You are here

Home » Feed aggregator » Sources

Defense Industry Daily

Subscribe to Defense Industry Daily feed
Military Purchasing News for Defense Procurement Managers and Contractors
URL: https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com
Updated: 4 days 15 hours ago

EMALS Glitches in Front of Press | France Mulls C-130Js | Jordan Too Buys Sniper Pods

Thu, 18/06/2015 - 07:25
North America

South America

  • Russia will deliver nine helicopters to Peru next month, following a $400 million contract for the 24 Mi-171Sh helicopters in December 2013 and a first batch delivery at the tail-end of last year. Previous reports from March indicated that the number of helicopters still to be delivered stood at fifteen, with the Russian manufacturer also reportedly set to open a Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO) center in the South American country to support its new helicopter fleet. Russia has also been angling to provide an upgrade program for Peru’s T-55 tanks.

Europe

  • Lockheed Martin and French defense officials are reportedly in discussions regarding a potential procurement of C-130J aircraft. The country’s defense ministry augmented its procurement budget last month to cover the potential purchase, with reports from earlier this year [French] stating that the country was in negotiations with Lockheed Martin regarding a deal estimated to be worth $670 million; however the French procurement agency DGA subsequently refuted these claims.

  • French firm Thales and Textron AirLand announced Wednesday that they have successfully integrated the former’s I-Master radar onto the latter’s low-cost light attack Scorpion jet. The radar also scored export success to Jordan this week, following a 2014 contract to equip the country’s fleet of AC-235 aircraft. The Scorpion has recently been pushed at India, with other possible customers spread globally, including several African and Asian states.

  • The Scorpion is also reportedly set to head to the United Kingdom’s naval aviation service, the Fleet Air Arm, for trials and flight demonstrations. These will take place over a period of ten days, with the jets also scheduled to undergo demonstrations at defense firm QinetiQ’s pilot training center. QinetiQ provides pilot training services to the UK Armed Forces, as well as to civilians.

Middle East

  • Lockheed Martin has been contracted to supply ten Sniper Advanced Targeting Pods to the Royal Jordanian Air Force, with the country currently engaged in airstrikes against Daesh in Iraq and Syria. The company was awarded a $485 million contract by the US Air Force in March, with a portion of this allocated for Foreign Military Sales. Jordan become the sixteenth Sniper ATP customer in 2013.

Asia

Today’s Video

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

ATP-SE: LITENING Targeting Pods Now Feature ‘Gen-5′

Thu, 18/06/2015 - 02:45
Sniper on F-16
(click to view full)

At the end of September 2010, the USAF dropped something of a bombshell. Under their $2.3 billion Advanced Targeting Pod – Sensor Enhancement (ATP-SE) contract, the service that had begun standardizing on one future surveillance and targeting pod type decided to change course, and split its buys.

This decision is a huge breakthrough for Northrop Grumman, whose LITENING pod had lost the USAF’s initial 2001 Advanced Targeting Pod competition. As a result of that competition, the USAF’s buys had shifted from LITENING to Sniper pods, and Lockheed Martin’s Sniper became the pod of choice for integration onto new USAF platforms. Since then, both of these pods have chalked up procurement wins around the world, and both manufacturers kept improving their products. That continued competition would eventually change the landscape once again.

In January 2015, Rafael announced that their upcoming upgrade that they call G-4 Advanced outside the U.S., and “G-5″ for the Americans will have air-to-air targeting capabilities.

In addition to more diverse targeting, the pods are said to feature inter-asset communications and sensor sharing capabilities – in essence some of the whiz-bang features touted in the F-35 platform that is supposed to push the F/A-18 into obsolescence.

ATP-SE: Evolution in Action British Harrier GR9,
over Afghanistan
(click to view full)

In Desert Storm, aircraft using precision weapons typically used just 2 bombs to destroy targets which would have required 9,000 bombs in World War II, and 300 in Vietnam. The targeting pods used in Desert Storm were expensive single purpose systems, however, which required multiple pods to perform various missions. The Laser Infrared Targeting and Navigating (LITENING) pod changed that in 1992, combining multiple sensors for maximum flexibility in a single pod, at comparatively low cost.

That combination made LITENING popular, and a partnership between RAFAEL and Northrop Grumman extended its reach. Between the 2 firms, LITENING was sold to customers around the world, including the US military. Other pods eventually followed in its footsteps: Raytheon’s ATFLIR became the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet’s designated pod within the US Navy, and Lockheed Martin took a big step forward when its Sniper/Pantera pod won the USAF’s 2001 competition. Then all targeting pods took a big step forward after the 9/11 attacks, as they proved their effectiveness so well that troops and air forces alike began clamoring for more. For older fighters, an advanced surveillance and targeting pod became the ultimate accessory. For newer fighter designs, targeting pods’ fast improvements and quick-change modularity have made them a standard fixture.

At the moment, core sensors on modern pods include a day camera, thermal imaging, laser rangefinding, laser designator, laser spot detection, inertial navigation, and GPS geolocation. This integrated array enables a pilot to effectively detect, recognize, identify, track and engage ground targets in day, night and under adverse weather conditions. Modern pods are so good that they’ve been used to watch individual people enter or exit a building.

Ball, LITENING
(click to view full)

While the USAF was progressively standardizing on the AN/AAQ-33 Sniper, the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard continued to be steady AN/AAQ-28 LITENING AT customers, alongside the US Marines. Northrop Grumman’s approach of steady improvement gave them an opportunity to show those customers the new G4 pod they had been developing. Interest apparently spread to the USAF, as they were brought into flight testing by US Air Force Reserve Command.

With the 2001 ATP contract expiring in 2009, the USAF decided to compete the follow-on order. Work on an RFP that could result in a new competitive landscape for targeting pods began in April 2008. The USAF hasn’t discussed its motives publicly, but new technological developments were given added impetus by the acquisition reforms that surfaced in December 2008. These aimed to institutionalize more competition for ongoing contracts, and the ATP-SE framework fits that mold.

By August 2009 the USAF had issued a draft RFP, with the formal ATP-SE RFP issued in January 2010. The split order was issued in September 2010.

Note that these pods’ modular construction means that existing LITENING AT pods can be upgraded to G4/SE status, and existing Sniper ATPs can be enhanced to the SE configuration. The Air Force’s ATP-SE contract doesn’t include upgrade kits at this point, however, just complete pods. The US military appears to have chosen to buy SE configuration upgrade kits under other contracts (vid Aug 29/09, Nov 7/11 entries) instead, and could modify its ATP-SE umbrella contract if it wished.

ATP-SE: The Competitors

Raytheon’s ATFLIR is only integrated with Boeing’s F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, and foreign options like the Damocles pod by France’s Thales suffer from the same integration limitations. That left only 2 realistic contenders for the USAF’s ATP-SE.

Lockheed Martin’s Aerial Sniper CF-18 w. Sniper
(click to view full)

Lockheed Martin’s AN/AAQ-33 Sniper ATP was designed to be a major step-change from the firm’s twin-pod LANTIRN systems, making use of a low radar signature profile and an advanced array of sensors and electronics, in order to offer longer range detection and identification. It also has an important time and money-saving feature: a sort of universal interface, which self-detects the plane type it’s on and automatically load the appropriate Operational Flight Program. It’s a simple change that saves a lot of money on testing and re-certiciation, as shown by the structure of the respective ATP-SE contracts.

Sniper ATP has also won competitions on straight performance. The British, for instance, explicitly cited the pod’s stand off detection and identification ranges as the reason they chose to equip their Harriers with Sniper pods for Afghan missions, rather than buy more of the LITENING-III pods that already equipped their Tornado and Eurofighter jets.

Key changes to the ATP-SE competition’s Sniper pods include new sensors (1k FLIR, HDTV), an evolution of the 2-way Compact Multi-Band Datalink (CMDL) that’s compatible with ROVER 3-5 per USAF requirements, and “automated capabilities” (all they’re allowed to say) to help the pilot perform ISR missions with less workload. Under the USAF’s NET-T Quick Reaction Capability contract, a point-to-multipoint data link architecture can provide an extended range “beyond line-of-sight” capability with the right positioning or infrastructure.

The USAF’s 2001 selection made Sniper a safe choice for international buys, and the LITENING pod’s Israeli origins has opened doors for Lockheed Martin in a number of Islamic countries. Sniper is currently integrated on the A-10A+/C, F-16 Block 25+ aircraft, F-15E/K/S/SG Strike Eagles, F/A-18A-D Hornets, and the B-52H and B-1B bombers. They were integrated with Harrier II GR7/9s, before Britain sold its fleet to the USMC for use as spare parts. Britain didn’t sell its Sniper pods, though, and Lockheed Martin says they’ve done some work on the Tornado GR4 (flight tests, but not operational yet), and on the Eurofighter Typhoon in cooperation with BAE.

As of June 2012, Sniper customers include the USAF (A-10C, F-15E, F-16, B-1B, B-52H), Belgium (F-16 MLU), Britain (Harrier GR7/9, all now sold to the USMC), Canada (“CF-18″ F/A-18 AM/BM), Egypt (F-16), Morocco (F-16), Norway (F-16), Oman (F-16), Pakistan (F-16), Poland (F-16), Saudi Arabia (F-15S), South Korea (F-15K, phase 2 buy from earlier LANTIRN pod contract), Singapore (F-15SG, F-16s), and Turkey (F-16).

Northrop Grumman: LITENING in a Pod LITENING III on GR4
(click to view full)

Northrop Grumman representatives informed DID that their pod will be an enhanced “LITENING SE” variant of their new LITENING G4, which has demonstrated both air-ground and air-air capabilities in testing. LITENING SE changes include an all-digital 1024 x 1024 pixel forward-looking infrared sensor (compared to the AT’s 640 x 512 pixel system); a similar 1K charge-coupled device TV sensor for daytime imaging; a Laser Target Imaging Program imaging system providing improved target recognition across a wide range of conditions; and a “plug and play” data link system that enables them to accept a variety of data links without further modifications to the pod or aircraft. Among other things, PNP-III (Plug N Play 3) is aligned with the ROVER 5 standard for 2-way transmissions with ground forces.

Northrop Grumman has sold its AN/AAQ-28 LITENING pods to a number of customers, for use on a number of different aircraft types. When looking at global coverage and customer bases, however, it’s important to note that Northrop Grumman is only 1 of 2 firms producing LITENING pods. Israel’s RAFAEL invented the LITENING, and has pursued parallel development and sales of their own LITENING I/II/III/EF models within the framework of their formal agreement with Northrop Grumman. At present, however, G4/SE technology is proprietary to Northrop Grumman, who is working on export clearances but hasn’t yet received them.

Overall, platforms known to have integrated at least one LITENING pod variant to at least the tested level include the AV-8B Harrier II, EA-6B Prowler, F-4E/F Phantom, F-5E variants, F-15E Strike Eagle, F-16 Block 15+, F/A-18 Hornet, F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, JAS-39 A-D Gripen, MiG-21, Sukhoi/HAL SU-30MKI, Tornado, Eurofighter Typhoon, HC-130H Hercules, and B-52H. There are also reports of Jaguar IM, Mirage 2000 (reportedly used during the 1999 Kargil War), and/or MiG-27 integration work in India; and photos of Brazilian A-1/AMX and Colombian Kfir C10 fighters with LITENING pods.

A-10 in Iraq
w. LITENING AT
(click to view full)

In terms of Northrop Grumman’s sales, Israel flies a handful of older LITENING ER models on some of its F-16s. The US military’s pods are all at least LITENING AT standard, even those that began life as LITENING-IIs or LITENING ERs. They’re complemented by a handful of even more advanced LITENING G4s, and Northrop Grumman’s pods serve with the USAF, AFRC, US ANG, and USMC on A-10A/C, AV-8B, EA-6B, F-16 Block 30+, F/A-18 C/D, F-15E, and B-52H aircraft. The A-10Cs, B-52s, F-15Es, and F-16s are all slated to become compatible with the new G4s.

Northrop Grumman LITENING AT pods also serve with the Italian (AV-8B Harrier II), and Spanish (AV-8B) navies. The LITENING AT Block 2 pod, which is somewhere between the AT and G4, serves with Australia (F/A-18 Hornet HUG), Finland (F/A-18 C/D), the Netherlands (F-16 MLU), and Portugal (F-16 A/B Block 15 and F-16AM MLU). In 2012, Denmark added itself to the customer list, buying G4 pods for its F-16 MLUs.

By the time the ATP-SE contract was issued, the US military already had about 10-30 LITENING G4 pods in the field, from about 50 ordered in 2009 by the USMC/ US ANG/ USAF Reserves under existing contract vehicles (see section below). That lot of pods was slated to finish delivery in 2011, and did so.

The Israelis are notoriously tight lipped about their customers, but known sales from RAFAEL have occurred to the IAF (F-16s), as well as exports to Britain (Eurofighter, Tornado GR4), Germany (Eurofighter, Tornado IDS, possibly F-4F); and Greece (“Peace Icarus 2000″ F-4E AUPs). There have also been reports of sales to Brazil (F-5BR), Chile (F-16); Colombia (Kfir C10), India (slated for Tejas LCA, on Mirage 2000, SU-30, others), Hungary (JAS-39), Singapore (F-16), South Africa (JAS-39, via Zeiss), Sweden (JAS-39), Romania (MiG-21 Lancer), Turkey (F-16, F-4E 2020), and Venezuela (F-16), among others.

Contracts & Key Events: ATP-SE FY 2013-2015

Net-T, pre-flight
(click to view full)

June 19/15: Lockheed Martin has been contracted to supply ten Sniper Advanced Targeting Pods to the Royal Jordanian Air Force, with the country currently engaged in airstrikes against Daesh in Iraq and Syria. The company was awarded a $485 million contract by the US Air Force in March, with a portion of this allocated for Foreign Military Sales. Jordan become the sixteenth Sniper ATP customer in 2013.

March 30/15:Lockheed Martin was awarded a $485 million IDIQ contract Friday for advanced targeting pods, a portion of which are earmarked for FMS. The Sniper pod is operational on the F-15, F-16, F-18, B-1, B-52 and A-10 platforms. Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Canada, the UK and Belgium are previous export customers. A separate $8.9 million contract will also see Lockheed provide the Jordanian Air Force with 10 of the targeting pods, through the UK as a third party.

Jan 15/15: In January 2015, Rafael announced that their upcoming upgrade that they call G-4 Advanced outside the U.S., and “G-5″ for the Americans will have air-to-air targeting capabilities.

Jan 18/13: Net-T. The USAF is testing a wireless router addition to ATP-SE pods called Net-T, which would work in the background and help troops on the ground communicate with each other. ROVER systems already allow communications with the aircraft, and Net-T works with ROVER 5 to share voice, real-time information videos, images, maps, coordinates, or any other file type, without having to resort to satellite links and their scarce bandwidth. That’s very helpful in urban environments, mountains, dense vegetation, etc., where troops have a clear path to an aircraft, but don’t have line of sight to each other.

This high priority developmental test began in October 2012 with the A-10Cs, F-16s, and F-15Es of the 40th Flight Test Squadron, along with some visiting B-1 bombers. Beyond testing key metrics like effective distances, bandwidth, etc., they wanted to be sure Net-T wouldn’t interfere with the LITENING and Sniper pods’ other functions: day/night surveillance, laser illumination and tracking, automatic target searching and tracking, and automated target reconnaissance. Fortunately, once the frequencies and data rates are configured, it’s just a 1-button push for the pilot to initiate transmit-in-Net-T mode.

The goal is to send the testing report to the USAF’s Precision Attack Systems Program Office at Wright Patterson AFB, OH by February 2013, to be followed by operational testing with the 53rd Wing – and hopefully by fielding on ATP-SEs in February 2014. Eglin AFB.

Jan 16/13: Sniper. Lockheed Martin announces USAF approval to begin full-rate production of the Sniper-SE. At this point, Sniper-SE remains the only ATP-SE pod that’s integrated and operational on the F-15E Strike Eagle, and B-1 and B-52 bombers.

Sniper FRP

Nov 12/12: LITENING. Northrop Grumman Corporation announces a $71.5 million order from the USAF to begin full-rate production of LITENING SE advanced targeting pods and spares, under the ATP-SE program.

LITENING FRP

FY 2010 – 2012

ATP-SE award. Litening G4 for F-16s. LITENING modularity
(click to view full)

Feb 13/12: LITENING. Northrop Grumman Corporation announces 2 follow-on Low Rate Initial Production delivery orders totaling a combined $66 million, to provide additional LITENING SEs. The orders were made under the Sept 30/10 contract.

Oct 24/11: LITENING. Northrop Grumman announces that the US Air National Guard Air Force Reserve Command Test Center (AATC) has recommended full fielding for LITENING G4 Advanced Targeting Pods on its F-16 C/D Block 25/30/32 aircraft, after a successful operational utility evaluation (OUE).

This is one of the plane sets mentioned in Northrop Grumman’s Sept 30/10 order, which included funds for testing and OUE. The pods, on the other hand, stem from the Oct 1/09 award noted in the “ATP-SE Lead Ins” section.

During the September 2010 – May 2011 OUE, LITENING G4 pods flew 530 sorties and accumulated more than 825 flight hours. According to the fielding recommendation issued by AATC to Air Combat Command:

“LITENING G4 provides a significant improvement in F-16 Block 30 mission area execution over baseline targeting pods. The addition of a short wave infrared sensor provides a unique capability to capture images in shadows where FLIR(Forward Looking InfraRed) or CCD [regular cameras] were ineffective.”

G4 OK for F-16s

Oct 18/10: LITENING. At a special event attended by senior members of Israel’s defense establishment, customers, and representatives of foreign militaries and airforces, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd. marked the sale of the 1,000th Litening Pod, including all partner sales. The event also included RAFAEL business partners Northrop Grumman from the USA, British firm Ultra Electronics, and Germany’s ZEISS.

According to Northrop Grumman sources, by early October 2010 they had total orders for 611 pods, and had delivered 523.

The RAFAEL release adds that “Litening pods have been procured by 26 countries. Litening pods have compiled, totally, more than a million flight hours.” Note that if all countries listed above as possible LITENING customers are included, it only adds up to 22. DID is certain of Northrop Grumman’s sales, but not of RAFAEL’s.

Sniper production
(click to view full)

Sept 30/10: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Orlando, FL (FA8626-10-D-2133) and Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. in Meadows, IL (FA8626-10-D-2132) will split a $2.3 billion contract to provide new advanced targeting pods and associated support equipment, spares and product support. At this time, $23.7 million has been committed to Northrop, and $23.5 million has been committed to Lockheed Martin, in order to provide test pods for the government. The ASC/WNQK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages this contracts.

Lockheed Martin later announces that the USAF has picked its Sniper ATP as the winner of the 60% share of its Advanced Targeting Pod-Sensor Enhancement (ATP-SE) competition.

Under the terms of this contract, Lockheed Martin says that the Government has options to buy up to 670 pods through 2017, with Lockheed Martin’s share of the program totaling more than $1 billion. Asked which platforms were covered in testing, Lockheed Martin personnel said that no additional per-platform testing was needed, just general performance testing.

LITENING AT: US F-16C
(click to view full)

Northrop Grumman later announces that if the government exercises all of their options, the firm’s LITENING SE would pick up approximately $920 million in orders for up to 670 pods through 2017. The USAF’s initial order encompasses flight testing of the targeting systems on Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve F-16 Blocks 25/30/32, USAF F-16 Blocks 40/50, and A-10C aircraft, and the firm says this represents potential orders for as many as 250 targeting pods plus spares, training and logistics support. If the USAF wants to add additional platforms qualified for LITENING-SE, additional testing contracts will be required.

Northrop Grumman representatives tell DID that they can produce about 8-9 LITENING pods per month at the moment, but production is expected to rise to 12+ per month if budgets and orders under ATP-SE require it. They expect ATP-SE Production Lots 1 & 2 to finish delivery by early 2012.

ATP-SE award

Contracts & Key Events: ATP-SE Lead-Ins FY 2011 – 2012 VANG LITENING G4
(click to view full) May 14/12: Northrop Grumman announces a $103 million delivery order from US Naval Air Systems Command, to equip the USMC’s aircraft with LITENING G4 pods. They’ll also provide G4 upgrade kits and spares to the US Air National Guard, to bring their earlier-model LITENING pods to the G4 configuration.

Northrop Grumman says that they’ve delivered more than 200 LITENING G4 systems so far, adding that all of its LITENING pods put together have achieved over 1.5 million flight hours.

June 19/15: Lockheed Martin has been contracted to supply ten Sniper Advanced Targeting Pods to the Royal Jordanian Air Force, with the country currently engaged in airstrikes against Daesh in Iraq and Syria. The company was awarded a $485 million contract by the US Air Force in March, with a portion of this allocated for Foreign Military Sales. Jordan become the sixteenth Sniper ATP customer in 2013.

March 13/12: LITENING G4 #100. Northrop Grumman announces the delivery of the 100th LITENING G4 targeting pod to meet a combination of USAF Lot 1/2 and US Marine Corps Lot 2/3/4 LITENING G4 production contracts. USAF Lot 2 will include the first LITENING-SEs.

Feb 6/12: LITENING G4 in combat. Northrop Grumman announces that its LITENING G4 has embarked on its first combat deployment, aboard US Air National Guard A-10Cs, and F-16C/D Block 30 aircraft. The pods will be used in Afghanistan.

Dec 5/11: LITENING. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. in Rolling Meadows, IL receives a $690.1 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive-firm, cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-plus-incentive-firm, time-and-materials LITENING Targeting Pod System post-production support contract, which will run until Sept 18/18. It will:

“…address supply requirements centered on hardware and software upgrades and associated host platform integration, initial spares, technical manual and technical orders, repair data, studies, spares recapitalization and support for the standup of organic depot repair requirements for the sustainment of the legacy LITENING pod fleet.”

Queries to Northrop Grumman and the USAF established that this contract doesn’t cover support for LITENING-SE pods as the USAF takes delivery. It covers existing LITENING AT/G4 stocks, including integration and certification of the new LITENING G4s with US ANG F-16C/D Block 30-50s, USAF active duty F-16C/D Block 40-50s, F-15E Strike Eagles, the A-10C close-support plane, and the B-52H heavy bomber. The USAF also confirmed that the contract may fund upgrades of existing pods to the LITENING-SE standard. This was a sole-source acquisition by the ASC/WNQK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (FA8626-12-D-2137). See also Northrop Grumman’s mid-March 2012 release.

LITENING support & upgrades

Nov 7/11: Sniper. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Orlando, FL receives an $841.5 million firm-fixed-price post-production support contract for Sniper targeting pods. Work will include “sensor enhancement on hardware and software upgrades and associated host platform integration, initial spares, technical manual and technical orders, repair data, studies and spares recapitalization, and support the standup of organic depot repair requirements…” The ASC/WNQK at Wright Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8626-12-D-2138), and when queried, they had this to say:

“The contract will include a five-year base ordering period [to 2016] and two, one-year options [which could extend it to 2018]. This new effort will provide for hardware, software, and associated updates for 375 Sniper targeting pods delivered to Combat Air Forces (CAF) under a prior contract. Updates may include Sniper pod upgrades to the Sniper advanced targeting pod-sensor enhanced (ATP-SE) standard.”

See also Lockheed Martin’s March 2012 release.

Sniper support & upgrades

Oct 19/11: LITENING G4. Northrop Grumman finishes delivering the 1st Lot of 50 LITENING G4s, under the 2009, $227.8 million US ANG contract. Production Lot 2 will begin production of the USAF’s LITENING-SEs, and the USMC’s ordered G4s. Northrop Grumman.

FY 2004 – 2010 ATFLIR on F/A-18F
(click to view full)

Sept 13/10: Sniper. Lockheed Martin announces a $13 million contract to upgrade the Sniper ATP’s existing data link with an enhanced digital Compact Multi-band Data Link (CMDL), improving secure digital transmission of high definition imagery and metadata at extended ranges. CMDL communicates seamlessly with the fielded ROVER family of ground stations, including ROVER 5.

Lockheed’s final ATP-SE Sniper offering will build on this work, and this CMDL upgrade follows the S3.5 software upgrade of U.S. Air Force and coalition Sniper pods operational on F-16 Block 30/40/50, A-10C, F-15E and B-1 aircraft. The S3.5 added emerging aircraft interfaces to Sniper ATP and provides new capabilities in air-to-air and air-to-surface tracking and designation, selectable ground-stabilized fragmentation circles, unpowered built-in-test data download capability, and video data link metadata and symbology enhancements.

March 10/10: LITENING G4. Northrop Grumman announces that it successfully demonstrated its LITENING pod on the U.S. Navy’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet at the US Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, China Lake, CA, during a 1.5 hour flight under operationally representative conditions. DID has confirmed from a reliable source that the pod was a LITENING G4.

To this point, the Super Hornet has only been fielded with Raytheon’s ATFLIR surveillance and targeting pods; even LITENING customer Australia picked ATFLIR for its F-18F Super Hornets.

Super Hornet test

Oct 1/09: LITENING G4. Northrop Grumman announces a $153 million contract from the USAF to provide LITENING G4 targeting and sensor systems and related equipment. Under the terms of the agreement, Northrop Grumman will deliver LITENING G4 targeting and sensor pods to the active U.S. Air Force, as well as kits for the Air Force Reserve Command and Air National Guard to upgrade existing LITENING AT pods to the G4 configuration, and additional data links for the Air National Guard and active U.S. Air Force.

This contract modification under an existing agreement marks the first updates of existing Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) and Air National Guard (ANG) LITENING pods to the G4 configuration, and the first sale to the USAF.

This order turned out to be a big deal, because it was part of the process of re-introducing competition to the USAF. The LITENING G4 sold here also forms the baseline for the company’s USAF Advanced Targeting Pod – Sensor Enhancement product.

LITENING G4 for US ANG/AFRC

Aug 29/10: Expeditionary/ TopLITE. Northrop Grumman Systems in Rolling Meadows, IL receives a $98.7 million ceiling-priced indefinite-delivery/ indefinite quantity contract for the procurement of Expeditionary Litening Pods (LPODs), upgrades to existing pods, and integration of LPODs into AV-8B Harriers (domestic and allied), F/A-18 Hornets (domestic and FMS), EA-6B Prowlers, C-130 Hercules, and Air Force platforms, including related parts and services. In addition, this contract provides for associated engineering and technical support and technical data.

Work will be performed in Rolling Meadows, IL, and is expected to be complete in June 2011. $16.1 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1. The Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages this contract (N00019-09-D-0025).

They’re “Expeditionary” G4s because this is the US Marines and Navy contract, which is separate from USAF orders. With respect to the C-130, LITENING has been integrated on a US Coast Guard C-130 as a demo, but nothing ever came of it. The USMC contract is related to a program called Toplite, a surveillance oriented version of LITENING that’s similar to RAFAEL’s RecceLITE. Northrop Grumman sees this as an opportunity to explore integration on lower-g aircraft by separating the turret out, and moving the backing electronics out of a pod configuration and inside the plane.

LITENING G4 & TopLITE for USMC

Feb 12/04: Sniper Adapter. Lockheed Martin announces a contract to integrate the Sniper XR targeting pod on the A-10 aircraft in support of the A-10 Precision Engagement (PE) Program. The contract award follows a successful demonstration of the Sniper system during the A/OA-10 Precision Engagement upgrade program’s critical design review.

Some existing A-10s do fly with targeting pods, but they’re earlier models of Northrop Grumman’s LITENING pod. The USAF picked Sniper as its future targeting pod in 2001, and the current contract will ensure that Sniper pods work seamlessly with the A-10’s upgraded stores management systems, pilot displays, weapon targeting, etc.

As part of the integration effort, Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control will develop the Pilot Vehicle Interface (PVI), pod Operational Flight Program (OFP) software, and pod interface adapter hardware for the A-10. Upon completion of this effort, the Sniper XR pod will self-detect and automatically load the appropriate Operational Flight Program when installed on either the A-10, F-16 or F-15E airframes. That work would pay dividends for a long time, by ensuring that new versions of the Sniper pod would remain compatible with certified jets. Otherwise, that certification takes months, and costs a lot of money (vid. ATP-SE award).

Additional Readings

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

RFP Coming for Ancient French Alpha Trainers | Airbus Formulating Heavy Lift Copter | Qatar to Buy 4 More C-17s

Wed, 17/06/2015 - 05:45
Americas

Europe

  • As France plans on replacing its fleet of Alpha jet trainers, a Request for Proposals is now expected in September. The Dassault-manufactured advanced trainer the French Air Force intends to replace dates from the 1970s. Alenia Aermacchi has previously seen its M-345 trainer evaluated by the French defense procurement agency DGA, with other possible replacements including both turboprop and jet trainers.

  • Airbus is developing a new heavy lift helicopter, referred to as the X6. A follow-up to the H225 Super Puma, which recently scored export success to Poland, the new concept model will undergo two years of concept definition, in collaboration with potential customers. The company also saw the first successful test flight of its H160 medium lift model a few days ago, with this also announced in Paris on Tuesday.

  • The Czech Republic will be one of three customers for the L-39NG jet trainer, manufacturer Aero Vodochody Aerospace announced on Tuesday. The trainers will go to Czech company LOM PRAHA s.p. who train the country’s Air Force pilots, as well as to two other customers; – the Breitling and Draken International display teams.

  • The cause of the Hungarian Air Force JAS-39C Gripen crash last week is being < href="http://hungarytoday.hu/news/gripen-crash-defence-minister-suspects-computer-error-behind-unfortunate-incident-24055">attributed to software issues, according to the country’s defense minister. This is pre-empting the outcome of the official investigation, with defense minister Csaba Hende citing initial details of that investigation.

  • Russia is planning to bolster its nuclear forces by adding over forty ICBMs to its arsenal by the end of 2015. The response from NATO has been understandably frosty, meanwhile no details of precisely which missiles the Russian defense ministry intends to produce have been given.

Middle East

Asia

  • Indian MIG-29s upgraded by Russia are being delivered to the Indian Air Force, with the new fighters now brought up to the UPG configuration. The first two of the improved jets are currently undergoing flight tests, with an additional pair preparing to start these. The upgrades were contracted for in March 2008, with the deal worth $952 million and covering five squadrons (69 aircraft) of IAF MIGs. The first six aircraft were upgraded in Russia, with the remainder undergoing work in India, using equipment kits supplied by RAC-MiG.

  • In a possible death-knell to the indigenously developed, infamously unreliable Arjun main battle tank, the Indian Army is looking at replacing its fleet of T-72 tanks, releasing a Request for Information regarding a newly-designed modular armored vehicle, known as the Future Ready Combat Vehicle (FRCV). This not only highlights that the Arjun will be unable to meet the Army’s future demands, but indicates that the Indian Army is seeking to base its future combat vehicles on a more open architecture, allowing for rapid integration of future technologies. The new vehicle is slated to enter service by 2025-27; however this is highly likely to slip given the Indian defense ministry’s procurement track record.

  • An Indian Jaguar trainer aircraft came down in near the city of Allahabad on Tuesday, with the pilots ejecting safely. The cause of the crash is as yet unknown, with an investigation now underway.

Today’s Video

  • Outstanding Indian Air Force promo vid

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

The JAS-39 Gripen: Sweden’s 4+ Generation Wild Card

Wed, 17/06/2015 - 02:23
South African JAS-39D
(click to view full)

As a neutral country with a long history of providing for its own defense against all comers, Sweden also has a long tradition of building excellent high-performance fighters with a distinctive look. From the long-serving Saab-35 Draken (“Dragon,” 1955-2005) to the Mach 2, canard-winged Saab-37 Viggen (“Thunderbolt,” 1971-2005), Swedish fighters have stressed short-field launch from dispersed/improvised air fields, world-class performance, and leading-edge design. This record of consistent project success is nothing short of amazing, especially for a country whose population over this period has ranged from 7-9 million people.

This is DID’s FOCUS Article for background, news, and contract awards related to the JAS-39 Gripen (“Griffon”), a canard-winged successor to the Viggen and one of the world’s first 4+ generation fighters. Gripen remains the only lightweight 4+ generation fighter type in service, its performance and operational economics are both world-class, and it has become one of the most recognized fighter aircraft on the planet. Unfortunately for its builders, that recognition has come from its appearance in Saab and Volvo TV commercials, rather than from hoped-for levels of military export success. With its 4+ generation competitors clustered in the $60-120+ million range vs. the Gripen’s claimed $40-60 million, is there a light at the end of the tunnel for Sweden’s lightweight fighter? In 2013 a win in Brazil started to answer that question.

JAS-39: The Gripen Program Saab’s JAS-39A-D Gripens “Could-have” weapons
(click to view full)

The JAS-39 Gripen is an excellent lightweight fighter by all accounts, with attractive flyaway costs[1] and performance. Its canard design allows for quick “slew and point” maneuvers, allowing it to take advantage of the modern trend toward helmet-mounted displays, and air-air missiles with much wider boresight targeting cones. The “Cobra” HMD completes that capability, and became operational on SAAF Gripens as of September 2011. Power to weight ratio is good, its PS-05 radar mechanically scanned radar gets good reviews, some “radar profile shaping” techniques have been employed to reduce its own signature, and its small physical size can make it a tricky opponent for enemy pilots.

Short Take-Off and Landing capability makes Gripen a difficult target on the ground as well. Sweden’s defense doctrines avoid dependence on easily-targeted bases, and its fighters are expected to fly from prepared sites next to automotive highways. Gripens can fly from a 9 x 600 meter/ 29.5 x 1,970 foot runway, and land in 600 meters or less – without using a launch catapult or an arrester hook.

The Gripen has one other asset that is often overlooked: very attractive lifetime operational costs. To date, each new generation of modern fighters has proven to be more expensive than its predecessors to operate and maintain. Since operation and maintenance are over 65% of a fighter’s lifetime cost, this aspect of the defense procurement spiral forces much smaller aircraft orders with each new generation of equipment. The JAS-39 was designed from the outset to counter this trend, and lifetime operating costs were given a high priority when making design and equipment decisions. Many of the Gripen’s competitors have tried, but Saab appears to have succeeded.

More exact cost figures were offered in July 2010 by Gripen technical director Eddy de la Motte, who quoted less than $3,000 per flight hour for Sweden’s Flygvapnet, and “for the export customers it will be less than $5,000, including maintenance, spare parts, fuel and manpower.” On its face, that’s stunning. By comparison, the USAF places the per-hour cost of an F-15 at $17,000 [PDF]. Even given a likely mismatch between direct flight costs, and figures that include allocated life cycle costs including depot maintenance, etc., that is a big difference. Switzerland is one customer where that difference appears to have been decisive. Swiss evaluations reportedly rated the Gripen at roughly half the O&M costs expected for its twin-engine Rafale and Eurofighter counterparts.

Gripen: integrated equipment Hungarian JAS-39C/Ds
(click to view full)

The Gripen’s equipment commonality and choice are good. Its engine is a derivative of GE’s F404, in wide use on F/A-18 A-D Hornets and many other platforms. A wide variety of international equipment has successfully been tested and integrated with the aircraft, including equipment from American, Israeli, European, and even South African[2] suppliers. Some key slots like radar-killing missiles still need to be filled, but Raytheon’s GBU-49/EGBU-12 Enhanced Paveway GPS/laser guided bombs were added in 2009, and Gripen is serving as the MBDA Meteor long-range air-air missile’s test aircraft for flight trials.

The end result is an effective lightweight fighter. As an example, the Hungarian Air Force described their experiences at Exercise Spring Flag 2007, held in May at Italy’s Decimomannu air base in Sardinia. Other participants included France (E-3 AWACS), Germany (F-4F ICE), Italy (AV-8B Harrier, F-16C, Tornado ECR and Eurofighter Typhoon), NATO (E-3 AWACS), and Turkey (F-16C), with tanker support from Italy, the UK and the US. The Gripen’s 100% sortie rate was impressive, and it also generated some interesting comments from Hungarian Air Force Colonel Nandor Kilian:

“In Hungary we just don’t have large numbers of aircraft to train with, but in Spring Flag we faced COMAO (combined air operations) packages of 20, 25 or 30 aircraft. The training value for us was to work with that many aircraft on our radar – and even with our limited experience we could see that the Gripen radar is fantastic. We would see the others at long ranges, we could discriminate all the individual aircraft even in tight formations and using extended modes. The jamming had almost no effect on us – and that surprised a lot of people.

Other aircraft couldn’t see us – not on radar, not visually[3] – and we had no jammers of our own with us. We got one Fox 2 kill[4] on a F-16 who turned in between our two jets but never saw the second guy and it was a perfect shot.

Our weapons and tactics were limited by Red Force rules, and in an exercise like this the Red Force is always supposed to die, but even without our AMRAAMs and data links we got eight or 10 kills, including a Typhoon. Often we had no AWACS or radar support of any kind, just our regular onboard sensors – but flying like that, ‘free hunting,’ we got three kills in one afternoon. It was a pretty good experience for our first time out.”

To keep the basic Gripen relevant, block upgrades occur about every 3 years. Block 19, in 2009, integrates IRIS-T SRAAM (Short-Range Air-to-Air Missile), NATO’s Link-16 as a supplement to Gripen’s own shared awareness datalink, and the Cobra helmet-mounted sight. Block 20 in 2012 is expected to include enhancements to the PS-05/A radar, and the ROVER close-air-support data link used with such success by American forces.

Partnerships & Production JAS-39C

The Industry Group JAS (IG JAS) is the joint venture partnership that develops the Gripen System for the Swedish Armed Forces. Partners included in IG JAS are Saab Volvo Aero Corporation and Ericsson Microwave Systems (now part of Saab Group). The development and production of the Gripen has been one of Sweden’s largest industry projects, consuming up to one-third of the Swedish defense budget in some years. Brazil’s 2014 purchase will give them a role in production, and made Embraer a design partner in the 2-seat JAS-39F.

The first JAS-39s were delivered in 1993, and the last Swedish plane was due to be delivered in 2007. While exact figures are extremely difficult to come by, sources place the average flyaway cost of the JAS-39 at about $40 million[4] per plane, or about $50 million in current dollars. The whole Gripen production run for all customers, according to current orders, will reach 261 aircraft. This consists of:

The multinational UK Empire Test Pilot’s School has bought Gripen flight hours from Saab since 1999. They switched from the JAS-39B to the JAS-39D in 2014.

The lion in winter…
(click to view full)

On the marketing front, Saab now handles all international sales, and ties to its parent firms like Investor AB allow it to offer an attractive program of industrial offsets to potential owners. An initial Gripen International marketing partnership with BAE gave the Swedish aircraft wide global representation, but BAE had conflicts of interest, and a divestiture formally ended the partnership in March 2010. A limited international marketing agreement for the JAS-39E/F is being negotiated with Brazil’s Embraer, but that isn’t done yet.

Unfortunately, the Gripen has lost out in or been absent from important export competitions in Austria (Eurofighter), Finland (F-18), Japan (DNP – F-35), India (Rafale, but not closed), the Netherlands (F-35), Norway (F-35), Poland (F-16), Qatar (DNP – TBD), South Korea (DNP – F-35), Switzerland (F-18, then a win but a lost referendum), and Singapore (F-15SG Strike Eagle to replace A-4 Skyhawks). Meanwhile, Sweden downsized its Gripen force to 100 JAS-39 C/D aircraft, flooding the market with second-hand models and choking new production opportunities. All in a market where overall export orders were already below Saab’s expectations.

A number of factors could be cited as reasons for this situation: purchasing slowdowns across the industry, the inertia of existing relationships and equipment standardization, Sweden’s lack of geopolitical weight in contrast to countries like the USA, France or Russia. In Singapore’s case, its status as a single engine lightweight fighter with limited range also hurt it – as did its partner BAE’s greater interest in promoting its own Eurofighter.

Still, the bottom line is that the Gripen was dependent on exports for profitability, as a result of the unprofitable contract Saab signed with the Swedish government. The government’s ability to assist with foreign export orders has proven to be very limited, and envisaged export orders have been more in line with skeptics’ predictions than with corporate hopes.

Can the Gripen production line survive? Upgraded variants have given the fighters new traction in the global marketplace.

JAS-39 Gripen: The Way Forward JAS-39NG: Evolution
(click to view full)

One way forward is through upgrades. Most JAS-39s offered in recent export competitions touted important improvements beyond the present C/D versions. The most important is next-generation AESA radar technology, which offers substantial improvements in detection, resolution, versatility, and maintenance costs. Other common upgrades include uprated engines and longer range. Eventually, they were formalized into 2 programs. The test and development program is called Gripen Demo. Production aircraft will be JAS-39E/Fs, though they’re also referred to as Gripen NG (“next generation”).

Regardless of the exact upgrade sets offered, the hope remains the same: that appropriate upgrades would allow the Gripen to continue offering better performance and features than lightweight fighter peers like the F-16 and MiG-29, including new variants like Russia’s new thrust-vectoring MiG-35 and Lockheed’s AESA-equipped F-16 Block 60 “Desert Falcon” flown by the UAE. They’re also intended to allow the Gripen to compete on more even terms with more expensive fighters like the Rafale, F/A-18 Super Hornet, etc.

In those competitions, Gripen would be positioned as a lower-budget option with “close enough” capabilities overall, and outright advantages in key areas. So far, that positioning has been right on the money in Brazil and Switzerland.

Gripen NG
click for video

That competitiveness is essential. Like France’s Rafale, which also depends on exports to finance its ongoing development, the Gripen is finding itself dependent on home government handouts in order to remain technologically competitive. That’s less than ideal, but given the Gripen and Rafale’s status as the future backbones of their respective national air forces, non-competitiveness is hardly an option. Absent further foreign sales, therefore, the question for both aircraft is how badly future upgrade costs will eat into their home market’s fighter procurement and maintenance budgets. Which explains Saab’s eagerness to escape this trap.

New weapons integration will continue, highlighted by the long-range Meteor air-to-air missile in 2014 – 2015. The sale to Brazil may be especially helpful in this regard, as it creates a customer with full source-code access who will be very interested in integrating their own weapons and systems. They’ll be building on a set of pre-planned upgrades, which form the core of the JAS-39E/F’s improvements.

Sensors & C4 ES-05 Raven AESA
(click to view full)

The first set of chosen Gripen enhancements will improve the pilot’s situational awareness, and this set of enhancements is being designed with an eye to retrofit compatibility on existing JAS-39C/D Gripen fleets. The upgrade set includes:

An AESA radar in place of the present PS-05 is an important future selling point, and has been promised in several of Saab’s recent foreign bid submissions. As of March 2009, Saab is partnered with Selex Galileo to design an ES-05 Raven AESA radar that builds on Selex’s experience with the Vixen 500 AESA, Ericsson’s PS-05 radar, and its Nora AESA experiments. The Raven incorporates an identification friend-or-foe (IFF) function that works in conjunction with the cheek-mounted active array SIT 426 IFF.

In an unusual twist, the Raven AESA will be movable using a single-bearing system, increasing its total field of view by a factor of 2 to +/- 100 degrees, and improving “lock, fire, and leave” maneuvers. The cost is paid in reliability and maintenance, because the pivot mechanisms create a point of failure and maintenance, whereas fixed AESA radars are mostly maintenance-free. Saab is betting that the improved scan performance will justify the cost. The quality of Raven’s AESA transmit/receive modules, and their integration, will also play a large role in the radar’s final performance.

Reaching this point wasn’t easy, and the developmental state of its radar has been a weakness for Saab in competitions like India’s M-MRCA. Saab bought Ericsson’s radar group, which also makes the Erieye AWACS radar, in March 2006. Later that year, they began the “Nora” AESA project, but by autumn 2007 they had changed their approach, and looked to leverage existing radar initiatives instead. That would have been fine in a normal marketplace, but underhanded anti-competitive behavior by Dassault and the US government left Saab without a viable partner, and cost them years of time on a critical market feature.

Gripen Demo & JAS-39D
(click to view full)

Sensors & Datalinks. Beyond the Raven radar, a passive IRST (infra-red search and track) system will be added to improve the JAS-39NG’s aerial target detection, without running the risk that the Gripen will reveal itself by emitting detectable electro-magnetic energy. The JAS-39E/F’s Skyward-G system is air-cooled, which eliminates the weight and maintenance of cryogenic liquid cooling systems.

IRST systems are useful against some ground targets, and all aerial targets. They especially enhance performance against opponents with “low observable” radar stealth enhancements. If medium-long range infrared guided missiles like MICA-IR or NCADE are integrated in Gripen at some future date, an IRST system can even provide missile guidance beyond visual range, without triggering the target’s radar warning receivers.

Link 16 is a situational awareness upgrade, and retrofits are also available for earlier Gripen models. Gripens already had a proprietary datalink that allows them to see a common picture of the battlefield, but the NATO Link-16 standard is more widely used, and adds the ability to share with other types of aircraft, air defense radars, ships, etc. (see June 11/07 entry, below).

EW/ECM. Electronic warfare enhancements are another component of situational awareness these days, and Swiss evaluations in 2008/2009 rated this as a platform strength. Upgrades are critical, in order to keep the platform current. The JAS-39 E/F will get them, and Elbit Systems’ PAWS-2 appears to be at least part of the upgrade.

Structural/ Mechanical JAS-39NG CAP Concept
(click to view full)

Mechanical upgrades are in the works, too.

Size & Payload. Early projections for the single-seat JAS-39NG showed a larger fighter, in order to carry more fuel, and more weapons on 2 extra stations (10 total). Subsequent reports regarding the JAS-39E/F confirm that the fighter will be longer and wider, but aims to have the same wing loading ratio as earlier models. Empty weight for the Gripen Demo technology development prototype was reported as 7,100 kg, which is up from the JAS-39C’s 6,800 kg, but still well below the 10,000 kg of the F-16E Block 60.[5] Maximum takeoff weight for Gripen Demo was a bigger jump from previous versions, rising to 16,000 kg from 14,000 kg. The derivative JAS-39E/F may end up being even heavier, at 16,500 kg or greater. Maximum payload only jumps from 5,000 kg up to 6,000 kg, however, because of…

Fuel. One of the Gripen’s handicaps against competing fighters has been its range. A 38%+ jump in internal fuel capacity is meant help to offset the Gripen NG’s weight and power increases, while extending the aircraft’s combat air patrol radius to 1,300 km/ 812 miles, and boosting unrefueled range to 2,500 km/ 1,560 miles. The landing gear is repositioned to accommodate those extra fuel cells. A new underwing 1,700 liter (450 gallon) fuel tank has been flown, and tanks capable of supersonic drop will be tested in future. With the full set of drop tanks, the JAS-39E/F’s total flight range is expected to reach 4,075 km/ 2,810 miles.

Engine. Hauling all of that around will require a more powerful engine than the current RM12 variant of GE’s popular F404. GE’s F414, produced in partnership with Volvo Aero and in use on the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet family, will be that engine. The base model offers a 25-35% power boost over its predecessor the F404, and the developmental F414 EPE could offer another 20% thrust increase on top of that, for a total boost of 50-62%.

Key F414G alterations for the Gripen will include minor changes to the alternator for added aircraft power, and Full Authority Digital Electronic Control (FADEC) software that’s modified for single-engine operation, instead of the Super Hornet’s twin-engine configuration. Reports also indicate that Saab will look to add divertless supersonic intakes to the JAS-39E/F. This technology saves weight while offering similar or better engine performance, and can be found on the F-35, as well as on China’s JF-17, J-10, and J-20 fighters.

Saab Group remains on track with the basic Gripen Demo program, which has also been referenced as the “Gripen MS21″. The next step will involve setting the final specifications for Sweden and for initial buyers, and finalizing the “JAS-39 E/F” design. Development is expected to be done by 2018-2020, with new JAS-39E/F fighters entering service in Sweden around 2023.

The Next Gripens: Industrial Gripen Demo rollout
(click to view full)

In July 2006, Saab received a SEK 1 billion contract from the Swedish government (about $150 million) to improve the aircraft, and develop the Gripen Demo/NG. This was later followed by a NOK 150 million (about $25 million) agreement with Norway in April 2007, and a set of industrial partnerships with key suppliers. A welter of upgrade contracts, studies, and private investment initiatives have also worked to finance R&D of key components, including the avionics and radar.

Saab’s approach to those Gripen Demo partnerships has been a departure from past practice. Instead of selecting key technologies and modifying them to become proprietary, as was the case for the F404-based Volvo RB12 engine, Gripen Demo is using far more “off the shelf” parts. As noted above, its new GE F414 engine will feature minimal changes, so the upgraded engine is expected to cost 20% less than the its RB12 predecessor. Suppliers like Honeywell and Rockwell were reportedly asked to just provide their products, and let Saab handle integration. There are even rumors that Saab may embrace the same HMDS pilot helmet used on the F-35, instead of Saab’s Cobra. At present, Saab is leading a team of Gripen Demo partners that include:

A demonstrator for the new version was rolled out in April 2008, and has been in flight testing since. Current negotiations with the Swedish, Swiss, and Brazilian governments are aimed at freezing the configuration for the JAS-39E/F/BR, which will feed back into the final industrial team.

As of April 2014, a much-modified JAS-39D (aircraft #39-7) is the primary component test bed, with upgraded avionics including a digital HUD, a production-standard ES-05 Raven AESA radar, and the SkyGuard IRST. Saab is currently assembling aircraft #39-8, a more representative test prototype of the JAS-39E/F that’s due to fly in 2015. Aircraft #39-9 is due to join the test fleet in 2016 as a primary system testbed, while aircraft #39-10 is due to fly in 2017 in the final JAS-39E configuration at the production-standard weight.

Future Gripens? Sea Gripen Concept
(click to view full)

Other aircraft upgrades are not advertised at present, but have been the subject of industry rumor and conditional commitments.

Some reports have touted the possibility of a thrust-vectoring engine in future Gripen upgrades, but this was not listed as a selling point in Saab’s submissions to Norway or Denmark, and has not been mentioned in any Gripen Demo descriptions. More probable rumors involve upgrading existing fighters to JAS-39 C+/D+, by adding the improved F414G engine.

Other reports over the years have focused on a carrier-capable Sea Gripen, and Saab had indicated that it would spend up to half of Gripen NG’s development budget on this variant, if it found a partner. In May 2011, however, an announcement seemed to indicate that the firm was beginning to move forward on its own, with development centered in the UK.

Carrier landing is usually a very difficult conversion, but Saab can take advantage of the aircraft’s natural Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) design. The Sea Gripen would add new undercarriage and nose gear to cope with higher sink rate forces and catapult launches, strengthen the existing tail hook and some airframe sections, and improve anti-corrosion protection. Launch options would include both catapult (CATOBAR) and “ski jump” ramp short take-off (STOBAR) capabilities, with maximum launch weight about 1/3 lower for STOBAR launches. Carrier landing speed is already in the required range under 150 knots, but the current 15 feet per second sink rate needs to be able to reach 25 feet/sec.

Sea Gripens have a possible future role in Brazil as a naval aircraft on Brazil’s NAe Sao Paolo or its successor. They also exist as a very unlikely backup to Britain’s F-35B Lightning IIs on the new CVF carriers, should absolute disaster strike.

Export Opportunities Czech JAS-39C/Ds
(click to view full)

Time will tell whether the JAS-39 Gripen’s unique combination of performance, price, and life-cycle benefits will find enough buyers in the end, or if it will go down in history as the twilight of Sweden’s indigenous combat aircraft designs. Thus far, buyers have included Sweden (195 + 60 JAS-39E upgrade), Brazil (36), South Africa (28), the Czech Republic (14 lease/buy), Hungary (14 lease/buy), and Thailand (12).

Meanwhile, Saab Defence & Security continues to pursue sales possibilities worldwide. The base list comes from a 2006 Bloomberg interview that outlined Saab CEO Ake Svensson’s thoughts about the aircraft’s potential export customers in the coming years. A report from Jane’s, based on that interview, added more specifics. Subsequent developments have closed off some opportunities, and added others.

Still open

  • Argentina: The country has been looking to replace its aged fighter fleet, and is discussing a deal for 24 JAS-39E/Fs, to be signed through Brazil’s Embraer. The catch? The USA and Britain both make critical parts.
  • Baltics: There is an lease requirement for up to 12 aircraft in Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania, but no active pursuit yet.
  • Belgium: interest formally notified in 2014.
  • Bulgaria: Stated in 2004 that it has a requirement for 20 aircraft to replace 6 MiG-21s and 15 MiG-29s. Issued a Request for Information (RFI) to Saab in May 2006. A 2011 RFI cut that to 8 planes. No movement or decision, but Russian aggression seems to be adding to their sense of urgency.
  • Croatia: Was looking for 8-12 aircraft, with an in-service date of 2011. A JAS-39C/D offer was presented, with Swedish JAS-39As to be loaned as an interim force. No action as of October 2014.
  • Greece: In limbo. Was looking to purchase a second tranche of 30-40 advanced fighters, with the process expected to begin in 2006. That was delayed, then hope was held out, then the 2010 fiscal collapse happened. Still in limbo.
  • Finland: Studying a EUR 6 billion program to replace their 62 remaining F/A-18C/D Hornets. Possible joint air defense cooperation with Sweden would help, but Gripen isn’t compatible with their stocks of AIM-9X and AIM-120C-7 air-to-air missiles. Buy decision expected after 2020, replacement to finish by 2030.
  • Indonesia: Looking to replace about 16 F-5E/F fighters. Indonesia has been expanding its own SU-27/30 and F-16 fleets, but they seem to want a 3rd fighter. The shortlist is a confused mix of heavy Su-35s & F-15s, and light F-16s & JAS-39s.
  • Malaysia: Limping along with MiG-29Ns until 2015, but not happy. Saab will offer 12-24 fighters and up to 2 Saab 340AEW AWACS aircraft for lease, competing against Boeing, Dassault & Eurofighter. Their AWACS offering, and unique experience with leasing, will help. So will neighboring Thailand’s happy experiences with the same mix.
  • Philippines: They just bought 12 South Korean FA-50s as low-cost light fighters, but the government says they will also want more advanced fighters to counter ongoing Chinese pressure, and the Gripen has been mentioned. We’ll see.
  • Slovakia: They need to replace their 8 serving MiG-29s, and want to cooperate with the Czech Republic, which is a Gripen customer. Believed to be looking at 6-8 JAS-39Cs, to the same standard as the CzAF.
  • Slovenia: There have been incredible reports re: national aspirations to field 40 aircraft. It’s difficult to see how they could afford anything even close to that, and they don’t fly any fighters at present.

Semi-closed

  • Hungary: Customer. The country extended its existing Gripen lease to 2026, and is looking to phase out its fleet of MiG-29s. Saab once thought that another 6 aircraft were possible within the lease extension, but that would have to be a separate deal mow.

Decided/ Closed

  • Brazil: Win (36 – 26E, 8F). The canceled F-X program got underway again, as Swensson had hoped, and Gripen outfought the favored Dassault Rafale. Follow-on buys could expand Brazil’s orders to 60 – 104 fighters, including a potential carrier-based variant within 10-15 years. Brazil will be a Gripen NG development and export partner, with full responsibility for the JAS-39F.

  • The Czech Republic: Extension. In July 2010, Saab officials said that they saw the potential for up to 10 more planes there, but the next 12-year cycle from 2015-2027 just extended the existing lease for 14 JAS-39C/Ds, while adding minor upgrades. On the other hand, continued Czech use makes a similar 6-plane lease/ buy the overwhelming favorite for Slovakia.

  • Denmark: DNB. Offered about 48 JAS-39DKs for their F-16 replacement competition. The Danes cancelled that competition, and now expect to buy just 25-35 fighters (F-35A, F/A-18E/F, or Eurofighter), with a decision delayed until 2014-15. Denmark is an F-35 Tier 3 industrial partner, and Saab and FXM decided not to bid in round 2.

  • Hungary: Extension. Renewed their 12-plane lease until 2026, and did not add any planes. Their ownership is one more reason that Slovakia is likely to fly Gripens.

  • India: loss. India’s M-MRCA competition for 120-190 fighters. JAS-39IN is out, and France’s Rafale is the pick… if M-MRCA can finish without a restart. Escalating costs have the buy under pressure, but even if Rafale negotiations fail, Sweden’s offer has shifted from the Gripen to collaboration on India’s own Tejas Mk.2.

  • The Netherlands: loss. A Tier 2 F-35 partner, but political pressure forced a competing bid, and Saab submitted one for 85 planes in 2008. The bid is essentially lost at this point, with the main Labour Party opposition apparently caving in to a similarly-expensive buy of just 35 or so F-35As.

  • Norway: loss. Had a requirement for 44 fighter aircraft to replace its F-16s. EADS withdrew its Eurofighter, then the F-35A won against the JAS-39N, but it may never have been a real competition. F-35A purchases have begun.

  • Romania: loss. Was looking for 40 new aircraft, but cut that down to 24 used F-16C/D Block 25s from Portugal.

  • Switzerland: canceled (22 JAS-39E picked, but lost referendum). Was expected to start the process to replace 3 of its F-5 squadrons later in 2006, but starts and stops pushed a decision to 2011. Saab’s Gripen was picked against the Rafale and Eurofighter in 2013, and Parliament ratified the decision, but a lack of courage in defending their position cost the government the referendum in 2014.

  • Thailand: Win (12). was looking to replace its aging F-5s, and Gripen won against more F-16s or Russian SU-30s. A follow on order brought their total to 12 JAS-39C/Ds, as part of a package that also included 2 S340 AEW planes. 2014 reports indicate that they may want another 6.

JAS-39 Gripen: Major Events 2014

Saab will build JAS-39Fs as well; Live opportunities in: Indonesia, Malaysia, Slovakia; Future opportunities in the Philippines? Thailand?; Government blows referendum in Switzerland, deal dead. CzAF JAS-39C, L-159As
(click to view full)

June 17/15: The cause of the Hungarian Air Force JAS-39C Gripen crash last week is being < href="http://hungarytoday.hu/news/gripen-crash-defence-minister-suspects-computer-error-behind-unfortunate-incident-24055">attributed to software issues, according to the country’s defense minister. This is pre-empting the outcome of the official investigation, with defense minister Csaba Hende citing initial details of that investigation.

Dec 15/14: Belgium. Sweden’s FMX defense export agency indicates that back in June it had received a request on joining a feasibility study for Belgium’s future combat aircraft procurement. FXM of course accepted and recently submitted a background document to the Belgian Ministry of Defence. The request applies to next generation Gripen Es. Belgium is going to upgrade its F-16s so they have ample time to make a decision. The F-35 is seen as a strong contender, if the Belgians can afford it.

Nov 9/14: Argentina. Argentina may want to do a deal with Brazil (q.v. Oct 22/14), but Britain has now publicly said “no.” To be more precise, they reiterate the continued existence of a ban. A spokesperson for the UK Department of Business, Innovation and Skills:

“We are determined to ensure that no British-licensable exports or trade have the potential to be used by Argentina to impose an economic blockade on the Falkland Islanders or inhibit their legitimate rights to develop their own economy…”

About 30% of the JAS-39E/F will be British, from the ejection seats to the radar, landing gear, and a number of electronic systems. Embraer could try to downgrade and substitute, but Argentina lacks the money to finance such an ambitious effort. Now add the fact that a newly-Republican US Senate and House would block export’s of GE’s F414 engines. As knowledgeable observers expected, Argentina will have to look elsewhere. C4ISR & Networks, “Argentina Buying Gripens? Brits Say ‘No Way'”.

Oct 22/14: Argentina. During the Embraer KC-390 medium jet transport’s rollout, Argentina and Brazil sign a formal “Alianca Estrategica em Industria Aeronautica.” Argentina is already making parts for the KC-390, and they need a larger partner for a number of other reasons. The FAB’s releases add that:

“El Gobierno nacional decidio iniciar una negociacion con la administracion de Dilma Rousseff para la adquisicion de 24 aviones Saab Gripen dentro del programa denominado FX 2…”

Regional export rights are also expected to be part of the $5+ billion deal, which is signed on Oct 24/14. That could get interesting, because the Gripen has systems from the USA and Britain in it. You might be able to replace electronics, but it’s expensive – and ejection seats and engines are a lot tougher. Sources: FAB NOTIMP, “Argentina quiere comprar 24 cazas supersonicos”.

Oct 18/14: Finland. The Finnish government has commissioned a working group to investigate Finland’s future tactical and strategic air defense options, with the tactical level centered around an estimated EUR 6 billion project to replace the country’s 60+ F/A-18C/D Hornets. New fighters would be delivered by 2030, at which point the Hornet fleet would be retired; but The working group is also looking to see whether it’s possible to upgrade the existing Hornets, which beat the JAS-39A/B Gripen and 2 other contenders in 1992. MoD official Lauri Puranen puts it this way:

“A 30-year old Formula 1 car can’t survive in this world, and we need to find out if a 30-year old fighter jet can…”

The answer depends on what you want them for, and how much better newer alternatives like the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, JAS-39E/F Gripen, F-35A/B etc. might be for the missions you need. An increasingly aggressive Russia, armed with SU-30SM, SU-34, and SU-35 fighters, is a significant threat – and its long-range S-400 anti-aircraft missiles can cover all of Finland. The Finns seem to understand this time, because the study will also look at options like joint air defense with Sweden, or joining the NATO alliance.

