service life. Mission reliability rates, on the other hand, have remained low. AMP is expected to make only a partial dent in the C-5A’s readiness rates, but the new technologies will make a large difference to C-5A+ fleet’s ability to fly in civil airspace when they are operational.

Aug 18/08: C-5M testing done. Lockheed Martin announces that its team has successfully completed developmental testing of all 3 C-5M RERP test aircraft. Preparations now get underway to deliver the 3 test aircraft to the US Air Force in support of Operational Test and Evaluation scheduled to begin in the 3rd quarter of 2009.

< strong>Aug 18/08: SAR. The US military releases its latest round of Selected Acquisition Reports. The C-5 RERP is included, because its costs have reportedly decreased again. The C-5As will now be abandoned completely, and only the C-5B/C aircraft will be upgraded all the way to C-5Ms:

“The SAR was submitted to rebaseline from a Development to a Production estimate following approval of Low Rate Initial Production (Milestone C) and to reflect the Nunn-McCurdy certified restructured program. Since the last report, costs decreased -$3,436.8 million (-30.9 percent) from $11,130.9 to $7,694.1 million due primarily to a reduction in quantity of 59 aircraft from 108 to 49 (-$3.271.0 million) and associated schedule and estimating allocations (-$163.9 million)

• . In addition, there were reductions in support associated with the quantity decrease (-$401.0 million).”

The move would also have a significant effect on C-17 production, as it will change the number of new airlifters required by the US military.

SAR change

July 7/08: Lockheed Martin Aeronautical Systems in Marietta, GA received a maximum $17.4 million, unfinalized contract modification. It covers work under CCP 553 for Readiness Spares Package for the C-5M Reliability Enhancements and Re-engining Program (RERP). At this time $8.7 million has been committed (FA8625-07-C-6471, P00005).

June 19/08: Infrastructure. Kern Steel Fabrication, Inc of Bakersfield, CA received a firm fixed price contract for $13.6 million for the design and production of an Isochronal (ISO) Maintenance Stand for the C-5 aircraft. The award amount in item #3 above involves the design and one first production unit (albeit not exercised yet, Option I involves quantities of 1 to 3 maintenance stands). At this time $13.6 million has been obligated (FA8533-08-C-0004).

April 18/08: RERP Lot 1-2. A firm-fixed-price contract for $127.2 million. This contract modification is an Undefinitized Contract Action (UCA) for Lot 1 material/fabrication and initial spares, and Lot 2 advance procurement items, for the C-5M Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining Program (RERP). At this time the full amount has been obligated (FA8625-07-C-6471, P00003).

April 7/08: SAR – fewer RERP planes. The C-5 RERP program’s changes lead to a detailed cost change breakdown in the Pentagon’s Selected Acquisition Reports release:

“Program costs decreased $6,375.3 million (-36.4 percent) from $17,506.2 million to $11,130.9 million, due primarily to net reductions in the Air Force cost estimate for equipment (-$3,332.0 million), installation (-$1,602.2 million), engineering change order estimates (-$505.5 million), and Government Furnished Equipment (-$210.2 million). Additionally, program costs decreased due to the application of revised escalation indices (-$41.0 million), a decrease in advance procurement costs (-$192.1 million), and decreases in initial spares (-$414.2 million) and other support and training costs (-$417.6 million).”

Feb 15/08: Only 49 C-5Ms. In a confusingly-written release, the USAF states that:

“Air Force officials announced today that officials in the office of the under secretary of Defense for acquisition, technology and logistics have certified the C-5 Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining Program for 49 additional aircraft.”

Here’s what that actually means. The 62 C-5As that are still flying will all go through the AMP program, and will receive new avionics by 2014. These C-5A+ Galaxys will be flown by the US Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve. Only the 47 flying C-5B transports and 2 C-5Cs used by NASA will receive the full AMP/RERP upgrade, and become C-5Ms by 2014. According to Defense News, US Undersecretary of Defense for acquisition, technology and logistics John Young believes that program costs will drop to $7.7 billion, down from the September 2007 estimate of $17.5 billion. See also: Sen. Carper release [D-DE].

SAR change

February 2008: The US Air Force Association’s Washington Watch feature notes developments on the C-5/ C-17 fronts:

“Congress ordered an “objectivity/sufficiency” review of the RERP by the Institute for Defense Analyses, due March 1. A RAND review is also being done at the Air Force’s request…”

“Gen. Norton A. Schwartz, head of US Transportation Command, said he “cannot support” terminating C-17 production at this time, given the problems facing the C-5 upgrade program. He declared his belief that the minimum fleet now is 205 C-17s… at a briefing on Capitol Hill.”

At present, total American C-17 orders sit at just over 190 aircraft.

Nov 19/07: SAR – RERP critical cost breach.The Pentagon releases their latest Selected Acquisition Report, and offers their official view re: program costs.

“C-5 RERP (Reliability Enhancement and Reengining Program) – The SAR was submitted to report a unit cost increase of more than 25% to the current baseline estimate and more than 50% to the original baseline, which resulted in a “critical” Nunn-McCurdy breach. Program costs increased $6,168.3 million (+54.4%) from $11,337.9 million to $17,506.2 million, due primarily to a revised program estimate based on an analysis of prime contractor production proposal data, System Development and Demonstration (SDD) actuals, and commercial pricing data.”

A critical cost estimate breach forces re-justification of the entire program under the USA’s Nunn-McCurdy legislation, which covers weapons acquisition.

SAR change

Oct 17/07: Flight International reports that the USAF has asked Airbus for information about the A380F freighter version of its super-jumbo jet, and speculates that it may be connected with the C-5AMP/RERP’s rising costs. DID looks at the A380F, whose 150t (33,000 pound) capacity surpasses even the C-5. There may be a connection, but it may or may not be the connection Flight International thinks.

Are you pondering what we’re pondering? See: “USAF Talking to Airbus About A380 Air Force 1, C-5 Replacement?” for the full story and analysis.

FY 2007

RERP blows cost breach; Infrastructure build-out.

C-5 Galaxy
(click to view full)

Sept 27/07: US Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne declares Lockheed Martin’s C-5 Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining (RERP) program in violation of Nunn-McCurdy cost inflation triggers, which require the Pentagon to notify Congress when cost growth on a major acquisition program reaches 15%. If increases reach 25%, the Defense Department must re-justify the program. Lockheed and its supporters are contesting the Air Force’s cost estimates, arguing that the RERP’s costs will grow at rates below the Nunn-McCurdy threshold notification requirement. The notification comes amidst Congressional fights over spending to modernize Lockheed C-5s versus new Boeing C-17s. See the “Additional Readings” section below, and also Aviation Week:

“According to Congressional Research Service defense analyst Christopher Bolkcom, in “then-year” dollars, the Air Force believes the total RERP program will cost $16.1 billion, versus Lockheed’s projection of $11.7 billion and the most recent Selected Acquisition Report’s estimate of $11.3 billion. Another Capitol Hill source has said Air Force forecasts reach $17.8 billion.”

Sept 27/07: RERP Re-baselined. A contract modification for $133.3 million for C-5 Reliability Enhancement and Re-engineering Program (RERP) System Development Re-baseline Engineering Change Proposal. This contract is a modification to an existing contract. At this time, $16.3 million has been obligated (F33657-02-C-2000, P00139).

April 30/07: RERP Lot 1a. A $23 million fixed-price-incentive-firm contract for advance procurement of long lead/ advance buy items for Lot 1 of the Low Rate Initial Production for the C-5M Reliability Enhancements and Re-engining program (RERP). At this time, total funds have been obligated. Solicitations and negotiations were complete April 2007 (FA8625-07-C-6471).

March 26/07: Infrastructure. A DID reader writes:

“I enjoy your articles covering various military spending. I have been checking your aircraft transport listings and haven’t seen much about the C5A. My reason for asking here in Martinsburg, WVA the Air Guard (167th) is spending between 300 million and 400 million to completely rebuild the base that was used for C130H to C5A. The work they’re doing on the other side of the field is absolutely amazing, huge new hangars, new runways and taxiways, construction crews working day and night. I find the amount of money being spent to be simply unbelievable with all of the spare capacity at BRAC’ed air bases. I guess Sen Byrd is spending house ways and means money instead of DoD to get it through, but I was wondering what are you folks hearing? You really got to see it to believe it, and you hear next to nothing in the media. Can your organization tell me anything about the Air Forces plan for the C5A and whats up at the 167th — Big money being spent.”

April 9/07: SAR – more C-5 AMPs. The Pentagon releases its Selected Acquisition Reports for the December 2006 reporting period, and the C-5 AMP program is listed due to cost increases: C-5 AMP (Avionics Modernization Program) costs increased $551.2 million (+64.1%), from $859.3 million to $1,410.5 million. The primary reason is a quantity increase from 59 to 110 kits (+51 kits, +$291.4 million), and associated increases in initial spares, peculiar support equipment, and other weapon system costs (+229.1 million).

SAR change

March 22/07: AMP Lot 5k. A $23.4 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for C-5 AMP production Lot V kits and spares. At this time, total funds have been obligated and work will be complete May 2009 (F33657-98-C-0006/P00167).

Dec 22/06: a $16.7 million cost-plus-award fee contract modification. This is a modification to the C-5 Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining Program (RERP). This undefinitized contract action will correct 4 of the 14 Avionics Modernization Program (AMP) waivers, incorporate functionally from the AMP Block Cycle Change (BCC) Cycle Change 2006 software build, and address specific high priority issues. At this time, $8 million have been obligated, and work will be complete June 2007 (F33657-02-C-2000/P00119).

March 7/07: C-5 justification. In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee Air & Land Forces Subcommittee, Congressional Research Service defense specialist Christopher Bolkcom says [PDF]:

“Current estimates of the per-aircraft cost of AMP and RERP are expected to be approximately one-third that of a new C-17, and the C-5 will carry twice the C-17’s payload. The C-5 also has superior load/off load capabilities. The upgraded aircraft (called the C-5M), is also expected to have greatly improved mission capable rates. It may be noteworthy that during Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, DoD leased Russian An-124 aircraft to carry outsize and oversize cargo because not enough C-5 aircraft were available. The An-124 Condor is a strategic lift aircraft larger than, but comparable to the C-5. As Figure 1 below illustrates, the Air Force has spent $170 million since FY2002 for An- 124 missions. It also appears that the number of An-124 missions is accelerating. FY07 figures already are on par with FY05 figures, and the fiscal year is not yet half over. While the C-5 may not be as modern as the C-17, or able to operate from as many runways, the fact that DOD has to outsource missions to Russian aircraft indicates that the C-5 still offers important capabilities that other U.S. aircraft may not be able to satisfy.”

DID will simply note the assumption that AN-124s were leased due to a shortage of C-5s, rather than a shortage of C-5s and C-17s. The testimony also includes program and operating cost data for both the C-5 and C-17 aircraft.

Dec 8/06: Process improvement. USAF Air Mobility Command officials announced Dover Air Force Base, DE as one of 3 central sites selected for future C-5 Galaxy isochronal inspections of the entire aircraft. Two additional C-5 ISO inspection sites, one at an Air National Guard base and another at an Air Force Reserve base, will be announced at a later date. During these ISO inspections, aircraft maintainers look for and repair problems in every system.

The US Air Force is reducing C-5 ISO inspection sites from 8 to 3 in order to centrally schedule the inspection from a fleet-wide perspective. Meanwhile, process improvements will aim to reduce “flow days” required to complete a C-5 ISO to a consistent number across the fleet, and reduce waiting time. If the system works, it would add an estimated average of 2.5 availability-days to every C-5 in the fleet, which equates to about 300 more sorties per year, or 10,000 pallets. USAF release.

Nov 30/06: Training. Flight Safety Services Corp. in Centennial, CO received an $18.1 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for C-5 Aircrew Training Systems Contract-Fund option 8. It covers students throughout and fixed operations, maintenance and support from Oct 1/06 through Sept 30/07. This work will be complete by September 2007. The Headquarters Ogden Air Logistics Center at Hill Air Force Base, UT issued the contract (F42630-99-C-0170/P00163).

Nov 17/06: C-5M #2 flies. The 2nd of 3 C-5M AMP/RERP aircraft that will comprise the new test set takes flight for the first time from Dobbins Air Reserve Base, GA. The first test aircraft first flew June 19/06 and has logged more than 51 flight hours to this point. C-5s that have completed only the AMP program, however, have logged more than 4,000 flight hours, many of which were flown in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The first C-5M completed dynamic taxi testing at the Air Force Flight Test Center at Edwards Air Force Base, CA in August 2006. This latest aircraft will be used mostly for utilities and subsystem tests, airfield performance, and diagnostics testing. Both of these aircraft were originally C-5B models. A 3rd test aircraft to be brought up to C-5M standards, a C-5A, is currently in the final stages of modernization and is scheduled to fly later in 2006.
Nov 3/06: Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center commander Maj. Gen. Robin E. Scott signs the C-5 AMP Qualification Operational Test & Evaluation (QOT&E) report, which provided a progress update on the C-5M program for the low rate initial production decision. The test team recognized that the C-5 AMP “enhances existing strategic airlift,” but still has limitations. Source.

FY 2006

1st C-5M (RERP) done, flies.

C-5M test flight
(click to view full)

USAF story.

Aug 8/06: A $6.3 million cost-plus-award fee contract modification. This action provides for an expansion of supply support and development for C-5 RERP. At this time $411,000 has been obligated. This work will be completed by August 2008(F33657-02-C-2000/P00092).

July 26/06: C-5M OpEval. The C-5 RERP re-engining program’s Operational Assessment begins. Source.

July 11/06: The C-5 AMP AFOTEC QOT&E test team completes the last test event. Source.

June 28/06: Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center (AFOTEC) commander Maj. Gen. Robin E. Scott signs the C-5 RERP operational assessment test plan. Source.

June 19/06: 1st C-5M flight. The first flight of the C-5M, the new designation given to the C-5 aircraft upgraded under RERP, occurs. Source.

C-5M 1st flights.

May 26/06: Sub-contractors. Eagle Tool and Machine Co., Inc. in Springfield, OH received a $7.5 million fixed price with economic price adjustment contract for 104 (each) landing gear cylinder and piston assemblies applicable to the C-5 aircraft. At this time, total funds have been obligated. Solicitations began March 2006 and negotiations were complete May 2006 (FA8203-06-C-0165).

May 16/06: 1st re-engining. The first C-5 RERP modification to re-engine the planes is complete. Source.

April 21/06: AMP’s Eval resumed. Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center (AFOTEC) leadership resumes the C-5 AMP’s Qualification Operational Test & Evaluation (QOT&E). Source”.

March 28/06: Flight Safety Services Corp. in Centennial, CO received a $7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for C-5 Aircrew Training Systems Contract-Fund Option, CLIN installation, integration and testing of the AMP Production Kits. At this time, total funds have been obligated. The scheduled completion date is March 2008. The Headquarters Ogden Air Logistics Center at Hill Air Force Base, UT issued the contract (F42630-99-C-0170/P00144).

March 21/06: Infrastructure. Burns & McDonnell in Kansas City, MO received a $20.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for construction of a C-5 corrosion control hangar. Work will be performed in Martinsburg, WVA and is expected to be complete by Oct. 31, 2007. Bids were solicited via the World Wide Web on Oct. 24, 2005, and 9 bids were received by the U.S. Property and Fiscal Office for West Virginia, Buckhannon, WVA (W912L8-06-C-0002).

Feb 2/06: Training. Flight Safety Services Corp. in Centennial, CO received a $5 million firm fixed price contract modification for C-5 Aircrew Training Systems Contract-Fund Option, CLINs for Dover Modernization Program (AMP) Kits. At this time, total funds have been obligated, and work will be complete by November 2006. The Headquarters Ogden Air Logistics Center at Hill Air Force Base, UT issued the contract (F42630-99-C-0170/P00142)

Jan 19/06: AMP Lot 4. A $33.3 million firm fixed price contract modification for C-5 AMP Production Lot IV Kits, Support, Spares and Maintenance Training Device Spares. This work will be complete in June 2008, and total funds have been obligated. Negotiations were complete in December 2005 (F33657-98-C-0006/P00161).

Nov 10/05: A $98 million firm-fixed-price, time-and-material and cost reimbursable contract. It will provide supply support, engineering and technical support, and software maintenance services to C-5 Galaxys modified under the Avionics Modernization Program (AMP), plus replenishment spares and non-warranty repair.

Solicitations began July 2005, and 1 proposal was received. Negotiations were complete November 2005, and work will be complete by November 2010. The Headquarters Warner Robins Air Logistics Center in Robins Air Force Base, GA issued the contract (FA8525-06-D-0001).

Oct 12/05: AMP Eval Paused. Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center (AFOTEC) leadership pauses the C-5 AMP’s QUOT&E evaluation. Source.

FY 2005

1st C-5 AMP delivered; C-5 AMP OpEval; C-5 RERP begins.

C-5, Truckin’
(click to view full)

Sept 13/05: Lockheed Martin reaches a critical milestone as technicians install the first engine pylon on a Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining Program (RERP) test aircraft. Installation of the new pylons, designed and built by Goodrich Aerospace, prepares the aircraft for the new General Electric CF6-80C2 engines which will be installed later in 2005.

The new General Electric CF6-80C2 engines are very widely used on passenger jets, and currently power the President’s Boeing 747, Air Force One. The engine delivers more than 50,000 pounds of thrust per engine, allowing the C-5Ms to carry more than 270,000 pounds and take off and land in distances as short as 5,000 feet. The new C-5 engines deliver 22% more thrust, achieve 30% shorter takeoff distances, enable 58% faster climb, and have a 99.98% departure reliability rate in commercial service, providing a ten-fold improvement in reliability and maintainability over the current TF39 engines. Lockheed Martin release.

Sept 7/05: AMP eval begins. AFOTEC testers began the C-5 AMP’s Qualification Operational Test & Evaluation (QOT&E). Source.

Jan 24/05: AMP Lot 3. A $59.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to provide for C-5 AMP Production Lot III Kits, Installation Option, Spares and Support. Total funds have been obligated. This work will be complete by December 2007. Negotiations were completed December 2004 (F33657-98-C-0006, P00126).

October 2004: 1st C-5 AMP delivered. The first upgraded C-5 AMP aircraft with modern avionics, wiring, etc. is delivered to the Air Force. Source.

1st C-5A+

October 2004: C-5 RERP begins. The first C-5 RERP modification to re-engine the planes begins. Source.

May 5/04: Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center commander Maj. Gen. Felix Dupre signs the C-5 AMP qualification operational test and evaluation plan. Source.

Dec 29/03: A $42.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 18 C-5 AMP kits. Total funds have been obligated, and work will be complete by March 2005. Solicitation began August 2002, and negotiations were completed March 2003 (F33657-98-C-0006, P00110).

FY 2003 and Earlier

Avionics bought; AMP work begins.

C-5, Antarctica
(click to view full)

June 6/03: A $16.7 million contract modification for a C-5 AMP engineering change proposal – the addition of the Integrated Standby Instrument System. At this time, $6.3 million of the funds has been obligated, and work will be complete by August 2004 (F33657-98-C-0006, P00093).

April 3/03: A $20.3 million firm-fixed-price/cost-plus-award-fee contract modification to provide for support of the C-5 AMP. At this time, all funds have been obligated. Solicitation began in August 2002; negotiations were completed in March 2003, and work will be complete by July 2004 (F33657-98-C-0006, P00080).

June 12/02: AMP begins. The first aircraft to be modified under C-5 AMP is brought into Lockheed Martin’s Marietta, GA facility. Source.

AMP Begins

March 25/02: A $5.3 million cost-plus-award fee contract modification to provide for 1 Lot global air traffic management and airworthiness certification support, in support of the C-5 Avionics Modernization Program. At this time, $2.1 million of the funds has been obligated. This work will be complete December 2003 (F33657-98-C-0006, P00048).

Feb 11/02: A $10 million cost-plus-award-fee and firm-fixed price with economic price adjustment contract modification to provide for FY 2002 engineering manufacturing development effort for the C-5 Avionics Modernization program. At this time, the total amount of funds has been obligated. This work will be completed February 2002 (F33657-98-C-0006, P00053).

Dec 21/99: a $28.8 million modification to a cost-plus-award-fee contract, F33657-98-C-0006-P00011, to provide for FY2000 engineering and manufacturing development in support of the Avionics Modernization Program for the C-5 aircraft. Expected contract completion date is September 2001.

Jan 22/99: a $120.5 million cost-plus-award-fee contract to provide for engineering and manufacturing development through FY 2002 for Avionics Modernization Program kits to be applicable to 126 C-5 aircraft. These kits will include Global Air Traffic Management and All Weather Flight Control systems. There were 17 firms solicited and 2 proposals received. Solicitation issue date was May 15/98. Negotiations were completed Nov 16/98, and the expected contract completion date is October 2005 (F33657-98-C-0006).

Base AMP contract.

Additional Readings Background: C-5M

• Lockheed Martin – C-5 Modernization Program

• GlobalSecurity.org – C-5 Galaxy

• The Aviation Zone, ‘Home of the Heavies’ – C-5 Galaxy. We especially love the C-5 flyby sound file [.WAV].

• GE Aircraft Engines – Model CF680C2: High Reliability, Long Life, Low Fuel Burn

Background: C-5M Program

• Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center (Aug 1/07) – Another Galaxy, Another Test: Operational Test and Evaluation of the C-5M. AFOTEC’s historian offers a detailed chronicle of the entire C-5 Galaxy program, from the cost overruns and wing problems that plagued its early years to the present C-5 AMP/RERP program.

• USAF, Wright-Patterson AFB – C-5 Avionics Modernization Program. Solicitation.

• The University of Texas at Austin: Studies in Ethics, Safety, and Liability for Engineers – The C-5 Galaxy: A Question of Need?

• US Joint Aircraft Survivability Program Office – Innovation in the C-5 LFT&E Program. Unfortunately, the old link no longer works and the fragments reproduced on this page are all that’s left. If any readers can give us pointers to the full document, or send us a copy, it was interesting.

• Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine (March 7/12) – Tweak My Ride.

• Lexington Institute (Oct 4/10) – Upgrades To Giant C-5 Galaxy Airlifter Greatly Increase Performance & Reliability. Quantifies some of the C-5M’s advantages over the C-17 in terms of cargo and range.

• USAF (Sept 16/10) – New facility supports C-5 Galaxy software testing. “The building itself cost $658,000, but another $15 million investment was needed for the set up of the lab, including the cockpit wiring and engineering the lab capability, writing the simulation software and validating everything works as intended.”

News & Views

• Aviation Week’s Defense Technology International (Jun 13/07) – A400M could Dominate Strategic Lift. With no C-5 production, and no C-17 production, it would be the only Western choice remaining, competing with Russia’s AN-124s. Also covers the C-17 program, and C-5 AMP/RERP upgrades. There is some question as to whether the upgrades can produce the required readiness rates.

• USAF (Nov 23/07) – AMC commander discusses modernization, recapitalization issues. Among other topics discussed, Gen. Lichte favors re-engining only the C-5Bs, and acquiring more C-17s. Congressional priorities eventually gave him exactly that, in a very roundabout way.

• Defense News (Oct 29/07) – Airplanes on Life Support. Moseley, Wynne Plead: Let USAF Pull the Plug. They’re talking about aircraft that can’t fly but must be kept per Congressional directives, which includes a number of C-130E Hercules and KC-135E Stratotankers. It also talks about the C-5 programs, and thoughts of discarding the C-5As.

• Gannett’s Air Force Times (Oct 29/07) – MRAPs going to Iraq on Russian cargo planes. “The Air Force has been forced to use Russian commercial cargo jets to rush Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles from the U.S. to Iraq because it does not have enough C-5 and C-17 planes to do the job, the service’s top civilian official said recently…” Ever consider sealift?

• Vacaville Reporter (Oct 29/07) – C-5, C-17 topic of planned study.

• DID (Oct 21/07) – USAF Talking to Airbus About A380 Air Force 1, C-5 Replacement? But how serious are they on either score?

• Gannett’s Air force Times (Oct 19/07) – Bill wants a study on airlift capabilities.

• Macon Telegraph (Oct 7/07) – C-5 future hangs on Air Force, Lockheed price differences. “The Galaxy fleet – sixty 1960s-vintage C-5As, forty-nine 1980s-era C-5Bs and two C-5Cs for use by NASA – has been plagued by nagging deficiencies. The C-5Bs were mission ready 66.6 percent of the time last year. The C-5As were much worse at 49.1 percent. The C-5’s counterpart, the much newer C-17 strategic airlifter, registered reliability of almost 85 percent.”

• Flight International (Oct 1/07) – USAF rounds on Congressional C-5 protection

• Defense News (Oct 1/07) – C-5 Upgrade Effort Imperiled by Cost Confusion.

• Stars & Stripes (Oct 1/07) – ‘Winglets’ could save Air Force millions on fuel. The C-5 fleet might be a candidate.

• Flight International (March 20/07) – Latest C-5 flies into budget storm.

• Government Executive (March 8/07) – Lawmakers divided over cargo plane options.

• House Armed Services Committee Air & Land Forces Subcommittee Hearing (March 7/07) – Statement Of Christopher Bolkcom, Specialist In National Defense, Congressional Research Service, On Air Force And Army Airlift And Aerial Re-Fueling Fixed-Wing Aircraft Programs [PDF].

• Air Force Link (Sept 25/06) – Dover AFB receives new maintenance trainer. A training simulator for maintenance? Yes, and it’s working well for the C-5M AMP program.

• Air Force Link (Feb 8/06) – C-5 Galaxy aircraft engine test successful.

• DID (Nov 14/05) – Delayed Pentagon Mobility Study Finally Offers a Preview.

• GE (Sept 16/04) – GE Engine Certified for U.S. Air Force C-5 Galaxy Program.

• Aviation Today (Feb 1/04) – GATM-izing Galaxy: New C-5 Avionics.

• USAF Agile Acquisition magazine (February 2004) – Teamwork, Innovation Eliminate Travis’ C-5 ‘Cannibalization’ Jet.

• Air Force Magazine (January 2004) – Saving the Galaxy.

• Aviation Today (Aug 1/2000) – C-5 Modernization, Step By Step.

• AFA Air Force Magazine (December 1998) – Nickel Grass: The airlift that saved Israel.

Americas

• General Dynamics is being tapped to support the US Army’s fleet of Stryker vehicles. The awarded contract modification has a value of $11 million and provides for the supplying the entire Stryker program with spare parts. The US military plans to use the Stryker as future backbone of its 8 US Army and 1 National Guard medium armored brigades. The improved double V-hull design of the vehicle provides better protection against IED’s and mines by channeling the blast force away from the occupants. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order. Work is expected to be completed by February 2019.

• The Navy is awarding Boeing with a firm-fixed-price delivery order in support of its fleet of P-8 aircrafts. The contract has a value of $13.3 million and provides for the delivery of consumable spare parts. In times of a renewed naval arms race maritime surveillance and patrol is becoming more and more important. The P-8 Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft will be essential to this surveillance and patrol capability. The aircraft’s airframe accomplishes a wide range of tasks. It can search and hunt submarines, monitor sea traffic, launch missile attacks on naval or land targets as required, and can act as a flying communications relay for friendly forces. The P-8A has 11 weapon hard points: 5 in the rotary weapon bay, 4 under the wings, and 2 under the fuselage. Weapon load can exceed 10t/ 22,000 pounds, and all hard points have digital weapon interfaces. Work will be performed at the company’s location in St. Louis, Missouri and is expected to be completed by March 16th, 2020.

• The Naval Sea Systems Command is contracting shipbuilder Huntington Ingalls for initial work on LPD 30. The awarded cost-plus-fixed-fee, not-to-exceed contract allows for the procurement of long lead time material and non-recurring engineering activities at a cost of $165.51 million. LPD 30 will be the first Flight II ship of the LPD 17 Amphibious Transport Dock ship class. LPD-17 San Antonio class amphibious assault support vessels are just entering service with the US Navy, and 11 ships of this class are eventually slated to replace up to 41 previous ships. LPD Flight II, keeps the same basic hull, but carries fewer Marines, holds less cargo, and removes a number of elements that add costs. The LPD Flight IIs begin with advanced communication suites and contain all the space one might require to-house and run a full theater command, they can also be equipped to serve in a Ballistic Missile Defense role. Work will be performed at multiple location throughout the continental US, including Pascagoula, Mississippi; Beloit, Wisconsin; Devens, Massachusetts; King of Prussia, Pennsylvania and Warminster, Pennsylvania, among others. Work is expected to be completed by December 2020.

• Government Marketing & Procurement LLC is being contracted to support the activities of the Defense Health Agency. The $18 million firm-fixed-price contract provides for the delivery, installation, configuration, engineering and furnishing of the Vocera Wireless Hands-Free Communications System. The US Army uses Vocera’s hands-free technology to improve operational efficiencies at its medical facilities. A trial held at Evans Army Community Hospital in Colorado showed a 50% decrease in patients that left without being seen. In other department the system improved workflow, sped up nurse response times by 75%, and reduced patient falls by 81%. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of August 1st, 2023.

Middle East & Africa

• Boeing is currently in the process of manufacturing several F-15 fighter jets for Qatar. Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of State for Defense Affairs Dr. Khalid bin Mohamed al-Attiyah recently inaugurated the F-15QA production line at the company’s plant in Missouri. Qatar’s new F-15s will come with a totally remodeled cockpit featuring large panel touch screen displays and a new HUD display developed by BAE systems. The F-15QA, is identical to the F-15SA that Boeing is building for the Royal Saudi Air Force. It has a fly-by-wire flight control system, digital electronic warfare (EW) suite, an infrared search and track (IRST) system, and the Raytheon APG-63(v)3 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar. In a typical escort configuration, the Advanced Eagle can carry 16 AIM-120 AMRAAM, four AIM-9X Sidewinder short-range missiles; and two High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missiles. Neither the Qatari MoD nor Boeing disclosed when deliveries of the F-15 (Qatar Advanced) Eagle will begin, but it has been disclosed that they will run through to the end of 2022. The Middle-Eastern nation ordered a total of 36 fighter jets at a cost of $12 billion.

Europe

• The Swedish government is authorizing its Defense Materiel Administration to finalize the purchase of the Patriot air-defense system. This authorization paves the way for the delivery of four fire units, missiles, spare parts, maintenance systems, training, and technical support. The USA’s MIM-104 Phased Array Tracking Radar Intercept on Target (PATRIOT) anti-air missile system offers an advanced backbone for medium-range air defense, and short-range ballistic missile defense, to America and its allies. The latest PAC-3 configuration boosts a number of advanced capabilities allows it to be used for point defense against ballistic missiles. The North-European country is acquiring the missile system as part of a US foreign military sale at a cost of $3.2 billion.

• The US State Department is determined to approve a possible foreign military sale to Latvia. The Eastern-European nation is looking to purchase 4 UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters and related equipment for an estimated cost of $200 million. UH-60M Black Hawk is a medium-lift, rotary-wing helicopter, essentially a modernized version of the UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter. The Black Hawk features a glass cockpit featuring fly-by-wire Common Avionics Architecture System (CAAS) and a digitized 1553 bus-based avionics suite. The airframe is powered by two General Electric T700-GE-701D engines that generate a maximum take-off power of 2,974kW and one engine inoperative (OEI) power of 1,447kW. The UH-60M can fly at a maximum cruise speed of 280km/h and offers a maximum range of 511km. Some of the major features include wire strike protection system, anti-plow keel beams, rotor de-icing provisions, active vibration control system, foldable stabilizer and tail pylon. The deal includes the four helicopters in standard USG configuration with designated unique equipment and other systems ranging from embedded GPS to FLIR systems.

Asia-Pacific

• Jane’s reports that Georgia’s defense manufacturer Delta is currently fielding a new MEDEVAC vehicle. The AMEV is based on the company’s 4×4 Didgori light armored vehicle (LAV) with the engine compartment at the front. The vehicle is powered by a 6.7-litre V8 turbocharged diesel engine that provides 300hp which enables the vehicle to achieve a maximum road speed of up to 80 mph. The AMEV weights 10.9 tons, which already includes a 1400 lb. payload. The LAV’s hull is constructed from Swedish Armox 500+ steel and adds an additional layer of appliqué passive armor. This package is designed to be rapidly replaced to meet evolving mission requirements or for repair. Role-specific equipment includes a first aid kit, oxygen cylinder with bracket and regulator, oxygen masks, medicine storage, head immobilizer, manual resuscitator, and portable suction equipment. Other medical equipment can be installed when required.

Today’s Video

• Watch: MiG29K races Lamborghini Huracán

Americas

• General Dynamics is being contracted to provide the US Army with 5th Generation Common Hardware Systems. The hybrid contract has a value of $3.9 billion. According to the Army the CHS-5 contract will enable the rapid procurement of total life cycle system management solutions in support of tactical programs. CHS provides state-of-the-art computing and networking equipment that improves connectivity, interoperability, logistics and maintenance support to soldiers, and is positioned as the Army’s primary organization to oversee commercial hardware for the Army’s tactical network. CHS-5 will support Army and Department of Defense (DoD) requirements to acquire flexible, cost effective, shared, and simplified non-developmental C5ISR solutions. Work is scheduled to be completed by August 2023. All work locations and individual funding will be determined with each order.