A decision to pursue joint air defense with Sweden could give the JAS-39E/F Gripen a “second time lucky” edge, but Finland’s stocks of AIM-9X and AIM-120C-7 air-to-air missiles are currently incompatible, and Russian anti-aircraft missiles could force a need for stealth that pushes detection range outside of Finnish airspace. The missile-compatible and stealthy F-35 also has a constituency (q.v. April 22/14), and so does the less expensive F/A-18E/F, but the Super Hornet may not have a live production line by then. Sources: FDF (2010), “The Successor of the Hornet Needs to Be Decided Only in the Early Twenties” | YLE Uutiset, “Finnish Defence Forces to replace aging Hornet fighter fleet” | Corporal Frisk, “Replacing the ‘capabilities of the Hornet fighter aircraft'”.

Sept 17/14: IHS Jane’s reports that:

“Saab is offering “100% technology transfer” in its bid to supply the Indonesian Air Force (Tentara Nasional Indonesia Angkatan Udara – TNI-AU) with its JAS 39 Gripen combat aircraft, a company executive has told IHS Jane’s.”

It’s a similar offer to the ones they made to India and to Brazil. Indonesia also has a native aviation industry, though PT Dirgantara has been focused on transport aircraft (CN-235, C-212) and helicopters (AS332). With that said, if Southeast Asia is an area of focus for Saab (q.v. Sept. 8/14), it makes sense to have a local partner who can build aerostructures and perform advanced maintenance. Sources: IHS Jane’s Defence Industry, “Saab offers “100% technology transfer” in bid to secure TNI Gripen deal”.

Sept 8/14: Indonesia. Saab begins actively pitching the JAS-39 to Indonesia, which indicates some level of belief in a serious competition, and in Saab’s odds within that competition. To an outside observer, “F-16 capability at a lower ownership cost” seems to be the basic competitive positioning.

The other driver at work may be the global market as a whole. An objective look for Saab sees the Middle East opting for the most expensive jets, while Asia’s biggest players have already made their picks. Africa doesn’t have much opportunity to offer beyond the South African win, and the coming deal with Brazil will cover any possibilities in Latin America. There are a number of small country opportunities in Europe, but those competitions are mostly in limbo. By process of elimination, Southeast Asia is a necessary focus for Saab right now, and Thailand has shown that even small wins lead to larger buys in time. A “max win” scenario in the region could add small but notable Gripen fleets in Malaysia and Indonesia, then follow-on possibilities in the Philippines (q.v. July 10/14), and perhaps even Vietnam over the medium-long term. Every regional win will make Saab more competitive within the region. Sources: Saab AB, “Gripen: Ideal for Indonesian Air Force”.

Aug 30/14: Slovakia. The Czech Republic, Slovakia and Sweden have signed a Letter of Intent to co-operate on using the JAS-39 Gripen, “…for ett bilateralt samarbete kring en gemensam luftrumsovervakning av Slovakien och Tjeckien.” Which is to say, as a foundation for bilateral airspace overwatch co-operation between Slovakia and the Czech Republic.

Note that past reports have gone as far as positing a common Gripen fighter squadron (q.v. April 3/14) if Slovakia also buys the aircraft, organized as a main base and a secondary forward base. Sources: Swedish FXM, “Idag har Sverige, Tjeckien och Slovakien undertecknat en avsiktsforklaring rorande samarbete kring Gripen” | Flightglobal, “Slovakia creeps closer to Gripen agreement”.

July 21/14: Denmark. Confirmed media reports indicate that Saab declined to bid in the re-launched Danish fighter competition, believing that they faced a situation similar to Norway’s where Lockheed Martin’s F-35 had already been picked. Denmark is already a Tier 3 F-35 industrial partner.

Boeing (F/A-18 Super Hornet) and Airbus (Eurofighter Typhoon) bid alongside Lockheed Martin and Saab, for an expected order of just 24-32 fighters. In contrast, the Norwegian experience appears to have triggered a more gimlet-eyed appraisal of opportunities by Saab, who also declined to participate in a recent Canadian RFI that was believed to be a political front. Each bid costs millions to prepare, so it’s a smart use of money – if one’s corporate intelligence is good enough to make consistently accurate assessments. Sources: Swedish FXM, “FXM not submitting tender for Gripen to Denmark” | Politiken, “Sverige opgiver at saelge kampfly til Danmark” | Reuters, “Saab will not bid for Denmark warplane order -newspaper” | Seeking Alpha, “Lockheed, Boeing, Airbus enter bids for Danish fighter jet tender”.

No bid in Denmark

July 15/14: Sea Gripen / Slovakia. Saab’s Lennart Sindahl tells a Swedish newspaper that the JAS-39E has become the base for a Sea Gripen design, following studies done in the UK.

They don’t intend to move forward without a confirmed customer, however, and the 3 countries they cite (India, Thailand, Brazil) amount to 1 valid prospect. India has already picked the MiG-29K and Tejas Naval LCA for its carriers, and Air Force dependencies on similar planes means that neither choice will change. Thailand has a carrier that’s arguably too small for a STOBAR fighter like Gripen, but it doesn’t matter – they lost the ability to operate fixed wing aircraft from it several years ago. It’s now a helicopter carrier that isn’t used very much, because they can’t afford it. That leaves Brazil, a Gripen customer working to co-develop the JAS-39F, who will need aircraft to replace the Skyhawks on NAe Sao Paolo in about a decade.

On a more optimistic note, he also says that Slovakia is getting closer to a deal for 6 JAS-39C Gripens, to give them interoperability with the Czech Republic and Hungary. Sources: SvD Naringsliv, “Saab tar kliv mot Gripen anpassad for hangarfartyg”.

July 10/14: Philippines. The Philippines recently bought 12 FA-50 light fighters, but Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin is reportedly interested in more advanced aircraft as well. Saab’s Gripen is reportedly on their radar screen, given the type’s low maintenance costs for a modern fighter. Sources: Saab’s Gripen Blog, “Gripen Has Admirers In Philippines Too”.

July 7/14: Weapons. MBDA announces that Saab and Sweden’s FMV have concluded missile integration firings with the JAS-39C/D Gripen and the Meteor BVRAAM (Beyond Visual-Range Air-to-Air Missile). The March 2014 launches completed the full integration program, which includes new MS20 operating software for the jet.

Full Meteor capability will be delivered as part of Swedish Flygvapnet MS20 upgrades. Once that upgrade is cleared for service, the JAS-39 Gripen will be the 1st platform able to use the long-range Meteor, whose continuous ramjet propulsion also widens its no-escape zone. Gripen’s Eurofighter and Rafale competitors won’t even begin to catch up until 2017, and there’s no scheduled integration date for other fighters. Sources: MBDA, “Gripen Closes In On Operational Meteor Capability”.

June 17/14: No Gripen for India. As negotiations to buy advanced Rafale fighters stall, and projected costs rise sharply, India’s Business Standard reveals that Saab had proposed to take a 51% share of a joint venture company, then leverage their expertise to help with HAL’s LCA Tejas Mk.2. It was an abandonment of Gripen in India, but for Saab, the JV would give them a major new niche in the global marketplace: a low-end fighter in a class below the Gripen and its Western competitors.

DRDO chief Dr V K Saraswat was enthusiastic, with an RFI in 2012 and an RFP in 2013. The idea does indeed make great sense in terms of India’s needs. The catch? Incoming DRDO chief Dr Avinash Chander was more focused on developing the Mk.2 alone, and believed that any foreign partnership would require a global tender. In India, that would take years. If MMRCA negotiations for the Rafale fail, on the other hand, and DRDO continues to fail at fielding even the Tejas Mk.1, the new BJP government may decide to take a second look at all of its options. Sources: India’s Business Standard, “Rafale contract elusive, Eurofighter and Saab remain hopeful”.

May 18/14: Switzerland. Unsurprisingly, a tepid and convictionless defense of the Gripen fighter deal results in a referendum loss, with projections showing about a 53.4% no vote. The only surprise is that the margin was this narrow, indicating a winnable vote. Compare and contrast with the September 2013 referendum, which resulted in the Swiss keeping conscription. Or the government’s success in the referendum that ratified their F/A-18 Hornet buy.

While some governments in Europe will re-run referendums until they get the result they like, the Swiss aren’t like that. The TTE fighter buy, and the unrelated referendum proposal to implement a SFR 22 (about $25)/ hour minimum wage, are both history. Switzerland will need to depend on French and Italian jets for basic airspace protection, and Sweden is very likely to end up buying Brazilian Super Tucano trainers instead of Swiss PC-21s. Sources: Swissinfo, “Swiss Reject $3.5 Billion Gripen Purchase in Blow to Saab” | Deutsche Welle, “Swiss referendum turns down minimum wage and new fighter jets” | Reuters, “Swiss voters narrowly block deal to buy Saab fighter jets: projection”.

Referendum kills Swiss buy

April 24/14: Weapons. Sweden has decided that they need KEPD 350 cruise missiles on their Gripens, but their politicians are doing a poor job explaining why. The semi-stealthy Taurus KEPD 350 cruise missile uses a combination of GPS navigation and Imaging Infrared final targeting, with a range of around 500 km/ 310+ miles. They’re integrated on Gripen, but Sweden has never bought any, even though Taurus is a consortium between Airbus, MBDA, and Saab Bofors Dynamics.

Now Defence Minister Karin Enstrom is pushing for a purchase, as part of the governing center-right coalition’s proposals to strengthen Sweden’s defenses post-Crimea (q.v. April 22/14). She touts their “wider reach and the ability to fight distant targets,” adding that “high-precision capacity can also have a deterring effect”. What she doesn’t explain is why that’s necessary, leading observers to conclude that it’s because Germany (KEPD 350) and Finland (AGM-158 JASSM) have been buying such weapons. Overall, it’s a terrible explanation to a country who sees its defense policy as defensive-only, especially after the government’s own foreign minister said in 2013 that cruise missiles would “never be relevant” for that very reason.

It also misses a critical military need, in the face of new advanced air defense missiles with ranges beyond 160 km. In order for Sweden’s Gripens to even fly over defended territory safely, Gripens need to be able to destroy enemy surface-to-air missile platforms that may threaten them, without entering their killing range. The KEPD 350 can perform this role, but the Gripen’s other integrated weapons cannot. If advance thought had been given, and Sweden’s military had outlined a “deep strike” doctrine aimed at the gathering places and logistics of any attacking force, advance consensus on an argument to establish that policy could also have served as a springboard for buying these missiles.

Firing a “bolt from the blue” works well if you’re shooting live KEPD 350s. If you’re a politician, however, it’s just poor preparation. Sources: The Local – Sweden, “Sweden wants cruise missiles ‘for defence'” | Radio Sweden, “Analyst: events sped up cruise missile decision”.

April 22/14: Finland. The Finns are looking ahead to eventual replacement of their upgraded F/A-18C/D Hornet fighters, which beat Saab’s early-model Gripens to become Finland’s first post-Russian fighters. The new discussion involves the JAS-39E/F and F-35A, and will probably involve other machines as well, depending on what’s still in production. But the politics are going to make your head spin. Helsinki Times:

“Carl Haglund (SFP), the Minister of Defence, has rejected the proposal by Eero Heinaluoma (SDP), the Speaker of the Parliament, to acquire JAS Gripen fighters from Sweden in a bid to promote Nordic co-operation…. “Although I advocate co-operation with Sweden, we should not acquire Swedish JAS fighters when we could acquire American F-35 stealth fighters for roughly the same price. Performance must take precedence in the investment,” emphasises Haglund…. “There may be fewer aircraft than at present, but the price tag will be a minimum of five billion euros. A special funding is required.”

Let’s leave aside that the F-35 won’t be roughly the same price, creating fleet size issues, and avoid the military arguments for each plane in light of Finland’s geography. SFP is the Svenska folkpartiet i Finland – Swedish People’s Party of Finland. You read that right. Finland has a Swedish cultural minority, which has often been part of the balance of power in Parliament, and Swedish is a recognized 2nd language that is taught in Finnish schools. As one might imagine, there are also some tensions under the surface. So, the prominent Social Democratic Party (SDP) is suggesting Gripens, but the influential Swedish party is saying no. On the other hand, how would it look if they just smiled and agreed to something this big? Sources: Helsinki Times, “Haglund advises against JAS fighter acquisition”.

April 22/14: 10 more in Sweden? Party representatives from all 4 parties in the current center-right governing coalition make a public statement, officially committing to more defense spending in light of Russia’s recent actions. The increase would be about $760 million per year (SEK 5 billion), and the main beneficiary will be the submarine fleet, which would add 3 newly-designed boats to the 2 in operation. The second beneficiary will be the JAS-39E fleet, which would grow to 70 planes. The 3rd new priority would be an improved air defense system.

In declining order of party seats, the spokespeople were Fredrik Reinfeldt (Moderate), Jan Björklund (Liberal People’s), Annie Loof (Centre) and Goran Hagglund (Christian Democrats). This is a minority government, which currently has a majority because of the Sweden Democrats, a right-wing populist party that’s described as ultra-nationalist, but includes an influential contingent of Chaldean Christians who immigrated from the Middle East. The party is outside the formal governing coalition, but very disinclined to vote with the left-wing opposition parties. Sources: Dagens Nyheter, “Sa vill regeringen starka forsvaret” | The Local – Sweden, “Sweden to beef up air force to counter Russia”.

April 18/14: Update. JAS-39E/F testing seems to be focused on components so far. A much-modified JAS-39D (aircraft #39-7) is the primary component test bed, with upgraded avionics including a digital HUD, a production-standard ES-05 Raven AESA radar, and the SkyGuard IRST. Saab is currently assembling aircraft #39-8, a more representative test prototype of the JAS-39E/F that’s due to fly in 2015. Aircraft #39-9 is due to join the test fleet in 2016 as a primary system testbed, while aircraft #39-10 is due to fly in 2017 in the final JAS-39E configuration with the production-standard weight. Sources: Selex ES, “Selex ES Advances Gripen Systems”.

April 16/14: EW. Finmeccanica subsidiary Selex ES says that tests involving a fighter and ground radars have cleared the way for production of their BriteCloud decoys, which contain DRFM active jammers and are are shot out of a dispenser instead of being towed behind the aircraft. That dispensing method creates larger miss distances for missiles that home in on the decoy, which is very helpful against proximity fuse warheads. It also eliminates added drag on the fighter. The flip side is that you don’t get the decoy back, but cylindrical BriteCloud decoys are the same size and shape as a flare, and can be dispensed from a standard 55mm flare cartridge.

That kind of capability is predictable given the advancing power of electronics, but realizing it is a big technological step forward. Britecloud will be part of the JAS-39E/F’s defensive systems, and is also available as an upgrade to existing JAS-39A-D fleets. Sources: Selex ES, “Selex ES successfully demonstrates BriteCloud Expendable Active Decoy technology”.

April 4/14: Sensors. Saab announces the first flight with the new Selex ES SkyGuard long range Infra Red Search and Track sensor, which can pick up other aircraft using heat instead of radar. Now all they need is a beyond visual range air-to-air missile that can take full advantage, like the French MICA IR or Russian R-27T/ AA-10T. Sources: Saab, “Saab successfully completes flight test with IRST for Gripen E”.

April 3/14: Slovakia. The Czech Republic’s Lidove Noviny writes that working groups are finalizing the details regarding major cross-cooperation with the Slovak Air Force, which currently flies 8 MiG-29s (2 trainer, 6 front-line) but is discussing a Gripen lease.

Key goals include cross-border operations for in-process missions like air policing intercepts, and full cross-servicing of each other’s fighters. Obviously, that will become a lot easier if Slovakia leases the same planes. The newspaper adds that if Slovakia does lease Gripens for operations after the MiG-29s’ service agreement expires in 2016, a joint Czech and Slovakian fighter squadron would be formed, with one main and one minor air base. Sources: Prague Post, “LN: Czech, Slovaks to connect their fighter squadrons”.

April 2/14: Espionage. Saab Switzerland spokesman Mike Helmy confirms that “Secret services have attempted to intercept our communications,” driven by unnamed states on behalf of their industries.

Saab Switzerland is a very logical target. A new customer for an advanced weapon, busy sharing a lot of industrial data as they look to line up manufacturing partners, gives new meaning to the phrase “I’d tap that.” Sources: Swiss RTS, “Le groupe suedois Saab, constructeur du Gripen, se dit victime d’espionnage”.

March 18/14: Malaysia. Reports suggest that just 3 manufacturers will submit leasing options in response to a Malaysian RFI. Saab will submit a bid of up to 24 fighters and 2 S340 AEW aircraft through Saab International Malaysia Sdn Bhd, addressing 2 Malaysian needs at once.

Boeing (F/A-18F) and BAE (Eurofighter Typhoon) have reportedly submitted bids as well, but neither has Saab’s military leasing experience. Dassault has reportedly declined to participate with its Rafale, while Sukhoi’s status (RMAF flies SU-30MKMs) is unclear in the absence of a response.

Malaysia will have to look at the bids, and decide if they’re willing to even lease new fighters as replacements for the RMAF’s dwindling MiG-29N fleet. In the wake of the mysterious Malaysian Airlines FLT 370 fiasco, however, Saab’s offer of AEW aircraft may give both the company and the program a higher profile in Malaysia. Sources: The Malaysian Reserve, “Three fighter jet makers to submit leasing bids” | TIME Magazine, “Another Lesson from MH370: Nobody is Watching Malaysian Airspace”.

Feb 12/14: Thailand. Flight Global says they’re a happy customer, and may want to boost their fleet to 18:

“Saab is in discussions with Thailand for six additional Gripen C/D fighters, the Swedish company says. In a press briefing, Saab Asia-Pacific president and chief executive Dan Endstedt said talks are ongoing. He did not give a timeframe for the possible acquisition, but says that he hopes the deal “happens soon”.”

Sources: Flight Global, “SINGAPORE: Saab looks for additional Thai Gripen sale”.

Feb 4/14: JAS-39F. IHS Janes reports that Brazil wants both single-seat and two-seat variants, unlike Sweden or Switzerland. Perhaps there will be a JAS-39F after all:

“Saab has confirmed to IHS Jane’s that Brazil’s aerospace industry will be given the opportunity to develop a two-seater version of the Gripen NG as part of the USD4.5 million consignment of 36 fighter aircraft…. Out of the 36 fighter jets under the FAB F-X2 programme, eight of the aircraft will be twin-seat Gripen Fs and the rest [DID: 28] will be in the single-seat Gripen Es.”

That would increase Brazil’s workshare, and give them a solid design role, but it also increases costs. Negotiations will be interesting. The other question involves weapons. The JAS-39D eliminates the 27mm cannon found in the JAS-39C, and it remains to be seen whether the JAS-39F will follow the same pattern. Sources: IHS Jane’s 360, “Saab confirms twin-seat Gripen F development for Brazil”.

Jan 17/14: Swiss referendum. Switzerland’s Federal Council announces that the TTE program’s national public referendum will be held on May 18/14, as a yes/no vote re: the Swiss Gripen Fund Law approved by Parliament. The opposition still has to collect 50,000 signatures first, but an organized group is unlikely to fall short of that goal on a high-profile issue, while supported by sitting political parties, in a country of 8 million people. They make it.

Subsequent developments show a pattern wherein the Swiss parties supporting the deal, Sweden, and Saab all abandon the political field under trumped-up pressure, effectively conceding the legitimacy of their argument. The government looks set to lose, even though the Swiss air force was off duty during an airline highjacking in the middle of the referendum. The hijacking had to be handled by Italian and French fighters. Read “Switzerland Replacing Old F-5 Fighters with New Gripen-E” for full coverage.

Jan 8/14: Slovakia. Slovakia is reportedly leaning toward JAS-39 fighters as a replacement for its MiG-29s. They might be able to get second-hand F-16s or Kfirs for less, but the JAS-39’s low maintenance costs are very attractive, and they want to cooperate with the Czech Republic. Flying the same jets offers them the ability to share costs and services at a much deeper level.

Slovakia currently fields 9 L-39 Albatros light attack planes, plus 3 in storage, and reportedly has 6-12 flyable MiG-29s. They’ve never bought fighters as an independent state – what they fly is what’s left of the fleet that was received in their “Velvet Divorce” with the Czech Republic. Sources: MINA, “Slovakia to replace Mig29s with Swedish JAS39″.

Jan 7/14: Indonesia. Indonesia wants to replace its 11 remaining F-5E/F Tiger II light fighters with 16 modern aircraft. Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro confirmed that they “have received proposals from several jet fighter manufacturers,” and are evaluating them. Indonesian Military Commander General Moeldoko added that the TNI-AU has studied the SU-35, F-16, F-15, and JAS-39 Gripen.

Moeldoko wants the requisition plan included in Indonesia’s Strategic Plan II for the 2015 – 2020, but the air force’s choice will also depend on available funds. The F-15 is significantly more expensive than other options, and if the air force wants 16 fighters, the state of Indonesia’s economy will influence what they can buy. Sources: Antara News, “Defense Ministry looking to replace aging F-5 tiger fighter aircraft”.

Jan 2/14: Czech. The Czech government has negotiated its next lease period for their JAS-39C/D Gripens. The new deal will have a longer lease term (12 years + 2 year option), and annual payments about 31% lower. It would be interesting to know how the lease-to-buy program has been affected by these changes, and to have clarity regarding the terms of ongoing aircraft modernization.

The catch is that October’s elections upended Czech politics, in the wake of scandals involving ex-PM Petr Necas and the PMO’s chief of staff that included an affair, using military intelligence to keep an eye on his estranged wife, and possible payments to legislators who resigned in advance of a critical non-confidence vote. The ODS party went from 2nd place to 5th, and its allied parties also lost ground. The new center-left government will be headed by the CSSD (Social Democrats), and includes the ANO protest party and the KDU-CSL Christian Democrats. The outgoing government could have signed the deal, but decided to leave it to the new government on the grounds that it’s a strategic decision.

The new government approves the deal on March 12/14 – see “Contracts” section. Sources: Wikipedia, “Czech legislative election, 2013″ | Czech Ministerstvo obrany, “Vlada schvalila prodej letounu L-159, prodlouzeni pronajmu gripenu prerusila”.

2013

Formal Swedish Gripen NG approval – with conditions; Swiss government approves Gripen NG; Gripen NG picked in Brazil; Denmark competition starts up again; Serious about Sea Gripen; Work begins to build the JAS-39E; No Gripen weapon school in South Africa. Gripen-F Demo
(click to view full)

Dec 18/13: Brazil. Earlier press reports that the competition was stalled for another 2 years are proven wrong by a somewhat unexpected announcement by the Ministerio da Defesa that Brazil has picked Saab’s Gripen-NG as their preferred bidder, and expects to buy 36 planes for $4.5 billion. That’s currently just an estimate, as negotiations need to sort themselves out. A final contract and financial arrangements are expected in December 2014, and deliveries are expected to begin 4 years later. That’s a challenge for Saab, as any schedule slippage in the development program would create a late delivery. Late fees can be expected to be a negotiating point, and Brazil’s MdD says that leasing JAS-39C/D Gripens as an interim force may be addressed in the negotiations as a 2nd contract.

The Gripen NG contract figure tracks exactly with previous reports by Folha de Sao Paolo, which means an additional $1.5 billion contract can be expected for long-term maintenance and support. Saab was the cheapest of the reported offers, beating Boeing ($5.8 billion) and Dassault ($8.2 billion, reportedly reduced) by significant margins. Once Edward Snowden’s revelations of NSA spying on Brazil’s government killed Boeing’s chances, there was no middle ground. The Rafale’s reported $10.2 billion purchase + maintenance total made it 70% more expensive than Saab’s Gripen. Brazil’s economic slowdown, and the Rousseff government’s focus on entitlement spending, made that cost chasm a big factor.

It wasn’t the only factor. The Gripen has Ministry statements indicate that industry’s long-standing preference for Saab’s industrial terms played a role, as Gripen-NG offers the prospect of participating in a new fighter’s design. So, too, did the unique prospect of full access to weapon integration source code, which the Ministry cited in its Q&A. That will allow Brazil to leverage its revived arms industry, and easily add weapons like Mectron’s MAR-1 radar-killer missile. Throw in the ability to participate in the future design of a carrier-based Sea Gripen variant to replace ancient A-4 Skyhawks on Brazil’s carrier, and Saab’s industrial combination overcame the Gripen’s reliance on an American engine and other equipment.

The Brazilian Air Force has a dedicated website to explain its choice. Dassault issued a terse statement pointing out the presence of US parts on Gripens, and positioning the Rafale in a different league. Which may be true, but it’s also true that global fighter buys have historically been heavily weighted toward a less-expensive league. Sources: Brazil MdD, “FX-2: Amorim anuncia vencedor de programa para compra de novos cacas” | MdD, “Perguntas & Respostas sobre a definição do Programa F-X2″ (Q&A) | Dassault, “FX2 contest – 2013/12/18″ | Folha de Sao Paulo, “Dilma agradece Hollande por apoio contra espionagem dos EUA”.

Brazil picks Gripen NG

Dec 6/13: Not in T-X. Boeing and Saab AB sign a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) to jointly develop and build a new advanced, cost-efficient advanced jet training solution for the USA’s upcoming T-X competition to replace the U.S. Air Force’s aging supersonic T-38s. The JDA has Boeing as the prime contractor and Saab AB as primary partner. Its scope covers design, development, production, support, sales and marketing of “a completely new designed aircraft, built to meet the needs of the Air Force.”

While Boeing’s predecessor companies did take Northrop’s YF-17 and develop it into the “new” F/A-18 Hornet, Boeing clarified to DID that their offering would not be derived from the JAS-39. Sources: Boeing, “Boeing and Saab Sign Joint Development Agreement on T-X Family of Systems Training Competition”.

Nov 26/13: Qatar. La Tribune cites a number of French export opportunities in Qatar, where the JAS-39 Gripen reportedly wasn’t even invited to bid. That helps France’s Rafale, and so does the USA’s failure to approve export requests in time to respond to the fighter RFP. At least 1 bid from an American manufacturer is expected, but Qatar already uses French weapons on their existing fleet of 12 Mirage 2000-5s, and they are a strong French defense customer generally. If Qatar really does want a mixed fleet, per some reports, the Rafale’s competition narrows to only the Eurofighter. Sources: La Tribune, “La France au Moyen-Orient (3/5) : le Qatar premier client du Rafale?”.

Sept 18/13: Switzerland. The Swiss upper house (Ständerat, or Council of States) votes 27 – 17 in favor of the Gripen fighter deal, following a 119 – 70 – 5 vote in the Swiss National Council. That completes elected political approval, but the deal is very likely to need approval in a countrywide referendum. If so, May 2014 is crunch time. Sources: SBC’s SwissInfo: “Gripen go-ahead: Fighter jets given parliamentary all-clear” | Saab Group, Sept 18/13 release.

Sept 12/13: Czech Republic. After over a year of negotiations, the Czech Government has agreed on terms to lease its 14 Gripen aircraft (12 JAS-39C, 2 JAS-39D) for another 14 years, to 2029. The next step is for the contract to be detailed and then formalized in a signed agreement.

The current 10-year, CZK 19.6 billion (about $1.033 billion) lease-to-buy arrangement lasts until 2015, so there’s no urgent rush. Still, it’s nice to settle the issue after a long period of proposed interim extensions (q.v. Feb 14/12), threats to end the lease (q.v. March 15/13), etc. The new Rusnok government appeared eager to settle the issue on a long term basis (q.v. July 15/13), and has successfully created a framework for doing so. Source: Swedish FXM export agency, Sept 12/13 | See also Saab, “Gripen for the Czech Republic”.

Czechs agree to new 14-year lease terms

Sept 11/13: T-X? Aviation Week reports that Boeing may abandon its push for a clean-sheet advanced jet trainer design, and hook up with Saab to offer a Gripen variant for the USA’s T-X. Subsequent comments from Saab EVP Lennart Sindahl that “We remain focused on the continued development of the Gripen E and the fighter will never be a trainer” make sense from a branding point of view, but Sindahl adds that Saab is open to new business opportunities, and using 2-seat JAS-39Ds as the base would offer an interesting recycling of Saab’s last-generation design.

There’s no doubt that a JAS-39 Gripen, which is flown by Britain’s Empire Test Pilot School, can effectively simulate the most advanced jets. It comes built for supersonic speeds and high Gs, with a helmet-mounted sight, modern weapons, and proven low operating costs. Even with a lower-end radar than AESA-equipped front line variants, it would serve well as a swing-role entrant that could fly Air National Guard (ANG) roles for domestic emergencies. It could also function as an excellent aggressor aircraft, providing capabilities that equal or exceed existing F-16C aggressors at a lower operating cost. F-22s are already using much more primitive T-38s as opponents in order to keep operating costs down, so having Gripens on hand would be a notable upgrade.

Those capabilities set Gripen apart from the General Dynamics/ Alenia M-346, but not from the Lockheed Martin/ KAI T-50, whose TA-50 and FA-50 variants can perform air policing and aggressor roles at a lesser but possibly adequate level.

That’s why price is likely to be the key for Saab – and for Boeing. On the one hand, the notional T-X order of 300 planes would double total Gripen production since the fighter’s inception, creating some economies of scale for a JAS-39T. Boeing can already deliver the significantly larger, twin-engine Super Hornet for around $60 million; still, in order to beat competitors hovering around $30 million, they’ll need to do more than just use 1 GE F404 engine and a cheaper radar. Sources: Aviation Week, “Boeing And Saab To Propose Gripen For T-X”.

Sept 4/13: Operating Costs. South Africa’s iOL News offers a snapshot of JAS-39C/D operational costs per flight hour (CPFH) for the South African Air Force. That’s a tricky area, for 3 reasons. The 1st is that there’s no standard formula, so different militaries can include different costs. The 2nd twist is that the SAAF fleet’s small size increases “dry” costs per flying hour, as fixed costs are amortized over fewer planes. The 3rd twist is unique to low-readiness countries like South Africa, who spend more per flight hour because they allocate few flight hours, but still have to maintain all of the jets. Even with all these caveats in mind, it’s still an interesting data point, especially alongside its comparison to a popular platform:

“[SAAF Director of Combat Systems] General John Bayne… said the “dry costs” (without fuel) for a Gripen were R104 600 per flying hour and fuel cost R30 800, giving a total “wet cost” of R135 400. Hawks fly at a dry cost of R67 500, with fuel costs of R15 400 and a total cost of R82 900…. “To date the Hawks have flown over 10 000 major accident-free flying hours since 2005 and the Gripens 3 500 since 2008,” said Bayne.”

At current exchange rates, that translates into JAS-39C/D flying-hour costs of about $10,465 dry and $13,350 wet; both are wildly higher than IHS Jane’s Aerospace and Defence Consulting’s 2012 estimate of $4,700 per flight hour. The same study’s figures for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet help provide some perspective, however, with a base US Navy Super Hornet figure of $11,000 CPFH, but $24,400 listed for Australia. Fortunately, we have a 2nd set of SAAF data points from a more popular platform. Gen. Bayne’s figures for the sub-sonic Hawk Mk.120 trainer & light attack jets translate to $6,755 dry and $8,295 wet. One good way to normalize Gripen figures for prospective customers is probably to create a ratio involving in-service Hawk trainers under similar circumstances vs. SAAF costs, then adjust from there. Source: iOL, “SAAF jets aren’t in storage, says general” | StratPost, “Gripen operational cost lowest of all western fighters: Jane’s”.

Operating Costs

July 24/13: Netherlands. Financieel Dagblad reports that Saab’s final offer to the Dutch government included penalties for late delivery. A reasonable move, given that the F-35 is about as close to operational capability now as it was 5 years ago.

To make things more interesting, Rekenkamer estimates are saying that the country’s EUR 4.5 billion acquisition budget is likely to buy just 33-35 F-35As, instead of the 85 fighters originally planned. Dutch News.

July 18/13: South Africa. DefenceWeb quotes Saab South Africa President Magnus Lewis-Olsson, who tells them that the SAAF’s interim Gripen support contracts ended in April 2013. Saab was hoping to get a support contract in place within the next few months, but if it doesn’t, SAAF personnel can only provide front-line maintenance. Over time, their fleet will become unable to fly. defenceWeb | DID: “South Africa’s Sad Military: Why Maintenance Matters.”

July 17/13: Weapon School. Saab South Africa President Magnus Lewis-Olsson tells defenceWeb that a planned global Gripen Fighter Weapon School in South Africa (q.v. July 10-18/12) represents a missed opportunity for the country. The 1,000 square meter training HQ would have been at AFB Overberg in the Western Cape, which Saab liked for its central location and available flight space. The course would have used a mix of Swedish and South African pilots, keeping those SAAF pilots current, and reimbursing the SAAF for the use of 4-6 Gripens that aren’t flying anyway due to budget cuts. Oddly, the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) didn’t move to support the initiative, and in fact seemed to campaign against it.

Meanwhile, Saab has completed its syllabus and is ready to begin construction of the School and start training. Other countries have expressed interest, and Saab will be moving forward. defenceWeb.

July 15/13: 1st JAS-39E. Saab announces that they’ve begun building pre-production test aircraft 39-8, the 1st complete pre-production version of the JAS-39E. They’re beginning with the front fuselage, as part of manufacturing and assembling of all parts of the fuselage. After the fuselage join comes the installation of cables, mount systems, the outer shell and other equipment. Other parts of the airplane are also being assembled during this process, and they will eventually be joined to or installed in the fuselage. Saab.

July 12/13: Czech Republic. The new Rusnok government’s defence minister Vlastimil Picek says that he’ll submit a proposal for extending the Czech Republic’s JAS-39C/D Gripen lease after the Chamber of Deputies’ expected vote of confidence in early August 2013. Military deputy chief-of-staff Bohuslav Dvorak added that the next lease would be longer than the 10-year lease signed in 2004.

The reality is that the Czech defense budget dropped 25.6% in absolute terms from 2005 – 2012, from CZK 58.44 billion to 43.47 billion and down to about 1.1% of GDP. The dueling imperative are that the Czech Air Force can’t realistically switch to another fighter, given the costs of new training, spare parts, etc. At the same time, they need to negotiate a deal they can afford within that small budget. Prague Daily Monitor | Defense News re: budget comparison.

May 15/13: Sea Gripen. Saab remains serious about its “Sea Gripen NG,” and has been working on the idea since their May 2011 announcement. They’re targeting India, Italy and the UK alongside Brazil, but India has picked the MiG-29K, and is developing their own lower-tier naval LCA fighter. Italy and the UK both seem committed to the F-35B. The leaves Brazil, where a Sea Gripen may be necessary, in order to compete for F-X2.

Brazil’s Navy is expected to buy its own fighters to equip a new aircraft carrier, which is expected to replace NAe Sao Paulo around 2025. They expect their 24 new fighters to be the same type as the FAB’s F-X-2 winner, which leaves Saab competing against 2 proven naval fighters in Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornets and Dassault’s Rafale-M.

To help build their case, former Brazilian naval aviator Comte. Romulo “Leftover” Sobral is invited to flight test a JAS-39D, in order to verify the design’s basic suitability for naval conversion. Sobral liked the aircraft’s intuitive flight controls, ground handling, stability at low airspeeds, acceleration response, handling at the high angles of attack used in carrier landings, and good visibility. He even liked the flight suit. The plane landed in 800m, and Comte Sobral believes that the plane does have the basic requirements to become an effective naval fighter. The Sea Gripen’s lack of proven status, and absence of even a flying prototype, will still hurt the JAs-39. On the other hand, the time lag from F-X2 to a naval buy gives Brazilian industry a unique opportunity to participate in designing the Sea Gripen. Saab Gripen Blog | Full article at Defesa Aerea & Naval [in Portuguese].

April 10/13: Brazil. Saab executive Eddy de la Motta is quoted as saying that Brazilian JAS-39 Gripen NGs would use AEL’s avionics, creating a forked version under the wider development effort. This will help Saab meet industrial offset obligations, and also create commonality for Brazil’s fighter fleet, but integrating all of those components with the plane’s mission computers, OFP core software, weapons, etc. is not a trivial task. Elbit subsidiary AEL’s avionics are used in many Brazilian aircraft, with the exception of the Mirage 2000s that will retire as F-X2 fighters enter the FAB.

A less comprehensive suite of AEL avionics will also be used in Boeing’s F/A-18 International, which offers AEL’s wide-screen display and some other components to all potential customers. Defense News.

March 13/13: Denmark. The Danes pick up their fighter competition as promised, following their announced hiatus in April 2010. Invited bidders include the same set of Lockheed Martin (F-35A), Boeing (Super Hornet), and Saab (JAS-39E/F) – plus EADS (Eurofighter), who had withdrawn from the Danish competition in 2007. The goal of a 2014 F-16 replacement decision has been moved a bit farther back, and now involves a recommendation by the end of 2014, and a selection by June 2015.

The Flyvevabnet are reported to have 30 operational F-16s, with 15 more in reserve, out of an original order of 58. Past statements indicate that they’re looking to buy around 25 fighters as replacements, but there are reports of a range from 24-32, depending on price. Danish Forsvarsministeriet [in Danish] | Eurofighter GmbH | Saab | JSF Nieuws.

March 8/13: Brazil. Brazil has asked the 3 F-X2 finalists to extend their bids for another 6 months from the March 30/13 deadline, as the Brazilian commodity economy remains mired in a 2-year slump. The competitors had hoped for a decision by the time the LAAD 2013 expo opened in April.

The length of the cumulative delays could create changes for the bids, and it effectively squashes any faint hopes that the new jets would be able to fly in time for the 2014 World Cup. Reuters.

March 15/13: Czech Republic. Czech Prime Minister Petr Necas says that the latest Swedish contract extension offer doesn’t meet Czech “expectations,” and makes noises about a competition to choose different fighters. He’ll repeat that line in July, as negotiations continue. Ceske Noviny.

March 13/13: South Africa. Opposition Democratic Alliance MP David Maynier forces the ANC government to acknowledge that 12 of its 26 delivered JAS-39/C/D fighters were in long term storage, and sums up the situation this way:

“The sad facts of the Gripen system are as follows: 26 Gripen fighter jets were delivered; 10 or fewer are operational; 12 are in long-term storage; there are six qualified pilots; there are about 150 flying hours available to the entire squadron for 2013.”

Read “South Africa’s Sad Military: Why Maintenance Matters” for full coverage.

Jan 17/13: Sweden. The Swedish government gives formal approval to the planned purchase of 60 JAS-39E/F fighters, a bit more than a month after the Swedish Riksdagen voted 264-18-19 in favor.

This isn’t an order, just approval to negotiate one – and there’s a big condition attached. If Switzerland backs out, and there are no orders from other countries, the Swedish deal will also die.

The SEK 47.2 billion framework contract is announced on Feb 15/13, see contracts section for more. Saab’s Gripen blog | Sweden’s The Local | Aviation Week | UPI.

Swedish approval – with conditions

2012

Sweden votes for JAS-39E/F; Czech extension; Swiss pick; South Korean opportunity declined. Sea or Land attack
(click to view full)

Dec 10-13/12: Testing. Swedish and Swiss pilots successfully test the Gripen-F Demo, and its new AESA radar, at Linkoping in Sweden. Swiss DDPS [in French] | Saab’s Gripen blog

Dec 6/12: Swedish vote. Sweden’s Riksdagen votes 264 – 18, with 19 abstentions, to approve the JAS-39E/F Gripen Next-Generation program. The total estimated cost, including maintenance and operation, is estimated to SEK 90 billion up until 2042. Swedish FXM | Saab’s Gripen blog.

Sept 23/12: Malaysia. RMAF chief Tan Sri Rodzali Daud tells The Sun Daily that Saab’s offer to lease 18 JAS-39 Gripens is under serious consideration, as a lower cost alternative to buying MiG-29N replacements. Other sources had told the paper that the Gripen and the RMAF’s existing SU-30MKM fighter had been eliminated in technical tests, but Daud stressed that all competing aircraft were still under consideration. He added that a special budget might be necessary to fund MRCA, and that operating and maintenance costs would play a big role in the RMAF’s choice. Indeed, O&M costs have been the main reason behind Malaysia’s desire to retire its MiGs.

If those criteria turn out to be accurate, then the SU-30MKM’s installed maintenance base, and Gripen’s proven design for low operating costs, could give them an important advantage over the Eurofighter and Rafale in Malaysia. Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet would fall somewhere in between. It’s more expensive to operate than the Gripen, and doesn’t have much commonality with Malaysia’s F/A-18D Hornets, but the joint base at Butterworth, Malaysia would offer Super Hornet interoperability with Australia. Just as the Gripen would offer interoperability with neighboring Thailand.

Sept 21/12: Sweden. Sweden’s government presents its 2013 budget request to Parliament, which includes the planned SEK 300 million (about $46 million) to begin paying for Gripen E/F development.

The challenge is that the agreed formula of SEK 300 million in 2013-14, and SEK 200 million thereafter, only gets them to SEK 2.3 billion by 2023. Unfortunately, the Swedish Forsvaret now says that the Gripen E/F program is expected to cost “cirka fem miljarder kronor” (about SEK 5 billion) above and beyond the current 10-year plan, and the plane is scheduled to enter service by 2023, 10 years after development funding begins. To us, that sounds like “half funded”; we’ve asked the Forsvaret to clarify. Swedish Forsvaret [in Swedish] | Swiss DDPS [in German].

July 10-18/12: Pilot school? Saab says that they’re moving to establish a new global Fighter Weapons School for Gripen pilots at the SAAF’s Overberg base, in the southern Cape area, along with the Swedish and South African air forces. The first class is said to be targeting an October 2013 opening. Aviation Week:

“A former site for secret South African/Israeli missile tests, Overberg hosts the SAAF’s test squadron and was chosen because it offers access to maritime, desert and high-elevation training areas, live ordnance areas and instrumented ranges with land targets… The SAAF will provide the school with [4-6] JAS 39C/D Gripens, plus aggressors (opposition aircraft) and targets if necessary, and each student will fly 20 day and night sorties. Discussions with other Gripen operators have already started. Airborne early warning and control aircraft or tankers could be added later.”

The South African National Defence Force (SANDF) follows with a sharp rebuke:

“We would like to place on record that there has never been any discussion between SAAB and the SANDF. It is with dismay that we read such in the media when no interaction whatsoever with regard to the purported school. The Air Force Base Overberg is a sensitive security establishment of the SANDF and will remain solely in the hands of the SANDF. The suggestion therefore that such a school will be established is devoid of truth.”

Saab tells defenceWeb that it remains 100% committed to the project, and says that the SAAF was onboard and supportive, “but final and formal approval with South African government bodies is still outstanding.” Saab | Aviation Week | defenceWeb.

July 10/12: Weapons – Meteor schedule. The Gripen will be the 1st plane integrated with MBDA’s Meteor long-range air-to-air missile, and the plane’s role during the last 6 years of firing trials could allow an early finish in 2013, instead of the planned 2014 operational date.

Subsequent revelations place the Eurofighter’s operational date with Meteor within 2017, and the Rafale’s in 2018.

MBDA has undertaken 21 test firings to complete the development program, is about the deliver a final performance statement that it’s “fully compliant from a lethality and kinematic point of view”, and is building the first production missiles. Aviation Week.

June 18/12: JAS-39E/F. Aviation Week’s Bill Sweetman reports from an aerospace conference at Sweden’s Malmen AB, where they’ve discussed details of the JAS-39E/F. They’re hoping that the first 2 development aircraft can fly in late 2013.

The plane’s new sensor set, avionics, and mission computer will be designed so that they can also serve as JAS-39A-D upgrades. The airframe is another matter. Sweetman describes the airframe as “largely new” compared to the JAS-39C/D, with new mid and aft fuselage sections, and widened blended wing-body sections, based on the design and lessons from Gripen Demo. The overall description involves a longer and slightly wider fighter that maintains the same wing loading, despite a gross weight increase over the JAS-39C/D that has reached 5,000 pounds. It’s also supposed to supercruise with weapons, using divertless inlets. Even with a new engine for those inlets to feed, however, the extra weight will make armed supercruise a challenge. The F414 EPE, which adds more thrust, is reportedly under discussion, but configuring the EPE for more thrust will penalize range.

Feb 29/12: JAS-39E/F. Sweden’s armed forces publish a report recommending that at least 60-80 JAS-39E/F Gripens be present in the future Swedish air force, with new aircraft beginning to arrive in 2020 and the entire effort lasting until 2030 or so. The military said its aim was to split the upgrade cost with “at least one other strategic partner country,” but did not reveal whom. It eventually becomes clear that the partner is Switzerland.

This sort of arrangement would usually mean new-build planes, given the extent of the changes, but Saab itself talks about upgrades, and so have earlier reports (vid. Jan 26/12). Either way, Swedish acceptance would stabilize the future of its next-generation Gripen project. Swedish media talk about a SKR 30 billion (about $4.5 billion) project, though the military isn’t discussing any firm estimate yet. Saab | Sweden’s The Local.

Feb 14/12: Czech mates. The Czech Republic’s government has reportedly decided to pursue a 5-year extension of the 10-year, CZK 19.6 billion (about $1.033 billion) lease-to-buy for its 14-plane JAS-39C/D fighter fleet, rather than opting for an immediate replacement tender. Czech defense minister Alexandr Vondra said that he didn’t expect Czech-Swedish negotiations to last longer than 4 months, but they have.

The net effect is to freeze the Gripen as the country’s intermediate-term fighters, and make the Czechs’ long-term fighter fleet plan an issue for a follow-on government. Subsequent negotiations and a new government would later change the country’s plans. Ceske Noviny | Ottawa Citizen.

Feb 13-14/12: Swiss 2009 evaluation leaked. The confidential 2008/2009 Swiss Air force evaluation results are publicly leaked. Its verdict that the Gripen didn’t meet minimum Swiss requirements for its future fighter directly contradicts earlier statements from Swiss military and political leadership that all 3 planes on offer had done so. This leaves the entire basis of the Swiss selection open to question, and pressure is building across the political spectrum.

In response, the Swiss have stated that they’re still open to formal offers, essentially touching off another round of bidding. Officials have staunchly defended their pick in the meantime, saying that it met Swiss requirements by the time the final offer was evaluated. Saab’s public stance reinforces both tracks, saying that they are finalizing Switzerland’s JAS-39E/F configuration, while dropping strong hints that they will lower their price in response to Dassault’s maneuvers (vid. Jan 29/12).

DID has confirmed that at least 2 key attributes did change between the report and the award: the Gripen’s ability to hit multiple targets in one pass, using newly-integrated GPS-guided weapons; and an operational helmet-mounted display. Read “Switzerland’s F-5 Fighter Replacement Competition” for full coverage, including report excerpts.

Jan 31/12: India loss. Dassault’s Rafale is picked as the “L-1″ lowest bidder for India’s 126-aircraft M-MRCA deal, even after the complex life-cycle cost and industrial calculations are thrown in. Next steps include the negotiation of a contract, in parallel with parliamentary approval and budgeting.

Until a contract is actually signed, however, India’s procurement history reminds us that even a “close” deal is just 1 step above a vague intention. The contract may take a while. Even the French government sees a deal as only an 80% probability within 6-9 months. The budgeting is likely to be even trickier. The IAF’s exclusion of cost considerations in picking its finalists means that the only question now is: how far over the stated budget will a full Rafale buy go? Some reports place the deal’s cost at around $15 billion – an increase of up to 50% from previous estimates. If economic downturns or squeezed defense budgets make those outlays a big enough issue, early enough in the process, it could have the effect of re-opening the competition. British PM David Cameron has expressed an intent to change India’s mind, and both Saab and Boeing are still positioned within India, in order to be ready for a renewed opportunity. In a competition that’s re-opened for financial reasons, the Gripen would have much better odds. Read “India’s M-MRCA Fighter Competition” for full coverage.

Jan 29/12: Switzerland. Dassault makes Switzerland a new final offer, after the competition: 18 Rafale fighters for SFR 2.7 billion (EUR 2.24 billion, $2.96 billion), instead of 22 Gripens for SFR 3.1 billion. On a per-plane basis, that’s 17.5% less than Dassault’s reported “final” RFP offer of SFR 4 billion for 22 Rafales.

The offer is aimed at the Swiss parliament, but the way it was handled looks set to create plenty of enemies. Parliamentary discussions are expected to begin in mid-February.

Jan 29/12: South Korea. The Korea Times quotes a DAPA spokesman, who confirms that Saab submitted an application to attend the F-X-3 fighter program’s mandatory explanatory session. They were joined by Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and EADS. The report adds that DAPA doesn’t see the Gripen as likely to meet its competition’s requirements. Then again, that’s what explanatory sessions are for. Saab itself told the newspaper that it hadn’t decided whether or not it would bid.

When the bids are submitted, Saab isn’t among them.

Jan 26/12: Swedish JAS-39E/Fs? Defense News reports that the Swedish government will soon begin examining a proposal from Swedish Air Force Command to upgrade 100 Gripens to next generation status:

“Some 20 possible new configurations for a Gripen E/F version are being examined by Saab, the AFC and FMV… The AFC advocates that the Air Force’s stock of C/D version Gripens be upgraded on a phased basis to spread the total cost over a five- to 10-year budgetary period. The AFC views the impending government decision, which it anticipates will be made in March, as the most critical funding issue facing Swedish defense.”

Jan 26/12: Switzerland. An anonymous letter from a “Groupe pour une armee credible et integree” alleges that Switzerland’s benchmark fighter tests had their results manipulated. The accusations are seen as being detailed and specific enough to prompt Switzerland’s parliamentary sub-committee for security policy to investigate further. 24 Heures [in French].

Jan 5/12: Czechmate? Financial Times Deutschland reports that Germany is looking to sell some of its used Eurofighters to Eastern European countries, at the cut-rate price of EUR 60-80 million each. The Czech Republic, Croatia, Slovakia and Romania are named. Even that price is likely to be rather steep for these countries, in comparison to alternatives like used F-16s, unless Germany can propose substantial savings on training and maintenance. Czech defense ministry spokesman Jan Pejsek says that: “I can completely exclude that talks have taken place, even a [informal] probing.”

Meanwhile, allegations that the CSSD government’s original deal to buy 24 JAS-39 fighters may have been marred by corruption, is creating uncertainty around the possible 2015 renewal of the 12-year, CZK 20 billion (now around $1.04 billion), 14-plane Czech lease-to-buy deal. The current OSD government is reportedly very cool to the idea, and may be considering less-capable options like the American F-16. Czech Prime Minister Petr Necas said in June 2011 that it would be difficult to imagine renewing the contract until the corruption investigation was concluded, and recently added that the country’s deteriorating economic situation would have to be taken into account when making this choice. Czech Position.

2011

Swiss win; India elimination; Doing the Brazilian limbo; Competition in Croatia; RM12 engine upgrades; Cobra HMD operational; Thais operational; Sea Gripen started. Swiss takeoff
(click to view full)

Dec 1/11: Swiss win. Switzerland announces their choice – and it’s Saab’s JAS-39 Gripen. Swiss Defence Minister Ueli Maurer estimates the cost of the envisaged deal at up to CHF 3.1 billion (currently $3.5 billion, probably more by 2014), for 22 planes. The DDPS explicitly stated that Gripen also won because it offered lower maintenance costs that made it affordable over the medium and long term. The deal includes a provision for 100% value industrial offsets to Swiss firms. Dassault wasn’t very happy, though they did concede that the Gripen beat them on price.

For various reasons, a secure contract isn’t expected until sometime in 2013. If the contract goes through, Switzerland will join Sweden, the Czech Republic, Hungary, South Africa, and Thailand as Gripen operators. Read “Switzerland Replacing its F-5s” for full coverage.

Swiss pick

Oct 14/11: Croatia. The Swedish Defence and Security Export Agency (FXM) publicly presents the Swedish JAS-39 Gripen offer, which has already been submitted to the Croatian government. It involves the sale of 8-12 JAS-39C/D fighters, rather than more advanced Gripen Demo/NG planes. Sweden would also loan Croatia some older JAS-39As as an interim force, to avoid a fighter gap as its aged MiG-21s are retired. The offer also support and training agreement for pilots and technicians, and an industrial co-operation package backed by Saab’s delivery record in the Czech Republic, Hungary and South Africa.

The biggest competitor in Croatia is thought to be the Eurofighter. It’s more expensive than the Gripen, but German influence, and the potential for shared training and support, is expected to make it a competitive option. Vid. March 27/08 entry re: the RFI. Saab Group.

Sept 20/11: Cobra HMD operational. South Africa’s air force becomes the 1st customer to declare the Gripen’s Cobra Helmet-Mounted Display operational, on 2 Squadron in Makhado. South Africa was the system’s first customer, but Sweden has since ordered its own Cobra HMDs.

Like all helmet-mounted displays, the Cobra dramatically improves the effectiveness of the plane’s short-range air-to-air missiles, by allowing launches at targets within a much larger field of view. Saab Group.

HMD operational

Sept 14/11: Switzerland. The Swiss House of Representatives and Senate approve a SFR 5 billion per year armed forces budget, instead of SFR 4.4 billion. The difference is about $682 million per year, and some of that will reportedly be used to help fund Switzerland’s fighter purchase.

Sept 12/11: RM12 engine upgrade. Volvo Aero discusses a 2-15% thrust increase for the JAS-39A-D model’s F404-derived engine, at the ISABE 2011 conference in Sweden. They also tout the engine’s record of over 150,000 flight hours without a single major engine mishap, which is indeed impressive. It helps to begin from a very stable, long-serving design like GE’s F404, but it also requires a design focus by Saab and Volvo Aero, extending into the maintenance system used by operating air forces.

Project leader Torbjorn Salomonsson saw the RM12’s improvements coming from an improved FADEC controller, improved fan and blisks for better airflow, and a new high-temperature turbine adapted from GE advances in the F404 and F414. Volvo Aero head of research, Henrik Runnemalm, added that:

“We have stated previously that it is possible to significantly increase the thrust of the existing RM12 engine at a very competitive cost. We will then have a more powerful and economical engine. It also means that we can upgrade the 220 engines that the Air Force already has whilst maintaining engine competence within country.”

July 8/11: Thailand. In a ceremony at Wing 7’s air base in Surat Thani, The Royal Thai Air Force (RTAF) officially declares its new air defense system operational. That includes the 6 initial Gripens, the S340 AEW Erieye plane, and the ground command and control systems. The system was originally intended to reach this milestone in September, but they managed to be 2 months early. Saab.

May 24/11: Sea Gripen starts development. A Saab Group release states that Saab AB will open a new UK headquarters and a new Saab Design Centre in London. The engineering center:

“…will capitalise on the UK’s maritime jet engineering expertise and is scheduled to open in the late Summer. Initially staffed by approximately 10 British employees, its first project will be to design the carrier-based version of the Gripen new generation multi-role fighter aircraft based on studies completed by Saab in Sweden.”

A 12-18 month concept design phase will follow. After that, Saab will need to decide whether or not to build a flight demonstrator. Sea Gripen was initially pushed for India (q.v. Dec 28/09 entry), but with Gripen out of M-MRCA unless something changes, the likely targets would appear to be Brazil’s suspended F-X2 program, or a Plan B for Britain if its F-35 plans go awry. As an example, imagine that catapult installations in the new CVF carriers prove unaffordable, ruling out F-35Cs, while the F-35B STOVL fails its probation and is canceled. With UK firms already providing 28% of the Gripen NG, Sea Gripen could tout itself as a legitimate British alternative to the more-expensive Eurofighter Naval concept. See also Flight International.

Sea Gripen studies

May 18/11: Brazil. Official opening of the Swedish – Brazilian centre of research and innovation (Centro de Inovacao e Pesquisa Sueco-Brasileiro, CISB) in Sao Bernardo de Campo, Brazil, which grew out of the Saab CEO’s September 2010 visit to Brazil. So far, the centre has attracted over 40 partners from academia and industry, who will be active partners in the specific projects. Areas of focus will be in Transport and Logistics, Defence and Security, and Urban development with a focus on energy and the environment.

Saab President & CEO Hakan Buskhe cites a coastal surveillance radar project with Atmos and a datalink development project with ION as examples, and the firm sees many opportunities in Brazil beyond the Gripen project. Civil security will get special attention, as Brazil is hosting both the FIFA World Cup and Olympic Games within the next few years. Saab Group.

April 27/11: Indian elimination. Saab confirms that the JAS-39IN Gripen has been eliminated from India’s M-MRCA competition, which has become a duel between Dassault’s Rafale and EADS/ BAE/ Finmeccanica’s Eurofighter Typhoon. Read “India’s M-MRCA Fighter Competition” for full coverage.

India

Feb 22/11: Thailand. The initial batch of 6 Gripen fighters arrives in Thailand. Bangkok Post.

Thai delivery

Feb 8/11: India. Saab announces the establishment of a Research and Development Centre in India, with an initial base of 100-300 Indian engineers. Areas of focus would include aerospace, defense, and urban innovation, including civil security.

See also Saab’s “India – an important part of Saabs production flow“, which covers Saab Aerostructures’ industrial strategy more generally. To date, Saab is working with Tata Advance Material (small to medium sized composite parts), QuEST Engineering (sheet metal and machined parts), and CIM Tools (machining and sub-assemblies).

Feb 4/11: Bulgaria. Bulgaria issues another fighter replacement RFI, soliciting information from Boeing (Super Hornet), Dassault (Rafale, Mirage 2000), EADS (Eurofighter), Lockheed Martin (F-16), and Saab (JAS-39 Gripen) re: 8 new and/or second-hand fighter jets, to replace its existing fleet of 12 MiG-21s.

Bulgaria issued a similar RFI in 2006, for 20 jets, but the global economic crash, and Bulgaria’s own issues in trying to pay for past defense purchases, forced a hold. The Defense Ministry has taken pains to emphasize that this is just an exploratory request, and is not the start of a purchase tender. Nevertheless, November 2010 saw the formation of a National Steering Committee and an Integrated Project Team, to draft preliminary fighter replacement operational, technical, and tactical requirements. That followed October 2010 remarks by Bulgaria’s Defense Minister Anyu Angelov, who discussed spending BGN 1 billion (around $725 million) for the purchase of an uncertain number of new fighter jets to replace its MiG-21s, while modernizing its fleet of 16 MiG-29A air superiority jets. Sofia News Agency | Saab | SNA re: Saab visit.

Jan 17/11: Brazilian limbo. President Rousseff leaves the entire F-X2 competition in limbo, in light of concerns about the financing of the purchase, how much to borrow for the initial fighter purchase, and inter-agency disagreements. The exact commitment is a decision later in 2011, but no contract until 2012. In practice, however, there is no firm timeline or deadline for a decision, the 2011 decision date is later revoked, and domestic spending priorities loom large in Rousseff’s agenda. Which makes this a de facto suspension.

If it is a suspension, it leaves the situation of every contender in play.

2010

BAE divests, ends partnership; Swedish sims upgraded; Danish delay; DJRP Reco pod; SAAF just for show? Gripen Demo w.
IRIS-Ts, Meteors, GBU-10s
(click to view full)

Sept 23/10: DJRP Reco pod. Thales announces that it has delivered its Digital Joint Reconnaissance Pod (DJRP) for installation and integration flight trials on South Africa’s JAS-39C/Ds. The electro-optic and infrared Thales DJRP completed its factory integration tests at Thales’s optronics facility in Glasgow, Scotland in June 2010.

Handover of the reconnaissance pod to the South African Air Force (SAAF) will occur after the integration phase.

Aug 7/10: India. India’s Times Now news show reports that the M-MRCA trials will leave only Dassault’s Rafale and EADS’ Eurofighter in the race. To be confirmed. Brahmand | Livefist.

July 13/10: Sea Gripen, Exports. Flight International reports from Farnborough on JAS-39NG plans and testing, including plans to allocate development funds for a carrier-based “Sea Gripen” variant, as described above. Having said that:

“The Sea Gripen will not be developed by Sweden alone… but potential partners could include Brazil and India, who have been offered to do work in their own countries. [Gripen technical director Eddy] De la Motte says the “cost of that programme will be a couple of billion Swedish crowns; more than one billion [DID: over $135 million]. It will be half of the Gripen NG’s development programme cost.”

The big challenge is that India has already picked the MiG-29K as its carrier-borne fighter, and Brazil may well close its door by picking the carrier-capable Rafale. Other carrier-using countries have locked in their future fighter choices, with the exception of Thailand and Spain. This means the Gripen would need to win in Brazil, or depend on new countries joining the ranks of naval fighter operators, in order to make Sea Gripen viable. For now, the announcement adds to their existing bid in Brazil, and thanks to the stated need for a partner, it costs nothing up front. With respect to export opportunities overall:

“Looking out to 2016, Saab-led Gripen International sees multiple export opportunities for almost 230 aircraft with Bulgaria (16), Croatia (12), the Czech Republic (10), Denmark (36), Hungary (six), Malaysia (12), the Netherlands (85), Romania (24), Switzerland (22) and Thailand (six).”