• Snowbird Environmental Systems is being tapped to cool down the Navy’s Hovercrafts. The awarded contract provides for the delivery of air conditioner units to be installed on the LCACs at a cost of $14 million. The Landing Craft, Air Cushions are high-speed, fully amphibious hovercrafts, that are capable of carrying a 60-ton payload over water and land at speeds in excess of 40 knots and a nominal range of up to 200 nautical miles. Carrying equipment, troops, and/or supplies, the LCAC launches from inside the well deck of an amphibious warship, then travels the waves at high speed, runs right through the surf zone near the beach, and stops at a suitable place on land. This is a two-year base contract with three one-year option periods is scheduled for completion by the end of July 2023. Work will be performed in Florida.

• The US Special Operations Command is looking to upgrade its SATCOM systems. Tampa Microwave is set to provide SOCOM with its Special Operations Forces Deployable Node–Lite requirement at a cost of $70 million. SDN-L is a deployable secure satellite communication system that provides secure voice, video, and data via a lightweight, commercial air transportable kit. The system provides high-capacity voice, data and video capability to small SOF teams (four to eight personnel) operating self-sufficiently at remote locations. It provides those teams with an essential communication capability needed for situational awareness, mission planning, analysis, collaboration, and real-time mission coordination. Work will be performed at the company’s location in St. Petersburg, Florida and a various USSOCOM mission units. Performance is expected to be completed by August 2023.

• The Navy is currently procuring a large quantity of engine components for its F/A-18 E/F and EA 18G aircrafts. General Electric will provide repair and replacement work for 773 F414 engine components under this order. The firm-fixed-priced, performance-based logistics requirements type contract has a value of $630.5 million. The F414 is one of the US Navy’s newest and most advanced aircraft engines. It incorporates advanced technology with the proven design base of its F404 predecessor. The F/A-18E/F provides a 40 percent increase in combat radius, a 50 percent increase in endurance, 25 percent greater weapons payload, three times more ordnance, and is five times more survivable than the F/A-18 A/C models. These major performance improvements are mainly due to the F414-GE-400 engine. Work will be performed in various General Electric supplier locations and in Jacksonville, Florida. Work is expected to be completed by April 2022.

Middle East & Africa

• The government of Kuwait could soon see a significant boost to its missile inventory. The US State Department is determined to approve a foreign military sale of 300 AGM-114R Hellfire missiles for an estimated cost of $30.4 million. The potential sale would also include missile containers, M261 launchers and spare parts. The Hellfire is the USA’s preferred aerial anti-armor missile. Hellfire II missiles comes in several variants. The AGM-114R is a “multi-purpose” missile that comes with guidance and navigation improvements. The 114R is designed to work well against all 3 target types: armored vehicles, fortified positions, or soft/open targets. The principal contractor will be Lockheed Martin.

Europe

• The French Air Force is set to receive some mid-life upgrades for its AWACS fleet as part of a US foreign military sale. Boeing is being awarded with a $9.8 million contract modification and will provide the French Air Force’s E-3F fleet with 40 mission-computing software changes and 17 ground-system software changes. France received 4 E-3F AWACS aircraft between 1991-1992 and undertook its own RSIP improvement program from 2002-2006. France intends to fly the platform until at least 2035. Work will be performed in Kent, Washington, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; and Avord Air Base, France. The work is expected to be completed by June 30, 2020. The total cumulative face value of the contract is $393,5 million.

• The Netherlands may soon receive more torpedoes for its Navy as part of a US foreign military sale. The US State Department is determined to approve the sale of 106 Mk 54 conversion kits for an estimated cost of $169 million. The Royal Netherlands Navy intends to upgrade its current Mk 46 torpedoes to the Mk 54 with the purchase of these kits. The Mk 54 stemmed from the need for a smaller, lighter, but cost-effective advanced torpedo that could be dropped from helicopters, planes, and smaller ships. To achieve this, it combined the expensive Mk-50’s search and homing system with the propulsion system of the Mk 46 torpedo and added off-the-shelf electronic components. Its size improves its ability to go after targets in shallower littoral regions, but the torpedo is designed to work in both deep water and near-shore or shallow environments. The deal would also include torpedo containers, Recoverable Exercise Torpedoes, air launch accessories for rotary wing aircraft and spare parts. The principal contractor will be Raytheon.

Asia-Pacific

• Jane’s reports that Lockheed Martin is currently is co-operating with the Indian Ministry of Defense to discharge defense offset obligations linked to its sales of C-130J-30 Hercules transport aircraft to the Indian Air Force (IAF). The comments follow media reports in India that the MoD has cashed in part of a bank guarantee from Lockheed Martin in relation to a fine linked to an alleged breach of offset obligations tied to the C-130J program. The offset package under discussion was linked to the US government’s sale of a second batch of six C-130Js announced in 2013, which was costed at $1.1 billion. The IAF acquired an initial batch of six aircraft in 2007 for $962 million, although Lockheed Martin’s offset obligations linked to this program have already been met. Sales of both batches of C-130Js were conducted under the US Foreign Military Sales route.

Today’s Video

• Watch: Sikorsky Black Hawk celebrates 40th anniversary

USN MH-60S test
(click to view full)

Hellfire I/II missiles are the USA’s preferred aerial anti-armor missile, and are widely deployed with America’s allies. They equip America’s helicopter fleets (AH-64, AH-1, OH-58D, MH-60S/R), AH-64 and S-70 helicopters flown by its allies, and even Australia and France’s Eurocopter Tiger attack helicopters. Range is officially listed as 9 km/ 5.6 miles.

While Hellfires lack the fast-jet launch capabilities – and correspondingly extended maximum range – of the UK’s MBDA Brimstone missiles, Lockheed Martin’s missile has made big inroads as the world’s high-end helicopter-launched missile. It has also carved out unique niches as tripod-launched coastal defense assets, as the guided missile integrated into American UAVs like the MQ-1 Predator family, and even as a missile option for transport aircraft like the AC-208B Combat Caravan and C-130J/W Hercules.

Lockheed Martin’s Hellfires

AGM-114K-A warhead
(click to view full)

Hellfire II missiles comes in several variants. The AGM-114K is the basic Hellfire II missile, with the standard semi-active laser guidance that allows for flexible designation of targets, and flexible missile attack profiles. It uses a shaped-charge HEAT(High Explosive Anti-Tank) warhead that can destroy armored vehicles, or punch into buildings.

The recently-introduced AGM-114K-A variant adds a blast fragmentation sleeve to the HEAT warhead’s anti-tank capability, giving it added versatility against unarmored targets in the open.

The AM-114M version was originally developed for the Navy; its warhead is solely blast fragmentation, which is effective against boats, lightly armored vehicles, etc.

The AGM-114N variant uses a thermobaric (“metal augmented charge”) warhead that can suck the air out of a cave, collapse a building, or produce an astoundingly large blast radius out in the open.

A new AGM-114R “multi-purpose” Hellfire II is headed into production/ conversion. It adds some guidance and navigation improvements, and goes one step further than the K-A variant: it’s intended to work well against all 3 target types: armored vehicles, fortified positions, or soft/open targets. The “Romeo” will become the mainstay of the future Hellfire fleet, used from helicopters and UAVs, until and unless Hellfire itself is supplanted by the JAGM program. Hellfire systems product manager US Army Lt. Col. Mike Brown:

“One of the most noticeable operational enhancements in the AGM-114R missile is that the pilot can now select the [blast type] while on the move and without having to have a pre-set mission load prior to departure… This is a big deal in insurgency warfare, as witnessed in Afghanistan where the Taliban are fighting in the open and simultaneously planning their next attacks in amongst the local populace using fixed structure facilities to screen their presence.”

The AGM-114R2 goes a step farther, and adds a height of burst sensor to make the 3-way warhead even more useful.

AGM-114P onto MQ-9
(click to view full)

Four more Hellfire variants feature key changes that aren’t related to their warhead types.

The AGM-114L “Longbow Hellfire” adds a millimeter-wave radar seeker, which makes it a “fire-and-forget” missile. It’s integrated with the mast-mounted Longbow radar on AH-64D Apache Longbow helicopters, and AH-1 Cobra family attack helicopters have been tested with different add-ons that would give them similar capabilities. It can also be guided by ship radars, and its fire-and-forget capabilities make it a very useful defense against small boat suicide swarms. The US Navy is taking on Army stocks to use in its Littoral Combat Ship.

The AGM-114P variant is modified for use from UAVs flying at altitude. That requires greater environmental tolerances, as the difference between temperature at launch altitude and near the target can be well over 100 degrees Fahrenheit. The AGM-114P’s 3-axis inertial measuring unit (IMU) also gives it a 360-degree targeting capability, making it easier to fire from UAVs that lack a helicopter’s swivel-and-point maneuverability. Its unique features will also be present in the new AGM-114R, which will succeed it.

The AGM-114Q model is a training round, with an inert mass that’s the same weight as the warhead. It’s used for live-fire training, where it creates less mess.

The TGM M36E7 corresponds to what the USAF would call a “CATM” – a training missile with the seeker head, but no rocket or warhead.

Contracts and Key Events

Naval concept
(click to view full)

Unless otherwise noted, orders are issued by the U.S. Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL, to Hellfire Systems, LLC in Orlando, FL – a Lockheed Martin/ Boeing joint venture.

August 3/18: Hellfire for Kuwait The government of Kuwait could soon see a significant boost to its missile inventory. The US State Department is determined to approve a foreign military sale of 300 AGM-114R Hellfire missiles for an estimated cost of $30.4 million. The potential sale would also include missile containers, M261 launchers and spare parts. The Hellfire is the USA’s preferred aerial anti-armor missile. Hellfire II missiles comes in several variants. The AGM-114R is a “multi-purpose” missile that comes with guidance and navigation improvements. The 114R is designed to work well against all 3 target types: armored vehicles, fortified positions, or soft/open targets. The principal contractor will be Lockheed Martin.

October 30/17: Orbital ATK announced hitting the milestone of delivering its 1,000th tactical motor for the AGM-114 Hellfire missile to military customers. The motor is currently in service with the US Armed Forces as well as 16 other allied nations, and is utilized on dozens of platforms ranging from helicopters, aircraft, unmanned aircraft, land combat vehicles and combat ships. The company is also working on upgrading the Hellfire rocket motor to include insensitive munitions, called the IM Hellfire, which will be produced exclusively at the Orbital’s new Large Tactical Motor Manufacturing Facility in Rocket Center, West Virginia. Also in development is a rocket pulse motors capable of operating at extremely cold temperatures that provide increased range and flexibility for both tactical and defense applications.

August 28/17: Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $547.9 million US Army contract for the production and delivery of Hellfire II air-to-ground attack missiles. As many as 7,359 Hellfire II missiles, in a number of air-to-ground variants, and including their containers will be produced by September 20, 2020 at the firm’s facility in Orlando, Florida. The Hellfire is the primary air-to-ground short-range precision guided missile for US helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and is in service with many other nations. It also comes in ground and ship-launched models.

March 19/17: The British government has been cleared by the US State department to move forward with the purchase of AGM-114R1/R2 Hellfire II Semi-Active Laser (SAL) missiles. Estimated to value around $150 million, the foreign military sales contract will involve the transfer of 1,000 rounds from existing US military stocks, as well as the provision of logistics support services and other related program support. London previously ordered 500 AGM-114s back in 2015.

May 16/16: The UAE has been cleared to purchase 4,000 AGM-114 R/K Hellfire missiles after the sale was cleared by the US State Department. Congress was notified of the potential $476 million deal on May 11 which will be delivered over the next three years in increments of 1,000 to 1,500 missiles by Lockheed Martin. According to the DSCA, “the proposed sale will improve the UAE’s capability to meet current and future threats and provide greater security for its critical infrastructure.”

May 4/16: France has requested to amend a previously-approved Foreign Military Sale of AGM-114K1A Hellfire missiles and increase the number ordered from 112 to 200. The estimated cost of the amendment is expected to be around $25 million. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) says the missiles “will directly support French forces actively engaged in operations in Mali and Northern Africa.”

February 16/16: A month after it was reported to have accidentally been sent to Cuba, the US has regained possession of its Hellfire air-to-ground missile. The inert munition had been used in NATO training exercises in Spain during 2014, however, shipping errors had it mistakenly sent from Paris to Havana instead of Miami. Further comment on specific defense trade licensing cases by the US State Department is restricted by federal law, but a team from Lockheed Martin were dispatched to retrieve the missile and take it home.

January 11/16: A dummy US Hellfire missile has been accidentally sent to Cuba, sparking concerns that its technology may be leaked to US adversaries. The missile had initially been on loan to Spain and was being used for NATO training exercises. It then seemed to go on a bit of a wander through Europe, first to Germany and then through France to Charles de Gaulle airport. Instead of being shipped to Florida, it was loaded onto an Air France flight to Havana. Despite a recent thaw in relations between Washington and its long time Caribbean adversary, demands to have the Hellfire returned have so far gone unanswered. An investigation is under way as to whether the re-routing was a deliberate act of espionage or just incompetence. Needless to say, someone is getting fired for that blunder.

The Iraqi government’s fight against the Islamic State gets another boost as the DCSA approved an $800 million sale of 5,000 Hellfire missiles. The sale also includes ten Captive Air Training Missiles as well as related equipment and support. A spokesperson for the US-led coalition stated that the territory held by IS in Iraq has shrunk by 40% from its maximum expansion in 2015. Let’s hope these Hellfires get delivered to the right people this time.

December 09/15: Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $318.3 million modification to a foreign military sales contract. The deal is to provide Hellfire II missile hardware/component production for South Korea, Egypt, Pakistan, Iraq, India, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Indonesia, with completion expected by October 2018. Fiscal 2015 other procurement (Army) funds in the amount of $56,590,878 were obligated at the time of the award. The contract comes as US allies are rushing to increase stockpiles of cruise missiles and other military hardware which has had manufacturers struggling to fill orders.

November 12/15: The United Kingdom has requested 500 AGM-114R Hellfire II Semi-Active Laser missiles from US stocks, with the State Department approving the sale. The potential deal – estimated to value $80 million – also covers logistics support and spares. The UK already operates the Hellfire I, with Italy and France also recently requesting Hellfire missiles, for use with Reaper UAVs and Tiger attack helicopters respectively.

November 6/15: France has also requested 200 AGM-114R2 Hellfire II missiles from the US, with the State Department also approving the request. The potential deal – now referred to Congress – is estimated to value $30 million, and the missiles are set to equip French forces operating in sub-Saharan Africa. The French Army’s Tiger attack helicopters will deploy the new missiles, with France also now developing a replacement missile for its Hellfires, known as the FAST-M.

June 5/15: Lebanon has requested 1,000 AGM-114 Hellfire II missiles from the US, with this potential deal estimated to value $146 million. The missile is in service with many countries worldwide, with a href=”http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/iraq-wants-hellfires-lots-and-lots-of-them-026078/”>Iraq ordering 5,000 of the missiles in August last year.

Aug 14/14: The Senate Armed Services Committee and Senate Appropriations Defense subcommittee have deferred action on a Pentagon request to shift $7.1 million from other accounts into the Hellfire missile program, as part of a larger reprogramming request. Note that deferral is not denial, it just means that other things need to happen first.

The FY 2014 budget had expected to buy 550 missiles for $58.5 million, but use in the field leaves the Pentagon $7.1 million short in order to keep stocks stable. Sources: Defense News, “Defense Panels Hold Up $7M Funding Shift for Hellfire Missiles – for Now”.

April 9/14: Hellfire for LCS. The US Navy confirms that they have picked the AGM-114L Hellfire Longbow radar-guided missile as the SUW Package’s initial missile. Hellfire Longbow won’t have any more range than Raytheon’s Griffin (~3.5 nmi), but the radar seeker allows the ship’s radar to perform targeting for salvos of multiple fire-and-forget missiles against incoming boat swarms. In contrast, the Griffin’s laser designation must target one boat at a time, from a position that’s almost certain to have a more restricted field of view.

Lockheed Martin says that the missile has had 3 successful test firings (q.v. Jan 14/14), and there are plans to test-fire the missile from LCS itself in 2014, using a new vertical launcher. Unfortunately for Lockheed Martin, there’s no immediate prospect of orders from the Navy, as its AGM-114L missiles would be drawn from existing US Army stocks. Those have shelf life limitations anyway, which is one reason the Army intends to begin buying JAGM laser/radar guided Hellfire derivatives around FY 2017. On the the other hand, US Navy deployment opens a market niche around the world, so future orders are possible. Sources: DoD Buzz, “Navy Adds Hellfire Missiles to LCS” | USNI News, “Navy Axes Griffin Missile In Favor of Longbow Hellfire for LCS”.

Feb 10/14: FY 2014. Hellfire Systems, LLC in Orlando, FL receives a $157.4 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for FY 2014 Hellfire II missile production requirements that include foreign military sales to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Indonesia.

All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2012 – 2014 budgets. Work will be performed in Orlando, FL, with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/16. US Army Contracting Command ? Redstone Arsenal (Missile) at Redstone, AL manages the contract, and acts an an FMS agent for other countries (W31P4Q-11-C-2042, PO 0068).

FY 2014 order: USA, Jordan, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia

Jan 14/14: Naval test. The US Army and Navy conduct multiple naval test firings of Hellfire Longbow millimeter-wave radar guided missiles, targeting high-speed boat targets at ranges of up to 6 km. The tests were conducted from a launcher aboard a 65-foot surface craft, using progressively more complex scenarios.

The swarming boat threat is subject to much discussion in an era where the boats themselves can be explosive-packed weapons on suicide missions, with the ability to do serious damage to high-end ships. Ship-based solutions are beginning to proliferate, even if purchases and installation remain slow. Lockheed Martin has experience with Hellfire as a helicopter-mounted solution to the problem, so the extension is natural, and the Longbow variant’s fire-and-forget operations is especially well suited to swarm defense. Lockheed Martin also leads the Freedom Class Littoral Combat Ship team.

On the other hand, Longbow Hellfire doesn’t have the range that LCS ships really need. They’re also a bit late to the maritime game. Raytheon’s shorter-range and cheaper AGM-176 Griffin is already in naval use, and the Javelin/Centurion missile & launcher combination for small boats can tie into Raytheon’s land force customer base. Lockheed Martin would also be feeling a bit of pressure from MBDA, who are running demonstrations that tout their dual-mode laser/radar guided Brimstone missile. Sources: Lockheed Martin, “Longbow Missiles Demonstrate Littoral Attack Capability”.

Sept 26/13: A $248.7 million firm-fixed price contract modification for 3,318 Hellfire II missiles in containers (various models) for the US Army, Navy and Air Force; as well as exports to Saudi Arabia, Korea, Kuwait, the Netherlands and Australia.

Work will be performed in Orlando, FL, and purchases will include funding will be from US FY 2011 through 2013 budgets. This was a non-competitive acquisition with one bid solicited and one received (W31P4Q-11-C-0242, PO 0049).

Aug 20/13: UAE. An $8.2 million firm-fixed-price, no-option contract modification with a cumulative maximum value of $886.2 million for Hellfire II foreign military sales (FMS) offset requirement to the United Arab Emirates. It’s part of the USA’s contract, because it’s also the umbrella for other buyers who want to take advantage of the USA’s volume discount. The benefits flow both ways, ans an order of this size will help keep prices down for the US military.

Work will be performed in Orlando, FL. Only 1 bid was solicited, as is common in these situations (W31P4Q-11-C-0242, PO 0043).

Dec 20/12: A $114.1 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy various models of Hellfire II tactical missiles in containers. Work will be performed in Orlando, FL with an estimated completion date of Feb 28/14. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0242). The overall contract has now reached $730.5 million.

Oct 4/12: Finalized. A $403.5 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy various models of Hellfire II missiles. Work will be performed in Orlando, FL with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0242).

Looks like they’ve finalized the underlying contract.

Contract finalized

Jan 5/12: A $53.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy more Hellfire II missiles, type and numbers unspecified. Inquiries reveal that the underlying contract, announced on Aug 1/11, still hasn’t been finalized.

Work will be performed in Orlando, FL, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-11-C-0242).

USMC AH-1Z: Launch!
(click to view full)

Aug 1/11: A $159 million firm-fixed-price, unfinalized contract begins procurement of 3,097 AGM-114N/P/Q/R Hellfire II missiles in containers; 16 Hellfire II guidance test articles to verify production lot performance; and engineering, equipment, and production services. The new multi-year contract’s final terms and number of missiles remain under negotiation, but this contract allows production to continue while those details are hammered out. FBO.gov sets the contract’s limits as:

“HELLFIRE II FY11-14 production contract requirements for a maximum total quantity of 24,000 HELLFIRE II missiles in containaers, conversion of a maximum total quantity of 1,800 HELLFIRE II missiles from one model to another HELLFIRE II model, and production of a maximum total quantity of 5,832 HELLFIRE II spare parts, consisting of 40 different national stock numbers (varying quantities).”

Work will be performed in Orlando, FL, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/14. Since the missiles have only 1 owning manufacturer, 1 sole-source bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0242).

New multi-year contract

Additional Readings

• Lockheed Martin – Hellfire II Missile

• Boeing – History: Rockwell International AGM-114 Hellfire

• Global Security – AGM-114 Hellfire Modular Missile System (HMMS)

• Designation Systems – Boeing/Lockheed Martin AGM-114 Hellfire

• DID – JAGM: Joint Common Missile Program. JAGM will replace AGM-114 Hellfire, *GM-71 TOW, and AGM-65 Maverick missile variants on Army and Navy helicopters, UAVs, and fighter aircraft… if the program is not cancelled first.

Americas

• Leonardo DRS is being contracted to provide the US Army with a new C-UAS capability. The awarded contract modification has a value of $13.25 million and provides for engineering and testing of the Mobile Low, Slow Small Unmanned Aerial System Integrated Defeat System (MLIDS) Increment 1. The C-UAS capability is essentially a vehicle-mounted weapons system that is capable of neutralizing small UAVs. MLIDS is a collection of different sensors and weapon systems that have been integrated by DRS to fill the C-UAS mission and mounted on top of two separate all-terrain mine resistant ambush-protected vehicles, or MATV. MATVs can be equipped with either an elevated electro-optical infrared system or with a combination of radar and a variety of kinetic weapons suitable for countering the threat posed by enemy UAVs. Work will be performed at the company’s location in St. Louis, Missouri and is expected to be completed by May 2019.

• The US Army is tapping Leidos for further work on the Saturn Arch program. The awarded contract modification provides for sustained operations and support services at a cost of $60 million. The Saturn Arch Program began in 2010, with an effort to implement intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities to a special aircraft fitted with state-of-the-art sensor technology to identify and assist in removing IEDs from the battlefield in Afghanistan. It uses a variety of platforms and sensor assets for detecting and assisting in the removal of enemy IEDs and other threats. Aerial platforms including manned and unmanned aircraft use electro-optical and infrared sensors, ground-penetrating radar, and radio-frequency detectors to locate IEDs, allowing friendly forces to either avoid or disable them. It also allows trends to be mapped to develop a picture of where the weapons are most concentrated in operations areas. Work will be performed in Bridgewater, Virginia, with an estimated completion date of 16th September 2019.

• The US Navy’s next Littoral Combat Ship is currently entering its post-shakedown availability (PSA). Austal is being awarded a cost-plus-award-fee order with a value of $14.8 million. The company will provide engineering and management services in support of the USS Tulsa (LCS 16), including work specification development, prefabrication efforts and material procurement. The USS Tulsa is an LCS-2 Independence class vessel which is a futuristic but practical high-speed trimaran, based on Austal designs and experience with vessels like the US Marines’ Westpac Express high-speed transport. LCS 16 carries a General Dynamics designed combat system, and standard LCS weapon fittings. Work will be performed in Mobile, Alabama and San Diego, California. The PSA is expected to be completed by August 2019.

• PAE Aviation and Technical Services is being tapped to provide a variety of services in support of the Navy’s fleet of F-5 aircraft. The awarded modification provides for options for organizational and limited depot-level maintenance and logistics support services for the F-5F Tiger II and F-5N Freedom Fighter aircraft at a cost of $47.9 million. The F-5 was born out of a 1950s US Navy requirement calling for a small, lightweight, jet-powered fighter to operate from the decks of its Escort Carriers. The F-5N is a single seat, twin-engine, tactical fighter and attack aircraft providing simulated air-to-air combat training. As a tactical fighter aircraft, the F-5N accommodates a pilot only in a pressurized, heated and air-conditioned cockpit and rocket-powered ejection seat. The avionics of the F-5E Tiger II are more sophisticated compared to the earlier version F-5A aircraft. It rolled out from production in 1987 and since then has undergone various upgrades to compete with changing combat environments. The aircraft costs are low and can be easily maintained compared to the F-15 and F-16 aircraft. Work will be performed at multiple locations, including Naval Air Stations Key West and Fallon, as well as Marine Corps Air Station Yuma. All work is expected to be completed by 2019.

Middle East & Africa

• Jane’s reports that the Israeli defense manufacturer IAI is currently jointly developing a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive (CBRNE) unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) with the Croatian company DOK-ING. In futuristic warfare scenario, CBRNE weapons cause hazardous effects including contamination of environment & terrain. CBRN UGVs can be used for detection, sample collection and marking of contaminated zones without risk of exposing personnel, which gives them a certain edge over conventional manned NBC recce vehicles. Details of the IAI and DOK-ING produced platform are currently in the embryonic stages. However, IAI General Manager for Robotic Systems Division Meir Shabtai explained that it would be suitable for military applications as well as the civil market. Under the collaboration agreement, DOK-ING will be providing the platform and IAI will be incorporating its autonomous capability.

Europe

• The US State Department is currently in the process of approving a possible foreign military sale to Denmark. The North-European country has requested the purchase of up to 46 SM-2 Block IIIA All-Up Rounds and other related equipment for an estimated cost of $152 million. SM-2 Block IIIA missiles have greater capability at even lower altitudes than previous SM-2 versions, a more powerful fragmentation warhead, and can use Interrupted Continuous Wave Illumination (ICWI) to improve performance against supersonic maneuvering anti-ship missiles. The missiles are provided as medium range (50 mile) rounds that can be fired from AEGIS rail launchers, AEGIS vertical launch systems, and Tartar rail launchers. The deal would also include a telemetry omni-directional antenna, warhead dud capable missiles, the Mk13 Vertical Launching System Canisters and operator manuals. The system will be installed on the Royal Danish Navy’s IVER HUITFELDT Frigate Class ships. In combination with the Anti-Air Warfare System (AAWS) combat system the missiles will enhance anti-air warfare capabilities. The principal contractors will be Raytheon and BAE Systems.

Asia-Pacific

• Japan is currently withdrawing its PAC-3 air defense systems in light of easing relations with North Korea. The systems had been deployed in five prefectures across the country since August 2017 to counter the threat posed by North Korean missiles. PAC-3 is the current standard for new-build Patriot Missiles. The missile uses a “hit-to-kill” approach, instead of the PAC-2’s large fragmentation warhead, which allows it to pack more missiles per launcher (16 instead of 4). Its enhanced capabilities also allow it to be used for point defense against ballistic missiles, and its Config-3 ground systems also feature a range of improvements to the battery’s radar, communications, electronics, and software. The missile batteries were returned to their respective Japan Air Self-Defense Force bases after Japanese officials decided that North Korea would be unlikely to fire ballistic missiles as tensions between Washington and Pyongyang have eased following the landmark summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un on 12th June on Singapore’s Sentosa Island.

Today’s Video

• Watch: What do we know about the F-15X ?

Americas

• L-3 Chesapeake Sciences Corp. is being tapped to provide the Navy’s submarine fleet with passive sonar equipment. The awarded contract modification has a value of $27.5 million and provides for the production of TB-29X towed arrays. The TB-29X is a thin line towed array passive sonar receiver installed aboard Navy submarines. The TB-29X array is in the same form factor as the TB-29 array; however, it offers increased capability, greater reliability and reduced obsolescence. These arrays can be used for back-fit on Los Angeles (SSN-688 and SSN-688I) submarines and forward-fit on the Virginia (SSN-774) class. Passive sonar is a method for detecting acoustic signals in an underwater environment, usually the ocean. The difference between passive and active sonar is that a passive sonar system emits no signals; instead, its purpose is to detect the acoustic signals emanating from external sources, such as enemy submarines and surface vessels. Work will be performed at multiple locations inside the US, including Liverpool, New York; Millersville, Maryland and Ashaway, Rhode Island. Work is scheduled for completion by November 2019.

• The Navy is contracting General Electric to provide its fleet of Super Hornets and Growlers with more thrust. The awarded firm-fixed-price-advance acquisition contract provides for the full-rate production of Lot 23 F414-GE-400 engines at a cost of $10.5 million. The F414-GE-400 is a 22,000-pound class afterburning turbofan engine. The engine features an axial compressor with 3 fan stages and 7 high-pressure compressor stages, and 1 high-pressure and 1 low-pressure turbine stage. At a weight of 2,445 pounds, the F414-GE-400 has a thrust-to-weight ratio of 9. The F414 delivers 35% more thrust than the original F404, which significantly improves the range, payload and survivability of the Super Hornet and Growler. Work will be performed in Lynn, Massachusetts, and is expected to be completed in December 2019.

• The shipbuilding firms tasked with delivery of conceptual designs for the US Navy’s future FFG(X) frigate are all being awarded with firm-fixed-price modifications to exercise further options for the Guided Missile Frigate Conceptual Design. Huntington Ingalls is receiving an additional $7.99 million, General Dynamics Bath Iron Works an additional $7.95 million, Fincantieri Marinette Marine $7.98 million, Lockheed Martin $6.97 million, and Austal is receiving a further $6.39 million. This modification is for additional Guided Missile Frigate Conceptual Design efforts. Huntington Ingalls will be maturing their proposed ship design, which is based on the National Security Cutter, to meet the FFG(X) System Specification. Work will be performed in Pascagoula, Mississippi and Ocean Springs, Mississippi and is expected to be completed by June 2019.

• The US Army is procuring a number of holsters for its new M17 and M18 pistols. Atlantic Diving Supply will provide the Army with Modular Handgun Holsters under this $49 million firm-fixed-price contract. Fielding of the M17 and M18 Modular Handgun System (MHS) started in November 2017. The M17 is a variant of SIG Sauer’s P320 handgun, while the M18 is a compact version of the M17. According to the Army, the MHS program is the first in a line of modernization efforts that the service will pursue over the next few years. The new handguns also have an external safety, self-illuminating sights for low-light conditions, an integrated rail for attaching enablers and an Army standard suppressor conversion kit to attach an acoustic/flash suppressor. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion expected by July 29, 2023.

Middle East & Africa

• The government of Kuwait is set to receive counter-measure equipment for its fleet of Super Hornets as part of a US foreign military sale. Raytheon will procure a total of 38 Integrated Multi-Platform Launch Controllers (IMPLCs) at a cost of $34.6 million. The ALE-50(V) consists of a launcher and launch controller attached to one of the aircraft’s weapon pylons, containing one or more expendable towed decoys. These trail behind the aircraft when deployed, attracting radar-guided missiles to themselves instead. Each decoy and payout reel is delivered in a sealed canister, and has a 10-year shelf life. The IMPLC is the standard launch controller for all future installations. It’s a component of the AN/ALE-50(V) countermeasures decoy dispensing set, and the IDECM integrated defensive electronics countermeasure system. In addition, this contract provides for the induction and repair of IMPLC assets, in support of the US Navy. Work will be performed at multiple locations, including Goleta, California; Forest, Mississippi and Andover, Massachusetts. This contract combines purchase for the Navy ($2,5 million) and FMS to Kuwait ($32 million). Work is expected to be completed in March 2021.

Europe

• The Swiss Army is reportedly introducing a modernized version of its Duro 4×4 tactical vehicle. Duro is a high-mobility military tactical vehicle initially developed by Bucher-Guyer in the mid-90s. vehicles are available in 4×4 and 6×6 configurations and are built with both protected armor and non-armor, and with overall weights ranging from 7t to 25t. The vehicle designed as a modular vehicle that could be easily fitted with interchangeable bodies, including fully-enclosed bodies and various shelters. The Duro can be equipped with a variety of self-defense measures ranging from 7.62 mm machine gun to 40mm grenade launchers. Switzerland is currently in the process of upgrading some of its 3000 Duro vehicles which it received between 1994 and 2002. General Dynamics European Land Systems will modernize about 2200 of those vehicles through the second quarter of 2022.

• The German Luftwaffe will have its first A400M in intensive care aeromedical evacuation (ICAE) configuration on standby starting from 1st August 2018. The “flying intensive care unit” can carry up to six medical patients to safety, including two in critical condition. That capacity will be expanded to reach 10 patients in time, surpassing the capability of the existing fleet of C160 Transall transports. Germany, which is the largest buyer of the multinational A400M, has received 20 of the 53 A400M aircraft it plans to buy. It has taken years to add certain capabilities to the aircraft, and officials are still working on enhanced protective measures. Introduction of the A400M in MEDEVAC configuration will complement the capability currently provided only by the Luftwaffe’s A310 Multi Role Tanker Transport (MRTT), which can also treat up to six patients in addition to providing intermediate care to 16 others and 22 less serious cases.

Asia-Pacific

• Japan’s Maritime Self-Defense Force has now the first of its 27DDG-class destroyers in its fleet. Named the Maya, the guided-missile destroyer is equipped with the Aegis Baseline J7 combat system and the Northrop Grumman AN/SPQ-9B radar system, which provides the capability to detect and track low-flying, high-speed, low-observable anti-ship missile targets in heavy-clutter environments. Aegis Baseline J7 is the Japanese equivalent for the current Aegis Baseline 9/BMD 5.1 standard. The vessel is also equipped with Raytheon’s Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) – a sensor data sharing tool currently fielded only on US and Royal Australian Navy ships. Powered by two combined gas turbine-electric and gas turbine (COGLAG) engines, the ship and 300 crew are propelled to a maximum stated speed of 30 knots. The Maya is slated for commission into the JMSDF in 2020.

Today’s Video

• Watch: US Army equips its Bradley with Stinger missiles

Americas

• The US Navy is boosting its fleet of patrol boats for its near-shore operations. Gravois Aluminum Boats LLC, doing business as Metal Shark, is being awarded a delivery order for 40 Patrol Boats at a cost of $18.4 million. The Metal Shark 40PBX has been chosen as the Navy’s new standard patrol boat in October 2017. The boat is replacing the fleet of force protection boats currently in use with Navy Expeditionary Combat Command’s Coastal Riverine Forces (CRF). The PBX is a 40 ft, welded-aluminum pilothouse patrol boat characterized by a chiseled, angular profile and a faceted hull, and is powered by twin diesel inboards driving water jet propulsors. The jet drives allow the joystick-controlled boat to hit speeds up to 35 knots. In its standard configuration the boat is equipped with a variety of weaponry, including a pair of remotely operated and stabilized 25 mm chain guns and six crewed .50 caliber machine guns. Its C4SI suite allows for enhanced situational awareness, survivability and multi-mission support. The contract also includes basic boat equipment, long-term preservation, boat familiarization and crew training. Work will be performed at the company’s location in Jeanerette, Louisiana, and is expected to be completed by April 2021.

• Sierra Nevada Corp. is being contracted to support the KC-130J tanker aircraft platform. The awarded $10.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee modification provides for the engineering and manufacturing of an outer wing station-430 to be installed on the aircraft. The KC-130J is a variant of the combat-proven C-130J and is used by the operating forces for aerial refueling, ground refueling, tactical transportation of personnel or cargo, and logistic support missions. The outer wing station, also known as rainbow panels are attached to the center wing and provide the aircraft with lift. The outer wing run from station 0 to 576. Work will be performed in Centennial, Colorado and Sparks, Nevada, and is scheduled for completion in July 2019.

• The US Special Operations Command is procuring upgrades for its M4A1 rifles. Sig Sauer is set to supply SOCOM with the Suppressed Upper Receiver Group (SURG). The five-year firm-fixed-price contract has a value of $48 million. The M4 Carbine is the latest member of the M16 family, offering a shorter weapon more suited to close-quarters battle, or to units who would find a full-length rifle too bulky. SURG is a 5.56mm, integrally suppressed upper receiver. This short stroke gas piston upper features a 6.75? barrel with a permanently attached 19 baffle, Titanium suppressor. It has two gas settings for use with sub and supersonic ammunition. Short stroke gas pistons eliminate carbon blow-back into the rifles chamber, and also reduce the heat problem created by the super-hot gases used to cycle the M4. The majority of work will be performed at the company’s location in Newington, New Hampshire and is expected to be completed by July 2023.

• The Navy is contracting L3 Technologies and Boeing to procure two EA-18G Tactical Operational Flight Trainers. The companies are respectively being awarded with a $9.5 million and $9.1 million contract. The EA-18G has a 90% commonality with F/A-18 Super Hornet, sharing its airframe, radar and weapon options. Only difference is that the Growler substitutes the Hornets 20mm Vulcan Gatling gun with advanced electrical equipment, providing US forces with an essential electronic attack capability. L3’s work will be performed in Arlington, Texas and is expected to be completed by November 2019. Boeing’s work will be performed in Arlington, Texas and St. Louis, Missouri, with an estimated completion expected by December 2019.

Middle East & Africa

• Turkey and Ukraine plan to jointly manufacture the new Antonov An-188 military cargo aircraft. Parties involved in negotiations include Turkey’s defense procurement office, TAI, Antonov and Ukraine’s umbrella defense entity Ukroboronprom. Turkish officials have made clear that for any co-production deal to go ahead the aircraft must be brought to full compliance with NATO standards. The An-188 multi-purpose military transport aircraft is a modification of An-70 medium-range transport aircraft, which was unveiled at the Paris Air Show in 2015. The plane will be equipped with four D-436-148FM three-shaft high by-pass turbofan engines and an advanced glass cockpit with the latest flight navigation and communication equipment. Featuring short take-off and landing (STOL) capability, the jet-powered aircraft will be able to perform take-off and landing on different airfields, including unpaved runways and short runways with a length of 1000 yards. The An-188 features a flight distance of up to 4784 miles, a cruising altitude of up to 40000 feet, and a speed of up to 497 mph depending on aircraft and engine type and variant.

Europe

• The French government is greenlighting the development of a new generation air-to-air missile. This program will renew the MICA of the Mirage 2000 and Rafale fighters in use by the Air Force and Navy. The MICA NG will be developed come in IR and electromagnetic variants and will replace the current MICA, whose withdrawal of service is expected between 2018 and 2013. The MICA NG is the first weapons program launched under France’s 2019-2025 Military Program Law. A Rafale can carry up to six Mica missiles. A Rafale pilot can release the MICA when intercepting an aircraft beyond visual range and can also fire the weapon from its rails when locked in a dogfight. The Rafale will also carry the Meteor missile to hit aircraft beyond visual range. The new missiles are scheduled for delivery between 2026 and 2031.

Asia-Pacific

• The Indian government is upgrading New Delhi’s air-defense systems. The capital will receive a new missile defense system, a reconfigured no-fly zone and refined protocols that regulate the termination of rogue planes. The new National Advanced Surface to Air Missile System-II (NASMS-II) will be procured from the US at a cost of roughly $1 billion. NASAMS is a medium-range, network-centric air defense system designed and developed jointly by Raytheon and Kongsberg. The system is armed with 3D Sentinel radars, short and medium range missiles, launchers, fire-distribution centers and command-and-control units. The system can identify, engage and destroy aircraft, helicopters, cruise missiles and UAVs. The system is network centric with an open architecture which increases survivability in case of electronic attacks. The missile system can engage 72 targets simultaneously in active and passive modes. The primary weapon of the system is the AIM-120 AMRAAM. If the purchase goes through India will join the RNoAF, the Dutch Army, the Spanish Army and the US Capital Region which are all currently deploying the NASMS.

Today’s Video

• Watch: USS Wichita will be delivered to the USN later this summer.

An M4 – or is it?
(click to view full)

The 5.56mm M-16 has been the USA’s primary battle rifle since the Vietnam war, undergoing changes into progressive versions like the M16A4 widely fielded by the US Marine Corps, “Commando” carbine versions, etc. The M4 Carbine is the latest member of the M16 family, offering a shorter weapon more suited to close-quarters battle, or to units who would find a full-length rifle too bulky.

In 2006 an Army solicitation for competitive procurement of 5.56mm carbine designs was withdrawn, once sole-source incumbent Colt dropped its prices. The DoD’s Inspector General weighed in with a critical report, but the Army dissented, defending its practices as a sound negotiating approach that saved the taxpayers money. As it turns out, there’s a sequel. A major sequel that has only grown bigger with time.

The M4/M16 family is both praised and criticized for its current performance in the field. In recent years, the M4 finished dead last in a sandstorm reliability test, against 3 competitors that include a convertible M4 variant. Worse, the 4th place M4 had over 3.5x more jams than the 3rd place finisher. Was that a blip in M4 buys, or a breaking point? The Army moved forward with an “Individual Carbine” competition, but as the results started to show the M4 again lagging – even with ammunition changed to a round specially formulated to make the M4 shine – the Army abruptly stopped the process once again, stating that the performance superiority of the competing gun was not better to a degree making it worthwhile. The Army stated after the tests that only a result that was twice as good as the existing gun’s performance would signify an actionable performance difference.

More recently, the Marines have considered adding
various after-market upgrades to the platform in order to increase accuracy, learning from the private sector and competitive shooting circuit what appears to be providing the best bang.

The M4 Carbine

M203 on M4 Carbine
(click to view full)

It seemed like a routine request. Order more M4 carbines for US forces in the FY 2007 supplemental, FY 2008 budget, and FY 2008 supplemental funding bills. It has turned into anything but a routine exercise, however – with serving soldiers, journalists, and Senators casting a very critical eye on the effort and the rifle, and demanding open competition. With requests amounting to $375 million for weapons and $150 million in accessories, they say, the Army’s proposal amounts to an effort to replace the M16 as the USA’s primary battle rifle – using specifications that are around 15 years old, without a competition, and without considering whether better 5.56 mm alternatives might be available off the shelf.

The M4 offers a collapsible buttstock, flat-top upper receiver assembly, a U-shaped handle-rear sight assembly that could be removed, and assortment of mounting rails for easy customization with a variety of sight, flashlight, grenade launchers, shotgun attachments, etc. It achieves approximately 85% commonality with the M16, and has become a popular weapon. It has a reputation for lightness, customizability, and, compared to its most frequent rival the AK-47, a reputation for accuracy as well. The carbine’s reputation for fast-point close-quarters fire remains its most prominent feature, however. After Action Reviews done by the Marines after the early phases of Operation Iraqi Freedom revealed that urban warfare scenarios made employment of the M16A2 difficult in some situations; Marines were picking up short AK-47s with folding butt-stocks, or scrounging pistols for use inside buildings.

Like its predecessor the M16, the M4 also has a reputation as an excellent weapon – if you can maintain it. Failure to maintain the weapon meticulously can lead to jams, especially in sandy or dusty environments. Kalashnikovs may not have a reputation for accuracy, or lightness – but they do have a well-earned reputation for being able to take amazing amounts of abuse, without maintenance, and still fire reliably. The Israeli “Galil” applied these lessons in 5.56mm caliber, and earned a similar reputation. Colt’s M16 and M4 have never done so.

The original order for the M4 Carbine in the mid-1990s was a small-scale order, for a specifically requested derivative of the Army’s primary battle rifle, to equip units who would otherwise have relied on less accurate 9mm submachine guns. As such, its direct development and sole-source contract status raised little fuss. Subsequent contracts also raised little scrutiny.

So, what changed?

1. Extended combat in dusty, sandy environments that highlighted the weapon’s weak points as well as its comparative strengths, leading to escalating volumes of complaints;
2. The emergence of alternatives that preserve those strengths, while addressing those weak points;
3. The scale of the current request for funding.

Nobody Loves Me but My Mother – and She Could Be Jivin’ Too…

XM29 OICW Prototype
(click to view full)

There have been sporadic attempts to field more modern weapons during its tenure, including the unwieldy 20-or-so pound, 2 barrel, “someone watched Predator too many times” XM-29 OICW, and more recently the aborted contract for the G36-derived XM-8 weapon family from Heckler & Koch. Still, the M4’s designers could never sing B.B. King’s famous tune.

The M16/M4 family has achieved a great deal of success, and garnered many positive reviews for its features and performance. Even its critics acknowledge that it has many positive attributes. The M4 has also attracted criticism – and at least 1 comprehensive fix.

According to briefing documents obtained by Gannett’s Army Times magazine:

“USMC officials said the M4 malfunctioned three times more often than the M16A4 during an assessment conducted in late summer 2002 for Marine Corps Systems Command at Quantico, VA. Malfunctions were broken down into several categories, including “magazine,” “failure to chamber,” “failure to fire,” “failure to extract” and “worn or broken part,” according to the briefing documents. During the comparison, the M4 failed 186 times across those categories over the course of 69,000 rounds fired. The M16A4 failed 61 times during the testing.

The Army conducted a more recent reliability test between October 2005 and April 2006, which included 10 new M16s and 10 new M4s… On average, the new M16s and M4s fired approximately 5,000 rounds between stoppages, according to an Army official who asked that his name not be released.”

In a subsequent letter to the magazine, M4 manufacturer Colt argued that the US Army had disagreed with the USMC study, then added that the Army and Colt had worked to make modifications thereafter in order to address problems found.

Gannett’s Army Times magazine also obtained a copy of Project Manager Soldier’s Weapons Assessment Team’s July 31, 2003, report:

“The executive summary said that M16s and M4s “functioned reliably” in the combat zone as long as “soldiers conducted daily operator maintenance and applied a light coat of lubricant.”

Soldiers had their own comments, however, which were also included in the report and relayed in the magazine article. 3rd ID soldier:

“I know it fires very well and accurate [when] clean. But sometimes it needs to fire dirty well too.”

25th Infantry Division soldier:

“The M4 Weapon in the deserts of Iraq and Afghanistan was quick to malfunction when a little sand got in the weapon. Trying to keep it clean, sand free was impossible while on patrols or firefights.”

82nd Airborne Division soldier:

“The M4 is overall an excellent weapon, however the flaw of its sensitivity to dirt and powder residue needs to be corrected. True to fact, cleaning will help. Daily assigned tasks, and nonregular hours in tactical situations do not always warrant the necessary time required for effective cleaning.”

75th Ranger Regiment member, SOCOM:

“Even with the dust cover closed and magazine in the well, sand gets all inside; on and around the bolt. It still fires, but after a while the sand works its way all through the gun and jams start.”

The 507th Maintenance Company, ambushed outside Nasariyah in 2003 during the opening days of the ground invasion of Iraq, might concur with all of the above. The post-incident report released by the US Army had this to say:

“Dusty, desert conditions do require vigilance in weapons maintenance… However, it is imperative to remember that at the time of the attack, the 507th had spent more than two days on the move, with little rest and time to conduct vehicle repair and recovery operations.”

Even without those extenuating circumstances, however, there have been problems. A December 2006 survey, conducted on behalf of the Army by CNA Corp., conducted over 2,600 interviews with Soldiers returning from combat duty. The M4 received a number of strong requests from M-16 users, who liked its smaller profile. Among M4 users, however, 19% of said they experienced stoppages in combat – and almost 20% of those said they were “unable to engage the target with that weapon during a significant portion of or the entire firefight after performing immediate or remedial action to clear the stoppage.” The report adds that “Those who attached accessories to their weapon were more likely to experience stoppages, regardless of how the accessories were attached [including via official means like rail mounts].” Since “accessories” can include items like night sights, flashlights, etc., their use is not expected to go away any time soon.

US Army Ranger Capt. Nate Self, whose M4 jammed into uselessness during a 2002 firefight after their MH-47 Chinook was shot down in Afghanistan’s Shah-i-kot Mountains, offers another case. He won a Silver Star that day – with another soldier’s gun – and his comments in the Army Times article appear to agree that there is a problem with the current M4 design and specifications.

M4 SOPMOD
(click to view full)

SOCOM appears to agree as well. While US Special Operations Command is moving ahead on their own SCAR rifle program with FN Herstal, they’re also significant users of the M4 Carbine’s SOPMOD version. By the time Capt. Self was fighting of al-Qaeda/Taliban enemies in Afghanistan with a broken weapon, Dellta Force had already turned to Heckler & Koch for a fix that would preserve the M4 but remove its problems. One of which is heat build-up and gas from its operating mechanism that dries out some lubricants, and helps open the way for sand damage.

In response, H&K replaced Colt’s “gas-tube” system with a short-stroke piston system that eliminates carbon blow-back into the chamber, and also reduces the heat problem created by the super-hot gases used to cycle the M4. Other changes were made to the magazine, barrel, etc. The final product was an M4 with a new upper receiver and magazine, plus H&K’s 4-rail system of standard “Picatinny Rails” on the top, bottom, and both sides for easy addition of anything a Special Operator might require.

HK416, labeled
(click to view full)

In exhaustive tests with the help of Delta Force, the upgraded weapon was subjected to mud and dust without maintenance, and fired day after day. Despite this treatment, the rifle showed problems in only 1 of 15,000 rounds – fully 3 times the reliability shown by the M4 in US Army studies. The H&K 416 was declared ready in 2004.

A rifle with everything they loved about the M4, and the fire-no-matter-what toughness of the Kalashnikov, was exactly what the Deltas ordered. SOCOM bought the first 500 weapons right off the assembly line, and its units have been using the weapon in combat ever since. Other Western Special Forces units who liked the M4 Carbine have also purchased HK416s, though H&K declines to name specific countries. US Major Chaz Bowser, who has played a leading role in SOSOCM’s SCAR rifle design program:

HK416: Desert Testing
(click to view full)

“One thing I valued about being the weapons developer for Special Operations is that I could go to Iraq or Afghanistan or anywhere with whatever weapons I wanted to carry. As soon as the H&K 416 was available, it got stuffed into my kit bag and, through test after test, it became my primary carry weapon as a long gun. I had already gotten the data from folks carrying it before me and had determined that it would be foolish to risk my life with a lesser system.”

Actually, they don’t even have to buy the whole gun. Christian Lowe of Military.com reports that:

“In a routine acquisition notice March 23 [2007], a U.S. Special Forces battalion based in Okinawa announced that it is buying 84 upper receiver assemblies for the HK416 to modify their M4 carbines… According to the solicitation for the new upper receiver assemblies, the 416 “allows Soldiers to replace the existing M4 upper receiver with an HK proprietary gas system that does not introduce propellant gases and the associated carbon fouling back into the weapon’s interior. This reduces operator cleaning time, and increases the reliability of the M4 Carbine, particularly in an environment in which sand and dust are prevalent.”

But the US Army won’t consider even this partial replacement option. The Army position was reiterated in a release on April 2/07:

“The M4 Carbine is the Army’s primary individual combat rifle for Infantry, Ranger, and Special Operations forces. Since its introduction in 1991, the M4 carbine has proven its worth on the battlefield because it is accurate, easy to shoot and maintain. The M4’s collapsible stock and shortened barrel make it ideal for Soldiers operating in vehicles or within the confines associated with urban terrain. The M4 has been improved numerous times and employs the most current technology available on any rifle/carbine in general use today.

The M4 is the highest-rated weapon by Soldiers in combat, according to the Directorate of Combat Development, Ft. Benning, Ga. In December 2006, the Center for Naval Analysis conducted a “Soldiers’ Perspective on Small Arms in Combat” survey. Their poll of over 2,600 Soldiers reported overwhelming satisfaction with the M4. The survey included serviceability and usefulness in completing assigned missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

The Cry for Competition: How Much Is That HK In the Window?

HK416s
(click to view full)

The HK416 isn’t the only alternative out there by any means – but it has been a catalytic alternative. In an analogous situation, limited USMC deployment of mine-resistant vehicles like Force Protection’s Cougar and Buffalo in Iraq, and the contrast between v-hulled casualties and Hummer casualties, led to a cascade that now looks set to remove the Hummer from a front-line combat role. The technology to deal with insurgencies that used land-mines has been proven for over 30 years – but awareness of that fact didn’t rise within the US military and among its political overseers until an obvious counter-example was fielded. One that demonstrated proven alternatives to the limited options people had previous been shown. Likewise, the use of the high-commonality HK416 has served to sharpen awareness that the M4 might not be the best option on offer for US forces.

Couple that with a major buy that looks set to re-equip large sections of the US military with a new battle rifle, and the question “what if we can do better?” starts to take on real resonance. The Army’s $375 million sole-source carbine procurement, on the basis of specifications that have not been changed to reflect these realities, is starting to raise hackles – and attract a wide spectrum of opponents.

Gannett’s Army Times quoted former Army vice chief of staff Gen. Jack Keane (ret.), who tried at the end of his tenure to update the USA’s infantry rifle with the XM-8 project, as saying:

“We are not saying the [M4 and M16 are] bad,” said “The issue for me is do our soldiers have the best rifle in their hands… The fact of the matter is that technology changes every 10 or 15 years and we should be changing with it. And that has not been our case. We have been sitting on this thing for far too long.”

An aide to Sen. Tom Coburn [R-OK] agreed, and added that the substantial price reduction created by the mere threat of an open competition in 2006 was evidence that Colt had been using its sole-source status to overcharge the government. The Senator has sent a formal letter to the Secretary of the Army requesting an open competition in order to ensure both the best deal, and the best off-the shelf rifle that incorporates modern improvements. The winner could well be Colt, said Coburn’s aide – but they should have to prove it, and earn it. “This is supposed to be a battle rifle.” He said. “We’re supposed to have a rifle that just doesn’t jam.” Impossible, of course – but one that jams far less often, and requires far less maintenance to avoid jams, while offering all of the M4’s compactness and add-on ease… that would represent a significant step forward.

Ironically, even Colt may have a better system ready to go. In a letter to Army Times magazine, Colt COO James R. Battaglini (US Marine Corps Maj. Gen., ret.) said:

“The gas piston system in the H&K 416 is not a new system. Rifles were being designed with these systems in the 1920’s. Colt proposed a piston operated weapon to the Army in the early 1960’s. Today Colt Defense has the ability and expertise to manufacture in great numbers piston system carbines of exceptional quality should the U.S. military services initiate a combat requirement for this type of weapon”

Unfortunately, fighting the Army for improvements is no easy task. Colt CEO William Keys, who is also a retired USMC General, explained out to Army Times that Colt has to build what the US Army asks for, to the Army’s exact specifications:

“If we have a change that we think would help the gun, we go to the Army… which is not an easy process, by the way. We spent 20 years trying to get [an extractor] spring changed. They just said ‘well, this works good enough.’ “

Sen. Coburn’s letter to Secretary of the Army Peter Green took a dim view of this entire situation:

“I am concerned about the Army’s plans to procure nearly a half a million new rifles outside the any competitive procurement process… There is nothing more important to a soldier than their rifle, and there is simply no excuse for not providing our soldiers with the best weapon – not just a weapon that is “good enough”… In the years following the Army’s requirements document [DID: for the M4 in the early 1990s], a number of manufacturers have researched, tested, and fielded weapons which, by all accounts, appear to provide significantly improved reliability. To fail to allow a free and open competition of these operational weapons is unacceptable… I believe the Army needs to rapidly revise its rifle and carbine requirements. Free and open competition will give our troops the best rifle in the world…”

The positions were, and are, clear. The US Army says the M4 isn’t broken, and adds that an Army-wide fix would cost $1 billion. Critics contend that these costs may be exaggerated given some of the potential solutions, and add that an army already planning to spend $525 million to re-equip the force with M4s has a moral and financial imperative to see if a better rifle exists. Meanwhile, calls about the M16/M4 had been coming in from Oklahoma, and other Senators and representatives had also been hearing from constituents on this matter.

By 2007, a second letter from the Senate was likely if the Army dug in its heels – and that letter would have had far more signatures at the bottom. In the end, however, legislative tactics forced the Army’s hand. The issue finally came to a head when Sen. Coburn [R-OK] exercised his ability as a Senator to block nomination of the proposed new Secretary of the Army, until the US Army relented and agreed to testing at the Army’s Aberdeen Test Center in Maryland. Secretary Geren was confirmed shortly thereafter, in July 2007.

The tests were conducted. The M4 finished last. The Army declared that performance to be acceptable. By 2010, however, there were noises about an “Individual Carbine Competition”, which became a full solicitation. A number of firms are lining up to provide new designs for the Army’s next-generation carbine, including Colt. Some of them even offer alternate caliber options that could make a real difference to lethality at range, a serious need in environments like Afghanistan. By August 2011, known competitors and designs included:

• Colt: CM901 multicaliber rifle (5.56mm through 7.62mm)
  
• ADCOR: B.E.A.R. Elite (5.56mm)
  
• FN USA: SCAR-16 (5.56mm)
  
• HK USA: HK416 (5.56mm).
  
• Remington: Adaptive Combat Rifle multi-caliber (5.56mm, 6.5mm Grendel, or 6.8mm)

Smith & Wesson was also reported to be entering the competition, but eventually decided not to take part.

The bigger question is whether this competition, like the ones before it, will ultimately prove to be an expensive mirage. As of April 2013, in the words of the old magic 8-ball, “signs point to yes.” Though one could also use “outlook not so good.”

Any Last Words?

G36s: Norwegian
Telemark battalion
by Torgeir Haugaard
(click to view full)

Sgt. Charles Perales of Fort Bragg, NC had this to say in a letter reprinted by Defense News:

“My unit – B Company, 2nd Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment – was deployed to Afghanistan from April 2005 to March 2006. While there, we were attached to Special Forces at Camp Tillman on the Afghan border… I saw first-hand what happens when your weapon jams up because of the harsh environments we have to call home there. An 18B weapons sergeant was shot in the face due directly to his weapon jamming. I just can’t believe that after things like this happen, the Army is still buying more M4s.

Why not rotate them like we used to before the war? All rapid-deploying units used to get the new M4, the support units would get the excess M16s and so on. I’m not saying they need to outfit the whole Army with a new weapon, but why not start phasing it in? …Soldiers’ lives are on the line. Why is it a hassle to make an improvement that could save lives?

The M4 isn’t a bad weapon; it just needs improvements. It’s about time people stop fighting to keep things the same and start moving toward a better weapon system.”

The last word will be left to SOCOM’s Major Chaz Bowser:

“We buy new laptop computers every few years across the gamut, so couldn’t we do the same with our single most important piece of military equipment? … Waiting for a leap-ahead technology based on a kinetic energy weapon platform is a waste of time and money, so we need to look at what is out there now… What the Army needs is a weapon that is now ready for prime-time and not a developmental system… The requirement comes from the field, not from an office in some garrison activity, not from some consultant and definitely not from a vendor.

Let’s do this quickly without all the bureaucracy typically associated with change. Find someone in our ranks who can make a decision – who hasn’t floated a retirement resume with a gun company – and make the decision now. Just look how fast we were all issued the ‘highly coveted’ black beret or the digital uniform. Find that recipe card, change out the word ‘Velcro’ with ‘battle rifle’ and that may be a start to finding a solution [DID: which, he acknowledges, could be Colt’s M4 if that’s what the competition shows]. Our men and women deserve much better than we are giving them, and shame on us.”

Updates: The Tests, Reactions, and Subsequent Developments FY 2018

Army looks to cancel Individual Carbine; USMC won’t join IC; Smith & Wesson out – will sell their innovations to law enforcement and civilians.

Remington ACR
(click for video)

July 31/18: SOCOM SURG The US Special Operations Command is procuring upgrades for its M4A1 rifles. Sig Sauer is set to supply SOCOM with the Suppressed Upper Receiver Group (SURG). The five-year firm-fixed-price contract has a value of $48 million. The M4 Carbine is the latest member of the M16 family, offering a shorter weapon more suited to close-quarters battle, or to units who would find a full-length rifle too bulky. SURG is a 5.56mm, integrally suppressed upper receiver. This short stroke gas piston upper features a 6.75? barrel with a permanently attached 19 baffle, Titanium suppressor. It has two gas settings for use with sub and supersonic ammunition. Short stroke gas pistons eliminate carbon blow-back into the rifles chamber, and also reduce the heat problem created by the super-hot gases used to cycle the M4. The majority of work will be performed at the company’s location in Newington, New Hampshire and is expected to be completed by July 2023.

FY 2012 – 2016

January 13/16: Remington has completed its $40.1 million delivery of M4 carbine rifles to the Philippine Army ahead of schedule. Over 56,000 of the rifles have been delivered in total, and will replace the antiquated 1960s era variant of the M-16 currently in use by the PA. Prior to distribution, a third of the new arms will undergo mandatory ballistic testing while the M-16s will be distributed to reservists.

March 16/15: The Army released a Sources Sought notice (W15QKN-15-X-7820), looking for one vendor that can bundle together a series of aftermarket improvements to the M4A1 carbine. The package, to be called the M4A1+, includes increased accuracy, rails, mounting surfaces, neutral, non-black, color, coatings, backup sites and a kitchen sink full of other, smaller improvements.

Feb 18/15: The Marines are considering adding
various after-market upgrades to the platform in order to increase accuracy, learning from the private sector and competitive shooting circuit what appears to be providing the best bang.

June 14/13: The Army excuses their decision to cancel the Individual Carbie competition by saying that none of the candidates met their criteria of 3,592 mean rounds between stoppages, using the new M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round. As a point of comparison, the original requirement for the M4 was 600.

The Army’s PEO Soldier says that SOCOM’s M4A1 achieved 1,691 MRBS, but refuses to release the results of the trials and provide a basis for relative comparison. Military.com.

May 2/13: Military.com reports that the Individual Carbine’s Phase II firing tests are done, but the US Army is about to cancel the Individual Carbine competition, and direct its tiny $49.6 million in FY 2014 to other things. The original plan involved 3 Phase III contracts, and soldier user tests that would include a total of 800,000 rounds fired.

Overall, the budget for new carbines is $300 million through 2018, and the decision on how to proceed reportedly rests with Secretary of the Army John McHugh. This paragraph sums it up best:

“Gun makers involved in the competition said they have heard nothing from the Army about Phase III of the competition. Competitors didn’t want to be named in this story but said they would not be surprised if the effort was canceled because they never believed the Army was serious about replacing the M4 family.”

March 19/13: Inspector General. In testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Pentagon’s Inspector General says they’ll audit the Individual Carbine program, as “DoD may not have an established need for this weapon nor developed performance requirements… such as accuracy, reliability, and lethality”.

Aside from the presumptuousness in the wake of incidents like Wanat, they’re also absolutely wrong on a factual level – the IC competition has had those standards for 3 years now. Source.

Aug 1/12: Political. Sen. Tom Coburn [R-OK] delivers a floor speech about the M4 and the Army’s failure to replace it. He reminds the Senate about the dust testing in which the M4 came in last, and points out that the average rifle age is 26 years, compared to 12 years in Germany, or 8 years for US Special Forces. The Army has been able to rush MRAP competitions for much more expensive equipment, but:

…secretary of Army Guerin… assured me that we would have a new competition for a new rifle for our troops. That was 2007. Here we are, six years later, and the army is now telling us we’re going to have a new competition in 2014… Because the guys that are responsible for making the decision on purchasing the rifles are not the guys that are out there on the line. Because if they were, we would have already had this competition…

On July 13, 2008, in the battle of Winot [sic] in Afghanistan, 200 Taliban troops attacked the U.S. troops at a remote outpost in Eastern Afghanistan. The Taliban were able to break through our lines… Believe it or not, do you know what killed most of us? Our own rifles. Practically every one of our dead was found with his m-16 torn down next to him where he had been trying to fix it. That’s occurring now. Except it’s not getting any press.

…You know, a lot of people do a lot of things for our country, but nobody does for our country what the soldier on the frontline does – nobody. Mr. secretary of the Army. This is a moral question. Get the rifle competition going. Members of congress, members of the senate who are on the armed services committee don’t allow this to continue to happen.

Nov 17/11: USMC sticking with M16A4 & M27 IAR. Military.com reports that the USMC has considered the HK416-derived M27 IAR as a future individual weapon, but decided to stick with improvements to the M16A4 rifle for that role.

It also means that the Marines won’t be adopting the winner of the Army’s Individual Carbine competition, which lowers the odds of having IC turn into a contract for a new weapon. HK might still walk away a winner in the USMC, though. The M27 IARs are being evaluated as future substitutes for FN’s M249 5.56mm light machine gun, and have been fielded to Afghanistan in a combat trial.

Nov 10/11: Smith & Wesson out. Military Times’ Gear Scout reports that Smith & Wesson won’t be competing in the Individual Carbine:

“I talked to David Holt, S&W’s VP of Military Programs who confirmed [the M&P4] was S&W’s entry into the U.S. Army’s individual carbine competition. He explained the company’s decision not to compete in the Army’s search for a new carbine… cited the program’s long acquisition timeline as one of the factors that made it difficult for Smith and Wesson to assume the risk of joining the carbine fray… They’ve put a lot of hours into the project and are very proud of the reliability improvement’s [sic] they’ve made over the M4 design. So, the carbine will likely end up for sale on the commercial LE/Gov market…”

FY 2009 – 2011

M4s and M249s fail at the Battle of Wanat; Key “Taking Back the Infantry Half-Kilometer” report leads to caliber questions; SOCOM cancels FN’s 5.56mm SCAR-L; US Army going through the competition motions, slowly, and giving mixed signals.