Finally, Gripen technical director Eddy de la Motte gave JAS-39 figures of less than $3,000 per flight hour for Sweden’s Flygvapnet, and “for the export customers it will be less than $5,000, including maintenance, spare parts, fuel and manpower.” On its face, that’s stunning. By comparison, the USAF places the per-hour cost of an F-15 at $17,000 [PDF]. Gripen is engineered for significant savings, but there’s also a possible mismatch between direct flight costs, and figures that include allocated life cycle costs including depot maintenance, etc.

Mid-May 2010: India. Gripen NG demo makes its international debut by taking part in the last phase of the Indian evaluation trials for the M-MRCA competition, following 135 test flights in Sweden. Testing includes high altitude trials at Leh airbase, 3,300m/ 10,826 feet above sea level, as well as testing under tropical conditions and comparative flight tests. Saab AB.

April 21/10: Raven AESA. Finmeccanica subsidiary SELEX Galileo provides an update concerning its “Raven 1000P” prototype AESA radar. The radar is flying on the Gripen Demo, and has been demonstrated in air-air and air-ground modes, including long range synthetic aperture radar scans at medium and high resolution imagery. The company says simply that “expected performance has been achieved,” without providing clarifying details, and notes that development and new capabilities will continue. SELEX Galileo release [PDF].

April 15/10: Romania. Agence France Presse quotes Jerry Lindbergh, a Swedish government official in charge of defense exports, who says that Sweden could provide Romania with 24 new “fully NATO interoperable Gripen C/D fighters, including training, support, logistics and 100 percent offset for the amount of one billion euros ($1.3 billion),” paid off over 15 years with low interest rates.

In essence, they’re offering newer and better fighters, for the same price as very-used F-16s. Alenia would later match this with an offer of its own for 24 used Italian Eurofighter Tranche 1s, which possess no precision ground attack capability. Read “Nothing But Netz: Romania’s New Fighters” for full coverage of Romania’s fighter buy.

March 24/10: Danish delay. Denmark decides to delay its fighter decision to 2014, with no delivery until 2018.

That gives the F-35 a chance to stabilize costs, and win an order it appeared to be losing to Boeing’s F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet. The Gripen remains a distant 3rd, but could recover. The US Navy plans to end Super Hornet production in FY 2015, barring exports to countries like India. Aviation Week Ares.

March 23/10: Exports drive Swedish simulator upgrades. Saab Group announces that Swedish Air Force Wing F 7, based at Satenas, is upgrading from JAS-39 A/B to JAS-39 C/D aircraft and simulators. The Multi Mission Trainer is already converted, and will soon be followed by the Full Mission Simulator.

What’s driving the conversion is the Thai order. The Gripen instructors at 1st OCTU are now preparing to train the first batch of Thai Gripen pilots, who recently arrived to Sweden.

March 15/10: Denmark. Danish radio station DR Forside reports that the Tier 3 JSF partner Denmark will pick Boeing’s F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet as its future fighter, instead of the F-35A JSF or Saab’s JAS-39DK Gripen NG.

According to the report, the ministry’s decision awaits an auditor’s review before being forwarded to the full government and to parliament. The formal contract and delivery date for new fighters are also expected to be delayed, with the F-16 fleet flying on and their replacements entering service in 2017-18. DR Forside [in Danish] | Aviation Week Ares.

March 9/10: India. Sweden flies its Gripen fighters into Bangalore for MMRCA-related trials – but India’s Business Standard reports that they’ll be JAS-39D Gripens, not the new Gripen NG. That could get the platform disqualified, depending on the decisions made by the IAF and Indian MoD:

“The Gripen NG… has always been one of the hottest contenders in the fray. Saab’s default on the MoD’s trial directive, which lays down that the fighter being offered must be the one that comes for trials [leaves it] vulnerable to disqualification… the Swedish Air Force, having opted to buy the Gripen NG, has ordered a series of improvements on the Gripen NG prototype. With those under way, Sweden’s flight certification agency, SMV, has ruled that the prototypes require additional flight-testing in Sweden before the aircraft can be sent to India… Sources close to the Gripen campaign say IAF pilots will be offered a chance to fly the Gripen NG during a visit to Sweden from April 6 to April 10. Gripen International will also ask for fresh dates for bringing the Gripen NG to India for trials.”

March 5/10: BAE divests. BAE’s 11.2 million Class B shares in Saab Group are sold to Investor AB, the Wallenberg family’s publicly traded holding company, at SEK 95.50 per share. The 10.2% share is half of BAE’s remaining 20.5% stake in Saab. Following the sale, and some conversions of some Investors AB and all BAE stakes from Class A to Class B shares, Investor AB’s stake in Saab will change from 19.8% of the capital and 38% of the voting rights, to 30% of Saab and 39.5% of its voting rights. Investor AB Head of Corporate Communications, Oscar Stege Unger, reportedly had this to say:

“[Cooperation between BAE and Saab has] in practice ceased, in as much as Saab manages the Gripen exports itself. There has also been a degree of overlapping between BAE and Saab in larger deals… Now BAE have decided that they do not see this as a strategic holding and want to pull out. We also think that it is good that we clarify the ownership structure.”

The March 4/10 closing price for Saab amounted to SEK 106.00 per share, so Investor AB is presumably happy already. Investor AB | BAE Systems | Sweden’s The Local | UK’s Telegraph | Bloomberg | Defense News.

BAE divests

March 4/10: South Africa. South Africa’s News24 reports that the country’s Gripen jets, along with its MEKO-A frigates and Manthatisi Class U209/1400 submarines, are effectively present only for show, given their extremely low budgets for actual usage.

The SAAF’s current fleet of 11 Gripens will spend 550 hours in flight in the current financial year, which compares to NATO standards of 20 hours per pilot per month (240 per plane per year). Most of that will take place during the 2010 World Cup. In the next 2 years, that meager total will shrink to a fleet total of 250 flight hours per year – or about 9.6 flight hours per plane, per year, with the full fleet of 26 planes.

2009

Raven AESA partnership; EGBU-12 GPS/laser guided bombs integrated; Brazilian dogfight; Dutch deal delineated; Dassault’s double-cross; JAS-39NG Supercruise. Gripen Demo
(click to view full)

Dec 28/09: Sea Gripen. Reports confirm that co-development of a carrier-capable “Sea Gripen” design was part of Saab’s response to India’s M-MRCA fighter competition RFI, adding that Brazil’s future fighter requirements were also targeted. Key changes are outlined, and Gripen VP of Operational Capabilities Peter Nilsson tells StratPost that the Sea Gripen is intended for both CATOBAR (Catapult Assisted Take Off But Arrested Recovery) as well as STOBAR (Short Take Off But Arrested Recovery – “ski jump”) operations:

“There will obviously be differences in the MTOW (Maximum Take-Off Weight). In a CATOBAR concept, the Sea Gripen will have a MTOW of 16,500 kilograms and a maximum landing weight of 11,500 kilograms. In a STOBAR concept it depends on the physics of the carrier. Roughly, the payload of fuel and weapons in STOBAR operations will be one-third less than the payload in CATOBAR operations. There will be no differences in ‘bring-back’ capability,” he says.”

Oct 22/09: Denmark downgrade. Danish Defence Minister Soren Gade says that Denmark plans to purchase just 25-35 jets to replace its 48 operational F-16s, instead of the 48 aircraft originally envisioned. Gade now believes the soonest an agreement can be reached on the purchase would be the start of 2010, and the Copenhagen Post reports that the military has estimated the purchase will eventually cost “at least 100 billion kroner” (at current rates, about $20 billion – presumably, this includes lifetime maintenance and full equipping costs).

That cost estimate is creating pause, especially in light of a February 2009 report that says the current F-16 fleet still has many hours left in their airframes. The cost imperative to stretch the current fleet runs up against the potential Danish aerospace jobs and manufacturing technology improvements that will accompany any new fighter order. A Danish Defence Command committee was set up in 2007 to evaluate the competitors, which currently include the F-35A, Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, EADS’ Eurofighter Typhoon, and Sweden’s JAS-39NG Gripen. Defence minister Garde is quoted as saying that at this point, there is no preference among the competitors. Copenhagen Post | defense aerospace.

Oct 4/09: Brazil. Brazil’s FAB confirms that revised bids are in from all 3 short-listed contenders, and Saab’s offer clearly has significant support from the Swedish government.

Gripen International’s revised bid offers a wide range of elements, including: Full involvement in the Gripen NG development program; Complete technology transfer and national autonomy through joint development; Independence in choice of weapons and systems integration; Production in Brazil of up to 80% Gripen NG airframes, via a full Gripen NG assembly line; and Full maintenance capability in Brazil for the Gripen NG’s F414 engine. That last offer would largely remove the threat of future American interference, and it would be interesting to see how Gripen International proposes to achieve it. Gripen International touts “significantly lower acquisition, support and operating costs” for its plane, and all this would be backed by a firm proposal for full long-term financing from the government’s Swedish Export Credit Corporation.

The additional offers are equally significant. Brazil will have the sales lead for Gripen NG in Latin America, with joint opportunities elsewhere. Saab would join the KC-390 program as a development and marketing partner, and Sweden will evaluate the KC-390 for its long term tactical air transport needs, as a future replacement for its recently-upgraded but aging C-130 Hercules aircraft. Saab also proposes to replace Sweden’s aged fleet of about 42 SK60/ Saab 105 jet trainers with Embraer’s Super Tucano, but it received a SEK 130 million ($18.8 million) deal in September 2009 to upgrade the planes’ cockpit systems, and current Swedish plans would see the SK60s continue in service until mid-2017. FAB release [in Portuguese] | Gripen International release.

Sept 29/09: Brazil. Embraer release:

“Regarding the article published in the Valor Econômico newspaper, dated September 28, 2009, Embraer clarifies that it is not directly participating in the selection process of the new F-X2 fighter for the Brazilian Air Force and, contrary to what was stated, it has no preference among the proposals presented. Embraer reaffirms its unconditional support of this process, always in close alignment with Brazil’s Aeronautics Command and the Ministry of Defense.”

Sept 28/09: Brazil. Brazil’s leading aerospace firm Embraer drops a political bombshell. Embraer’s Deputy Chief Executive for the defense market, Orlando Jose Ferreira Neto, tells Valor Economico that the firm was asked to advise the Air Force re: industrial proposals, and concluded that participating in the JAS-39NG Gripen’s development offers Brazil’s aerospace industry the best long-term benefits. Embraer reportedly saw the JAS-39NG as offering the opportunity to participate in the design process, rather than just producing parts.

The opinion is a shock, as France’s interest in buying Embraer’s KC-390 transports was expected to leave Brazil’s top aerospace firm solidly on-side for the Rafale bid. T-1 Holdings executives (see Sept 17/09 entry) were also quoted in the article. In response, Defence Minister Jobim fires back to say that the government will make these decisions, not Embraer. Dow Jones | Defense Aerospace translations (note: links will not last) | Valor Online, via Noticias Militares [in Portuguese] | Defesa Brazil [in Portuguese] | O Globo [in Portuguese].

Sept 17/09: Brazil. Saab announces that over 20 engineers from the Brazilian firms Akaer, Friuli, Imbra Aerospace, Minoica, and Winnstal are already working on the Gripen NG project in Linkoping, Sweden, with the Swedish government’s authorization. The 5 firms will participate as the T1 holding, and would be responsible for projecting and manufacturing the JAS-39BR’s central and rear fuselages and wings. If all goes well, Akaer predicts that as of 2010 a team of at least 150 engineers and technicians from the T1 holding will start working in Brazil, alongside 20 Swedish specialists.

Beyond Gripen production, the holding’s goal is to form a new Brazilian aeronautical center in Brazil, and some technology transfer in the area of composite materials is reportedly underway already. Shaping the wing of a supersonic craft requires higher quality levels than civil applications, as well as manufacturing challenges owing to thicker and more resistant parts. Management and integration training within a holding structure of this type will also be required.

Sept 7/09: Brazil. Brazil’s Ministerio Da Defesa announces that Dassault Aviation is now the F-X2 competition’s preferred bidder, and the country will order 36 Rafales subject to further negotiations. The announcement also says that Brazil has secured French cooperation to develop Embraer’s KC-390 medium transport, and possibly buy 10-12 of the aircraft when they’re introduced.

This sale would be France’s 1st export order for its Rafale fighter, after numerous attempts spanning more than a decade. The twist in this story is that the air force has yet to request final bids, or deliver its evaluation and recommendations.

Sept 7/09: Dutch deal described. The Dutch TV show KRO reporter does an expose, which claims that the Ministerie Van Defensie (MvD) has knowingly misled Parliament regarding its F-35 procurement plans. The report says that the Dutch Defence Materiel Organization head had told the MvD in 2005 that its plans for 85 F-35s was not sustainable at expected budget levels. But the MvD continued to use that number when describing its planned budget and plans to Parliament, and even signed off on that number in the 2006 production phase agreement.

The MvD responds that it still intends to buy 85 aircraft, and that a budget increase to EUR 6.1 billion will take care of the gap. Which is true – if the pricing for the F-35As can be relied on. In contrast, KRO reveals that Gripen International has submitted a firm fixed-price bid for 85 in-service JAS-39NLs at EUR 4.7 – 4.8 billion. KRO reporter video [Flash] | Defense Aerospace KRO partial translation | MvD response [in Dutch].

June 16/09: South Africa. Swedish Chief Prosecutor Christer van der Kwast decides to close the preliminary investigation concerning alleged bribes in connection with the sale of Gripen fighters to South Africa. Saab SVP for Communications and Public Affairs Cecilia Schon Jansson, is unequivocal:

“No illegal methods have been forthcoming from Saab, and this is strengthened by the fact that the Chief Prosecutor now decided to close the investigation.”

See: Chief Prosecuror’s statement [in Swedish] | Saab Group release.

March 24/09: ES-05 Raven AESA. Saab and SELEX Galileo sign an agreement to develop an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar for the JAS-39NG. This is both a major milestone event and a contract, so it’s covered in full the “contracts” section, below.

March 10/09: RBE-2 Dassault double-cross. Aviation Week’s “AESA Radars Are A Highlight of Aero-India” points to problems with the JAS-39’s AESA radar, which stems from Dassault’s acquisition of a large shareholding in Thales. Rather than produce an RBE2 AESA radar that’s available on 2 platforms, Dassault appears to be excluding other options. The hope appears to be that this will lead to more orders for Dassault’s Rafale, rather than just shrinking Thales’ installed base for AESA fighter radars. Aviation Week:

“In 2007, Saab struck a deal with Thales to provide an AESA antenna for the Gripen Demo program, to be mated with the signal processor from the JAS 39C’s Saab PS-05 MSA radar… Thales will honor the Gripen Demo contract but its AESA will not be available for a production NG.

Sweden has talked about [Raytheon’s] RACR, but would prefer the PS-05/A’s “back end” modules for ease of integration and to stay away from control issues associated with U.S. components. The answer may lie with Selex, which, first as Ferranti, then as GEC-Marconi and subsequently as BAE Systems, was Sweden’s partner on the original PS-05/A.”

Selex was also Saab’s partner in the M-AESA R&D project. Selex Galileo’s Italian division has considerable experience with the Grifo family of mechanically scanned radars, while Selex S&AS UK division has already created the Vixen AESA radar for smaller fighters. Korea’s F/A-50 was recently barred from using the Vixen 500E, under an agreement with co-developer Lockheed Martin that did not allow the F/A-50’s capabilities to surpass the ROKAF’s F-16s.

Feb 2/09: Brazil. Gripen International confirms a Brazilian F-X2 bid involving 36 JAS-39NG aircraft. Their release adds that Brazil will have “direct involvement in the development, production and maintenance of the platform but it will also generate transfer of key technology including access to Gripen source codes.”

Boeing confirms that it has submitted a bid involving 36 F/A-18 Super Hornet Block IIs, with the APG-79 AESA radar. It is presumed that Dassault also submitted a 36-plane bid for its Rafale fighter. Boeing release | Gripen International release.

Jan 21/09: “Supercruise.” A JAS-39NG “supercruises” over the Baltic Sea, flying at 28,000 feet above Mach 1.2, without using afterburners, until the pilot ran out of test area and had to head back to the Saab Test Flight Centre in Linkoping. Saab Group release.

Very few aircraft can supercruise at all, and the fuel penalty means that most fighters’ time above Mach 1 during their entire service lives is measures in minutes, not hours. Supercruise cannot be operationally useful, however, unless it can be maintained with weapons mounted. The extra weight and drag created by externally-mounted weapons can make this a real challenge, which is why supercruise reports beyond America’s F-22A have been in “clean” configuration, with no weapons carried. Unless details are given to the contrary, the working assumption is that this was a “clean” configuration flight.

2009

Gripen Demo rollout; Norway loss. JAS-39D, Swiss arrival
(click to view full)

Dec 18/08: Dutch study. Tier 2 Joint Strike Fighter partner The Netherlands issues a comparative study of the F-16 Block 60+, JAS-39MG Gripen, and F-35A, which has been compiled in cooperation with several organization, and audited by 2 ministries and RAND Europe. It recommends the F-35 as the best combat aircraft. Surprisingly, it also concludes that the F-35 also has the lowest capital costs, and the lowest anticipated life-cycle costs. The issue will now go before Parliament.

Read “Dutch MvD Report Urges F-35 over Gripen NG, F-16E Fighters” for full details and updates.

Nov 20/08: Loss in Norway. The first domino falls. Norway chooses the F-35 over the JAS-39, though the way they chose to make that decision and announce it has created controversies, and had a negative effect on relations with Sweden. The decision itself is now controversial as well, after Sabb’s CEO took the very unusual step of holding a public presentation full of very specific criticisms regarding the accuracy and fairness of Norway’s process.

Nov 6/08: Jane’s publishes “Analysis: Why 2009 could be the year of the Gripen.” It calls attention to the ongoing competitions in Brazil (36+), Croatia (12), Denmark (48), India (126+), the Netherlands (85), Norway (44), Romania (around 40) and Switzerland (36) make final selections, and estimates total sales of up to 523 aircraft worth around $35-40 billion at stake:

“It will be a truly crucial period in shaping the future of the global fighter market. The common link between these eight contests is the presence of the Saab Gripen in the bidding process… Jane’s believes the Gripen team has reasons for optimism, however. First of all, in terms of the aircraft’s capability, Saab is offering its enhanced Gripen NG (Next Generation) variant for the Brazilian, Danish, Dutch, Indian and Norwegian requirements… According to Saab, further enhancements will be rolled out in three-year increments… Development and incorporation of specific customer-funded requirements is also envisaged as part of a 50-year programme plan… the Gripen NG programme would be accelerated in the event of a contract win and the aircraft would be available to enter service from 2014.

With regard to cost, the Gripen NG is viewed by Jane’s as competitive in terms of both acquisition and through-life support costs when compared to its rivals. Bob Kemp, sales and marketing director for Gripen International, citing figures produced for the Dutch fighter contest, said Saab believes that the Gripen NG, as part of an 85-aircraft fleet, would cost EUR6 billion (USD7.6 billion) less than the F-35 in terms of life-cycle costs over a 30-year period…”

Aug 25/08: Netherlands. Gripen International delivers its formal response to The Netherlands’ F-16 replacement program, which has been re-opened due to ongoing political controversies concerning the F-35’s eventual costs.

Eurofighter GmbH and Dassault refused to participate in this exercise, citing unrealistic time limits and perceived favoritism, and Saab’s request for an extension was denied. Saab reportedly replied to 85% of the 250 questions that had to be answered by 25 August; some questions with respect to integration with American products were reportedly not answered, as American firms must receive clearance from the US government in order to even discuss that information with Saab.

The F-35A is still heavily favored, but Saab’s offer is an all inclusive package comprising 85 next-generation “JAS-39NL” Gripen NG aircraft, plus a complete package of training, spares, simulators and support, and industrial co-operation to at least 100% of the total value of a possible contract. Other interesting elements include an option for final assembly in the Netherlands, and a ‘Repairables Exchange Service’ designed to lower costs and reduce their customers’ need for initial inventories of spare parts. Gripen International release | Gripen International Presentation [PDF, 3.2MB] | Gripen International Offer Summary [PDF, 3.2MB].

July 2/08: Switzerland. Gripen International delivers its initial bid to the Swiss government, and announces conditional industrial partnerships. See DID coverage.

April 28/08: Gripen International delivers its MMRCA bid to India’s Ministry of Defence. The JAS-39IN is based on the Gripen NG/ Gripen Demo, and includes an AESA radar and an IRST (InfraRed Scan and Track) system, a Transfer of Technology (ToT) program, a life-time logistics support solution sourced from Indian suppliers with support from Saab and its partners, and full industrial offset cooperation. Gripen International release | Saab release.

Eddy de la Motte, Gripen International’s India Campaign Director:

“Gripen IN will provide India with a capability that offers complete independence of weapon supply… We will do this by transferring all necessary technologies to enable Indian industry and the Air Force to build, operate and modify Gripen to meet all indigenous requirements over time.”

April 28/08: Norway. Gripen International delivers its bid to the Norwegian government. Dagbladet reported, and Gripen’s release confirmed, that Norway added a new wrinkle – a guarantee from Sweden that it would not be the only operator of this fighter type. That guarantee may have consequences for the size of Sweden’s Gripen force.

Gripen Demo
c. Gripen International
(click to view full)

April 23/08: Gripen Demo Rollout. A 2-seat version of the next-generation Gripen Demonstrator aircraft is ‘rolled out’ to the media and public at a ceremony in Linkoping, Sweden.

Photos show it equipped with illustrative mock-ups of IRIS-T short range air-air missiles, Meteor long-range air-air missiles, and Paveway precision-guided bombs. Gripen International release | Saab release | Saab: Videos from the ceremony | Gripen: Saab CEO interview & rollout videos

March 27/08: Croatia. Sweden’s FMV procurement agency announces that it has answered a Request For Information from Croatia, involving a potential lease to buy deal for 12 Saab-made Gripen fighter jets. No prices are quoted at this stage, but Reuters reports that the jets would be former Swedish Air Force planes. Other candidates for Croatia’s air force reportedly include the EADS Eurofighter, Lockheed Martin’s F-16, and Russia’s MiG-29.

Sweden’s FMV adds that : “This invitation from the Croatian authorities follows the recent receipt of similar invitations from Norway, India, Denmark, Switzerland, Romania and Bulgaria…” Reuters report | Reuters Sidebar: “FACTBOX-Balkan candidates offer NATO leaner military muscle”

March 3/08: India. With Gripen competing in India’s MMRCA contest, Saab hosts Indian TV journalist Vishnu Som from New Delhi Television for an episode of his new show, “The Jet Set.” See the full episode: Saab release | Full episode [Windows Media]

Jan 17/08: Switzerland. The JAS-39 Gripen is one of 4 aircraft solicited in a competition to replace 3 of Switzerland’s 5 aging F-5 E/F squadrons. Other competitors are Boeing’s F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, Dassault’s Rafale, and EADS’ Eurofighter. See “Switzerland Replacing its F-5s” for more.

Jan 17/08: Norway. Gripen International announces that it has been formally invited to bid on the Norwegian F-16 replacement fighter contract. It will compete one-on-one with the F-35A lightning II.

2007

F414 for Gripen Demo; Brazil’s back; Link-16 added; Spring Flag 2007. Gripen w. “smokewinders”
c. Gripen International
(click to view full)

Dec 21/07: Norway, Netherlands. EADS pulls its Eurofighter out of the Norwegian and Danish competitions, leaving both future fighter programs as a straight-up competition between the JAS-39 and the F-35. The rationales given are vague and make little sense, but many sources believe their key objection is official favoritism toward the F-35. The government-to-government nature of the F-35 deal, it seems, wouldn’t require the same industrial offsets, though the F-35 program has pledged significant production contracts with Denmark’s Terma and with Norwegian firms.

The Motley Fool, on the other hand, wonders if the same dollar devaluation that’s hammering EADS in the passenger jet market is also creating a price chasm for the Eurofighter. At $100-120 million per aircraft vs. $50-70 million for its Gripen and Lightning II competitors, it was already a significantly more expensive aircraft before dollar devaluation. Bloomberg | Financial Times | Flight International | Motley Fool.

Dec 13/07: Hungary. Hungary receives its last 3 Gripen fighters from its 14-aircraft lease/buy deal signed with the supplier and Sweden’s Defence Materiel Administration (FMV). Its fleet now consists of 12 JAS-39Cs and 2 JAS-39Ds. A Dec 10/07 announcement by Kaj Rosander of Gripen International added that “We have fulfilled our total export [read: industrial offsets] obligations to the Hungarian Ministry of Economy and Transport.” Flight International

Dec 5/07: Denmark. Gripen International release: “In connection with a Gripen deal with Denmark, Saab is planning extensive co-operation with Danish industry. Saab has signed a large number of agreements for over 100 percent of the contractual value.”

Denmark’s F-16 replacement order will cover up to 48 planes, and Saab Group’s DKK 10 billion ($1.9 billion) co-operation agreement with dominant Danish defence company Terma in the areas of aviation, space, defense and civil security includes non-military contracts. Saab’s automotive enterprise remains a significant asset when competitions turn on industrial offsets, and is a much wider focus than Terma’s F-35 related contracts; then again, it has to be, since far fewer Gripens are likely to be produced. The Saab-Terma agreement is spread over 10-15 years, and parts of it are dependent on Denmark selecting the Gripen NG for its air force. See full Gripen release.

Nov 29/07: Denmark. The Gripen team submitted their formal proposal to Denmark in December 2005, in response to that country’s RFI(Request for Information), but supplementary information was also requested. The Gripen team’s response is formally handed-over, on time. Gripen International release.

Nov 8/07: IRIS-T. A JAS-39 Gripen fires an IRIS-T short range air-air missile with an operational target seeker for the first time. It was a high g-load test firing using a fully operational missile without a warhead, and was successful at hitting the target over the Vidsel range in northern Sweden. The IRIS-T is a multinational (Germany, Greece, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden) 4th-5th generation SRAAM that is currently under development for several air forces. Gripen International’s Jan 16/08 release adds that:

“The missile is being developed to combat targets at short range and is also designed to strike targets behind the firing aircraft. IRIS-T will enter service alongside the Cobra HMD (Helmet Mounted Display) System…”

Nov 5/07: Brazil re-launch. Brazil’s F-X competition appears to be on again, with a $2.2 billion budget for 36 front line fighters. A 50% boost to defense spending in the FY 2008 budget accompanies the announcement. Looks like Brazil may be serious this time, and the Gripen is tagged as one of the contenders.

Oct 2/07: Gripen International announces that a 10-ship flight of Swedish Air Force F21 Wing’s JAS-39C/D Gripens were hosted by the USAF 493rd Fighter Squadron “Grim Reapers” at Lakenheath, England for joint exercises. Electronic warfare systems were the focus of the exercise, the pilots performed Close Air Support missions and executed air-to-ground attacks against targets defended by simulated surface-to-air missile systems during the week-long exercise. They also flew air combat missions against the Grim Reapers’ F-15C Eagles; unfortunately, no results were given.

Sept 28/07: South Africa. As is often the case, South Africa’s Gripen purchase involved industrial offsets. Given the nature of South Africa, those offsets involved special quotas for small and medium “black empowered enterprise” engineering firms. Saab discusses those efforts, with a focus on a 2006 R11 million ($2 million) contract between Saab and Aerosud under which local engineering firms secured sub-contracts for the supply of ground support equipment.

South Africa’s Aerosud is responsible for the program, including managing and mentoring a select group of BEE companies which manufacture the various items, raising their quality standards so that they could become qualified suppliers to the aerospace industry. Items supplied include electrical test equipment, overhaul platforms and test rigs to tailored engine inlet covers, engine trolleys and cockpit access ladders. Companies supplying these items include Cape Town’s Quad Engineering, ContactServe of Olifantsfontein, and the Tshwane-based companies Vacuform and Hartell. Gripen International feature.

Sept 12/07: Denmark. Danish Minister of Defence Soren Gade and the Swedish Minister of Defence Sten Tolgfors signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) regarding Gripen at Saab in Linkoping, Sweden. Denmark is planning to replace its aging F-16 fleet of 48 aircraft within the next 10 – 15 years, and are conducting a comprehensive evaluation of different aircraft types. The MoU guarantees that all relevant Swedish information which is needed for the Danish evaluation of the Gripen fighter will be available; in practical terms, the JAS-39DK is now an official member of the fighter competition. Saab release. A Gripen International release adds that the Danish Air Force Chief, Major General Stig Ostergaard Nielsen flew in a JAS-39D during his August 2007 visit to Sweden.

July 2/07: F414 picked. Saab announces that GE Aviation’s new F414G fighter engine will power its next-generation Gripen models. The F414G is derived from the popular 22,000+ pound/ 96 kN thrust F414-GE-400s that power the twin-engine F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, and offers a 25-35% power boost over its predecessor the F404. Key F414G alterations will include minor changes to the alternator for added aircraft power, and modified Full Authority Digital Electronic Control (FADEC) software for enhanced single-engine operation.

GE Aviation and Volvo Aero Corporation will be working together on the new F414G fighter engine. Although Volvo Aero has manufactured modified F404 engines under license for past Gripen fighters, GE will be supplying GE F414G engines directly to Saab for the Gripen Demo project, with Volvo as a major sub-contractor. GE is currently delivering 2 F414 Engines, with flight-tests and customer demonstration evaluations planned for 2008-2010. Gripen International.

July 2/07: Gripen International continues to tout its aircraft for India’s MRCA fighter competition. India Defence reports that the firm has gone one step farther than the July 2006 promise to have all airframe production take place in India. The firm stresses that the aircraft would be next-generation “Gripen Demo” aircraft, and adds that they were “willing to provide all the know-how for India to carry out modifications according to its needs.” This is a very high level of technology transfer, and resembles the benchmark adopted by the partner nations in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter consortium.

India’s government finally issued the formal RFP for the MMRCA competition on Aug 28/07.

June 11/07: Link-16 added. Saab announces that Link 16/ MIDS compatibility will become an option on the JAS-39, replacing or complementing the existing Swedish datalink. Full Link 16 certification is planned for 2008. The Link-16 program is part of the SEK 1 billion ($139 million) Version 19 systems upgrade – see July 3/06 entry in the contracts section, below. Finally, this tidbit was interesting:

“By the late 1950s Sweden’s military thinkers and aircraft builders had recognized the game-changing effect that a linked flow of secure electronic combat data could have on tactics and operations. It is well known now – but was once a highly-classified national secret – that Saab’s J 35 Draken was fielded with one of the world’s first operational datalink systems. Since then, every generation of Saab combat aircraft from Draken to Viggen to Gripen has fielded more and more powerful datalink capabilities.”

May 2007: Spring Flag 2007. In September 2007, Hungarian pilots described their experiences at Exercise Spring Flag 2007, held in May at Italy’s Decimomannu air base in Sardinia. It included combat assets from France (E-3 AWACS), Germany (F-4F Phantom ICE), Italy (AV-8B Harrier, F-16C, Tornado ECR and Eurofighter Typhoon), NATO (E-3), Turkey (F-16C), and Hungary (JAS-39C/D Gripen) with tanker support from Italy, the UK and the US. The Gripens were the only participating aircraft with a 100% sortie rate, and generated some interesting comments from Hungarian Air Force Colonel Nandor Kilian re: the Gripen’s radar capabilities and low visual cross-section (see above, or follow the link).

If you’re curious about the view from inside these kinds of exercises, DID recommends former USAF Air Weapons Controller John S. Green’s “Command and Control” recounting of a 1980s exercise involving American F-15s in Germany.

Feb 8/07: Norway. “F-35 Lightning II Faces Continued Dogfights in Norway.” Endre Lunde chronicles developments in Norway, including endorsement of the Gripen by one of the governing coalition’s political parties.

2006 and earlier

Saab buys Ericsson Microwave; Saab layoffs; Red Flag EW; Terma MoU in Denmark; Terma MRP reco pod. JAS-39 landing
c. Gripen International
(click to view full)

Nov 16/06: Red Flag Alaska – Gripen EW rules! Saab’s release discusses Gripen’s performance at Red Flag Alaska. During the 11-day exercise, the 4 aircraft each flew 2 sorties per day, accumulating 340 flight hours (150 ‘on mission’) with a staff of 12 pilots and 35 maintenance technicians.

In the tactical realm, note the release’s confirmation that the JAS-39 has the ability to drop Laser Guided Bombs carried on one Gripen aircraft, using laser designator pods fitted to another Gripen aircraft. The aircraft’s warning and electronic warfare systems (EWS) also got high ratings: Lt. Col. Lindberg said that:

“…it was almost impossible for the Red air force to get through our EW systems. We always knew where the air defense was, could avoid them and still do our work, even in very dynamic situations, with the threat getting more complex each day.”

Nov 16/06: IRIS-T. Saab announces successful tests with the IRIS-T short-range air-air missile, in order to verify Gripen compatibility. IRIS-T is in production, and is a multinational project that includes Germany, Greece, Italy, Sweden, Norway and Spain. It was developed following German experience with the Russian R-73/AA-11 Archer on East German MiG-29s, which caused them to rethink the entire design philosophy behind ASRAAM and pull out of the multinational project.

Nov 3/06: Terma MoU. Saab and Danish defence and aerospace company Terma announce a Memorandum of Understanding for a longer-term business relationship. As a first concrete step, Terma and Saab signed a Contract for production of DKK 10 million (about $1.7 million) worth of Gripen parts, to begin immediately at Terma’s facilities in Grenaa, Denmark. Gripen International

Nov 1/06: Denmark. Danish Aerotech A/S and Saab AB conclude a conditional cooperation agreement worth up to DKK 200 million (about $34.3 million). If Denmark decides to purchase the Gripen fighter as a replacement for its current F-16 fighters, Danish Aerotech is expecting to supply Saab with mechanical, electrical and electronic components as part of the new cooperation agreement. Since its establishment in 1992, Danish Aerotech has been a Saab partner responsible for all maintenance on Danish Saab T-17 training aircraft. Gripen International.

Aug 23/06: Bulgaria RFI. Gripen International announces its response to Bulgaria’s May 2006 RFI: 16 JAS-39 Gripen C/D aircraft (12 single and 4 two-seater) with full support and training provided in cooperation with the Swedish Armed Forces. Several financing options were outlined, and Saab/GI’s usual 100% offset promise was included. The first aircraft could be delivered within two years.

July 19/06: India. Saab pledges to conduct all production in India if it wins the MRCA fighter competition, and cites its record of successfully meeting industrial offset provisions.

June 26/06: Red Flag, ho. Flight International reports that 7 Swedish Air Force Gripens (5 JAS-39Cs and 2 two-seater JAS-39Ds), Two Tp84s (C-130H), and 12 pilots will be headed to Eilson AFB, Alaska under Lt. Col. Ken Lindberg for the latest Red Flag Alaska exercise. As a traditionally neutral country, Sweden has not participated in such exercises before. The Gripens will be deployed with LITENING III targeting pods, and will participate in both air-air and air-ground missions (4-6 aircraft each day, 2 missions per day), including leading mixed air groups from participating nations. They will take off from Ronneby AFB, Sweden on July 13, fly mostly overland without air-air refueling, and arrive on July 17, 2006. This Red Flag Alaska will run from July 24 – August 4, 2006, and is expected to involve 47 fighters and 6 support aircraft from participating countries. See Flight International article for more on the Gripen deployment, and a US Air Force Link article has more background re: the Red Flag Alaska exercises.

June 20/06: Meteor. The JAS-39 Gripen successfully completes its first test set of MBDA Meteor missile firings. Further flight test campaigns will be performed with the Meteor on the Gripen combat aircraft during 2006 and beyond.

June 12/06: Saab buys Ericsson Microwave. Saab Group acquires Ericsson Microwave Systems, who make the Gripen’s current PS05 radar – and probably its future AESA radar as well. EMS also makes the Erieye AESA radar that serves on Saab’s S-1000 and Embraer’s EMB-145 airborne early warning aircraft. See DID coverage.

JAS-39N concept
(c) Gripen International
(click to view full)

May 15-16/06: Denmark, Norway. Gripen International announces the tabling of offers to Denmark and Norway for JAS-39 Gripens to replace those nations’ aging F-16 fleets. The aircraft would have “longer range and greater payload” than existing JAS-39 C/D Gripens, but other than that no details of the offers themselves are released.

For slightly more background, see also their Dec 9/05 release “Gripen for Denmark – Tailor-made to suit Danish needs!”

April 25/06: Swedish cuts? The Swedish Armed Forces submit their 2007 budget proposal, which includes a plan for the reduction of Sweden’s Gripen force to just 100 aircraft. The remainder of the force will either be sold on the international market to approved buyers, or scrapped.

March 24/06: eDefense Online publishes “Gripens in Hungary Spark EW Revival.” The archive no longer exists, but an excerpt follows:

“The original decision to lease 14 Gripens from Sweden was made in September 2001 by the country’s previous conservative government. Although many, mostly economic reasons were given for this surprise move against the US offer of Lockheed Martin (Ft. Worth, TX) F-16s, insiders in Hungary say that as a kind of “side effect,” the HDF will have access to a more comprehensive electronic-warfare (EW) system that offers a more “independent” EW capability. While providing “indigenous” EW planning for the customer was included in the original December 2001 contract calling for the leasing of air-to-air-combat-oriented JAS 39A/B aircraft, when the current post-communist government altered the deal in March 2003, more capable hardware was ordered as well. The revised contract includes the lease-to-own of the unique JAS 39 EBS (Export Baseline Standard) HU (Hungary) version, which has a significantly improved EW system compared with its predecessor.”

Dec 13/05: Meteor. Gripen is the first aircraft to flight-validate system integration with MBDA’s Meteor long-range air-air missile. Gripen International.

June 8/05: Layoffs. Saab announced that it will lay off 350 workers in four business units, owing to a reduction of work for the JAS-39 Gripen. The 350 lay-offs involve workers at Saab Aerostructures, Saab Aerosystems, Saab Aircraft and Saab Support. Saab had already laid off 1,000 people in 2003 and 2004; and including this latest move, notice had now been given to 760 people in 2005. The company warns that it expects to lay off a further 1,000 – 1,500 people in 2005 and 2006.

March 29/05: Terma MRP. Flight tests validate Terma’s new Modular Reconnaissance Pod (q.v. contract, Jan 7/02). Flight tests and evaluation will be ongoing at Saab in Linkoping for approximately a year, and introduction into Swedish service to replace the AJSF-37 Viggens will be in 2006. Saab Group’s release quotes Richard Ljungberg, Saab test pilot and former Swedish Air Force recce pilot:

“Excellent handling qualities, the digital flight control system took care of everything; it just feels like flying a clean aircraft… We even tested camera functions in the pod together with maneuverability of the aircraft during the first flight.”

JAS-39 Gripen: Contracts & Awards 2014

Czechs extend lease to 2027; ETPS multi-year support to 2018 and new fighter; JAS-39F development MoU. Gripen for FAB
(click to view full)

Oct 27/14: Sweden. Sweden’s 2015 budget will need to make some changes, in the wake of the Swiss fighter referendum defeat:

“In order to ensure the development and acquisition of the new JAS Gripen 39 E, we will take the responsibility for the completion of its upgrade and production. As a consequence of the incomplete JAS-deal with Switzerland, the allocation to defence equipment will be given an additional SEK 2 billion in 2014. This initiative will be funded in part by reducing the appropriation for international operations by SEK 500 million. The allocation for defence equipment will also receive a further SEK 900 million in 2015. The JAS-project will thereby receive a total of SEK 2.9 billion over the next two years. This is crucial in order to ensure that the lost revenues in the JAS-project do not have a negative impact on other planned equipment acquisitions.”

SEK 2.9 billion is about $404 million at current exchange rates. Sources: Swedish MoD, “Budget reinforcement to the Swedish Armed Forces’ regimental- and air surveillance capabilities”.

Oct 24/14: Brazil. Saab signs a SEK 39.3 billion / BRL 13.363 billion / $5.475 billion contract with Brazil’s COMAER for 28 JAS-39E and 8 JAS-39F fighters, alongside provisions for training, initial spares, and a 10-year Industrial Co-operation contract to transfer technologies to Brazilian industry. Embraer will have a leading role as Saab’s strategic partner, with a JAS-39F co-development role and full responsibility for production.

This contract winds up having wider implications as well, by securing Sweden’s order for 60 JAS-39Es. As signed, it required at least 1 other customer, which was going to be Switzerland until a weak effort from that government destroyed the deal in a referendum. Brazil has now become that additional customer, and Saab expects that this commitment will keep the JAS-39 in service to 2050.

What’s left? Brazil’s FAB confirms that the interim lease agreement for 10-12 JAS-39C/Ds will be a separate deal with the Swedish government. Meanwhile, the JAS-39NG contracts still require certain conditions before they become final, such as required export control-related authorizations from the USA et. al. All of these conditions are expected to be fulfilled during the first half of 2015, with deliveries to take place from 2019 – 2024. Sources: Saab, “Saab and Brazil sign contract for Gripen NG” | Brazil FAB, “Brasil assina contrato para aquisicao de 36 cacas Gripen NG”.

Brazil: 36 Gripen NG

July 12/14: ETPS. Saab signs a new agreement with QinetiQ’s Empire Test Pilots’ School from 2015 – 2018, continuing an association that has been in place since 1999. ETPS will continue to use the JAS-39D fighter they switched to earlier in 2014, after a long period using a JAS-39B for the most advanced portions of the curriculum. Hakan Buskhe, Saab’s President and CEO:

“Since 1999 Gripen has trained more than 70 test pilots and provided more than 800 hours for the ETPS. Saab has a record of 100 per cent on-time delivery with a jet that is totally reliable. The relationship between Saab and the ETPS is something really unique.”

ETPS buys Gripen flight hours from Saab, plus all required support, instead of owning the planes. Operations are conducted at Saab’s Flight Test Department in Linkoping, Sweden, with ETPS instructor pilots flying under Saab supervision. Saab provides supervisory pilots, the Gripen aircraft, logistics, ground support and facilities. Saab 105 jet trainer aircraft are also provided, to act as radar targets for training. Campaigns typically last for 1 week in May and 4-5 weeks in August and September. Sources: QinetiQ/ UK MoD LTPA, ETPS | ETPS, “The Saab Gripen” | Saab, “Saab and ETPS sign new multi-year agreement for continued Gripen training”.

Empire Test Pilot School

July 11/14: JAS-39F Brazil MoU. There’s no agreement yet for the Gripen lease, but Saab and Embraer have signed the expected Memorandum of Understanding around JAS-39E/F production.

Embraer will be the Brazilian industrial lead, performing its own assigned work while managing all local sub-contractors in the program. They’ll also work with Saab on systems development, integration, flight tests, final assembly and deliveries, with full joint responsibility for the 2-seat JAS-39F Gripen NG. Sources: Embraer and Saab, “Embraer to partner with Saab in joint programme management for Brazil´s F-X2 Project”.

March 3/14: Brazil. Brazil and Saab sign advance agreements on defense cooperation, which lay the foundation for the future Gripen contract. This includes a defense cooperation framework agreement, whose scope is already wider than just fighters, and a corollary agreement that commits to appropriate levels of secrecy and security procedures within that cooperation framework. The new agreements build on documents signed in 1997 and 2000, and both will be forwarded to Brazil’s National Congress for approval.

The industrial goal is to be able to produce 80% of the plane in Brazil, which has future implications given that final Brazilian orders over time are estimated at 60 – 104 fighters. Equally significant, the accompanying security agreements include access to the Gripen’s source code. That will allow Brazil to add its own weapons to the new fighters, increasing the global attractiveness of both Saab’s Gripens and of Brazil’s weapons. A current wave of Latin American upgrades could create timing issues for wider regional sales, but export partnership arrangements are under discussion. They currently revolve around Latin America, and developing nations with close Brazilian ties (“das nacoes em desenvolvimento com as quais o Brasil possui estreita relacao bilateral”). Sources: Brazil FAB, “Brasil assina acordos de cooperacao e da prosseguimento a compra dos cacas suecos” | See also Defense News, “Fleet Modernization Drives Requirements Across South America”.

Brazil: Defense cooperation agreements

March 12/14: Czech Republic. The Czech cabinet approves a 12-year the extension of their Gripen fleet lease, with a 2-year option to 2029. Annual outlay will be CZK 1.7 billion, for a total of CZK 20.4 billion over the base period ($1.033 billion). That’s reportedly about a 31% drop. The official contract signing is expected later, but this decision was the key event.

The deal includes the jets, training for 25 pilots and 90 maintenance technicians, depth logistics support, and upgrades to add Link-16 and night vision optics. Sources: Swedish FXM, “Czech Republic approves new Gripen agreement” | Ceske Noviny, “Czech govt approves extension of Swedish Gripen fighters lease” | Sweden’s The Local, “Czech renew lease on Jas Gripen jets”.

New Czech lease

March 4/14: Sub-contractors. Switzerland’s RUAG receives a CHF 68 million ($41.1 million) contract from Saab to develop and produce payload mountings for the JAS-39E’s hardpoints. The order reportedly includes 4 work packages, with CHF 15.5 million ($9.4 million) committed immediately for design, system development, and prototypes for 3 JAS-39E test planes. RUAG is already soliciting sub-contractors within Switzerland.

An option for series production would make up the rest, but Saab can award it elsewhere if the Swiss referendum fails. As appears likely. Sources: RUAG, “RUAG wins contract for SAAB Gripen E payload mountings” | UPI, “RUAG making payload mountings for Gripen fighters” (their currency conversion is wrong) | Saab’s Gripen Blog, “Swiss Technology Group RUAG Collaborates With Saab”.

Jan 30/14: Support. Saab announces a SEK 174 million (about $27 million) Swedish option to support and maintain Gripen fleets throughout 2014, placed under the June 29/12 multi-year contract. The contract still covers JAS-39 fleets in Sweden, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Thailand. South Africa has its own independent support contract, after a long period of bungles and a near-crisis for its fleet (q.v. Dec 19/13).

Work will take place at Saab’s facilities in Linkoping, Arboga, Jarfalla, Gothenburg… and Ostersund, which wasn’t mentioned in the 2012 contract. Saab’s June 2012 announcement placed the contract’s maximum option value at SEK 2 billion (about $283.6 million), but this release has revised that to SEK 1.36 billion (about $208 million), with SEK 795 million allocated so far. Sources: Saab, “FMV places order for Gripen support and maintenance”.

2012 – 2013

Sweden & Switzerland agree in principle to buy 82 JAS-39Es, followed by a framework contract and the development contract; Sweden issues 60-plane conversion contract; Hungary extends lease to 2026; South Africa gets a real support contract. JAS-39D & Swiss F/A-18
(click to view full)

Dec 19/13: South Africa. South Africa has been relying on short-term interim support contracts that expired in April and endangered the fleet, but a SEK 180 million ($27.5 million) contract with Armscor creates a longer-term arrangement from 2013 – 2016 that should improve costs and predictability.

The contract includes typical support services like engineering support, MRO (maintenance, repair, and overhaul), and spares replenishment, as well as technical publications amendments to keep them current with SAAF changes. Read “South Africa’s Sad Military: Why Maintenance Matters” for full coverage.

South African support

Dec 18/13: Sweden. Saab receives its Swedish Defence Materiel Administration (FMV) contract to convert 60 JAS-39Cs to JAS-39 Gripen Es. The SEK 16.4 billion (about $2.498 million) contract covers the next decade of work from 2013 – 2023, with initial deliveries scheduled in 2018.

The contract is announced the same day that Brazil picks Gripen NG for an initial $4.5 billion buy of 36 planes. That may be simple coincidence, but the Feb 15/13 umbrella contract did have provisions that would allow Sweden to end the conversion contract if the Swiss referendum rejects a fighter buy, and no other customers had committed. While the final contract with Brazil isn’t expected until December 2014, their selection puts that doomsday scenario to rest.

This contract was expected in the fall, and is larger than the math in the initial contract had suggested (SEK 12.962 billion, q.v. Feb 15/13). It follows SEK 13.2 billion in final development contracts (q.v. Feb 15/13, March 22/13), and represents Gripen NG’s 1st production order.

Swedish Gripen E conversion contract

Dec 18/13: Meteor. Saab announces an SEK 186 million (about $28.4 million) order from Sweden’s FMV procurement agency, to finish integration of the Meteor long range air-to-air missile on Gripen E. These funds are on top of the February 2013 contract to develop the JAS-39E Gripen NG.

The order will play out over Gripen E’s 2013 – 2023 development, but Meteor is scheduled to become operational on JAS-39C/D models in 2014, and JAS-39E conversion shouldn’t take that long. The challenge will be bringing the new fighter itself up to an adequate readiness state for qualification trials, which creates a likely certification threshold of 2017 – 2019. Sources: Saab Group, “Saab Receives Order for Integration Support of Weapon System for Gripen E”.

Dec 3/13: Sub-contractors. Israel’s Elbit Systems EW and SIGINT – Elisra announces a contract “for the integration and delivery” their PAWS-2 passive missile warning system “onboard the Gripen fighter.” They don’t say whether this is only for a particular country, as an available upgrade for any model, or targeted for the new JAS-39E/F. The latter option is most likely, as an improved Missile Approach Warning System was an explicit component of the Gripen-E’s upgrades.

PAWS looks for the heat plume of incoming missiles, and calculates whether it’s a potential threat. If it is, PAWS triggers a pilot warning, and can fire automatic flare/ chaff countermeasures while cueing DIRCM direct laser countermeasures. If it isn’t a threat, the system doesn’t bother the pilot, and saves on-board resources until they’re needed. PAWS-2 already serves aboard Israel’s unique F-16i Soufa deep strike fleet, and Elisra says that it was picked for Gripen after in-depth evaluations that included a comparative live fire test. Sources: Elbit Systems, “Elbit Systems Selected to Provide Electronic Warfare Systems for the Gripen Fighter System”.

April 2/13: Industrial. Saab announces that they’ve set Swiss workshare for all future JAS-39E fighters, but haven’t set their exact industrial partnerships yet. They’ve committed to the armasuisse policy of having 5% of their industrial benefits in Italian-speaking regions, 30% in French speaking regions, and 65% in German speaking regions.

Swiss industry will become sole suppliers of the fighter’s rear fuselage, tail cone, air brakes, pylons, and external fuel drop tanks.

March 22/13: Gripen E SDD. Saab receives its SEK 10.7 billion (about $1.65 billion) system design & development order for the JAS-39E, covering work over 2015-2023. It includes full definition and development work for the type, as well as adaptation of test and trial equipment, simulators and rigs.

This brings total Gripen-E funding to date SEK 13.2 billion, on top of funding to create and test Gripen Demo over the last several years. Additional funds under the SEK 47.2 billion development and production framework agreement will be booked when each order is received, and are expected in 2013-2014. If Sweden’s FMV exercises a cancellation under the conditions of the framework agreement, they are liable to Saab for both costs incurred to date, and for cancellation fees. FMV [in Swedish] | Saab Group.

JAS-39E development contract

Gripen Demo
(click to view full)

Feb 15/13: Contract. About 2 months after an overwhelming Dec 6/12 parliamentary vote (q.v. Events section, above), Sweden’s FMV signs a SEK 2.5 billion development contract with Saab for 2013-2014 work on the JAS-39E Gripen Next-Generation. The contract also comes with a number of development and procurement options, which could raise the total to SEK 47.2 billion (currently $7.471 billion).

Within another month or 2, Saab expects to sign a contract that funds the rest of Gripen E development, worth SEK 10.6 billion. This would bring the development and testing total to SEK 13.1 billion (about $2.075 billion) on top of Gripen Demo, far higher than initial estimates (vid. Sept 21/12 entry).

By the end of 2013, Saab expects to sign a contract to convert 60 Swedish JAS-39C fighters to JAS-39Es. That will require a lot of work, because the fuselage is substantially different. Initial JAS-39E deliveries aren’t expected until 2018, and the type isn’t currently expected to gain its operational capability designation before 2023 or so.

By the end of 2014, Saab expects to sign a tranche contract for JAS-39E specific equipment, support and maintenance. It would begin in 2018, alongside the first upgraded Swedish fighters.

The umbrella contract adds provisions for 22 new Swiss JAS-39Es, plus initial support, training, etc. By 2014, Saab should know if the referendum on the purchase has passed. The Swiss contract will be CHF 3.126 billion, or SEK 21.138 billion / $3.384 billion at current rates. If Switzerland’s referendum fails to pass and no other customer has bought the JAS-39NG, however, the contract has provisions that would cancel the conversion deal with Sweden at agreed-upon terms.

A bit of math leaves an interesting question. If the Swiss deal is included in the SEK 47.2 billion figure, then 47.2 billion – 13.1 billion development – 21.138 Swiss = just SEK 12.962 billion/ $2.04 billion. That has to cover major structural modifications on 60 Swedish fighters, add expensive new equipment including engines and radars, AND finance a support deal encompassing all of the JAS-39E’s unique new features and parts. $34 million per fighter is possible for the conversion, but conversion and maintenance is a stretch. The Riksdagen’s Gripen upgrade vote had approved SEK 90 billion to 2042, so the explanation may be that the JAS-39E support annex is very short term. [DID adds: the final conversion contract alone was SEK 16.4 billion] Swedish FMV | Saab.

JAS-39E contract framework for Sweden, Swiss

Aug 25/12: JAS-39E/F. Sweden’s government announces that they are committed to buying 40-60 next-generation JAS-39E/F fighters, as part of a joint effort with Switzerland who will buy 22 more. To fund this effort, they’ve agreed to commit another SEK 300 million to the defense budget in 2013 and 2014, and SEK 200 million per year after that.

By the time the 1st planes are scheduled to enter service with the Flygvapnet, in 2023, that extra funding would amount to SEK 2.3 billion (currently almost $350 million), if subsequent governments maintain it. It’s hard to know if that’s enough, as negotiations are reported to be in progress for the system development contract, but if the aircraft includes everything it’s supposed to have, that would be a cheap price. Green Party MP Peter Radberg says that his party calculates the likely development cost at “a couple of billion kronor per year” instead.

At the same time, the Swiss government issues a statement that there is an agreement in principle between armasuisse and Sweden, completing a Memorandum of Understanding signed on June 29/12. The countries will reportedly share support and upgrade costs under an umbrella model, and final details of specifications, delivery dates, prices, equipment and infrastructure have reportedly been settled, pending final approval from Swiss political authorities. That will include a national referendum – see “Switzerland Replacing Its F-5 Fighters” for full coverage of that buy. Swedish government Release [in Swedish] & Video | Swedish Armed Forces | Svenska Dagbladet – full statement from 4 party leaders [in Swedish] | Swiss government [in German] | Swedish-Swiss Framework Agreement [PDF, in French] | Saab Group || Sweden’s The Local | Expatica Switzerland | Agence France Presse | Aviation Week | Bloomberg | Reuters.

JAS-39E/F commitment

June 29/12: Support. A multi-year support deal with Sweden’s FMV replaces all of the existing Gripen support contracts with a single contract that includes performance-based support and maintenance, extra funding for the MS20 upgrade package, and studies and definition activities for further Gripen development. It covers Gripen fleets in Sweden, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Thailand, but not South Africa.

The initial order is SEK 3.6 billion ($510.5 million) plus a series of 1-year options totaling up to SEK 2 billion (currently $283.6 million) until December 2016.

Performance-based activities include spare parts, maintenance of aircraft systems, and technical engineering support. there’s also an international angle, as Saab’s work maintains updated technical publications and logistics solutions for operation of the Gripen system in Sweden, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Thailand. Most of the work will take place at Saab’s facilities in Linkoping, Arboga, Jarfalla and Gothenburg. Sources: Saab, “Saab signs support and development agreement with FMV for Gripen”.

Swedish support, 2012-2016

Jan 30/12: Hungarian extension. Hungary opts to extend its lease of 14 Gripens for another 10 years, to 2026, but doesn’t add any more planes just yet. Terms aren’t disclosed, but the Budapest Business Journal reports that:

“Hungarian Defence Minister Csaba Hende said earlier that extending the lease until 2026 would save the state HUF 63bn [DID: about $290 million]… Government data show the Gripen lease costs the budget an annual HUF 30bn. Training programmes for the aircraft cost an additional HUF 2bn a year.”

That would place the 10-year extension at about $1.1 to $1.4 billion equivalent, including training, based on straight-line extrapolation. In 2001 the Swedish and Hungarian governments entered into a lease-purchase agreement, with a further modification in 2003 that included 14 Gripen C/Ds (12 single-seater and 2 two-seater aircraft). All aircraft were delivered in 2006 and 2007, and all 14 aircraft were in operation with the Hungarian Air Force by the end of 2008. The current contract was due to expire in 2016. Saab | Budapest Business Journal.

Hungarian extension

2010 – 2011

Thais orders another 6 JAS-39C/Ds, AEW plane, missiles; Meteror BVRAAM integration contract; Swedish orders to modernize and maintain the fleet, incl. new avionics system; Curtiss-Wright DSPs for new AESA; Swedish JAS-39
(click to view full)

Sept 6/11: ES-05 Raven. Curtiss-Wright Corporation announces a $15 million contract from SELEX Galileo to supply rugged embedded digital signal processor modules from 2010 – 2014. The company’s Motion Control segment will develop the DSP modules at its Ashburn, VA facility.

The firm has confirmed that their DSPs will provide the radar processing for the new ES-05 Raven AESA fire control radar system, and the contract could rise to $25 million over the lifetime of the program.

July 1/11: Support. Sweden’s FMV issues SEK 1.034 billion (about $159 million) worth of contracts to Saab for a variety of Gripen-related services in 2011.

First, Saab will undertake continual maintenance and updates for Sweden’s JAS-39C/D fighters, in compliance with the Swedish Armed Forces’ long-term planning. Second, related efforts will work to maintain the Swedish fleet’s operational capability, including technical support, product maintenance, flight testing, and flight simulator operation. finally, Saab will conduct studies regarding further JAS-39 development, and a resource baseline will be laid down for renewed Gripen testing and verification in the long-term. Saab.

May 18/11: Avionics. Saab announces a SEK 152 million (about $24.1 million) order from the Swedish FMV for cockpit development work on the Gripen C/D fighter, upgrading the material system 39/ edition 19 configuration during 2011-2012.

March 3/11: Support. Saab announces a SEK 120 million (about $19.1 million) order from the Swedish FMV Defence Material Administration, to provide technical support, product maintenance, flight test and simulators to ensure that Sweden’s Gripen fleet remains ready and operational. The work will be done during Q2 2011, mainly at Saab facilities in Linköping, Arboga, Gothenburg and Järfälla.

Jan 25/11: Upgrades. Saab announces a SEK 127 million (about $18.2 million) order from the Swedish FMV to modify undeclared sub-systems of Sweden’s JAS-39 edition 19 fighters – the 2009 upgrade baseline. Work will be carried out in 2011 and 2012.

Nov 23/10: Thai Order #2. Saab receives a SEK 2.2 billion (currently $316.6 million) order from Sweden’s FMV to provide Thailand’s 2nd tranche of fighters (6 JAS-39C Gripens) and equip the 2nd S340 AEW&C aircraft being sold to Thailand.

There’s also a 3rd component to the overall deal – Saab’s RBS-15F air-launched anti-ship missiles. Precise designations matter here. The FMV specified RBS-15Fs, which are radar-guided Mk.I missiles, without the land attack capabilities of the longer-range, GPS/radar guided Mk.III variants. The RBS-15Fs can be carried on the Gripens to hit ships over 70 km away, using a 200 kg warhead delivered by a stealthy, wave-hugging approach that includes programming for indirect attack vectors, and evasive maneuvers.

The agreement is reportedly signed by RTAF commander in chief Air Chief Marshal Itthaporn Subhawong and FMV Director General Gunnar Holmgren, and FMV’s announcement would not disclose the full value of the government-to-government contract. Swedish FMV | Gripen International | Saab Group | Bloomberg | Engineering News, South Africa | Flight International | ScandAsia | China’s Xinhua.

Thailand

Nov 16/10: Training. Saab announces an order from the Swedish FMV procurement agency, to deliver 3-dimensional (3D) models to the Swedish Gripen simulators, to be generated from aerial images using Saab’s new Rapid 3D Mapping(TM) system.

Sept 8/10: Meteor. Sweden’s FMV military procurement agency gives Saab a 4-year, SEK 312 million (about $42.75 million) contract to integrate MBDA’s Meteor long-range air-to-air missile with their JAS-39 fleet’s radar, displays, and support and maintenance systems like simulators and planning computers. The order includes test flights and test firing, as well as a 2-way datalink for communication with the missile and even “hand-off” targeting after it has been fired.

The JAS-39 has a head start in this area. It has been the Meteor missile’s test platform since 2006, and has already conducted several Meteor test firings. Work will mostly be performed in Linkoping, Sweden, with some involvement from the Gothenburg facilities. Sweden is now the 3rd country to sign Meteor production orders, after Britain and Spain, but the other 2 countries will mount them on the Eurofighter Typhoon. Saab Group | Gripen International | Defense News.