B.E.A.R. in detail
click for video

Aug 8/11: ADCOR. Military.com covers ADCOR’s announced interest in the IC competition, and its B.E.A.R. design. It’s a gas piston system with some clever features for keeping dust out, a free floating barrel, an adjustable cyclical rate, faster and simpler cleaning, and a “forward charging handle” that lets the soldier clear a jammed weapon with their off hand (also present in Remington’s ACR). Military.com | ADCOR page.

June 21/11: Data Rights Issue. Daniel E. Watters of The Gun Zone explains how the Army got here, the deal with Colt, and the difficulty they’ll have getting a new weapon in the Individual Carbine competition. Read “Colt M4 Data Rights & The Individual Carbine Competition.”

June 14/11: M4. FBO.gov releases Presolicitation W56HZV-10-R-0593, covering 70,000 – 100,000 M4 and M4A1 carbines over 5 years. The Government expects to order 25-30% in each of years 1 and 2, and 13-17% in each of years 3 through 5. They’re certainly serious about the M4, if not about its replacement.

The contractor(s) winning the best value competition will also be required to provide ancillary equipment as specified by the contract, and will be paid only for produced items, not for setup and manufacturing costs. Bidding is restricted to firms in the U.S. & its territories, and the carbines will be produced in accordance with the M4/M4A1 Technical Data Package (TDP) and the license agreement between the U.S. Government and Colt Defense, LLC. That TDP is restricted/ export controlled, and requires submission of a Non-Disclosure Agreement. The TDPs will not be available until an NDA is submitted, and an FBO.gov solicitation is issued. Read “Colt M4 Data Rights & The Individual Carbine Competition” for an analysis of how the Army reached this point, and what it could mean in practice.

June 14/11: Competition. Defense Procurement news reports that the US Army still has a 2-track strategy (vid. March 10/10 entry). One is the IC competition. The other involves competing the M4 design, now that the Army and not Colt owns the data rights. Colt has reportedly reacted to the announced Army plans by ramping up their lobbying efforts, so Congress can pressure the Army to keep the program with them.

May 25/11: Lobbying. An Associated Press article lays out the hired lobbyists and political backers for some of the Individual Carbine contenders, while discussing possible offerings. See also Fox News‘ coverage. Contenders, and their lobbyists, include:

Colt:
CM901 multicaliber rifle (5.56mm – 7.62mm)
Roger Smith, a former deputy assistant Navy secretary @ $120,000 a year
Rep. Rosa DeLauro [D-CT, Appropriations]. Rep. John Larson [D-CT], Sen. Joe Liberman [I-CT, retiring].

FN Herstal:
SCAR-L 5.56mm.
American Business Development Group @ $120,000/ year.
Sen. Lindsey Graham [R-SC, SASC], Joe Wilson [R-SC, HASC].

HK USA:
HK416 5.56mm.
Parted ways with Greenberg Traurig in 2009, and with Mark Barnes and Associates in early 2010. No replacement mentioned.

Remington:
Adaptive Combat Rifle multi-caliber (5.56mm or 6.8mm).
$500,000 over last 2 years to Winborn Solutions, and Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough
Sen. Chuck Schumer [D-NY]

Smith & Wesson:
(M&P4, will not be entering the competition)
Greenberg Traurig @ $360,000/ year

April 18/11: Competition. In published responses to questions from industry over Draft RFP W15QKN-11-R-F003, the US Army has laid out a schedule for its “Individual Carbine”. The RFP is expected in May 2011, with Phase 1 evaluations from July to October 2011, and Phase 2 evaluations extending to July 2012. The contracts, if any, would be awarded in October 2012, followed by even more evaluations of the remaining contenders, lasting until March 2013.

While there is no caliber or mechanical type requirement, the Army may not choose to do anything, in the end. It is openly espousing a “dual path” strategy to upgrade existing M4s, even as it launches this competition. Given a long past history of declaring that new designs don’t offer enough benefits over existing M4s to justify a purchase, outside observers can be forgiven any skepticism they may have over the Army’s determination to field anything else when all is said and done. PROCNET Q&A responses | PEO Soldier | Gannett’s Army Times | Aviation Week Ares.

Jan 31/11: Competition. The US Army issues Draft RFP W15QKN-11-R-F003 for an “Individual Carbine.” In practice, the solicitation announces an Industry Day on March 30/11, and offerors are directed to NOT submit proposals at this time. Interested parties are advised that only firms within the Small Arms Industry will be granted admittance at the Doubletree Hotel Washington DC – Crystal City, and that ITAR export control procedures are in effect.

Col. Doug Tamilio, the service’s project manager for soldier weapons, reportedly said in a statement that “We’re challenging industry to develop the next-generation carbine and we’re looking forward to the results.” On the other hand, there have been previous industry days (vid. 2008), and other next-generation carbines have been shelved in the past, on the nebulous ground of not being enough of an improvement over the M4. FedBizOpps | Wall St. Journal.

SCAR-L top, SCAR-H
(click to view full)

June 25/10: FN SCAR. Military.com reports that SOCOM has decided to cancel further 5.56mm SCAR-L Mk.16 rifle purchases on cost and efficiency grounds, and will probably recall the 850 fielded weapons, rather than continue to support them. SOCOM will be adding to their stock of 750 7.62mm SCAR-H Mk.17 riles, however, and will field an extended SCAR-H Mk.20 with sharpshooter enhancements.

SOCOM cancels 5.56mm SCAR-L

March 10/10: Competition. In testimony before the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Air and Land Forces, senior Army officers state that [PDF]:

“We are currently taking a dual approach to improve the current weapon, the M4, as we move forward with a new carbine requirement. The Project Manager (PM) released a market survey in January 2010, seeking the best industry has to offer for improvements to the current M4. The PM expects to release an RFP soon to compete the upgrade program. Additionally, the Army will conduct a full and open competition to address a new requirement for an individual carbine. Once the Joint Requirements Oversight Council approves the new requirement, the PM will initiate the competition with the release of an RFP for comments from industry. This is the first step in conducting the competition. The Army is working with the other Services in these programs to ensure their requirements are included in our process and they are always invited to participate in the programs’ development and production.”

Jan 12/10: HK. Heckler & Kock announces that they will begin producing civilian variants of the HK416 and the 7.62mm HK417 in a new HK manufacturing facility in Newington, New Hampshire. It’s co-located within an existing 70,000 square foot facility, and would create an American manufacturing base from which to offer military HK416s as well. EVP Wayne Weber of Heckler & Koch USA:

“It is our intention for all U.S. made HK products to equal the quality and reliability of the products made in Germany… By establishing American-based manufacturing, we can compliment our German production and ensure that HK can be more competitive in the U.S. and comply with government contracts requiring U.S. manufacturing. HK products made in the USA will be fully compliant with federal solicitations giving preference to domestically produced products.”

USMC M240B,
Afghanistan
(click to view full)

Nov 30/09: Report. US Army TRADOC releases a paper by Major Thomas P. Ehrhart of the Command and General Staff College titled “Increasing Small Arms Lethality in Afghanistan: Taking Back the Infantry Half-Kilometer” [PDF]. It points out that American forces are routinely engaged in Afghan firefights beyond 300 meters, where their weapons are less effective than their opponents. Excerpts:

“Comments from returning non-commissioned officers and officers reveal that about [50%] of engagements occur past 300 meters. The enemy tactics are to engage United States forces from high ground with medium and heavy weapons, often including mortars, knowing that we are restricted by our equipment limitations and the inability of our overburdened soldiers to maneuver at elevations exceeding 6000 feet. Current equipment, training, and doctrine are optimized for engagements under 300 meters and on level terrain.

There are several ways to extend the lethality of the infantry. A more effective 5.56-mm bullet can be designed which provides enhanced terminal performance out to 500 meters. A better option to increase incapacitation is to adopt a larger caliber cartridge, which will function using components of the M16/M4. The 2006 study by the Joint Service Wound Ballistics – Integrated Product Team discovered that the ideal caliber seems to be between 6.5 and 7-mm. This was also the general conclusion of all military ballistics studies since the end of World War I.

The reorganization of the infantry squad in 1960 eliminated the M1D sniper rifle and resulted in the loss of the precision mid-range capability of the infantry squad… All 5.56-mm weapons are most effective when employed within 200 meters due to velocity limitations. Once contact is made, the fight is limited to machine gunners, mortars and designated marksmen. In the table of organization for a light infantry company8 only the six -M240B 7.62-mm machine guns, two- 60-mm mortars and nine designated marksman armed with either 7.62-mm M14 rifles or accurized 5.56-mm M16A4’s rifles are able to effectively engage the enemy. These weapons systems represent 19 percent of the company’s firepower. This means that 81 percent of the company has little effect on the fight. This is unacceptable.”

Reclaiming the Infantry Half-Kilometer

Oct 12/09: Field. The Associated Press reports that M4 carbine and M249 SAW light machine gun failures contributed to the debacle at Wanat, Afghanistan, in which an American outpost was overrun by the Taliban, and to another situation at nearby Kamdesh. An excerpt:

“[Douglas Cubbison of the Army Combat Studies Institute at Fort Leavenworth, KS] study is based on an earlier Army investigation and interviews with Soldiers who survived the attack at Wanat… The Soldiers said their weapons were meticulously cared for and routinely inspected by commanders. But still the weapons had breakdowns… Cubbison acknowledges the high rates of fire during the two-hour battle may have led to the failures. But he says numerous problems occurred relatively early in the engagement.”

Defense Tech adds that:

“Basically, the most damning conclusions are compiled in the recommendations section of the report. There are a few instanced specified in the report of an M4 fouling, and one where the M4 fouled and the Soldier picked up a SAW and that was jammed up as well… Staff Sergeant Phillips poured out fire, as recalled by another Engineer Specialist loading for him, [SSG Phillips] went through three rifles using them until they jammed.”

Debacle at Wanat

FY 2007 – 2008

Army holds test – M4 last by far.

M4, EDT-III
(click to view full)

Sept 17/08: Competition. Military.com’s Christian Lowe reports that that the Army issued a solicitation to industry in August 2008, asking companies to submit proposals that would demonstrate “…improvements in individual weapon performance in the areas of accuracy and dispersion… reliability and durability in all environments, modularity and terminal performance.”

The intervening years have seen a number of new carbine designs hit the market, as well as a number of “personal defense weapons” that attempt to deliver carbine-class firepower in a weapon only slightly larger than a pistol. Most use calibers other than 5.56mm or 9mm, however, which has prevented their adoption for use by pilots, vehicle crew, and other specialists who need an extremely compact weapon. The Army solicitation also asks for ideas on a “subcompact” variant that would fit in this category.

The article quoted Richard Audette, project manager for Soldier weapons at the US Army’s Picatinny Arsenal. The Army is currently working on its carbine requirements document, and is trying to write it in a way that does not exclude other calibers:

“We’re at the point now where we’re going to go out and compete… We’re looking for anyone that has a world-class carbine… We’re interested in any new technologies out there… We want to know about everything that’s out there, regardless of caliber… If you’ve got a 6.8 [mm caliber weapon], we’re interested in that and seeing what that brings to the table.”

What the Army will insist upon, however, is production capacity. Colt can churn out 10,000 M4s per month, and in June 2009 the M4s blueprints will no longer be a Colt exclusive. Experience with ongoing M16 orders suggests that this will expand production capacity, and drive down prices. In contrast, manufacturers of weapons in promising new calibers like 6.8mm have not received large military orders to ramp up their production capacity to the same levels. Producibility is certainly a valid concern. It must be part of any fair and reasonable competition. It can also be abused to become a back door method of ratifying existing decisions, while adopting the veneer of competition. Which will it be in this case? Only time will tell.

July 11/08: Demonstration. Military.com reports that about 30 legislative aides signed up to attend a July 11 demonstration at Marine Corps Base Quantico. Congressional and industry sources report that the event feature the standard 5.56mm M4 carbine, plus the FN SCAR Mk17 7.62mm (SCAR MK16 is the 5.56mm version that was tested by the Army), – and a modified “M4-style MURG (Modified Upper Receiver Group)” rifle capable of firing a new 6.8mm special purpose cartridge round, among others. Attendees included FN-USA, HK, LWRC who offers receiver group switchouts like HK’s and adds a 6.8mm version, Barrett (REC-7 6.8mm), and Bushmaster. All reportedly avoided commercial sales pitches, and stuck to facts and demonstrations.

Complaints persist from troops on the front lines regarding the current 5.56mm round/riling combination’s lethality. The ballistic characteristics of calibers around 6.8mm have yet to feature a breakthrough military purchase in the face of 5.56mm standardization, but these calibers are gaining growing recognition for their balance of size (can be used with M16 magazines), light weight, and knock-down power.

Participants reportedly had the opportunity to observe the effects of different caliber rounds in translucent ballistic jelly, which simulates human tissue, and to fire the weapons involved. Sens. James Coburn [R-OK] and Ken Salazar [D-CO] remain very active in this area, but the number of participants suggests that their efforts may be gaining traction in spite the Army. Military.com | American Mohist.

Late December 2007: Test results. DID obtains some exact results from the Army’s testing. The Army has now done 3 dust tests. In the late 2006/Jan 2007 report “Baseline Reliability and Dust Assessment for the M4, M16, and M249,” the M4 jammed 9,836 times – 1 jam every 6 rounds. In a May 2007 “Extreme Dust Test II”, with no competitors, the M4 had 1 jam every 88 rounds, using heavy lubrication. In the November 2007 “Extreme Dust Test III”, as DID has discussed, the competing rifles were subject to significantly more maintenance and lubrication than elite American forces like Delta used in their weapon selection process, or indeed in HK’s own field testing of its HK416s prior to shipment.

We’ll begin with the Army’s overall results, from its own release:

“Even with extreme dust test III’s 98.6 percent success rate there was a total of 863 class 1 and 2 weapon/magazine stoppages with 19 class 3 stoppages. During extreme dust test II conducted during the summer, there were 296 total class 1 and 2 stoppages and 11 class 3 stoppages.

A class 1 stoppage is one a Soldier can clear within 10 seconds; a class 2 stoppage is one a Soldier can clear, but requires more than 10 seconds; and, class 3 is a stoppage that requires an armorer to clear.”

DID will simply point out that 10 seconds can be a rather fatally long time when people are shooting at you, and at your friends. So, what happens when the Extreme Dust Test III stoppages are broken out by weapon?

The M4 Carbine is the Army’s existing weapon.

• 882 jams, 1 jam every 68 rounds, again using heavy lubrication. In addition all 10 of the M4 barrels needed to be replaced, and a number of their parts were replaced during the test. None of the cold hammer forged HK416 and XM-8 barrels needed replacement.

The HK416 is a modified M4 carbine, which can be and has been converted from existing rifles. Used by US Special Forces.

• 233 jams, 1 jam every 257 rounds, 3.77x more reliable than the M4.

FN SCAR is US special Forces’ new weapon, designed by SOSOCM. It just went into production in late 2007.

• 226 jams, 1 jam every 265 rounds, 3.85x more reliable than the M4

XM-8 is a developmental rifle. It’s an advanced version of HK’s G36, a rifle in wide use by many NATO armies. The US Army cancelled the XM-8 weapons family 2 years ago.

• 127 jams, I jam every 472 rounds, 6.95x more reliable than the M4.

The failure of M4 barrels at 6,000 rounds confirms SOCOM objections that date back to the Feb 23/01 report “M4A1 5.56mm Carbine and Related Systems Deficiencies and Solutions,” which ended up concluding that “M4A1 Carbine… does not meet the requirements of SOF.” The barrel replacement also increases the rifle’s life cycle costs when compared with the 10,000 round advertised barrel life, as additional barrels are sold to the Army for $240 each. A longer, heavier M16 barrel, which is a competed production weapon, cost $100 by comparison. While the dust test is indeed an extreme test, the 10,000 round requirement is under “all conditions” – not just ideal conditions.

Dec 18/07: The US Army publishes “M-4 Carbine Has High Soldier Confidence Despite Test.” Not exactly a headline to inspire confidence, as the Army acknowledges that the M4 Carbine finished last among the 4 contenders – but amazingly, asserts that the rifle is just fine and shows no interest in buying even the HK416’s parts swap-out into the existing M4:

“After being exposed to the heavy dusting, 10 of each weapon fired 6,000 rounds apiece. They were fired in 50 120-round cycles. Each was then wiped and re-lubricated at the 600 round mark. After 1,200 rounds were fired from each weapon, they were fully cleaned and re-lubricated… “While the M-4 finished fourth out of four, 98 percent of all the rounds fired from it went off down range as they were supposed to do,” Brig. Gen. [Mark] Brown [commander of Program Executive Office Soldier and the Natick Soldier Systems Center] said. “However, the three other candidates did perform better at about a 99 percent rate or better, which is a mathematically statistically significant difference, but not an operationally statistical difference.”… The Army has put an option on an existing contract for 64,450 M4s, according to the general.”

“A mathematically statistically significant difference, but not an operationally statistical difference.” Statistically, 99% is a 100% improvement over 98%. Operationally, I jam every 68 rounds is almost one jam for every 2 30-round magazines. Whereas one jam in 257 rounds would only happen about once in 8 30-round magazines. Readers are left to contemplate the operational significance of those probabilities in a sustained, serious firefight.

4-Rifle test: M4 finishes dead last

June 29/07: Testing. A document circulated on Capitol Hill asking for testing includes these excerpts:

“The Army has claimed “83% reported confidence that the M4 will not suffer major breakage or failure that necessitates repair before further use” – A soldier should be 100% confident that his weapon will not break the next time he fires it… Since the M16 was introduced in Vietnam the answer has always been “It’s the soldiers’ fault”… The Special Operations Command has the most proficient soldiers in the world, they shoot the most and they operate in the most difficult environments – In 2001 SOCOM was highly critical of the reliability of the M4, and they chose to adopt a new weapon – the SCAR. Our Tier 1 units – like Delta Force, and Seal Team 6 have all abandoned the M4 for other weapons that is [sic] significantly more reliable.”

M4 Carbine Contracts Announced to Date

M4 carbine, firing
(click to view full)

The following contracts concern the M4 Carbine and its variants directly; other than spare parts or magazines, all other related contracts for accessories etc. were excluded. We also excluded M16 contracts that did not also include M4s.

No announced DefenseLINK contracts have fit these criteria since February 2009, though some sole-source orders may be found in other venues. The FBO.gov June 14/11 presolicitation may lead to additional announced orders.

March 6/14: US Army Contracting Command at Picatinny Arsenal, NJ awards $16.3 million in contracts as a firm-fixed-price, multi-year contract for M4 rifle bolts under the M4 product improvement program. Each request will be competed between Colt Defense LLC in West Hartford, CT (W15QKN-14-D-0027) and FN Manufacturing LLC in Columbia, SC (W15QKN-14-D-0026), though 6 bids were received. The contract runs until Feb 28/18.

Jan 7/13: Colt Defense LLC in West Hartford, CT receives $14 million firm-fixed-price contract for the M4 Product Improvement Program replacement barrel and front sight assembly. Work location will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Dec 30/16. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 6 bids received by the US Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-13-D-0040).

Dec 19/12: From FBO.gov, amended solicitation #W15QKN-13-R-0039, originally issued Nov 27/12:

“…requirement for up to a total of 350,000 Replacement Bolts used in the conversion of the M4 Carbine to the M4A1 Carbine. To meet continuous requirements for FY13 through FY17, the United States Government intends to award one or more four-year IDIQ contracts with Firm Fixed Price (FFP) orders based on Other Than Full and Open competition… Competition for this requirement shall be other than full and open, and limited to the United States and its territories, island possessions and protectorates, in accordance with the license agreement between the US Government and Colt Defense LLC, limiting distribution of the Technical Data Package (TDP). The authority to limit competition is in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(ii)(A), only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. FAR 6.302-1(a)(2) applies when supplies or services required by the agency are available from only one responsible source, or for DoD, NASA and the Coast Guard, from only one or a limited number of responsible sources, and no other type of supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements.

The maximum contract ceiling price for the total anticipated contract award is $21,350,000.00. The maximum quantity of units is

350,000. The anticipated award date for this action is 3rd Quarter of Fiscal Year 2013.”

Nov 16/12: The GAO dismisses Colt’s protest.

Oct 9/12: Colt protests again. For the 2nd time in 5 months, Colt lodges a protest of the US Army’s efforts to upgrade its M4 carbines to M4A1s. This protest is aimed at the amended Sept 21/12 solicitation. Military.com.

July 24/12: Colt Protests, Wins. The US Government Accountability Office’s ruling forces the US Army to rework the original M4A1 upgrade competition that Remington had won (q.v. April 25/12 entry), so vendors in the competitive range could re-submit. Colt protested both Remington Defense’s win, and the miscalculation of royalties Colt would receive.

More than 6,000 soldiers in the 101st Airborne have already received the rifles, but the Army will need to resolve these protests if it wishes to begin installing conversion kits in summer 2013. The M4A1 includes a heavier barrel, a full automatic trigger assembly, and ambidextrous fire controls. A free-float forward rail, which improves accuracy is widely available on civilian guns, might receive a contract by the end of 2014. What’s conspicuous by its absence is a more reliable firing system. Col. Scott Armstrong of PM Soldier Weapons:

“There were 11 [vendors] that competed in that; they went through nearly a year of testing…. None of the offerers completed the first phase or outperformed the current bolt and bolt carrier group on the M4A1 configuration. Areas that the competitors really fell short in were reliability, durability as well as high temperature and low temperature conditions. The M4A1 bolt outperformed [the competition] in all of those areas.”

See: GAO ruling | Military.com

April 25/12: M4s from Remington. Remington Arms Company, LLC in Ilion, NY receives an $83.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for 24,000 M4A1 carbines. Remington is positioned for any future carbine competition, if there is one, with the ACR. Meanwhile, its “R4” seems to have found a production niche, now that Colt no longer owns all rights. This is the 1st non-Colt M4 contract, and Remington beat 5 other bids – presumably including Colt.

Work will be performed in Ilion, NY until April 12/17. U.S. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI manages the contract (W56HZV-12-D-0056).

Oct 5/11: GTD, Inc. in Lola, MT, received an $8.6 million firm-fixed-price indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for M4/M4A1 Carbine Trigger Components. Work will be performed in Lola, MT, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/16. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 4 bids received by the U.S. Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-11-D-0207).

June 14/11: RFP. FBO.gov releases Presolicitation W56HZV-10-R-0593, covering 70,000 – 100,000 M4 and M4A1 carbines over 5 years. The Government expects to order 25-30% in each of years 1 and 2, and 13-17% in each of years 3 through 5.

The contractor(s) winning the best value competition will also be required to provide ancillary equipment as specified by the contract, and will be paid only for produced items, not for setup and manufacturing costs. Bidding is restricted to firms in the U.S. & its territories, and the carbines will be produced in accordance with the M4/M4A1 Technical Data Package (TDP) and the license agreement between the U.S. Government and Colt Defense, LLC. That TDP is restricted/ export controlled, and requires submission of a Non-Disclosure Agreement. The TDPs will not be available until an NDA is submitted, and an FBO.gov solicitation is issued. Read “Colt M4 Data Rights & The Individual Carbine Competition” for an analysis of how the Army reached this point, and what it could mean in practice.

Feb 2/09: Colt Defense LLC in Hartford, CT received a $9.5 million firm-fixed-price 5-year Requirements contract for 18,000 Barrel & Front Assemblies; 13,600 Hand Guards; 7,100 Heavy Barrel Assemblies; 22,000 Receivers and Cartridges; and 200,000 Extractor Spring Assemblies. Work is to be performed at Hartford, CT with an estimated completion date of Sept 28/12. US Army Tank and Automotive Command Rock Island in Rock Island, IL manages this contract (DAAE20-03-D-0191).

April 17/07: Small business qualifier Colt Defense LLC in Hartford, CT, was awarded on April 6, 2007, the full delivery order amount of $50.8 million as part of a firm-fixed-price contract for M4 and M4A1 carbines. Work will be performed in Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete by July 30, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Feb. 16, 2007 by the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Rock Island, IL (W52H09-04-D-0086). See also July 26/06.

Jan 22/07: Small business qualifier Colt Defense LLC in Hartford, CT received a delivery order amount of $5.6 million as part of a $24.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for Unique Spare Parts for the M4 and M4A1 Carbine. Work will be performed in Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete by May 30, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on April 5, 2004. The U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command, Rock Island, Ill., is the contracting activity (DAAE20-03-D-0191).

Sept 26/06: Small business qualifier Colt Defense LLC in Hartford, CT received a maximum $10 million firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for M4A1 machine guns. The M4A1 Carbine and variants will be utilized with the family of carbines that are currently in the U.S. Military arsenal. The M4A1 Carbine will come in four basic versions, which consist of longer and shorter versions of the M4A1 Carbine. Work will be performed in Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete by September 2011. Contract funds in the amount of $278,300, will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured by the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division in Crane, Indiana (N00164-06-D-4805).

July 26/06: Small business qualifier Colt Defense LLC in Hartford, CT received a delivery-order amount of $53.8 million as part of a $242.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for procurement of M4/M4A1 carbines. Work will be performed at Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete by Sept. 30, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on June 30, 2006. The Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command, Rock Island, Ill., is the contracting activity (W52H09-04-D-0086).

Jan 13/06: Small business qualifier Center Industries Inc. in Wichita, KS received a $7,712,600 modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for aluminum magazines for the M16 rifle/M4 carbine. Work will be performed in Wichita, KS and is expected to be complete by Oct. 31, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on Dec. 30, 2005 by the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Rock Island, IL (DAAE20-02-F-0022).

April 1/05: FN Manufacturing Inc. in Columbia, SC received a delivery order amount of $6.7 million as part of a $29.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for M16A4 rifle and M4 carbine. Work will be performed in Columbia, SC, and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2008. There were 2 bids solicited on Dec. 20, 2004, and 2 bids were received by the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Rock Island, IL (W52H09-05-D-0080).

FN Manufacturing LLC writes in to say that they have won “the vast majority of M16A2, A3 and A4 contracts as well as spare parts contracts for these systems since 1989” through “full and open competition.” Having said that: “…never was FN Manufacturing LLC, or any other small arms manufacturer, awarded M4 contracts. The M4 cannot be competed and always has been awarded sole source to Colt because of licensing rights restricting full and open competition until 2009.”

Aug 30/04: Small business qualifier Colt Defense LLC in Hartford, CT received a delivery order amount of $0 as part of a $123 million firm-fixed-price contract for 124,803 weapons in either M4 carbine or M4A1 carbine configurations. Work will be performed in West Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete by Sept. 30, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on Oct. 14, 2003 by the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Rock Island, IL (W52H09-04-D-0086).

Jan 15/04: Small business qualifier Colt Defense LLC in Hartford, CT received Jan. 13, 2004, a delivery order amount of $4,029,095 as part of an $8,058,190 firm-fixed-price contract for M4 unique spare and repair parts. Work will be performed in Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete by Jan. 30, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on Sept. 18, 2003 by the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Rock Island, IL (DAAE20-03-D-0191).

July 31/02: Colt’s Manufacturing Company Inc. in Hartford, CT received an $18.5 million undefinitized contracting action for 25,764 M4 carbines and 300 M4A1 carbines, in support of the U. S. Air Force, U. S. Army, and foreign military sales countries on July 30, 2002. Work will be performed in West Hartford, CT, and is to be complete by Sep. 30, 2004. This was a sole source contract initiated on June 6, 2002 by the U.S. Army Tank and Automotive Command in Rock Island, IL (DAAE20-02-C-0115).

Sept 19/96: Small business qualifier Colt’s Manufacturing Company Inc. in Hartford, CT received a $5.5 million firm fixed price contract, with a potential value of $.5 million if all options are exercised, for 9,861 M4 Carbines, 5.56mm and 716 M4A1 Carbines. Work will be performed in Hartford, CT and is expected to be complete by April 30, 1998. This is a sole source contract initiated on September 6, 1996 by the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive & Armaments Command in Rock Island, IL (DAAE20-96-C-0391).

Appendix A: Testing, Testing – Fairly?

XM-8 Family
(click to view full)

The promised tests included the M4 and 3 other rifles: the M4-based HK416, the FNH USA-designed Mk16 SOCOM Combat Assault Rifle (best known as FN SCAR-L), and the H&K XM8 carbine. Unlike the M4, the HK416, XM8, and FN-SCAR all use gas-piston operating systems to achieve automatic fire. The XM8 family is an very updated version of the popular G36 in use with many NATO militaries; it was slated to be the M4’s replacement, but that RFP was suspended by the Army in July 2005 and then canceled in October 2005. The FN-SCAR is a “live” program, and July 2007 marked the beginning of Special Operations Command’s operational tests of the FN-SCAR 5.56mm Mk16 and the 7.62mm Mk17, which could become its future mainstays.

Miltary.com reported that the US Army sand tests will include 10 samples of each weapon through which engineers will fire 6,000 rounds. Each weapon and loaded magazine will be exposed to “extreme dust” for 30 minutes then test fired with 120 rounds. Each weapon will be wiped down and lubricated every 600 rounds, with a full cleaning every 1,200 rounds. The firing, collection of data and analysis of data is expected to take approximately 5 months.

FN SCAR w. Grip Pod
(click to view full)

One’s first reaction upon seeing the proposed testing regimen was to compare it very unfavorably with the regimen Delta Force put the HK416 through, firing it day after day without maintenance for thousands of rounds. Or even the testing HK itself uses for its HK416s. Indeed, it seems on its face to be a test designed to minimize the very weaknesses in the M4 incumbent that have triggered this controversy. Those who believe the cycle is reasonable cite 300 rounds as the soldier’s 1-day load, and say that under sand storm conditions, a once a day wipedown is the bare minimum for any weapon. Every 600 rounds is thus a safety factor of 2 against the worst possible conditions. Of course, sandstorms have a way of lasting more than one day, and when they do – as in the initial portion of Operation Iraqi Freedom – even vehicle interiors may feature a fine particulate haze.

Within its chosen regimen, there were 3 key ways the Army could choose to bias the test. One was the size of the particulate in the dust chamber – which can be made large in relative terms to lower the number of problems with fouling and jams. The biggest problems in theater are with the very fine particulates. This is especially relevant given the October 2004 report prepared by the Desert Research Institute for the US military. “Geochemical and Physical Characteristics of Iraqi Dust and Soil Samples” [PDF, 2.9 MB] stated that:

“…current chamber test methodology misrepresents real-world conditions. The character of the soils and dust collected from areas of military activity in Iraq is greatly different from the material used in current weapons testing procedures. Current procedures employ laboratory generated dust that is 99.7% silicon dioxide (i.e. quartz), contains no salt or reactive chemicals, and contains coarser particle sizes than most of the Iraq samples. Use of this material cannot simulate conditions in Iraq that have contributed to the weapons failures.”

The next item to watch was whether the rifles used were randomly chosen, or cherry picked and then pre-maintained to perform at an unusual reliability level vs. a field weapon. A third way of gaming the testing system could involve the level of lubrication used. One source noted that the first dust test new M4s had 9,836 jams in 60,000 rounds – almost one jam every 6 rounds. The Army kept working on the test until they figured out a “generous lubrication” approach that used far more than the manufacturer recommended, but lowered jams to 1 in 88 rounds. A fair test must match the manufacturer’s manual for each weapon, or use the same lubrication for each weapon based on the minimum recommended among all test weapons.

Additional Readings

Background: Weapons & Key Trends

• DID – Colt M4 Data Rights & The Individual Carbine Competition. guest Article by Daniel E. Watters of The Gun Zone.

• The Gun Zone – A 5.56 x45 mm “Timeline”. The prologue section begins in 1882, and subsequent sections go all the way to the present day. The feature includes M4-related contracts that were never announced on the Pentagon’s DefenseLINK.

• Gary K. Roberts, LCDR, USNR at NDIA 2008 conference – Time for a Change [PDF format]. LCDR Roberts offers a history of US military small arms programs, as well as testing results from the 2007 multi-agency M4A1/MK12 Modified Upper Receiver Group (MURG) project. Includes evaluations of 6.8mm and 7.62mm caliber performance.

• Winds of Change – Taking Back the Infantry Half-Kilometer. Links to official report re: the need for lethality at range in Afghanistan, and related materials.

• NY Times At War: Notes from the Front Lines – The Weakness of Taliban Marksmanship. And how they make it work for them anyway. Effective, accurate counterfire at range offers an especial advantage against such opponents.

• Colt – M4 5.56mm Carbine

• Quarterbore – Special Operations improves M4 carbine. Written by SGT. Nelson Mumma Jr.

• Special Operations.com – A Short History of the M4 Carbine. More of a chronicle of variants and add-ons.

• Hartford Courant (Dec 5/04) – Ex-Marine has West Hartford, Conn., Gun Maker Colt Shooting Straight. Also notes the firm’s political backers in Washington, most prominently Rep. Jack Murtha [D-PA, now deceased].

• Gun Websites – Colt CM901 modular battle rifle. Can be chambered in 5.56mm through 7.62mm.