Meteor integration

June 1/10: Support. Saab announces a SEK 230 million (currently $29.4 million) support contract from the Swedish Defence Material Administration. It covers product maintenance, technical support, and basic operations such as test flying, rigs and simulators, in order to ensure that the Svenska Flygvapnet’s Gripens remain operational. Work will be undertaken during the second half of 2010, at Saab’s Swedish plants in Linkoping, Arboga, Goteborg, and Stockholm. Saab AB.

May 25/10: Upgrades. Saab AB announces a 2-year, SEK 450 million (currently $57.25 million) contract from Sweden’s FMV procurement agency, in order to develop a next-generation set of Gripen avionics upgrades. Saab VP and head of the Aeronautics business area, Lennart Sindahl, explains part of the problem, which is common to all modern combat aircraft:

“Computers with the best performance possible today will be viewed as inadequate for the tasks facing Gripen in ten years, when the aircraft must remain modern for a further twenty years. Few high-tech products have a service life as long as Gripen.”

In response, Saab will develop a completely new avionics system that includes new displays, back-end computing, and features like sensor fusion, the ability to sort and selectively display information with different security classifications, and changes to the electronic system architecture. The challenge is doing these things without breaking existing capabilities, of course, and the new package isn’t scheduled to enter service with Sweden until about 2020. Saab AB.

March 31/10: Upgrades. Sweden’s FMV procurement agency issues a 4-year, SEK 400 million (about $42.3 million) contract to Saab Group to improve the reconnaissance pod’s user interface, and give it night-time capability.

The Gripen can also carry the LITENING-III surveillance and targeting pod, which has full night-time capability, and its ReeceLite relative. This order, however, almost certainly involves Terma’s Modular Reconnaissance Pod (MRP 39, q.v. Jan 7/02 entry below).

March 30/10: Support. Saab announces a SEK 600 million (about $82.6 million) support contract for 2010-2011:

“The contract represents a part of continual system maintenance and updating tasks for the Gripen and complies with the Swedish Armed Forces’ long-term planning for the Gripen… as well as maintaining the material prerequisites for conducting coordinated testing of the flight system. The material prerequisites include renewal of test equipment and test aircraft for testing of the Gripen system on the long term.”

March 10/10: Upgrades. Saab announces a 5-year, SEK 2 billion (currently about $280 million) contract from Sweden’s FMV procurement agency, aimed at upgrading the existing fleet of JAS-39 C/D Gripen fighters. On the capability front, upgrades will include improved communications systems, and ECM (Electronic Counter-Measures) defensive systems, upgrades to the existing PS05 radar that will increase its range and add new functions, and integration of additional weapons.

On the operational front, Saab will be making some changes to reduce operating costs, based on the fleet’s 130,000 hours of flight experience to date. Interestingly, there’s also a project to “reduce the noise and emissions from test runs during engine maintenance.” Work will mainly take place at Saab’s Swedish plants in Linkoping, Gothenburg, Jarfalla, Kista and Arboga. Saab release.

Feb 16/10: IRST. Saab picks SELEX Galileo’s Skyward-G Infrared Search and Track (IRST) to equip Gripen NG. Saab Gripen blog.

2008 – 2009

Swedish government support & upgrade contracts, incl. EW & IFF, IRIS-T SRAAM integration; Sweden orders Cobra HMDs; MRP 39 reece pod development; ETPS support agreement; ES-05 Raven AESA radar development contract with SELEX, after Thales sabotages RBE2-AA AESA collaboration; F414 picked for Gripen NG; improvements. RTAF Gripens
(click to view full)

May 9/09: Thailand. The Thai Democrat Party government cancels its 15 billion baht follow-on option for 6 Gripens. Faced with a drop in government revenues, it slashes the coming defense budget from 171 billion to 151 billion baht.

Subsequent comments indicate that the purchase may end up being delayed, rather than canceled. That is what happened, in the end.

March 24/09: ES-05 Raven AESA. Saab and SELEX Galileo sign an agreement to develop a mechanically-pivoted Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar for the JAS-39NG. Terms are not disclosed.

The Raven’s base technology comes from SELEX Galileo’s proven Vixen family of AESA radars, but it has evolved while incorporating technologies and experiences from other radars, including the existing PS-05. Part of that evolution is an innovative combination of AESA focus and low signal “leakage” beyond its focus area, with the potentially wider field of regard that mechanically-pivoted radars can possess. The result will be a far more capable radar than previous Vixen offerings. The new joint radar is now known as the ES-05 Raven, and the addition of mechanical rotation to traditional AESA strengths is an interesting design choice that will give the Raven a unique set of strengths (wider scan; lock, fire and leave tactics) and weaknesses (reliability, maintenance). The end quality of its AESA transmit/receive modules, and their integration, will also play a large role in the radar’s final performance.

The arrangement is initially aimed at Brazil’s F-X2 fighter competition, where it leverages Selex Galileo’s strong pedigree equipping Brazil’s F-5BR fighters (Grifo-F radar) and AMX light attack jets (Scipio radar). Once integrated and proven, of course, the AESA upgrade would be available to any Gripen customer. Saab | Gripen International.

Raven AESA partnership

Feb 10/09: Sub-contractors. Saab and TATA Consultancy Services (TCS) partnered Aeronaoutical Design and Development Centre (ADDC) has been awarded its first contract by Saab to participate in the aerostructural design and development for Gripen NG. Gripen International.

Feb 9/09: Studies. Saab announces an SEK 400 million (about $49.7 million) order from the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration (FMV) for 2009 studies regarding future Gripen capabilities.

Until significant export sales are made, Sweden remains the home market and financier of the ongoing upgrades required to keep Gripen current. This order is a continuation of a project that started last year, and will form the base for the Swedish Armed Forces decisions regarding what capabilities and technologies to incorporate in subsequent versions.

Jan 8/09: Support. Saab announces a SEK 550 million (about $70 million) order from the Swedish FMV procurement agency, to support the Swedish Air Force. Covered activities during 2009 will include program management, product maintenance, support, flight testing, pilot equipment and simulators.

Gripen Demo rollout
(click to view full)

July 9/08: EW. Saab announces a pair of orders from the Swedish FMV procurement agency worth SEK 574 million (about $95.5 million).

A SEK 324 million order for Electronic Warfare Systems (EWS) will equip Sweden’s aircraft with up to date antennae, transmitters and appropriate electronics, and deliveries will be made during 2008-2009.

The second contract is a SEK 250 million contract for weapons pylons that will enable the Gripens to use GPS-equipped weapons systems like JDAM bombs; most likely this involves pylons with MIL-STD 1760 circuitry. Deliveries will take place between 2009-2011.

April 23/08: Thales AESA. Saab announces a contract with France’s Thales to develop a new advanced radar based on AESA technology. Peter Andersson, product manager at Saab Microwave Systems:

“At present Thales is developing an AESA within a French radar programme and, like Saab Microwave Systems, is one of the world leaders within the radar field. Together we can quickly develop a demo-product that can show the markets the advantages of AESA technology. The collaboration over the antenna is also cost effective and is in line with Saab’s overall strategy of finding industrial partners for Gripen… Our collaboration is for the Gripen demo. We will have to see what happens in the future.”

The collaboration is good for Thales, which have been building the RBE2 AESA radar for France’s Rafale fighter. With other future fighter markets locked up, a Gripen deal offers them their best hope of leveraging that technology into wider sales. Both Thales and Saab have experience with AESA radars, but the global fighter market pits them against established competitors in the USA’s Northrop Grumman and Raytheon, and prospective competitors in Russia’s Phazotron and Euroradar (EADS, Finmeccanica’s SELEX SAS and Galileo Avionica, and INDRA).

Saab Microwave Systems is responsible for the overall radar system and its capability, Thales contributes with the antenna, and Saab Aerosystems is responsible for integrating the final product into the JAS-39. Collaboration surrounding the AESA radar actually started in autumn 2007; integration of the complete radar system will continue during 2008, and is expected to be completed in the spring of 2009. The first test flights are planned for summer 2009, and Saab intends to follow that with customer demonstrations.

RBE-2 AESA

Jan 8/08: IFF. Saab has awarded the Thales Group a contract to supply new IFF (Identification, Friend or Foe) Combined Interrogator-Transponders (CITs) for existing and future JAS-39 Gripen fighters. Price was not disclosed.

The contract covers a total of 143 aircraft. 68 Swedish Gripens will receive NATO Mode 4 CITs, and another 75 Gripens (47 Swedish, 14 Hungarian, 14 Czech) will be upgraded to Mode 4 CITs with Mode S capability that gives each aircraft its own “squawk” and can tell aircraft apart in a crowded sky. The aircraft will be ready for the transition to the new NATO Mode 5 secure IFF capability, but this will not be part of the current upgrades. [Source Epicos report link now broken.]

2007 and Earlier

Thailand orders 6;

Note that this section is not complete. See the Gripen Program Timeline, above, for key milestones and buys involving Sweden, South Africa, Hungary, and the Czech Republic.

Gripen & S-1000
(click to view full)

Oct 17/07: Thailand. The Thai government announces a $1.1 billion deal for 12 JAS-39 Gripens and 2 S-1000 Erieye AWACS aircraft. Phase 1 will feature 6 Gripens and 1 AWACS for $600 million, with a $500 million Phase 2 option for another 6 Gripens and the 2nd AWACS.

Thailand’s current political situation did much to clinch the deal – but it also risked unraveling it. Read: “Thailand Buying JAS-39 Gripens, AWACS” for full coverage.

Thailand

Oct 17/07: Gripen Demo – Go! SEK 3.9 billion ($600 million) contract with the Swedish Defence Material Administration (FMV) to upgrade 31 Swedish Air Force JAS-39 A/B Gripens to the very latest JAS-39 C/D standard. The FMV has also given the go ahead for the next-generation ‘Gripen Demo’ variant.

Gripen Demo

Oct 3/07: Cobra HMD for Sweden. A SEK 345 million ($54 million) deal between Sweden’s FMV and Saab promises to equip Swedish Gripens with the Cobra Helmet-Mounted Display. South Africa has already ordered it for their Gripens, and an HMD can really add to a fighter’s air-air capabilities.

July 2/07: F414 picked. Saab announces that GE Aviation’s new F414G fighter engine will power its next-generation Gripen models. The F414G is derived from the popular 22,000+ pound/ 96 kN thrust F414-GE-400s that power the twin-engine F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, and offers a 25-35% power boost over its predecessor the F404. Key F414G alterations will include minor changes to the alternator for added aircraft power, and modified Full Authority Digital Electronic Control (FADEC) software for enhanced single-engine operation.

GE Aviation and Volvo Aero Corporation (now part of GKN) will be working together on the new F414G fighter engine. Although Volvo Aero has manufactured modified F404 engines under license for past Gripen fighters, GE will be supplying GE F414G engines directly to Saab for the Gripen Demo project, with Volvo as a major sub-contractor. GE is currently delivering 2 F414 Engines, with flight-tests and customer demonstration evaluations planned for 2008-2010. Gripen International release.

F414G for Gripen Demo

April 26/07: Norway. Norway and Sweden sign a Memorandum of Understanding on co-operation in development work on future versions of of the JAS-39, worth NOK 150 million (currently about $25 million) over 2 years, plus the option to further extend the agreement. There was also a Letter of Agreement (LoA) signed between Norway and Saab subsidiary Gripen International that will enable Norwegian companies to undertake advanced development work in a range of high technology areas, such as composites, communication systems, studies and integration work for Norwegian weapon systems, ammunition, logistics and data systems connected to Next-Gen Gripen development.

July 17/06: UK ETPS. Trainee test pilots at Britain’s world-class ETPS (Empire Test Pilots’ School), which is operated by QinetiQ in partnership with the UK MOD, have signed a new agreement that increases their use of the JAS-39 Gripen. In 2005 all syllabus requirements were met, zero flights were lost due to unserviceability, and where all teaching goals in all areas were exceeded. The new 2006 deal will see a 30% increase in student numbers, a 20% increase in flights per student, the training of a third ETPS Instructor Pilot (IP) and the inclusion of Flight Test Engineer students within a refined syllabus. The 2006 program goes very well, with 56 sorties in just 10 flying days, and no downtime due to mechanical issues.

The 2006 test pilot students will be drawn from the French Air Force, the United States Navy, the Royal Australian Air Force and Britain’s Royal Air Force. See Saab release for more details.TEXT

UK ETPS

MRP-39 on Gripen
(click to view larger)

July 3/06: Upgrades. Saab received a SEK 1 billion ($150 million equivalent as of 05/07) order from the Swedish Defence Material Administration, covering continued development of the Gripen System. The order reportedly covers various software upgrades, as well as other development activities supporting the long term development of the Gripen system. Work will be performed at Saab Aerosystems and Saab Aerotech in Linkoping, Sweden as well as at Saab Avitronics in Jarfalla and Kista, Sweden. See release.

March 23/06: Drop tanks. Saab Aerosystems appoints Swiss firm RUAG as single source supplier for drop tanks to the Gripen. At the same time, an initial EUR 4 million order for more than 60 export drop-tanks was announced, with first deliveries scheduled for August 2007.

Note that entries before 2006 are incomplete at this point.

Dec 29/05: IRIS-T. Saab receives a SEK 150 million ($18.9 million) contract for integration of the IRIS-T 4th generation short-range air-air missile on the Gripen. Saab is planning to fire the first shot with IRIS-T in 2007, but the integration process will continue to 2009.

IRIS-T

Jan 7/02: Terma MRP. Terma A/S announces a sub-contract from Saab Avionics AB to make Modular Reconnaissance Pods for the Swedish JAS-39 Gripen fleet, in order to meet the Swedish FMV’s request for a new reconnaissance system. Terma bid jointly with Saab on that contract as the partner responsible for the pod system. AerotechTelub is responsible for Integrated Logistic Support, Recon Optical for the CA270 sensor, and L3 Communication for the digital mass memory.

Terma is contracted to develop, qualify and supply the Modular Reconnaissance Pod (MRP 39), including the Environmental Control System, Electrical System, Ground Support System, and part of the Reconnaissance Management System (RMS). The MRP 39 is conceptually based on Terma’s successful F-16 MRP, but it employs a circular cross-section on the lower area of the pod, and an advanced rotating window section. The rotating window is attached directly to the MRP 39 strongback and can be positioned at various positions along the length of the pod mid-section, giving the system more flexibility to add different sensors with different weight and balance restraints. The window section’s 360 degree rotation is electronically synchronized to the sensor aiming, except for take-off and landing where it is rotated up to a safe position.

The upper part of the MRP 39 has a square cross-section providing room for the strongback, ducts for the environmental control system, cabling, etc. The idea is to offer more internal pod space, and provide separation that helps eliminate or limit buffeting and dynamic vibrations on the sensitive equipment.

The Environmental Control Unit (ECU) will be a new, hybrid structure providing both air and liquid coolers and heaters, plus two symmetrical, multi-speed fans. The ECU will be installed in the aft cone of the MRP 39 and it will be handled as a single, line replaceable unit for ease of maintenance. Saab re: partners.

Terma MRP 39 Reco Pod

End notes

fn1. Defense-Aerospace.com’s July 2006 report attempting to estimate the true cost of western fighters placed the JAS-39C Gripen at over $68.9 million per plane based on the offer to Poland, and estimated the plane’s program cost (R&D amortized) at $78.7 million. To give the reader a quick idea of how that benchmarks, costs for the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet were estimated at $ 78.4/ 95.3 million, the Eurofighter at $ 100-120/ 120-145 million, and the F-35 Lightning II at $ 115 LRIP / 112.5 million. Read the full report here. The report also noted Saab’s official response of $35-40 million per plane flyaway costs, however, and acknowledged the problems involved in calculating per-plane figures based on foreign orders due to other costs and terms. [Return to story]

fn2. Saab clarified that they had not integrated and qualified all of the weapons shown in the “could-have weapons” illustration. Rather, it was intended to display a full range of options that Saab could integrate, in response to customer requests and funding. DID is working on a current list. [Return to story]

fn3. The Gripen’s “visual stealth” may surprise some people, but it shouldn’t. A lightweight fighter with a small frontal cross-section always has this edge in air-air combat. An especial disparity occurs when fighters like that confront bigger aircraft; American F-4 Phantoms had some nasty experiences along these lines in Vietnam, flying against much older MiG-17s and MiG-19s. A trip to the Pima Air Museum in Tucson, AZ, where a MiG and Phantom are positioned right across from one another, makes the difference clear. Now throw in the Gripen’s high maneuverability, and the widened ‘threat cone’ for modern short-range infrared missiles. An enemy pilot must now scan for threats in a much larger area – when seconds are all he has, he risks missing an oncoming Gripen in a quick scan, or looking in the wrong place.

In exchange for these advantages, lightweight fighters have traditionally given up the powerful radars that could guide medium-range missiles. Moore’s Law of rising silicon chip power has removed this trade-off, and turned it into a difference of degree rather than an absolute difference in capability. [Return to story]

fn4. “Fox 2 kill” means an infrared missile shot. Many current Gripens are equipped with Sidewinders, but the plane has also been integrated with the European multinational IRIS-T, and the South African/ Brazilian A-Darter. [Return to story]

fn5. Many thanks to reader Dave Dogman, who took the time to read the Saab presentation to Norway and noted the typo – it isn’t 8,100 kg empty weight for Gripen NG, but 7,100 (up from 6,800). DID is grateful to him for pointing this out. [Return to story]

Additional Readings & Sources

DID thanks Saab and the Swedish FMV for their assistance with this article. Any mistakes are our own. 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.

JAS-39 Gripen: The Platform

JAS-39 Gripen: Ancillary Equipment

Peer Competitors

Export Competitions: Highlights

News & Views

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

C-17s for Qatar

Wed, 17/06/2015 - 02:19
QEAF C-17
(click to view full)

In 2008, Qatar’s military air transport assets would have involved pressing the Qatar Emiri VIP Flight at Doha into service, with its mix of Boeing aircraft (707, 727, 747), small Airbus models (320 family), and a Falcon 900 business jet. As the Gulf Cooperation Council begins to work together more closely, however, and members like the UAE begin to adopt specialty roles, improved air transport capabilities are a natural outgrowth.

Tactical airlifters like the C-130 Hercules serve in other GCC countries, and Qatar ordered 4 new C-130J-30s in October 2008, but they’re also reaching higher. In 2008, they ordered 2 C-17 Globemaster III strategic transport aircraft for the Qatar Emiri Air Force, via direct commercial sale, with a future option for another 2.

Qatar’s Orders QEAF delivery ceremony
(click to view full)

The C-17 aircraft and engines were sold via direct commercial sale, rather than a Foreign Military Sale that must be announced by the DSCA. As a direct commercial sale, the Pentagon does not announce Boeing’s C-17 sales, and there is no obligation for Boeing to do so. Based on past C-17 purchases, the 4 planes and initial fielding provisions are likely to cost about $900 million, plus support costs.

A sale of this nature goes beyond just the aircraft, of course. The DCS sale of 4 planes has been accompanied by official requests for associated equipment and services from Boeing, as well as work under the C-17’s Globemaster Sustainment Partnership. Services will include operational maintenance, logistics support and training, spare and repair parts, support equipment, flight engineer training, communications equipment, maintenance, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical data, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics support services, preparation of aircraft for shipment, etc.

The QEAF’s order has since been surpassed by purchases in the UAE (6) and India (10), but it was significant to Boeing in 2008. For one thing, it demonstrated the growing internationalization of the C-17’s customer base. By itself, the Qatari order was too small to affect the looming closure of the C-17 production line, but the vote of confidence helped lengthen it, especially as Qatar began using the aircraft as a visible way of exerting international “soft power” influence. Painting their 1st C-17 in Qatar Airways colors was meant as an explicit statement of that intent, and as a way of raising their plane’s profile when it did venture out on missions.

Announced Contracts and Key Events 2011 – 2013

Deliveries done; Spare engine request. QEAF C-17 #4
(click to view full)

June 17/15: Qatar has signed a contract with Boeing for an additional four C-17 airlifters, to complement the four already in service with the Gulf state. Other C-17 customers within the GCC include Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates.

June 27/13: Engines. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Qatar’s formal export request for 2 F117-PW-100 spare engines to power its C-17s, plus associated support equipment, training, and other US government and contractor support. Unlike the C-17s and their original engines, this is being handled as a Foreign Military Sale.

The estimated cost is $35 million, and Pratt and Whitney of East Hartford, CT will be the prime contractor. Final prices are subject to contract negotiations, but this is a well-understood off-the-shelf item. The amount should be very close.

Dec 10/12: #3 & 4. Boeing delivers the Qatar Emiri Air Force’s 4th C-17 Globemaster III at a ceremony in Long Beach, CA. Because the contract is a Direct Commercial Sale, the firm didn’t have to announce the contract when Qatar picked up its 2 additional options. Qatar received its 3rd airlifter “earlier this year,” and this delivery makes number 249 for Boeing.

Earlier in 2012, Qatar’s C-17s supported the NATO-led operation in Libya, and provided relief for drought victims in Kenya. In early 2010, QEAF C-17s delivered humanitarian aid to Haiti and Chile following devastating earthquakes. Boeing.

Purchases & deliveries complete

June 15/11: Flight International reports that:

“Unrest in the Middle East has shifted priorities in some key countries. This has prolonged discussions on potential deals with Qatar to purchase two more C-17s and with Kuwait to buy its first C-17, said Bob Ciesla, Boeing’s C-17 programme manager.”

2008 – 2010

From request, to deliveries and missions. QEAF C-17, Malta
click for video

Oct 22/10: GSP. Boeing receives a $64.6 million contract modification, covering for the continued performance of the C-17 Globemaster III sustainment partnership for NAMA (NATO) and Qatar. At this time, $32.5 million has been obligated (FA8614-04-C-2004).

March 10/10: It’s good to have happy customers. At Quatar’s Air Force Day, Boeing and the QAF tout the new airlifter’s achievements. Brig. Gen. Ahmed Al-Malki, head of head of Qatar’s airlift selection committee, says that international humanitarian missions were part of the rationale behind the purchase of these strategic airlifters.

A QEAF C-17 touched down in Haiti’s capital, Port-au-Prince, just days after the Jan 12/10 earthquake, while another mission flew to Chile on March 4/10 in response to that country’s Feb 27/10 earthquake. Boeing release.

Oct 6/09: GSP. An $11.5 million contract to exercise the FY 2010 option for the continued performance of the C-17 Globemaster III Sustainment Partnership for Qatar Emiri Air Force aircraft. At this time, the entire amount has been obligated (FA8614-04-C-2004).

Boeing provides Qatar’s C-17s with operational support, including material management and depot maintenance support, under the C-17 Globemaster III Sustainment Partnership at Al Udeid Air Base, where the QEAF’s C-17s are based.

Sept 10/09: #2. Boeing delivers the QEAF’s 2nd C-17 Globemaster III during a ceremony at the company’s C-17 final assembly facility in Long Beach, completing Qatar’s initial order.

Qatar 02 will make a brief stop at Charleston Air Force Base, S.C., before heading to its new home at Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar. It is registered as a military aircraft yet bears the same gray, maroon and white livery seen on government-owned Qatar Airways commercial jetliners. Brig. Gen. Ahmed Al-Malki, head of Qatar’s airlift selection committee, says that this unique C-17 paint scheme is intended to build awareness of Qatar’s participation when it is used during multinational operations around the world. Boeing release.

Aug 11/09: #1. Boeing formally delivers delivered Qatar’s 1st C-17 Globemaster III airlifter during a ceremony at the company’s facility in Long Beach, CA. Actual use in Qatar is dependent on the Qatar Emiri Air Force’s plans and requirements regarding testing and training. Boeing will formally deliver Qatar’s 2nd C-17 later in 2009. Boeing release.

July 31/09: GSP. A $64.4 million modification to the international C-17 Globemaster III Sustainment Partnership contract, which will add sustainment support the Qatar Emiri Air Force’s C-17 aircraft during FY 2009-2011. At this time, $6.7 million has been committed by the MSWE/516 AESG/PK at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8614-04-V-2004).

July 21/08: Qatar signs an agreement with Boeing to buy 2 C-17 airlifters and associated equipment and services, with an option for 2 more. Because it’s a Direct Commercial Sale, Boeing isn’t required to divulge the terms. Boeing release.

July 11/08: The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces [PDF format] Qatar’s official request for logistics support, training, and associated equipment and services, to accompany the 2 C-17s it’s buying via direct commercial sale.

The proposed services will require 10 U.S. Government and contractor representatives to participate in training, and be present for technical reviews twice per year. The total value of the support arrangements could be as high as $400 million.

Qatar buys 2

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

JSTARS Replacement: Competition Opened Wide

Wed, 17/06/2015 - 02:05
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 Challenger 604. 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

Replacement competition. Inside the E-8C
(click to view full)

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

Other E-8 related

News & Views

Lexington Institute (April 8/09) – Air Force Radar Plan Imperils Troops.

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

The MQ-4C Triton: Poseidon’s Unmanned Herald

Tue, 16/06/2015 - 02:50
BAMS Operation Concept
(click to view full)

The world’s P-3 Orion fleets have served for a long time, and many are reaching the end of their lifespans. In the USA, and possibly beyond, the new P-8 Poseidon Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft will take up the P-3’s role. While the P-8’s base 737-based airframe offers strong service & maintenance arguments in its favor, the airframe is expensive enough that the P-3s cannot be replaced on a 1:1 basis.

In order to extend the P-8 fleet’s reach, and provide additional capabilities, the Poseidon was expected to work with at least one companion UAV platform. This DID FOCUS Article explains the winning BAMS (Broad Area Maritime Surveillance) concept, the program’s key requirements, and its international angle. We’ll also cover ongoing contracts and key events related to the program, which chose Northrop Grumman’s navalized MQ-4C Triton Global Hawk variant.

Next-Gen Maritime Patrol Systems: Issues and Options USN ERJ-145 ACS concept

The P-3 fleet’s heavy use in both maritime surveillance and overland roles points up a potential problem with its successor the P-8A Poseidon. The 737-based aircraft will be bought in fewer numbers than the aircraft it replaces, but its high end Littoral Surveillance Radar System (LSRS) capabilities could quickly turn it into a sort of “mini-JSTARS,” making it a platform with strong maritime and land surveillance capabilities like NATO’s similar sized Airbus 321-based AGS battlefield surveillance aircraft.

As an expensive but in-demand asset, the P-8’s coverage scope could easily translate into a fleet run ragged by high flight hours per airframe, and forced into early retirement. See the Strategic Review article “Brittle Swords: Low-Density, High-Demand Assets” [PDF] for more background on this phenomenon.

The logical response is to pair the P-8s with a lower cost counterpart.

Hence the P-8 Poseidon’s companion Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) UAV program, run by NAVAIR’s PMA-263 program management office.

BAMS: Requirements and Missions NGC on BAMS
click to play video

The BAMS UAV is formally designated MQ-4C Triton: “M” as a multi-mission aircraft, even though all of its missions are ISR/reconnaissance missions.

The name fits. In mythology, Triton was Poseidon’s son, and the messenger of the sea. Tritons will work with the P-8 Poseidon maritime surveillance aircraft on missions that will include maritime surveillance, collection of enemy order of battle information, battle damage assessment, port surveillance, communication relay; plus support for maritime interdiction, surface warfare, battlespace management, and targeting for maritime and strike missions. MQ-4C Increment 3 UAVs and beyond are slated to add SIGINT capabilities, to capture enemy communication and radar transmissions. They would begin replacing the current EP-3 fleet in that role.

The MQ-4C UAV’s required capabilities definitely placed it at the high end of today’s UAV spectrum. BAMS had to be capable of a completely pre-programmed mission track, communication plan, and sensor employment plan, with manual override possible to support real-time control and/or re-tasking. The baseline requirement for operation with the P-8A is currently Level II control (receipt of sensor data to/from), with a proposal to quickly increase to Level IV (full control except landings) in the P-8A’s first improvement cycle. It also needed the ability to land on its own if necessary, however, using pre-surveyed and pre-programmed air fields.

Many of those capabilities are already present in existing medium UAVs. The requirements that follow are not.

BAMS: expected ‘orbits’
(click to view full)

BAMS had to have a minimum mission radius of 3,000 nautical miles, with a 10 hour time to on-station at 2,000 nmi mission radius, and autonomous flight through moderate icing or turbulence. More to the point, the requirements were expressly crafted for persistence. They included an 80% Estimated Time On Station (ETOS) for a group of BAMS platforms, over a period of 1 week (168 hours). That means UAVs in the air, within their assigned patrol zones at an estimated 900 nmi distance from launch, for 134 hours out of 168. That’s the minimum – the goal is 95% ETOS, or almost 160/168 hours.

The Navy saw BAMS UAVs employed within 5 “orbits” around the globe, with no more than 3 UAVs operating at the same time within each orbit. While this may make BAMS seem like a tiny program, consider the fact that all aircraft have fatigue lifespans measured in flight hours. Many fighters have lifespans of 10,000-12,000 hours. Transport aircraft can reach 30,000-40,000 hours, with major rebuilds along the way. Now consider the number of UAVs required to support flight profiles within those orbits, which are estimated to sum to 43,800 on-station flight hours/year, plus flight times to and from station for each mission. Over an expected program operational lifetime of about 20 years.

BAMS also has an unlisted, but critically important, program requirement. As UAVs proliferate in this role and begin undertaking long-range missions, they’ll require enough secure bandwidth to transmit large first-pass processed data sets to accompanying aircraft or ground stations. That cannot be provided from within the BAMS program, though communications relay packages on high-altitude BAMS UAVs will help military commanders on the surface. BAMS is in turn reliant on the USA’s Global Information Grid’s future security and capacity, in order to reach its full potential.

BAMS Options BAMS/P-8 mission sets
(click to view full)

Some nations use smaller business jet derivatives for maritime surveillance, and this option was closely considered by the Navy. The joint ACS (Aerial Common Sensor) program had potential dual-use features that could have made it a maritime surveillance supplement, as well as a SIGINT/ELINT (Signals & Electronic Intelligence & intercepts) platform to replace the Navy’s aging EP-3 Aries II fleet. The ACS program’s demise has taken that option off of the table for now. As it happens, however, the Navy had already chosen a different kind of companion for its P-8.

While business jets offered economy and numbers, the US Navy believed that unmanned UAVs could bring more to the long and oft-times tedious job of maritime surveillance. They can undertake very long-endurance flights of 30 hours or more, in part because they don’t have to carry processing stations and crew, or worry about aircrew endurance.

Northrop Grumman was always the favorite to win the BAMS competition. Its unarmed RQ-4 Global Hawk UAV had already proven itself in battlefield surveillance roles around the globe, and had been used as the Navy’s GHMD/BAMS-D maritime surveillance UAV testing and concepts research.

In contrast, the General Atomics MQ-9N Mariner’s main offered efficiency at much lower flight ceilings, up to 3,000 pounds of integrated weapons, and commonality with the Air Force’s MQ-9 Reaper strike UAV.

Boeing’s manned/unmanned G550 business jet was the 3rd major entry, offering the largest payloads, twin-engine redundancy, and compatibility with a civilian fleet.

BAMS: The MQ-4C Triton MQ-4C Triton rollout
(click to view full)

The “RQ-4N” system chosen by the US Navy was based on the USAF’s RQ-4B Block 20 Global Hawks, but it incorporated a wide range of changes on the way to its unveiling as the MQ-4C Triton.

Sensors received the biggest overhaul. MQ-4Cs will have a more rounded belly housing for Northrop Grumman’s own 360-degree coverage AN/ZPY-3 AESA radar, as part of their Advanced Integrated Sensor Suite (AISS). Unlike conventional mechanically-scanned radars, AESA radars offer the ability to zoom in on several targets of interest, and they can do this without stopping the broader scan. That shift from Raytheon’s side-looking AESA radar used in the RQ-4B could have become a major risk factor, which was a big reason behind Northrop Grumman’s decision to field their new radar on a Gulfstream II BAMS test bed during the competition.

Beyond the radar, “Electronic Support Measures” systems that can pick-up, map, and identify radar emissions initially relied on Northrop Grumman’s LR-100, but Sierra Nevada’s Merlin ESM system was substituted in order to meet the program’s requirement for 360-degree, 300 nm/ 555 km coverage. In the visual spectrum, AISS includes an optical day/night surveillance and targeting turret.

Other sensors expected for the MQ-4C include a “due regard” radar and other systems that let them descend safely into potential air traffic over international waters (currently facing development difficulties), Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) in various modes, and of course sensor packages with additional SIGINT/ELINT equipment and other specialty mission packages. The UAV must be able to perform “first pass” processing of any data it receives, before sending it on to other ships, aircraft, and/or ground stations.

RQ-4N concept
(click to view full)

Communications. A Ka-band Wideband Gapfiller satellite link will replace the commercial Ku-band link used by the USAF, in order to ensure 100% accessibility over long stretches of water. In addition, a pair of Ku-band and X-band datalinks have been added to the fuselage sides, to act as communications relays. Those relays, plus the addition of dual Common Data Links instead of single-CDL, and Link 16 capability UHF/VHF radios with HAVE QUICK and SINCGARS capability, will allow real-time data feeds to other Navy ships and aircraft. The US Air Force is reportedly considering this upgraded set for its own Global Hawks.

On the MQ-4C, an Automatic Identification System (AIS) receiver will allow the detection, identification, geo-location, and tracking of cooperative ships equipped with AIS transponders.

Mechanical. The need to have Navy UAVs descend and rise from altitude during over-water missions requires de-icing systems on the MQ-4C’s engine inlet, wings and tail. Strengthened wing structures were also deemed to be necessary.

One final mechanical issue concerns the Global Hawk design’s single turbofan engine. To cope with possible engine outages without losing these ultra-expensive UAVs, the USAF reportedly uses a combination of modified control software and alternate “glide-to” landing bases. When flying over vast ocean expanses, high altitude flight will be required, in order to keep the “glide-to” option alive.

BAMS: The Program

In April 2008, NAVAIR’s PMA-263 selected Northrop Grumman’s RQ-4N Global Hawk, which has since been re-designated MQ-4C. The FY 2014 budget cut the program from 70 (5 test + 65 operational UAVs) to a total of 66: 5 test + 61 operational UAVs.

BAMS Budgets from FY 2009 include:

Industrial team members include:

NGC performs Global Hawk sub-assembly work at its Unmanned Systems Center in Moss Point, MS, and anticipates performing final assembly at its St. Augustine, FL manufacturing center.

Triton’s Tactical Support Centers for command and control will be focused around the P-8A’s main bases: NAS Jacksonville, FL and NAS Whidbey Island, WA. Initial MQ-4C basing will include Ventura County Naval Base, at the Point Mugu, CA facility. Beyond that, NAVAIR has been tight-lipped, but reports have highlighted a few likely locations.

Andersen AFB on the island of Guam, which already supports some RQ-4 Global Hawks, is expected to become an important forward Pacific base, along with Hawaii and Diego Garcia. A fall 2013 agreement with Japan will provide for some Global Hawk basing in Japan itself, as a forward deployment from Andersen. It would be logical to expect MQ-4Cs as part of any eventual arrangement there. Australia’s Cocos Islands in the Indian Ocean have also been discussed as a way of relieving congestion at Diego Garcia, while keeping RQ-4 and possibly MQ-4 UAVs closer to sea lanes and countries of interest. The required infrastructure upgrade is an issue for Australia, however, and much may depend on Australia’s own purchasing decisions regarding the MQ-4C.

Sigonella AB in Sicily, Italy is already a key Global Hawk base, and it will also house NATO’s RQ-4B Block 40 AGS fleet. It’s likely to serve as the Triton’s hub to help cover Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, but other bases in that region would make the fleet much more effective. Advanced spy planes have already flown out of the UAE, which would be very convenient for covering the Middle East and western Indian Ocean. Portugal’s Azores was a key naval air waystation for decades until NAF Lajes was inactivated in the late 1990s, and would be well positioned for operations to cover Africa’s oil-rich and piracy rich western coast. It’s worth keeping an especial eye on developments in those 2 locations.

BAMS: The International Angle Mariner UAV
(click to view full)

The US Navy has been using the RQ-4 Global Hawk as a demonstration and proving platform to refine requirements and concepts of operations for BAMS, under the GHMD(Global Hawk Maritime Demonstrator) program. Even so, UAVs aren’t widely used for maritime surveillance just yet.

Beyond America’s shores, India has successfully used Israel’s Heron and Searcher II UAVs for coastal patrol as well and overland surveillance; UAVs from their 2005 follow-on Heron order have also been pressed into service along the coasts. To the southeast, Australia has undertaken successful trials with the General Atomics’ Mariner UAV for Coast Guard duties along its resource-rich Northwest Shelf. In the Great White North, Canada is evaluating UAVs for a maritime surveillance role under its JUSTAS program; Phase 2 could even include arctic surveillance out of Goose Bay, Labrador. IAI/EADS’ Eagle UAV, and General Atomics’ Altair high-altitude UAV derived from the MQ-9 Reaper, have already been tested as part of requirements definition.

Every one of these countries could eventually end up involved in the BAMS program.

P-8i test flight
(click to view full)

India’s MPA competition chose the “P-8I” as their next maritime patrol aircraft. With BAMS integration already scheduled for their chosen platform, a nation that sees its responsibilities stretching across the Indian Ocean from the Straits of Malacca near Singapore, to the Persian Gulf, and down to Madagascar, has obvious uses for the compatible Triton long-range, long-endurance UAV platform.

India seems to agree with this logic, but a treaty that it hasn’t signed is in the way. MTCR was originally aimed at limiting cruise missile exports, but a jet-powered UAV shares enough characteristics to create problems. Discussions are ongoing.

The Canadians have also been approached as possible partners in the P-8A Poseidon program, as a future replacement for their P-3/CP-140 Auroras. Thus far, they have made no commitments. Meanwhile, Northrop Grumman is offering them an RQ-4 variant called “Polar Hawk” for Arctic patrol, incorporating some MQ-4C features like de-icing. The vast expanses of Canada’s north make the speed of a jet-powered UAV very attractive, Northrop Grumman will have to beat General Atomics, which is offering its jet-powered Predator C as well as its slower MQ-9 UAV. If NGC can win, adding more Global Hawks for other missions would become easier.

AP-3C: who’s next?
(click to view full)

Australia went even further, and made itself a partner in BAMS via its AIR 7000 program. First Pass Approval was given in September 2006, and a Project Agreement was signed on Jan 13/07. Australian Embassy personnel have attended NAVAIR PMA-263 industry days, Australian technical experts are part of the BAMS integrated project teams, and NAVAIR’s BAMS RFP now includes an “Australian Unique Option” section. BAMS had passed its Milestone B “go/no-go” decision, and was analyzing unique Australian requirements before an expected Australian second-pass approval decision that could begin Australian BAMS production in 2012, and achieve Initial Operating Capability in 2015.

In 2009, however, Australia chose to drop out of the BAMS program, with sources citing both operational stress over the P-8A’s similarly-timed introduction, and fiscal pressures. They could still choose to drop back in, and their May 2013 Letter of Request for technical information is a step in that direction. The trade-off is that they’ll be looking at more of a finished product, with less scope for free-of-charge changes.

BAMS: Contracts & Key Events BAMS cutaway
(click for full PDF)

Unless otherwise noted, all contracts originate with the Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD.

FY 2015

Know MQ-4C

June 16/15: In a third and final contract awarded to Northrop Grumman on Monday, the firm was handed a $39.1 million contract to improve the current air-to-air radar subsystem design of the Navy’s MQ-4C Triton UAV and to demonstrate that the radar technology is feasible and risk-mitigated. The Navy has previously stated that it intends to fit a “due regard” radar to the Triton, as part of capability upgrade scheduled for introduction by 2020.

March 9/15: First deployment scheduled. An MQ-4c Triton will be deployed to Guam in FY 2016, according to information passed to Congress from Admiral Jonathan Greenert, chief of naval operations. The drone, capable of staying in the air for more than a day, was first flight tested just six months ago.

Nov 3/14: Sense-and-Avoid. After canceling the original plan for a “due regard” sense-and-avoid system to prevent collisions with other aircraft (q.v. April 9/14, Aug 13/13), the Navy has re-issued a less advanced RFI.

Instead of requiring radars that could handle ground clutter for low-altitude landings, the MQ-4C will take the more sensible approach of using airport radar data. Instead of demanding full capability up front, the Navy wants a “modular” and “scalable” design that will be improved over time. Ultimately, they want Triton to comply with ICAO ANNEX 2, Section, 3.2; U.S. Code of Regulations (CFR) Part 91.111 and 91.113; and Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 4540.01 guidelines for safe flight. But they’re willing to begin with DoDI 4540.01. Sources: FBO.gov #N00019-15-P7-PMA-262-0029, “MQ-4C Triton Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Sense and Avoid Air-to-Air Radar Capability” | Flightglobal, “US Navy re-starts sense and avoid radar for MQ-4C”.

FY 2014

Basing; SIGINT limitations; Sense-and-
Avoid problems; Global Hawk Block 40 will have some maritime capability; Triton cuts coming? MQ-4Cs at Palmdale
(click to view full)

Sept 23/14: Cuts? Reuters reports that reliability improvements in the MQ-4C may be a double-edged sword. The target had been 68 UAVs, in order to maintain 5 “orbits” of 4 UAVs on call for continuous surveillance. Better reliability could tempt the Navy to cut the number bought. The USAF’s RQ-4B Block 40s will also have some maritime surveillance capability (April 28/14), which adds to the pressure.

FY 2015 is expected to see the first production purchases of long-lead items, but budget cuts to date have already slowed program delivery to initial use in 2017, and IOC to mid-2018 with a full orbit of 4. Sources: Reuters, “UPDATE 1-Navy says may trim Northrop drone order due to better reliability”.

Sept 18/14: Testing. After an 11-hour, 3,290 nmi cross-country flight at 50,000 feet along the Mexican border, across Florida, and then up the Eastern Seaboard, Patuxent River, MD gets its 1st MQ-4C. PMA-262’s Pax River tests will include flight envelope expansion, sensor and communications testing, and interoperability testing. Sources: “Navy’s Triton unmanned aircraft completes first cross-country flight” | NGC, “MQ-4C Triton UAS Arrives at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Enters Next Phase of Testing.”

July 4/14: Front-line thoughts. Foxtrot Alpha’s “Confessions Of A US Navy P-3 Orion Maritime Patrol Pilot” interviews a US Navy P-3C pilot who now flies P-8As. He also has some thoughts regarding the MQ-4C, and its performance compared to the current EP-3E electronic eavesdropping plane. His 3 areas of concern are bandwidth limitations, jamming, and real-time strike support:

“It is worth considering what the MQ-4C Triton can and cannot do. Any Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) operations by Triton will likely be limited by satellite bandwidth. I’m speaking from my own knowledge and assumptions here, but consider the task at hand. If you want real-time data off a UAV you have to transmit it via a satellite uplink to a ground monitoring station…. Is it more cost-effective to simply wait till the MQ-4C lands and accept that the downloaded intel will then be hours old? Maybe or maybe not.

Now let’s consider a wartime scenario. Other nations have demonstrated anti-satellite capabilities, including kinetic hard-kill capabilities against low Earth orbit satellites. While this isn’t a concern for geo-synchronous communications satellites, the ability to jam or spoof UAV satellite uplinks was possibly demonstrated during the loss of the RQ-170 [stealth UAV] over Iran. How secure exactly are our satellite uplinks? Are they safe from cyber attack? Will this bandwidth be available to the Navy during wartime or will more pressing communications take precedence? This is all above my pay-grade but realize that UAV endurance doesn’t come without a price.

There’s another factor to consider and that’s the nature of the EP-3E’s mission. EP-3s are capable of supporting a Carrier Strike Group’s air wing by providing communications and signals intelligence support. This is a distinctly ‘real-time’ function as enemy air defense operators may only speak for a few moments or activate SAM radars for several seconds. The latency (time delay) inherent in satellite communications and control systems could possibly mean the difference between life and death for strike pilots in F/A-18 Hornets heading into the target area. If you take away EP-3E, you may lose that real-time SIGINT and COMINT capability.”

April 28/14: Friendly competition? The USAF is touting success in an 11.5 hour RQ-4B Global Hawk Block 40 flight over the Point Mugu sea range in California.

This Maritime Modes program risk reduction work involves testing software that lets the Block 40’s MP-RTIP AESA radar use a Maritime Moving Target Indicator and a Maritime Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar (MISAR) to track surface vessels. The MQ-4C has other naval capabilities beyond these, but then, MP-RTIP is well-tuned for land surveillance. As budgets decline, Global Hawk variants that can do similar jobs may find themselves competing for budget dollars. Sources: USAF, “Air Force tests new surveillance capability”.

April 9/14: Sense-and-Avoid. The US Navy still wants to place this technology on the MQ-4C, not least because it will be required for low-altitude flying in many areas of interest. The problem is that miniaturizing the Exelis AESA radar turned out to be much harder than they thought, to the point where they had to pause and look at other options (q.v. Aug 13/13).

Above 18,000′, standard ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast) and TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) “due regard” systems can keep the UAV from getting too close to civilian aircraft, and to many military airplanes as well. Below that altitude, ground and ship-based radars can be used, and something might be doable using aerial radars like AWACS plus datalinks. On the other hand, the whole point of the MQ-4C is to survey areas where those assets aren’t already on patrol.

This is a serious issue for UAVs generally, so it may be worth biting the bullet and investing the funds required to solve the problem. It may even be a hard and significant enough problem to justify DARPA’s involvement. Sources: USNI, “Navy Expanding Search for ‘Sense and Avoid’ Technologies for Triton”.

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 program dashboard and timeline have been updated accordingly, though the Navy’s program office has authorized NGC to develop a new target baseline and schedule with increased costs and schedule delays. That isn’t represented in the charts yet. The program has 3 big technical risks left.

One is software, thanks to about 1.6 million lines of new code in an 8 million line system. There are another 2 software phases left before operational evaluation begins in January 2016.

Another is navigation. In September 2013, the Global Hawk program experienced an anomaly with a navigation system, suspending the derivative Triton’s test flights until a workaround was identified. The problem remains unfixed.

Finally, the air-to-air “sense and avoid” radar subsystem (q.v. Aug 13/13) for operating in civil airspace has hit a wall, and delayed the program by about 1 year.

March 28/14: Infrastructure. The Guam MACC Builders joint venture in Honolulu, HI wins a $45.5 million firm-fixed-price task order under a multiple-award construction contract. they’ll design and build a high bay maintenance hangar to support MQ-4C forward operations and maintenance at Andersen AFB, Guam. That involves scheduled inspections, airframe repairs, pre- and post-flight operations, as well as technical order compliance and aircraft modifications. A pair of unexercised options could raise the total to $46.7 million.

All funds are committed immediately, using a combination of FY 2010 and FY 2014 budgets. Work will be performed in Yigo, Guam, and is expected to be complete by April 2016. Six proposals were received for this task order by NAVFAC Pacific at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, HI (N62742-10-D-1309, #0003).

March 24/14: Testing. The Mq-4C has completed the envelope expansion portion of its test flights (q.v. Jan 6/14). Sources: NGC, “Northrop Grumman, U.S. Navy Complete Initial Flight Testing of the Triton Unmanned Aircraft System”.

March 4/14: FY15 Budget. The USN unveils their preliminary budget request briefings. Precise figures are only offered later, but the Navy does offer planned purchase numbers for key programs between FY 2014 – 2019.

MQ-4C Triton production was supposed to start with 3 UAVs in FY15, but that isn’t happening because the program is behind. In addition to the late start, the Navy’s mid-term budgets will also slow the production ramp-up. Production begins in FY16 instead with 4 (unchanged), and continues with 4 in FY17, 4 in FY18 (-2), and 4 in FY19 (no previous comparable). Subsequent documents show that the program’s overall budget doesn’t change all that much, but around $400 million is added to R&D, and costs per UAV rise a bit. Those costs may drop a bit in future, if Australia buys in as expected.

The immediate pause makes sense, but the vastness of the Pacific and supposed importance of the “Pacific Pivot” don’t seem to be getting a lot of weight in the Navy’s 5-year plan – which also cuts P-8 sea control aircraft, and E-2D Advanced Hawkeye AWACS. Sources: USN, PB15 Press Briefing [PDF].

Jan 6/14: Testing. Northrop Grumman announces that the MQ-4C is half-way through the envelope expansion portion of flight testing. It’s still early days, with the longest mission being just 9.4 hours at up to 50,000 feet. Sources: NGC, “Multimedia Release — Northrop Grumman, Navy Complete Nine Flights of Triton Unmanned Aircraft System”.

Nov 4/13: Sub-contractors. Northrop Grumman Corp. and Triumph Aerostructures’ Vought Aircraft Division have finished initial MQ-4C structural strength testing at Vought’s Dallas, TX facility. Which means torturing the wings and bending them 22% beyond US Navy structural requirements, in hopes they don’t break or permanently deform. This isn’t just a life-span issue. It’s a very immediate requirement whenever a Triton UAV has to drop down for a closer look at something, possibly through inclement weather.

Vought was involved in these tests because they produce Global Hawk family wings. A fatigue test of the entire airframe will begin in 2017. Sources: NGC, Nov 4/13 release.

Oct 7/13: Basing. The Whidbey News-Times reports that the MQ-4C’s Tactical Support Centers for command and control will be placed at the 2 main P-8A support centers: NAS Jacksonville, FL and NAS Whidbey Island, WA. It seems like a fairly obvious operational conclusion, but it was also the consensus of environmental assessments.

“Four of the MQ-4C Tritons will be based out of Ventura County Naval Base in California [by 2016], but the existing P3 tactical support center at Whidbey Island Naval Air Station will be expanded to support both the P8-A and the Triton…”

Sources: Whidbey News-Times, “New drone supports P-8A Poseidon”.

FY 2012 – 2013

Test plan approved and BAMS becomes “MQ-4C Triton”; NGC buying 1 for itself; Australia renews interest, but it’s lukewarm; India is interested; DOT&E testing report; RQ-4A BAMS-D crash; Sense and Avoid tech suspended. MQ-4C: 1st flight
click for video

Sept 9/13: Australia. Australia’s Liberal Party is back in power after a convincing electoral win over Labor. While the new government’s commitment to 2% of GDP for defense spending is a broad positive for industry, their level of commitment to the MQ-4C weakened:

“The acquisition of unmanned aerial vehicles will be dependent on the advice of the chief of the Defence Force and service chiefs, as well as a clear cost-benefit assessment that demonstrates the value of these aircraft.”

Triton is likely to pass that test, but this is a step back from earlier statements to the effect that Triton was a high-priority buy. Sources: Australian Liberal Party, “The Coalition’s policy for Stronger Defence” | Defense News, “New Australian Leadership Pledges to Boost Defense Spending”.

Aug 14/13: Infrastructure. Small business qualifier Whitesell-Green, Inc. in Pensacola, FL wins a $15.9 million firm-fixed-price contract to build a BAMS Mission Control Complex at NAS Jacksonville, FL. It will be a freestanding 2-story structure with two Electromagnetic Interference Shielded Mission Control Systems, a Tactical Operations Center with sensitive compartmented information facility spaces, and numerous roof-top mounted antennas. This project will also renovate some interior spaces, including a reconfigured command suite, systems reconfiguration, and in some cases finish upgrades. Finally, additional antennas will be built at a remote site south of the new facility.

All funds are committed immediately. Work will be performed in Jacksonville, FL, and is expected to be complete by December 2014. This contract was competitively procured via Navy Electronic Commerce Online, with 8 proposals received by NAVFAC Southeast in Jacksonville, FL (N69450-13-C-1258).

Aug 13/13: Sense-and-Avoid. BAMS Program manager Navy Capt. Jim Hoke says that ITT Exelis’ radar-based Airborne Sense And Avoid system (q.v. Aug 10/12) is “behind schedule,” so the Navy has “made a decision to pause on the capability right now” and has stopped work. Hoke says that he understands how important this capability is for operations in crowded airspace and allied countries (vid. May 29/13, May 14/13), especially given the MQ-4C’s operational need to descend to lower altitudes at times for a closer look, but “all options are on the table.” If the system really is seen as critical, that could mean a re-compete of the sub-program, or the Navy could decide to join the USAF’s ABSAA effort (q.v. July 30/12).

Re-competes can be problematic, but this may be a case where the circumstances are attractive. The natural scalability of AESA radars means that any successful implementation could be applied to other large UAVs, from NATO’s planned RQ-4 Block 40 AGS Global Hawk variant, to smaller MALE UAVs like the MQ-9 Reaper or MQ-1C Gray Eagle. That’s a significant and growing opportunity for the winning contractor, with follow-on “proven leader” opportunities around civil UAV use. This dynamic could attract firms willing to invest up front with low bids or substantial resources, and the base ABSAA field is a mature one thanks to civil aircraft. Breaking Defense.

Sense-And-Avoid radar on hold

June 25/13: Australia. With an election coming, the MQ-4C Triton seems secure, as both parties remain committed to it. Reuters:

“There’s not a lot of new money in our policy, (but) we are going into Broad Area Maritime Surveillance, the Triton,” said conservative defense spokesman David Johnston, who is likely to become defense minister following the September 14 elections…. “This is about maritime security and surveillance in the Indian Ocean,” a senior Labor insider with close knowledge of defense planning said. “This is a force multiplier. It’s better to think of Triton as a mobile satellite we can steer around the Indian Ocean,”

June 14/13: Sense-and-Avoid. BAE Systems’ AN/DPX-7 Reduced Size Transponder (RST) Indentification Friend-or-Foe system flies on the MQ-4C for the 1st time. IFF transponders broadcast coded location signals to friendly aircraft, and also receive signals from civil and military aircraft around them. They aren’t a complete solution to the problem of operating in crowded airspace, but with the right programming and UAV flight system connections, they can help. Unmanned Systems Technology.

May 29/13: Sense-and-Avoid. Answers from Northrop Grumman clarify the MQ-4C’s sense-and-avoid systems:

“Triton’s due regard radar is meant to provide safe separation of aircraft while the system is in flight at lower altitudes. The U.S. Navy’s mission requires that Triton be able to descend to lower altitudes to make closer identification of surface vessels. The radar is still in development and would be flight tested on Triton at a later date. This is a Navy requirement to ensure that the Triton UAs can safely operate over international waters.”

With respect to ICAO certification issues, Northrop Grumman would only say Global Hawk is the first unmanned aircraft system to achieve a military airworthiness certification. That can only be used to fly a pre-approved, monitored flight plan in American civil airspace, and then only if a specific supplemental FAA certificate of authorization (COA) is granted in advance. Whether this level of certification will work at NAS Sigonella, Italy is a question that the US Navy will need to answer. “Saigon” has already been a base of operations for RQ-4B Block 20 Global Hawks, which lack any form of collision avoidance system. The question is how restricted future MQ-4C flight options would be, absent further certifications.

May 22/12: Fly! The MQ-4C has its 1st flight. The flight was originally scheduled for March 2013, but all goes well, The Navy and Northrop Grumman flight test team conducts an 80 minute flight from Palmdale, CA, reaching up to 20,000 feet while remaining within restricted airspace.

Northrop Grumman says that additional flight tests will take place from Palmdale to mature the system, before it’s flown to the main flight test facility at NAS Patuxent River, MD, later this year. It will be interesting to see if it flies there under its own power, or is disassembled and carried in a heavy-lift aircraft. Even the carrier-based X-47B stealth UCAV had to travel to Pax River on a truck, because the FAA wouldn’t certify it for flight in civil airspace. The MQ-4C is designed with a sense-and-avoid system, so the FAA could conceivably grant it a waiver. US Navy Capt. Jim Hoke is the current Persistent Maritime UAS office (PMA-262) program manager, and it will be up to him to oversee transportation arrangements. US Navy | US NAVAIR | US Navy Live | NGC.

1st flight

May 22/13: XP – 7. Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems in Bethpage, NY receives a $15.3 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification to upgrade some MQ-4C Triton components from Windows XP to Windows 7. Microsoft is ending support for XP, hence the shift, which will happen in quite a few US military programs. We wonder about the security implications of using Windows at all in an incredibly expensive autonomous system, but that’s a separate discussion.

Work will be performed in Hollywood, MD (33.5%); Bethpage, NY (25.8%); Rancho Bernardo, CA (15.6%); San Diego, CA (12.7%); Salt Lake City, UT (9.8%); Stillwater, OK (1.10%); Melbourne, FL (1.0%) and Van Nuys, CA (.05%), and is expected to be complete in April 2014. Funds will be committed as needed by US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD (N00019-08-C-0023).

May 16/13: Australia. Australia’s government announces that they’re sending a formal Letter of Request to the USA for the MQ-4C Triton UAV. The letter will become a Foreign Military Sales Technical Services Case with the United States Navy to obtain detailed cost, capability and availability information. They emphasize that they haven’t picked the MQ-4C yet for AIR 7000 Phase 1B, but they didn’t announce letters of request for any other platforms that might compete with the Triton, like General Atomics’ MQ-9. Which may have separate opportunities of its own:

“As also outlined in the 2013 Defence White Paper, Defence will analyse the value of further investment in unmanned aircraft for focused area, overland intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, including for use in border security operations. This will include the potential expansion of the role of these assets in the ADF to include interdiction and close air support, subject to policy development and Government consideration.”

See: Australia DoD | US NAVAIR.

May 14/13: Euro Hawk falls. Germany has decided to end the Euro Hawk UAV project, after spending EUR 562 million on system development and test flights. Not only would it cost hundreds of millions more euros to attempt EASA/ICAO flight certification, but German authorities reportedly lacked confidence that they would receive a certification at the end of the process. Rather than pay another EUR 600 – 700 million for additional UAVs and equipment, and an equivalent amount to attempt EASA certification, Germany will attempt to find another path.

The remaining questions fall instead on Sigonella, Italy, where NATO and the USA plan to base MQ-4C Tritons, and RQ-4B AGS Global Hawk Block 40s. German lawmakers are raising those questions, and some are advocating pulling out of NATO’s AGS as well.

March 4/13: Australia. Aviation Week reports that Australia may want more P-8As, at the possible expense of its MQ-4C companion UAVs:

“The RAAF is quietly making a case for 12 Poseidons, arguing that eight would not be enough to cover the vast oceans surrounding the continent. And the unmanned requirement is now described as “up to” seven high-altitude, long-endurance aircraft, potentially reducing Northrop Grumman’s opportunity. At the same time the air force sees an argument for a supplementary drone, possibly the Predator, to take on some of the electronic-intelligence missions that would otherwise fall to the Poseidons and Tritons.”

This is a bit of a head-scratcher. The stated purpose of sustained ocean coverage would be better served by adding another orbit of 3-4 MQ-4Cs (to 10-11), using the P-8s as more of a fleet overwatch and contact response force. Likewise, it makes little sense to use a different UAV for ELINT/SIGINT collection, especially the slow and shorter-range MQ-9. Rather, one would use the MQ-9s in nearer-shore maritime and EEZ patrols, along the lines of the 2006 Northwest Shelf experiments, in order to free up MQ-4Cs for longer-range expeditions over strategic corridors, and the ELINT/SIGINT mission they will be equipped for as of Increment 3.

Feb 22/13: Australia. Australia may have officially dropped out of the BAMS development phase (vid. March 2/09 entry), but News Corp. reports that Defence Minister Stephen will sign a formal export letter of request for the MQ-4C at the 2013 Australian International Airshow. Australia has remained part of the P-8A program for a manned sea control jet, so the MQ-4C is a natural pairing.

The purchase budget is expected to be $A 2-3 billion, but it may be overshadowed by Australia’s expected announcement that they will buy another 24 F/A-18F Super Hornets. News Corp.

Feb 7/13: India. Northrop Grumman’s MQ-4C business development lead Greg Miller tells Shephard’s UV Online that India’s RFI for a High Altitude, Long Endurance maritime surveillance platform holds promise:

“They want to follow the US model; P-8 and Triton…. The Indian Navy agrees with the US’ requirements, which exactly fits our sweet spot.”

Their problem is the same problem facing South Korea: the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), which bans the export of cruise missiles or unmanned vehicles with certain range and payload limits. India hasn’t signed MTCR, but the issue needs to be resolved at a government-to-government level. UV Online.

March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish. With respect to BAMS, they say the design is stable, with 99% of drawings releasable to manufacturing. Software code is a challenge, as are the UAV’s new-design wings. Disruptions to the USAF’s Global Hawk programs aren’t expected to affect schedule, but fewer UAVs produced does drive up the cost per UAV. Excerpts:

“The second development aircraft, the first aircraft with a full sensor suite and the air-to-air radar subsystem, is nearing completion and is expected to begin testing in 2013…. However, the program poses a significant software development challenge, utilizing nearly 8 million lines of code, more than 20 percent of which will be new. Much of the remaining software is derived from Global Hawk; however, officials noted that integration and testing of this code is taking longer than expected. Officials also noted that delays in the manufacturing of the aircraft wing as well as corrections to software during integration of subsystems are the primary reasons for a delay in the program’s operational assessment and production decision….”