• ADCOR: The B.E.A.R. Story

• Modern Firearms [Guns.RU] – FN SCAR: Mark 16 and Mark 17- Special Forces Combat Assault Rifle (USA / Belgium). One of the 7.62mm SCAR’s most interesting and potentially life-saving features is the ability to switch its chambering, which would let operators scavenge Russian/Chinese magazines from the enemy for ammunition.

• Defense Update – Special Operations Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR)

• National Defense Magazine (July 2005) – Custom-Designed Rifle Aims to Fit Commandos’ Special Needs. Discusses the FN SCAR.

• Heckler & Koch USA – HK416

• Soldier Tech – HIGHLY EVOLVED: The HK416 Enhanced Carbine

• HK Pro – The HK416: The M16 has finally been fixed (Cal 5.56 mm x 45). There’s also a larger 7.62mm version in development, the HK417.

• DID – IAR What IAR: The USMC’s SAW Substitution. The FN-SCAR, HK416, and Colt variants of the M16 were all competing. A variant of the HK416 won, and became the M27 IAR.

• Remington Defense – ACR. Their Adaptive Combat Rifle is multi-caliber in 5.56mm, 6.5mm Grendel, or 6.8mm.

• GlobalSecurity.org – XM8 Future Combat Rifle / Lightweight Assault Rifle/ Modular Assault Weapon System

• National Defense Magazine (February 2004) – Army Tests New Rifle That Could Replace M16, M4. Referring to the canceled XM-8; it also discusses the XM-29 OICW.

• Ghost Recon.NET – XM29 Objective Individual Combat Weapon. Very good coverage.

News & Views

• EveryJoe (May 12/14) – Are U.S. Soldiers Dying From Inadequate Weapons? By Lt. Col. Tom Kratman (ret.), who summarizes a number of significant improvements in rifle design since the M4.

• Washington Times (Feb 20/14) – Cover-up? Army historian says report on deadly Afghan battle was altered to absolve faulty gun.

• Washington Times (Feb 19/14) – Troops left to fend for themselves after Army was warned of flaws in rifle.

• US DoD Inspector General (Sept 16/13, #DODIG-2013-131) – Army Requirement To Acquire Individual Carbine Not Justified. Because asking bean counters what the combat troops need is the way to win wars.

• NDIA National Defense (March 2013) – Industry Shooting for Army’s First New Rifle in Half Century (UPDATED). Details the contenders.

• Defense Procurement News (June 14/11) – Colt May Face World Without M4 Carbine Production

• AP (May 25/11) – INFLUENCE GAME: As Army eyes a new combat rifle, companies load with lobbyists to win the work

• Defense Tech (Dec 30/10) – Enemy Performance at Wanat. Not such a positive review of the M4.

• NY Times At War blog (July 7/10) – Examining the Complaints About American Rifle Reliability. Positive review of the M4/M16.

• US Army (Nov 13/08) – Army looking at new carbines as follow-on to M-4. Industry day for firms to show their small arms products to Secretary of the Army Pete Geren and representatives of the Army’s Program Executive Office-Soldier. The US Army remains clear that buying almost 500,000 M4s in the near future remains their priority – at which point, the space for a follow-on purchase is questionable.

• Tactical Life, via Military.com (Oct 10/08) – M4 Round Has Strong Competitors. Shooting tests involving the 6.8mm SPC and 65mm Grendel round are discussed; note that 6.8mm versions of the M-16/M4 family are already available in the marketplace.

• Anarchangel (Nov 1/07) – Stuck on You. Looks at the issues of network effects and sunk costs as they apply to rifles etc. Author’s own opinions.

• Military.com (July 27/07) – Army Agrees To M4 Sand Test Shoot-Off

• FN Herstal USA (July 12/07) – FN Herstal SCAR And EGLM Receive Approval To Proceed With Initial Operational Test & Evaluation (IOT&E). Money is requested for procurement in FY 2008. EGLM is the SCAR rifle’s grenade launcher.

• Military.com Defense Tech (May 25/07) – Soldiers Want a Bigger Bang. Describes a December 2006 survey, conducted on behalf of the Army by the Center for Naval Analyses. Figures included jamming in combat, based on over 2,600 interviews with Soldiers returning from combat duty. The M249 SAW light machine gun and M9 pistol fared especially poorly.

• Military.com (April 30/07) – Senator Tells Army to Reconsider M4

• Defense Tech (April 30/07) – M4 Debate Fires Up

• Sen. Tom Coburn, R-OK (April 12/07) – Letter to the Hon. Peter Green, Secretary of the Army re: M4 competition. DID also spoke with Sen. Coburn’s office.

• Military.com (April 6/07) – Army Won’t Field Rifle Deemed Superior to M4

• Murdoc Online (April 3/07) – Jammed. Reprints a letter to Defense News from a Sgt. Who served in Afghanistan with B Company, 2nd Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment.

• US Army (March 29/07) – Army position: M4 Carbine is Soldier’s battlefield weapon of choice

• Colt Defense Weapon Systems (March 26/07) – Letter to the Editor from Colt Defense LLC in response to Army Times staff writer Matthew Cox article, “It’s Better Than the M4, but You Can’t Have One.” No permalink, just a position on the web site’s news page at this time. Signed by Colt COO Marine Corps Maj. Gen. James R. Battaglini (ret.)

• Gannett Company Inc., Army Times (March 19/07) – Straight shot: Next rifle should be tested, selected by soldiers who’ll use it. Author Maj. Chaz Bowser is a leading weapons designer within US Special Forces, and has helped lead the development of their SCAR Rifle system.

• Gannett Company Inc., Army Times (Feb 26/07) – Army Times Editorial: Field the best weapon

• Gannett Company Inc., Army Times (Feb 26/07) – Out of Reach: Better than M4, but you can’t have one

• US Center for Naval Analyses (December 2006) – Soldier Perspectives on Small Arms in Combat [PDF format]. Includes statistics and reports re: jamming and other issues.

• DID (Nov 2/05) – OICW-1 Canceled, Door Closes on XM-8 For Now

• DID (July 22/05) – OICW Individual Weapon RFP Temporarily Suspended. Well, maybe not so temporarily.

• The Shepherd and the SEAL: An Afghan Tale. Describes the aftermath of the Red Wing Down incident in Afghanistan, and the eventual rescue of a Navy SEAL thanks to Afghan traditions of hospitality and a very brave man.

• US Army News Service (July 17/03) – Army releases findings from 507th ambush

• Association of the US Army (Jan 30/03) – Chief Awards 8 Silver Stars to Rangers. Including Capt. Nate Self.

Americas

• The US Army is contracting the Acrow Corporation to enhance its troop mobility. The awarded firm-fixed-price contract has a value of $19 million and provides for a 240-meter Line of Communication Bridge (Acrow 700XS) and one 280-meter wet gap float system. The contract includes the full spectrum of necessary equipment and materials such as bridge spans, floating pier assemblies and approach ramps. Those bridge systems are an essential part of mobility operations that enable land component forces to move freely and quickly across terrain. Mobility operations are designed to facilitate moving forces to achieve a position of advantage in relation to the enemy. Deployment of a Line of Communication (LOC) Bridge is not quite tactically focused but is used to establish semi-permanent or permanent support planned road networks that anticipate a high-volume of traffic. These bridges are typically placed in locations free from the direct influence of force on force combat operations. Work will be performed in Lafayette, New Jersey and Fort Wayne, Indiana. Work is scheduled for completion by July 26, 2019.

• The Air Force is tapping Lockheed Martin Rotary and Mission Systems to enhance the combat effectiveness of FMS customers. The awarded indefinite-delivery/definite-quantity contract provides for the procurement of Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night (LANTIRN) support equipment and sustainment work at a cost of $99.9 million. LANTIRN allows fighter aircraft to fly at low altitudes, at night and under-the-weather to attack ground targets with a variety of precision-guided and unguided weapons. The system consists of a navigation pod and a targeting pod integrated and mounted externally beneath the aircraft. The AN/AAQ-13 navigation pod provides high-speed penetration and precision attack assistance in all flying conditions, using a terrain-following radar and a fixed infrared sensor to display an image of the terrain in front of the aircraft on a heads-up display of cockpit viewscreen. The AN/AAQ-14 laser and infrared targeting pod assists in the delivery of precision weapons. Work will be performed in Orlando, Florida, and is expected to be completed by July 24, 2023.

• Elbit Systems of America is receiving a $7.2 million firm-fixed-price delivery order to support the Navy’s fleet of V-22 aircraft. The order provides for the procurement of 120 Slim Multi-Function Displays to be installed on the Common Configuration and Modernization retrofit aircraft. Of the 120 displays, 100 are reserved for the Navy, 4 for the Air Force and 16 will be delivered to Japan. The Slim Multi-Function Display is a digital system of flight information that is designed to reduce pilot workload and provide enhanced safety and includes a HUD on the cockpit canopy. Work will be performed at the company’s location in Fort Worth, Texas, and is expected to be completed in October 2019.

Middle East & Africa

• The US State Department is determined to provide the government of Bahrain with naval support as part of a foreign military sale. The potential deal has a value of $70 million and provides for items and services as part of a Follow-On Technical Support (FOTS) for the Royal Bahrain Navy Ship Sabha (FFG-90). The Sabha, formerly the USS Jack Williams (FFG-24) was transferred to the kingdom as Excess Defense Article on September 13, 1996. The FFG-7 Oliver Hazard Perry class was produced as a capable 3,600t – 4,100t anti-submarine platform, with some secondary air defense and anti-ship capabilities via its SM-1 Standard and RGM-84 Harpoon missiles, and which could be bought in large enough numbers to fill the US Navy’s needs. The Sabha was launched in 1980 and is now considered to be the lead frigate of the Royal Bahrain Navy. Bahrain is a key US ally in the Middle-East and is home to the US Navy 5th fleet.

• The Israeli Air Force is currently in negotiations with Boeing regarding a deal with a potential value of up to $11 billion. This deal would be the IAF’s largest-ever acquisition, considerably boosting its mobility and strike capabilities. Israel Hayom daily reports that the deal includes a squadron of F-15 jets with upgraded stealth features, a squadron of transport helicopters and KC-46 tanker aircraft. Israel’s outdated CH-53 Sea Stallions will likely be replaced by CH-47 Chinooks and V-22 Ospreys. The purchase will be funded from US military aid money, which comes to some $3.8 billion annually, over the next decade as the new planes and helicopters are delivered. If the deal goes through and Israel returns to purchasing F-15s, it would mark the first Boeing fighter jet acquisition by the Israeli Air Force in two decades. In the years since, Israel has bought 100 F-16s and another 50 F-35 stealth jets from Boeing’s chief competitor, Lockheed Martin.

Europe

• The government of Norway is set to receive communication support as part of a US foreign military sale. The $17.6 million firm-fixed-price contract provides for the acquisition of US Digital Data Link M1 systems to be installed on Norway’s RQ-20B Puma AE II and RQ-12A WASP Block IV unmanned air systems. The Puma AE designed for land based and maritime operations and is capable of landing in the water or on land. The Puma can stay in the air for over three hours using a battery and operates at an altitude of up to 500 feet. It weighs only 14 pounds and is less than 5 feet long, making it possible to launch by hand. The Wasp AE Micro Air Vehicle is man portable and can stay in the air for up to 50 minutes at altitudes of 500 feet. Both UAVs are designed for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and carry common ground control systems which include the Digital Data Link M1. Work will be performed in Monrovia, California, with an estimated completion date of July 25, 2019.

• Luxembourg is set to be the fifth customer of the Airbus H-145M multirole medium-twin helicopter. The battlefield support helicopter is primarily intended for use by military and law enforcement agencies. The helicopter can be deployed in transportation, special operations, ISTAR, SAR, fire support, and medical evacuation missions. The H-145M can seat up to 11 personnel including crew and troops. The large cabin space accommodates up to ten troops in a high-density air assault layout, or a fully-equipped force for special operations. The platform is compatible with seven- and 12-tube rocket launchers, a 20mm cannon pod, a 12.7mm machine gun pod, and air-to-surface missiles. It can also be configured to carry laser-guided rockets. Deliveries are scheduled to take place before the end of 2019 with an IOC expected in 2020. No details of the contract value have been disclosed, but the deal also includes a training and support package. Airbus Helicopters says it has now secured orders for 51 H145Ms.

Asia-Pacific

• The Indian Air Force is currently in the middle of a major modernization program of its 118 Jaguar ground attack fighters. The $3 billion program sees that the aircraft will be fitted with new engines, airframes and spares and will be upgraded with new avionics, communication and AESA radars. The effort will probably continue for the next 5-years and will extend the operational life of the aircraft for another 20-years. The Jaguar made its maiden flight in 1968 and was produced in 23 variants. The Indian Air Force placed a $1 billion order in 1978 to procure 40 Jaguars and license to build 120 Jaguar aircraft at Hindustan Aeronautics Limited under the local designation Shamsher. Main contractor will be India’s state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited which will receive decommissioned Jaguar fighters from France and Oman free of charge and will buy more planes from the UK at a throwaway price.

Today’s Video

• Watch: H145M firing campaign equipped with HForce.

Puma AE team
(click to view full)

The mini-UAV market may lack the high individual price tags of vehicles like the RQ-4 Global Hawk, or the battlefield strike impact of an MQ-9 Reaper, but it does have 2 advantages. One is less concern about “deconfliction” with manned aircraft, as described in “RQ-7 Shadow, or the Cessna-sized MQ-1 Predator.

The other advantage is mini-UAVs’ suitability for special operations troops, who are being employed in numbers on the front lines around the world. “Raven UAVs Winning Gold in Afghanistan’s ‘Commando Olympics’” details the global scale of this interest – and in July 2008, a $200 million US SOCOM contract for a breakthrough mini-UAV underscored it again. Now AeroVironment’s S2AS/ RQ-20A Puma AE is moving beyond Special Operations, and into the regular force.

Mini-UAVs: Evolution & Advantages

CL-227, pre-launch
(click to view full)

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) that can perform battlefield missions seem like a recent phenomenon, but countries like Israel and Canada have been building and using them for 3 decades now. Israel translated its early lead into a globally competitive UAV industry; Canada has not, as the early lead generated by projects like the CL-227 Sentinel/”flying peanut” withered on the vine.

As American forces began to adopt UAVs more widely, however, opportunities were created for domestic manufacturers to establish volume production, and become global leaders. The American penchant for technology, and the pressure of battlefield requirements, began to create another opportunity: greater UAV diversity. At the high-end, UAVs moved from brigade, fleet group, and division surveillance roles, and began to replace high-end national reconnaissance assets (vid. RQ-4 Global Hawk). At the brigade and division levels, armed UAVs began to give these devices important strike roles in counterinsurgency scenarios (vid. MQ-1/9 Predator family).

The next level down are tactical UAVs like Textron AAI’s RQ-7 Shadow, IAI’s Searcher II, Elbit’s Skylark II, or the Boeing/Insitu ScanEagle. They require additional support equipment for launch/recovery, and have the ability to cover “this sector” or even “this city”.

RQ-14 Dragon Eye,
Smithsonian NASM
(click to view full)

At the same time, the march of technology had made another new development possible: large numbers of “mini-UAVs” small enough for soldiers to carry, with electronic sensors that could capture good quality imagery, and then relay it to troops over expanding electronic networks.

The mini-UAV market focuses on flying devices that can be carried, launched, and recovered by soldiers. They generally have ranges up to 20 km, and an endurance of 1-3 hours in the air. These UAVs aren’t designed to do depth reconnaissance, but to look over the next hill, watch a neighborhood in a city before troops enter it, patrol a base’s outer perimeter, etc.

Even smaller micro-UAVs are in development, and focus more tightly on “this building” or “this engagement”.

Aerovironment’s Mini-Mes

Pointer UAV
(click to view larger)

The late Dr. McReady’s Aerovironment, Inc. has a history of aerial innovation, from human and solar-powered flight to early entries that helped define the mini-UAV market. Their main competition is Israel’s Elbit Systems (esp. the popular Skylark I), while their most advanced competitor may be Prioria’s Maveric, selected by the Canadian armed forces. As Aerovironment’s history shows, however, their own firm’s new designs are their most frequent competitors:

1990: Aerovironment delivers the first privately-developed FQM-151 Pointer hand-launched UAVs, for “extended evaluation” by the US military and Special Operations communities. Some are used in Iraq and Kuwait during Desert Storm in 1991.

The subsequent Puma UAV design, begun in 2001, can be fairly characterized as a Pointer UAV that incorporates most of the industry’s advances since 1990. It’s part of a long progression for AeroVironment, which has played a big role in the mini-UAV space’s evolution:

2003: Aerovironment’s Dragon Eye/Swift (RQ-14) wins the US Marines’ competition for a mini-UAV.

2004: A new Aerovironment mini-UAV, the RQ-11A Raven, is fielded under limited expedited orders with the US Army’s 10th Mountain Division, and some special forces. This is not a formal competition, however, but an outgrowth of a 2002 ACTD (advanced concept technology demonstration) project.

RQ-11, Iraq
(click to view full)

Fall 2005: The US Army’s RPUAV competition arises from the RQ-11’s success. SOCOM joins this competition, and the upgraded RQ-11B Raven wins.

The US Marines switched from Dragon Eye to the Raven B in 2007, and the US Air Force now fields them too. Raven has also proved popular with foreign militaries, and is in service with Britain, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Spain, among others.

August 2006: The USAF picks another Aerovironment mini-UAV for its BATMAV UAV competition, and deliveries begin under the 5-year $45 million contract. The Wasp UAV began as a DARPA project, and the larger Wasp-III is a 1-pound vehicle with a wingspan just under 3 feet. It is called a ‘micro-UAV,’ but in truth it sits on the borderline between mini-UAV systems and true micro-UAVs.

Late 2007: The US Marines began buying and issuing Wasp-IIIs at the platoon level, complementing the RQ-11 Raven B, which is issued at the company and battalion levels. In January 2008, the USAF approved full-rate BATMAV production.

June 2008: SOCOM’s AECV program aims to select a mini-UAV that can be used by all branches, including Navy SEAL teams and USMC MARSOC. It picks the Puma AE, a new UAV from Aerovironment that adds a stabilized micro-camera, waterproofing, and the ability to land and recover the UAV on water. The “RQ-20” Puma subsequently finds a niche with route clearance minehunters, thanks to the advanced state of its optics, and ends up serving with the regular US Army, Marines & Air Force.

The Puma AE

RQ-20A Puma assembly
(click to view full)

Puma is slightly larger than Raven as is Aerovironment’s largest mini-UAV offering, but it’s still man-portable and hand-launched. The original Puma was almost 6 feet long, with a wingspan of 8.5 feet. Aerovironment pursued the typical young industry profile of build-field test-build as it developed the AE variant, issuing modified UAVs to units in the field for evaluation and feedback.

The US SOCOM contract has been the Puma program’s focus for a some time now, as SOCOM’s specifications led Aerovironment to conclude that its larger Puma platform was a better fit than the existing RQ-11B Raven. Along the way, Puma has been used for hybrid fuel cell experiments, and an “Aqua-Puma” driven by requests from the field served as an interim step along the road to the final Puma AE. In March 2012, it received the formal USAF designation “RQ-20A.”

AV on Puma AE
click for video

The hand-launched Puma AE’s most significant innovation is that it can land on both land and water, surviving near-vertical “deep stall” final approaches. In addition to the obvious special forces scenarios like river infiltrations, the ability to land on water and in very tight areas on land means that Puma can also be used from boats and ships, without vessel modifications for landing systems or vehicle storage.

The other big innovation is its sensor system. Previous mini-UAV systems tended to have micro-cameras that could be moved by the operator to pan, tilt, or zoom. What they usually have not had was a camera that was fully stabilized to fix on a designated point and provide a steady, constant image that compensates for aircraft movement etc. Recently, firms like Israel’s Bental Systems have begun to offer stabilized micro-payloads. Puma AE incorporates this innovation in an EO/IR day- and night-capable, waterproof sensor package that provides this kind of image tracking and stabilization. Other payload designs can be clipped in as they are developed for military or civilian applications.

Control is exercised from Aerovironment’s Ground Control Station (GCS) with a line of sight communications range of 15 km, and the system has its own internal GPS for positioning. The Ground Control Station is shared by the firm’s Raven and Wasp/BATMAV systems. Flight endurance is about 2 hours in the production version, and typical flight altitude is 100-500 feet. Like other mini-UAVs, Puma relies on its small size, small radar profile, and quiet engine to avoid detection.

Contracts and Key Events FY 2013 -2018

 

Raven & Puma
click for video

July 30/18: Data Link M1 for Norway The government of Norway is set to receive communication support as part of a US foreign military sale. The $17.6 million firm-fixed-price contract provides for the acquisition of US Digital Data Link M1 systems to be installed on Norway’s RQ-20B Puma AE II and RQ-12A WASP Block IV unmanned air systems. The Puma AE designed for land based and maritime operations and is capable of landing in the water or on land. The Puma can stay in the air for over three hours using a battery and operates at an altitude of up to 500 feet. It weighs only 14 pounds and is less than 5 feet long, making it possible to launch by hand. The Wasp AE Micro Air Vehicle is man portable and can stay in the air for up to 50 minutes at altitudes of 500 feet. Both UAVs are designed for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and carry common ground control systems which include the Digital Data Link M1. Work will be performed in Monrovia, California, with an estimated completion date of July 25, 2019.

May 11/18: German Navy buys a PUMA The German Navy will receive several RQ-20B Puma II UAV. Produced by AeroVironment the hand-launched tactical unmanned aircraft system provides the German Navy with a persistent intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance capability. Its force protection and over-the-horizon reconnaissance capability comes without the need to modify the host ship from which it is operated. To fulfill all the requirements set by the Bundesamt fur Ausrustung, Informationstechnik und Nutzung der Bundeswehr, AeroVironment partnered with the German company ESG Elektroniksystem- und Logistik GmbH. AeroVironment developed the Puma system to win a 2008 United States Special Operations Command competitive program of record. The mini-UAV market focuses on flying devices that can be carried, launched, and recovered by soldiers. The RQ-20B Puma II AE differs from the baseline RQ-20A-model. It is equipped with longer-life battery power sources (increasing endurance to 3.5 hours and range to 20 km), a transit bay that can accommodate additional payloads.

March 19/18: FMS Contracts AeroVironment has landed a $9.09 million foreign military sales contract to provide an undisclosed number of its RQ-20B Puma surveillance systems and support to the government of Egypt. Work will be performed in Monrovia, California, with an estimated completion date of September 16, 2020. The RQ-20B Puma AE II M3/M4 is a man portable system capable of both ground and water landings. It is equipped with an electro-optical (EO) and infrared (IR) camera and illuminator and can deliver 3.5+ hours of flight endurance while versatile smart battery options support diverse mission requirements. Other operators of the system include the US military and Belgian Army.

August 16/16: A US Navy guided-missile destroyer has received an RQ-20B Puma UAV with a precision recovery system. Manufacturer AeroVironment stated that the recovery system enables the Puma to operate from a variety of vessels for rapid response reconnaissance. The multi-environment UAV is hand launched, and is programmed to autonomously glide back to the flight deck, but can also float; allowing for sea recovery.

July 26/13: FAA. The US Federal Aviation Administration issues its 1st UAV Restricted Category Type Certificates, which include the Puma UAV. The UAV will support emergency response crews for oil spill monitoring and wildlife surveillance over Alaska’s Beaufort Sea, within the Arctic Circle.

Experimental Airworthiness Certificates have been used for non-government UAV operations in the past, but they don’t allow commercial use. The FAA says that US military acceptance of the ScanEagle and Puma designs was an important factor in granting the new Restricted Category certificates, which do allow commercial operations.

That’s going to be a hotter area for UAV manufacturers over the next few years, and for the FAA as well. The Federal Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 mandated that the FAA integrate UAVs into domestic airspace by 2015, but a key deadline establishing 6 pilot sites by August 2012 wasn’t met. These type certificates are a small step forward, within a larger framework. Sources: US FAA | AeroVironment | NDIA’s National Defense magazine | Seattle Times.

(Restricted) Commercial USA in USA

Jan 3/13: SUAS 2013-2017. U.S. Army Contracting Command in Natick, MA awards a 5-year, $248 million multiple-vendor fixed-price Small UAS contract. From FBO.gov:

“The Army currently has fielded 1,798 RQ-11B systems and 325 RQ-20A systems and has a requirement to sustain and maintain this existing fleet. The Army has met 92% of the RQ-11B Army Acquisition Objective (AAO), and has met 83% of the anticipated need for RQ-20A (required by USFOR-A-issued JUONS). Additionally, the current [DID: RQ-11B & RQ-20A] fleet has pre-planned spiral upgrades such as the Gimbal payload, which will be competed and retrofitted under this effort. The need exists to complete the AAO; maintain, sustain and upgrade the fleet; and procure future SUAS Systems as required by DoD, Other Government Agencies (OGA) and foreign countries.”

Vendors will compete for each order, and work can include full Unmanned Aerial Systems, upgrades, testing, packaging, marking, and storage and shipping. Work location will be determined with each order, and the contract runs until Dec 20/17. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 5 bids received. All 5 qualified to compete:

• RQ-11B Raven & RQ-20A Puma: AeroVironment Inc. in Monrovia, CA (W911QY-13-D-0073). Obviously, they’re in a strong position for fleet upgrades at least, as well as for additional UAVs.

• NOVA Block III: Altavian in Gainesville, FL (W911QY-13-D-0074). They’re not a household name, but their air/land UAV is working with the USACE (Army Corps of Engineers). They partner with ISR Group Inc. in Savannah, TN for support and service.

• Skylark-I LE Block 2: Elbit Systems of America LLC in Fort Worth, TX (W911QY-13-D-0075).

• Skystinger, and others: Innovative Automation Technologies LLC in Gainesville, FL (W911QY-13-D-0076). Skystinger is more like the RQ-11 Raven, while their AXO is closer to the RQ-20 Puma. Note that The Skystinger is the only UAS that IAT could confirm, but they did say there was more than 1 UAS offered.

• Desert Hawk III: Lockheed Martin Corporation, Owego, NY (W911QY-13-D-0077). The Desert Hawk has been successfully used on the front lines by British forces.

The AECV contract expires in 2013, so this appears to be the follow-on. See also: AeroVironment | Elbit Systems | Gainesville Sun.

SUAS multi-vendor

Oct 20/12: Support. The US government announces a woman-owned small business only solicitation for up to $25.5 million in SUAS support work, after soliciting interest and finding 3 such businesses who qualify. The FBO.gov solicitation adds that:

“…SUAS PdO must maintain the capability to support current and future Warfighter needs for SUAS systems in CONUS and OCONUS…. The objective of the SUAS Support Program is to support the Warfighter’s as well as other Governmental Agencies (OGAs) and Non-Governmental Agencies users’ SUAS-related sustainment needs. These needs primarily include SUAS training, maintenance, repairs, and engineering services. Additionally, the SUAS PdO will require various logistics, technical management, and program management services to support its SUAS customers.”

FY 2012

USAF, USMC, Denmark & Sweden become customers; Puma becomes RQ-20; #1,000 delivered.

Moving launch,
Afghanistan
(click to view full)

June 12/12: Danish win. Aerovironment announces a $9.6 million win in Denmark. This competed win follows a $2.4 million Danish Army order for RQ-11B Raven systems in 2007.

Denmark

June 11/12: Swedish win. AeroVironment announces that they’ve won an unspecified Swedish firm fixed-price contract for 12 hybrid small unmanned aircraft systems. The Swedish Army’s order will be a mix of Puma AE and Wasp air vehicles, plus a set of common ground stations, training, and logistics support. Contract options could increase the buy to a total of 30 systems. The firm adds a roundup of foreign RQ-11 Raven, RQ-20 Puma, and Wasp customers:

“In addition to Sweden, other international governments that have purchased AeroVironment small UAS include Australia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy, Lebanon, the Netherlands, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Spain, Thailand, Uganda, and the United Kingdom.”

Sweden

April 20/12: Puma = RQ-20. AeroVironment announces a $20.4 million firm-fixed-price follow-on order from the US Army for RQ-20A Puma AEs. They will provide overwatch for security, route clearance operations, etc. in Afghanistan. Delivery is scheduled within 30 days.

Separately, AeroVironment announced the production and delivery of its 1,000th Puma AE air vehicle, and the USAF’s approval of the “RQ-20A” designation for the Puma AE system.

Milestones: #1,000, RQ-20A

April 20/12: USMC order. AeroVironment announces the 1st RQ-20A Puma AE order from the US Marine Corps. The $5.6 million firm-fixed-price order was placed via the all-services contract now managed by the US Army. Delivery is scheduled within 2 weeks.

The USMC were pioneers in adopting mini-UAVs, picking AeroVironment’s RQ-14 Dragon Eye in 2003 for the Small Unit Remote Scouting System (SURSS) program. Other buys from the firm have included Wasp mini-UAVs beginning in 2007, and the replacement of their Dragon Eyes with RQ-11B Ravens beginning in 2009. The Puma buy will give the Marines the full 3 tiers of mini-UAV performance: Wasp, Raven, and Puma, ahead of the US Army’s own plans (vid. Feb 4/11 entry).

USMC’s 1st

April 18/12: USAF order. AeroVironment announces its 1st Puma AE order from the USAF, which already uses its RQ-11 Raven and Wasp mini-UAVs. The $2.4 million firm-fixed-price order is below the threshold for public notification, and was placed on April 5/12 through the existing U.S. Army contract. Delivery is scheduled within 2 weeks.

USAF 1st

April 4/12: Plans. The US Army discusses its plans for a family of small UAVs again. They may actually be headed toward 2 Family of Small UAS contracts (1 products, 1 services), in an effort to “refine requirements.” After all this time, the Army is still working on a capabilities document outlining the parameters of the Family of Small UAS.

The Army is also hoping to develop a universal control station for the F-SUAS.

Feb 13/12: Sentient MTI. AeroVironment, Inc. announces an exclusive global distribution license with Sentient in Melbourne, Australia for its Kestrel Land MTI Tier I automatic target detection software, designed for full motion video for use with small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). Kestrel software automatically detects moving objects, then places tracking boxes around them for easy monitoring. That’s especially helpful with mini-UAVs, because of the payload optics’ limitations, and better tracking of multiple moving objects fills an obvious need of front-line troops.

Over the past 18 months Sentient and AeroVironment have optimized and integrated the software with AeroVironment’s mini-UAS common Ground Control System for Puma, Raven, and Wasp UAVs. Sentient makes a number of Kestrel solutions used around the world. It’s worth noting that the AeroVironment deal doesn’t impair its Kestrel Land MTI Tier II/III used by larger UAVs like the ScanEagle, RQ-7 Shadow, and MQ-9 Reaper; and by patrol aircraft like the P-3 Orion; or its Kestrel Maritime products. What it does, is fence in the market for mini-UAS solutions with a desirable and hard-to copy capability. AeroVironment | Sentient.

Jan 31/12: Pentagon DVIDS discusses preparations by the “Lancers” of Second Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, who are “going into Operation Enduring Freedom with the most Raven [a small unit UAS] and Puma operators in the history of OEF combat,” according to AMCOM UAS specialist Tarah Hollingsworth. Sgt. Christopher Harris, a 2nd SBCT UAS operations non-commissioned officer, adds that:

“I was on the initial fielding of the Puma when it was first brought in about three years ago when I was in Afghanistan… We were able to use it on all kinds of patrols, whether it be presence patrols, recon or anything of that sort. I utilized it two times for a call for fire; it’s very accurate for that.”

FY 2011

US Army joins AECV buy, assumes management of the contract; US Army’s 3-tier mini-UAV plans; RQ-16’s Tango Uniform opportunity?; Communication relay demo; Training issues.

Puma AE, pre-launch
(click to view full)

2011: The US Army assumes management of US SOCOM’s AECV contract, following its own October 2010 order for the UAVs, and interest from other services. Source.

AECV = Army

Aug 16/11: Comm relay. Boeing announces successful May and August demonstrations of its new narrowband communications relay, using an Insitu ScanEagle and AeroVironment’s Puma AE mini-UAV. During the multiservice demonstrations, held in California, the UAVs flew at a variety of altitudes while linking handheld military radios dispersed over mountainous regions, extending the radios’ range tenfold.

Larger RQ-7B Shadow UAVs have also been used in this role, but those are generally controlled at the battalion level or above. Narrowband relays small enough to work on hand-launched mini-UAVs like the Puma AE would represent an important step forward, especially for Special Operations forces.

August 16/11: AeroVironment, Inc. announces a $65.5 million firm-fixed-price contract delivery order for new digital Puma AEs, and initial spares packages. It’s another buy under the existing $200 million US SOCOM All Environment Capable Variant (AECV) contract (vid. July 1/08), and will be delivered in the coming months.

June 9/11: AeroVironment, Inc. in Monrovia, CA receives a $13.1 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for “Puma unmanned aircraft systems training and contractor logistics support.” Aerovironment has since confirmed that this is for the Puma AE. They now simply call it “Puma,” because the very different UAV they had formerly called Puma is not in production.

Work will be performed in Simi Valley, CA, and Kandahar, Afghanistan, with an estimated completion date of Oct 14/11. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by the U.S. Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-11-C-0004).

April 20/11: Training issues. The US Army currently equips each brigade with 15 RQ-11B Raven systems, but the 9 Afghan BCTs want to raise that to 35 each (105 UAVs). They’re also shipping larger Puma-AE UAV systems into theater, with 64 in and another 20 requested. So what’s the problem? Training.

Right now, the US FAA requires Federal Aviation Administration must issue a certificate of authorization, in order to fly UAVs in US air space. There are limits to that requirement, but it takes months to get that certification, and it’s hurting operator training. Commanders are complaining that some operators lack adequate pre-combat preparation, and must learn on the job.

In response, the US Army has instituted a buddy program, a tracking program for operators, and a ground-based technical solution. Under the buddy program, skilled mini-UAV operators will teach other soldiers. The web tracker will make sure that qualified operators don’t get lost in the shuffle when they move from one brigade to another. The technical solution involves a ground-based sense-and-avoid system that may help expedite FAA certification. NDIA’s National Defense Magazine.

April 21/11: AeroVironment, Inc. announces an $11.5 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for new digital Puma AE systems, initial spares packages, and training services.

The new UAVs were bought under the existing United States Special Operations Command All Environment Capable Variant (USSOCOM AECV) indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract, and deliveries are scheduled to be completed over the next several months.

Feb 4/11: Platoon mini-trio. Aviation Week reports that the US Army wants to beef up UAV availability down to the platoon level, in an environment where, as Army Operations Office aviation UAS director Lt. Col. James Cutting puts it, “there will never be enough multi-million-dollar systems to cover them.” Where now there are 17 RQ-11 Ravens in a brigade combat team (BCT), the Army plans to increase this to 49 “Small UAS family of systems”, initially made up of AeroVironment’s Puma at the high end, RQ-11B Raven mini-UAV as the core, and smaller Wasp III as the true “flying binoculars” micro-UAV.

Down the road, this set is expected to be a competition, and the numbers involved make it an attractive target. According to Cutting, the Army will push the new UAVs directly down to engineer, armor and infantry units, rather than forming more aviation units and adding their overhead. Since the UAVs in question are so small, and fly at under 1,000 feet, they can be used without worrying about “deconfliction,” and don’t really require the same planning & support overhead as, for instance, a unit of RQ-7B Shadows, or MQ-1C Gray Eagles. Aviation Week | Aviation Week Ares.

Jan 6/11: The US Army issues a stop-work order on the Class I Unmanned Aerial System (RQ-16 T-Hawk), as part of the E-IBCT next-generation brigades. Formal termination takes place on Feb 3/11. In light of the Oct 22/10 order, this could become a major opportunity for the Puma AE. Defense News.

Oct 26/10: Aerovironment announces a $7.2 million for an unspecified number of new digital Puma AE systems and training services, under the existing US SOCOM indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract.

Oct 25/10: More Army minis. The NDIA’s National Defense magazine reports that Puma AE is forcing its way into regular Army operations, due to a combination of unforgiving high-altitude terrain and roadside mission demands:

“The Army currently supplies 15 sets of Ravens (with three aircraft per set) to each brigade in Afghanistan. The current plan is to buy 3,000 Ravens, and the Army so far has acquired more than 2,000… [but units] have asked for a “larger small” unmanned aircraft that can carry more sensors and fly longer… So the Army is now tapping into the SOCOM contract and buying 72 Pumas to meet urgent demands, Gonzalez said. The Puma request came directly from the top commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David Petraeus… The Army already is testing the concept of a “family” of three aircraft (Raven, Puma and Wasp) in combat. It fielded 15 sets six months ago to the 101st Airborne Division and will allow the unit to keep them for a year for further evaluation, said Gonzalez. One of the concerns is designing a controller that can operate all three aircraft.”

Oct 22/10: AeroVironment, Inc. in Simi Valley, CA receives a $17.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee letter contract, which establishes not-to-exceed amounts for Puma-AE capable contractor logistics support, training, and accounting for contract services in support of Joint Urgent Operational Need Statement CC-0289, entitled, “Unmanned Aircraft Systems for Route Clearance.”

AeroVironment confirms that this order is for the regular army, not SOCOM. The RQ-16 T-Hawk ducted fan UAV is supposed to be handling that special niche, but the Puma would appear to have carved out a place, thanks to its stabilized EO/IR payload, and added conventional reconnaissance capabilities. Work is to be performed in Simi Valley, CA, with an estimated completion date of Oct 14/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command, CCAM-AR-A at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-11-C-0004).

Army in.

FY 2008 – 2010

$200M AECV win for US special Operations.

Puma AE concept
(click to view larger)

Sept 8/10: An additional order valued at $4.4 million for Puma AE payloads and retrofits. Work is scheduled to be performed “within a period of several months.” Source.

Aug 31/10: Aerovironment announces a $35.3 million delivery order for digital Puma AE systems, spares and training service, under the existing US SOCOM indefinite delivery/ indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract. Work is scheduled to be performed “within a period of several months.”

July 1/08: US SOCOM AECV. AeroVironment, Inc., wins a 5-year (base year plus 4 one-year option periods), maximum $200 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for an “all environment capable variant small unmanned aircraft systems” from the US SOCOM’s Program Executive Office – Fixed Wing. It covers aircraft, ground control systems, spares, repairs and training under a combination firm fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee and cost reimbursable arrangement. The initial delivery order is valued at $6 million, and is fully funded.

Work will be performed in Simi Valley, CA and the base year period lasts for exactly 1 year from date of contract award. This contract was awarded through full and open competition (H92222-08-D-0048). See also Aerovironment release.

SOCOM AECV

Puma fuel cell
(click to view full)

March 6/08: AeroVironment announces a 9 hour flight for a modified Puma powered by an onboard fuel cell/ battery hybrid energy storage system. During the flight, a 2-camera payload system provided a live, streaming video feed from the Puma. Aerovironment developed the battery pack, power electronics and controls portion of the hybrid energy storage system, which used London-listed Protonex Technology Corporation’s Pulse UAV fuel cell system.

This successful demonstration is not part of the SOCOM bid, but is conducted under Aerovironment’s separate small business innovation research (SBIR) Phase II contract with the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL). AFRL’s goal is to develop advanced energy storage and propulsion technologies for unmanned aircraft. The overall program advanced swiftly from kickoff in January 2007, to a 5-hour flight in May 2007, a 7-hour flight in July 2007, and then this 9-hour flight. Aerovironment release.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Aerovironment – UAS: Puma AE

• Aerovironment – UAS Advanced Development Center: Fuel Cell Puma

• Designation Systems – Aerovironment Puma. Differs in a number of significant respects from the Puma AE.

• Aerovironment – BATMAV. Also known as Wasp-III.

• USAF – BATMAV Micro Unmanned Aircraft System

• See DID’s coverage of the RQ-11 Raven, beginning in Feb 2005 with “Raven UAV Draws Raves From The Field” and including “Field Report on Raven, Shadow UAVs From the 101st“.

• DID (2005) – AeroVironment Given SBIR contract for New UAVs: Can They Do It Again?

Americas

• Hamilton Sundstrand Corp. is being contracted for support work on the MV-22 and CV-22 platforms. The three-year long-term requirements contract has a value of $64.8 million and provides for repair work of the constant frequency generator (CFG) installed on the aircraft. The MV-22 is flown by the US Marine Corps. The newest Block C variant includes forward-mounted defensive systems, ice detectors, dust protection and a “Cabin Situational Awareness Device”. The US Air Force Special Operations Command operates the CV-22, which adds more sophisticated surveillance capabilities and beefed-up defensive systems. The CFG together with the auxiliary power unit and variable frequency generator is housed in the V-22’s mid-wing gearbox. The mid-wing gearbox transmits power between the left and right interconnecting drive shafts without changing speed or direction of rotation. This contract intends to enhance the CFG reliability and improve its overall aircraft operational readiness. Work will be performed in Rockford, Illinois, and is expected to be completed by July 2021.

• Boeing is being awarded a change order by the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center. The change order is valued at $15.5 million and provides for the development, qualification and delivery of a Flight Termination Receiver 2.0 (FTR 2.0). For 50 years, land-based Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) have been part of the US primary strategic deterrence capability, the nuclear-armed triad that also includes submarine-launched ballistic missiles and long-range heavy bombers. Nuclear weapons have a devastating effect and a nuclear war has the potential to wipe out all life on earth. The FTR is an essential piece that allows for the missiles destruction after it has already been launched. The Flight Termination System can take a number of commands via Radio Frequency that range from safing and arming devices to terminating the missiles flight. Work will be performed in Layton, Utah, and is expected to be completed by July 31, 2021.

• The US Army is contracting Raytheon to support its Electronic Warfare Program Management Tool (EWPMT). The contract modification provides for interim contractor support to maintain and field the EWPMT’s Capability Drop 3 through 4. Development of the tool was the Army’s answer to an ever-increasing amount of electromagnetic spectrum operations and electronic warfare. Rolle out in 2016, the EWPMT provides commanders with both greater understanding and awareness of the spectrum for better planning and decision making. Key tasks the tool provides the force with; include capabilities to plan, coordinate, manage and deconflict electronic warfare and spectrum management operations; integration of electronic attack in the targeting process to ensure electronic attack can meet the commanders’ desired effect, and synchronization of electronic warfare and spectrum operations. Work will be performed in Fort Wayne, Indiana, with an estimated completion date by September 2022.

• The US Air Force’s fleet of E-8 JSTARS is earmarked for retirement by the mid-2020s. The National Defense Authorization Act endorses the Air Force’s plan to replace the E-8 JSTARS with a new network of sensors spread across unmanned aerial vehicles and aircraft, called the Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS). The USA’s 17-plane E-8C Joint Surveillance Targeting and Attack Radar System fleet’s ability to monitor enemy ground movements over very wide areas, while seeing through problematic weather conditions, has made it an invaluable contributor to every US military ground campaign over the last 15+ years. In the future the E-8’s role will be filled by the MQ-9 UAV. The ABMS is a network of de-centralized systems, which fuses the data from hundreds of sensors to provide situational awareness for combatant commanders across the globe. The current NDAA provides $120 million for the accelerating the development of the ABMS and its integration onto the MQ-9.

Middle East & Africa

• The Israeli Air Force is receiving funds for construction work on of its bases under the US foreign military sales program. Conti Federal Services is being awarded a firm-fixed-price contract with a value of $69.4 million to build hardened aircraft shelters in Israel. This contract is part of a larger Israeli infrastructure project needed to accommodate the countries new F-35i ‘Adir’ fighter jets. Those hardened aircraft shelters are outfitted with cranes and underground pits, as well as air-conditioning, water, sewage, and compressed-air systems. Construction of those shelters is vital to protecting the multi-million fighter jets in light of the growing threat of large-scale rocket and missile attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah. Work will be performed in Tel Aviv, Israel and is scheduled for completion by September 2020.

Europe

• The Spanish S-80 submarine program is experienced further delays. The S-80 program had its genesis in 1989, but it wasn’t until 1997 that Spain’s Armada began defining its objectives more clearly. The S-80 contract between Spain and Navantia was signed in 2004 with the initial delivery planned to take place in 2011. The program was interrupted in 2013 due to excess weight problems that threatened the submarines buoyancy. Spain’s S-80 submarines will be an entirely new and larger ship class that builds upon Navantia’s recent submarine experience, rather than a modified version of the more well-known AIM 2000 Scorpene AIP boats. It will share some key technology developments, however, including Air-Independent Propulsion. At present, its seems that the first submarine will be delivered in 2023, over a decade later than envisaged.

• Poland will soon add Lockheed Martin’s High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) to its inventory. The government has decided to obtain the weapon system directly from the US rather than procuring the same capability through a consortium led by the Polish Armaments Group (PGZ). The acquisition is part of Poland’s Homar program that seeks to obtain a squadron-level fire module of multiple rocket launchers. The program aims to provide the Polish Army with a capability of striking targets at distances of up to 180 miles. HIMARS is a highly-mobile artillery rocket system offering the firepower of MLRS on a wheeled chassis. HIMARS is operated by a crew of three – driver, gunner and section chief – but the computer-based fire control system enables a crew of two or even a single soldier to load and unload the system. In addition to the standard MLRS round, HIMARS is capable of launching the entire MLRS family of munitions, including the extended-range rocket, the reduced-range practice rocket and all future variants. HIMARS carries a single six-pack of MLRS rockets, or one army tactical missile system (ATACMS) missile.

Asia-Pacific

• The Philippine Navy (PN) is set to take delivery of its first two AW-159 ‘Wildcat’ helicopters in March 2019. The ‘Wildcat’ comes in an Army and Navy version. Both AW159 versions will share a common fully-marinized airframe, with provisions for a range of mission and role-based equipment with an estimated 90% commonality. The PN has opted for an anti-submarine warfare package to protect its frigates currently being constructed by Hyundai Heavy Industries. The AW159 helicopters will be able to carry rockets and gun pods, and the naval version adds BAE’s Sting Ray light torpedoes. The helicopter is capable flying at a speed of 291 km/h and has a range of 777 km. The contract for the two anti-submarine helicopters is worth over $101 million and includes munition, mission essential equipment, and integrated logistic support.

Today’s Video

• Watch: The Islamic Republic of Iran has overhauled and upgraded 10 of its Su-22s.

E-8C JSTARS Connectivity
(click to view larger)

The USA’s 17-plane E-8C J-STARS (Joint Surveillance Targeting and Attack Radar System) fleet’s ability to monitor enemy ground movements over very wide areas, while seeing through problematic weather conditions, has made it an invaluable contributor to every US military ground campaign over the last 15+ years. Other countries are finally introducing similar capabilities, but the JSTARS fleet size, maturity, and array of functions make it a unique class asset for America’s entire alliance structure. All Boeing 707 family E-8 Joint STARS aircraft are assigned to the Georgia Air National Guard’s 116th Air Control Wing at Robins Air Force Base, GA, a “total-force blended wing” with active-duty Air Force, Army and Air National Guard personnel.

An asset like that needs to be kept current, or replaced with something that is. E-8 planes have received both system upgrades and R&D work, in order to improve aircraft readiness and operating costs. A 3rd round of upgrades is beginning, but the USAF seems to be leaning toward a limited future for its battlefield surveillance and relay planes.

Improving JSTARS

JT8D pod on E-8C
(click to view full)

Plans to improve JSTARS have focused on 3 main areas.

One is the planes’ aged Pratt & Whitney TF33-102C engines. By 2011, an R&D program had proved out a replacement concept involving PW’s JT8D-219 engines in a pod-based kit, but the USAF hasn’t funded fleet conversion.

The 2nd area involves the aircraft’s electronics, which age out at a faster pace than other components. The entire force was upgraded to Block 20 status in 2005, but the use of commercial hardware and software standards only solves part of the problem. The canceled E-10A had already made big investments in an updated Battle Management Command and Control (BMC2) mission suite, but adding BMC2 to existing E-8 aircraft would involve substantial rewiring and other “deep maintenance” work. That’s time-consuming and expensive.

Proteus & MP-RTIP pod
(click to view full)

The 3rd area involves the planes’ radar and sensors. J-STARS operations have to contend with their AN/APY-7 radar’s limitations, which have been underscored by the challenges inherent in campaigns against stateless terrorists and counter-insurgency fights. One is that the radar has to “break track” with a target, in order to collect an image. Another is the radar’s resolution, which is adequate to find tanks and ground vehicles, but doesn’t reach the under 1 meter resolution of current technologies. It isn’t difficult to imagine that a J-STARS or Global Hawk would need to perform wide area scans, while focusing with higher resolution on one target of interest, and occasionally taking high-resolution synthetic aperture radar pictures for transmission to HQ or other platforms, all at the same time.

The E-8C J-STARS can’t do that at the moment, but the architecture of AESA radar arrays is making this sort of thing possible on platforms like advanced fighters. Understandably, the USAF wanted this capability for its reconnaissance aircraft. A new AESA radar called MP-RTIP was originally developed for the (canceled) E-10A JSTARS replacement, with a claimed 5x – 10x resolution improvement over the JSTARS’ APY-7. A smaller version will now be mounted on Global Hawk Block 40 UAVs, and one obvious approach would be to equip E-8s with a full-size MP-RTIP or a similar radar.

The cost of that conversion has pushed the USAF away from that idea, while looking at other methods to improve the platform. The JSTARS Radar Modernization (JSRM) replaced 2 radar receivers with 1 modern receiver, improving resolution and tracking. 2011 tests added a keel beam accessory bay (KAB) behind the APY-7 radar, and installed a high-resolution MS-177 multispectral camera for sub 1-meter resolution and target identification. The KAB could accommodate other sensors instead, which would add flexibility to the platform. A February 2013 test even added MP-RTIP, after a fashion. It showed that E-8s could stream MP-RTIP radar data from a RQ-4B Block 40 UAV for analysis on board, then use the E-8’s superior communications systems to distribute the results.

JSTARS Upgrades: Current Plans & Progress

Re-engined JSTARS
(click to view full)

In April 2013, the USAF’s FY 2014 JSTARS budget entry explained some of the program’s remaining parameters. They break down into 2 main areas. One is Spiral Development, and accompanying efforts to keep training systems up to date. The other is the core electronics problem of parts that are going out of production, called “Diminishing Manufacturing Sources.” The submission also explained what happened to the re-engining program.

Re-engining. The USAF has terminated the re-engining program without completing System Design and Development, though they did develop a design and successfully fly an aircraft with it. What’s left? Completion of all logistics development tasks and operational tests.

Spiral Development. This involves various technology development/insertions to enhance target identification, data processing & transmittal, and weapon control capabilities, such as:

• JSTARS Net Enabled Weapons (JNEW) and Joint Surface Warfare (JSuW). JSuW-JNEW activities include participation in the JSuW Joint Capability Technology Demonstration (JCTD) and Engineering and Manufacturing Development for Network Enabled Weapons (NEW) which includes, but is not limited to Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile-Air Surface Warfare-Anti-Surface Warfare (JASSM-ASuW).
  
• JSTARS Radar Modernization (JSRM). The JSRM activities apply MP-RTIP receiver technology to JSTARS, replacing 2 current receivers with a single receiver based on modern technology.
  
• Blue Force Tracker (BFT).
  
• Battlefield Airborne Communication Node (BACN) compatibility, allowing the E-8 to work with the USAF’s airborne communications relay and translation fleet of EQ-11A Global Express jets, and EQ-4B Global Hawk drones.
  
• Combat identification and future program planning for Analysis of Alternatives recommendations.

Future program planning activities include but are not limited to:

• Modular equipment enclosure (MEE)
  
• Automatic identification system (AIS)
  
• Analyst support architecture (ASA) software
  
• Common data link (CDL) integration

Spiral development also supports requirements that arise quickly under current and future Urgent Operational Needs (UON), quick reaction capabilities (QRCs), top-down directed efforts, requirements definition, capability gap analysis, pre-Milestone A (MS A) technical risk reduction activities, Blue Force Tracker, multi-agency communication capability (MACC) and the Air Force tactical receive system (AFTRS) radio replacement for the integrated broadcast service (IBS) data, other large airborne platform integration efforts including self-defense suite (SDS), and radar & aircraft performance improvements. Equipment developed under spiral development are procured under Kill Chain Enhancement-MN-38203.

Avionics Diminishing Manufacturing Sources. Av-DMS efforts deal with electronics that are either out of production or about to be. Fixing the problem could involve buying a lot of spares, but it often involves redesigning affected systems to use modern electronics. JSTARS has a long list, and its efforts include, but are not limited to:

• Aircraft Information Program (AIP)
  
• Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS)
  
• Communications
  
• Navigation
  
• Surveillance and Air Traffic Management (CNS/ATM) upgrades
  
• Control and Display Unit (CDU) Replacement
  
• Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT)
  
• Flight Data Recorder (FDR)
  
• Electronic Flight Bag (EFB)
  
• Mode 5 Identification Friend or Foe (IFF)
  
• Embedded GPS Inertial (EGI) with Selective Availability Anti-Spoofing Module (SAASM)/M-Code GPS
  
• Digital Multi-Function Flight Display (Attitude Direction Indicator
  
• Horizontal Situation Indicator and Attitude Heading Reference System)
  
• Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B)
  
• A new flight management system (FMS)
  
• Flight director
  
• Instrument Landing System (ILS) Marker Beacon multi-mode receiver (MMR)
  
• Digital engine instruments.

Additional Modernization efforts include interoperability with manned and unmanned platforms (q.v. Feb 25/13 entry); space data links; advanced Battle-Management Command and Control (BMC2) concepts; 8.33/25 kHz VHF Radio with Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS) voice and data communication; ISR Constellation; Air Moving Target Indicator (AMTI – can detect low, slow-flying aircraft); Advanced Radar Modes (ARM); Aided Target Recognition (ATR); Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR)/Enhanced Synthetic Aperture Radar (ESAR); Network Centric Collaborative Targeting (NCCT); and Beyond-Line-of-Sight (BLOS) Network Architecture Upgrades (BNAU).

Pilot interview

Over the last couple of years, there has been some progress, but that’s winding down as the USAF prepares to implement its set of modifications:

FY 2011 Accomplishments: Completed JSuW Link 16 JCTD; continued JSRM radar receiver development; completed SYERS (MS-177 multispectral camera) demo in new keel bay extension; continued Avionics DMS development; completed Enhanced Land Maritime Mode (ELMM) SDD and began production; continued CNU-JTRS replacement development; continued 8.33/25 kHz Radio with SINCGARS retrofit; continued PME DMS RASP SDD; FVB mitigation; Analysis of Alternatives; QRC efforts; and Spiral Development. Supported non-recurring engineering activity including development; FAA Certification; Flight Testing; Flight Performance Manuals; Pneumatic SDD (bleed air); Maintenance Training.

FY 2012 Accomplishments: Completed JSRM radar receiver development and began flight demo; Continued Av-DMS [Diminishing Manufacturing Sources] development and studies; Completed BNAU [SATCOM upgrades] design, and began BNAU integration and test; Continued Flight Viability Board (FVB) mitigation, QRC efforts, and Spiral Development. MIDS-JTRS tests successful, and it’s approved for E-8C fielding. Completed CNU-JTRS SDD design, integrate, test and Link 16 Concurrent Multi-Netting (CMN)-4/2,Dynamic Net Management(DNM), and Link 16 Enhanced Throughput (LET) study.

FY 2013 Plans: Will complete JSRM radar receiver flight demo, will complete Av-DMS development and studies, will complete BNAU integration and test, and will continue FVB mitigation, QRC efforts, and Spiral Development. Completed manned-unmanned interoperability test with Global Hawk Block 40 UAV and its MP-RTIP radar.

FY 2014 Plans: Will continue FVB mitigation, QRC efforts, and Spiral Development. Upgrade contract awarded (q.v. Oct 22/13).

Competition, and the E-8’s Future

P-8 AGS concept
(click to view full)

The envisioned JSTARS upgrade program has faced continued delays, and continued shrinkage. Its current $110 million estimate is just 4% of Northrop Grumman’s initial Plan B suggestion, which indicates a focus on keeping the fleet operational rather than enhancing it significantly.

Meanwhile, competitors are proposing alternatives, as advancing technology brings similar or better capabilities within reach of smaller aircraft.

Boeing began by proposing a $5.5 billion program to replace the E-8C fleet with a derivative of its 737-based P-8A Poseidon sea control jet, instead of paying that estimated amount to upgrade the E-8Cs with new cockpits, sensors, and engines. Boeing’s P-8 AGS would include the Raytheon-Boeing Littoral Surveillance Radar System (LSRS) or its AAS successor, Raytheon’s AN/APY-10 multi-mode radar in the nose, some of the E/A-18G Growler electronic attack plane’s ESM electronics for detection and geo-location of electro-magnetic emissions, and an electro-optical surveillance and targeting turret. Because they use current radar technologies, the P-8A’s surface-looking radars are reportedly already competitive with JSTARS. A P-8 derivative would also give the USAF space and integration for weapons or additional sensors, while keeping the P-8’s new civil-compliant avionics, new mission electronics, new airframe, and the lower operating and maintenance costs of a smaller, more advanced, and widely used jet.

Boeing’s unofficial proposal led Northrop Grumman to counter with a less expensive “Plan B” radar improvement option, using 1 foot x 8 foot cheek fairings derived from its top-end APG-77 and APG-81 fighter radars. This would be combined with a keel beam accessory bay (KAB), which can also include other sensors like long-range cameras for positive personal identification. Northrop Grumman contended that this would drop the E-8 fleet’s upgrade price to around $2.7 billion: $900 million for re-engining, $500 million for new APY-7 receivers and exciters, $1 billion for the cheek array, and $300 million for avionics upgrade and battle management improvements.

UK: Sentinel R1
(click to view full)

After 2013, it appears that the USAF would rather spend that kind of money on new jets that offer modern capabilities from the outset, and cost much less to operate. 737s are cheaper to run than 707s, but several competitors are looking even smaller, to business and regional jets from Bombardier, Embraer, and Gulfstream. Initial solicitations are due soon, and the USAF is imagining a modern fleet beginning to enter service around 2022.

Raytheon has already created the ASTOR Sentinel R1 for Britain, using Bombardier’s Global Express. Brazil uses Embraer’s P-99B, based on their ERJ-145. Lockheed Martin’s Dragon Star/ Net Dragon MULTI-INT rental uses a Gulfstream III, and they’ve been working with Italy in Afghanistan. Boeing offers their P-8 as a base, and they’re also supplementing it with a smaller Bombardier Challenger 604 MSA offering, which borrows the P-8’s core mission systems. The P-8A’s mission system will soon be programmed to include overland radar surveillance, so the MSA’s only barrier will involve mounting an appropriate radar.

If the USAF can’t find any recapitalization money because of budget-swallowing programs like the F-35 fighter, their options will shrink. The Northrop Grumman Global Hawk UAV family’s continued momentum in the face of USAF opposition could leave the USAF dependent on USAF RQ-4B surveillance and EQ-4 BACN communications fleets to perform lesser slices of the E-8C’s roles, with the hope that improvements over time would allow flying over a wider range of conditions, and broaden each UAV’s capabilities. NATO’s pooled RQ-4B Block 40 AGS fleet would also be available for a set number of hours each year.

The US Navy could also take over a chunk of this role. USN P-3Cs have already been used for overland surveillance in CENTCOM, and their 737-based P-8A Poseidon replacements will gain an extremely capable surface-looking AAS radar by 2019 or so (P-8A Increment 3). Poseidon’s MQ-4C Triton UAV companion is a Global Hawk derivative with its own surveillance capabilities, including an advanced surface-scanning AN/ZPY-3 AESA radar that’s currently optimized for maritime surveillance.

Contracts and Key Events FY 2015-2018

Replacement competition.

Inside the E-8C
(click to view full)

July 27/18: Successor The US Air Force’s fleet of E-8 JSTARS is earmarked for retirement by the mid-2020s. The National Defense Authorization Act endorses the Air Force’s plan to replace the E-8 JSTARS with a new network of sensors spread across unmanned aerial vehicles and aircraft, called the Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS). The USA’s 17-plane E-8C Joint Surveillance Targeting and Attack Radar System fleet’s ability to monitor enemy ground movements over very wide areas, while seeing through problematic weather conditions, has made it an invaluable contributor to every US military ground campaign over the last 15+ years. In the future the E-8’s role will be filled by the MQ-9 UAV. The ABMS is a network of de-centralized systems, which fuses the data from hundreds of sensors to provide situational awareness for combatant commanders across the globe. The current NDAA provides $120 million for the accelerating the development of the ABMS and its integration onto the MQ-9.

January 11/18: Protest—GAO Verdict A protest by Raytheon has been rejected by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO), paving the way for Northrop Grumman to provide the new radar as part of the US Air Force’s JSTARS recapitalization program. Raytheon had offered its Archimedes radar for the JSTARS recap, while Northrop were offering a radar of their own. Companies vying for the prime contract spot—Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop—were permitted to submit two proposals: one with Raytheon’s Archimedes and another with Northrop-manufactured one. Northrop are no doubt delighted with the GAO’s decision as the firm is, at present, guaranteed a major role on the JSTARS recap program even if it loses the prime contracting spot. However, the USAF is currently reconsidering whether the current recap program is the best strategy to replace the E-8C fleet and plans to make a final determination in the fiscal year 2019 budget, meaning that Northrop’s victory may be short lived if the program is ultimately canceled. Raytheon is currently exploring its legal options.

January 5/18: Incident An incident before Christmas involving engine failure on an E-8C JSTARS aircraft, caused damage to a total of five aircraft in the ground surveillance fleet. Based at Warner Robins AFB, Georgia, the engine failed on December 21 during a maintenance test run on a crowded ramp by the runway, spewing debris from the engine around the ramp and parking areas. Three of the five damaged aircraft returned to flight status within three days, while a fourth was said to be repaired in the early new year. The fifth is believed to be still grounded, but none of the Northrop APY-7 radars installed inside the aircrafts’ belly were damaged. Each E-8C—a modified Boeing 707-300—is powered by four Pratt & Whitney TF33-102C engines, a 1950s design derived from the once ubiquitous P&W JT-3. A re-engining program for the aircraft was cancelled in 2011, and the USAF is currently considering whether to cancel a competition to select a business jet platform to replace the E-8C fleet, and restart it with a platform that could survive in contested airspace. Flight operations were reportedly not affected by the incident.

November 30/17: Contract Protest Raytheon is contesting a US Air Force (USAF) decision to reject its Archimedes radar—a derivative of the APS-154 Advanced Airborne Sensor found on the P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft—from the service’s E-8C JSTARS replacement program. While the USAF has yet to officially announce rival Northrop Grumman as the winner, the flying branch did notify Raytheon that Archimedes was no longer under consideration, prompting the firm to file a protest with the US Government Accountability Office on 20 November. Both Raytheon and Northrop are still under contact from an award last year to carry out radar risk reduction work and Raytheon has maintained that it will continue its work on the JSTARS radar risk reduction effort. Speaking to Flight Global, a Raytheon spokesperson said its “radar solution for the JSTARS program offers the air force the most mature and capable technology available to meet this urgent need,” adding that “the evaluation process had significant flaws, and we have filed a protest accordingly.”

December 30/16: A request for proposals (RFP) has been released by the USAF for the replacement of the E-8 Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS). $6.9 billion has been earmarked for development and production of the new aircraft, with interested parties required not to offer used, reconditioned or remanufactured platforms. The radar system for the new platform will be a separate competition involving offers from Northrop Grumman and Raytheon.

September 28/16: E-8C JSTARS aircraft grounded due to maintenance concerns are back flying again. Issues surrounding a radar mishap had resulted in four E-8Cs undergoing a USAF launched independent investigation following their delivery from depot maintenance at Northrop Grumman’s facility in Lake Charles, Louisiana. One aircraft experienced water damage to the Northrop APY-7 radar after the glassfibre canoe did not properly drain water.

September 26/16: Maintenance work carried out on USAF JSTARS aircraft by Northrop Grumman, has resulted in four of their fleet being grounded over concerns with the quality of the work. The four planes are being inspected for any possible safety of flight issues on the ground at Robins Air Force Base, GA, home of the 116th Air Control Wing. Assembly of an independent review team is also underway which will be tasked to “inspect and validate quality assurance processes at the contractor’s depot,” according to a service spokesperson.

March 28/16: Raytheon and Northrop Grumman have been awarded “not-to-exceed” contracts by the USAF for $60 and $70 million respectively. The award is for both companies to further develop their competing long-range, wide-area surveillance radars systems as part of the Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) program. One supplier will then be selected in either late 2017 or early 2018 to supply 17 units, to be attached to 17 yet-to-be-determined business jets built by one of three competing suppliers – Gulfstream, Bombardier or Boeing.

February 23/16: The USAF has pushed back the awarding of its contract for the Joint Surveillance Targeting and Attack Radar System (JSTARS) program by as much as six months. It had been reported in January that sole-source contracts were soon to be awarded to both Raytheon and Northrop Grumman for the further development of their competing active electronically scanned array radars. The revision of the acquisition strategy has been said to reduce overall program risk by giving more time in the early stages of JSTARS development.

January 28/16: Northrop Grumman and Raytheon look set to be awarded sole-source contracts by the USAF for further development of their competing active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars as part of the Northrop Grumman E-8C JSTARS recapitalization effort. Foreign proposals for the radar development were ruled out by the government, but they are accepting foreign airframes for the plane’s replacement. Once the program is completed, the radars will form the centerpiece of the E-8C’s replacement aircraft, which will be based on commercial business jets.