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 MQ-4C Triton is included, and the program is falling behind. The plan was to conduct an Operational Assessment in June 2013, leading to a Milestone C decision in October 2013.

Unfortunately, a combination of UAV mission computer software stability problems, and radar performance issues identified in tests with Northrop Grumman’s radar-equipped Gulfstream-II jet, delayed flight testing from May 2012 to “at least” January 2013. The program has also “deferred development and testing of [unspecified] air vehicle and sensor capabilities until after Milestone C in order to reduce current test schedule pressures.”

The plan to reach Milestone C by October seems less and less likely, especially given additional “ground test delays encountered in [fall 2012].” Northrop Grumman will also need to resolve issues with software stability for both the mission computer and ZPY-3 MFAS radar, radar detection and tracking consistency, and radar image quality.

Jan 8/13: Company bird. Northrop Grumman is spending its own money to build and equip its own MQ-4C UAV, complete with the same sensor set the Navy will get. The UAV is under construction, and just had its wings and fuselage joined.

It isn’t the first time Northrop Grumman has done this; indeed, in many ways it’s just a further extension of the company Gulfstream-III business jet test bed, which has been flying since before the development contract was awarded. Initial missions for the company’s UAV will involve supplementing Navy tests, in order to help the team reach their goal of operational UAVs by late 2015. Eventually it will become a platform for demonstrations, integration of different sensors that the US Navy or other customers are interested in, and system performance improvement testing.

1 MQ-4C for Northrop Grumman

September 2012: Testing. A 2nd MQ-4C is added to ground test efforts, with a focus on control software and subsystems. NGC.

Aug 10/12: Sense-And-Avoid. ITT Exelis exhibits their BAMS airborne sense-and-avoid (ABSAA) radar for the first time, at the Unmanned Systems North America conference in Las Vegas. It’s the 1st U.S. Department of Defense ABSAA/ ICAO “due regard” radar program of record, with flight testing expected to start in Q1 2013.

Aug 10/12: Sense-And-Avoid. ITT Exelis exhibits their BAMS airborne sense-and-avoid (ABSAA) radar for the first time, at the Unmanned Systems North America conference in Las Vegas, NV. It’s the 1st US Department of Defense ABSAA/ ICAO “due regard” UAV radar program of record, with flight testing expected to start in Q1 2013.

Their “SkySense 2020H” can be adapted for other UAVs, but the self-contained, 50 pound MQ-4C configuration involves 3 thin-tile AESA array panels mounted at the front of the UAV. It operates in the Ku-band with an 8-10 nmi range, and a 110 degree wide x 30 degree high field of view. AESA radars are flexible if the right software is installed, and Exelis is also looking at using SkySense for weather radar and communications functions. AIN Online.

July 2012: Testing. 1st MQ-4C Triton begins ground tests. NGC.

July 30/12: Sense-And-Avoid. The USAF Research Laboratory (AFRL) has been working on a sense-and-avoid system called Multiple Intruder Autonomous Avoidance (MIAA) since 2008, and is about to conduct the final test phases using a Calspan-operated Learjet as an RQ-4 surrogate. Co-operative commercial aircraft are dealt with using standard methods: a traffic collision avoidance system and ADS-B. Aviation Week says that for non-cooperative aircraft:

“The flights will evaluate collision-avoidance algorithms and a new electronically scanned sense-and-avoid radar, as well as a new technique to perform passive target ranging from the two-dimensional imagery provided by electro-optical sensors.”

Once they’re done, MIAA will become move to EMD system development as part of the USAF’s Global Hawk program. The Navy and Army are both interested, however, and are partners in this effort. A Global Hawk flight is planned in 2015, with Initial Operating Capability planned in 2017. Aviation Week, via NPS.EDU: “Sense-And-Avoid System To Transition To Global Hawk”.

June 14/12: Triton unveiled. Northrop Grumman and US NAVAIR unveil the 1st MQ-4C at Northrop Grumman’s Palmdale, CA plant, and announce its operational moniker: “Triton.” In mythology, Triton was Poseidon’s son, the messenger of the sea. US NAVAIR | Northrop Grumman.

MQ-4C “Triton”

BAMS-D Crash
click for video

June 11/12: BAMS-D Crash. An RQ-4A BAMS-Demonstrator Global Hawk crashes into a marshy tributary of Maryland’s Nanticoke River, during a routine training flight from Naval Air Station Patuxent River. There were no injuries to civilians and no property damage, but the crash site has been blocked to recreational boat traffic while the agency investigates. The crash leaves 4 UAVs in the program: 3 for testing, tactics, and doctrine development in the USA, and 1 deployed abroad with the 5th fleet. CNN | Wired Danger Room | WBOC.

May 30/12: Canada. Northrop Grumman Corporation and Canada’s L-3 MAS announce plans to offer Canada a “Polar Hawk” UAV for surveillance of Canada’s arctic land and seas.

As one might guess, it will need to share a number of structural features like strengthened wings and improved de-icing with the MQ-4C Triton. Improved satellite communications, with specialized receivers for polar-orbit satellites, will also be necessary. Sensors aren’t discussed, but the accompanying picture shows a conventional Global Hawk shape, without the AN/ZPY-3 MFAS. NGC.

May 29/12: More SDD. Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems in Bethpage, NY receives a $32.8 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification, for BAMS system development and demonstration. This modification funds a maintenance concept change that will develop a logistics management I.T. system, and improve the transition from contractor logistics support to organic military maintenance by the Navy. Funding will be committed as needs arise.

Work will be performed in Bethpage, NY, (74.54%), Rancho Bernardo, CA (20.82%), Melbourne, FL (4.59%), and Palmdale, CA (0.05%); and is expected to be complete in September 2015 (N00019-08-C-0023).

January 2012: Testing. The Pentagon approves the MQ-4C Triton Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP), which will guide efforts to bring the UAV to a successful Milestone C decision, and into low-rate initial production. DOT&E.

Test plan approved

FY 2010 – 2011

Designation shifting to MQ-4C; Sub-systems in development. Global Hawk
(click to view full)

April 25/11: ZPY-3. Northrop Grumman announces the start of system tests for the BAMS UAV’s Multi-Function Active Sensor (MFAS) maritime surveillance radar. MFAS will use a 2-dimensional radar with both electronic and mechanical scanning.

Northrop Grumman’s Aerospace Systems sector facility in San Diego, CA is expected to take delivery of the 1st MFAS in June 2011, following ongoing radar software mode development and hardware synchronization and integration activities. A 2nd radar is slated for delivery in September 2011, and risk reduction flight tests on board the company’s Gulfstream II test-bed expected before year end.

March 16/11: Northrop Grumman Corporation completes the 1st of 3 BAMS fuselages under the SDD phase. The MQ-4C fuselage will undergo final assembly and system checkout at the company’s Palmdale, CA facility, ahead of its first flight in 2012. NGC.

March 7/11: CDR. Northrop Grumman announces that the BAMS program completed its system-level Critical Design Review (CDR) with the U.S. Navy in February 2011 – but it is not fully closed yet. The government and Northrop Grumman teams will be working to close out issues raised during the CDR, before it can be officially over.

The system-level full CDR sets the initial product baseline for the MQ-4C system, and was preceded by 10 subsystem and segment CDRs. Northrop Grumman VP and BAMS program manager Steve Enewold says that the SDD phase’s first 2 UAV fuselages are being built at Moss Point, MS, and the first will ship in April 2011 to Palmdale, CA for final assembly. The next major milestone is Test Readiness Review, planned for fall 2011. First flight is expected in 2012, and Enewold says the program continues to meet its acquisition baseline cost, schedule and performance requirements.

Feb 18/11: Sense & Avoid. Northrop Grumman Aerospace Sector’s Battle Management & Engagement Systems Division in Bethpage, NY receives a $25.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order to develop an “airborne sense and avoid capability for the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) unmanned aircraft system in support of the Navy and Air Force.” The goal is a TRL 7 system, i.e. a prototype tested in operationally-relevant conditions.

The wording is interesting, as it implies that USAF RQ-4A/B Global Hawks will also be fitted with this capability. As they should be. Sense and avoid technologies are used in commercial aircraft, in order to prevent mid-air collisions. While flying at 60,000 feet will go a long way toward zero collisions, the UAVs do not begin at that altitude, and BAMS in particular will not spend all of its mission time at that level. Throw in funded experiments like aerial refueling between 2 Global Hawk UAVs, and expectations that the stratosphere is likely to be more crowded in future, and the necessity of sense & avoid technologies becomes clearer. To this point, however, the US Navy and USAF have pursued different technology approaches: an ITT-supplied air-to-air radar and ADS-B cooperative surveillance for the Navy, and a multi-sensor “multi-intruder autonomous avoidance (MIAA)” USAF project that uses 3 electro-optical cameras, a low-power radar, and the civil TCAS traffic collision avoidance system.

Work to reconcile those approaches into a common prototype will be performed in Bethpage, NY (50%) and San Diego, CA (50%), and is expected to be complete in November 2012. $7,368,022 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (N00019-10-G-0004). See also: Aviation Week.

Feb 9/11: Northrop Grumman announces a $3.3 million contract to participate in the Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Control Segment (UCS) Architecture Working Group (UCSWG), sponsored by the Office Secretary of Defense’s (OSD) Unmanned Warfare Office.

The UCSWG is an open technical standards committee consisting of industry and government representatives from each UAS program of record, several emerging UAS programs and small businesses. The objective of the UCSWG effort is to define a common UAS control station architecture based on standard data models and service interface definitions to enable interoperability, scalability and adaptability of UAS ground stations.

Sept 1/10: New designation. A ceremony at Northrop Grumman’s Moss Point, MS manufacturing facility marks the beginning of RQ-4N BAMS UAV construction.

It is also the first official mention of the platform’s MQ-4C designation. Northrop Grumman spokesman Jim Stratford explains that “M” stands for “Multi-mission,” referring to planned expansion to communications relay and SIGINT missions. The “C” is because there are significant differences from the USAF’s RQ-4B Block 20/30/40, such as anti-icing and sense/avoid capabilities. The “RQ-4N” was Northrop Grumman’s designation during the BAMS competition, but it was never official. Northrop Grumman.

March 3/10: Sub-contractors. Curtiss-Wright Corporation announces a $25 million contract from Northrop Grumman Corporation to provide BAMS’ Advanced Mission Management System (AMMS). Curtiss-Wright will design, develop and manufacture BAMS UAV AMMS units at the company’s Motion Control facility in Santa Clarita, CA Hardware deliveries will start at the end of 2010 and continue through 2011.

FY 2008 – 2009

BAMS System Development & Demonstration contract; Australia steps back from BAMS program. Australian RQ-4N? No.
(click to view full)

Aug 13/09: USAF getting ideas? The Shepard Group reports that The United States Air Force is exploring a potential communications suite re-architecture for its RQ-4 Global Hawk fleet, based on the Navy’s RQ-4 BAMS set. The BAMS de-icing system has also attracted interest.

April 27/09: Northrop Grumman Integrated Systems in Bethpage, NY received a $22.4 million modification to a previously awarded cost plus award fee BAMS System Development and Demonstration (SDD) contract (N00019-08-C-0023). This modification will add wing static and load testing for the BAMS RQ-4N UAS.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (90%) and Bethpage, NY (10%), and is expected to be complete in December 2012.

March 2/09: Australia out. Defense minister Joel Fitzgibbon announces that Australia will not be exercising its option to continue as a member of the BAMS program. The country is shelving the “AIR 7000 Phase 1B” project, in order to concentrate on the introduction of the 737-based P-8A Poseidon instead. Despite the minister’s focus on operational difficulties and schedule slips, Northrop Grumman’s statements cite fiscal pressures as one of the key reasons behind the decision.

Australia will probably want and need maritime patrol UAVs at some point, and its public-private CoastWatch program already has a provision for introducing some to the mix over the next decade. The question around BAMS is what price Australia might pay in penalty fees, if any, should the country decide to rejoin the BAMS program at a later date. Australian DoD | The Australian | Canberra Times.

Australia out

Feb 4/09: Delays. Aviation Week reports that the BAMS schedule has slipped, owing in part to delays created by Lockheed Martin’s protest. The first RQ-4N BAMS will begin testing in FY 2012 instead of FY 2011, with low-rate production beginning in FY 2013, and initial operational capability declared by FY 2016 instead of 2015. Full delivery is now expected by FY 2019.

Feb 4/09: Reports indicate that one of the Gobal Hawk Maritime Demonstration UAVs has deployed to CENTCOM’s theater of operations by the US Navy. Information Dissemination believes that its future will include pirate tracking off of Africa’s eastern coast. GHMD is a limited program that is both a predecessor to BAMS, and a way to experiment and learn how an advanced maritime patrol UAV can be used in real world operations (CONOPS).

Dec 23/08: Northrop Grumman announces that U.S. Navy’s Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX-20) gave the RQ-4 Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration (GHMD) team its Q2 2008 Test Team of the Quarter award. To date, the 2 GHMD demonstrator aircraft have flown more than 1,350 hours.

The team’s accomplishments included performing more than 1,000 hours of flight operations over an 18-month period, troubleshooting issues with the communications system, integrating the automatic identification system into the aircraft so it can be used in civilian air space, conducting tests with the ocean surveillance initiative, and developing tactics and guidelines for unmanned patrol systems. From January to June 2008, the team also supported various operational activities, including the Southeastern Anti-Submarine Warfare Initiative 08-2, the USS Iwo Jima Group Sail, and the Commander Carrier Strike Group 8. The team’s successes during this period culminated with the Trident Warrior exercise in June 2008, when the team flew more than 113 hours over a 5-week period, including an unplanned 23-hour humanitarian mission in which a GHMD was re-tasked to assist in the Northern California wildfires. July saw the UAVs participate in the Rim of the Pacific 2008 fleet exercise, which saw the team finish 4 missions totaling more than 92 hours.

Sept 29/08: Rolls Royce puts out a release confirming that Northrop Grumman has selected their AE 3700H engine to power the RQ-4N BAMS UAV. This is hardly a surprise, as Rolls Royce was part of the bid team and those same engines power non-naval Global Hawks. Rolls Royce release.

Aug 8/08: The Congressional Government Accountability Office (GAO) denies a protest from the Lockheed Martin MS2/ General Atomics team, which offered its MQ-9 Reaper derived Mariner UAV for BAMS. The grounds of that denial were interesting, and included improvement in Northrop Grumman’s contractor performance in comparable programs like the USAF’s MQ-9 systems. An improvement that was not matched by similar corrective successes at General Atomics.

The BAMS program had been frozen while the appeal went forward, but it is now free to begin in earnest. US Navy NAVAIR announced on Aug 11/08 that the program would resume. See: GAO decisions #400135.1/2.

GAO denies protest, contract continues

April 22/08: Northrop Grumman Corp. Integrated Systems in Bethpage, NY won a cost-plus-award-fee contract with an estimated value of $1.16 billion for the BAMS System Development and Demonstration (SDD) phase. This phase includes the design, fabrication, and delivery, of 2 unmanned RQ-4N Global Hawk variant aircraft with mission payloads and communications suites; one Forward Operating Base Mission Control System; one Systems Integration Laboratory; and one Main Operating Base Mission Control System.

Work will be performed in Bethpage, NY (30%); San Diego, CA (25%); various locations throughout the United States (13%); W. Salt Lake City, UT (9%); Rolling Meadows, Ill., (7%); Falls Church, VA (6%); Baltimore, MD (5%); and Norwalk, CT (5%), and is expected to be complete in September 2014. This contract was competitively procured through a request for proposals; 3 firms were solicited and 3 proposals were received, as the RQ-4N beat out the General Atomics Mariner and Boeing’s “optionally manned” G550 for the contract (N00019-08-C-0023). See also US DoD release | Northrop Grumman release.

BAMS SDD

Jan 31/08: An 18-month, $15 million cooperative agreement between the United States and Australia becomes part of the pre-system development and demonstration processes for the US Navy’s Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Unmanned Aircraft System program. DC Military.

FY 2007 and Earlier

BAMS competition and contenders; Australia joins the program. NGC’s Gulfstream II
(click to view full)

Sept 4/07: General Atomics talks about their BAMS efforts, which they are undertaking in conjunction with Lockheed Martin. The firm announces successfully completion of wind tunnel testing at the San Diego Air & Space Technology Center on a 1/10 scale model of its Mariner, which “exceeded our expectations… Preliminary evaluations validated key competitive capabilities of the aircraft and suggest that Mariner’s design is even more efficient than originally assumed.”

Basically, the testing enabled a specific set of configuration changes to be evaluated at a lower cost and faster pace, while generating important data regarding performance and statistical sensitivities.

Aug 6/07: Northrop Grumman promotes its “sense and avoid” approach, which is intended to meet the BAMS requirement of safely operating alongside manned military and civilian aircraft.

Though they rely in part on high-end capabilities like the Global Hawk’s radar, UAV deconfliction is a major industry issue and the underlying algorithms used are likely to be significant beyond BAMS – in its X-47B UCAS-D unmanned naval fighters, for instance.

June 18/07: Boeing enters the fray. The BAMS 550 would create a manned/unmanned version of the Gulfstream G550 business jet (already in service with the Navy) with fully integrated sensor and communications suites and an advanced mission control system. The Boeing BAMS 550 industry team consists of Boeing, Gulfstream, Raytheon, Rolls-Royce and Honeywell, and touts “an offering that significantly improves upon the historically low reliability, limited payload and extensive support requirements of legacy unmanned aircraft systems.” The Register | Boeing handout [PDF]

May 24/07: Northrop Grumman Corporation discusses its BAMS offer and proposed approach. Their offer is based on an RQ-4N maritime-configured RQ-4B Global Hawk, that will meet “all of the threshold and more than 90% of the Navy’s objective requirements.” The RQ-4N will benefit from the GHMD contracts and efforts already undertaken with the US Navy.

Northrop Grumman’s approach is called Head Start, and is organized around step by step risk assessment that concentrates on system elements, sensor effectiveness, and demonstrating a ForceNet-compliant communications system. Head start will also use a specially modified Gulfstream II business jet as a flying test bed, equipped with the radar sensor that Northrop Grumman is offering as part of its BAMS system. Bill Beck, BAMS Head Start program manager, says: “The test-bed will be used to perform end-to-end communication functionality testing using the Advanced Mission Management System for network, bandwidth and sensor control. It will be tied to a company-built prototype of the Mission Control System (MCS), located at our Hollywood, Md., facility.” The prototype MCS contains off-the-shelf commercial software and hardware components, in keeping with the US Navy’s drive toward upgradeable open architecture approaches.

Carl Johnson, NGC’s vice president of the BAMS program, claims that. “This approach creates a significant program schedule margin which ensures an initial operation capability well ahead of threshold requirements.”

The Northrop Grumman RQ-4N BAMS team includes Northrop Grumman as prime contractor and team leader, unmanned aerial vehicle supplier and developer of the Multi-Function Active Sensor active electronically scanned array radar and the Night Hunter II electro-optical infrared sensor; L-3 Communications providing communications integration; Raytheon supporting the Mission Control System segment; and Rolls-Royce providing the jet engine.

May 8/07: Lockheed Martin discusses its BAMS proposal, which involves the modified Mariner version of General Atomics MQ-9/Predator B. The firm has partnered with EDO, FLIR Systems, Honeywell, LSI, and Sierra Nevada Corp., and its entry will offer an Electro Optical Infrared (EOIR) high definition camera, Automatic Identification System (AIS) to identify ships at sea, a communications relay capability, and Link 16 among its systems.

The Mariner shares its avionics, fuselage, flight controls, and engine (Honeywell TPE-331-1OT turboprop) with the MQ-9/Predator B, but adds enhanced wings (88 foot wingspan) and tails to support the increased takeoff weight, plus 2,000 pounds of additional fuel, 34 antennas for communications, anti-icing and deicing capability, and a retractable EO/IR surveillance turret as part of its 1,350 pound internal payload. The design has an extra 800 pounds of internal payload to offer, plus 4,000 pounds of external payload, which can be carried up to 50,000 feet. Maximum range would be 7,100 nautical miles, albeit at a rather slower speed than the jet-powered RQ-4. The flip side is that the Mariner would be able to cruise for long periods at low altitudes, and do so efficiently. Defense Daily.

May 3/07: The Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Unmanned Aircraft System source selection process formally begins, with receipt of proposals from aerospace manufacturers. A winner is expected to be announced this fall following BAMS Milestone B approval, with a System Design and Development (SDD) contract award following soon after.

Cdr. Bob Dishman, the BAMS Integrated Product team lead, is quoted in a NAVAIR release as saying that “This is a full and open competition and we are satisfied with the number, breadth and technical maturity of the proposals we have received.” See full NAVAIR release.

Jan 29/07: Flight International reports that the US NAVAIR is delaying the release of tenders for its broad area maritime surveillance (BAMS) unmanned air system requirement until mid-February, in order to enable modification of bid documents to meet unique Australian requirements for the system.

Jan 13/07: Aussies in. Australia formally signs a project agreement to participate in the BAMS system development and demonstration phase.

July 28/06: The Australian government has given first pass approval to AIR 7000 Phase 1, under which Australia will spend A$ 1.0-1.5 billion to develop a “multi-mission unmanned aerial system.” Formal negotiations can now begin with the USA on a cooperative development program linked to BAMS, and a final participation decision is expected by late 2007. Australian industry participation will be a key factor, especially with respect to the Integrated Ground Environment for UAV control and fusion of sensor information.

Australia

Additional Readings & Sources Background: BAMS/ Triton and Key Ancillaries

Export Opportunities

News & Views

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

Colt Bankrupt (Again) | Sikorski to Be Cast Off, Buyer or Not | Russia Offering SU-30MKI Upgrades to India

Tue, 16/06/2015 - 02:31
Americas

Europe

Asia

Today’s Video

  • A JF-17 at the Paris Air Show…

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

Israel’s Arrow Theater Missile Defense

Tue, 16/06/2015 - 02:23
Arrow test concept
(click to view full)

In a dawning age of rogue states, ballistic missile defenses are steadily become a widely accepted necessity. Iran is widely believed to be developing nuclear capabilities, and Israeli concerns were heightened after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad urged that Israel be “wiped off the map” (the fact that America was also placed in that category went largely uncovered).

Because missile defenses are so important, states like India and Israel have taken steps to ensure that they have the ability to build many of the key pieces. The Arrow project is a collaboration between Boeing and IAI to produce the missile interceptors that accompany the required radars, satellites, command and control systems.

NOTE: Article capped and coverage suspended in 2011.

The Arrow System Arrow launch
(click to view full)

In general, the Israeli Arrow is a more advanced weapon than the Patriot and possesses far more range, undertaking high altitude interceptions and covering a wide area (est. 90km/ 54 mile range, maximum altitude 30 miles/ 50 km for Arrow 2) as a Theater Missile Defense (TMD) system. Unlike the USA’s THAAD, PAC-3, or SM-3 which all use “hit to kill” technology, Israel’s Arrow relies on a directed fragmentation warhead to destroy enemy missiles. It can work in conjunction with a number of systems, but its main Israeli partner is the Green Pine long-range, ground-based fire control radar. The system and its engagements are controlled by the mobile Citron Tree battle management center. Since the launchers are also mobile, and the radars are semi-mobile, the system is resistant to pre-emptive strikes if good discipline is maintained.

The exoatmospheric, 2-stage Arrow-3 will use pivoting optical sensors and its own upper-stage kick motor, instead of separate control rockets for final steering. The goal is a highly maneuverable missile that can reach more than double the height of existing Arrow-2 interceptors, using a lower-weight missile. This will also have the effect of extending the missile’s range.

In contrast, Israel’s Patriot PAC-2s are more of a local point defense system with a range of about 40km/ 24 miles. They were all Israel had during the 1991 Gulf War, but these days, Israel’s Patriot PAC-2 GEM+ missiles will only be launched if the Arrow missile fails, or the target is outside the Arrow’s protective umbrella. In that respect, the Arrow/Homa system will play a role similar to the longer-range naval SM-3 Standard missile that forms the high end of Japan’s planned ABM shield (and seems destined for Europe and other states in a land-based role), or the US Army’s THAAD.

Overall responsibility for Arrow lies with the U.S. Missile Defense Organization (MDA) in Washington, DC, and the Israel Ministry of Defense in Tel Aviv, Israel. The program is executed by the Israel Missile Defense Organization in Tel Aviv, and the US Army Program Executive Office for Air and Missile Defense’s Arrow Product Office in Huntsville, AL. Key contractors include:

  • Israel Aircraft Industries (prime contractor, Arrow missile, Green Pine fire control radar)
  • Tadiran Electronics in Holon, Israel (Citron Tree battle management center)
  • Boeing (about 35% of the Arrow missile, manages many US subcontractors)
  • Lockheed Martin Missiles & Fire Control in Orlando, FL (radar seeker)
  • Raytheon in Santa Barbara, CA (Infrared seeker)
  • Other American subcontractors include ATK in Iuka, MS and Clearfield, UT; Manes Machine, in Fort Collins, CO; Ceradyne Thermo-Materials, Inc., in Scottsdale, GA; and Sanmina SCI, in Huntsville, AL.
  • Rafael Armament Development Authority, Haifa, Israel (Black Sparrow air-launched target; joint U.S./Israel effort).

EL/M-2080 “Green Pine”
(click to view larger)

Israel deployed the first battery of Arrow-1 missiles on March 14/2000, and has continued to upgrade the system. The summer of 2005 marked delivery of the first co-produced Boeing/IAI missiles. Israeli and US troops engaged in pre-training for the biennial Juniper Cobra exercise in 2007, and part of that process includes working out interoperability issues between the Patriot PAC-3 system (ad PAC-2 GEM+ that Israel deploys) and Arrow.

On July 29/04 Israel and the USA carried out joint experiment in the USA, in which the Arrow was launched against a real Scud missile. The experiment was a success, as the Arrow destroyed the Scud with a direct hit. In December 2005 the system was successfully deployed in a test against a replicated Shahab-3 missile. This feat was repeated on February 11/07.

Despite some international interest in the Arrow, the USA has blocked export initiatives so far. Although India purchased an Arrow-capable “Green Pine” radar from Elta in 2001, and has expressed interest in deploying its own battery of Arrow interceptor missiles, U.S. concerns regarding compliance with the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR, an international agreement limiting the proliferation of ballistic missile technology) have effectively halted such plans for the time being. This did not stop India from using the Green Pine technology in its own November 2006 anti-missile test, using a modified Prithvi short-range ballistic missile with an exo-atmospheric kill vehicle and a hit to kill warhead.

Contracts & Key Events, 2004-Present Arrow-3 development
click to play video

The section is still being updated.

June 16/15: Joint US-Israel missile programs may benefit from additional funding under a Defense Appropriations Bill, following a vote in the House. The programs covered by the increase in funds include the Iron Dome, Arrow, Arrow 3 and David’s Sling systems. The last of these will receive the most significant boost, with an additional $286.5 million allocation.

Feb 22/11: An Arrow System successfully intercepts a ballistic target missile during a flight test conducted at Pt. Mugu Sea Range, CA. This test is part of the Arrow System Improvement Program (ASIP) and was conducted jointly by the Israel Missile Defense Organization and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency.

The test represented a realistic scenario, and all the elements (Arrow, Green Pine radar, Citron Tree BMC) performed in their operational configurations, using new Block 4 software designed to improve their ability to discriminate targets. US MDA release | video || Defense News.

July 27/10: The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense votes to fund Israel’s missile defense programs at $422.7 million for 2011, nearly $96 million above the original White House funding request. This represents a doubling of aid for missile defense from 2010, in the wake of an emerging consensus that the CIA’s 2007 estimate of Iran’s nuclear weapons program was wrong, and underestimated Iranian progress.

On the other hand, the structure of that funding is less good for the Arrow program. While the HASD added $58 million to the administration’s original FY 2011 Arrow-3 request, that provisional $108.8 million is actually less than FY 2010 funding of $157.4 million ($60M request + $97.4M Congress added). Likewise, the complementary medium range RAFAEL/Raytheon David’s Sling/Magic Wand dropped from $134.7 million in FY 2010 to $84.7 million requested in 2011. The net increase comes from a one-time, $205 million grant for the procurement of 10 RAFAEL Iron Dome batteries for defense against short-range missiles. HASD Chair statement [ PDF] | HASD Table [PDF] | AllGov | Jerusalem Post | Israel’s Globes business news.

July 26/10: Israel and the United States sign a deal to develop and field the Arrow 3 system. It will be capable of tracking and shooting down ballistic missiles at a higher altitudes, including fully exoatmospheric threats. US MDA | China’s Xinhua.

March 22/10: Defense News reports that U.S. and Israeli government and industrial partners will press ahead with Arrow 3 work through good faith understandings, until formalized government-to-government accords catch up. The goal is to deploy the new missile by 2014.

Production of the Arrow-2 is winding down, and final deliveries are planned by the end of 2010. Government and industrial partners have apparently been working together on Arrow-3 for nearly 2 years, moving the program through at least 4 of the US Missile Defense Agency’s required technology “knowledge points, and validate critical subsystems. A first fly-out is planned for 2011.

Manufacturing
(click to view full)

April 7/09: The Israeli Ministry of Defense and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency conduct a successful test of the Arrow ballistic missile defense system. The operationally realistic test was conducted in Israel, using an ASIP interceptor co-produced by Boeing and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI). The event marked the co-produced Arrow II’s 2nd intercept in 2 attempts, as well as its 3rd successful flight test. Boeing.

Jan 4/09: Israel’s Arutz Sheva news service reports that the Arrow missile defense system has been deployed near Ashkelon, in part because IAI has worked with American firms and developed an updated radar system named MC4. The new radar can also deal with smaller missiles, such as the Hamas government’s Kassam or Grad rockets being launched from Gaza. Using GPS and camera sensors, the MC4 system tracks the flight path, and within a minute of launch, it can determine both the launch site and projected landing site of the missile.

At the same time, pressure is building to add Northrop Grumman’s SkyGuard laser system to Israel’s defenses, a system whose technology is based on joint US-Israeli research:

“Supporters claim that the Skyguard laser based system is more suited to Israel’s needs than the rocket-based Rafael solution. Firstly, the laser can intercept short range missiles such as the Kassam rocket which hit their targets in less than 10 seconds. The rocket-based Rafael system can only hit medium-range rockets which reach their targets in more than 20 seconds. In addition, each laser round fired costs approximately $3,000. In contrast, defensive rockets for the Iron Dome system are estimated to cost over $100,000. Supporters also claim that the Skyguard system could be deployed in a short amount of time, whereas the completion of the Iron Dome rocket system is not foreseen in the near future.”

Sept 29/08: The USA has deployed an unspecified X-band radar system in Israel, manned by around 120 American personnel. Reports hint that the system may be similar to the radars deployed to Japan, or the AN/TPY-2 used as part of the THAAD system. The Guardian:

“One key feature of the system is that information from early-warning satellites – which greatly increases the radar’s ability to pinpoint launches – would remain in US hands. The satellite ground station would be in Europe and transmit data to Israel.

…The high-powered X-Band system, manufactured by Raytheon Company, would allow Israel’s Arrow II ballistic shield to engage an Iranian Shehab-3 missile about halfway through its 11-minute flight to Israel, six times sooner than Israel’s existing Green Pine radar can. The X-Band can track an object the size of a baseball from 2,900 miles away.”

Feb 14/08: IAI announces that The Israel Ministry of Defense (IMOD) / Missile Defense Organization (IMDO) has awarded a follow-on production contract to Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI)’s MLM Division for an undisclosed number of additional Arrow 2 Anti-Tactical Ballistic Missile (ATBM) system interceptors. The interceptors will be assembled in Israel at IAI’s MLM Division, the Arrow prime contractor, with major portions coming from Boeing IDS, the U.S. prime contractor in Huntsville, AL., ATK in Luka, MS., and various other subcontractors across the U.S.

Aug 23/07: The Jerusalem Post publishes “IDF modifying Arrow deployment in the North.” Key quote:

“Following this past summer’s war and the recognition that the next war will involve Syrian and Iranian missile barrages, the Air Defense Forces decided to adopt a “wide deployment” for its Arrow missile batteries.”

Aug 6/07: Jane’s Defence Weekly: “Israel is leaning towards upgrading its own anti-ballistic missile Arrow Weapon System (AWS) rather than acquiring the US Theatre High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) system. While no formal decision has yet been taken, Jane’s has learned that officials from the Israel Ballistic Missile Defence Organisation (BMDO) have informed the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) about potential complications with integrating THAAD into the country’s missile-defence alignment.”

March 26/07: An improved Arrow II missile, with modifications to its hardware and electronics under the Arrow System Improvement Program, is successfully test-fired this afternoon at Palmahim Air Force Base. The interceptor performed successfully according to design specifications, meeting all expectations and objectives. This is the 1st successful test of the improved configuration, and the 2nd test overall of a co-produced interceptor. Testing is managed by the Israeli Missile Defense Organization, in close cooperation with the U.S. Missile Defense Agency.

Test objectives were to collect flight engineering data for future test events, and to test the capabilities of the improved Arrow interceptor. This test marks the U.S./Israeli Arrow II program’s 14th success in 16 attempts. US MDA [PDF].

Feb 12/07: A successful ballistic missile intercept test by the Arrow missile defense system, conducted at night over the Mediterranean Sea. It’s the 1st test of a co-produced Arrow intercept missile fired from an improved launcher, using 2 Arrow batteries separated from each other. The target, called “Black Sparrow,” was launched from an F-15 fighter aircraft at which point the Fire Control Radar acquired the target and notified the Battle Management Center. A defense plan was issued and a mission command was sent to the Launch Control Center to fire the interceptor missile. This test marks the U.S./Israeli Arrow II program’s 13th success in 15 attempts. US MDA [PDF].

Spring 2005: The 1st co-produced Arrow 2 interceptor is delivered by IAI to the MoD. Source [PDF].

Feb 2/05: Israel Defense Forces carry out a successful test of the IAI/Boeing Arrow anti-missile system at a secret location in the center of the country. The Jerusalem Post reports that “an F-15 fighter jet flying over the Mediterranean dropped a Black Sparrow test missile specially designed to simulate an incoming Iranian Shihab 3 missile headed toward the Israeli shore.” The successful interception occurred at a higher altitude than previous efforts, and tested recent improvements made to the Arrow 2 system.

Israeli Air Force Patriot missile batteries also participated passively in the test, following the incoming missile with their radars. The Times of India notes that this was the 14th test of the system, which has included joint tests in the USA and advanced tests simulating advanced separating warheads. As evidenced by the Patriot batteries’ participation in this latest test, Israel is working to integrate all of its key assets and connections to US data into one national system, rather than relying on fragmented local control. Jerusalem Post | copy at United Jerusalem.

Pt. Mugu launch
(click to view full)

Aug 26/04: US Missile Defense Agency [PDF]:

“The Arrow anti-ballistic missile system was used today in a joint Israel/United States test exercise as part of the ongoing Arrow System Improvement Program (ASIP). The test was the second in a series conducted at the Point Mugu Sea Range in California. It was the thirteenth Arrow intercept test and the eighth test of the complete weapon system. The Arrow interceptor was launched toward the target but no intercept was achieved. Many of the test objectives were successfully completed, and the test data is being analyzed by test engineers to determine why an intercept did not occur.”

July 29/04: A modified Arrow System Improvement Program anti-ballistic missile successfully intercepts and destroys a ballistic missile target today, west of San Nicolas Island on the Pt. Mugu Sea Range in California. Point Mugu was used, in order to offer a realistic scenario that could not have been tested in Israel due to test-field safety restrictions.

The objective of the test was to demonstrate the Arrow system’s improved performance against a target that represents a threat to Israel. This was the 12th Arrow intercept test, and the 7th test of the complete Arrow system. US MDA [PDF]

April 1/04: Boeing announces a $78 million contract from Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) to produce Arrow II interceptor components. The contract, effective immediately, runs through 2006 with options for additional production until Q2 2008. The total contract value could exceed $225 million if all options are exercised.

Boeing and IAI signed a teaming agreement in 2002 to co-produce the interceptor for the Arrow weapon system. The firm is responsible for production of the electronics section, the radome, motorcases for the booster and sustainer, and the canister that holds the interceptor in the missile launcher. Boeing production and program management will be conducted in Huntsville, AL. IAI, the prime contractor of the Arrow system, is responsible for system integration and final interceptor assembly in Israel.

Boeing will manage several major subcontracts to support the Arrow interceptor production including Alliant-Techsystems in Iuka, MS and Clearfield, UT; Manes Machine, in Fort Collins, CO; Ceradyne Thermo-Materials, Inc., in Scottsdale, GA; and Sanmina SCI, in Huntsville, AL.

Sept 14/2000: The Israel Ministry of Defense, in cooperation with the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense Organization and the U.S. Army, conduct the 2nd successful intercept of a target ballistic missile by the Arrow Weapon System (AWS) in Israel. This was the 8th overall Arrow-2 flight test, but the 1st intercept for the against a new air-launched, in-bound target called the Black Sparrow.

The Arrow interceptor took off and flew in a nominal trajectory, acquired the Black Sparrow target, then locked on and homed on the designated threat. The warhead was fused at the proper range and the Arrow interceptor destroyed the target. The Green Pine fire control radar and Citron Tree battle management center participated fully in the test, performing battle planning, launch operations, and up link/down link message applications, as well as post intercept verifications. Both assets worked according to plan and fulfilled all test objectives. Analysis of all data is underway to evaluate and confirm results. US MDA [PDF]

Additional Readings & Sources

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

Bringing Home the BACN to Front-Line Forces

Tue, 16/06/2015 - 02:01
E-11A BACN
(click to view full)

In late June 2009, the USAF awarded Northrop Grumman Defense Mission Systems Inc., of San Diego, CA an urgent requirement contract for its Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) System. Under current plans, Northrop Grumman will help the USAF deploy BACN in up to 4 “E-11″ Bombardier BD-700 Global Express (see also BACN-modified photo) ultra-long-range business jets, and in up to 4 EQ-4B Global Hawk Block 20 UAVs, for sustained deployment through 2015.

BACN is an airborne communications relay that extends communications ranges, bridges between radio frequencies, and “translates” among incompatible communications systems. That may sound trivial, but on a tactical level, it definitely isn’t.

The BACN System Global Express
(click to view full)

BACN was developed under a Department of Defense Microelectronic Activity contract (#H94003-04-D-0005), as part of the Interim Gateway Program. It provides a high-speed, Internet protocol (IP)-based airborne network infrastructure that that extends communications ranges, bridges between radio frequencies, and “translates” among incompatible communications systems – including both tactical and civil cellular systems. Using BACN, a Special Forces soldier on the ground could use a civil cell phone to speak to a fighter pilot in the cockpit.

BACN supports seamless movement of imagery, video, voice and digital messages, with support for waveforms that include SINCGARS (single-channel ground and airborne radio system), DAMA (demand assigned multiple access), EPLRS (enhanced position location reporting system), SADL (situation awareness data link), Link 16, and IP-based networking connectivity using TTN (tactical targeting network), TCDL (tactical common data link) technology, CLIP (Common Link Integration Processing), and 802.11b. Northrop Grumman’s joint translator/forwarder (JXF), originally developed for US Joint Forces Command, is to accomplish digital-message transformation.

That kind of system can be especially useful in rugged terrain that block line-of-sight communications, in combined civil/military situations, or when different services or even different countries are operating side by side in the field. Afghanistan meets all of those criteria, an so do some aspects of operations in Iraq.

F-22A: Got BACN?
(click to view full)

There are even reports that BACN may be installed in the F-22 Raptor as a communications gateway that would solve some of that platform’s issues; releases concerning the JEFX 08 exercises were vague on this subject, mentioning only BACN’s ability to receive unique F-22 waveforms.

As of 2006, the Northrop Grumman BACN team included:

  • Northrop Grumman’s Defense Mission Systems, Space Technology, Integrated Systems and Information Technology sectors
  • NASA Johnson Space Center in Houston, TX
  • Rockwell Collins in Cedar Rapids, IA
  • Raytheon Solipsys in Laurel, MD
  • L3 Communications in Salt Lake City, UT
  • Qualcomm Inc. in San Diego, CA
  • ViaSat Inc. in Carlsbad, CA

BACN served

Northrop Grumman and teammate Orion Air Group provide 24/7 operations and support services for BACN on the front lines.

At present, BACN is flying on 3 modified E-11A Global Express long-range business jets (1 leased, 2 USAF-owned), and 3 (soon 4) EQ-4B Global Hawk Block 20 UAV variants. Another E-11 plane has been contracted for integration.

Contracts and Key Events

Unless otherwise specified, contracts are issued and managed by the staffs at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA, and performed by Northrop Grumman. Contracts began with the firm’s Defense Mission Systems, Inc. unit in San Diego, CA, then shifted to Northrop Grumman Systems Corp’s Defense Systems Division in Herndon, VA after 2010, following the firm’s move to Washington, DC. Since then, the contractor’s side had shifted back and forth between Herndon VA and what is now Northrop Grumman Space & Mission Systems Corp. in San Diego, CA.

FY 2014 – 2015

EQ-4B Operations

June 6/15: On Monday the Air Force awarded a $145.4 million contract modification for services in support of the Battlefield Airborne Communication Node Joint Urgent Operational Need (BACN JUON). Contractor Northrop Grumman also benefited from a $35.7 million modification to the KC-10 tanker Contractor Logistics Support program.

Aug 6/14: Northrop Grumman Corporation announces an $89.7 million contract option to continue operating and supporting BACN (4 E-11A jets, 3 EQ-4B UAVs, all payloads) in support of overseas contingency missions through June 2015. Sources: NGC, “Northrop Grumman Awarded Contract to Continue BACN Mission Support Contract”.

Jan 15/14: Northrop Grumman Information Systems in Herndon, VA receives a $52.3 million firm-fixed-price cost-reimbursement modification, exercising CLIN options to continue supporting and operating E-11A BACN aircraft.

$31.8 million in FY 2014 O&M funds are committed immediately. Work will be performed at Kandahar AB, Afghanistan, as well as Wichita, KS, and is expected to be complete by Jan 23/15 (FA8726-13-C-0001, PO 0013).

FY 2011 – 2013 SmartNode on Firebird
(click to view full)

May 7/13: Northrop Grumman Space and Missile Systems Corp. in San Diego, CA receives a $89.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, extending the FY 2009 BACN payload contract that covers deployment support and operation of the fielded systems.

Work will be performed at San Diego, CA, and abroad at locations where currently deployed until June 22/14. $7.5 million in FY 2013 Operations and Maintenance funds are committed immediately by the USAF Life Cycle Management Center/HNAK at Hanscom AFB, MA (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0076).

Nov 1/12: E-11A. A $48.2 million firm-fixed-price contract for E-11A BACN platform maintenance at Kandahar Air Base, Afghanistan. The contract will run until February 2018. Whether the Afghan regime will run that long is another question (FA8726-13-C-0001).

Sept 27/12: 4th E-11A. A $33 million contract modification for BACN Node payload integration and supplemental type certificates on E-11A aircraft S/N 9506. That serial number indicates a new contractor-owned aircraft. This will bring the number of E-11As to 4: 2 leased, and 2 government-owned.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA, and is expected to be completed by Oct 31/13. The AFLCMC/HNAK at Hanscom AFB, MA manages the contract (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0059).

New E-11
A

Sept 7/12: EQ-4B #4. Northrop Grumman delivers the USAF’s 4th EQ-4B Global Hawk 4 months ahead of schedule, in a flight from the Palmdale, CA facility to Grand Forks AFB, ND. It’s the 2nd scheduled delivery from the Dec 28/11 entry.

Briefings with appropriate personnel reveal that it may be the 4th EQ-4B delivered, but it’s only the 3rd one flying for the USAF. The Aug 20/11 crash (added below) explains the discrepancy. NGC release, Oct 23/12.

June 2012: EQ-4B #3. Northrop Grumman delivers the USAF’s 3rd EQ-4B Global Hawk ahead of schedule. It’s the 1st scheduled delivery from the Dec 28/11 entry. Source.

June 21/12: All. A $106.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, to extend the deployment and operation of BACN payloads installed in 3 EA-11A jets and 3 E-Q4B Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicles.

Work will run to June 22/13, and will be performed both within the United States, and outside the USA where currently deployed (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0043).

June 21/12: E-11A. A $50.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 8 more months of E-11A Platform Maintenance support for the 3 aircraft: tail numbers 9355, 9358, and 9001. Work will be performed at Kandahar Air Field, Afghanistan until Feb 24/13 (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0053).

May 17/12: SmartNode – BACN Lite. Northrop Grumman completes a series of test flights for its SmartNode Pod, which is based on BACN technology but can be carried by smaller aircraft and UAVs. SmartNode can connect to BACN platforms, ground operational centers or other pods to create encrypted, high-bandwidth digital data and voice connectivity. The project is funded by the firm and by a US military customer, and Northrop Grumman used its own Firebird “optionally manned” plane because the designated platform wasn’t immediately available for testing.

The SmartNode Pod is designed to be a part of the Pentagon’s Joint Aerial Layer Network (JALN), which would link ground, space and airborne communications nodes to offer military forces the bandwidth they require. That had been the goal of the $20-25 billion TSAT satellite program, before it was cancelled; JALN represents a much more diverse and incremental approach to the same problem. Discussions with Northrop Grumman indicate that BACN would sit at the top tier of JALN, while SmartNode is a mid-tier solution that won’t do satellite communications, has fewer message translation options, won’t support as many networks, and won’t support many of the classified American networks. On the other hand, it’s a 250 pound payload that can fly on MALE(Medium Altitude Long Endurance) UAVs like the US Army’s MQ-1C Gray Eagle, IAI’s Heron, etc., providing high-bandwidth relay and a useful subset of technical translations at less cost, in more places. NGC | USAF re: JALN.

March 30/12: E-11A. A $26.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price, time-and-material contract modification exercises options for a 7.5 month extension of E-11A serial number 11-9001 services, in support of Overseas Contingency Operations from April 1/12 through Nov 16/12. Should be painted in a nice military grey by now (vid. Nov 18/11), but the USAF hasn’t bought the jet, yet.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (44%) and Yorktown, VA (56%) – (FA8726-09-C-0010, Modification PO 0050).

Feb 23/12: E-11A. A $34.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification adds a 4-month extension for the continued operations support and maintenance of the USAF’s 2 BACN E-11A jets, and operational support and maintenance of the BACN payloads. Work will take place in San Diego, CA, and the extension runs until June 22/12 (FA8726-09-C-0010 PO 0042).

Dec 28/11: EQ-4B. Northrop Grumman Defense Mission Systems Inc. in San Diego, CA receives a $47.2 million firm-fixed-price contract to buy and integrate BACN payloads on 2 more RQ-4B Global Hawk Block 20 aircraft: AF-11 and AF-13. These 2 HALE UAVs will be provided to Northrop Grumman as government furnished property. Then Northrop Grumman will integrate the BACN payload and turn them into EQ-4Bs, bringing the delivered fleet to 4 and the serving fleet to 3.

Work will be performed in Palmdale, CA, and is expected to be complete by Aug 22/12 for AF-11, and Dec 15/12 for AF-13. USAF Material Command’s Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom AFB, MA (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0041).

2 more EQ-4B UAVs

Nov 18/11: E-11A. A $29.5 million firm-fixed-price contract modification. The modification is for a Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Plan (CAMP) Level 8C inspection of Air Force aircraft E-11A, serial number 11-9001, followed by a 5-month extension of the operation and support of the aircraft. It also provides an option to repaint the aircraft to USAF specifications, and for correction of any faults found during CAMP inspection.

This is the same sort of sequence followed for the other 2 leased jets, just before the USAF bought them. One firm was solicited and one firm submitted a proposal to USAF Materiel Command’s Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom AFB, MA (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0038).

Nov 3/11: The USAF’s BACN platforms get official designations. The Bombardier BD-700s are E-11As, and the modified Global Hawk Block 20 UAVs are EQ-4Bs. Northrop Grumman.

Designations

Sept 30/11: E-11A. Orion Air Group, LLC in Newport News, VA receives a $50 million firm fixed price contract to buy 2 of the leased “E-11A” Global Express BD-700-1A10 jets, serial # 9355 & 9358, including their engines. The aircraft and engines were provided to the Pentagon by Northrop Grumman, under a sub-lease for operations (FA8726-09-C-0010). Now we know why the Sept 21/11 contract had that re-painting option.

US Air Force Materiel Command, Electronic Systems Center, Airborne Networks Division at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA manages this contract (FA8307-11-C-0014).

Bizjet buyout: 2 E-11As

Sept 21/11: E-11A. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp.’s Defense Systems Division in Herndon, VA receives a 5-month, $43 million extension to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to operate and maintain the other 2 E-11A Global Express BACN jets, serial numbers 11-9355 and 11-9358. This contract also provides for the operation and maintenance of the BACN payload by Northrop Grumman, and offers an option to re-paint the 2 BD-700 aircraft to USAF specifications (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0035).

Aug 20/11: EQ-4B lost. One of the USAF’s EQ-4B’s (tail number 04-2017) crashes about 105 nautical miles NW of Kandahar, during a communications relay mission over Afghanistan. The accident investigation believes that a connector failed, which led to the loss of electricity for the payload, and for the aileron and spoiler flight control systems. That made the UAV uncontrollable, and it arrowed into the ground within 4 minutes. There isn’t much left, as one might imagine given the UAV’s starting altitude. The investigation isn’t 100% definitive, because the avionics were not recovered at the crash site.

The EQ4B is home-based at Beale AFB, CA with the 9th Reconnaissance Wing, but it was forward-deployed to Afghanistan for its missions. Crash investigation [PDF].

EQ-4B crash

July 8/11: E-11A. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp.’s Defense Systems Division in Herndon, VA receives a 4-month, $20.7 million extension to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for operate and maintain E-11A Global Express BACN jet, serial number 1-900. This contract also provides for the operations and maintenance of the BACN payload (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0032).

June 25/11: The BACN system completes its 2,000th USAF mission flown in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Since the system was deployed to support Afghan theater operations in October 2008, BACN has accumulated more than 20,000 operational flight hours in those 2,000 missions, with a mission availability rate of 98%.

The interval from Oct 1/08 – June 25/11 inclusive is 998 days, which means an average sortie rate of about 2 missions per day, 24/7.

Mission #2,000

Dec 21/10: The Department of Defense (DoD) and the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) have selected the BACN Joint Urgent Operational Need (JUON) program to receive one of the Top 5 DoD Program Awards given annually for excellence in systems engineering.

BACN also has been honored in 2010 with the Weapon Systems Award from the Order of Daedalians, a national fraternity of military pilots, and the 2010 Network Centric Warfare Award for Outstanding Achievement from a Defense Industry Partner, from the Institute for Defense and Government Advancement. Northrop Grumman.

Recognition

Dec 13/10: E-11A. A $74.6 million option for continued maintenance and support of the payload installed in 2 of 3 modified BD-700 Global Express aircraft leased from March 2011 through October 2011. Money will be committed as needs arise (FA8726-09-C-0010; P00021).

Nov 30/10: All. A $34.1 million contract modification to extend BACN payload maintenance and support in current theaters of war. At this time, $10 million has been committed (FA8726-09-C-0010; P00020).

FY 2006 – 2010 RQ-4B Block 20
(click to view full)

Sept 22/10: EQ-4B. Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems Sector in San Diego, CA received a $20 million contract modification which will provide replenishment spares relative to the RQ-4B Global Hawk Block 20 BACN joint urgent operational need effort. WR-ALC/GRCKA at Robins Air Force Base, GA manages this contract (FA8528-09-D-0001; PO 0016).

BACN was originally deployed on board a high altitude NASA WB-57 aircraft. Deployment on board the Global Hawk UAV is the next step beyond its current platform, a modified Bombardier Global Express business jet.

March 11/10: Sub-contractors. ViaSat in Carlsbad, CA receives $21.5 million firm-fixed-price contract and delivery order for MIDS-LVT Link 16 terminals, combining purchases for the USA (68%) and Germany (11%); and for Australia (18%) and South Korea (3%) under the Foreign Military Sales program.

Contract funds in the amount of $1.6 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Work will be performed in Carlsbad, CA (30%) and in various other sites worldwide (70%), and is expected to be complete by Feb 28/12. This contract was competitively procured via the Space and Naval Warfare Systems E-commerce Web site, with 2 offers received, based on a synopsis released via the Federal Business Opportunities Web site (N00039-10-D-0032).

ViaSat’s subsequent release says that this new award includes LVT (1) terminal variants for F/A-18, P-3, and E-2D aircraft; and MH-60R/S helicopters, along with terminals for the BACN program and other U.S. Navy applications. The MIDS-LVT Lot 11 order also includes LVT (2) “ground” terminal variants for various U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force and Joint Forces applications, as well as terminals for Germany, Australia, and Korea.

Feb 22/10: All. Northrop Grumman Defense Mission Systems, Inc. in San Diego, CA, was awarded a $77.9 million contract to maintain and support the Battlefield Airborne Communications Node system “in support of overseas contingency operations” through fiscal year 2010. The award is corrected on Feb 25/10 to add an order number, and say that only $58.4 million has been committed (FA8726-09-C-0010, P00008).

Jan 26/10: Recognition. At the Institute for Defense and Government Advancement’s Network Enabled Operations conference in Arlington, VA, BACN receives the 2010 Network Centric Warfare Award for Outstanding Achievement from a Defense Industry Partner. NGC release.

Sept 14/09: All. A $35.5 million contract to provide the rapid fielding and support of the Battlefield Airborne Communications Node System. At this time no money has been obligated; it will be allocated as needs arise (FA8726-09-C-0010, P00003).

June 24/09: Contract. A $276.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee urgent requirement contract for its Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) System. At this time, $97.8 million has been obligated by the 653rd Electronic Systems Group at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA (FA8726-09-C-0010).

The contract will fund fielding in 3 long-range Bombardier BD-700 Global Express jets, and 2 Global Hawk RQ-4B Block 20 UAVs. It will also fund the company’s support for continuing operations of the existing BACN-equipped BD-700, which the Air Force deployed to the front lines in December 2008. See also Northrop Grumman release.

BACN ordered

Oct 18/06: Development. Northrop Grumman will continue to enhance and expand the Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) under 2 recently awarded Defense Microelectronics Activity contracts, issued under its Advanced Technology Support Program.

The 16-month, $25 million BACN Spiral Technical Phase II will continue base development, building on the initial $25.7 million BACN contract in April 2005. The 24-month, $8.5 million Intraflight Datalink Gateway System will add a secure data link allowing the F-22 Raptor to communicate with other platforms without compromising its stealth. Northrop Grumman.

BACN Development Phase II

Additional Readings

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

China’s Hypersonic Vehicle Reportedly Passed Third Test in Row | Northrop Joins GD-Gulfstream Team for JSTARS Competition | AF Wants Cheap High-Speed UAV Demo

Mon, 15/06/2015 - 02:08
Americas

Europe

  • On Friday, France successfully test-fired [French] an ASMP-A nuclear-capable cruise missile, launching the supersonic ramjet-powered missile from a Rafale fighter. The new missile is an upgrade to the ASMP (Air-Sol Moyenne Portee – medium range air to surface) missile, with the new model boasting a longer range. All Rafales in the F3 configuration are capable of carrying the missile, with this representing all jets delivered from 2008.

  • Spain’s defense ministry has authorized Airbus to restart flight tests of its previously grounded A400M fleet, following a crash in early May. International operators of the transport aircraft have retained their grounding orders, with the company’s Seville facility recently becoming clogged with the grounded aircraft.

  • Poland’s defense ministry has reportedly begun the process of arranging upgrades for the country’s fleet of Leopard 2A4 main battle tanks, with a contract expected within months. Two Polish firms have been invited to tender for the program, which was originally planned for 2013. In that year Poland ordered 105 2A5-model Leopards, without investing in bringing their existing 2A4 model tanks up to spec. As such, the Poles are now playing catch-up to equalize their fleet’s capabilities.

  • The Saab/Diehl RBS15 Mk3 anti-ship missile has been successfully launched from a German corvette, completing an operational test in order to secure qualification. The missile is sub-sonic, with customers including Poland, France, Sweden and Finland.

Asia

Today’s Video

  • Friday’s launch of an ASMP-A from a French Air Force Rafale…

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

Korea’s KDX-III AEGIS Destroyers

Thu, 11/06/2015 - 02:36
KDX-III: DDG-991
(click to view full)

The Korean Destroyer eXperimental (KDX) surface combatant shipbuilding program involves 3 individual classes of ships. The 3 KDX-I Gwanggaeto Great Class ships are called destroyers, but at 3,800 tons, their size and armament more properly rank them as small frigates. The last ship of class was commissioned in 2000. The next 6 KDX-II Chungmugong Yi Sun-sin Class ships are indeed destroyers at 6,085 tons full load, with a hull design licensed from Germany’s IABG, and more advanced systems that include SM-2 air defense missiles. They were commissioned between 2003-2008.

With that experience under their belts, Korea entered the 3rd phase of the program. Their KDX-III King Sejong Great Class destroyers weigh in at 8,500 tons standard displacement and 11,000 tons full load. That’s heavier than the USA’s CG-47 Ticonderoga Class cruisers, making them the largest ships in the world to carry Lockheed Martin’s AEGIS combat system. They will form the high end of South Korea’s Navy, while offering a premium showcase for some of the new weapons and electronic systems developed by South Korea’s defense sector.

The KDX III Sejongdaewang-Ham Class KDX-III promo video
(click to view full)

The KDX-III is clearly intended to be a multi-purpose destroyer will full air defense, land attack, anti-shipping, and anti-submarine capabilities. It is also being designed with the ability to add tactical ballistic missile defense capabilities, and important consideration if North Korea is your neighbor. At present, however, the ships do not possess AEGIS BMD modifications, or SM-3 missiles. The ROKN has ordered 3 ships so far, and will add another 3 for delivery from 2023 – 2027.

These ships are larger than America’s Ticonderoga Class cruisers, and are Aegis cruisers themselves in all but name. Their range of capabilities falls short in the area of ballistic missile defense, but that could be changed for under $100 million per ship. In every other area, they make a competitive case to be the Pacific region’s leading modern multi-role heavy surface combatant, while providing an important platform for new South Korean weapons.

Size

Built by Hyundai Heavy Industries in Ulsan, 415 kilometers (257 miles) southeast of Seoul, the KDX-III King Sejong Class will be significantly larger than the 5,000t KDX-IIs. These ships are 166m / 544 feet long and 21m/ 69 feet wide, and 49m/ 161 feet deep, with a standard displacement of 8,500 tons, and a full load displacement of around 11,000 tons. A set of 4 ubiquitous GE LM2500 naval gas turbines provide main power, giving them a high top speed of 30 knots.

Hangars in the back allow carriage of 2 medium naval helicopters. The ROKN actually uses smaller Lynx family helicopters as their primary anti-submarine warfare platform, including the advanced new AW159 Wildcat.

Key Sensors

Sometimes described as an enlarged and updated DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class, KDX-III will also use the advanced AEGIS radar & combat system (initially Baseline 7, Phase 1) combination, with the AN/SPY-1D (V) radar and the MK99 system of SPG-62 illuminators, etc.

France’s Sagem provides their Vampir long-range IRST (InfraRed Search and Track) system for passive day and night surveillance of ocean and land targets.

For underwater surveillance, a hull-mounted DSQS-21BZ (ASO 90 family) sonar from Atlas Elektronik is paired with a Korean LIG Nex1 towed sonar.

Weapons

Fixed weapons will include BAE’s 5-inch/ 127mm MK45 Mod 4 naval gun, a pair of 324mm triple torpedo mounts in KMK 32 configuration, a Raytheon RIM-116B Rolling Airframe Missile Block 1 for short-range air defense, and a 30mm Thales “Goalkeeper” CIWS system for close-in defense against aircraft and boats.

KDX-III ships real firepower lies their array of 128 vertical launch cells, which is slightly more than the American Ticonderoga Class cruiser’s 122 cells. On the Korean ships, these VLS cells come in 2 types.

The standard Mk 41 vertical launch cells are split 48 forward, and 32 aft, for a total of 80. Vertically-launched SM-2 Block IIIA/B surface-to-air missiles handle long-range anti-aircraft duties, and an upgrade to the SM-6 is planned. The ships could also upgrade to ABM-capable SM-3s, if accompanying modifications are made to the radar and combat system, but South Korean leaders aren’t interested. Mk.41 cells can also carry a wide variety of other payloads, including quad-packed RIM-162 anti-aircraft missiles, vertically-launched anti-submarine torpedoes, or Tomahawk cruise missiles. South Korea currently seems focused on filling them with SM-2s. This will give the destroyers 3-layer anti-aerial protection (SM-2/6, RAM, Goalkeeper).

Weapons variety comes from a 3rd VLS set of 48 aft-mounted “K-VLS” cells, a Korean system that holds locally-designed weapons like Hyunmoo cruise missiles, SSM-700K Haesung anti-ship missiles, Red Shark “K-ASROC” vertically launched rocket-assisted anti-submarine torpedoes, or other compatible weapons.