October 7/15: A senior Air Force official has revealed that budgetary constraints may kill off the Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) recapitalization program. William LaPlante, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, stated on Tuesday that given sequestration and competing priorities, the program could now face the axe, a particularly poignant point given that the Pentagon recently blocked the program from moving to its demonstration phase, known as Milestone A. The announcement will undoubtedly spook the three contractors currently working on the early development for the program, following the awarding of engineering and manufacturing development contracts in August.

September 30/15: The Defense Department has blocked approval of a move to advance the JSTARS recapitalization program into its demonstration phase, known as Milestone A. The program, intended to field a replacement for the Air Force’s fleet of E-8 Joint Surveillance Targeting and Attack Radar System aircraft, kicked off in August, with the Air Force handing out three contracts to fund pre-engineering and manufacturing development work. The hold-up could be down to the Air Force’s funding strategy for the program, or potentially a changing requirement set.

September 14/15: Raytheon is remaining non-aligned as the competition for the Air Force’s JSTARS replacement program, offering its wide-area radar to the three competing industry teams. The three primes – Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman – were handed pre-engineering & manufacturing development contracts in August, with these now partnered with other industry partners to offer competing bids for the $6.5 billion program. The three teams are offering modified commercial designs, with Raytheon’s Skynet radar design expected to enter production in coming years.

August 11/15: The Air Force has handed out three one-year contracts to further develop competing designs for the JSTARS replacement program. The competition to replace the fleet of Northrop Grumman E-8Cs is scheduled to lead to a production contract before the JSTARS fleet is retired from FY2019. Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman were each awarded pre-engineering and manufacturing (EMD) contracts – Boeing and Northrop Grumman each approximately $10 million, with Lockheed Martin receiving the largest at $11.5 million – as a risk-reduction measure ahead of a planned production contract expected in late 2017. A Request for Proposal (RFP) is anticipated ahead of this date, with the Air Force planning to award two EMD contracts for test aircraft, followed by a further contract for three low-rate initial production aircraft.

June 17/15: Following Northrop Grumman, L-3, General Dynamics and Gulfstream’s lead, a competing team of Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Bombardier are now positioning to compete for the Air Force’s JSTARS recap program. Raytheon and Lockheed Martin had previously announced their intention to partner for the competition, with Bombardier set to bring their long-range business jet to the team, to complement Raytheon’s sensor portfolio and Lockheed Martin’s system integration expertise. The Air Force has also opened up the competition to European firms.

June 15/15: Northrop Grumman has partnered with General Dynamics, Gulfstream and L-3 to compete for work on the Air Force’s Joint STARS (JSTARS) recap program. In March the Air Force opened up the competition to European firms, with other US competitors including a Raytheon/Lockheed Martin team, with the JSTARS replacement program pushed back in February to a revised deadline of 2023. The newly-announced team will most likely base their replacement platform on the Gulfstream G550 business jet.

March 11/15: Air Force throws competition open to European aviation firms. Airbus, Dassault and Bombardier may now be invited to compete for a JSTARS replacement. The initial decision to attempt a replacement with a Boeing 767-based airframe with Northrop Grumman was cancelled due to gushing costs. The Air Force is opening it up to international competition. The service also indicated that it would like to see an airframe that is smaller than the original JSTARS Boeing 707 E-8C.

Feb 19/15: Lockheed teams with Raytheon. Lockheed is teaming with Raytheon in its bid for the JSTARS replacement program, bringing its active array sensor technology to the competition. Other competitors include Boeing, and incumbent Northrop Grumman. The JSTARS replacement program was pushed back a year to 2023 with the Administration’s initial budget announced a couple weeks prior.

Nov 17/14: What’s next? Northrop Grumman hasn’t made any commitments regarding the pending E-8 JSTARS replacement competition (q.v. June 17/14), except to say that they will participate. They have a solid base to build on from their E-8 JSTARS, their MP-RTIP radar now flying on RQ-4B Global Hawk Block 40s, and their effort to develop the canceled E-10A’s command and battle management system. They’re even doing advance testing already:

“Since this whole thing began, we’ve been doing all of the required things you would expect in terms of risk reduction, requirements analysis, trying to understand the system architecture,” [Alan Metzger] said. Northrop has refined its battle management command-and-control software and integrated it with assorted computers, communications systems and sensors within a Gulfstream 550 testbed.”

Why the G550? It is flown by Israel in AEW&C and SIGINT/ELINT roles, but the real reason is that it’s basically the smallest aircraft under consideration for the role. If you know what’s possible there, you have a known lowest baseline to adjust from, depending on what the USAF’s RFP spits out. With that said, this course of action does convey a pretty clear sense in the industry that the USAF is looking for something a lot smaller than the E-8C. Sources: NDIA Magazine, “JSTARS Contractor Joins Modernization Competition”.

FY 2011 – 2014

JSSIP III restrained improvements contract; Demonstrations: Advanced camera sensor, Streaming for Global Hawk radar data; USAF leaning toward replacement not upgrades.

E-8C JSTARS
(click to view full)

June 17/14: What’s next? The USAF is looking at options for recapitalizing JSTARS, with Initial Operating Capability of 4 planes by 2022, in order to counter escalating operations and maintenance costs. The planes need to accomodate about 13 crew and a 13? – 20? radar, stay on station for 8 hours with aerial refueling capability for more, and reach 38,000 feet. The USAF plans to ask for $2.4 billion over the next 5 years, but the dollars don’t really exist to launch another major USAF program. Hence USAF JSTARS recapitalization branch chief Lt. Col. Michael Harm:

“With the completion of the 2011 JSTARS mission area analysis of alternatives study and the onset of Budget Control Act-directed budget levels, it became clear that the future of the JSTARS weapons system lay in a more cost-effective platform as compared to extending the lifecycle of the current 707 airframes.” ….The Air Force is currently drafting requirements for the program, which will be finalized by early 2015, Harm said. In order to keep the system affordable, it plans on using commercial, off-the-shelf equipment and minimizing new technology development.”

Boeing is expected to enter its P-8, which is already configured for the mission and the above requirements once the LSR radar is added. Added costs would be limited to expansion of communications links and software development, and Navy commonality would be a big plus.

Raytheon’s Sentinel R1 already serves in the JSTARS role with Britain’s RAF, and the smaller Bombardier jet needs ongoing system and software development to reach its full potential. Operating costs would be lower, expanding the current USA-UK Airseeker RC-135V Rivet Joint ELINT/SIGINT partnership to encompass Sentinel R1s is a thinkable option, and Bombardier can lean on Raytheon and/or its Learjet subsidiary as the American lead. Aerial refueling might be the issue, given Sentinel’s configuration and the USAF’s insistence on dorsal boom refueling.

Gulfstream is looking to do something similar by partnering up and offer either the G550, which is already in use by Israel and its customers in AEW&C (CAEW) or ELINT/SIGINT (SEMA) variants, or the longer-range G650. They say that the’ve done the design work for aerial refueling, but haven’t had a customer take them up on it yet. E-8 JSTARS lead Northrop Grumman, who led the canceled E-10A program and retains key technologies, is a very logical partnering choice. With that said, Lockheed Martin has their own expertise to offer, and their Dragon Star ISR aircraft-for-lease is a Gulfstream.

The USA’s default option, of course, is to do nothing. The E-8C fleet would then become vulnerable to future fleet-sized USAF cuts. Meanwhile the P-8As would field in the Navy and informally take over some of the JSTARS role, alongside USAF UAVs like RQ-4B Global Hawk Block 40 and its EQ-4 BACN counterpart. Sources: NDIA National Defense, “Industry Ready to Compete for JSTARS Recapitalization Program”.

Oct 22/13: JSSIP III. Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems in Melbourne, FL receives a sole-source $414.5 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity Joint STARS System Improvement Program III contract, with a combination of firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive-firm, and cost-plus-fixed-fee elements. the. JSSIP III aims to improve E-8C performance, capability, reliability and maintainability, but won’t touch the plane’s engines.

Sources in Washington suggest that the scope of this program has been squeezed repeatedly from all sides, as the contractor and USAF worked hard to find new solutions, and a common ground that can attract and keep funding. What emerged was a minimalist upgrade focused on replacing operator work stations (OWS) and radar signal processor computers, installs larger OWS displays, and migrates the OWS operating system to a LINUX-based, open-system architecture. Upgrades to the system’s on-board network infrastructure increase its bandwidth. Sources say that the initial $43 million contract will buy 7 conversion kits, with follow-ons for up to 9 more kits and for installation work. The entire set of actual awards would reportedly spend just $110 million of this contract.

Note that the JSTARS Total System Support Responsibility (TSSR) contract is due for renewal very soon. It’s instructive to compare the relative costs of the USAF’s sustainment contract vs. this upgrade contract, in order to fully understand the cost of this fleet.

Work will be performed at Melbourne FL, and is expected to be complete by Oct 20/20. USAF Material Command’s Air Force Life Cycle Management Center at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA will manage the contract (FA8730-14-D-0002). See also Northrop Grumman, Oct 30/13 release.

JSSIP III upgrades

Oct 21/13: At AUSA 2013, Northrop Grumman’s booth displays a small “Broadcast GMTI” kit, which would allow the E-8C to send its radar pictures directly to nearby ground forces. GMTI stands for “Ground Moving Target Indicator” software, which helps battlefield radars highlight and track moving targets. The aircraft is already being used as a communication relay, so bandwidth isn’t a problem.

Sept 23/13: Replace it. USAF Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh tells AFA’s Air and Space Conference that the USAF prefers outright replacement of JSTARS. It’s Tier 2 behind the F-35, KC-46A, and new bomber, which means it probably isn’t affordable under actual budgets. Nevertheless, Walsh says the USAF is trying to build a plan for providing battlefield surveillance “at the best cost over time” using an analysis of alternatives.

There’s definitely a need. The 7th Expeditionary Airborne Command and Control Squadron has flown the overall JSTARS fleet an average of 19.4 hours each day since 9/11. Other USAF officials say that the E-8 fleet’s depot track record, the need to replace their electronics, and their size and old engines makes them less competitive than alternatives.

Technologies have advanced considerably. Boeing’s 737-based P-8 AGS is one option, offering the USAF the most room for specialized equipment, and a platform with many key systems already finished via US Navy development funds. Elsewhere around the world, even smaller platforms are flying this mission. Israel operates a SEMA variant of the G550 large business jet, Brazil offers the R-99B/ EMB 145 Multi-Intel based on its ERJ-145 regional jet, and Britain’s Sentinel R1 fleet uses a Bombardier Global Express long-range business jet airframe. Sources: USAF 116th ACW, “JSTARS Recapitalization” | AFA Air Force Magazine, “Replacing JSTARS”.

Feb 25/13: Global Hawk + E-8. A flight test involving the T-3 JSTARS test aircraft and an RQ-4B Global Hawk Block 40 drone streams data from the UAV’s superior radar to the E-8. Northrop Grumman program director Bryan Lima states that:

“Operators in the Joint STARS aircraft were able to use the Global Hawk as an adjunct sensor…. We were able to display and use the Global Hawk’s radar data on the Joint STARS platform to extend and improve the overall surveillance capabilities and utility of both platforms.”

Sources: Northrop Grumman, March 6/13 release.

Jan 17/13: MIDS JTRS. The Pentagon releases the FY 2012 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). MIDS JTRS is included, and there’s some good news: FY 2012 testing showed that many of the 2010 IOT&E test’s deficiencies have been fixed.

MIDS JTRS on the E-8C JSTARS was declared operationally effective and suitable, but with limitations. The system worked, with no terminal failures in 114.3 hours of testing. The problem is that terminal operators had display problems, which needs to be fixed.

Within the same volume as the MIDS-LVT, the software-defined MIDS JTRS will be able to handle Link 16 with NSA certified encryption, Link-16 Enhanced Throughput (ET) and Link-16 Frequency Remapping (FR). It will also have TACAN (a tactical air navigation aid providing range and bearing from a beacon), UHF or VHF, and the Wideband Networking Waveform as communication options, and additional capabilities are implemented on 3 additional programmable channels from 2 MHz – 2 GHz. The US Navy is continuing development of 2 major MIDS JTRS increments: CMN-4 (Link 16 four-channel Concurrent Multi-Netting with Concurrent Retention Receive) and TTNT (Tactical Targeting Networking Technology). These new capabilities may require significant hardware and software design changes to the MIDS JTRS core terminal, as well as modifications to host platforms for TTNT. That adds considerable technical risk, and will require extensive testing.

April 4/12: MIDS-JTRS. The MIDS JTRS terminal is approved for Full Production and Fielding by Mr. Frank Kendall, Acting Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics.

Despite earlier problems with ViaSat terminal, both MIDS-JTRS vendors have now been found Operationally Effective and Operationally Suitable by Commander, Operational Test & Evaluation Force (COTF) and Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E), and will soon attain Initial Operational capability (IOC) on 3 different platforms: the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighter family, the E-8C JSTARS battlefield surveillance & communication aircraft, and the RC-135 Rivet Joint electronic eavesdropping plane. JPEO JTRS [PDF]

March 14/11: Sensors. Northrop Grumman announces that they’ve completed Congress-mandated installation and testing of an MS-177 multispectral camera that adds visual imagery on top of the E-8C’s AN/APY-7 synthetic aperture radar pictures. Adding camera capability means permission to launch attacks in minutes, instead of hours, with no need to confirm using other platforms like UAVs.

The 500 pound Goodrich MS-177 sensor, derived from the U-2 spy plane’s Syers-2 camera, can keep focus on a target that’s head-on at the start of the plane’s pass and moves to the side as the plane flies, instead of being limited to side shots. It’s housed in a new keel beam accessory bay (KAB) behind the APY-7 radar, on JSTARS test aircraft T-3.

Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems director of Joint STARS’ architectures and concept demonstrations, Mike Mos, touts the key benefit as identification: “From long distances, the APY-7 radar combined with the MS-177 camera could identify very clearly people, buildings, automobiles and ships.” The APY-7 radar has been tweaked so it can spot moving individuals, a well as tanks, but attacks can’t be launched based on radar images alone. Some other form of positive identification is required, typically photos or video images. Cameras provide sharper images than the APY-7, and even the new MP-RTIP radar can’t tell you, for example, the registration number painted on a ship’s side. Or see a face.

The test has wider implications. The KAB could contain other sensors, creating other opportunities to expand the E-8’s payloads. Next steps for the team include more aerodynamic modeling and testing with the new fairing, and research into other sensor combinations. The team hopes this will pave the way for low percentage cost, high impact upgrades to the entire 17-plane fleet. See also Defense News re: initial September 2010 installation.

FY 2005 – 2010

$500+ million upgrade contract; E-8C Block 20 conversions finished; MP-RTIP radar progresses, slowly; Boeing submits a counter-proposal to the USAF.

E-8 JSTARS
(click to view full)

Sept 24/10: MP-RTIP. Northrop Grumman Integrated Systems Western Region in El Segundo, CA receives a $12.3 million contract modification which will fund MP-RTIP radar system development and demonstration for integration with the RQ-4 Global Hawk Block 40 program. At this time, the entire amount has been committed by the Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA (F19628-00-C-0100; PO0220).

Sept 13/10: P-8 AGS. The battle over the E-8 JSTARS fleet’s future is heating up. Boeing is proposing a derivative of its P-8A Poseidon sea control aircraft as a proposed $5.5 billion, 1-for-1 replacement of the current E-8C fleet, instead of paying that estimated amount to upgrade the E-8Cs with new cockpits, sensors, and engines. The Boeing AGS version would include the Raytheon-Boeing Littoral Surveillance Radar System (LSRS), Raytheon’s AN/APY-10 multi-mode radar in the nose, some the same Electronic Support Measures for emissions geo-location that are featured on the E/A-18G Growler electronic attack plane, and an electro-optical surveillance and targeting turret. A P-8 derivative would also give the USAF space and integration for weapons on board, or additional sensors in those spaces.

Northrop Grumman believes the Boeing figure may be a lowball price, and has its own proposal to add 1′ x 8′ array radars on the plane’s cheeks, derived from the firm’s APG-77 and APG-81 AESA radars that equip F-22 and F-35 stealth fighters. Today, JSTARS operations have to “break track” with a target to collect an image. The cheek fairings would solve that problem, while keeping the existing AN/APY-7, in order to lower the upgrade price to around $2.7 billion: $900M re-engining, $500M for new APY-7 receiver and exciters, $1 billion for the cheek array, $300M for avionics upgrade and battle management improvements. This would replace the previous push to swap the APY-7 for their new MP-RTIP radar.

Northrop Grumman executives have expressed concern that USAF officials haven’t showed them the 2009 initial capabilities document, which could launch a competition to replace or upgrade the E-8C. That isn’t a required step, but it is common practice. This may be because the USAF is considering even wider options – like putting the focus on “persistent ground looking radar and optical surveillance with high resolution moving target capability,” instead of an E-8C vs. 737 AGS competition. If so, the firms could find themselves competing with other platforms, possibly including derivatives of airship projects like Northrop Grumman’s US Army’s LEMV etc. Aviation Week | Flight International.

Boeing’s alternative

July 13/10: Sub-contractors. Tactical Communications Group, LLC announces a contract from Northrop Grumman’s E-8 JSTARS team for multiple TCG BOSS systems, in order to conduct comprehensive testing for Link 16 standards compliance by the new mission system and MIDS-JTRS terminals.

March 24/10: Sub-contractors. Curtiss-Wright Corporation announces a $10.5 million contract from Northrop Grumman Corporation to provide an upgraded Radar Signal Processing (RSP) solution for use in the JSTARS program. The initial portion of the contract, for $5.1 million, was awarded to cover “Prime Mission Equipment (PME) Diminishing Material Source (DMS),” ensuring that the USAF will have enough on hand in future. An additional $5.4 million was awarded to enhance the RSP solution “so that it meets advanced radar processing capacity requirements necessary to support future radar performance needs.”

The contract is part of a larger upgrade to the RASP (Radar Airborne Signal Processor (RASP) system used in Joint STARS. Curtiss-Wright’s Motion Control segment will design and manufacture the Radar Signal Processing (RSP) solutions at its San Diego, CA facility.

March 13/09: Accident. A contractor leaves a plug an E-8 fuel tank relief valve – and it nearly costs the USAF a JSTARS plane and all aboard when the wing fuel tank blows out during an aerial refueling near Qatar:

“The PDM [Programmed Depot Maintenance] subcontractor failed to follow Technical Order (TO) mandated procedures when employing the fuel vent test plug during PDM. Due to the relatively short period of time between take-off and [aerial refueling], the [aircraft] did not have the opportunity to burn a substantial amount of fuel from the number two fuel tank which could have allowed the “dive flapper” valve to open after the tank’s excessive air pressure decreased to the point where the flapper valve would open. This explains why this mishap did not occur… between the time [the plane] left the PDM facility and the time of the mishap [on March 13/09].”

The damage is “only” $25 million, and the JSTARS may end up being retired from the fleet. Sources; USAF Accident Report [PDF] | Defense Tech, “A Basic Mistake That Trashed a JSTARS” (incl. pictures).

Major but non-fatal accident

Aug 7/09: MP-RTIP. Northrop Grumman Integrated Systems Western Region in El Segundo, CA received a $57.1 million modified contract to provide a demonstration unit of the initial parts of the MP-RTIP for the Joint Stars E-8 platform. At this time, $27.2 million has been committed by the Multi-Sensor Command and Control Aircraft Program Office at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA (F19628-00-C-0100 P00174).

Nov 4/08: MP-RTIP. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. of El Segundo, CA receives a $5.8 million cost reimbursement with award fee contract modification under the Joint STARS Radar Modernization program. They will perform a risk reduction study to examine the full extent of the effort required to integrate the (now-canceled) E-10’s planned MP-RTIP radar onto the E-8 JSTARS platform. All funds have already been committed by Hanscom AFB, MA (F19629-00-C-0100, Modification P00153).

Work on the study will be done at Northrop Grumman facilities in Norwalk, CT; Melbourne, FL; and El Segundo, CAl and Raytheon’s Space and Airborne Systems business unit. See also Northrop Grumman release.

April 8/09: In “Air Force Radar Plan Imperils Troops,” the center-libertarian Lexington Institute asks:

“What’s wrong with this picture? The Air Force plans to spend over a hundred billion dollars to buy 2,000 new fighters, but it can’t find the money to upgrade a handful of radar planes with better technology for tracking insurgents. Even though it has already spent a billion dollars to develop the new technology it now says it can’t afford to install. And even though warfighters in Iraq have identified an urgent operational need for the new capability.”

Nov 21/05: Upgrades. Northrop Grumman Corp. in Melbourne, FL receives a maximum $532 million cost-reimbursement fixed-price contract to procure improvements which will increase the E-8C fleet’s performance, reliability, and maintainability. The USAF can issue task orders totaling up to the maximum amount, but may issue less.

This contract will include a wide range of efforts, from studies to systems engineering and simulations, engineering change proposals, manufacturing, installation, test and demonstrations, production and retrofit, documentation, support, and training. The USAF is currently most interested in improvements to communications, navigation, surveillance, air traffic management, mobile target tracking, advanced radar systems, and airborne networking and communications improvements.

Work will be complete in December 2011. Solicitations began in August 2005, with 1 proposal received by the Headquarters Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom AFB, MA (FA8708-06-D-0001).

Contract for studies & upgrades

Aug 16/05: Northrop Grumman completes E-8C Block 20 upgrades to JSTARS planes delivered before 2002. Block 20 upgrades use integrated commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) computing and signal-processing hardware from Mercury Computer Systems and Compaq Computer Corporation. The full change creates more of an “open-systems” configuration for hardware and software, rather than relying on proprietary military electronics. Sources: Northrop Grumman, “Northrop Grumman Completes Joint STARS Computer Upgrade”.

Block 20 complete

Appendix A: Death of the E-10

E-10 M2CA Concept
(click to view full)

The E-10A aircraft concept sought to combine the functions of 707-based E-3 AWACS aerial surveillance and command aircraft, and E-8 J-STARS ground surveillance planes, all packaged in a single 767-400 jet. Advances in modern electronics made the project thinkable, but budgetary constraints killed it in early 2007, leaving the USA’s existing E-3 and E-8 fleets to soldier on.

The E-10A had 2 key technologies that continue to draw interest.

One was an updated Battle Management Command and Control (BMC2) mission suite that would be used as the aircraft’s nerve center. The bad news is that adding BMC2 to existing aircraft would involve substantial rewiring and other “deep maintenance” work.

The other was the MP-RTIP (Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program) wide-scan AESA radar, which will deploy a smaller-size version on NATO’s AGS (RQ-4B Global Hawk Block 40) fleet. Northrop Grumman has been pressing for an E-8C radar upgrade that would leverage their billion dollars worth of work on MP-RTIP, and improve E-8 scan resolution by a factor of 5x-10x.

Since December 2000, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman have been teamed for the design, development and production of MP-RTIP, and development of MP-RTIP continues under a $1.2 billion program. Its X-band Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar uses beam steering that can couple electronic and mechanical options. Specifics will depend on the platform and payload space, and antenna size can be tailored accordingly.

MP-RTIP’s Rocky Road

RQ-4B Block 40 rollout
(click to view full)

As of the end of May 2009, MP-RTIP was behind its original schedule, and had not tested its most advanced variants. While the basic synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and ground moving target indications (GMTI) have finished testing, technical glitches took their toll. Due to issues with radar calibration, about 376 hours and 64 flights with Scaled Composites’ Proteus vehicle had been needed to iron out radar system level performance verification (RSLPV) on these basic modes, out of a total of 1,063 hours and 186 flights as of May 2009.

The MP-RTIP is reportedly having problems with “concurrent modes” when the radar is asked to do several things at once, which has cause high-level Pentagon officials to air their dissatisfaction in public.

Remaining modes in 2009 included ground high-range resolution (HRR) and concurrent moving-target indicator (MTI) modes. The HRR/c-MTI combination leverages the advantages of AESA technology and improved processing, in order to field a substantially improved SAR/GMTI ground radar scan. Ground HRR allows more precise measurement of a target’s length, while concurrent MTI does not force the radar to suspend collection in other modes while MTI is running. Some sources add that MP-RTIP will also have aerial MTI capability, which would give it the ability to find other UAVs and cruise missiles.

Additional Readings Background: E-8 JSTARS

• USAF Fact Sheets – E-8C Joint Stars

• Northrop Grumman – E-8C Joint Stars. Northrop Grumman is the E-8C’s lead integrator; the base plane is Boeing’s.

• DID (Nov 23/05) – USA Spending $532M to Upgrade its E-8 J-STARS Eyes in the Sky.

Other E-8 related

• DID – Re-engining the E-8 JSTARS.

• DID (Dec 18/11) – 17 E-8C Planes x 30 Months = $540M Support Costs.

• DID – AGS: NATO’s Battlefield Eye in the Sky [Alliance Ground Surveillance]. RQ-4B Block 40 Global Hawk UAVs with MP-RTIP radars, which may become complements to the JSTARS fleet. The status of the USA’s Block 40 fleet is less certain.

• Northrop Grumman – AN/ZPY-2 Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program (MP-RTIP). Was once seen as the core of any JSTARS upgrades.

• GlobalSecurity.org – Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program.

• Wikipedia – Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program.

News & Views

• Lexington Institute (July 29/09) – Air Force Delay on Radar Plane Fix Hurts Soldiers.

• Aviation Week (May 29/09) – MP-RTIP Work Continues With Two Modes Tested [dead link].

Lexington Institute (April 8/09) – Air Force Radar Plan Imperils Troops.

• AIAA’s Aerospace America, via WayBack (September 2002) – SARs Will Remain Budget Stars.

Future Lynx naval
(click to view full)

In 2006, Finmeccanica subsidiary AgustaWestland received a GBP 1 billion (about $1.9 billion at 02/07 rates) contract from the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) for 70 Future Lynx helicopters, and began a new chapter in a long-running success story. The Lynx is an extremely fast helicopter that entered service in the 1970s, and quickly carved out a niche for itself in the global land and naval markets. The base design has evolved into a number of upgrades and versions, which have been been widely exported around the world.

In Britain, Lynx helicopters are used in a number of British Army (AH7 & AH9) and Fleet Air Arm (Mk 8) roles: reconnaissance, attack, casualty evacuation & troop transport, ferrying supplies, anti-submarine operations, and even command post functions. The Future Lynx program reflects that, and British government and industry are both hoping that its versatility will help it keep or improve the Lynx family’s global market share. This is DID’s FOCUS Article for the AW159 Lynx Wildcat Program, describing its technical and industrial features, schedules, related contracts, and exports.

The AW159 Wildcats

Mk8: everyone retires…
(click to view full)

Britain originally referred to the 2 variants as Future Lynx Battlefield Reconnaissance Helicopters (BRH, now AW159 Wildcat Mk.1) for the British Army, and Future Lynx Surface Combatant Maritime Rotorcraft (SCMR, now AW159 Wildcat HMA Mk.2) for the Navy.

Both AW159 versions will share a common fully-marinized airframe, with provisions for a range of mission and role-based equipment but an estimated 90% commonality. The new helicopter features a range of improvements, including human factors design improvements to the airframe, a new British Experimental Rotor Programme (BERP) main rotor for improved performance, a new 4-blade tail rotor to give improved yaw control at high weights, plus crashworthiness improvements, armoring improvements, and built-in infrared signature suppression to maximize survivability.

Communications equipment will be compatible with the new BOWMAN systems used by British ground forces, but can be changed for export orders.

The cockpit includes a fully integrated display system of 4 primary 10″x8″ inch displays. Sensors include a nose mounted Wescam MX-15Di surveillance turret with IR/TV imaging and laser ranging/targeting, and the naval variant will also carry the 360-degree Selex Galileo 7400E active array radar. Britain decided to confine dipping sonars to its larger AW101 Merlin naval helicopters, but Wildcat export models have the option of using the long-range detection capabilities of Thales’ Compact FLASH.

Defensive protection is provided by a comprehensive integrated defensive aids suite from Selex Galileo that includes missile warning, radar warning, and countermeasures dispensing systems.

Spike-NLOS

AW159 helicopters will be able to carry rockets and gun pods, and the naval version adds BAE’s Sting Ray light torpedoes. Beyond that, integration of Thales’ beam-riding LMM missile (FASGW-L program) is underway, and Wildcat is the initial platform for Sea Skua’s small anti-ship missile successor (FASGW-H/ ANL).

Given Britain’s cramped defense budgets, expansion beyond that weapon set depend on the stated requirements and desires of export customers. If local reports are correct, South Korea is adding the Spike-NLOS missile and its 25km range. That missile would out-range short-range air defense systems, and give the helicopters a very long reach against enemy hovercraft, speedboats, or coastal artillery.

The AW159’s projected Maximum All-Up Mass (MAUM) is 5,790 kg, but can grow to 6,250 kg if necessary during its service life. New nose and tail structures, and an up-rated undercarriage ensure that the helicopter can handle these weights. A pair of LHTEC CTS800-4N engines rated at 1015 kW (1,361 shp) add extra power, and their 36% power increase over previous GEM engines will help maintain the Lynx’s reputation as a speedster. Despite the added mass, therefore, these changes translate into greatly improved hot and high performance, load-carrying ability, and single engine performance overall. All without significantly increasing fuel consumption.

Other enhancements to Future Lynx include a new 12,000-hour fatigue life airframe. The original goal was a 30% parts reduction, but a successful design-to-cost process managed to reduce the number of airframe parts by 80%, using improved design techniques and machined monolithic components.

Future Lynx: The Program

Lynx BRH & Longbows
(click to view full)

The Future Lynx program aims to replace both British Army’s 100 or so AH7s & AH9s, and Fleet Air Arm’s set of about 60 Lynx Mk 8 helicopters.

The original goal was 40 Battlefield Reconnaissance Helicopters (BRH) for the British Army, and 30 Surface Combatant Maritime Rotorcraft (SCMR) for the Royal Navy, with an option for another 10 helicopters that could be split in any way desired. At present, contracts have been issued for 34 AW159 BRH/ Mk.1 Army helicopters, and 28 naval AW159 SCMR/ HMA Mk.2s. Barring future expansion, that will constitute the entire program.

By 2013, there was some question regarding whether the AW159 Mk.1 helicopters would be armed. The Royal Navy’s AW159 HMA Mk.2s will be armed, carrying Sting Ray torpedoes, FASGW-L LMM direct fire missiles, and FASGW-H anti-ship missiles. What they won’t carry is sonar capabilities, though a full ASW version with a SONICS/FLASH Compact dipping sonar system is being delivered for export.

Program & Industrial Structure

In April 2005, the UK Government announced the selection of Future Lynx for the British Army’s and Royal Navy’s requirements, with detailed technical and commercial discussions subsequently taking place that led to a contract award in June 2006. Both EADS’ Eurocopter Unit and Boeing had wanted to compete for the helicopter contract, but the MoD declined to put the contract out for competition.

Instead, Future Lynx was the launch program for a new Strategic Partnering Arrangement between the MoD and AgustaWestland. The UK MoD hailed it as “a major milestone in the implementation of the new Defence Industrial Strategy (DIS),” helping them to meet the objective of sustaining critical helicopter design and engineering skills in the UK by supporting over 800 high technology jobs across the UK.

The public-private partnering arrangements are enshrined within a formal Business Transformation Incentivisation Agreement, and a formal Strategic Partnering Arrangement. The MoD adds that partnering is already delivering significant improvements in spares delivery and technical support for Sea King and EH101 Merlin helicopters operated by the MoD.

An integral requirement of the SPA has been the back to back signature by AgustaWestland of the Future Lynx Contract and Partnering Charters with the 6 major suppliers to the Future Lynx Program. Major industrial partners include:

• GKN Aerospace (helicopter airframes)
  
• LHTEC partnership between Rolls-Royce and Honeywell (engines)
  
• Finmeccanica’s Selex Galileo (defensive suite, SCMR Seaspray 7400E radar)
  
• GE Aviation
  
• General Dynamics UK
  
• Thales UK (avionics, COMPACT FLASH dipping sonar and SONICS processing system for SCMR exports)

Other suppliers of note include:

• L-3 Wescam (MX-15Di surveillance & targeting turret)

So far, the timeline looks like this:

Future Lynx: Contracts & Key Events 2015 – 2018

 

Bringing her in
(click to view full)

July 27/18: PN delivery The Philippine Navy (PN) is set to take delivery of its first two AW-159 ‘Wildcat’ helicopters in March 2019. The ‘Wildcat’ comes in an Army and Navy version. Both AW159 versions will share a common fully-marinized airframe, with provisions for a range of mission and role-based equipment with an estimated 90% commonality. The PN has opted for an anti-submarine warfare package to protect its frigates currently being constructed by Hyundai Heavy Industries. The AW159 helicopters will be able to carry rockets and gun pods, and the naval version adds BAE’s Sting Ray light torpedoes. The helicopter is capable flying at a speed of 291 km/h and has a range of 777 km. The contract for the two anti-submarine helicopters is worth over $101 million and includes munition, mission essential equipment, and integrated logistic support.

March 13/18: First Deployment Four new AW159 Wildcat helicopters will be deployed by the British Army to Estonia in what will be the its first operational deployment. The mission will last for four months from April and is part of NATO’s enhanced Forward Presence (eFP) in Eastern Europe. During their deployment the Wildcats will be supporting Estonian troops and British ground troops in training, as well as participating in NATO’s Exercise ‘Sabre Strike’, which is to span all three Baltic states and involve the armed forces of about 20 nations.

January 17/18: Lynx Retirement Great Britain’s Army has officially retired its last Westland Lynx helicopters from service after 40 years in operation. Leaving RAF Odiham in Hampshire at 9:00 GMT on Tuesday 16, the four remaining Lynx went on one last aerial tour taking in military bases and locations associated with the helicopter and culminated with a V-shaped “air procession” along the River Thames in central London. A similar event took place in March 2017 with Royal Navy Mark 8 Lynx before the aircraft were decommissioned. The Lynx are being replaced with the AgustaWestland AW-159 Wildcat.

January 4/18: Philippines The beefing up of the Philippine Navy’s capabilities are set to get a boost this year, with deliveries of Rafael Spike E-R (Extended Range) missiles—for use on Manilla’s brand-new multi-purpose assault craft (MPAC)—scheduled for very early in the first quarter of this year. Adding to the missiles, the first delivery of two AgustaWestland AW-159 Wildcat anti-submarine helicopters will be completed by the end of 2018, with the second model coming in early 2018. A government spokesperson said the Wildcats will be based on two frigates ordered from South Korea’s Hyundai Heavy Industries, without giving any further information.

July 27/17: The British MoD has insisted that fabrication of the AW159 Wildcat helicopter will remain within the UK. Leonardo, the helicopter’s manufacturer, had been considering moving from its facility where the Wildcat is fabricated in Yeovil, UK, however, the government announced that work will remain there for the life cycle of the Wildcat program. The helicopter is in use with the British Royal Navy and British Army, with 62 of the models currently in service.

January 12/17: Leonardo helicopters has been commissioned to provide support for UK AW159 Wildcat helicopters. The five-year Wildcat Integrated Support and Training contract, worth $333 million, will see Leonardo provide a range of support and training services for Wildcat variants operated by the Royal Navy and Army and will preserve some 500 jobs at its UK facilities. Navy Wildcats act as the core of the service’s aviation capability, tackling ASW roles, force protection, transport and information, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance, while the Army variant performs reconnaissance, command and control, force protection, and transport missions.

January 11/17: Production of a Laser Directed Energy Weapon demonstrator has been ordered by the UK government, with MBDA and industry partners from the UK Dragonfire consortium winning a $36 million contract to carry out the work. It is hoped that the weapon will be demonstrated by 2019, eventually entering service by the mid-2020s. London also signed a $303 million Integrated Support and Training contract with Leonardo Helicopters in a five year deal for the provision of support work of Royal Navy AW159 Wildcat ASW helicopters.

March 25/16: Jane’s has reported that the Philippines have decided on the purchase of two AW159 Lynx Wildcat naval helicopters for their navy. At $114 million, the helicopters will give the Philippine Navy a long sought after anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capability, carrying active dipping sonar (ADS), sonobuoys, and torpedoes, while for the anti-surface warfare role it can be armed with anti-ship missiles, rockets, and guns. Manilla had been searching for a helicopter to fill an ASW hole since 2014, with Augusta Westland beating off offers from Airbus, Bell, Sikorsky and NHIndustries.

September 21/15: The Royal Navy’s AW159 Wildcat helicopter has completed heat trials in the Middle East, with these taking place aboard Type 45 destroyer HMS Duncan, following dispatch of the helicopter to Bahrain.

2013 – 2014

South Korea buys; From 1st HMA Mark 2 flight to standup of 825 NAS training squadron.

Oct 10/14: Re-commissioning. 825 Naval Air “Channel Dash” Squadron is formally re-commissioned into the Royal Navy with its AW159s, and receives the “Falkland Islands 1982” battle honors that were denied it when the squadron was disbanded after that conflict.

The squadron gets its name from Operation Fuller, which attempted to halt the breakout of 66 German ships from Best, France through the English Channel, and back to their German home ports. A sortie of 6 825 Sqn. Swordfish biplanes from RAF Manston near Kent attacked with torpedoes in broad daylight, with only 10 Spitfires for air cover against a vastly larger Luftwaffe force, plus the guns of the German ships. All of the planes were shot down, with only 5 of 18 survivors, and a posthumous Victoria Cross was awarded to Lt. Cdr. Esmonde. All 66 German ships made it. Operation Fuller failed dismally – but 825 Squadron did not. Sources: Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm Museum, “The Channel Dash – Operation Fuller” | Royal Navy, “New Navy Wildcat Helicopter Squadron commissions at RNAS Yeovilton”.

July 30/14: De-commissioning. 700W Naval Air Squadron at Royal Naval Air Station (RNAS) Yeovilton is decommissioned, after 4 years of work bringing the AW159 into the fleet and a flyby ceremony with all 7-helicopters. The Wildcat HMA2s will stand up again on Aug 1/14 as 825 NAS, which will train both aircrew and maintenance engineers, and get the first deployable Wildcat flights ready to go. Sources: UK Royal Navy, “Wildcat pride as they take to the sky”.

700W NAS disbands, 825 NAS begins

July 17/14: Weapons. AgustaWestland signs a EUR 113 million (about GBP 89.3M / $153.1M) contract with the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) to integrate, test, and install ANL anti-ship missile and LMM light strike missile system compatibility onto 28 Royal Navy AW159 Wildcat HMA2 helicopters.

Note that the UK MoD has also signed a EUR 60.2 million contract with LMM missile maker Thales regarding broader integration of their missile onto the Wildcat fleet. Sources: Finmeccanica, “Finmeccanica – AgustaWestland signed a contract worth EUR 113 million with the UK Ministry of Defence”.

June 17/14: Exercises. The AW159’s 700W Naval Air Squadron dropped in on the former aircraft carrier HMS Illustrious during the big Deep Blue Anti-Submarine exercise off of the Cornish coast. It didn’t perform any anti-submarine work, however, just dropped off some supplies while the ship’s 9 Merlin Mk.2 naval helicopters hunted a Dutch Walrus Class SSK and a British SSN.

The Wildcat will continue training and trials with 700W until the end of July 2014, before disbanding. It will be replaced by the operational 825 Naval Air Sqn, which will be the parent unit for training all air and ground crew working on the AW159 HMA Mk.2. Sources: Royal Navy, “New Wildcat debuts aboard Illustrious”.

June 16/14: Weapons. The Ministry of Defence awards Thales a GBP 48 million (EUR 60.2 M / $81.5 M) contract, covering the Light Modular Missile’s final development, qualification and integration on AW159 Wildcat helicopters, plus deployable test equipment.

The chosen configuration involves a 5-missile launcher on each hardpoint, rather than the 7-missile sets shown in previous mock-ups. Read “Direct Sting: Thales’ Small LMM / FASGW-L Missiles” for full coverage.

Jan 6/14: Weapons. South Korea will be adding RAFAEL’s Spike-NLOS missile to its AW159s, giving them a 25+ km reach:

“…the new lot will be mounted on Wildcat maritime choppers to be purchased over the next two years, an official with the Defense Acquisition Program Administration said Friday. “We’ve recently struck a deal with the Israeli manufacturer of the missile…. The missiles cost about W300 million (US$1=W1,056) each, approximately 100 times the price of a shell for the K-9 self-propelled howitzer.”

Well, yes, but K9 armored vehicles can’t fly, K9 shells aren’t guided, and they can’t hit moving targets. Other than that, it’s a great comparison. South Korea already operates land-based versions of the Spike-NLOS light strike missile, whose primary mission from land-based platforms is to kill North Korean artillery. A naval helicopter that became the first aircraft to mount it would add speedboats and hovercraft to the target list, and gain a much longer reach than the 15 km Hellfire missiles aboard AH-64E attack helicopters and US Navy MH-60Rs. In fact, it would be long enough to out-range short-range air defense systems. The Hellfire-range Spike-LR is more commonly mounted on helicopters, but subsequent reports indicate that this isn’t a reporting mistake – they’ve really picked the NLOS variant. Sources: Chosun Ilbo, “Korean Choppers to Be Armed with Israeli Missiles” | Defense Update, “Seoul to Equip its New Maritime Helicopters with Israeli SPIKE Missiles”.

Feb 6/13: Sonar. AgustaWestland picks the compact version of Thales FLASH dipping sonar as their standard offering for naval Lynx exports. The FLASH Compact sonar features an optimized, lightweight architecture, as well as a fully electric reeling machine so that smaller helicopters can deploy it. Thales’ SONICS system will act as an on-board real-time data processing system, with a VHF receiver to pick up sonobuoy data.

This equipment has been offered with their Super Lynx 300s before, so the announcement seems to be directly targeted at the AW159. Note that Britain’s AW159 Wildcat HMA Mark 2 helicopters don’t have a dipping sonar on board, but South Korea has said that their AW159s will. This appears to nail down the type.

They’ll be in good company. FLASH platforms include America and Australia’s MH-60R Seahawks; Britain’s AW101 Merlins; NH90 helicopters ordered by France, Norway & Sweden; and the UAE’s EC525 Cougars. All of these other machines are medium helicopters or larger. Thales.

Jan 28/13: HMA Mk.2. The Royal Navy refers to its “Wildcat HMA Mark 2”, as they discuss their 1st delivered helicopter’s inaugural flight at Yeovil in Somerset. HMA stands for Helicopter Maritime Attack, and is part of the operational designation. SCMR is the Future Lynx program’s reference, which is a separate thing.

British Army helicopters will be Wildcat Mark 1s, and the first 2 were officially handed over on July 11/12. MoD | Royal Navy | Defense Update.

1st Naval AW159 delivered

Jan 16/13: ROK on. South Korea’s DAPA spokesperson Baek Yun-hyung announces that the naval AW159 is South Korea’s preferred choice for its MH-X competition, with a planned initial buy of 8 helicopters. Finkeccanica’s Jan 17/12 release places the overall contract value at EUR 560 million (about $744 million), with AgustaWestland’s share at EUR 270 million. It’s the new helicopter type’s 1st export order, with deliveries planned from 2015-2016. DAPA’s Baek:

“The Wildcat was deemed superior in three of four fields: cost, operational suitability, and contractual arrangements…. The overall consensus is that the Wildcat is the better option…. In joint operations the US model is superior but both models meet our performance requirements.”

The ROKN’s AW159s will have the full complement of dipping sonar, radar, surveillance & targeting turret, rescue hoist, provision for anti-ship missiles and torpedoes, door gun, etc. Media descriptions involve using the helicopters with the ROKN’s 2,200t Ulsan Class light frigates, which are designed to serve as high-end coastal patrol vessels with a mix of anti-ship and anti-submarine capabilities, plus low-end air defense. A smaller helicopter will serve them better (“operational suitability”), but the class doesn’t have much service time left. The ROKN’s new 2,300t FFX Incheon Class light frigates will also need helicopters, and the ROK’s 24 Super Lynx 300s and 8 AW159s should give them good options. AgustaWestland | Finmeccanica | Hankoryeh.

South Korea orders AW159

Jan 13/13: NAO Report. Britain’s NAO releases its 2012 Major Projects Report. The overall Future Lynx program remains GBP 140 million under its original GBP 1.803 billion approval estimate, in part because it has reduced to number of helicopters from 80 (at GBP 23.1 million each) to the current order set of 62 (at GBP 26.8 million each).

The program is 7 months behind schedule, which will push the Army’s AW159 BRH in-service date from January to July 2014, but won’t affect the naval SCMR’s January 215 schedule. Meanwhile, bureaucracy is getting in the way. “Significant unanticipated activity has been undertaken to satisfy the emerging Regulatory Instructions issued by the recently formed Military Aviation Authority (MAA).”

2012

1st delivery. Support contract. Denmark loss.

AW159 BRH
(click to view full)

Nov 21/12: Denmark. Denmark’s Forsvarsministeriet announces that it has picked the MH-60R for a 9-helicopter buy, to replace their existing fleet of 7 AgustaWestland Lynx 90B machines. Danish MH-60Rs will be missing their sonobuoy launchers and ALFS FLASH dipping sonar, which will increase their available internal cabin space for transport missions.

The DKR 4 billion (about $686 million) choice must next be approved by the Finance Ministry, and then passed in a budget by Parliament. That’s expected to happen, and it would be followed by deliveries from 2016 – 2018. Danish Forsvarsministeriet [in Danish] | Sikorsky | Flight International | Jane’s .

Denmark loss to MH-60R Lite

July 11/12: Support. At Farnborough, the MoD takes the opportunity to announce that their GBP 250 million Wildcat in-service support and training contract is up and running with AgustaWestland, who will outfit a specialist training centre at RNAS Yeovilton. This deal builds on the earlier GBP 76 million March 8/11 contract, and will include flight simulators and a wide range of other equipment to train pilots, ground crew and engineers.

The initial period of the availability-based Wildcat Integrated Support and Training (WIST) contract will run to March 2017, but the framework as a whole stretches to the Wildcat’s planned out of service date in 2044. It builds on the contracting-for-availability approach pioneered with the firm’s Sea King (SKIOS), Apache, and AW101 Merlin helicopter fleets, where money is paid for levels of fleet availability rather than parts and hours worked. Regular price and value for money reviews are designed to ensure performance targets are being met, and help to price successive WIST phases.

WIST includes aircrew, maintainer and ground crew training as well, and it actually started in early 2012 so the April delivery could go smoothly. AgustaWestland and its suppliers are now delivering a complete spares provisioning service, enhanced technical support services including aircraft safety management and full systems integration rig support, and simulator and ground based training for both aircrew and maintainers. The contract will sustain over 300 industry jobs, mainly in the South West of England at Royal Naval Air Station Yeovilton. Its Wildcat Training Centre will include 2 Full Mission Simulators, a Flight Training Device, and a Cockpit Procedures Trainer. AgustaWestland will be responsible for delivering over 60 different training courses for ab-initio Army aircrew, ground crew and maintainers starting in July 2013, as well as for Royal Navy ab-initio aircrew and maintainers starting in January 2014. Once the helicopters are in service, operational currency and continuation training will also be supported at RNAS Yeovilton. UK MoD | AgustaWestland.

1st SCMR delivered, WIST through-life support contract

July 11/12: Official delivery. The first 2 of 62 AW159 Wildcat helicopters are officially unveiled and delivered by AgustaWestland at the Farnborough International Airshow. Both are Army BRH variants, which will come into service in 2014. Royal Navy AW159 SCMR Wildcats are due to be delivered for training later in 2012.

Technically, AgustaWestland says the 1st AW159 was accepted in April 2012, ensuring on-schedule and on-budget delivery. To date, a total of 5 production Wildcat helicopters have been finished. UK MoD | AgustaWestland.

BRH Delivery

Feb 17/12: Testing. The UK MoD announces that an AW159 SCMR prototype has completed 2 sets of 10-day sea trials aboard the Type 23 frigate HMS Iron Duke. The helicopter landed on the ship’s deck nearly 400 times by day and night, in “various weather conditions” off the coasts of southern England and northern Scotland, and in the Irish Sea. It sounds miserable this time of year, and probably was, but that’s what it takes in order to write the new machine’s “ship-helicopter operating limits” manual.

Prototype ZZ402 also tested its mission systems, night-vision cockpit and navigation systems. The Navy will continue toward the type’s 2015 fielding goal by performing future tests of its radar, electro-optics, navigational kit, and compatible missiles. UK MoD.

Jan 23/12: Denmark. AgustaWestland signs a Heads of Agreement (HoA) with Denmark’s Systematic A/S to jointly explore business opportunities worldwide, including integration of the SitaWare range of systems with AgustaWestland’s helicopters

They’ll also cooperate on the Danish Maritime Helicopter Programme. AgustaWestland is proposing the AW159 helicopter to replace Denmark’s earlier-generation Lynxes, but they will face competition from Sikorsky’s MH-60R, and probably from the European NH90-NFH. Both competitors are larger helicopters. AgustaWestland.

2011

Testing; training.

LMMs/FASGW-L on
AW159 SCMR, Apache
(click to view full)

Nov 7/11: Testing. The AW159’s first at-sea landing on a ship begins 4 weeks of ‘operating limit trials.’that will include ground scenarios, as well as RFA Argus. UK MoD.

June 21/11: Denmark. AgustaWestland signs a cooperation agreement with Denmark’s Terma A/S to jointly explore business opportunities in the fields of aircraft survivability equipment, 3D-Audio, advanced aero structures and other equipment.

The two companies already have cooperated successfully on the AW101 helicopter, which Denmark has bought. They’re hoping that the Danish Maritime Helicopter Programme will also buy the AW159 Wildcat, to replace earlier generation Lynx maritime helicopters. AgustaWestland.

June 20/11: The AW159 Lynx Wildcat flies at the Paris Air Show, and the firm offers a progress report.

The 3 test helicopters have completed over 250 of 600 flying hours. Wildcat #1 will start hot and high trials in the USA in June 2011, and Wildcat #3 will undertake Shipborne Helicopter Operating Limit (SHOL) trials in October 2011. Wildcat #2 recently completed chaff and flare firing trials, and is focused on integration of the avionics and mission sensors. A production helicopter has begun flying, and 6 more are undergoing final assembly.

AgustaWestland is currently negotiating with the UK MoD on a comprehensive IOS through-life support contract. AgustaWestland.

April 20/11: Testing. The 1st production AW159 performs its maiden flight at AgustaWestland’s Yeovil facility. Source.

April 5/11: FASGW-L. Thales receives a contract for 1,000 Lightweight Multi-role Missiles (LMM), to equip the UK’s AW159 helicopters as their “Future Anti-Surface Guided Weapon – Light” (FASGW-L). The parties offer no details regarding contract costs, as they’re re-routing funding from an existing project, in order to finalize LMM development and produce the initial set of weapons. The casualty is believed to be Thales’ laser beam-riding, Mach 3.5 Starstreak portable anti-aircraft missile, which reportedly had some of its technology re-used in the less costly LMM.

March 8/11: Training. AgustaWestland announces a GBP 76 million ($122.2 million) contract with the UK Ministry of Defence to design and develop an integrated Lynx Wildcat training solution, including building and equipping a new modern training center at RNAS Yeovilton in South West England, where both Royal Navy and British Army AW159 squadrons will train. The facility will provide training courses for Army aircrew and maintainers starting in January 2013, with training for Royal Navy aircrew and maintainers starting January 2014.

The Wildcat Training Centre will be equipped with a suite of briefing rooms, integrated electronic classrooms and a learning management system, a Full Mission Simulator (FMS), Flight Training Device (FTD) and Cockpit Procedures Trainer (CPT) simulators, any of which will be capable of delivering Army or Royal Navy conversion and mission training. Each of the Full Mission Simulators has 6 degrees of freedom to provide acceleration sensations, and a visual system that complies with JAR-FSTD-H Level D standard. Other synthetic training devices will cover mechanical, avionic and weapon systems. Key suppliers include Indra (Full Motion Simulators and other aircrew training equipment), and Pennant Training Systems (suite of maintenance training aids). The contract for construction of the facility will be awarded later in 2011, but all other work will start immediately.

2009 – 2010

Maiden flight. Export promotion.

Maiden flight
(click to play video)

Nov 19/10: Testing. TI3, the 3rd and final AW159 test helicopter, successfully completes its maiden flight at AgustaWestland’s Yeovil facility in the UK. TI3’s main tasks include load survey trials and naval development, including ship helicopter operating limit trials. AgustaWestland.

Nov 19/10: Exports. Shephard’s Rotorhub reports that Britain is already promoting the AW159 Wildcat on the international market:

“Sheehan said the main targets for the aircraft were existing operators of earlier Lynx variants, identifying six in Europe and seven across the rest of the world. In addition, the DSO has been in discussion with the Royal New Zealand Navy (RNZN) about the capabilities of the Wildcat naval variant and Sheehan is meeting with RNZN representatives in early 2011. New Zealand is considering whether to proceed with an upgrade of its SH-2G Super Seasprite helicopters when they are due for one in 2015 or replace the aircraft outright.

…Any export aircraft could mirror the Royal Navy’s equipment package and be fitted with the Selex Galileo Seaspray 7000E active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, L3 Wescam MX-15D EO/IR imaging system MBDA Sea Skua missiles and Thales LMM missiles. The aircraft could also be fitted with the Thales FLASH (Folding Light Acoustic System for Helicopters) dipping sonar if required. Sheehan was also bullish about the Wildcat having seemingly emerged unscathed from the [SDSR], suggesting the requirement may even increase from the current order of 62 once the wider effects of the SDSR are digested by the MoD.”

Oct 14/10: Testing. TI2, the 2nd AW159 test helicopter successfully completed its maiden flight at AgustaWestland’s Yeovil, UK facility. TI1 continues to perform air vehicle and flight envelope testing, while TI2 will undertake the flight testing of the aircraft’s core avionics and mission systems, following testing on AgustaWestland’s Full Systems Integration Rig (FSIR).

AgustaWestland has now also established a new AW159 production facility at its Yeovil plant that introduces a pulse line production system. They hope to make big efficiency improvements in the final assembly process. AgustaWestland.

Nov 11/09: Testing. The 1st AW159 successfully completes its maiden flight at AgustaWestland’s Yeovil facility, with AgustaWestland Chief Test Pilot Donald Maclaine at the controls. Another 2 test aircraft will join this machine in 2010, in order to complete the AW159 and mission equipment flight testing.

To date, AgustaWestland says the program has remained on time and on budget for all of its major milestones. The first operational aircraft is still scheduled for delivery in 2011, and the Lynx Wildcat is still slated to reach full operational capability with the Army in 2014 and the Royal Navy in 2015. AgustaWestland release.

Maiden flight

April 24/09: Renamed – and Reduced. During a ceremony at AgustaWestland’s Yeovil facility, the Future Lynx is officially renamed the AW159 Lynx Wildcat. UK MoD | The AgustaWestland release states that:

“62 AW159s will be initially procured by the UK MoD, 34 for the British Army and 28 for the Royal Navy… continues to be on time and on budget and was the first major project to be awarded under the Strategic Partnering Arrangement signed by the UK Ministry of Defence and AgustaWestland in June 2006. AgustaWestland has also signed partnering agreements with a number of key supplier on the Future Lynx programme including Selex Galileo, a Finmeccanica company; GKN Aerospace, LHTEC – a partnership between Rolls-Royce and Honeywell, General Dynamics UK, Thales UK and GE Aviation. The first flight of the aircraft is on schedule to take place in November 2009 with the first airframe having entered final assembly in November 2008, ahead of schedule. AW159 deliveries will commence in 2011 and it will enter operational service with the British Army in 2014 and the Royal Navy in 2015.”

“AW159 Wildcat”

2007 – 2008

Subcontractors.

BRH concept
(click to view full)

Dec 14/08: The unofficial British Navy Matters site offers its year in review for 2008. It highlights a number of negative trends, and has this to say about the Future Lynx program:

“The Future Lynx helicopter project finally seems to secure, but the order announced in 2006 of 30 helicopters plus 5 options for the Royal Navy has been reduced to 28 aircraft. Back in 2001 the RN was hoping for 60 new helicopters.”

Nov 13/08: Sub-contractors. GKN Aerospace delivers the first complete Future Lynx Airframe to AgustaWestland on schedule. The firm reports that it has achieved challenging an 80% reduction in parts count when compared with the existing Super Lynx airframe. GKN release.

July 14/08: Sub-contractors. GE Aviation announces a contract from AgustaWestland to provide the Integrated Cockpit Display System on 70 Future Lynx and 30 Merlin Capability Sustainment Plus (MCSP) helicopters for the UK Ministry of Defence. The contact is valued at more than $55 million over the next 10 years, with production deliveries commencing in early 2009.

The integrated cockpit display system includes a smart 10″ x 8″ Integrated Display Unit (IDU), flexible & adaptable Remote Interface Unit (RIU) and 2nd Generation Integrated Standby Instrument System (ISIS).

May 21/08: Sub-contractors. GKN Aerospace announces that they have commenced Super Lynx airframe assembly on schedule at the Company’s Yeovil, UK facility, following a design-to-cost program. In order to meet these goals, the new design makes extensive use of monolithic machined components instead of a traditional fabricated detail structure; overall, the airframe’s parts count has been reduced by 80%, instead of the originally forecast 30%.

During production, digital assembly instructions developed by GKN Aerospace directly from CATIA v5 will be presented to each individual on a stand alone wireless IT workstation, while state-of-the-art assembly tooling improves production mechanics.

Nov 1/07: Sub-contractors. BAE Mobility & Protection Systems announces a contract from AgustaWestland to design, develop, and provide 140 S5000 crew seats, plus 340 S3000 troop seats and interface frames, for use on the UK’s Future Lynx helicopters. Deliveries are slated tp run from 2011-2016.

The crashworthy Armor Holdings S5000 crew seat has mission adaptive armor for the seat pan and backrest, and incorporates a state-of-the-art 5-point harness with a dual action rotary buckle, armrest, headrest, adjustable thigh and lumbar support, and a folding armored wing panel to increase the lateral protective area. The S5000 crew seat features field installation of less than one hour and provides maximum ballistic protection.

The S3000 rear cabin troop seats include state-of-the-art 4-point lightweight restraints with a rotary buckle. The modular seat frame system features quick installation and removal of interface fittings from frames through the use of 4 quick release pins. The cabin seat can be installed in aft, forward, and side facing locations, allowing flexibility for different cabin layouts. BAE Systems release.

Oct 30/07: Sub-contractors. AgustaWestland announces that the first monolithic machined panel for the first Future Lynx (a BRH Army variant) was manufactured last week at Oldland CNC’s facility in Bristol, United Kingdom. The manufacture of the first component, a lower fuselage bulkhead, was witnessed by representatives from the UK Ministry of Defence Integrated Project Team and AgustaWestland.

Oldland CNC is manufacturing 83 of the 147 Future Lynx primary structure monolithic machined components and supplying them to GKN Aerospace for incorporation into the airframe prior to delivery to AgustaWestland. The first Army variant remains on target to fly late 2009.

Feb 19/07: SCMR radar. Finmeccanica subsidiary Selex Sensors and Airborne Systems (Selex S&AS) received a contract from AgustaWestland to provide the multi-mode e-scan surveillance radar for the Royal Navy’s variant of the Future Lynx helicopter.

The GBP 20 million (currently about $39 million) contract will see the Selex S&AS Seaspray 7000E AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) radar installed as the scan and targeting radar for the Navy’s Surface Combatant Maritime Rotorcraft (SCMR) as it monitors the sea lanes, launches missiles, et. al. The Seaspray 7000E combines a state of the art active electronically scanned array with a commercial off the shelf processor, and covers both air-to-air and air-to-surface scanning. AESA radars feature improved range and capabilities, while requiring less maintenance. See SELEX release | Seaspray 7000E datasheet [PDF].

2005 – 2006

Future Lynx contract. Subcontractors.

SCMR concept
(click to view full)

July 27/06: Sub-contractors. GKN Aerospace will supply the complete, assembled airframe for all 70 Future Lynx helicopters. They will be responsible for managing the entire supply chain for this work and will assemble the airframe at Yeovil, prior to delivery to AgustaWestland. This contract is valued at approximately GBP 50 million (roughly $80 million) through to 2016.

GKN Aerospace has been supplying assemblies for the Lynx airframe for over 20 years, and for the last 5 years it has supplied all Lynx airframes to AgustaWestland. The new Super Lynx airframe will continue to be manufactured in aluminum, but will incorporate monolithic machined components to reduce the component count by some 30%. See release.

July 17/06: Sub-contractors. AgustaWestland awards Thales a 10-year, GBP 60 million contract for Future Lynx avionics. Thales UK will provide core elements of the avionics management, communications, and navigation systems, as well as taking responsibility for the integration of some of the Commercial Off The Shelf equipment within the Navigation and Communications sub-systems. The Thales Secure Communications Control System (SCCS), which is at the heart of the communications system, is from the family of TopSIS products. It is already selected and fitted on a number of aircraft including the UK’s Chinook Mk2/2A helicopters and ASTOR Sentinel R1 reconnaissance aircraft, as well as the Australian MRH-90 transport and Tiger reconnaissance/ attack helicopters, and its Airbus 330-derivative Multi-Role Transport and Tanker aircraft. See release.

July 17/06: Sub-contractors. AgustaWestland has awarded Smiths Aerospace a contract to supply the new SDS-5000 large area cockpit display system for the new Future Lynx helicopter. The Smiths Aerospace 10″ x 8″/ 25 cm x 20 cm liquid crystal displays provide more than 70% additional display area compared to the existing Smiths’ SDS-4000 display system which it replaces. Design and development has commenced, manufacture will take place in Cheltenham, UK, and deliveries to AgustaWestland will begin in 2008. The contract value was not announced in the release.

July 5/06: Sub-contractors. Smiths Aerospace has been awarded a $21 million contract for the development and supply of its comprehensive HUMS technology for the Future Lynx. The contract involves the implementation of the Smiths combined Health & Usage Monitoring System and Cockpit Voice & Flight Data Recorder (HUMS/CVFDR) capability on all 70 of Britain’s Future Lynx aircraft. Development is due to commence this year at Smiths’ facilities in Southampton, UK and in Michigan, USA, with deliveries scheduled to commence in 2011.

The Future Lynx HUMS will continuously monitor the fleet wide health and performance of safety-critical components, providing advance warning of potential equipment failures and collecting valuable data for routine maintenance of each aircraft. HUMS sensors monitor the health and usage of the engines, transmission, drive-train system, rotor system and airframe by detecting and diagnosing potential failures, recording usage, automating test procedures and providing alerts for potential maintenance actions. The HUMS also provides continuous Rotor Track and Balance (RTB) capability, negating the requirement for the installation of carry aboard equipment and the overhead for dedicated RTB check flights. This feature will be operational in advance of the UK’s operational use of the aircraft, in time for the Super Lynx flight trials phase.

June 22/06: Sub-contractors. General Dynamics UK Limited announces a GBP 24 million (about $44 million) contract from AgustaWestland for the design, development and manufacture of an Advanced Tactical Processor for the UK’s Future Lynx Programme.

The Tactical Processor will be based on GDUK’s combat proven family of open systems computers, and will host software applications that interface to the hardware using an Allied Standard Avionics Architecture Council (ASAAC) standard based 3-layer software stack. It will also provide a sophisticated video processing and distribution function, embedded mission recording and playback and a digital map capability that is common to the UK’s Merlin Mk3 support helicopter. The new helicopters ATP will also feature 2-way data communication with the GD designed BOWMAN network.

June 22/06: Strategic Partnering Arrangement for Future Lynx Program signed between the UK MoD and AgustaWestland. This solidifies the GBP 1 billion order for 70 helicopters, which is worth $1.9 billion at the time.

June 13/06: Business Transformation Incentivisation Agreement signed between the UK MoD and AgustaWestland. AgustaWestland release.

Future Lynx contract

March 24/05: Future Lynx selected as the preferred option for UK land and sea helicopter requirements. See DID coverage.

Additional Readings Background: Helicopter

• AgustaWestland – AW159.

• Army Technology – Future Lynx Battlefield Reconnaissance Helicopter, United Kingdom.

• NavalTechnology – AW159 Future Lynx / Lynx Wildcat – Maritime Surveillance and Attack Helicopter, United Kingdom.

• British Army – Wildcat Mk1.

• Royal Navy – Wildcat. Their designation is Wildcat HMA Mk2, where “HMA” stands for “Helicopter Maritime Attack”.

• Naval Technology – Super Lynx – Combat Helicopter, United Kingdom. The Super Lynx 300 fits between the Lynx Mk8 and the AW159 Future Lynx; see also AgustaWestland page.

• Army Technology – Lynx Mk7 / Mk9 Multirole Helicopter, United Kingdom.

Background: Ancillaries

• DID – Light Naval Strike: MBDA’s FASGW-H / ANL Missile.

• BAE Systems – Sting Ray Mod 1 Lightweight Torpedo.

Official Reports

• UK NAO (HC 684-i, 2012-13) – 2012 Major Projects Report.

News & Views

• UK Armed Forces Commentary (Nov 18/13) – The evolving budget situation: helicopters – UPDATE. Explains that Army AW159s may lose their attack capability, and shows a number of internal configuration layouts.

• Defence Review Asia (June 2009) – Evolution Of The Species: AgustaWestland Eyes Regional Opportunities For AW159 [PDF].

• Times Online (March 25/05) – Westland GBP 1bn helicopter deal angers rivals. “Privately, [EADS] is thought to be furious that its offer to allow its helicopters to be built under licence at Yeovil by an AgustaWestland workforce trained by EADS had been overlooked…”.

• Associated Press (March 24/05) – Finmeccania Gets Helicopter Contract.

• BBC (March 24/05) – Helicopter Firm to Get GBP 1bn Boost.