Passive Defense

The ships are being designed with a number of low-observable features to reduce their radar profile. These measures also include advanced infrared signature reduction methods designed to give it an IR signature far superior to comparable ships, including its U.S. contemporary the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke class destroyer. If that fails, a locally-designed LIG Nex1 SLQ-200K Sonata ESM system helps the destroyers react to and attempt to jam incoming missiles.

The KDX-III Program KDX-III Destroyer concept
(click to view full)

Official statements said that the name Sejongdaewang-Ham (“King Sejong”) was chosen for the first ship because of this importance in Korean history. Besides supporting the creation of the Korean “Hangeul” alphabet, this 15th century Chosun Dynasty monarch is also known for strengthening the country’s national defense capability.

GlobalSecurity.org estimates that each of the first 3 ships cost about 1.2 trillion won (roughly $923 million equivalent, albeit in pre-2008 dollars).

  • ROKS King Sejong’s official delivery to the ROK Navy took place at the end of 2008
  • ROKS Yulgok Yi I was supposed to enter service in 2010, but took until 2011.
  • ROKS Seoae Ryu Seong-ryong (was Kwon Yul), was commissioned at the end of August 2012.

Then what?

The program had options for another 3 ships, but the March 2010 sinking of the corvette ROKN Cheonan by a North Korean submarine temporarily shifted the ROKN’s focus away from the globe’s blue waters, and back toward its own littoral regions. Rather than continuing to build more KDX-III destroyers, there was talk in South Korea of modernizing the cheaper 5,000t KDX-II light destroyer design, giving the “KDX-IIA” ships stealthier radar and emissions signatures, and adding AEGIS radars and combat systems to give them better anti-aircraft coverage.

That talk died in 2013, with approval of a KRW 4 trillion/ $3.8 billion program to build another 3 KDX-III ships, and field them from 2023 – 2027.

The key consideration when deciding between KDX-IIA light destroyers and cruiser-sized KDX-III was the trade-off between having a larger number of modern ships in the water to handle submarines and Fast Attack Craft, vs. fleet capability for potential ballistic missile defense (BMD) missions. North Korea fields both kinds of threats, but it was the emergence of a territorially aggressive China and its Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) that turned the tide in favor of more KDX-IIIs. The KDX-III’s SPY-1D (V) radar, AEGIS combat system, and long-range anti-air and surface attack missiles make them a potent force for policing large naval territories.

North Korea couldn’t make that a South Korean national priority, but China did. Less than a month after China’s ADIZ was declared, South Korea had declared one of its own, and announced the KDX-III follow-on contract to give their claim more teeth.

The ships have a set upgrade path for missile defense, thanks to the US Navy’s program to retrofit DDG-51 ships, and the KDX-III destroyers should have enough on-board power and available weight/space growth to handle the BMD mission. Current plans call for adding SM-6 missiles, which are scheduled to gain a point defense BMD role in 2015 – 2016. Korea’s size and maritime geography may make that a perfectly appealing prospect, alongside land-based BMD systems with longer reach.

Contracts and Key Events

Contracts are covered where they are public, and traceable directly to the KDX-III program. This is not always true, for instance with weapons that serve on more than one ship type.

2014

USN SM-6 test
(click to view full)

June 11/15: South Korea has requested the sale of the Aegis Combat System through a Foreign Military Sale. The potential sale of three of the systems, as well as auxiliary equipment, could be worth $1.9 billion and comes weeks after the North tested a “submarine-launched” missile. The ACS comprises the SPY-1 radar, Display System and Underwater Countermeasure System, with the Aegis system also capable of operating in a Ballistic Missile Defense capacity.

Nov 5/14: KDDX. South Korea’s Daewoo shows off models of their proposed KDDX follow-on to the KDX-III. Ship size shrinks to 8,000t, and the number of vertical launch cells also shrinks (48 strike-length Mk.41 and 16 K-VLS, from 80/48), but it retains provision for 16 SSM-700K Haesung anti-ship missiles in dedicated launchers, and provision for a Phalanx CIWS or SeaRAM launcher. This preliminary set of attributes helps explain the proposed budget of $3.8 billion for 3 ships, which is actually a bit low for a KDX-III class ship. It also helps that South Korea may possess the globe’s best shipbuilding industry.

“According to a DSME representative at Indo Defence, the KDDX is being developped as a smaller, more compact and more stealthy follow on to the AEGIS KDX-III destroyers. The main requirements from the ROK Navy are lower maintenance and operating costs than KDX-III…”

Many aspects of the ship aren’t finalized yet, including the radar, but the proposed delivery timeframe of 2023-2027 would make America’s developmental AMDR radar a possible addition, allowing the ROKN to keep the Aegis BMD combat system. There is also talk of using other radars, but unless the ROKN wants to abandon Aegis and its ballistic missile defense modes, they would have to be integrated into the same Aegis combat system. Australia’s CEAFAR/ CEAMOUNT active array radars may be able to offer better radar performance and Aegis integration by then, if Australia invests in new frigates quickly enough. Or, the Koreans could try long-time supplier and Samsung partner Thales, who are working with the Dutch to create their own BMD capable radar (APAR & SMART-L) and combat system combination aboard the Mk.41 compatible De Zeven Provincien Class. Sources: Navy Recognition, “DSME showcasing its next generation KDDX Destroyer for ROK Navy at Indo Defence 2014″.

May 26/14: No SM-3s. South Korean official rule out any deployment of SM-3s for now. Defense Ministry spokesperson Kim Min-seok:

“We’ve never considered adopting the SM-3 missiles… Among issues under consideration is how to boost our maritime-based intercepting capabilities, but we’ve not yet reviewed any details…. Intercepting a missile in the ascending stage goes beyond what our military aims at. It is also beyond our capability…. The KAMD [land-based missile defense architecture] has been under development regardless of the U.S. system, and no changes have been made in our position.”

Planned SM-6 missiles will give the ROKN terminal BMD intercept capabilities around 2015-2016 if they add a combat system upgrade, and that seems to be enough. The national KAMD system currently includes Israeli Green Pine long-range radars, ex-German PATRIOT PAC-2 missiles, and an AMD-Cell command and control backbone. South Korea is about to to upgrade its PATRIOT batteries to PAC-3/Config 3, and add SM-6 missiles to KDX-III destroyers. They may also field Cheolmae 4 BMD-capable missiles in future, designed in collaboration with Russia. Sources: Yonhap, “Acquiring SM-3 missiles not an option for S. Korea: defense ministry”.

May 26/14: Weapons. South Korea has been working to resolve problems with its vertically-launched “Red Shark” (Hongsangeo) rocket-boosted torpedoes since a formal complaint was filed in July 2012. They’ve just finished their 3rd consecutive successful test, which has led DAPA to resume production.

About 500 of these ASROC-type weapons have been deployed on ROKN destroyers thus far, but FFX Batch II frigates are also expected to include them in future. Sources: Yonhap, “S. Korea to resume production of homegrown torpedo after quality improvement”.

2011 – 2013

3rd and last ship delivered; KDX-III ships are tougher than contemporaries; Destroyers used to track North Korean rockets; Chinese belligerence ensures more orders. DDG-991, RIMPAC 2010
USN LHD-6 & CG-65
(click to view full)

Dec 10/13: 3 more. The Joint Chiefs of Staff didn’t even wait until Dec 22/13. Shortly after Korea declared its own expanded air identification zone, JCS chairman Choi Yun-hee approves the KRW 4 trillion (about $3.8 billion) plan to field 3 new Aegis destroyers between 2023 – 2027. That price is much more realistic, but note that it’s still about 1/3 less than the USA pays for smaller Arleigh Burke Flight IIA Aegis destroyers.

The ROK MND later confirms that the new ships will be capable of conducting ballistic missile “detection and tracking”, which is more significant than it sounds. Adding that capability involves about $60 million in modifications to radar processing electronics and software, and once it’s installed, the SM-6 missile that South Korea plans to buy will offer last-stage terminal missile defense. It’s much more diplomatic to leave this as an implied capability, but it will absolutely be present, unless the ROKN elects to use an obsolete version of the Aegis system when the ships are built, rather than the AEGIS BMD 5.1+ system that will available by 2020. If South Korea wants to go beyond last-stage terminal defense, it will also have an inherent ability to add that by simply buying SM-3 missiles. Future events will drive that decision.

We’d also like to point out the amusing refusal of China’s Xinhua to mention that Korea’s new ship decision was prompted in part by China’s new ADIZ. South Korea’s MND is diplomatic, but “ocean sovereignty defense” is pretty clear. Sources: South Korea MND, “Additional securement of three Aegis ships by the mid 2020s” | Yonhap, “(EALD) S. Korea to build three more Aegis destroyers ” | China’s Xinhua, “S.Korea to increase Aegis destroyers to six by 2027″ | ROK Drop, “South Korea Declares ADIZ That Overlaps With Chinese Zone”.

3 more approved

Dec 1/13: 3 more? Yonhap reports that China’s aggressive Nov 23/13 “East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone” declaration, which includes key natural gas fields and ROK facilities like Ieodo Ocean Research Station, is changing South Korea’s defense plans.

A proposed $2.8 billion buy of 3 more KDX-III destroyers was probably going to lose out to other priorities, but now it’s an urgent priority for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The proposal is now expected to be finalized during a Dec 22/13 meeting, and the destroyers are expected to enter service between 2022 – 2028. Note that $2.8 billion for 3 ships would be about half of what the US Navy pays for smaller DDG-51 Aegis destroyers. That would be amazing, given the 40%+ standard cost share for (often foreign) mission equipment vs. the assembled ship.

All this, and F-35s too. Lockheed Martin says Happy Cyber Monday and Merry Christmas to you too, Xi Jinping. Sources: “S. Korea to OK plan to build three more Aegis destroyers: source”

June 11-12/13: SM-6. The Yonhap news agency quotes “a senior government official,” who says that its KDX-III destroyers will have their SM-2 missiles supplemented by SM-6 purchases as of 2016, as part of KAMD. The SM-6 will complement the ROK’s existing SM-2s. By 2016, they’ll be usable as terminal point defense against ballistic missiles, while also providing long-range air defense against enemy fighters, cruise missiles, etc. If the 2016 delivery date is fixed, it implies a 2014 order for SM-6 missiles. It also implies a future system upgrade for the ships, from a standard Aegis combat system to Aegis BMD 5.0.

KAMD would integrate the ROK’s Green Pine radar, PATRIOT missile batteries, naval missile defense assets, and other surveillance systems into a single “kill chain”, reducing Korea’s dependence on American help. On land, South Korea is looking to upgrade its PATRIOTs to the latest PAC-3/Config-3 standard. The question is how compatible that system will be with the USA’s missile defense systems. A working group has been set up with the USA, and findings are expected in early 2014. South Korea hopes to have KAMD v1.0 fully ready by 2020. Sources: Yonhap, “S. Korea to deploy new surface-to-air missiles for Aegis destroyers” | Global Post, “S. Korea aims to establish missile destruction system by 2020″.

Naval BMD OKed

April 5/13: Amidst the standard threats of war that accompany changes in South Korean administrations, the South Korean military has deployed 2 of its KDX-III destroyers to the East and West Seas, as North Korea reportedly prepares to launch a mobile Musudan/ Nodong-B missile from somewhere along the east coast.

The class isn’t equipped for full ballistic missile defense, but it can pick up missile launches and track them for a period of time. Arirang News.

Dec 12/12: An Unha-3 long-range rocket launched by North Korea is detected by a KDX-III destroyer in the Yellow Sea 94 seconds after its 9:51 am launch. The 1st stage passed over the northernmost island of Baengnyeong one minute later and the 2nd stage flew west of Japan’s Okinawa.

North Korea claims that the rocket is part of a space program. Everyone else understands it as an ICBM test vehicle. A similar launch in April 2012 broke apart shortly after lift-off. Korea Times.

Aug 30/12: #3 delivered. The ROK Navy takes delivery of ROKS Seoae Ryu Seong-ryong [DDG-993], at Hyundai Heavy Industries’ No. 6 dockyard in Ulsan. She will be deployed for combat around mid-2013, after a 9-month trial period. Navy Recognition.

KDX-III #3 in service

July 16/12: #2 trials. ROKS Yulgok Yi I [DDG-992], successfully completes at-sea Combat System Ship Qualification Trials (CSSQT) for the ship’s Aegis Combat System, supported by the U.S. Navy and Lockheed Martin.

Qualification took place at the Pacific Missile Range Facility off the Hawaiian island of Kauai. The trials are the final tests of system design, hardware and software integration, ship construction and crew training. The anti-air warfare exercises included manned aircraft raids, electronic attack scenarios and live air-defense engagements. Lockheed Martin.

June 1/11: #2 in service. The ROKN places the 2nd KDX-III destroyer, ROKS Yulgok Yi I, into service after 9 months of test operations, and assigns her to their Navy’s 7th fleet. South Korea’s Yonhap | NTI | China’s official Xinhua.

KDX-III #2 in service

March 24/11: #3 launched – last? The South Korean Navy launches DDG 993 Seoae Ryu Seong-ryong, named after a leading scholar of the 16th century. Hyundai Heavy Industries SVP Park Sang-cheol is quoted as saying that:

“The Seoae Ryu Seong-ryong is quite different from other existing aegis vessels. Over 100 tons of steel are attached on both sides to prevent damage from explosions in and outside of the ship. This system for a destroyer is not seen anywhere else in the world.”

This ship will be the 3rd – and possibly the last – KDX-III destroyer. The ROKN anticipates commissioning the Seoae Ryu Seong-ryong in late 2012, following various sea trials. Operational deployment isn’t expected until mid-2013. After that, the question is whether the ROKN picks up the program’s 3 options, or decides to build a larger number of lighter and less expensive ships. Meanwhile, the Chosun Ilbo reports that the military is thinking of supplementing or replacing the KDX-IIIs’ medium range SM-2 anti-aircraft missiles with the new active-seeker SM-6, once the U.S. finishes developing it. Hyundai Heavy Industries | Lockheed Martin | Ariang TV | Chosun Ilbo | Forecast International | Korea Herald.

Jan 5/11: Aegis. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ receives a $40.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee letter contract with performance incentives for combat systems engineering and installation and test aboard the “DDG 993 Kwon Yul,” the KDX-III program’s 3rd ship (which was renamed by March 2011). Requirements include the necessary combat systems engineering, computer program development, and ship integration and test support to deliver a variant of the U.S. Navy Aegis baseline 7, phase I computer program and equipment. This contract also funds an integrated test team to assist the Korean shipyard in performing installation and testing of the Aegis Combat System.

Work will be performed in Ulsan, Korea (48%); Moorestown, NJ (44%); Kongsberg, Norway (7 %); and Dijon, France (1%), and is expected to be complete by September 2012. This contract was not competitively procured by US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington Navy Yard, DC (N00024-11-C-5103, Foreign Military Sales case KS-P-LPN).

2000 – 2010

2nd ship delivered; Red Shark K-ASROC missile ready to add to KDX-III; Software glitch impairs radar tracking. ROKS King Sejong the Great
(click to view full)

Aug 31/10: #2 delivered. Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering delivers the Yulgok Yi-I to the ROK Navy, as the 2nd ship of class [DDG 992]. KBS.

ROKS Yulgok-Yi I

July 29/10: #1 qualified. Lockheed Martin announces that ROKS Sejong the Great successfully completed a 3-week series of Combat System Ship Qualification Trials (CSSQT), at the US Navy’s Pacific Missile Range Facility off of Kauai, HI. During the CSSQT, the ship’s Aegis Combat System faced comprehensive surface, subsurface and anti-air warfare exercises, as well as thorough testing of the system’s tactical data link capabilities. The anti-air warfare exercises included manned aircraft raids, electronic attack scenarios, and live Standard Missile-2 and Rolling Airframe Missile air defense engagements.

March 26/10: Sinking Shock. The Pohang Class corvette ROKS Cheonan is attacked and sinks, killing 46 of the 104 crew members. Subsequent investigation shows that it was sunk by a North Korean torpedo, fired from a submarine with what was apparently complete surprise.

The attack causes South Korea to re-evaluate its defense plans. The FFX project may end up receiving a boost, at the expense of high-end ships like the KDX-III AEGIS destroyers. Wikipedia re: Cheonan | Chosun Ilbo | JoongAng Daily | NY Times || ROK ambassador to US CSIS presentation [PDF] | Korea JoongAng Daily re: force rethink.

ROKS Cheonan corvette sunk

Nov 17/09: Aegis. Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors in Moorestown, NJ received a $41.1 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-03-C-5102) for combat systems engineering (CSE), installation, and testing aboard KDX-III Ship 2. This award includes CSE, computer program development, and ship integration and test support to deliver a variant of the US Navy Aegis weapon system Baseline 7 Phase I computer program and equipment to support the construction of the 2nd Korean ship in the KDX-III class. In addition, this contract funds an integrated test team to assist the Korean shipyard in performing installation and testing of the Aegis Combat System.

This contract involves purchases for the Republic of Korea under the Foreign Military Sales Program. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (53%) and Korea (47%), and is expected to be complete by December 2010. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington DC issued the contract.

July 20/09: New squadron concept. The Korea Times reports that their Navy plans to establish a strategic mobile fleet of 2 destroyer-led squadrons by February 2010, in a bid to develop blue-water operational capability beyond coastal defense against a North Korean invasion.

Each mobile squadron would initially consist of a KDX-III Aegis destroyer, 3 4,500-ton KDX-II destroyers, and maritime aircraft. That would be augmented by submarines and smaller ships like the FFX frigates, once a forward naval base is finished on the southern island of Jeju, around 2014.

June 22/09: Red Shark ready. The Korea Times reports that the indigenous Hongsangeo (Red Shark) replacement for American VL-ASROC anti-submarine missiles has completed its 9-year, $80 million development program, and will begin deployment in 2010.

The state-funded Agency for Defense Development (ADD) has also worked with Hongsangeo manufacturer LIG Nex1 to develop the conventional Cheongsangeo (Blue Shark) light torpedo and Baeksangeo (White Shark) heavy torpedo. The Red Shark system uses a Blue Shark torpedo, with a rocket booster for vertical launch and added range.

June 3/09: Glitched. As North Korea prepares to test another long-range ballistic missile, The Korea Times reveals quotes an anonymous Navy source, who said that software glitches in its missile tracking radar system may keep ROKS Sejong the Great in repairs. The ship arrived at the Naval Logistics Command in Jinhae, South Gyeongsang Province on May 23/09. According to their source:

“A flaw in the data transmission system linked with the missile tracking radar in the Aegis destroyer was found. Engineers from the Navy and Lockheed Martin are trying to fix the problem and reconfigure the radar system… The Navy has actually not been able to test the Aegis radar’s maximum capability so far due to the software glitch… We’re not sure at the moment if Sejong the Great will be able to participate in detecting a North Korean ballistic missile this time.”

AEGIS software problem

2005 – 2008

Ship #1 from launch to active service; Ship #2 launched; Will the destruction of ROKS Cheonan change South Korea’s naval plans? DDH-991 launch
(click to view full)

Dec 22/08: Active service begins. ROKS Sejong the Great [DDG 991] enters active service, making it the 94th AEGIS-equipped ship fielded and making South Korea the 5th nation to field such ships.

ROKS Sejong the Great achieved the impressive feat of on-time, on-budget delivery for a first-of-class ship. It was built and tested at Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI) in Ulsan, Korea and commissioned in Pusan, and completed its combat system test program ahead of schedule. Lockheed Martin.

KDX-III #1 in service

Dec 1/08: Aegis. Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors in Moorestown, NJ received a $19.2 million modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-03-C-5102) for AEGIS Weapon System Inter Site Data Link (ISDL) integration efforts and delivery of the Baseline K1.1 Aegis Weapon System computer programs integrating this capability into the KDX-III Sejong the Great Class destroyers.

The contractor shall provide program management, system engineering and computer program development, ship integration and test, and technical manual services. This contract involves purchases for the Republic of Korea under the Foreign Military Sales Program. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (90%) and Ulsan, South Korea (10%), and is expected to be complete by November 2009. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington DC issued the contract.

Nov 14/08: #2 launched. The 2nd KDX-III destroyer, Yulgok Yi I [DDG 992], is launched at Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering (DSME) in Okpo, Korea. Yi I was a prominent Confucian scholar of the Joseon Kingdom (1392-1910). Korea Times | Lockheed Martin.

Nov 7/08: #1 accepted. ROKS Sejong the Great [DDG 991] has its delivery accepted by the Republic of Korea Navy. Lockheed Martin.

ROKS Sejong the Great

May 25/07: #1 launched. The first KDX-III destroyer, the ROKS King Sejong [DDG 991], is launched in a ceremony at Ulsan shipyard in the southeastern port city. KOIS report | Hyundai Heavy Industries release.

March 1/07: Navigation. DRS Technologies Inc. announces a $7 million contract from the Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering (DSME) Co. Ltd. to provide FODMS Navigation Sensor Distributors for the 2nd KDX-III destroyer, ROKS Yulgok Yi I [DDG 992]

2002 – 2005

South Korea picks AEGIS system for KDX-III, Kongsberg ASW system.

Apr 25/05: Fiber network. Fresh off of a win to build fiber-optic multiplexing systems for American Arleigh Burke Class DDG 110-112 AEGIS destroyers, DRS Technologies Inc.’s EW & Network Systems unit in Buffalo, NY won a $9.2 million contract to build a fiber-optic network system for the Republic of Korea Navy’s related KDX-III King Sejong Class AEGIS destroyer.

DRS EW&NS will build the Fiber Optic Data Multiplex System (FODMS), a general purpose, dual-network system that provides data and integrated communications among propulsion and power control systems, steering, navigation sensors, weapons systems, alarms, indicators, bridge systems and the Aegis combat system, and ensures interoperability between legacy systems and off-the-shelf systems. Work will include the development of design documentation and installation drawing, installation and performance testing of the system. Work will commence immediately, and continue through January 2010.

The Special & Naval Shipbuilding Division of Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. in Ulsan, Republic of Korea, awarded the contract. DRS’ news release noted that the company also expects to receive future contracts of this nature, as the ROKN deploys additional KDX-III destroyers.

June 26/03: Aegis. The U.S. Navy today awarded a $267.5 million contract to Lockheed Martin to provide combat systems engineering, computer program development, and ship integration and test support, as part of the U.S Navy and Lockheed Martin’s responsibility to provide the Aegis Weapon System for its KDX-III Destroyer Program. Lockheed Martin’s release adds that the Korean Navy selected the U.S Navy and Lockheed Martin to equip KDX-III with AEGIS “in late 2002.”

June 18/03: ASW combat system. Lockheed Martin and Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace (KDA) announce a $21 million contract today for the KDX-III destroyers’ anti-submarine warfare control system. The contract expands a trans-Atlantic naval business relationship that began with work on Norway’s F310 Fridtjof Nansen Class AEGIS frigates.

June 17/03: VLS. Lockheed Martin announces an initial $67 million contract to continue production, delivery and installation of the MK 41 Vertical Launching System (VLS) for the U.S. Navy. An additional contract option of $129 million to support of Korea’s KDX-III shipbuilding program could raise the contract’s total value to $196 million. United Defense, LP of Aberdeen, SD (now BAE Systems), will be issued a major subcontract to produce major subassemblies for the MK 41 VLS, as will Metric Systems in Fort Walton Beach, FL.

July 25/02: AEGIS picked. Lockheed Martin wins the contract to provide South Korea’s navy with weapons control systems for the 3 KDX-III destroyers, beating European rival Thales SA. The KDX-III will be equipped with the SPY-1 passive phased array radar and AEGIS combat system, rather than Thales APAR active array radar that serves on the German and Dutch F124 air defense frigates.

AEGIS/SPY-1 beats APAR

March 18/02: AEGIS request. The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announces [PDF] South Korea’s formal request to buy 3 Lockheed Martin AEGIS air defense systems, worth a potential US$1.2 billion, to arm the ROKN’s 3 new KDX-III destroyers.

The order will include 3 AEGIS Shipboard Combat Systems, 3 AN/UPX-29 (V) Aircraft Identification Monitoring System MK XII Identification Friend or Foe systems, 3 shipboard gridlock systems, 3 Common Data Link Management System/Joint Tactical Distribution Systems, 3 MK 34 gun weapon systems, 3 Navigation Sensor System Interfaces; plus testing and combat system engineering technical assistance, computer program maintenance, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and technical assistance, testing, publications and documentation, training, spare and repair parts, and other related support.

The principal contractors will be Lockheed Martin Naval Electronic Systems and Support of Morristown, NJ; Raytheon Company in Andover, MA; General Dynamics Armament Systems in Burlington, VT; and Lockheed Martin Naval Electronics Systems and Support in Eagan, MN. One or more proposed industrial offset agreements may be related to the proposed sale, but that hasn’t been finalized. If the sale does go through, South Korea will need 50 contractor representatives for approximately 5 years, to support integration and testing of the AEGIS Combat Systems.

AEGIS export request

Additional Readings Background: The Ships

Background: Ancillary Technologies

News & Views

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

AMRAAM: Deploying & Developing America’s Medium-Range Air-Air Missile

Thu, 11/06/2015 - 02:33
AIM-120C from F-22A
(click for test missile zoom)

Raytheon’s AIM-120 Advanced, Medium-Range Air to Air Missile (AMRAAM) has become the world market leader for medium range air-to-air missiles, and is also beginning to make inroads within land-based defense systems. It was designed with the lessons of Vietnam in mind, and of local air combat exercises like ACEVAL and Red Flag. This DID FOCUS article covers successive generations of AMRAAM missiles, international contracts and key events from 2006 onward, and even some of its emerging competitors.

One of the key lessons learned from Vietnam was that a fighter would be likely to encounter multiple enemies, and would need to launch and guide several missiles at once in order to ensure its survival. This had not been possible with the AIM-7 Sparrow, a “semi-active radar homing” missile that required a constant radar lock on one target. To make matters worse, enemy fighters were capable of launching missiles of their own. Pilots who weren’t free to maneuver after launch would often be forced to “break lock,” or be killed – sometimes even by a short-range missile fired during the last phases of their enemy’s approach. Since fighters that could carry radar-guided missiles like the AIM-7 tended to be larger and more expensive, and the Soviets were known to have far more fighters overall, this was not a good trade.

Some MRAAM History, and AMRAAM’s Design Approach

Before 1991, the combat record of all air-air missiles was generally poor – and most of the kills scored in combat belonged to short-range heat-seeking missiles. The USA entered Vietnam expecting that 70% of AIM-7 Sparrow missile shots would result in a kill. The real-world total was 8%, even though the USA faced older MiG 17-21 aircraft, rather than the newest Russian fighters.

That trend began to shift somewhat in the 1980s. The Falklands War had no aircraft on either side that could use medium-range air-air missiles, but Israeli F-15s and F-16s used AWACS and poor Syrian tactics to produce an 88-0 kill ratio in 1982. The F-15s’ medium-range AIM-7F Sparrow missiles performed better in terms of fire:kill ratios than they had in past conflicts, but the vast majority of kills were still made with Sidewinder or Python short-range missiles. Further afield, the Iran-Iraq War saw Iran’s F-14 Tomcats demonstrate good performance with their long-range Phoenix missiles, against Iraqi aircraft that often lacked radar warning receivers, and never saw the missiles coming. A reprise of sorts took place in 1991, when exceptional situational awareness and poor Iraqi tactics allowed US aircraft to score around 80% of their Iraqi air-air kills in 1991 with modernized AIM-7 Sparrow medium-range missiles.

The lessons that had led to the AMRAAM program still applied, however, and the conflicts in Lebanon, Iran, and Iraq demonstrated the potential value of longer-range missiles and some of their enabling technologies. That helped AMRAAM retain its support, despite initial development glitches and rising costs. It still aimed to remove the shortcomings that made the AIM-7 a somewhat dangerous weapon for its own side. The key lay in its new approach to guidance.

AIM-120A cutaway
(click to view full)

In beyond-visual-range engagements, AMRAAM is guided initially by its inertial reference unit and microcomputer, which point it in the right direction based on instructions from the targeting aircraft or platform. A mid-course target location update can be transmitted directly from the launch radar system to correct that if necessary, an approach that may avoid triggering enemy radar warning receivers. In the final phase of tracking, however, the internal active radar seeker becomes completely independent and guides the missile through its own active lock-on. Most sources place its reported range at about 50 km/30 miles[1].

F/A-18C, loaded for bandits
(click to view full)

When coupled with modern radars, AMRAAM’s guidance approach allows a fighter to launch and control many missiles at once, avoiding a dangerous fixation on one target. Its autonomous guidance capability also provides a pilot with critical range-preserving launch and leave capability, improving survivability and helping to avoid “mutual kill” situations. Even more advanced technologies are emerging that go one step further, and allow secure “hand-off” of a fired AMRAAM to another friendly fighter.

All of these abilities, of course, assume an air environment in which it is possible to use IFF (Identification, Friend or Foe), AWACS (Airborne Warning & Control Systems) aircraft, Link 16/MIDS, etc. to safely distinguish enemy aircraft from friendlies. This has been a problem in past conflicts, resulting in rules of engagement that force the use of visual identification before firing. Obviously, that negates many of the tactical advantages of having beyond-visual-range (BVR) missiles.

Customers & Performance Launch from F-22
click to play video

AMRAAM is a joint U.S. Air Force and Navy program that achieved initial operational capability in 1991, and is still in brisk production over 20 years later. At least 28 other countries have also bought AMRAAM variants, which can be fitted to F-15s, F-16s, the F/A-18 family, F-22s, F-35s, EADS Eurofighters, and Saab’s JAS-39 Gripen. Germany’s aging F-4 Phantom IIs, the British/German/Italian Panavia consortium’s Tornado aircraft, and Britain’s Harriers can also carry them.

Dassault’s Mirage 2000v5 and later have been advertised at times as having this capability, but confirmation is weak, and no current Mirage 2000 customer flies with this option. The reports probably represented offers to add this capability. Dassault’s 4th generation Rafale aircraft is also listed in some venues as having AMRAAM capability, though Raytheon has never said so, and all Rafales currently operate with MBDA’s MICA missiles instead.

Even so, AMRAAM’s record of sales success has made it the global standard for medium-range AAMs, and the number of beyond visual range kills as a percentage of total air-to-air victories has risen sharply during the “AMRAAM era.”

What does this mean in practice for missile performance?

To date, RAND’s Project Air Force notes that AIM-120 missiles have demonstrated 10 kills in 17 firings, for a 59% kill rate. That’s a significant improvement over the AIM-7’s record, and AIM-120A and AIM-120C missiles split these kills equally. Victims have included an Iraqi MiG-25 and MiG-29, 6 Serbian MiG-29s, a Serbian J-21 Jastreb trainer/light attack jet, and the accidental downing of a US Army UH-60A helicopter. The last of these incidents occurred in 1999.

One caution regarding these figures is that both AMRRAM missiles, and electronics used for electronic countermeasures, have both advanced considerably in the dozen-plus since the missile’s last combat kill. A second set of cautions involves the circumstances of these victories. There are no reports of electronic countermeasures being used by any AMRAAM victim, none of these victims were equipped with beyond visual range weapons of their own, the Iraqi MiGs were fleeing and non-maneuvering, and the Serbian MiGs reportedly had inoperative radars.

These difficulties in assessing true BVRAAM (beyond visual range air-air missile) performance in the modern era are magnified by a corollary fact: None of AMRAAM’s competitors have been able to compile much of a performance record, either. With the end of recurring full-scale Arab wars against Israel, the globe’s top trial venue for full-scale warfare has evaporated, leaving few opportunities to put modern anti-aircraft systems to a real test.

AMRAAM: Upgrades & Derivatives AIM-120C

The Pentagon’s Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) approved AIM-120A AMRAAM Full Rate Production (Milestone III B) in April 1992. Subsequent modifications have produced improvements in a number of areas, but the AIM-120D is likely to be the first really large jump in AMRAAM capabilities from version to version. It should be noted, however, that incremental upgrades add up over time. An AIM-120C-6, for instance, is a generation beyond an AIM-120A in terms of its overall capabilities.

AIM-120B was first delivered in late 1994. It had a number of electronics upgrades, from the guidance section to hardware modules and processor. Its hardware was also reprogrammable, which is not possible with the AIM-120A.

AIM-120C missiles featured a change in shape, with smaller fins that would allow 3 missiles to be carried inside the F-22A Raptor‘s stealth-maximizing internal weapons bays. A number of incremental updates brought it to AIM-120-C6 status, including guidance section upgrades, smaller control electronics, a slightly larger rocket motor, an improved warhead, and a target detection upgrade.

At present, the AIM-120-C7 is the most advanced AMRAAM approved for export beyond the USA. The AIM-120-C7 is currently in production for almost all export customers, with an improved seeker head, greater jamming resistance, and slightly longer range. Additional work continues to improve the C7’s resistance to electronic countermeasures, and this 2-phase EPIP program is scheduled to continue into FY 2017.

US-only AIM-120D missiles will feature the C7 improvements, but the D version reportedly adds a very strong set of upgrades. Pentagon documents confirm the use of smaller system components; with an upgraded radar antenna, receiver & signal processor; GPS-aided mid-course navigation; an improved datalink; and new software algorithms. The new hardware and software is rumored to offer improved jamming resistance, better operation in conjunction with modern AESA radars, and an improved high-angle off-boresight “seeker cone,” in order to give the missile a larger no-escape zone. Less-publicized improvements reportedly include a dual-pulse rocket motor, for up to 50% more range and better near-target maneuvering.

AIM-120D fielding is scheduled for FY 2015 on the F/A-18C/D Hornet, F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, F-15C/D Eagle, F-15E Strike Eagle, and F-16 Falcon. The F-22A is expected to integrate the new missile in FY 2018. At present, the AIM-120D is not available for export, and that won’t necessarily change when integration is done.

Other AMRAAM-Related Systems

Other AMRAAM variants exist.

NCADE. The most interesting AMRAAM modification remains an R&D program designed to see if AMRAAMs modified with an AIM-9X Sidewinder’s infrared seeker and a 2nd stage rocket booster could be forward-deployed on fighters, and used to shoot down ballistic missiles during their lift-off phase.

With the coming addition of IRST systems to American fighters, NCADE would also offer an effective no-warning long-range weapon against aerial enemies, including stealth fighters. To date, however, the US military and Congress have failed to take an interest in NCADE beyond initial development work. Raytheon has also declined to pursue a self-funded approach.

CLAWS out
(click to view full)

SAM/GBAD. A parallel set of modifications and enhancements have seen AMRAAM missiles pressed into service in a surface-air missile role. Programs like Norway’s NASAMS, the USMC’s CLAWS (ended in 2006), etc. are often referred to by the umbrella term SL-AMRAAM, for Surface Launched AMRAAM. SL-AMRAAM contractors include Raytheon, as well as Kongsberg Defence and Aerospace of Norway, and Boeing.

Kongsberg has sold its related Norwegian Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System (NASAMS) system to Norway, Finland, The Netherlands, Oman, Spain, and the USA. There are rumors that a SLAMRAAM type system has been deployed in Egypt, and such systems have drawn official buying interest and rumored contracts from Chile, and the UAE. The key to effective deployment is integrating the system, and its accompanying IFCS control system and AN/MPQ-64F1 Improved Sentinel radars, with a country’s wider air defense command and control systems.

The US Marines killed their own CLAWS program in 2006, the same year the US Army’s SLAMRAAM passed its System Critical Design Review. The Army eventually canceled SLAMRAAM in FY 2012. Even so, the USA has a deployed system to protect the Washington DC area, and exports keep the surface-launched AMRAAM option alive and well if the USA changes its mind.

The 3 surface launchers for AMRAAM at present include the 8-missile “universal launcher” which can be mounted on medium trucks, the 5-missile CLAWS for smaller vehicles, and the 6-missile fixed NASAMS. All 3 launcher types provide 360 degree coverage, with a 70 degree off boresight capability – i.e. a 140 degree target acquisition cone. In June 2007, Raytheon announced more SLAMRAAM upgrades via options to add SL-AMRAAM-ER extended range variants (likely via a rocket booster on the missiles), and an AIM-120 variant with an AIM-9X infrared seeker. The latter would allow a mix-and-match combination of radar/infrared SAM sets, similar to the Spyder, VL-MICA, etc. being fielded by international rivals. On which topic…

AMRAAM’s International Competitors R-77/AA-12 on MiG-29
(click to view full)

The AMRAAM’s most prominent global competitors, in declining order of prominence, include:

Russia’s Vympel R-77, also known as the AA-12 Adder and colloquially called the ‘AMRAAMski’. It is a larger missile with a similar guidance approach, and reportedly offers a slightly longer range, varying from 60-90 km (36-54 miles) depending on assessments of its drag coefficient. It looks a bit like the French MICA missiles, but its “screen door” or “potato masher” tail fins are its most distinguishing characteristic. Comparisons of its maneuverability, electronics, and hence its fire:kill effectiveness ratio remain a matter of speculation in public-domain circles, and there are also reports that the R-77 can be launched and ‘handed off’ to another aircraft. This has tactical implications, as discussed by one DID source:

“The ‘cobra’ maneuver… where the Flanker pitchers [vertically] to over 100 degrees is not a stunt, it is a missile launch maneuver for a over-the-shoulder launch on a passing head-on target by an IMFIL missile, as briefed to me by the Director of TsAGI. German Zagainov.”

The R-77 can equip modern SU-30 fighters like the SU-30MK2, modernized SU-27s, and some of the most modern MiG-29/35 offerings as well. There are also reports that India has even fitted the missile to its upgraded MiG-21 ‘Bisons,’ leveraging their new Phazotron Kopyo radars and upgraded avionics.

There are reports that the coming RVV-MD upgrade may extend the missile’s range to 110 km. A R-77M ramjet version has reportedly been developed with 150+ km range, but confirmation of the ramjet program’s success and status remain sketchy. Firmer reports[2] now exist re: Russia’s ongoing development of the Novator K-100-1, which is based on the KS-172 missile instead; it will have a reputed range of 200-400 km.

Meteor BVRAAM

MBDA’s Meteor, which also includes Saab in the development group and adds Boeing as its American partner. The Meteor stems from Europe’s different fighter design philosophy and acquisition timing. Their 4th generation fighters were introduced in the 1990s, and feature less stealth than the F-22A or F-35. The Eurofighter, Gripen, and Rafale can be fitted with existing missiles like AMRAAM or MICA, but ultimately the Euro vision was that air supremacy against threats like the SU-30/R-77 combination required a long range (100 km/ 60 miles or more) missile – one with extreme maneuverability and ramjet propulsion that gives it Mach 4 powered flight to the very end of its range, rather than the “burn and coast” approach of most missiles. The Meteor is that missile, and it is currently undergoing testing and evaluation; it’s expected to begin service on JAS-39 Gripen fighters by the end of 2014.

Initial platforms for the Meteor BVRAAMs will include Saab’s JAS-39 Gripen (2014), EADS/BAE Eurofighter (2017), and Dassault’s Rafale (2019). MBDA has announced that it will be modified in future to fit the F-35’s stealth-enhancing weapon bays; given its characteristics, it also seems like a natural future upgrade for older planes like Tornados and F/A-18s. Forecast International sees MBDA as Raytheon’s biggest overall air-air missile competitor in the coming years.

Rafale w. MICA-RF & IR
(click to view full)

MBDA’s MICA family. MBDA inherited MICA from the French firm Matra. It uses a guidance philosophy similar to AMRAAM’s, and has very good maneuverability. MBDA posts its range as 60 km. What’s different is that it comes in 2 versions, and is designed for use at all engagement distances. The MICA IR version uses infrared homing, like many short-range AAMs. This allows it to be used at close range, or used to conduct no-warning attacks at longer ranges, using advanced IRST (InfraRed Search and Track) type optronics that have become common on 4+ generation fighters. The MICA RF uses active radar guidance like AMRAAM, and is in service aboard upgraded Mirage F1s, Mirage 2000-5+, and Rafale fighters.

MBDA’s truck-mounted or ship-mounted air defense versions are imaginatively named Vertical Launch MICA. The system’s ability to carry IR-guided MICA missiles allows effective operation in environments where turning on one’s radar will attract enemy strikes.

RAFAEL Derby
(click to view full)

RAFAEL’s Derby. Derby 4 looks a lot like AMRAAM, but it’s actually based on Israel’s own well-developed missile technology. It lists a 50 km effective range like AMRAAM, but this is questionable given its size and commonalities with the shorter-range Python 4; some observers place its range closer to 30 km. Derby 4 has been updated with a new seeker, has lock-on after launch capability for snap employment in short-range aerial engagements, and features its own programmable ECCM (Electronic Counter-Countermeasures) technologies. Apparently, it still lacks an in-flight datalink, and must rely on last-reported position before switching to active mode. Derby has been exported to a few Latin American countries.

RAFAEL’s truck-mounted SPYDER combines Derby and short-range 5th generation IR/imaging-guided Python 5 missiles, to create a versatile system adapted for use against a wider range of threats. A new Spyder 6×6 truck version (SPYDER-MR) was unveiled at Eurosatory 2006 that doubled mixed missile capacity to 8, and put boosters on all missiles to improve their range and performance. SPYDER customers include India’s order for 18 SPYDER systems of 5 vehicles each, Peru’s buy of 6 systems, and an order from Singapore.

AMRAAM: Program

AMRAAM continues to be funded in the USA as a joint USAF/ Navy effort, based on proportional contributions, and AIM-120C/D missiles are in active production for the US military and allied countries. The USA alone was expected to account for nearly 18,000 AMRAAMs bought, but as of the FY 2014 budget submission, expected orders would be 16,153: 11,792 for the USAF, and 4,461 for the US Navy.

The AMRAAM family of missiles has also chalked up significant export success from foreign air forces and armies. Those sales aren’t part of American budgets, but their boost to sales and production volumes does lower costs for the missile’s American customers. Obviously, export orders vary widely by country and year, and it can be many years between repeat AMRAAM buys from foreign air forces. In aggregate, however, foreign orders represent a very significant source of demand, which keeps production lines active, improves volume, and helps lower costs for the Pentagon. Indeed, the Pentagon’s cost per missile estimates in its budgets are dependent on at least 200 missile orders per year from foreign sources.

AMRAAM prices vary depending on the year, and their production quantity. The current average cost for AIM-120Ds seems to be somewhere around $1.5 million per missile. Which isn’t cheap, but if it blows up even a bargain-basement $25 million fighter, it’s a very good exchange ratio.

AMRAAM Program: Technical Challenges “Heave!”
(click to view full)

DMSMS. During the May 2010 AMRAAM International Users’ Conference, the USAF’s 649th Armament Systems Squadron raised the issue of “Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS).” In English, it means that companies who manufacture some parts are either going out of business, or ceasing production. The 649th ARSS said component shortages would begin as soon as 2012, unless AMRAAM customers built up spare stocks, or paid for missile redesign and retrofit work that would solve the problem. Time will tell.

Delivery Halt. Consistent problems with cold-temperature testing of AMRAAM rocket motors halted all AMRAAM deliveries to all customers from 2010 – 2012, and created almost a 2-year inventory backlog. Raytheon and ATK were puzzled, because the rocket motor’s design was the same, but subtle reformulations in the rocket motor’s fuel were to blame. Norway’s NAMMO stepped into the breach as the new primary rocket motor supplier, and Raytheon is gradually catching up AMRAAM deliveries to the USA, Chile, Finland, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates. April 2014 reports indicate that ATK has qualified its own new motor, and will become a supplier again in FY 2015.

AIM-120D. The AIM-120D is still in developmental testing by both the US Air Force and US Navy at Eglin AFB, FL, and China Lake Naval Weapons Station, CA. Funding was issued to prepare the manufacturing line for full production, and production orders are well over 350 missiles. The first production set of AIM-120D missiles was scheduled to be delivered from December 2007 – January 2009, but “continuing delays in resolving developmental hardware issues and less-than-expected effectiveness in flight test execution” have stymied the program.

The AIM-120D will finish about 6 years behind its 2008 target date for operational testing, due to technical failures that include missile lockup and aircraft integration problems. Some of those issues seem to be resolved now, but the missile won’t be fielded on any fighters until FY 2015, and a System Improvement Program will be needed afterward.

AMRAAM: Contracts & Key Events CATM training
(click to view full)

Unless otherwise specified, The Headquarters Medium Range Missile System Group at Eglin Air Force Base, FL issued the contract, and Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ was the contract recipient.

Some definitions of terms are useful. AMRAAM All-Up Rounds (AURs) include the missile and its storage container. Air Vehicles Instrumented (AAVIs) are fully functional missiles with telemetry electronics instead of a warhead, and are used to support free flight testing. If the order says “Telemetry missiles” or “Warhead Compatible Telemetry Instrumented System (WCTIS)” configured AAVIs, on the other hand, the missile is meant to support live fire warhead testing. Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM) have seeker heads but no rocket motor or warhead; they are used in testing, training – and in combat exercises, where they can help keep score without any risk of real casualties.

FY 2015

June 11/15: Raytheon has completed lab testing of the Advanced, Medium Range Air to Air Missile – Extended Range (AMRAAM-ER), a ground-based air defense missile based on the AIM-120D and designed to be integrated with the Kongsberg NASAMS launcher. These latest tests validate that the missile can be integrated with the launcher, which will team with the AN/MPQ-64F1 Improved Sentinel radar to provide a highly capable air defense system. Raytheon is also taking the motor from its Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile and integrating it into the AMRAAM-ER to improve the missile’s range and engagement ceiling.

May 10/15: The US has reportedly deployed the AIM-120D AMRAAM missile to the Pacific, with recent photographs appearing to show the Raytheon-manufactured missile equipping a F/A-18E Super Hornet. Previous statements indicated that the missile wouldn’t be deployed until later this year, with the missile achieving Initial Operating Capability only last month.

March 25/15: Raytheon received a contract modification today totalling $528.8 million for the production of AMRAAM air-to-air missiles, a portion of which are earmarked for Foreign Military Sales. The company recently announced that it has begun development of an extended-range variant of the missile, with tests scheduled for later this year.

Feb 23/15: New -ER variant. Raytheon announced its newest AMRAAM-ER air-to-air missile will have extended range and more maneuverability. It plans tests before the year is out.

Dec 12/14: Japan. The US DSCA officially announces Japan’s export request for 17 AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM missiles, 2 Captive Air Training Missiles (CATMs), containers, missile support and test equipment, support equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical documentation, U.S. Government and contractor logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated cost is $33 million. Japan already has older AIM-120C5s in its inventory. The small size of this request matches Japan’s order for its first F-35s.

FY 2014

F-35 test

Aug 12/14: Turkey. The US DSCA officially announces Turkey’s export request for 145 AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM missiles, 10 extra missile guidance sections, 40 LAU-129 launchers, plus containers, support equipment, spare and repair parts, integration activities, publications and technical documentation, test equipment, personnel training and training equipment, and other US Government and contractor support. The estimated cost is up to $320 million.

This follows a $157 million request for 107 AIM-120C-7s (q.v. Sept 26/08). The DSCA says that these missiles will be used on the TuAF’s F-16 aircraft, and eventually their F-35As.

The principal contractor will be Raytheon in Tucson, AZ, and if a contract is signed, multiple trips to Turkey involving U.S. Government and contractors will be needed for technical reviews/support, program management, integration, testing, and training. The exact numbers and duration are unknown, and will be determined during contract negotiations. Sources: DSCA #13-50, “Turkey – AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM Missiles”

DSCA request: Turkey (145)

July 18/14: Lot 27. An $8.5 million a firm-fixed-price contract modification is an order from Australia, as part of Production Lot 27 (FY 2013, q.v. June 14/13). The money adds integration and testing for AMRAAM contract line item numbers 0008, 0009, and 0010, and brings the total cumulative face value of the multinational contract to $564.8 million. All funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed at Tucson, AZ and is expected to be complete by June 30/16. USAF Life Cycle Management Center/EBAK at Eglin AFB, FL manages the contract (FA8675-13-C-0003, PO 0026).

June 30/14: Support. Raytheon in Tucson, AZ receives a sole-source $163.2 million fixed-price/ fixed-price-incentive/ cost-plus-incentive contract for AMRAAM Program Support and Sustainment (PSAS). PSAS provides sustaining engineering, program management, contractor logistics support. It will also address the diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortage tasks involving the AMRAAM CPU chip, improving the AMRAAM guidance section within the current performance envelope, and developing applicable test equipment.

$88.6 million is committed immediately, using a combination of USAF and US Navy missile/weapon budgets, and some O&M budgets. This contract has unclassified 45.7% foreign military sales service/repair requirements for Saudi Arabia, Korea, Israel, Singapore and United Arab Emirates.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ and is expected to be complete by Jan 31/17. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/EBAK at Eglin AFB, FL manages the contract (FA8675-14-C-0026).

June 27/14: DC NASAMS. Raytheon IDS in Tewksbury, MA receives an $8.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to sustain the USA’s NASAMS (Norwegian Advanced Surface to Air Missile Systems) “interim air defense capability deployed in the Homeland Defense Area 1″ (i.e. in Washington, DC). This is a new follow-on service contract for the missile system, with 1 base year bought and options for up to 4 more years.

All funds are committed immediately, using US Army FY 2014 O&M funds. Work will be performed at Redstone Arsenal, AL, with an estimated completion date of June 27/14. Bids were solicited via the Internet, with 1 received by US Army Contracting Command Redstone Arsenal Missile at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-14-C-0114).

April 23/14: Industrial. Raytheon is making progress on its AMRAAM backlog, now that Nammo is supplying rocket motors that fully meet specifications. As of March 5/14, the firm has reportedly recovered $179 million (28.8%) of the $621 million withheld by the U.S. Air Force since 2012.

Bloomberg News cites USAF spokesman Ed Gulick as the source. The firm has reportedly told the USAF that it expects to be fully back on schedule by July 2014, and the corresponding funds are being released under a revised delivery schedule agreed on in December 2012.

Gulick adds that ATK has qualified a new motor, and is expected to resume deliveries to Raytheon in May 2015. Sources: Bloomberg, “Raytheon Recovering From Missile Delivery Delays, Air Force Says”.

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). They cover the AIM-120 rocket motor problem, the AIM-120C3-C7 Electronic Protection Improvement Program (EPIP) software upgrade, and the AIM-120D.

As of October 2013, Nammo had manufactured 1,000 motors in their role as the sole source provider for new production motors.

The EPIP is in integrated testing under a plan that DOT&E approved in April 2012, though the ongoing lack of a budget from the US Senate has delayed the program.

The AIM-120D’s problems since December 2011 are better known, though most details are classified. IOT&E testing resumed in May 2013, but the program continues to experience delays. Follow-on Operational Test and Evaluation (FOT&E) is progressing, and is scheduled to end in FY 2014. On the good news front, captive-carry performance has exceeded the interim Mean Time Between Failure requirement, and is approaching the mature requirement of 450 hours.

March 4-11/14: FY15 Budget. The USAF and USN unveil their preliminary budget request briefings. They aren’t precise, but they do offer planned purchase numbers for key programs between FY 2014 – 2019. The detailed documents are released over the course of the next week, and those figures have been added to the charts and background above.

The AIM-120D has been delayed for a couple of years by testing issues, preventing the US military from benefiting from its extended range, improved seeker, etc. The Navy says that “AMRAAM procurements have been deferred in FY15 to ensure adequate time to correct testing and production delays,” which fits with planned Initial Operational Capability in FY 2015 for the Navy’s Hornets and Super Hornets. Meanwhile, they’re dropping purchases from just 44 in FY14 (-10 from request) to 0 in 2015 (-83 from FY14 plan). In contrast, the USAF is moving ahead with AIM-120D buys, buying 183 missiles (-16 from request) in FY14 and requesting 200 (-15 from plan) in FY15.

The Navy says that they’ll eventually catch up with its buys, which are slated to accelerate beyond its earlier plans. They plan to purchase 138 AIM-120Ds in FY 2016 (+30), 154 in FY 2017 (+26), 233 in FY 2018 (+63), and 274 missiles in FY 2019. The USAF is saying similar things, with a planned spike in FY 2017 (+30) and 2018 (+86), and continued high production in 2019. In reality, however, promises of “more later” very rarely come true. At about $1.5 million per missile, the required increases aren’t ruinous, but if finding the funding was easy, they wouldn’t be making reductions now. Source: USN, PB15 Press Briefing [PDF] | USAF, Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Overview.

Feb 25/14: Testing. Raytheon in Tucson AZ receives a sole-source $20 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for work associated with AMRAAM Aircraft Integration, operational testing, and flight test support. The primary objective of this effort is to provide the necessary aircraft lab, flight test, flight clearance, simulation support, and repairs/maintenance during all aircraft integration efforts. If there are failures, troubleshooting, failure analysis etc. will be added as well.

$3 million in FY 2013 and 2014 RDT&E funds are committed immediately to 5 task orders (TO 0001 Simulation Support, TO 0002 Integration Support, TO 0003 Flight Clearances, TO 0004 Tech Support and TO 0005 Management/Financial Support).

Work will be performed at Fort Worth, TX; Eglin Air Force Base, FL; Hill AFB, UT; Edwards AFB, CA; Nellis AFB, NV; White Sands Missile Range, NM: China Lake/Point Mugu, CA; St. Louis, MO; Seattle, WA: Baltimore, MD, and Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by September 2019. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/EBA at Eglin AFB, FL manages the contract (FA8675-14-D-0009).

Dec 19/13: AIM-120D. Raytheon Missiles Systems, Tucson AZ, has been awarded a sole-source $40 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for system improvements to include design, development, and test of the AIM-120D missile. Still working on that…

$4 million is committed immediately from FY 2013 – 2014 RDT&E budgets. Work will be performed at Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by March 31/15. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/EBA at Eglin AFB, FL manages the contract (FA8675-14-D-0082).

FY 2013

Orders: USA, Oman, Saudi Arabia; 1st launch for F-35; Operational mobile SAM introduced; Deliveries & payment resume with new rocket motor supplier. AMRAAM delivery
(click to view full)

July 19/13: ROK.The US DSCA announces [PDF] the Republic of Korea’s official request for 260 AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM missiles, creating a contingency stock for use with its KF-16 and F-15K fighters. The order will also include missile support and test equipment, spare and repair parts, support equipment, personnel training and training equipment, and other forms of US Government and contractor support. The estimated cost is up to $452 million, but that will depend on a negotiated contract.

The principal contractor will be Raytheon Missile Systems Company in Tucson, AZ, and if a contract is negotiated, it will require multiple government and contractor trips to South Korea over an 8-year period for technical reviews/support, program management, and training. Raytheon representatives will also be needed in South Korea to conduct modification kit installation, testing, and training.

DSCA ROK: 452

July 18/13: AIM-9X Block 3. Flight Global reports that US NAVAIR is pushing for an AIM-9X Sidewinder Block III, and hopes to give the short-range missiles a 60% range boost. That range would start to push the AIM-9X into comparable territory to France’s MICA.

US NAVAIR intends to launch the Block III’s EMD development phase in 2016, developmental testing in 2018, and operational tests in 2020, followed by Initial Operational Capability in 2022.

Part of the reported rationale involves the proliferation of digital radar jammers on enemy fighters, which lowers AMRAAM’s odds of a successful radar lock. NAVAIR doesn’t say it, but the F-35’s provision for just 2 internal air-to-air missiles forces all weapon options to be more versatile – which sometimes means more expensive. Unfortunately, programs like the “Triple Target Terminator” were seen as too expensive. Raytheon’s AMRAAM-derived NCADE was another alternative, but the US military hasn’t pursued it.

June 25/13: SL-AMRAAM. Raytheon delivers the first NASAMS High Mobility Launcher. Norway is the customer, and the electronics improvements on HML will also be retrofitted on their fixed NASAMS systems. These improvements include modern upgrades like GPS and north-finding instrumentation. Raytheon.

June 14/13: FY 2013. A $534.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for AMRAAM Production Lot 27. The FY 2013 totals are supposed to be up to $332.3 million to buy 180 AIM-120D missiles for the USAF (113) and Navy (67), and the other 51% of this order is AIM-120C-7s for Oman (F-16C/Ds) and Saudi Arabia (F-15C/D/S/SA). The cost ratios make it very likely that there are more than 180 missiles headed abroad, and their combined recent DSCA requests involve 27 for Oman and 500 for Saudi Arabia.

Given a standard 2-year delivery lag for orders, it’s likely that we’re looking at all of Oman’s request, and part of Saudi Arabia’s. The USA depends on a minimum of 200 AIM-120C orders to keep per-missile prices at their estimates, and this set should cover that. Raytheon is touting their recent ability to deliver faster than specified, which should help ease concerns about the backlog that developed from their 2010-2012 delivery stoppage.

Work will be performed at Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by Jan 31/16. USAF Life Cycle Management Center/EBA at Eglin AFB, FL manages the contract (FA8675-13-C-0003).

FY 2013

June 6/13: F-35. First full launch of an AMRAAM from the new F-35 fighter. In this case, it was an AIM-120-C5 AAVI from an F-35A, #AF-01. It isn’t a targeted launch yet, which depends on the Block 2B software. They just want to be sure that it can be launched from the internal bay without blowing up the plane. USAF | LMCO F-35 site | AFA Air Force Magazine.

April 4/13: AMRAAM + F-15SGs. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Singapore’s request to buy 100 AIM-120C7 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) – but it’s the context for this $210 million export request that makes it important. Sure, Singapore also wants 10 AMRAAM Spare Guidance Sections and an AMRAAM Programmable Advanced System Interface Simulator (PASIS). They also want 18 AN/AVS-9(V) Night Vision Goggles, the H-764G GPS with GEM-V Selective Availability Anti-Spoofing Module (SAASM), and Common Munitions Built-in-Test Reprogramming Equipment (CMBRE-Plus) “in support of a Direct Commercial Sale of new F-15SG aircraft.”

In other words, they’re about to buy another 12 F-15SGs as F-5 replacements and grow their fleet to 36, instead of buying 12 F-35Bs that won’t be useful until 2018 or later.

Because the fighters are a DCS sale, Singapore will manage it themselves, and figures aren’t disclosed. They’ve done this for all of their F-15SG buys, and past estimates for their 12-plane buys have been around $1.5 billion ($125 million per aircraft + support etc.). Their support and training infrastructure is already in place, so the total may be lower this time.

The $210 million FMS request will cover additional containers, spare and repair parts, support equipment, tools and test equipment, training equipment, and US government and contractor support – though Singapore won’t need any more on-site representatives. The prime contractors will be Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ (AMRAAM); Honeywell Aerospace in Phoenix, AZ; ITT Night Vision in Roanoke, VA (NVGs); and ATK Defense Electronic Systems in Clearwater, FL.

DSCA Singapore: 100 – and more F-15SGs coming

Jan 10/13: Fixed. The USAF resumes AMRAAM payments to Raytheon, freeing up $104 million in immediate funds. Deliveries from now on will be based on ready missiles, rather than using a number of milestones from progressive funding.

Norway’s NAMMO AS is Raytheon’s new rocket motor supplier, and deliveries of missiles with new NAMMO motors are beginning this month. About 125 motors have been delivered so far, with production set to reach 100 per month very soon.

ATK needs to reformulate their fuel and re-certify it, which isn’t likely to take less than 18 months. They’re out for now, but the experience has reminded the USAF and Raytheon that multiple supplier arrangements have value. Enough value to justify more money in a tight budget environment? We’ll see.

The late deliveries create penalties for Raytheon worth about $27 – $33 million, which includes things like no-cost labor to install software upgrades, warranty coverage and free repairs. The USAF gets warranty coverage for 325 AIM-120D missiles, and 40 no-cost repairs. Reuters.

Motor switch, payments & deliveries resumed

Dec 12/12: Weapons. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Oman’s request for weapons to equip its existing and ordered F-16s. Implementation of this proposed sale will require multiple trips to Oman involving “many” U.S. Government or contractor representatives over a period of up to or over 15 years for program and technical support and training. The request includes 27 AIM-120-C7 AMRAAMs, among many other weapons. The estimated cost is up to $117 million for all, but exact costs will be determined by any negotiated contracts.

DSCA Oman: 27

Nov 19/12: Support. Raytheon in Tucson, AZ is being awarded a $6.4 million cost-plus fixed-fee contract to provide AMRAAM flight support.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and will run to the end of the fiscal year on Sept 30/13. The AFLCMC/EBAD at Eglin AFB, FL manages the contract (FA8675-13-C-0052).

FY 2012

Stopped deliveries. Poland. NASAMS launch
(click to view full)

Sept 6/12: NASAMS USA. Raytheon IDS in Tewksbury, MA receives a $9.65 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for maintenance and sustainment services in support of the Norwegian Advanced Surface to Air Missile System. There is a NASAMS system guarding the USA’s National Capital region.

Work will be performed in Redstone Arsenal, AL, with an estimated completion date of Aug 30/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-12-C-0276).

July 23/12: Stopped deliveries. IHS Jane’s reports that Raytheon has been unable to deliver any AIM-120 missiles for almost 2 years, because they keep failing cold firing tests designed to mimic temperatures at high altitudes. Raytheon and motor manufacturer ATK say that the materials and formulation haven’t changed in more than 30 years, but consistent test failures began in late 2009, and Raytheon reportedly has a stock of 800 undeliverable missiles.

Something, somewhere has changed, but what? Raytheon and ATK are highly motivated, as payments have been suspended until the problem is fixed. As of this date, they’re still looking for that fix. Raytheon’s official statement as of September 2012 is:

“Restoring AMRAAM to full production is a top priority for Raytheon, and has the full involvement of company leadership and our rocket motor suppliers. Raytheon has continued to produce AMRAAM guidance and control sections on schedule, while we wait for our primary supplier to deliver compliant rocket motors. All resources of Raytheon and our supplier, as well as government and other experts have been engaged to resolve the rocket motor manufacturing issues. We have developed a second rocket motor supplier that has begun to deliver. Raytheon recently delivered 132 AMRAAM all-up rounds to the U.S. Air Force. We continue to work closely with our rocket motor suppliers and our customer; we expect to be on track making additional significant missile deliveries to our customers before the end of the year.”

Deliveries Frozen

May 10/12: An $11.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for “central processing unit, circuit card assembly spike extension” in Production Lot 24 (FY 2010) AMRAAMs. Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and will run until July 31/13 (FA8675-10-C-0014, PO 0021).

March 23/12: AIM-120D. Bloomberg reports that the USAF is now withholding a total of $621 million in payments to Raytheon for the AIM-120D: $419 million in FY 2010 payments, and $202 million from FY 2007-2009.

Since January 2011, Raytheon has met or exceeded planned monthly delivery goals just 3 out of 14 times, and the AIM-120D production line is 193 missiles behind schedule as of Feb 29/12, according to Air Force data. Part of the problem is that ATK “has had difficulty for the past year consistently producing rocket motors to specification”. ATK says they’ve committed their top talent to the issue, and look forward to resuming deliveries to Raytheon “in the near future.” Raytheon would hope so, since the accumulating delays already cost them about $180 million in FY 2012 budget cuts, and could cost them again in FY 2013.

March 20/12: Cracked Up. The Taipei Times reports that the ROCAF currently has 120 AIM-120-C5s and 218 AIM-120-C7s in inventory, thanks to deliveries that began in 2004. Unfortunately, some of them were experiencing cracking in their pyroceramic radome nose cones. American investigators concluded that Taiwan’s high humidity, plus the pressure created by supersonic flight, were the problem. The ROCAF will respond by improving storage and rotation cycles.

The Taipei Times does note that Taiwan’s radar-guided MBDA MICA and locally-built Tien Chien II missiles aren’t having this problem, despite being exposed to the same conditions.

Nose job

Feb 3/12: Polish request. The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces [PDF] Poland’s official request to buy F-16 weapons, as well as a 5 year fleet support contract that includes associated equipment, parts, and training. The entire contract set could be worth up to $447 million, and includes up to 65 AIM-120-C7s. See “2012-02: Poland Requests F-16 Weapons, Support” for full coverage.

DSCA Poland: 65

Jan 26/12: The Pentagon offers releases concerning its 2013 budget, including some news about program cuts, but the Comptroller doesn’t have the full budget documents up yet.

One encouraging piece of news for Raytheon is that one of the areas designated for protection or budget increases involves “Improved air­ to air missiles.” Despite its problems, the AIM-120D may be safe, for now. Pentagon release | “Defense Budget Priorities and Choices” [PDF]

Jan 26/12: A $17.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide test integration of software that’s intended to update and improve the US-only AIM-120D missile. Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/13 (FA8675-09-C-0201, PO 0013).

Jan 17/12: DOT&E. The Pentagon releases the FY2011 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The AMRAAM is included, specifically the ongoing problems with the AIM-120D. The report says that there is still no date set for its operational testing readiness review, which was supposed to happen in 2008. Why not?:

“The four key deficiencies include missile lockup, built-in test (BIT) failures, aircraft integration problems, and poor GPS satellite acquisition… Raytheon has solved the BIT fail problem and has developed a pending solution to the GPS failure problem… The Air Force accomplished the final DT/OT(developmental testing/ operational testing) shot successfully in August 2011, but Raytheon has not yet resolved missile lockup or aircraft integration problems.”

FY 2011

Lot 25. Exports. SLAMRAAM ended. SLAMRAAM from FMTV
(click to view full)

Aug 31/11: FY 2011 order. A $569 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for the FY 2011/ Lot 25 AMRAAM order, divided 77%/ 23% between US government sales and Foreign Military Sales.

USA & General: 234 AIM-120D All-Up-Round (AUR) missiles; 101 AIM-120D CATMs; 4 AIM-120D AAVIs; 8 integrated test vehicles; Air Force AIM 120D guidance section; 103 non-developmental item-airborne instrumentation units; test equipment; Personnel Reliability Program Phase IV.

Exports: 203 AIM-120C7 Foreign Military Sales AURs; warranty for 100 CATMs; warranty for 25 AIM-120C7 AURs (Bahrain); and Foreign Military Sale software and contractor logistics support (FA8675-11-C-0030).

FY 2011

June 29/11: Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ receives a $10.5 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for the “Processor Replacement Program Foreign Military Sales software extension probability of weapon effectiveness.” The AAC/EBAC at Eglin Air Force Base, FL manages the contract (FA8675-09-C-0052, PO 0032).

June 16/11: FY12 zero-out? Flight International reports that the USA may cut Lot 26 AIM-120D production from the FY 2012 budget:

“Raytheon’s production line for the [AIM-120D] is more than 100 weapons behind schedule and operational testing has yet to begin…[so] the House appropriations committee’s defence panel wants to eliminate funding [for all 379 missiles] in the AIM-120D production account… in the fiscal year 2012 defence budget. Such a move, if approved by the Senate, would gut Raytheon’s production line for one year. Since its AIM-120D and export AIM-120C7 missiles are produced on the same line, the price of the latter could rise as order quantities are reduced. That could leave foreign buyers with a larger bill or fewer missiles next year.”

Asked about this, the USAF told DID that the AIM-120D is almost finished combined developmental and operational test phase. The next significant program milestone is the Operational Test Readiness Review (OTRR) in August 2011, to determine if the program is ready for dedicated operational testing.

As of the end of May 2011, the US military has taken delivery of 225 AIM-120Ds, vs. a contract delivery requirement of 361. That’s a backlog of 136 missiles, which are only paid for after they are delivered and signed for via DD250 documentation.

June 2/11: Australia request. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Australia’s formal request to buy up to 110 AIM-120C-7 AMRAAMs, 10 AIM-120C-7 AAVIs, 16 AIM-120C-7 CATMs, plus containers, weapon system support equipment, support and test equipment, site survey, transportation, repair and return, warranties, spare and repair parts, publications and technical data, maintenance, personnel training and training equipment, and other forms of support. The DSCA specifically notes that:

“The proposed sale will allow the Australian Defense Force to complete Australia’s F/A-18 program under their Project AIR 5349. Phase I allowed acquisition of F/A-18[F Super Hornet] Block II aircraft and Phase II is for the acquisition of weapons.”

The estimated cost is $202 million, with Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ as the contractor. Actual costs will, of course, depend on the terms of any eventual contract. Australia already uses AMRAAMs on its older F/A-18A/B Hornets, but its F-111s did not. A larger AMRAAM-capable fleet means a need for a few more missiles. This proposed sale wouldn’t require any additional U.S. Government or contractor representatives in Australia.

DSCA Australia: 110

Feb 17/11: AMRAAM component shortage? Focus Taiwan covers a ROCAF report on the May 2010 AMRAAM International Users’ Conference, in which the USAF’s 649th Armament Systems Squadron raised the issue of “Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS).” In English, that means people who manufacture some parts of the missile are either going out of business or ceasing production. The 649th ARSS said component shortages could begin as soon as 2012, and recommends that countries revise their AMRAAM support contracts to include maintenance and warranty clauses.

The longer term hope is to issue contracts for Raytheon to develop replacement components, as part of a joint logistics support plan extending to around 2030. Taiwan will join some other AMRAAM users in raising the issue of humidity, which makes it harder to store and maintain the missiles, and could accelerate their spares problem.

Component problems

Feb 16/11: Swiss budget. Switzerland approves its 2011 armament program. Biggest expense in the $450 million total? CHF 180 million ($192.8 million) to upgrade its stocks with new AIM-120-C7 AMRAAM medium range air-air missiles, alongside the old AIM-120Bs which were bought in 1992 with the air force’s 26 F/A-18C/D Hornet fighters.

The Defence Ministry no longer considers the AIM-120Bs to be up to date from an operational point of view, and is buying what it terms a “minimum number of guided missiles” to address that situation. The new AIM-120-C7s will be available alongside the older AIM-120Bs, though the latter are likely to be used more often in reserve and training roles. Swiss VBS | defpro. See also the Dec 21/10 entry, for the associated DSCA request.

Switzerland

Feb 14/11: FY 2012 budget. The Pentagon releases its FY 2012 budget request, even as it waits for the new 112th Congress to pass the FY 2011 budget that its predecessors failed to enact. The $579.5 million request would buy 379 missiles (218 USAF, 161 Navy), and provide $80.7 million in R&D for “product improvements such as fuzing, guidance, and kinematics.”

Jan 31/11: Support. A $15 million contract for AMRAAM technical support: systems engineering, small software enhancements, test support, maintenance and modification of special test assets, support to the Navy hardware in the loop simulation, aircraft integration, and other technical engineering requirements. At this time, no money has been committed – task orders will be issued if needed (FA8675-11-D-0050).

Jan 6/11: SL-AMRAAM. The Pentagon announces a number of changes, instead to take $150 billion from administration and weapons programs, and shift them into higher priority weapon programs. One of the proposed cancellations is the Army’s SLAMRAAM program which, like all of these proposed cuts, must be agreed and legislated by the US Congress before it comes into effect.

On the one hand, given the ongoing decline of American tactical airpower, canceling SLAMRAAM in favor of keeping older, short-range Stinger and Avenger air defense missile systems is a definite risk. On the other hand, AMRAAM ground-based air defense systems are selling around the world in Finland, the Netherlands, Norway, et. al., and will remain available as a mature system that can be implemented quickly if the need is recognized. Pentagon release re: overall plan | Full Gates speech and Gates/Mullen Q&A transcript || Atlanta Journal Constitution | The Atlantic | the libertarian Cato Institute | The Hill | NY Times | Politico | Stars and Stripes || Agence France Presse | BBC | Reuters | UK’s Telegraph | China’s Xinhua.

SLAMRAAM ended

Dec 21/10: Swiss request. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Switzerland’s official request to buy 150 AIM-120-C7 missiles, 6 AIM-120-C7 Telemetry Missiles, 24 AIM-120-C7 Captive Air Training Missiles, and 1 spare Missile Guidance Section, plus missile containers, weapon system support equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical documents, repair and return, depot maintenance, training and training equipment, and other forms of U.S. Government and contractor support. The estimated cost is $358 million.

Switzerland would use the missiles on its existing fleet of F/A-18C/D Hornet aircraft, which already carry earlier-model AIM-120B AMRAAMs. The prime contractor will, of course, be Raytheon Missile Systems Corporation in Tucson, AZ.

DSCA Switzerland: 150

Dec 13/10: SLAMRAAM. Raytheon announces the 2nd test firing of an unguided SLAMRAAM from its new carrier platform, an FMTV truck. Details and purpose are the same as the 1st firing, discussed in the Sept 9/10 entry.

Oct 20/10: Saudi Arabia. As part of a nearly $30 billion weapons export request that involves upgrading their entire F-15S fleet, and buying 84 new F-15SA Strike Eagles, Saudi Arabia also seeks export permission for up to 500 AIM-120-C7 AMRAAMs as one of the weapons in their request. US DSCA [PDF] | DID’s “The Saudis’ American Shopping Spree: F-15s, Helicopters & More”

DSCA Saudi: 500

FY 2010

SAR. Radomes. Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Chile. AIM-120D into F-22A
(click to view full)

Sept 28/10: Support. A $10.2 million contract modification which will extend the period of performance of the AMRAAM aircraft integration support effort contract through Sept 30/13. $1,815,268 has been committed (FA8675-08-C-0050; PO0016).

Sept 10/10: More radomes, please! A $25.8 million contract modification to restart the AMRAAM Radome “Phase II Pyroceram” project. At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA3002-09-C-0003; AO0017).

A USAF representative explained that Raytheon had produced a large number of missile radomes before the line shut down, and it was thought that they would cover all future requirements. Since then, AMRAAM orders have surged ahead of those estimates, and stocks of radomes have been drawn very low. Production has to begin again, and this contract modification asks Raytheon to qualify the factory to build the same design radome as before. Production of new radomes will occur under the AMRAAM production contract, awarded separately, beginning in 2012.

Sept 9/10: SLAMRAAM. Raytheon announces that an unguided version of its ground-launched SLAMRAAM had a successful test firing from an FMTV truck at Eglin Air Force Base, FL. SLAMRAAM was initially mounted on Humvees, but it has become clear that those weren’t tough enough, so the Army will be using FMTV medium trucks instead. An FMTV derivative called the Caiman is even up-armored with a V-hull to survive mine blasts.

Missiles won’t launch exactly the same way from a different vehicle, however, because the launching itself creates different turbulence effects. That can have effects on nearby soldiers, and even on subsequent missiles if they’re ripple-fired. Understanding these “dynamic launch effects” was the goal of this test, and Raytheon adds that it will “reduce risk on future potential FMTV missile integration efforts, such as the AIM-9X.” Many other ground-launched air-to-air missile conversions use a dual setup of infrared and radar guided missiles, from Israel’s Spyder to France’s VL-MICA; adding AIM-9X to SLAMRAAM would give it the same versatility.

Aug 6/10: FY 2010 order. A $492.4 million contract which will provide AMRAAM missiles to American and international customers, and appears to be the FY 2010 buy. Note that AIM-120Ds and their accompanying training and test missiles are only sold to the US military. The order includes:

  • 132 AIM-120D AURs;
  • 12 AIM-120D Air Vehicles Instrumented (AAVI)
  • 87 AIM-120D Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM)
  • Warranty for 85 AIM-120D AURs for the USAF
  • Warranty for 10 AAVIs for the USAF
  • Warranty for 87 CATMs for the US Air Force and Navy
  • AIM 120D guidance section and rear data link for the USAF
  • 273 AIM-120C7 AURs for all Foreign Military Sales customers
  • Warranty for 58 AIM-120C7 AURs for Foreign Military Sales customers Chile (13) and Jordan (45)
  • 192 non-developmental item-airborne instrumentation units
  • Test equipment; HIF/Spike life time buy; and contractor logistics support. This includes

Foreign Military Sales class customers within this order total 44% of its value, and include Morocco, Jordan, and Kuwait (q.v. Nov 15/10 entry); plus Canada, Chile, Finland, Singapore, South Korea, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA8675-10-C-0014).

FY 2010

April 28/10: Alternate rocket motor. Raytheon announces that it’s working with Norway’s NAMMO to begun qualifying an alternative rocket motor for the AIM-120 AMRAAM that would be interchangeable with current motors, and maintain the same performance as the current rocket engine. ATK is currently the primary rocket motor provider. Raytheon Missile Systems Air Warfare Systems VP Harry Schulte says that this is simple prudence for a key product, which has been bought by 36 countries, with more than 1.8 million captive-carry hours and more than 2,900 live firings:

“A second source of rocket motors ensures Raytheon will meet its commitment to the U.S. and international warfighter by providing a continual supply of AMRAAMs.”

NAMMO has a long-standing relationship of its own with Raytheon, and has delivered more than 40,000 rocket motors for the AIM-9 Sidewinder short range air-air missile program. It also seems like an good move if rocket motors are creating a problem for AMRAAM, which turns out to be the case. NAMMO ends up as the new supplier before all is said and done, with ATK free to pursue supplier certification without affecting deliveries. Raytheon release.

April 2/10: Support. A $13.5 million contract which provides support for 4 months of AMRAAM system engineering and program management, due to delay of Lot 24 (FY 2010 production), which would otherwise have covered those funds. At this time the entire amount has been obligated by the 695ARSS/PK at Eglin Air Force Base, FL (FA8675-09-C-0052). When asked about the delay, the team at Eglin AFB has this to say:

“The Air Force has changed contracting policy, departing from the more streamlined, “review-discuss-concur” (sometimes known as “alpha contracting”) approach of recent years, in favor of a traditional contracting approach that requires considerably more cost information and independent auditing by the Defense Contract Audit Agency.

This policy change has extended the schedule for negotiating and awarding our contracts. The Lot 24 contract, planned to be awarded in March/April originally, is now forecast for a June/July award. The four-month “bridge” contract was awarded to protect the program’s critical engineering and management workforce… [but] does not increase the ultimate cost of the Lot 24 contract.”

April 1/10: SAR. The Pentagon releases its April 2010 Selected Acquisitions Report, covering major program changes up to December 2009. AMRAAM makes the list, for both good and bad reasons:

“Program costs increased $6,402.7 million (+43.0%) from $14,880.6 million to $21,283.3 million, due primarily to a quantity increase of 3,887 missiles from 13,953 to 17,840 missiles (+$3,775.7 million) and associated schedule, engineering, and estimating allocations

  • (+$457.7 million). Costs also increased due to software integration efforts (+504.4 million), the realignment of Navy and Air Force missile procurement during fiscal 2008 through fiscal 2024 (+$918.6 million), an increase in telemetry equipment to support training (+$422.9 million), and increases in tooling and test equipment, diminishing manufacturing sources requirements, and production/test support resulting from the extension of the production program from fiscal 2013 to fiscal 2024 (+$280.4 million).”

SAR

March 16/10: R&D. A $19.5 million contract to continue funding the AMRAAM system improvement program. At this time, the $2.8 million has been committed by the 696th ARSS at Eglin Air Force Base, FL (FA8675-10-C-0105).

March 9-11/10: AIM-120D. The new AIM-120D AMRAAM takes the first 2 Developmental Test/ Operational Test (DT/OT) live shots, at Eglin AFB, FL. Eglin officials tell DID that “Performance appeared to have been as predicted, but the [full] test data is still under review. The March 9 shot from a Navy F/A-18E Super Hornet resulted in a “lethal intercept” of the target, presumably due to proximity detonation. The March 11th shot from a USAF F-15C resulted in a direct hit.

The AIM-120D Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase is complete [and] fielding will follow the completion of an extensive operational testing effort that is currently underway. The 3rd and final DT/OT shot is planned for early-May 2010, and all missiles for the testing programs have been delivered.

March 2/10: SLAMRAAM. Raytheon announces that the USA’s Surface Launched Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (SLAMRAAM) program has received approval from the U.S. Army for long-lead purchases, not to exceed $18 million, leading to low rate initial production. The step toward LRIP status is an important milestone for that program.

Nov 15/09: Kuwait, Morocco & Jordan order. The US government executed separate letters of offer and acceptance with Kuwait, Morocco and Jordan enabling those US Middle East allies to purchase AIM-120C-7 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAMs).

In earlier requests to the US Congress, Kuwait had asked to buy 120 AIM-120-C7 AMRAAMs (see Sept 9/08 entry); Morocco had asked to buy 30 AIM-120-C5 AMRAAMs (C5 is the production version before the C7 – see July 9/08 entry); and Jordan had asked to buy 85 AIM-120-C7 AMRAAMs (see Aug 3/09 entry). The 3 countries will use the AMRAAMs in both air-to-air and air defense missions.

Jordan, Kuwait & Morocco

Nov 10/09: Chile request. The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) notified Congress of a request by Chile to buy 100 AIM-120C-7 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) and associated parts, equipment and logistical support for approximately $145 million. DSCA requests are not contracts. If Congress does not block the request within 30 days, negotiations can begin for related contracts.

Chile intends to use these missiles to improve its capability to meet current and future threats of enemy air-to-air weapons. Chile is updating its military’s capability while increasing interoperability of weapon systems between itself, the US, and other allies.

DSCA Chile: 100

Oct 29/09: Rocket boost? Alliant Techsystems (ATK) announces a nearly $10 million contract to improve rocket motor technologies for the Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM), and well as future air-to-air missile systems. The scope of the work being performed under the Counter Air/ Future Naval Capabilities program is to develop technologies that will extend missile range, decrease time-to-target, improve end-game maneuverability, and improve the rocket motor’s response to insensitive munitions stimuli.

There are 4 main areas that ATK will concentrate on: high burn rate propellants for improved kinematics; improving case stiffness for reduced weight and agility; low erosion nozzles for improved performance; and multi-pulse propulsion for better end-game maneuverability. The Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division at China Lake, CA manages the contract. ATK expects to complete the work by June 2013.

FY 2009

FMS, Jordan, Bahrain. F-18F launch
(click to view larger)

Sept 16/09: Testing. Raytheon Co. in Tucson, AZ received a $22.2 million modification, which changes a previously awarded unfinalized contract (N68936-09-C-0097) to a cost-plus fixed-fee contract. Raytheon will design, build, and integrate an all-inclusive AMRAAM hardware-in-the-loop simulation system for military construction project P710, at the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division in China Lake, CA. Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ (75%) and China Lake, CA (25%), and is expected to be complete in September 2011. The Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division in China Lake, CA will manage this contract.

The hardware-in-the-loop simulation facility includes hardware mounts, a flight table that can mount the core seeker assembly etc., and an anechoic chamber, in order to create simulated missile firings. It can test the missile’s radar seeker and ECCM (electronic counter-counter-measures) against simulated targets and threats, from a variety of imagined speeds and angles, and produce Monte Carlo simulations that explore hundreds of “firings” and create statistically useful results, without using up hundreds of missiles and expensive airframe time. It can also test the signals being sent to the rest of the missile, and make sure the software and mechanics are doing what they’re supposed to do.

The move from Point Mugu was prompted by changes mandated in the USA’s 2005 Base Realignment and Closure Act, and the new facility is expected to begin operations in September 2011 with AIM-120C7 capability. By September 2012, the facility is expected to be fully operational, with the ability to handle AIM-120C3-C7 models. See also NAVAIR release | Thanks to NAWCWD China Lake for clarification.

Aug 18/09: R&D. A $20.1 million cost-plus fixed-fee contract for the AMRAAM system improvement program. At this time $2.5 million has been committed. The 696th ARSS at Eglin Air Force Base, FL manages the contract (FA8675-09-C-0201).

Aug 3/09: Jordanian request. The DSCA announces [PDF] Jordan’s official request to buy 85 AIM-120C-7 missiles, 6 AIM-120C Captive Air Training Missiles, missile containers, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, personnel training and training equipment, and support. The estimated cost is $131 million.

Implementation of this proposed sale will require bi-annual trips to Jordan involving 6 U.S. Government and 4 contractor representatives for program management reviews over a period of up to 5 years.

DSCA Jordan: 85

July 28/09: Bahrain request. The DSCA announces [PDF] Bahrain’s official request to buy 25 AIM-120C-7 AMRAAMs, missile containers, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, personnel training and training equipment, and support. The estimated cost is $74 million.

Implementation of this proposed sale will require bi-annual trips to Bahrain involving 6 U.S. Government and 4 contractor representatives for program management reviews over a period of up to 5 years.

DSCA Bahrain: 25

May 11/09: FY 2009 order. A $521.3 million firm-fixed-price contract to Raytheon Co. of Tucson, AZ for AMRAAM production (FA8675-09-C-0052). This appears to be the Lot 23 contract. At this time, the entire amount has been committed. The order includes:

  • 105 containerized AIM-120D AMRAAM All-Up-Rounds;
  • 72 AIM-120D captive air training missiles, and warranties;
  • 11 instrumented AIM-120D “air vehicles,” for missile flight tests;
  • 2 AIM-120D integrated test vehicles, which include guidance systems etc.;
  • 106 “non-developmental items,” including airborne instrumentation units, test equipment, Phase 1A activities related to AMRAAM radomes, quad target detection device parts replacement work to address obsolescence, US Navy AIM 120D guidance section and development infrastructure support equipment, and upgrades; and
  • 495 AIM-120C7s for Foreign Military Sales outside the USA.

FY 2009

Feb 22/09: UAE order. A Raytheon official confirms that the United Arab Emirates and the U.S. government have executed a letter of offer and acceptance for 224 AIM-120C7 missiles, to equip the UAE’s F-16E/F Block 60 fighter fleet.

Terms are not disclosed, but the number matches the DSCA sale request on Jan 3/08. That request involved a larger package that also included JDAM smart bombs and other weapons; it was worth up to $326 million. Reuters.

UAE

Feb 13/09: Newer chips. The USAF issued a $21.7 million modification to a cost plus fixed fee contract with performance incentives. Raytheon of Tucson, AZ will conduct the AMRAAM Processor Replacement Program, Phase II. At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA8675-07-C-0055, P00022).

Some sources cite 30 MHz as the original speed for AMRAAM’s processor, in a world where computer chips that were cutting edge midway through the AMRAAM program’s lifespan are now museum pieces. Newer chips definitely offer the potential for performance improvements, but the most important benefit in this case may be the newer chips’ continued availability from manufacturers.

Jan 12/09: A $6.7 million modification to the AMRAAM Lot 22 Production contract (see May 28/08 entry). At this time, the entire amount has been committed (FA8675-08-C-0049, P00008).

Dec 10/08: Greece. Raytheon in Tucson, AZ receives a $7.9 million contract modification to administer AMRAAM-related industrial offset programs in Greece, as a modification to the Production Lot 21 contract. See also the July 1/08 entry, covering the addition of 130 AIM-120C7s to Greece as part of the Lot 21 production run.

At this time the entire amount has been obligated. 695 ARSS at Eglin Air Force Base, FL manages this contract (FA8675-07-C-0055, modification P00020).

Nov 25/08: AIM-120D. The Air Force is paying $6 million to modify a firm fixed price contract with Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ. This contract will upgrade 2 guided weapons test sets to AIM-120D Capability, including spares, and additional GPS. At this time, all the money has been committed (FA8675-07-C-0055, Modification P00019).

Oct 20/08: Turkey, Denmark & Finland. Rocket motors have shelf lives, too. The USAF issues a contract modification for $12.9 million. In exchange, Raytheon will supply 436 propulsion sections (baseline rocket motors) that will be installed in AIM-120B missiles. This effort supports foreign military sales to Turkey, Denmark, and Finland, and all funds have been committed (FA8675-08-C-0049, P00005).

Oct 15/08: Testing. The AIM-120C7 AMRAAM enters the U.S. Navy’s Weapon System User Program (WSUP) evaluations, fired from Super Hornets of the U.S. Navy’s VFA-143 squadron against a BQM-167A target drone. The Navy fighters also fired one of the new short-range AIM-9X Sidewinder missiles during the joint mission, which included USAF F-15Cs from Eglin Air Force Base’s 60th Fighter Squadron.

Raytheon’s release adds that “All missiles guided within lethal range of the target and were assessed as 100 percent successful.”

FY 2008

South Korea, Singapore, Finland, Greece, Morocco, Kuwait, UAE, Turkey. F-15C fires AMRAAM
(click to view full)

Sept 26/08: Turkish request. The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces [PDF] Turkey’s official request to buy 107 AIM-120C7 AMRAAM missiles, 2 missile guidance sections, missile containers, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, and various support services. The estimated cost is $157 million.

Raytheon Electronic and Missile Systems of Tucson, AZ is the prime contractor. The Turkish Air Force uses AMRAAMs, and will have no difficulty absorbing these missiles into its armed forces. Implementation of this sale will not require the assignment of any additional U. S. Government or contractor personnel in country.

DSCA Turkey: 107

Sept 10/08: R&D. A cost plus fixed fee contract for $7.4 million, in return for work on AIM-120C3 through AIM-120C7 Counter Advanced Electronic Attack (EA) Risk Reduction and Concept Refinement (RR/CR). In English, this work will make it harder to jam most of the AMRAAM missiles in current service. At this time all funds have been committed by the 328th Armament Systems Group at Eglin AFB, FL (FA8675-08-C-0247).

Sept 9/08: UAE request. The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announces [PDF] the United Arab Emirates’ official request to buy 288 AIM-120C7 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) missiles, 2 Air Vehicle-Instrumented (AAVI) missiles, 144 LAU-128 Launchers, Surface Launched Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (SL-AMRAAM) software, missile warranty, KGV-68B COMSEC chips, training missiles, containers, support and test equipment, missiles components, spare/repair parts, publications, documentation, personnel training, training equipment, contractor technical and logistics personnel services, and other related support elements. The estimated cost is $445 million.

The principal contractor will be Raytheon Corporation in Waltham, MA. The purchaser intends to request industrial offsets, but specifics will be defined in negotiations between the UAE and Raytheon. Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of 10 U.S. Government personnel and 15 Contractor representatives to the United Arab Emirates for a period of 3 months. Also, various personnel will be required to travel to the United Arab Emirates in one-week intervals, for surveys and other program requirements.

DSCA UAE: 288

Sept 9/08: Kuwait request. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Kuwait’s official request to buy 120 AIM-120C7 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM), 78 LAU-127-B/A launchers that fit on its fighter aircraft, 78 LAU-127-C/A Launchers, Captive Air Training Missiles, missile containers, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government (USG) and contractor engineering, technical and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistical and program support. The estimated cost is $178 million.

The prime contractor will be Raytheon Missile Systems Corporation in Tucson, AZ. Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of up to 10 U.S. Government and contractor representatives for one-week intervals twice annually, to participate in training, and technical review.

DSCA Kuwait: 120

July 11/08: Finland request. Finland requests 300 AIM-120C7 AMRAAM missiles, plus missile containers, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, and other related support. The order could be worth up to $435 million. Finland already uses AMRAAM missiles on its F/A-18C/D Hornet fighters. DSCA announcement [PDF].

DSCA Finland: 300

July 11/08: Singapore request. Singapore requests 128 AIM-120C7, 72 AIM-120C5, and 6 CATM missiles as part of a larger package worth up to $962 million.

DSCA Singapore: 200

July 9/08: Morocco request. Morocco requests 30 AIM-120C5 missiles as part of a larger package for its forthcoming F-16 C/Ds worth up to $155 million.

DSCA Morocco: 30

July 1/08: Greek order. An $87.6 million contract modification will provide 130 AIM-120C7s to Greece, and 6 Non-Developmental Item Airborne Instrumentation Units (NDI-AIUs) to Germany, as a modification to the AMRAAM Production Lot 21 contract. At this time all funds have been committed (FA8675-07-C-0055, P00011).

Greece

July 1/08: Processor replacement. A $13.2 million modification to a cost plus fixed fee contract for the Processor Replacement Program, Phase I. This project will replace the data processor module that’s common to both AMRAAM and the new Standard Missile 6 (SM-6) naval ship defense missile. The problem is that the AMRAAM Data Processor (ADP) and the Input-Output application specific integrated circuits (I/O ASIC) in the guidance section electronics aren’t manufactured any more. The electronics industry has much shorter life cycles than the military does, so the USAF is looking to replace these obsolete parts and do any redesign required.

This effort supports the US military and foreign military sales to Greece and Taiwan. All funds have already been committed (FA8675-07-C-0055, P00012).

June 20/08: South Korea request. South Korea is requesting $200 million worth of additional air-air missiles and precision attack weapons for its F-15Ks: 125 AIM-120C7 AMRAAMs, 14 CATMs, and 2 dummy rounds; plus AGM-54G Mavericks, JDAMs, Paveway II/IIIs, and chaff. Read “South Korea Buying Weapons for its new F-15Ks.”

DSCA ROK: 125

June 6/08: The USAF is modifying the firm-fixed-price Lot 21 production contract with Raytheon Missile Systems of Tucson, AZ by $44.8 million, in order to provide AIM-120C-7 Software Tapes 18A/20 to Greece and Taiwan. At this time, $17.4 million has been obligated (FA8675-07-C-0055, P00010).

May 28/08: FY 2008 order. A $412.2 million firm-fixed-price contract for Lot 22 AMRAAM production: 98 AIM-120D All-Up-Round Missiles, 11 AIM-120D Air Vehicles Instrumented (AAVIs), 8 AIM-120D Integrated Test Vehicles (ITVs), 78 AIM-120D Captive Air Training Missiles, a warranty for 68 AIM-120D AURs (USAF), a warranty for 11 AAVIs USAF, and a warranty for 78 CATMs (USAF/USN).

This order also includes 213 AIM-120C-7 foreign military sales AURs, 5 AIM-120C foreign military sales AAVIs, 269 Non-Developmental Item-Airborne Instrumentation Units, Spares (US/FMS), Test Equipment, Obsolescence to include Radome source replacement, Quad Target Detection Device parts replacements, and second source funding for the Common Air Launched Navigation System. At this time, all funds have been committed (FA8675-08-C-0049).

Deliveries are scheduled to begin in 2010 and continue through 2011. See also Raytheon release.

FY 2008

May 21/08: AIM-120D. A modified cost plus contract for $9.8 million, required because the Phase IV AMRAAM SDD program to develop the AIM-120D is experiencing turbulence. “Continuing delays in resolving developmental hardware issues and less-than-expected effectiveness in flight test execution are the primary reasons for the SDD program being behind schedule.” DID asked for clarification, and the program office explained:

“The AMRAAM Phase IV SDD program has experienced unexpected delays during the transition from POD (proof of design) to POM (proof of manufacture) hardware design and integration for a variety of reasons. The hardware delays varied from late deliveries from subcontractors to minor redesigns of CCAs culminating in delayed production of POM units and a corresponding schedule slip. The program has also experienced less-than-expected effectiveness over the past year in flight test execution due to weather, aircraft and target maintenance delays(such as the recent extended F-15 Fleet grounding), and POM missile hardware availability for flight test. The POM hardware issues have been resolved and Raytheon Missile Systems is now successfully producing POM missiles for aircraft integration and test efforts.”

The current forecast date for the functional configuration audit has slipped about 10 months, from June 30/08 to April 30/09. That schedule extension increases the contract’s cost by about 10%, which is available with the existing program budget. Technical requirements have not changed, and at this time $6.8 million has been obligated (FA8675-04-C-0001, P00047).

Feb 12/08: SLAMRAAM. The Project on Government Oversight watchdog group issues a December 2007 report from the US DoD’s Office of the Inspector General, which was obtained via the Freedom of Information Act. It discusses, and faults, the US Army and Defense Contracting Management Agency’s handling of the $623 million SLAMRAAM ground-launched anti-aircraft missile program. DID includes more complete excerpts and summaries from the report, including program manager and DCMA responses, and adds more details regarding the SLAMRAAM system.

Jan 3/08: UAE request. The UAE requests 224 AIM-120C7 AMRAAMs, as part of a larger weapons purchase request to buy its F-16 E/F Block 60 Desert Falcon fighters that could be worth up to $326 million.

DSCA UAE: 224

FY 2007

SAR. Netherlands, Pakistan, Israel. AIM-120A launch
(click to view full)

Sept 26/07: Sub-contractors. A contract modification for $7.8 million, which buys 309 replacement baseline rocket motors to be installed into AIM-120A, AIM-120B, and AIM-120C Air Vehicles. Raytheon actually buys these from ATK. At this time all funds have been obligated. The 695th ARSS at Eglin Air Force Base, FL issued the contract (FA8675-07-C-0055, P0004).

Sept 25/07: Sub-contractors. Harris Corp. Government Communications Systems Division of Melbourne, Fla. received a modification to a firm fixed price contract for $9.3 million. This action provides 86 sets of Warhead Replacement Tactical Telemetry (WRTTM) applicable to AIM-120 AMRAAMs. Also, line items are included for Data, Interim Contractor Support (ICS) required to maintain and repair the WRTTM, ICS required to maintain and repair the WRTTM Test Sets and Support Equipment, ICS required to perform services in support of approved Engineering Change Proposals, ICS services and materials required for Program Management, ICS Services and Materials required to provide Quarterly, 5 days on-the-job training sessions for Tyndall AFB, FL, personnel for the operation and maintenance of the WRTTM Test Set and Support Equipment.

At this time all funds have been obligated. The 542nd Combat Sustainment Wing at Robins Air Force Base Ga. issued the contract (F09603-03-C-0006-P00018).

Aug 24/07: Israel request. The US DSCA announces [PDF format] Israel’s request to buy 200 AIM-120C-7 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air (AMRAAM) missiles, containers, components, spare/repair parts, publications, documentation, personnel training, training equipment, and other related support elements. The estimated cost is $171 million, and the principal contractor will be Raytheon Missile Systems Corporation, Tucson, AZ.

As noted above, AMRAAM competes to some extent with RAFAEL’s shorter-range Derby 4 missile. To date, however, Israel’s Cheyl Ha’avir has elected to purchase AMRAAMs instead for its fighters. See “Israel Requests $642M in Missiles, Fuel” for complete coverage.

DSCA Israel: 200

June 19/07: SLAMRAAM Plus? Raytheon announces SLAMRAAM upgrades via options to add SL-AMRAAM-ER extended range variants (likely via a rocket booster), and a variant with AIM-9X infrared seekers to match the combination radar/infrared surface-to-air sets like Spyder, VL-MICA, et. al. being fielded by international rivals.

April 16/07: FY 2007 order. A $180.3 million firm fixed price contract for 96 AIM-120D AMRAAM Air Vehicles, 5 AIM-120D AMRAAM Air Vehicles Instrumented, 105 Airborne Instrumentation Units, and warranty for 25 USAF Captive Air Training Missiles. This action also funds the Manufacturing Excellence Model Initiative, Test Equipment, and 2 priced options. At this time, $175.6 million have been obligated. This work will be complete January 2010 (FA8675-07-C-0055).

FY 2007

April 9/07: SAR. The Pentagon releases its April 2007 Selected Acquisition Report, and AMRAAM is one of the systems covered. Overall program costs increased $1.6 billion (+12.2%) from $13.2 billion to $14.8 billion:

“…due primarily to lower-than-expected Foreign Military Sales (FMS) projections (+$557.9 million) and an acquisition strategy pricing change (+$859.2 million). There were also increases related to a stretchout of the annual procurement buy profile (+$93.7 million), additional special tooling and test equipment (+$54.8 million), and an overrun in the AIM-120D (Phase 4) system development and demonstration contract (+$32.7 million).”

SAR

AIM-120A: preparing for a swap

Jan 29/07: Rocket switch. U.S. Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) officials and 435th Munitions Squadron airmen recently moved to shift serviceable rocket motors from older AIM-120A AMRAAMs and put them in unserviceable AIM-120B and C models, creating viable AIM-120 B/C missiles. The systems involved are part of USAFE’s war reserve assets, but also serve as a forward-positioned stockpile for the U.S. Central Command and elsewhere. The in-house weapon overhaul of 63 missiles saved the Air Force more than $31 million and approximately 3 years of time, and was the largest field retrofit in the AMRAAM’s history.

Dec 6/06: SLAMRAAM. Kongsberg announces a contract valued at NOK 345 million (about $60 million) with the Netherlands for NASMS system deliveries to the Dutch Army under the Future Ground Based Air Defence (FGBAD NL) program. The program combines systems from EADS with the SLAMRAAM-based NASAMS surface-to-air system developed by Kongsberg.

Dutch SAMs

Nov 17/06: Pakistan. A $269.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option to purchase 500 AIM-120C5 AMRAAM missiles and rehost on behalf of Pakistan (100%). Work will be complete April 2011 (FA8675-05-C-0070/P00028). This order is part of Pakistan’s $5.1 billion program to buy new F-16s and upgrade its existing fleet, and is the biggest AMRAAM export order to date. See also Raytheon’s January 15, 2007 release.

Pakistan

Nov 8/06: AIM-120D & AFSO-21. A USAF article discusses how the AIM-120D Production Program Manager was a bit skeptical when he was asked to be team leader on an Air Force Smart Operations for the 21st century rapid improvement event. By the time they were done, however, they had cut the acquisition-delivery time down from 11 months (48 weeks) to 4.5 months (20 weeks) using AFSO process improvement tools. Maj. Charles Seidel was impressed – and so were other weapons programs. Here’s what they did.

Nov 2/06: A $5.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for AIM-120D production transition, with all funds already obligated. This work will be complete March 2007 (FA8675-06-C-0003/P00005).

Oct 31/06: SLAMRAAM. Raytheon announces that its AMRAAM-based Complementary Low Altitude Weapons System (CLAWS) air defense system finished 14 month Limited Technical Inspection in just 12 months and exceeded performance expectations, clearing the way for Marine Corps acceptance of the final 2 fire units. The tests took place at Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems’ Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA.

CLAWS is a SLAMRAAM/HUMRAAM variant, and despite test success, the USMC decided that US air superiority made it an acceptable cancellation. Time will tell if that is wise.

Oct 17/06: SLAMRAAM. Raytheon Fires Surface-Launched AMRAAM to Test New Command Destruct/Self Destruct Capability. The successful tests took place in Sweden, following successful SLAMRAAM tests in Norway.

FY 2006

NCADE. Pakistan, Singapore, Saudi Arabia. F-16 launches AIM-120
(click to view full)

Sept 29/06: Singapore & Saudi order. A $65.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option to purchase 123 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAMM) Air Vehicles (AAVs) Air Intercept Missile (AIM)-120C-5 missiles: 9 are for the USAF and 114 are foreign military sales to Singapore and Saudi Arabia (DefenseLINK did not break that out by country). The contract also includes 51 warranties and foreign military service software configuration management. Work will be complete November 2008 (FA8675-05-C-0070, PO 0026).

Singapore & Saudi

Sept 15/06: FY 2006 supplement. A $112.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to provide for 104 AIM-120C7 AMRAAM Air Vehicles, 112 Non-Developmental Item, Airborne Instrumentation Units (NDI-AIUs), proposal preparation, L3 Communications Pulse Code Modulation, Encoder Qualification Non-Recurring Expense, NDI-AIU Test Equipment Upgrade as well as 12 AIM-120D AMRAAM Air Vehicles Instrumented (AAVIs), 50 AIM-120D Captive Air Training Missiles (they have the seeker but no rocket motor), and an option for AIM-120D production transition.

The AIM-120C7 is the most current AMRAAM missile, but the other elements of the contract certainly indicate that the transition to the AIM-120D is getting closer (FA8675-06-C-0003, PO 0003). An October 6, 2006 Raytheon release notes that this contract supplements the Lot 20A effort awarded in February 2006; the two Lot 20 contracts combined total $168 million. The first production set of AIM-120D missiles will be delivered from December 2007 through January 2009.

FY 2006 SUP

July 26/06: AIM-120D. A $25.4 million cost-plus contract modification. This action provides for AMRAAM AIM-120D system demonstration development contract re-baseline. At this time, $7.4 million has been committed. Solicitations began April 2006, negotiations were complete July 2006, and work will be complete in June 2008. The Headquarters 328th Armament Systems Group, Eglin Air Force Base, FL issued the contract (FA8675-04-C-0001/P00028).

June 28/06: Pakistan request. The US DSCA announces Pakistan’s request for 500 AMRAAMs and 12 training missiles, as part of a $650 million weapons request within a $5.1 billion program to expand and refurbish its F-16 fleet.

DSCA Pakistan: 500

May 9/06: Contract. a $21.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for advanced medium range air-to-air missile (AMRAAM) lead time away material, and systems engineering performance responsibility (SEPR). The lead time material will cover 12 operational test missiles (AIM-120D) and 40 initial operational capability missiles (AIM-120D and AIM-120C7). Work will be complete in October 2007 (FA8675-06-C-0003/P0002).

April 28/06: NCADE. Raytheon Company announces a $7 million contract from the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) for a risk reduction demonstration associated with the evolving Network Centric Airborne Defense Element (NCADE) program. NCADE is testing the idea that a modified AMRAAM might be able to shoot down ballistic missiles just after launch, if a fighter can get close to the launch area.

The 12-month Raytheon effort will focus on propulsion systems and seeker enhancements as part of the overall NCADE system capability. Work on this contract will be performed at Raytheon’s Missile Systems business in Tucson, Ariz. Aerojet will perform propulsion work at its Redmond, WA location.

NCADE

April 21/06: Testing. Most people don’t think about the effect that all those nifty aircraft maneuvers have on the weapons it’s carrying – but weapons developers have to, and so does the USAF. This article describes April 2006 tests of the AIM-120D missile in an F-22A Raptor weapons bay, in order to check the effect of noise and vibration on the missile. Previous tests with the AIM-120-C7 had determined that vibration levels in certain frequencies were harmful to the missile’s electronics, and the AIM-120D has a different navigation system as well as a different arrangement of electronics cards. The test was used to validate Raytheon’s modeling and assumptions, and the results are fed back into ongoing development.

March 13/06: Support. A $5.5 million firm fixed price contract option, exercised as a separate contract for a 11 month repair capability and a 11 month Service Life Prediction Program for non-warranted Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) Air Intercept Missile-120 components consisting of the AMRAAM Air Vehicle missiles, airborne instrumentation units, common field level memory reprogramming equipment, missile built-in test sets, containers, Navy captive air training missile, foreign military sales AMRAAM air vehicle instrumented missiles and repairable components of these items for the Air Force, Navy and 26 foreign military sales countries. This work will be complete in January 2007 (FA8675-06-C-0073).

Feb 17/06: Industrial. A $35.4 million firm fixed price contract for production transition (1 Lot), test equipment/tooling (1 Lot), unique identification, non-recurring expense (1 Lot), and software trouble reports (USN) (1 Lot). Solicitations were complete in April 2005, negotiations were complete in February 2006, and work will be complete by March 2007 (FA8675-06-C-0003).

FY 2005 and Earlier (Partial) AMRAAM on LAU-129 rail
(click to view full)

August 23/05: Singapore request. The US DSCA announces Singapore’s request to buy 200 AIM-120C Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) and 6 CATM-120C AMRAAM Captive Air Training (CAT) Missiles, as part of a “provisional” $741 million weapons order.

Singapore soon makes its accompanying choice official: the F-15SG Strike Eagle is its next-generation attack aircraft.

DSCA Singapore: 200

April 4/05: FY 2005 order. Raytheon Company announces a $200 million contract from the USAF for continued production of 434 more AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air missiles (AMRAAM).

FY 2005

Footnotes

fn1. It’s worth noting that “missile range” is an extremely variable number – obviously, a missile’s effective range for 2 aircraft closing head on is much greater than a situation where one aircraft is fleeing and the missile must catch up. Most missile ranges are posted for head-head engagements. See the “Air-Air Missile Non-Comparison Table” for a fuller explanation, with diagrams, and key figures for most international missiles.

fn2. Jane’s Defence Weekly, July 11/07.

Additional Readings & Sources: Current Missiles

Additional Readings & Sources

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

Equipping Lebanon’s… Government?

Thu, 11/06/2015 - 02:00
Lebanese armed forces

The Lebanese Army’s own web site is blunt: “The assistance received from Syria, the USA, and other friendly countries has played a basic role in bridging the gap between needs and available means.”

A number of countries are stepping up to fill those gaps, left in a military ravaged by foreign occupation, a long and losing civil war, and the presence of Hizb’Allah – a foreign-backed private army in Lebanon, with superior firepower. The battle for influence in that country is multi-polar, with countries including the USA, France, and Saudi Arabia moving to counter Syria and Iran’s proxies, and countries like Russia working with independent agendas. The USA has been supplying a wide range of equipment from ammunition to armored vehicles, and is adding tanks, mini-UAVs, and even patrol boats to that list. Belgium has worked to sell some of its own tanks and APCs, France has offered help with Lebanon’s existing French equipment; and in April 2009, Russia went so far as to offer MiG-29 fighters, for free, from its own stocks.

What capabilities would these systems bring? How are those sales going? And how is Lebanon itself changing, in the wake of both Hezbollah’s takeover and Syria’s civil war?

UAVS, Tanks, and Planes RQ-11 assembly
(click to view full)

The main internal threat is Hezbollah, who is currently part of a 2009 unity government that is within the orbit of Syria’s Bashar Assad, and of Iran via its Hezbollah foreign legion. Pentration of the army and its institutions is accordingly extensive, which creates hard questions about the aid’s appropriateness, and security risks surrounding systems that are turned over.

Aerovironment’s RQ-11 Raven has become extremely popular in Afghanistan, and seen extensive use in Iraq. While the hand-launched UAV is far too small to carry anything beyond cameras, and is limited to low-flying missions out to about 1-15 miles, its virtues as a readily-used, squad-portable reconnaissance system that lets troops see over the next hill, or into the next block, are well and widely appreciated.

The M60 tank is a development of the M48 Patton, and was the M1 Abrams’ predecessor in the US Army and Marines. While the M1 was developed in response to the threat of the Soviet T-72, it turned out that the M60 was the T-72’s real peer competitor, whereas the M1 proved to be a massive overmatch. Something the M1 crews appreciated during combat in Operation Desert Storm. The M60A3 was the last serving model, sporting electronic upgrades while retaining the rounded turret and 105mm gun. It still serves with a number of militaries around the world. Egypt has the largest regional M60 fleet, followed by Turkey’s “M60 Sabras” that sport significant Israeli improvements to their sighting systems and electronics, as well as a full array of explosive reactive armor.

Recent combat experience teaches that even in urban situations, when tanks enter the fray, fights usually end quickly. Tanks of the M60’s vintage, however, lack the advanced armor protection and shaped designs required to withstand hits from popular threats like RPGs and anti-tank missiles. This can be remedied to some extent by adding explosive reactive armor and other ancillary systems. In their absence, however, M60s could not be expected to last very long against even private armies like Hezbollah, which makes extensive use of anti-tank missiles. The M60A3s, and similar vintage Leopard 1A5s from Belgium, would nonetheless offer an improvement over Lebanon’s existing T-54/55 and M48A5 tanks.

Russian MiG-29
(click to view full)

Lebanon’s fixed-wing fighter/attack force currently consists of about 4 Hawker Hunter jets, a 1950s era subsonic design that remains an aviation classic, and an OV-10 Bronco turboprop observation and light attack plane. In contrast, the used MiG-29s offered for free by Russia are late 1980s high-performance fighters, intended as a competitor to the F-16. Early versions are mainly air interceptor aircraft, though some Soviet MiG-29As were also given nuclear strike roles. Subsequent MiG-29Cs were confined to Soviet forces, incorporating radar improvements and an enlarged spine with extra fuel and an active electronic jammer system. Neither variant is suitable for delivering precision ground attack ordnance, a capability restricted to subsequent MiG-29S upgrades and modifications.

An interesting but very logical shift occurred in early 2010, when Russia and Lebanon agreed to substitute Mi-24 “Hind” helicopter gunships for the MiG-29s. The Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s saw some air-air engagements involving Iraqi Mi-24s and Iranian AH-1J SeaCobra helicopters, but the Hind’s main use is as a ground attack platform. It fits Lebanon’s military requirements and base infrastructure far better than the MiG-29s would have, but it also introduces an interesting new capability into Lebanon’s correlation of forces.

Meanwhile, Hezbollah’s participation in Lebanon’s government is a triple-edged sword for the Lebanese military.

On the one hand, it makes hostilities with Lebanon’s army unlikely so long as the accord lasts. The other 2 edges, however, are sharp. One is that it gave Hezbollah free rein to re-arm and organize. Hezbollah’s agenda is set in Iran and not in Lebanon, which has set the stage for future conflicts within and beyond Lebanon. For instance, Hezbollah is currently functioning as Iran’s Condor Legion equivalent in Syria’s civil war.

The other edge is that Israeli officials have said that since Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese government, acts carried out by Hezbollah would be considered to be coming from Lebanon’s government – i.e. acts of war rather than terrorism. The strong implication is that any Israeli response would encompass all of Lebanon, not just Hezbollah. So far, that has largely kept a lid on things.

Contracts and Key Events 2015

June 11/15: Lebanon is buying six Super Tucano ground attack aircraft from the US through a Foreign Military Sale thought to be worth approximately $462 million, including spares, support services and auxiliary equipment. The US and Lebanese governments discussed the potential sale of Super Tucanos in 2010, with the DSCA announcement on Tuesday confirming reports from March which set a deadline of 2018 for delivery of the six aircraft. The Embraer-manufactured turboprop aircraft is particularly useful in counterinsurgency operations, as well as being more very affordable. For these reasons the Super Tucano has seen export success to several African states and numerous other nations worldwide.

Feb 26/15: April set as French arms delivery commencement. France is reportedly to start shipping its planned sale of $3 billion worth of Saudi-purchased arms to Lebanon in April. The announcement appears to have taken many media organs by surprise, given the already volatile military situation in the country. Different reports ascribe various Saudi motives for the pressing of the weapons into Lebanese Army hands, ranging from expressing pique at the U.S. (UPI) – whose arms were not purchased – to a direct effort to fund a force to take on Hezbollah (MintPress). It took the French two years to get to this point of readiness. Had the Saudis sought U.S. arms, the approvals would certainly have been much longer in coming, if they ever came. That the Lebanese Army would take on Hezbollah remains unlikely, as precedent shows a long inability to deny Hezbollah anything in Lebanon the group wishes to take.

2014

Aircraft requests as ISIS threat creeps in. IqAF Hueys

Oct 24/14: UK. After a meeting between UK Chief of the Defense Staff General Sir Nicholas Houghton and Lebanese Army Commander General Jean Kahwaji. the UK sends Lebanon a $16 million donation. It includes 164 Land Rovers, 1,500 sets of body armor, a secure radio communication network, border watchtowers, and HESCO bastions that can be filled with earth to create bulletproof walls in Army positions along the frontier. Meanwhile, Lebanon’s Daily Star says:

“As for the earlier $3 billion aid announced by Saudi King Abdullah Bin Abdel-Aziz, it will come in the form of weapons, equipment and training to be provided by France…. [but] has not yet gone into effect with reports saying that the Kingdom first wants to receive assurances that the weapons will not benefit Hezbollah.”

That sounds like a pretty tall order, given the realities of Lebanon. Sources: Al Defaiya, “UK Delivers Military Equipment to Lebanese Army”.

Oct 8/14: France. The French defense minister says that the 3-way deal with Saudi Arabia (q.v. Dec 30/13) may finally be ready to finance over EUR 2 billion in purchases of French weapons:

“Ce projet a ete valide par la France et ce projet est valide avec les forces armees libanaises”, a-t-il declare mercredi 8 octobre, lors de la seance des questions au gouvernement. Et d’ajouter : “Tous les travaux sont termines et le president de la Republique a indique hier à Monsieur [Saad] Hariri [ancien Premier ministre et leader politique de la communaute sunnite libanaise, NDLR] que les conditions etaient desormais remplies.”

That could end up being a very substantial infusion. The question is what the government will spend it on. And who will end up controlling what they buy. Sources: France24, “Liban : conditions réunies pour livrer des armes françaises, selon Le Drian”.

Sept 17/14: Helicopter request. A little more than 2 years after asking for 6 Huey IIs (q.v. July 25/12), Lebanon requests another 18 Huey II helicopters, as well as associated spares and services, for an estimated cost of $180 million.

That’s about the same unit cost as the previous request, and comparable to a request submitted but then canceled by Iraq in 2007. Huey IIs are refurbished and upgraded UH-1Hs sold “as good as new” by Bell. The bulk of Lebanon’s current but old helicopter fleet is comprised of 23 Hueys which were used to drop bombs – a rather unusual task for rotary aircraft – on Fatah al-Islam in 2007. Source: DSCA 14-20.

DSCA request (18 Huey IIs)

AC-208B firing
(click to view full)

Sept 12/14: AC-208Bs. US ambassador David Hale says the USA will send “an armed Cessna” , and also arm a Cessna it had previously provided to the Lebanese Army. they’re referring to the AC-208B conversion, which allows the Caravan to independently carry, target, and fire 2 AGM-114 Hellfire laser-guided missiles. It’s hardly a regional power projection tool, but it’s a fine platform for surveillance and strikes on isolated guerrilla groups.

“The Lebanese government and army have requested additional aircraft from the United States: an armed Cessna and other light air support aircraft… It is our intention to support those requests for additional aircraft, using funds generously made available to Lebanon by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia…” [q.v. Dec 30/13]

That won’t use much of their $3 billion offer, and it’s a good investment for all concerned. Beyond the usual hijinks in Lebanon, the Sunni ISIS group has reached beyond Syria and Iraq into Lebanon, taking a number of Lebanese soldiers captive and beheading them. Iraq is already using AC-208Bs successfully against ISIS, and the USA is stepping up efforts to contain the group via 3rd parties since it has abandoned its own combat presence in Iraq. The Saudis also see ISIS as a threat, one that’s approaching the level offered by Iran and its legions. Sources: Lebanon Daily Star, “US arming Lebanon military to combat ISIS: Hale” | Kuwait News Agency, “US to deliver armed light Cessna aircraft to Lebanon to combat ISIL” | Middle East Monitor, “US to deliver armed aircraft to Lebanon”.

2012 – 2013

8 Huey IIs; Man-portable radios

Dec 30/13: Saudi Arabia. Lebanon couldn’t help but be drawn into the Sunni-Shia proxy wars that are engulfing the Arab world. Saudi Arabia pledges $3 billion in military aid to Lebanon’s government, in a move that’s clearly designed to strengthen that government at the expense of Iran’s Hezbollah. Specific equipment isn’t specified, so we’ll see how all of this works itself out.

Here’s the Saudi dilemma, in a nutshell: what to provide? If the money is used to provide small arms, anti-tank missiles, and good training, it would probably make the biggest difference on the ground. The bad news? These items are small and portable. Hezbollah’s infiltration of the armed forces and power within the government means that many of the items in question won’t stay in government hands. On the other hand, if Saudi aid is used to provide higher-end items like armed helicopters, armored vehicles, etc., then the bad news is that $3 billion doesn’t actually deliver as much as one imagines. Especially in a military whose support systems and infrastructure are questionable. That high-end approach is also vulnerable to counter-strokes: all Hezbollah would need to do, in order to incapacitate new fleets, would be to threaten the maintenance workers in order to ensure that they do a poor job. Sources: CS Monitor, “Saudi Arabia promises record $3 billion in military aid to Lebanon”.

July 31/13: Radios. Advanced Technology Systems Co. in McLean, VA receives a $26.7 million multi-year, firm-fixed-price, foreign military sales from Lebanon for TETRA trunked radio communication systems. TETRA is an abbreviation of TErrestrial Trunked RAdio. It has been defined and approved by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), and is a standard for radio communication in the same way that GSM is a mobile telephony standard. It’s often used to create networks for first responders and internal security forces, but a number of militaries around the world also use them.

Work will be performed in Lebanon. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD (W15P7T-13-C-D082).

May 26/13: Syria/Lebanon War. In the New Yorker, war correspondent Dexter Filkins reports:

“It’s official: the war in Syria has spread to Lebanon. In an extraordinary speech Saturday, Hassan Nasrallah, the bearded and bespectacled leader of the Lebanese militant group, Hezbollah, promised an all-out effort to keep the murderous regime of Bashar al-Assad in power in Syria. “It’s our battle, and we are up to it,” Nasrallah said in a televised address. The war, he said, had entered “a completely new phase.”

This is a terrifying development; the beginning of a regional war. Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed armed group, has been fighting inside Syria for months, something I detailed in an article on the group in February. But Hezbollah was intervening in Syria covertly…. As more and more Hezbollah fighters died inside Syria, that lie could no longer be sustained. The truth is out.

On Saturday, by declaring his undying loyalty to the Assad regime, Nasrallah has signalled an escalation in Hezbollah’s involvement…”

Nov 1/12: Hueys. Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. in Hurst, TX receives a $33.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for single-engine UH-1H+ Huey II helicopters and related support services. Work will be performed in Hurst, TX with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-11-G-0011).

U.S. Army Security Assistance Command has confirmed to us that this order will be transferred to the “government” of Lebanon. The July 25/12 DSCA request was for 6, and this appears to cover that number.

July 25/12: Helicopter request. The US DSCA announces [PDF] a potential sale to Lebanon of 6 Huey II helicopters and associated equipment, parts, training, and logistical support, at an estimated cost of $63 million. Hezbollah is still in charge, albeit somewhat weakened by the civil war in Syria, which interferes with supply lines to their masters in Iran. The US DSCA claims that:

“This proposed sale serves U.S. national, economic, and security interests by providing Lebanon with necessary mobility capabilities to maintain internal security, enforce United Nation’s Security Council Resolutions 1559 and 1701, and counter terrorist threats… The Huey II will augment Lebanon’s aging fleet of UH-1H aircraft.”

If Congress agrees enough to avoid overtly blocking the sale within 30 days, Lebanon can begin negotiations with Bell Helicopter in Fort Worth, TX. Fortunately for Bell, “Implementation of this proposed sale will not require the assignment of any additional U.S. Government or contractor representatives to Lebanon.”

Jan 12/12: AC-208Bs. Alliant Techsystems, Inc. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $16.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for one used Caravan Cessna 208B aircraft, continued contractor logistics support, and spares with associated repair and return effort. This supports a Foreign Military Sales Program and the Lebanon Air Force Caravan Program.

The C-208B is a single-propeller plane that’s often used for flight training and light cargo duties. The Iraqi Air Force have turned them into low-cost AC-208B “Combat Caravan” surveillance and close support planes by adding a surveillance/targeting turret, accompanying internal displays, and M299 racks for Hellfire missiles on the wings. official reports indicate that the planes headed to Lebanon are Combat Caravans.

Work will be performed in El Segundo, CA, and is expected to be complete by Nov 16/16. The ASC/WINK/FMS at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH acts as Lebanon’s agent in this matter (FA8620-12-C-4005). See also Flight International.

2011

AMP-145 CPB concept
(click to view larger)

June 13/11: Takeover. The new Lebanese government names its cabinet, which Hezbollah and its supporters dominate. BBC.

Jan 19/11: Takeover. Hezbollah ousts Prime Minister Hariri and engineers a de facto coup in Lebanon. Lebanon Daily Star | Now Lebanon | Reuters | Ya Libnan.

Jan 14/11: Patrol Boats. Maritime Security Strategies, LLC in Tampa, FL received a $29 million firm-fixed price contract to construct a 42-meter coastal security craft and provide associated equipment, material, training and technical services to the Government of Lebanon. This will be the first sale of the firm’s AMP-145 multi-mission platform design, though their regional orders also include 2 60-meter Offshore Supply/Command Vessels under construction for the Iraqi Navy.

MSS’ managing partner, USN Rear Admiral (ret.) Robert Cox touts “new designs and features that deliver significant cost and performance improvements over the current industry offerings,” including fast reconfiguration. The hulls are an epoxy-resin composite, with an aluminum deck and superstructure. American shipbuilders have had mixed results with composite hulls, but they are coming into wider international use due to their weight advantages, which translates directly into greater speed, increased maneuverability and lower fuel consumption.

The Lebanese Navy’s AMP-145 incorporates ITAR compliant controls and automation, including embedded sensors in key components, and a non-militarized, passive Integrated Bridge System (IBS) from Raytheon Anschutz GmbH that manages the ship’s automation system, as well as feeds from CCTV and a FLIR thermal imaging cameras. Surface search X and S-band ARPA radars, a full package of navigation sensors, data management software, GMDSS A3, and all other electronics and safety equipment completes the IBS and Command and Surveillance package. The C2/Operations Center is fitted with a customized Situational Awareness Display which shares all charts, targets and craft movements with the Integrated Bridge System. Depictions of the craft show a 30mm cannon and mounts for 7.62mm – 12.7mm machine guns, but armament details were not provided.

Work will be performed in Tampa, FL, and is expected to be complete by January 2012, though the company has set a delivery date of end 2011. MSS will work with its primary design agent and shipbuilding partner, RiverHawk Fast Sea Frames, LLC, of Tampa, FL to design, produce and outfit the ship. The MSS/RiverHawk team is currently completing epoxy-resin composite hull construction and rigging in of the major engineering systems at VectorWorks Marine facilities in Titusville, FL. The aluminum decks and superstructure are nearing completion in RiverHawk’s Tampa yard, where they will be mated to the hull, and several South Florida sub-contractors will also play significant roles. The contract was not competitively procured by US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC, who manages the contract on behalf of its Foreign Military Sale client (N00024-11-C-2241).

  • Length: 43.5 meters
  • Breadth overall: 8.5 meters
  • Draft: ~ 2 meters
  • Displacement: ~ 265 metric tons
  • Crew Complement: 6 – 22
  • Speed: > 25 knots
  • Range @ 11 Knots: > 2600 nm
  • Effective Limits @ 12 Knots: Sea State 4
  • Survivability: Sea State 5
  • Endurance: 5-7 days

Meanwhile, Hezbollah has taken its marching orders and withdrawn from the government in Lebanon, setting up a minor political crisis as the country waits for a UN report that’s likely to indict Hezbollah members, as well as its foreign backers in Syria and beyond, for the Hariri assassination. See also: Maritime Security Strategies | Al-Defaiya | Al-Jazeera | Reuters | Voice of America | Israel’s Ynet News.

2010

French SA342
(click to view full)

Dec 17/10: HOT missiles. Agence France Presse reports that France will give Lebanon 100 MBDA HOT anti-tank missiles to equip Lebanon’s SA342M Gazelle helicopters. A Lebanese official told AFP that: “The missiles will be delivered before the end of February and are being given with no conditions attached.”

The move has sparked concern among some American political figures. Lebanese received 12 Gazelle helicopters in mid-2007, and in January 2010, it signed an agreement to refurbish them (vid. Jan 22/10 entry).

Nov 13/10: Unblocked. The congressional hold on $100 million in military aid to Lebanon clears, as Rep. Howard Berman [D-CA] and Nita Lowey [D-NY] drop their opposition after a classified briefing and presenting results of a “thorough inter-agency review” by the Obama administration. Berman: “As a result, I am convinced that implementation of the spending plan will now have greater focus, and I am reassured as to the nature and purposes of the proposed package.” Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) Resident Scholar Aram Nerguizian, whose report on U.S. military aid to Lebanon is coming out later in November 2010, has said that American aid can help the armed forces keep a lid on Lebanon, and “keeps Lebanon from escalating beyond the range of the real.” Israel, on the other hand, seemed less reassured:

“Iran’s domination of Lebanon through its proxy Hezbollah has destroyed any chance for peace, has turned Lebanon into an Iranian satellite and made Lebanon a hub for regional terror and instability”

Lifting the hold Congressional may release funds while the present “lame duck” session is still alive, until and unless future action affirmatively blocks it. Berman chairs the House Foreign Affairs committee, and Lowey heads the House Appropriations committee’s foreign operations subcommittee. They will be reduced to ranking minority members in the new Congress, however, and Berman’s likely successor, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R-FL], opposes further aid to Lebanon as well as to the Palestinian Authority. Lebanese Daily Star | Agence France Presse | Israel’s Arutz Sheva | Bloomberg | Foreign Policy Magazine | Jerusalem Post | Fox News | UAE’s The National | Reuters | Voice of America.

Aug 8/10: Blocked. The US Congress is blocking $100 million in aid to the Lebanese military, amidst concerns it is cooperating with Hezbollah. The Congressional holds come in the wake of an Aug 3 shooting of 2 Israeli officers while brush was being cleared along the northern border. One Israeli officer was killed and another seriously wounded in the firefight, which also killed at least 2 Lebanese soldiers and a journalist. There are reports that the Lebanese troops in question were using American-supplied weapons. Associated Press | Jerusalem Post | al-Manar TV (Hezbollah affiliate) | Lebanon Daily Star | Australia’s The Age/ Reuters re: clash.

June 3/10: The USA delivers $427,000 worth of weapons, body armor and bomb investigation equipment to Lebanese security officials, via a $1 million anti-terrorism assistance program for Lebanon from the U.S. State Department. UPI.

May 24/10: Rising US concern. Foreign Policy magazine’s blog The Cable documents rising concern within the Pentagon and Congress over continued military aid to Lebanon, in the wake of what they see as a blurring of the lines between the government and Hezbollah.

MI-24 Hind
(click to view full)

Feb 26/10: Make Hinds, not Fulcrums. NaharNet reports that Lebanese President Michel Suleiman has returned from a visit to Russia, and…

“Russian authorities agreed to substitute the 10 MiG-29 fighter jets previously mulled military aid with Mi-24 advanced military helicopters “based on the request of the Lebanese side that conducted technical and functional studies on the Russian fund for the Lebanese Air Force.”

The Mi-24 “Hind” helicopter gunship became famous during Russia’s war in Afghanistan, and it remains popular with militaries around the world. The most modern version is the Mi-35. Unlike most attack helicopters, it has secondary troop transport capabilities.

Jan 22/10: Lebanon has reportedly signed an agreement with the French company Euro Tech to revamp 13 Gazelle helicopters transferred in 2007, equipping the 10 Puma helicopters granted by the UAE, and training Lebanese helicopter pilots.

The Puma helicopters are expected to start arriving within the first half of 2010 in 2 batches of 4 and then 6 machines. Reports suggest, however, that France is hesitant to supply Lebanon with missiles for the Gazelle helicopters, for fear they would end up in Hezbollah’s hands. The Lebanese Air Force reportedly used up all of its missiles in the 2007 Nahr el-Bared battle against Fatah al-Islam terrorists. Nahar Net.

2009

Nov 16/09: Media report that Russian military experts will be visiting Lebanon in the next few days and staying until Nov 26/09. They will be assessing the conditions at Lebanese airports and bases, assessing their ability to support MiG-29s and other equipment. A formal contract for the 10 MiG-29s is expected very shortly after their report. China’s Xinhua reports that the MiG deal is causing some trepidation in certain parts of Lebanon:

“Since then, the deal has sparked an internal debate about the necessity of obtaining these aircraft in a small country like Lebanon, which has a national army and an armed militia Hezbollah, which owns thousands of short and mid-range rockets.”

See also: Lebanese Daily Star | Naharnet Newsdesk | Il-Oubnan | China’s Xinhua.

April 9/09: Naharnet Newsdesk reports confirmation of American arms shipments to Lebanon by US State Department officials David Hale and Colin Kahl:

“Hale said the shipment includes 41 Howitzer artillery and 12 Zodiac boats. He said the Lebanese military will also be receiving in May 12 pilotless Raven aircrafts that would help the army monitor any attempt to fire rockets from southern Lebanon into northern Israel. Hale said the delivery also includes one Cessna Caravan aircraft, which is expected to arrive end of April to provide air support for ground forces. A set of 20 Hellfire air-to-ground missiles and the first batch of 10 M-60 tanks will also be arriving in May, according to Hale.”

April 8/09: The Pentagon’s AFPS reports on progress:

“Toward helping it fulfill that role, the United States has provided more than $410 million in military assistance to Lebanon since 2006. That support has included Humvees, trucks, M-198 howitzer artillery pieces, M-4 and M-16 rifles, body armor vests, MK-19 grenade launchers, shoulder-fired rockets, spare helicopter parts and millions of ammunition rounds.

More recently, the Defense Department has been working with the Lebanese government to expedite delivery of Cessna close-air-support aircraft with precision Hellfire missiles and [RQ-11] Raven unmanned aerial vehicle systems. The United States is also working to transfer M60 Abrams tanks to the Lebanese military from other countries in the region, Kahl said. These systems, expected to be delivered by June…”

2008

M60A3
(click to view full)

Dec 19/08: Defense News quotes “a senior U.S. state department official… in Beirut” saying that he U.S. plans to deliver M-60 tanks to Lebanon in spring 2009. the official stresses that the US does not see any competition with Russia or other countries, as all assistance to help the Lebanese government is welcome.

Dec 1/08: The Pentagon’s AFPS publishes “U.S. Forces Help Lebanese Military Assert Control“, which discusses American efforts to re-equip Lebanon’s army:

“The United States and Lebanon signed a military cooperation agreement in October [2008], establishing the U.S.-Lebanese Joint Military Commission to provide an official framework for the bilateral U.S.-Lebanese military relationship… “The most important [recommendation] was that the Lebanese military needed a lot of help in the military basics… They needed trucks, Humvees, parts and ammunition more than they needed high-end, expensive weaponry.” They also need training… In 2006, the United States renewed its security relationship with Lebanon, and since then has funneled more than $400 million in foreign military sales money… “Our part of that is to help build up the Lebanese armed forces so the Lebanese government can be sovereign in all its territory.”

…The United States has sent 285 Humvees to Lebanon, and another 312 will arrive by March. The United States has sent 200 trucks to the Lebanese and 41 M-198 155 mm artillery pieces. The Lebanese army also will get night-vision equipment and some tactical unmanned aerial vehicles. “Behind it is all basics – 12 million rounds of ammo, spare helicopter parts, shoulder-fired rockets,” Straub said. “We want them to play their role in controlling Lebanese territory. We also want them to deter the terrorist threat.” The United States is committed to getting Lebanon more modern tanks, and the U.S. military is working on delivering M-60A3 tanks.”

Dec 18/08: The UK’s Times reports that Russia will provide Lebanon with 10 MiG-29 fighter jets, for free, under an agreement on military-technical assistance. Rosoboronexport’s Mikhail Dmitryev said that the jets would come from Russia’s existing stock, and added that Moscow was also in talks to supply Lebanon with heavy armor. The country currently operates very old T-54/55 Russian tanks.

Aug 27/08: Belgian defense minister Pierre Crem visits Lebanon to finalize an agreement to sell 43 Leopard 1A5 tanks, and 28 M113 derivative armored personnel carriers (16 AIFVs and 12 conventional), to Lebanon. RTL Info via MplL.

M113s form the backbone of Lebanese mechanized forces, thanks to significant donations from American stocks. The AIFV model adds a 25mm gun. The Leopard 1A5 is a modernized Leopard tank, roughly on par with or slightly better than the American M60A3.

Additional Readings

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

CNAS Report on Drones: Sky Isn’t Falling Yet, But Look Out | Lebanon Getting Its Super Tucanos | China Employs Fast Trains in Troop Movement Exercises

Thu, 11/06/2015 - 00:12
Americas

  • Raytheon has completed lab testing of the Advanced, Medium Range Air to Air Missile – Extended Range (AMRAAM-ER), a ground-based air defense missile based on the AIM-120D and designed to be integrated with the Kongsberg NASAMS launcher. These latest tests validate that the missile can be integrated with the launcher, which will team with the AN/MPQ-64F1 Improved Sentinel radar to provide a highly capable air defense system. Raytheon is also taking the motor from its Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile and integrating it into the AMRAAM-ER to improve the missile’s range and engagement ceiling.

  • The Air Force awarded an approximately $1.5 billion, eight-year contract for the sustainment and test operation of Arnold Engineering Development Complex, with $2 million of this awarded on Wednesday. The AEDC is the world’s largest and most sophisticated flight simulation test facility, with fourteen unique test units worldwide.

  • DynCorp was handed an $18.3 million support service contract modification in support of Joint Special Operation Task Force – Philippines, bringing the total value of the contract to $154 million. The US officially ended the JSOTF in the Philippines in February, with some advisors remaining after thirteen years of operation in the country. This force reduction was intended to conclude by the beginning of May, with this latest contract scheduled to run to June next year.

  • The Center for a New American Security (CNAS) think tank has released a report detailing the potential danger of proliferating small UAVs becoming aerial IEDs, including being used as ‘swarms’ capable of causing significant destruction with a low price tag. China has been developing cheap UAVs, with the readily-available cheap civilian market already significantly growing throughout the world.

Europe

  • Russia’s Aerospace Defense Forces have test-fired a short-range anti-missile system in Kazakhstan, with this test coming as the country’s Defense Ministry announced that it intends to triple the number of air defense missiles in 2015 compared with 2014.

  • Russia’s new main battle tanks are not quite as modern as the Russian media makes them out to be. The Russian Defense Ministry has marketed the T-14 Armata tank as a cutting-edge machine designed to surpass rival NATO designs. The T-14 is less heavily armored and armed than the Abrams, Challenger II and Leopard II, each of which have been around for several years.

Middle East

Asia

Today’s Video

  • The Super Tucano in action…

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

KC-46s Take Missiles in Tests | WIN-T Gets Full Rate Green Light | Germany Hands Raytheon Defeat, Selects Meads

Wed, 10/06/2015 - 05:26
Americas

  • 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.

  • The Navy has begun “deadload-testing” the EMALS system aboard the Pre-Commissioning Unit Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78). The electrically-power catapult system was successfully no-load tested in May, with Navy personnel also now qualified to operate the system, following certification earlier this month.

  • The go-ahead has been given to General Dynamics for full rate production of the Warfighter Information Network – Tactical (WIN-T) Increment II, following Defense Acquisition Board approval to the Army in May. This means that the system – which is designed to act as a mobile command post, providing mobile command, control and communications – may be bought for remaining units due to receive the WIN-T system up to 2028. This increment also begins embedding WIN-T communications gear in select vehicles, such as MRAPs, bringing them Secure Internet Protocol Router (SIPR) connectivity as well as SATCOM capability.

  • Microsoft was handed a $9 million Navy contract on Tuesday, for software support services and fixes. The contract also includes options totalling $30.8 million if all exercised up to 2017, with the base contract scheduled to finish in July next year. Microsoft began a major push into DoD contracting in 2005.

Europe

  • Seemingly a confirmation of previous reports, Germany has reportedly selected the US-European MEADS system for its air defense requirement, beating out a rival offer for upgraded Raytheon Patriots. Reports from May in the German press cited undisclosed sources indicating that the Defense Ministry had selected MEADS, with these latest reports stemming from comments made by Sen. Charles Schumer, who appears to have acquired the information from the German Embassy in Washington.

  • In what will come as a relief to European NATO states enduring repeated scrambling of interceptor aircraft over recently months, the Russian Air Force has grounded its fleet of sixty-three Tu-95 long-range bombers, following an engine fire leading to a runway overrun on Monday.

Middle East

  • Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) Ltd has conducted a set of test flights of the company’s Harop loitering munition for an unspecified customer. The UAV is designed to stay on target for several hours before utilizing a 15kg warhead as it conducts a ‘kamikaze’ attack on its target. The Indian Air Force is an international customer for the system, having bought 10 Harpy systems in 2009, with Turkey also having purchased the system in 2005. Germany successfully tested teaming of the Harpy with Rheinmetall’s KZO UAV in 2011, with the country’s Defense Ministry procuring the Harpy for a demonstration phase of its WABEP (Weapon system for Stand-off Engagement of Individual and Point Targets) requirement in 2009.

  • IAI subdiary ELTA has also unveiled a new Ultra High Frequency Active Electronically Scanned Array radar system, reportedly capable of detecting targets with very low Radar Cross Sections (RCS), as well as being capable of operating as part of a Ballistic Missile Defense system. The system is modular, capable of seeing multiple units bolted together to transition the system from a mobile system with a 500km range to up to 22 units providing a strategic BMD and space-object tracking capability.

  • The Israeli and US Air Forces signed a Strategic Accord on Tuesday, with twelve joint teams being stood-up to tackle common issues, including one tasked with integrating Israel’s future F-35s into its Air Force.

Asia

  • India appears to have deployed carrier-capable MIG-29K fighters to the Eastern base of Vizag, likely a prelude to the standing-up of the next squadron of the Russian-manufactured aircraft for the Western side of the country. India will order up to 45 of the aircraft, with the Russian manufacturer expected to deliver 6 by the end of 2015, with another 6 in 2016. However, the most significant issue facing the future deployment of the MIGs is not the aircraft themselves but rather the lack of new carrier to launch them from, particularly given thelatest slippage in the domestically-manufactured INS Vikrant’s schedule.

  • Australia has established an expert panel to review the country’s future submarine evaluation process. With France, Germany and Japan all potential partners in the $50 billion program, the panel will try to maintain good procedural practise throughout the Australian government’s Future Submarine Strategy.

Today’s Video

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

WIN-T: US Army’s Connection to the Global InfoGrid

Wed, 10/06/2015 - 03:25
WIN-T concept
(click to view larger)

As the Army’s tactical portion of the USA’s Global Information Grid (GIG) network, Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) is designed to help deployed forces tap into that global network and its databases, collectors, and connections to national agencies. At present, this requires multiple private networks, or outright forward deployment of representatives from the agencies in question. If it can be done at all.

WIN-T has absorbed the program formerly known as the Joint Network Node, and another 3 fielding increments will gradually add key capabilities to the system. Increment 1/ JNN is widely fielded, Increment 2 is being fielded, and R&D contracts are beginning fleshing out Increment 3.

The WIN-T Program

WIN-T has changed a lot since it began in 2002. The timeline below captures key shifts and events, as well as future plans:

The biggest program change involved its split into different increments. So, what’s involved?

The New Structure: Incremental Change (click to view larger)

WIN-T Increment 1 provides soldiers access to the GIG while stationary, and used to be known as the Joint Node Network. It lets small platoons on the ground communicate with the rest of the world, something they couldn’t do in the past.

The JNN-N node was originally intended as an interim bridge before WIN-T arrived. It consists of vehicles and shipping containers (the Joint Network Node, the Battalion Command Post Node, the Ku SATCOM trailer and the Hub Node) equipped with systems that provide voice over IP, dynamic IP, videoconferencing and access to the military’s classified and unclassified networks. The US Army likes the idea of using commercially available Ku-band satellites via an integrated suite of state-of-the-art baseband, switching and termination equipment. Commercial Ku-band SATCOM offers performance and availability advantages that include higher throughput rates, as well as the ability to upgrade many of the fielded Ku-band terminals to Ka-band used by the military’s own Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS).

JNN was so successful that it became WIN-T Increment 1 in 2004. By 2006, the Army had fielded JNN to every infantry battalion operating in Iraq, and was started to push the gear down to the company level. The June 2007 WIN-T program restructuring added WGS broadband military Ka-band satellite connectivity as Increment 1a, to lower bandwidth costs and offer more networking options. WIN-T Increment 1b added Net-Centric Waveform software to optimize bandwidth, and a “colorless” core security architecture.

General Dynamics is developing Increment 2 and Increment 3 under a 2007 contract. General Dynamics C4 Systems leads a WIN-T team that includes Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, Harris Corporation, L-3 communications, and networking rivals Juniper Networks and Cisco Systems.

WIN-T Increment 2 is designed to provide connectivity on the move. Integrating SATCOM, line-of-sight and terrestrial signal types, the “self healing” WIN-T increment 2 is designed to provide high-bandwidth connectivity that can automatically switch as between ground-based and satellite connections. For example, if a commander is moving into a city, which begins blocking line-of-sight signals, the system automatically connects to SATCOM.

This increment begins embedding WIN-T communications gear in select vehicles, bringing them Secure Internet Protocol Router (SIPR) connectivity. It also has to be backward-compatible with WIN-T Increment 1/1a/1b, because the reality of purchases and rollouts mean that different Army units will be equipped with different WIN-T Increments at any given time.

WIN-T Increment 3 will introduce an airborne network node to act as a relay, creating a 3-tier failover of land line-of-sight, then airborne relays, and then satellite as a last resort. The intended result is fully mobile networking, with better reliability and capacity. Inc 3 also aims to field smaller, more tightly integrated communications and networking gear.

Increment 3 was supposed to be part of the Army’s Future Combat Systems vehicles, but they were canceled in June 2009.

WIN-T Increment 4, the last of the WIN-T developmental program elements, is pending definition and contract award. It’s still supposed to cover on-the-move protected satellite communications, though that’s going to mean using the AEHF constellation rather than the envisioned T-SAT program.

WIN-T: Program Dashboards Contracts and Key Events FY 2014 – 2015

(click to view larger)

June 10/15: The go-ahead has been given to General Dynamics for full rate production of the Warfighter Information Network – Tactical (WIN-T) Increment II, following Defense Acquisition Board approval to the Army in May. This means that the system – which is designed to act as a mobile command post, providing mobile command, control and communications – may be bought for remaining units due to receive the WIN-T system up to 2028. This increment also begins embedding WIN-T communications gear in select vehicles, such as MRAPs, bringing them Secure Internet Protocol Router (SIPR) connectivity as well as SATCOM capability.

April 21/15: General Dynamics was awarded a $36.4 million contract to produce and repair components for the WIN-T, with the firm beating two other bids to take the contract.

Oct 31/13: WIN-T-3. General Dynamics C4 Systems Inc. in Taunton, MA receives another $475 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to complete WIN-T Increment 3’s research and development. Work location and funding will be determined by each order.

These funds are on top of the $921 million R&D contract to develop both Increment 2 & Increment 3 (q.v. Sept 18/07), and see also the May 23/13 SAR report for cost escalation background. GDC4S was already responsible for Increment 3, and just 1 offer was solicited and 1 bid received by US Army Contracting Command at Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD (W15P7T-14-D-0002).

WIN-T-3 development add-on

Oct 3/13: WIN-T-2. The US Army announces that they’ve been approved to proceed with a $111 million WIN-T Increment 2 delivery order, as part of continued but contingent limited production. GDC4S will produce the next lot of WIN-T Inc 2 network nodes for additional brigade combat teams and division headquarters units.

WIN-T Inc 2 will be extended within 10th Mountain Division as part of wider CS 13 communications deployments, adding their 3rd Brigade Combat Team alongside 4 BCT. In addition, 2 more 101st Airborne Division BCTs will be conducting fielding and training with CS 13 and WIN-T Inc 2. The Army adds an important caveat when they note that:

“At the same time that it fields [WIN-T Inc 2] to CS 14 units, the Army will continue to coordinate with the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the test community to address remaining issues and simplify the system.”

See our March 28/13 and Jan 17/13 entries for more on that subject. Sources: US Army | GD, Oct 3/13 release.

FY 2012 – 2013

WIN-T-2 on M-ATV
(click to view larger)

June 27/13: Testing. DefenseTech quotes Army officials who explain how new equipment, including WIN-T, are driving tactics in exercises – and how the results change equipment design in return. With respect to WIN-T:

“There is a lot of complexity and challenge to mission command on the move,” he said. “A commander’s got a lot going on. He’s got to know where his elements are and at the same time know what the enemy is doing. You have to manage the data elements in real time. One solution was to have another soldier take on the monitoring of the data and manage the data so that the commander is not stuck to the screen.”

After installing the second version of the system on wheeled vehicles, the Army plans to configure numerous tracked vehicles with the technology, Smith said.”

June 8/13: WIN-T. General Dynamics touts the Army National Guard’s use of WIN-T Increment 1 after Hurricane Sandy hit New Jersey in October 2012. The system reportedly became a hub for law enforcement, other first responders, and the military after power was lost and cellular and mobile communications were down. Sources: GDC4S, June 18/13 release.

May 23/13: SAR. The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 31/12 includes shifts in WIN-T: 690 nodes subtracted from Increment 2, and 429 added to Increment 3. The result is a net subtraction of 261 nodes, coupled with a $2.1 billion overall cost increase…

WIN-T Increment 2 – Program costs decreased $1,323.9 million (-20.5%) from $6,461.3 million to $5,137.4 million, due primarily to a quantity decrease of 690 nodes from 2,790 to 2,100 nodes to align with the capability sets (-$1,115.8 million) and associated schedule and estimating allocations (+$38.8 million). Other decreases were due to the removal of the Armored Brigade Combat Team recurring A-Kit costs (-$150.8 million), a decrease in initial spares resulting from the decrease of 690 nodes (-$107.6 million), and decreases in fielding, new equipment training, and software maintenance resulting from 690 fewer nodes (-$83.5 million). These decreases were partially offset by an increase due to revised escalation indices (+$82.7 million) and increases resulting from additional costs for follow-on operational test and evaluation; platform certification testing; initial operational testing; and joint command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance radio production qualification testing (+$70.4 million).

WIN-T Increment 3 – Program costs increased $3,434.6 million (+23.8%) from $14,455.5 million to $17,890.1 million, due primarily to a procurement quantity increase of 404 nodes from 3,045 to 3,449 nodes (+$1,232.4 million) and associated schedule, engineering, and estimating allocations (-$497.7 million), and a development quantity increase of 25 nodes from 39 to 64 nodes (+$158.2 million) for limited user testing. Additional increases related to the increase of 404 procurement nodes include: fielding, new equipment training and hardware end of life (technology refresh) (+$1,556.1 million), software licenses (+$230.9 million), initial spares requirements (+$99.5 million), and engineering change orders for hardware procurement (+$79.1 million). There were other increases attributable to updates to the systems engineering and program management cost estimate (+$322.7 million) and the application of revised escalation indices (+$302.4 million). These increases were partially offset by decreases resulting from descoping of the Point of Presence-Command and Modular Communication Node-Global Information Grid Interface (-$42.8 million) and a reduction in development engineering due to leveraging of the WIN-T Increment 2 design (-$42.5 million).

SAR – WIN-T-2 shrinks, WIN-T-3 grows

May 6-23/13: Testing. WIN-T Increment 2 completes a Follow-on Operational Test and Evaluation (FOT&E) during the US Army’s Network Integration Exercise (NIE) 13.2, using the JTRS-compliant AN/PRC-154 Rifleman and AN/PRC-155 2-channel Manpack networking radios as key interfaces.

During the evaluation, more than 3,800 soldiers from the 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division conducted a wide range of on-the-move military and peacekeeping operations, both day and night, at White Sands Missile Range, NM. Sources: GDC4S, June 19/13 release.

April 18/13: Training. General Dynamics announces that WIN-T Increment 2 is now in the hands of the U.S. Army’s 10th Mountain Division, whose 4 BCT is training for their upcoming deployment to Afghanistan with the system. Their point of interface is their JTRS-compatible Thales AN/PRC-154 radios.

Late last year, GD says that the Army ordered 136 additional WIN-T Increment 2 network nodes, bringing total orders to 532 and extending its reach to the company level. Sources: GDC4S, April 18/13 release.

March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish. With respect to WIN-T-2, the technologies and manufacturing are deemed to be mature, but:

“Based on the results of the May 2012 operational test, the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, concluded that only some of the program’s configuration items and technologies were operationally effective and that the program is not operationally suitable as six of the eight configuration items did not meet their reliability targets. The Director recommended that the Army dedicate resources to fix the program’s reliability and ability to support a 72-hour mission, and demonstrate improvements through a future operational test event. The Director also recommended that the Army consider appointing an independent review panel to determine if the program is capable of meeting its original reliability targets or recommend redesign changes. The Army is to perform a life-cycle cost analysis to determine the additional costs for maintenance support due to the program’s inability to meet its original reliability targets.”

With respect to WIN-T-3:

“WIN-T Increment 3 will not demonstrate the maturity of all 18 of its critical technologies in a realistic environment until its planned April 2015 production decision…. The program office stated that it has dropped two critical technologies from the original set of 20; the Joint Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Transmission Management Subsystem, and the Distributed Network Agent were removed due to their similarities with several of the program’s other critical technologies…. The program plans to begin employing alternative methods to assess design stability once it has completed its design review, now scheduled for June 2013, and has a stable baseline design, but has not made any final decisions about those methods. The program intends to conduct system-level developmental testing on a fully configured, production representative prototype in July 2014.”

Jan 17/13: DOT&E Testing Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2012 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). WIN-T is included:

“WIN-T Increment 2 is not suitable due to poor reliability and maintainability and not survivable due to deficiencies noted in the classified annex to the DOT&E BLRIP report…. In February 2012, the Army approved a revised requirement that lowered WIN-T Increment 2’s reliability requirement by 30 – 60 percent based upon an updated operational mission summary/mission profile…. As a result of IOT&E, DOT&E assessed WIN-T Increment 2 as not survivable due to significant Information Assurance vulnerabilities that would degrade a unit’s ability to succeed in combat. These vulnerabilities are discussed in a classified annex to the DOT&E BLRIP report.

On September 26, 2012, the DAE signed an ADM… Authorized the Army to procure an additional 538 WIN-T Increment 2 communication nodes as a second Low-Rate Initial Production [while requiring further testing and corrective plans].”

Oct 4/12: WIN-T-2. The U.S. Department of Defense has authorized the Army to continue WIN-T Increment 2 as part of the Army’s Capability Set 13 deployment, after its Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) was deemed to be successful during the Army’s Network Integration Evaluation 12.2 exercise.

Accordingly, General Dynamics C4 Systems receives a $346 million delivery order to buy more sets for Brigade Combat Teams and Division Headquarters units. Most production for the WIN-T Increment 2 system takes place at General Dynamics C4 Systems’ facility in Taunton, MA, with components from a variety of suppliers that include veteran-owned and small businesses in 28 states. GDC4S.

Oct 1/12: WIN-T-2. Initial fielding of the WIN-T Increment 2 network as a key component of Capability Set 13 begins at Ft. Drum, NY, and Ft. Polk, LA. Two brigades of the 10th Mountain Division begin their training using previously procured equipment. Source.

March 30/12: SAR The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 31/11 includes…

“WIN-T Increment 3 – Program costs decreased $1,600.4 million (-10.0%) from $16,055.9 million to $14,455.5 million, due primarily to a decrease in hardware costs reflecting fewer quantities of high cost Configuration Items being procured and a change in the mix of Configuration Items being procured (-$1,809.1 million) and a decrease of 123 nodes from 3,168 to 3,045 due to the removal of the requirement to replace Increment 2 hardware with Increment 3 hardware (-$291.4 million). There were additional decreases resulting from the descoping of the 4-channel Joint Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (JC4ISR) radio and antenna (-$287.2 million) and a decrease in systems engineering, program management, and spares costs due to compression of the procurement schedule by two years from FY 2026 to FY 2024 (-$262.4 million). These decreases were partially offset by a net increase in other support costs due to increased annual software license costs and the retrofit of the JC4ISR radios and antennas (+$383.8 million), an increase in hardware estimates for the Satellite Tactical Terminal-High Powered and Highband Radio Frequency Unit-Multiband Terrestrial antenna (+$352.6 million), and the application of revised escalation indices (+$325.6 million).”

SAR – WIN-T-3 reductions

Jan 17/12: DOT&E testing. The Pentagon releases the FY 2011 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). WIN-T is included, but only tangentially:

“The Army conducted a combined WIN-T Increment 2 and Increment 1b Limited User Test at Fort Stewart, Georgia; Fort Lewis, Washington; and Fort Gordon, Georgia, in March 2009. DOT&E assessed the WIN-T Increment 2 as supportive of voice, video, and data communications. However, the network needs improvement in the following areas:

  • Reliability
  • Ability to support on the move communications
  • Training provided to Soldiers due to complexity of the system
  • Speed of communication due to network routing
  • Network Operations Management
  • Information Assurance

Nov 18/11: The US Army is evaluating its latest build of field networking equipment, after the 3-week NIE 12.1 event. The spring 2012 event will test NIE 13, which will include the new WIN-T Increment 2 gear.

FY 2010 – 2011

Datapath equipment
(click to view full)

May 10/11: WIN-T-2. Lockheed Martin announces a $105 million contract from General Dynamics C4 Systems, for more WIN-T Increment 2 components. Lockheed Martin will deliver transmission subsystem radios, modems, antennas, and mast systems, which will be integrated into a variety of combat vehicle platforms.

Integrating SATCOM, line-of-sight and terrestrial signal types, the “self healing” WIN-T increment 2 is designed to provide high-bandwidth, on-the-move connectivity which can dynamically switch between terrestrial and satellite sources, depending on the terrain.

April 15/11: SAR. The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 30/10 includes “significant” program cost change for WIN-T Increments 1 & 2:

“WIN-T Increment 1 – Program costs increased $468.1 million (+12.2%) from $3,835.0 million to $4,303.1 million, due primarily to a quantity increase of 83 communications nodes from 1,777 to 1,860 communications nodes (+$119.5 million) and an increase in other support costs for modification work (+$477.4 million), partially offset by a decrease in the estimating costs for a volume discount due to the quantity increase (-$129.8 million).

WIN-T Increment 2 – Program costs increased $1,354.8 million (+27.1%) from $4,997.8 million to $6,352.6 million, due primarily to a quantity increase of 630 communications nodes from 2,216 to 2,846 communications nodes (+$983.4 million) and a resulting increase in other support costs due to an additional year of procurement and the refinement of the fielding schedule (+$476.6 million). There are additional increases in the cost of government furnished software due to the transfer in procurement responsibility from the contractor to the government (+$89.5 million) and in non-recurring production costs due to additional platforms requiring integration (e.g., the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle) (+$62.3 million). These increases are partially offset by reductions in contract costs due to definitized prices, quantity lot discounts, and a decrease in actual contract hardware costs (-$272.8 million).”

SAR – WIN-T-2 grows

March 16/11: WIN-T-2 General Dynamics C4 systems announces $295.8 million in WIN-T Increment 2 delivery orders, to equip 5 additional brigade combat teams (BCTs).

The US Army has now ordered Increment 2 systems for a total of 8 BCTs under a 3-year contract that was awarded in March 2010 (vid. April 5/10 entry).

Aug 2/10: Sub-contractors. General Dynamics awards Lockheed Martin a contract worth up to $400 million to provide communications hardware and equipment for the WIN-T Increment 2 transmission subsystem, which will enable the network to transfer data over dispersed areas. Equipment produced will include transmission subsystem radios, modems, antennas and mast systems. The initial award is valued at $71 million.

July 21/10: Testing. General Dynamics C4 Systems touts a recent 4-day U.S. Army Brigade Combat Team Integration exercise at White Sands Missile Range, NM. Its 7 realistic mission scenarios included WIN-T and JTRS radio systems, allowing widely dispersed Army units to exchange command-and-control messages, location information, voice, electronic chat and imagery while on the move.

May 13/10: WIN-T-3. General Dynamics C4 Systems announces a $12.4 million contract modification to develop a line-of-sight communications payload for the MQ-1C Extended Range/Multi-purpose (ER/MP) UAV to serve as a communication relay on the WIN-T Increment 3 network.

The payload will use the Highband Networking Waveform (HNW) to serve as a line-of-sight radio repeater while the UAS is in flight, which is especially useful to troops in urban environments, or other rugged terrain that block level line of sight.

April 5/10: General Dynamics C4 Systems in Taunton, MA receives a $164 million firm-fixed-price contract for WIN-T Increment 2 low-rate production, urgent 1st order, for the procurement of equipment for 3 brigade combat teams, 1 division headquarters, 4 regional hub nodes, and one base equipment complement to support the initial operational test and evaluation for WIN-T Increment 2.

Work is to be performed in Taunton, MA with an estimated completion date of June 30/10. The equipment then will undergo formal testing during 2011, culminating in an Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) in November 2011. One sole-source bid was solicited by the CECOM Acquisition Center in Fort Monmouth, NJ (W15PT-10-D-C007).

This 3-year contract has a total potential value of $2.8 billion, if all options are exercised. See also GDC4S release.

Increment 2 begins

FY 2002 – 2009

JNN-N

June 5/09: WIN-T. General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies receives a $119 million modification to an existing delivery order (W15P7T-06-D-L219) to provide satellite communications earth terminals and support services for Increment One of the US Army’s WIN-T program.

Under the contract, General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies will provide 293 satellite transportable terminals (STT), 6 unit hub SATCOM trucks (UHST) and 534 Ka-band upgrade kits and spares.

General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies’ work is being performed under an existing World Wide Satellite Systems delivery order, managed by the WIN-T program manager’s Commercial Satellite Terminal Program in Ft. Monmouth, NJ. This modification to the existing delivery order brings the contract’s total value to $378 million for 956 STTs and 17 UHSTs, which represent approximately half of the hardware quantities available on the 4-year program.

May 1/09: Boeing in Saint Louis, MO receives a $10 million cost-plus fixed-fee contract for WIN-T Point of Presence and the FCS Integrated Computer System (FCS ICS). They’re the Future Combat Systems lead integrator, and their task will be to integrate WIN-T functions (HAIPE & RFNM) and the Network Management System (NMS) with the FCS ICS on the program’s vehicles etc.

Work is to be performed in Bloomington, MN (93.02%), and St. Louis, MO (06.98%) with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/14. One bid was solicited with one bid received by TACOM Warren’s AMSXCC-TAC-AB in Warren, MI (W56HZV-05-C-0724).

April 6/09: WIN-T-2. General Dynamics announces that the US Army’s 4th Brigade – 2nd Infantry Division in Fort Lewis, WA, and 3rd Infantry Division in Fort Stewart, GA completed a limited user test of WIN-T Increment 2. A General Dynamics-led team supported the testing, during which soldiers from the 2 units planned and executed multiple missions, sharing command and control information from the command post down to the company level using WIN-T.

March 4/09: WIN-T-2. A General Dynamics-led team completes a developmental testing of the WIN-T Increment 2 on-the-move broadband networking capability. The test included building and operating a network comprising more than 35 network nodes. In a tactical environment, a network this size would support an Army division and associated brigade, battalion and company elements.

Feb 2/09: WIN-T. General Dynamics C4 Systems Inc. in Taunton, MA receives a $9 million cost-plus-award-fee contract, as part of WIN-T System Development & Demonstration. They’ll define, model, simulate, and demonstrate WIN-T System’s architecture in a field environment.

Work is being performed at Taunton, MA, and Gaithersburg, MD, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/10. One bid was solicited by sole source and 1 bid received by the CECOM Acquisition Center in Fort Monmouth, NJ (DAAB07-02-C-F404).

Nov 3/08: General Dynamics C4 Systems announces delivery of the first WIN-T Increment 1 equipment to the US Army. Increment 1 builds on the former Joint Network Node-Network (JNN) and provides soldiers with a high-capacity communications network when they are stopped.

On schedule deliveries of WIN-T Increment 1 to the 5th Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) at Ft. Lewis, WA, includes networking hubs, network management suites and network nodes. The equipment serves battalion, brigade and division/corps command posts and Expeditionary Signal Battalions.

1st WIN-T delivery

Sept 24/07: WIN-T. General Dynamics announces a $24 million contract from the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command in Fort Monmouth, NJ, to provide specialized JNN-N/ WIN-T Inc 1 satellite communications earth terminals and support services. Sources: GDC4S release.

Sept 18/07: WIN-T 2/3 development. A $921 million contract to the General Dynamics-Lockheed Martin WIN-T will develop WIN-T Increments 2 & 3. Sources: GD C4 Systems, Sept 27/07 release.

Win-T Increment 2 & 3 development

Aug 22/07: General Dynamics, Taunton, MA receives an $8.2 million increment as part of a $1,179,461,286 cost-plus-award-fee contract for the development of WIN-T.

Work will be performed in Taunton, MA (77%), and Gaithersburg, MD (23%), and is expected to be completed by June 30/10. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This was a sole source contract initiated on July 12, 2007. The U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command, Fort Monmouth, NJ, is the contracting activity (DAAB07-02-C-F404).

July 10/07: General Dynamics, Taunton, MA receives a $22.5 million increment as part of a $1,069,909,287 cost-plus-award-fee contract for system development and demonstration for the architecture of the WIN-T system.

Work will be performed in Taunton, MA (40%), and Gaithersburg, MD (60%), and is expected to be completed by Sept. 30, 2011. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 19, 2007. The U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command, Fort Monmouth, NJ, is the contracting activity (DAAB07-02-C-F404).

June 2007: Restructured. The US Army restructures the WIN-T program into 4 major increments, after a formal cost breach under the terms of the USA’s Nunn-McCurdy legislation.

The former Joint Network Node (JNN) remains WIN-T Increment 1 from 2004, but it will add WGS satellite compatibility (1a) and some bandwidth management and security improvements (1b).

WIN-T Increment 2 development is valued at $126 million, to deliver initial on-the-move broadband networking using radio links that fail-over to SATCOM. Fielding is scheduled to begin in 2009.

WIN-T Increment 3 development is valued at $795 million. It will complete Increment 2’s goals and add better network capacity management, security and full on-the-move capabilities. Limited user testing is scheduled to begin in 2011. Increment Three also addresses the size, weight, power and cooling requirements for systems to be hosted in Future Combat Systems vehicles.

WIN-T Increment 4 is envisioned as an upgrades stage, based on new technology that includes enhanced satellite communications protection and compatibility with the ultra high-bandwidth T-SAT network. Sources: GD C4 Systems, Sept 27/07 release.

WIN-T Restructured

Feb 13/07: General Dynamics C4 Systems, Taunton, MA, was awarded on Feb. 8, 2007, a $44,102,000 increment as part of a $269,143,489 cost-plus-award-fee contract for a within scope change to the Warfighter Information Network – Tactical System Development and Demonstration.

Work will be performed in Taunton, MA (50%), and Gaithersburg, MD (50%), and is expected to be completed by June 30, 2007. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This was a sole source contract initiated on Jan. 5, 2007. The U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command, Fort Monmouth, NJ, is the contracting activity (DAAB07-02-C-F404).

Sept 1/06: General Dynamics C4 Systems, Taunton, MA, was awarded on Aug. 28, 2006, a $7,259,000 increment as part of a $202,503,038 cost-plus-award-fee contract for an engineering change to the Warfighter Information Network – Tactical System Development and Demonstration.

Work will be performed in Taunton, MA (50%), and Gaithersburg, MD (50%), and is expected to be completed by Jan. 31, 2007. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This was a sole source contract initiated on Aug. 1, 2006. The U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command, Fort Monmouth, NJ, is the contracting activity (DAAB07-02-C-F404).

June 3/05: General Dynamics C4 Systems, Taunton, MA, was awarded on June 2, 2005, a $7,632,000 increment as part of a $126,672,195 cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-plus-award-fee, and time and materials contract for a further development of an initial architecture for the Warfighter Information Network Tactical Communication System.

Work will be performed in Taunton, MA (75%) and Gaithersburg, MD (25%), and is expected to be completed by Jan. 9, 2006. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. There were an unknown number of bids solicited via the World Wide Web on April 8, 2002, and three bids were received. The U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command, Fort Monmouth, NJ, is the contracting activity (DAAB07-02-C-F404).

Nov 12/04: General Dynamics C4 Systems, Taunton, MA, was awarded on Nov. 10, 2004, a $14,987,144 increment as part of a $112,579,352 cost plus fixed fee, cost plus award fee, and time and materials contract for development of an initial architecture for the Warfighter Information Network Tactical Communication System.

Work will be performed in Taunton, MA (75%) and Gaithersburg, MD (25%), and is expected to be completed by Jan. 9, 2006. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. There were an unknown number of bids solicited via the World Wide Web on April 8, 2002, and three bids were received. The U.S. Army Communication-Electronics Command, Fort Monmouth, NJ, is the contracting activity (DAAB07-02-C-F404).

Aug 9/02: General Dynamics Government Systems Corp., Taunton, MA, is being awarded a $3,000,000 increment as part of a $72,294,296 cost-plus-fixed-fee and time and materials contract for development of an initial architecture for the Warfighter Information Network – Tactical communication system.

Work will be performed in Taunton and is to be completed by Jan. 9, 2006. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. There were an unknown number of bids solicited via the World Wide Web on April 8, 2002, and three bids were received. The U. S. Army Communications-Electronics Command, Fort Monmouth, NJ, is the contracting activity (DAAB07-02-C-F404).

Additional Readings

News & Views

Categories: Defence`s Feeds

KC-46A Pegasus Aerial Tanker Facing Schedule Pressure

Wed, 10/06/2015 - 02:40
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 2015

Boom assembly

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: Lawmakers Slam US Defense Acquisition | Politicker.com | Deutsche Welle | International Herald Tribune | Reuters | China’s Xinhua.

    June 18-25/08: The Congressional Government Accountability Office sustains Boeing’s protest The ruling validates a number of Boeing’s complaints, and recommends:

    “The GAO recommended that the Air Force reopen discussions with the offerors, obtain revised proposals, re-evaluate the revised proposals, and make a new source selection decision, consistent with the GAO’s decision. The agency also made a number of other recommendations including that, if the Air Force believed that the solicitation, as reasonably interpreted, does not adequately state its needs, the Air Force should amend the solicitation prior to conducting further discussions with the offerors; that if Boeing’s proposal is ultimately selected for award, the Air Force should terminate the contract awarded to Northrop Grumman; and that the Air Force reimburse Boeing the costs of filing and pursuing the protest, including reasonable attorneys’ fees.”

    See full DID coverage of the decision, and the road ahead, updated to include the full text decision, released on June 25/08. There are reports that the USAF may attempt to bull this one through, and someone fully committed to that side might believe this to be a realistic possibility given the full text decision. DID is not optimistic about the realism of that approach, however, and explains why not with reference to the GAO rulings.

    GAO sustains protest, program will be restructured and re-competed

    June 25/08: Defense Tech reports that:

    “John Young, the Pentagon’s acquisition czar, has reportedly drafted a letter for the four congressional committees that oversee defense spending and policy informing them of the Pentagon’s decision to go ahead and award the contract to Northrop Grumman… “Their finding is that the full document is quite different from the summary,” issued last Wednesday, said a source familiar with the issue. The source said Air Force leaders believe much of what was challenged is “procedural” and can be resolved without rebidding the deal.”

    June 23/08: Aviation Week reports that outbound U.S. Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne says the service may have to “reshape and revise” the request for proposals (RFP) for a new refueling tanker competition. One new criterion under consideration may be a flyoff of the dueling designs.

    June 12/08: Aviation Week reports that Rep. Norm Dicks [D-WA], whose constituency is closely tied to Boeing, says he is working with House defense appropriations chairman John Murtha [D-PA] to introduce an amendment to an appropriations bill preventing the KC-X award to Northrop Grumman and EADS Airbus.

    He pledges to do “whatever it takes,” regardless of the outcome of the GAO’s ruling later this month. Any GAO ruling would be non-biding, which is why the outcome of the tanker contract (continuation, repeal, or forced split) will eventually be decided in Congress no matter what; the GAO report’s primary value will be as an influencer in that debate.

    April 21/08: Reuters reports that the USAF met last week with Boeing and Northrop Grumman’s CEOs “to voice concern about the “vitriolic” tone of public statements over a $35 billion refueling aircraft program.” Particular concern was expressed regarding Boeing’s allegations of irregularities in the USAF’s process. Defense analyst Loren Thompson, of the Virginia-based Lexington Institute went so far as to say that: “The tone of the tanker debate has turned so negative that Air Force leaders are concerned that it could damage their long-term relationship with Boeing.”

    Given trends in the industry and this protest’s intrinsic requirements, the question may not be whether relationship damage is acceptable. It may be how much damage is acceptable. See “USAF to Boeing, NGC: “Don’t Make Us Come Back There” for more.

    April 11/08: Boeing claims that USAF evaluators found that the KC-767 tanker had almost 5 times as many survivability discriminators as the KC-30B, with 24 positive discriminators (11 major, 13 minor) while the KC-30 scored 5 minor discriminators.

    Some of Boeing’s major discriminators reportedly included more robust surface-to-air missile defense systems; Cockpit displays that improve situational awareness; Better Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) hardening; Automatic route planning/ rerouting and steering cues to the flight crew to avoid threats once they are detected; Better armor-protection features for the crew and critical aircraft systems; and Better fuel-tank-explosion protection features. Boeing release.

    April 10/08: Congressman Duncan Hunter [R-CA-52], ranking Republican member of the House Armed Services Committee, recommends a 3rd option:

    “The most remarkable aspect of the recent competition for the next Air Force refueling tanker contract was the absence of the best aircraft: the Boeing KC-777. The CEO of FedEx, Fred Smith, had it right when he briefed Members of Congress… one of the most compelling factors is the fuel offload of the KC-777 ER (with additional under floor body tanks) at 2,000 nautical miles… nearly three times as much as the “winning” A330. …the KC-777-200 carries 30% more fuel and 62% more cargo than the A330. And when you compare payload, passenger and aero-medical evacuation capability, the KC-777 is the clear winner at 39% more payload, 94 more passengers and 30 more patients than the A330.

    … at $40 billion plus, the dollars associated with the “tanker buy” are huge. And the profits reaped from the sale will be available for reinvestment by the winning competitor for new generations of aircraft… The tanker competition is subject to the authorization and appropriation of dollars. The taxpayers, should, through their elected representatives, make the KC-777 the next Air Force tanker.”

    April 8/08: Dueling ads. Northrop Grumman begins to respond in detail to Boeing’s assertions re: the USAF evaluations in the “Why We Won” ongoing series:

    Mission Capability | Versatility | Greater Range | Takeoff Performance (can take off with more fuel load from a 7,000 foot runway) | Fuel Offload | Air Refueling Efficiency | Past Performance | Cost and Price Comparison | Fleet Effectiveness | Development Cost | Survivability (“The Air Force had to balance survivability against other capabilities, criteria and cost…”) | Key Selection Criteria | Strengths and Weaknesses | Past Performance in Detail | Superior Air Refueling.

    April 3/08: Northrop Grumman Corporation launches the website “America’s New Tanker” as a potential centerpiece of its lobbying efforts. The NGC release adds:

    “Citizens across the nation have generated tens of thousands of letters to their respective congressman, senators and governors in support of the Air Force’s selection of Northrop Grumman to provide the KC-45 Tanker. The website also offers a capability that enables visitors to receive e-mail news updates about the program.”

    As media efforts go, the site is currently a very bare bones affair, with a single page of content, a sign-up page for email updates, and a form letter generator to Congress. It is ahead of Being’s comparable efforts, however.

    April 2/08: The USA’s Congressional Government Accountability Office denies denied requests from Northrop Grumman and the U.S. Air Force to throw out Boeing’s protest of the KC-X deal. By law, the GAO has 100 days from the day of complaint to determine if that complaint has merit.

    While Northrop Grumman refers to streamlining of Boeing’s protest in its release, Boeing took a very different position. Tanker program spokesman Bill Barksdale said categorically that “We’re not reducing anything… We’re not eliminating anything.” Defense News | Northrop Grumman release.

    March 27/08: Britain. FSTA signed in Britain. Britain signs a GBP 13 billion (currently about $26 billion), 27-year public-private partnership deal with the AirTanker consortium, who will deliver 14 A330-200 MRTT aerial tankers and operate them over the life of the contract. This is the largest-ever Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contract in the defense realm, anywhere in the world.

    The A330 MRTT/ KC-30 had been Britain’s platform choice since 2006, when it beat a KC-767 offer from Boeing and Serco. The British planes will rely entirely on 3 hose-and-drogue systems, however; unlike the KC-45A, or other A330 MRTT wins, they will not carry a refueling boom for use with dorsal refueling inlets. Britain’s aircraft carry refueling probes for use with the hose-and-drogue method, and eliminating the boom simplifies civilian use of FSTA aircraft when the RAF doesn’t need them.

    March 24/08: B311344 Protest of the Boeing Company: Second Supplemental Protest [PDF format, Public Redacted Version]

    March 13/08: Boeing launches its Tanker Facts protest blog.

    March 12/08: The Lexington Institute offers “Boeing Fights Back: How it Plans to Prevail,” explaining Boeing’s strategy as they see it.

    March 10/08: Boeing announces that it will file a formal protest on March 11/08, asking the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to review the KC-X decision. Boeing chairman & CEO Jim McNerney called it:

    “…an extraordinary step rarely taken by our company, and one we take very seriously… we continue to believe we submitted the most capable, lowest risk, lowest Most Probable Life Cycle Cost airplane as measured against the Air Force’s Request for Proposal. We look forward to the GAO’s review of the decision.”

    Interesting choice of claims. Boeing said it would provide additional details of its case in conjunction with the protest filing. Boeing release | DID’s “Boeing on KC-X: “Methinks We Doth Protest to You” has fuller details re: the protest grounds.

    Boeing files a protest

    March 7/08: The U.S. Air Force has completed its debrief for Boeing – amd Boeing appears to be getting ready for a formal protest/ challenge. Mark McGraw, Boeing vice president and program manager of the KC-767 tanker:

    “We spent several hours with Air Force leaders, listening and probing, all in an effort to better understand the reasoning behind their decisions… While we are grateful for the timely debriefing, we left the room with significant concerns about the process in several areas, including program requirements related to capabilities, cost and risk; evaluation of the bids and the ultimate decision. What is clear now is that reports claiming that the Airbus offering won by a wide margin could not be more inaccurate… Our plan now is to work through the weekend to come to a decision on our course of action early next week,” said McGraw. “It will be a very rigorous and deliberative process to ensure we’re balancing the needs of the warfighter with our desire to be treated fairly. For decades Boeing has been recognized as a defense company that never takes lightly protests of our customers’ decisions.”

    March 6/08: The Lexington Institute discusses the KC-X competition’s ratings, and claims that the evaluation wasn’t even close. DID explains why their claim might be believable when even Boeing hasn’t been debriefed yet, and goes on to summarize and annotate their comments while pointing back to the original source. Read: “KC-X: Rating the Contenders.”

    March 6/08: The USAF originally said that Boeing wouldn’t be debriefed until around March 12th, but Boeing wasn’t happy with that. The briefing has now been moved up to an unspecified earlier date. Bloomberg news | Boeing release.

    March 5/08: Northrop Grumman enters the lobbying fray to counter critics of the deal. The US industrial base, jobs, foreign content, and foreign supplier risk are all addressed. The points made echo Sen. Richard Shelby’s [R-AL] earlier points, though the firm changed the words “insource jobs” to “create jobs,” in order to avoid getting Airbus in trouble for the flip side of insourcing, which is outsourcing jobs from France. Readers should also note that the Joint Cargo Aircraft competition they refer to was a contest between 2 European aircraft: Alenia’s winning C-27J Spartan, and EADS-CASA’s C-295. NGC release | Sen. Richard Shelby statement.

    March 4/08: EADS announces the first in-flight “wet contact” that transferred fuel via the EADS Air Refuelling Boom System (ARBS). The A310 test aircraft was partnered with Portuguese Air force F-16s at an altitude of 27,000 feet, locking down one of the last milestones in ARBS’ development.

    The boom is 17 meters long at full extension and allows the transfer of 2270 litres/minute (1200 US gal/min). The fly-by-wire boom is controlled remotely from a console in the cockpit, where an operator uses an advanced technology 3 dimensional visual system to steer the boom, rather than using direct visual contact from the plane’s rear.

    March 4/08: Taxpayers for Common Sense reports on the lobbying dollars spent to date on the KC-X RFP by both sides. DID looks at the totals, and wonders if that’s the most useful question. Perhaps a better question would be: how well was that money spent? Read “The KC-X Tanker Deal: Tracking the Lobbyists.”

    March 3/08: A release from House Speaker Pelosi’s office [D-CA] says that the award to Airbus “raises serious questions that Congress must examine thoroughly… Given the ramifications of this decision for the United States, the Air Force must explain to Congress how it meets the long-term needs of our military and the American people.” The tone is not friendly, and answers to be sought during the battle on Capitol Hill include:

    • “What are the national security implications of using an aircraft supplied by a foreign firm for this essential mission?”
    • “Were the risks associated with choosing a conceptual design over a proven capability properly assessed?”
    • “Was sufficient consideration given to the impact of the contract award on jobs in America and on our technological base?”

    Both Sen. Hilary Clinton [D-NY] and Sen. Barack Obama [D-IL, where Boeing is a major presence] have expressed opposition to the award, though neither has committed to ending the deal as part of their Presidential campaigns. Republican Presidential Candidate Sen. John McCain [R-AZ] has reserved judgment, saying:

    “Having investigated the [KC-767] tanker lease scandal a few years ago, I have always insisted that the Air Force buy major weapons through fair and open competition. I will be interested to learn how the Air Force came to its contract award decision here… I’ve never believed that defense programs, that the major reason for them should be to create jobs… I’ve always felt that the best thing to do is to create the best weapons system we can at minimum cost to taxpayers.”

    Feb 29/08: Airbus wins. After all the studies, the lobbying, and the proposal refinements, the USAF picked a winner. The A330 MRTT/ KC-30B from Northrop Grumman and EADS Airbus will now become the USAF’s next aerial tanker – if the USAF can make its decision stick:

    Northrop Grumman Corp. of Los Angeles, CA won a cost plus incentive/award fee, fixed-price incentive, firm-fixed-price contract for the newly-named KC-45. This contract is awarded after full and open bidding, and provides for the system design and development of 4 test aircraft for $1.5 billion. This contract also includes 5 production options targeted for 64 aircraft at $10.6 billion. At this time no funds have been obligated. The Aeronautical Systems Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH issued the contract (FA8625-08-C-6451).

    Follow-on procurement of 110 production aircraft will be split into several production lots per usual procedure; the USAF has estimated their value at $35 billion over 25 years, plus additional costs for sustainment and support. The news even came as a bit of a shock to EADS’ CEO. The Financial Times of London reports that:

    “As recently as Friday afternoon the EADS team had been convinced that Boeing would take the contract. Mr Gallois, about to leave Paris for a mountain holiday, said he had simply not believed his ears when informed at 10.25pm local time last night.”

    Gallois is also quoted as saying “no, we didn’t smash the price,” in response to questions re: the common tactic by Airbus of slashing their margins to win sales. Aerospace analyst Steve East at Credit Suisse was less convinced, and recommended “sell into strength” on the grounds that the deal may not generate significant profits for EADS. Per this article’s Jan 14/08 entry about moving A300F production to the USA, Airbus CEO Tom Enders added that:

    “All 4 System Design and Development aircraft are already in production. Preparatory work is now underway for our commitment to co-locate the final assembly of the tankers and A330 civilian freighter aircraft at Mobile, Alabama, creating the first new large commercial aircraft assembly facility in the U.S. in over 40 years.”

    Gen. Arthur J. Lichte, commander of US Air Mobility Command, said that the Northrop/EADS KC-30 had been chosen because it offered “more cargo, more fuel offload, more passengers and more availability.” The USAF took pains to stress the degree of rigor in the selection process, and the importance of the contract, in hopes of forestalling a protest. Whether or not a protest is forthcoming from Boeing, however, there will almost certainly be a pitched battle on Capitol Hill. The USAF has worked to prepare for that likelihood with a $240 million Tanker Transfer Fund that could be spent during a protest.

    A split-buy is the most likely proposal in the political arena, given both past tendencies in Congress and the political leanings of the states most affected, which tend to lean more toward the Democratic Party in Boeing’s case, and more toward the Republican Party in EADS/Northrop’s case. On the other hand, the USAF strenuously opposes a split buy, both for reasons of delay (estimated at 18-24 months) and of future operations and maintenance inefficiencies. As they say in the airlines: “We are expecting turbulence ahead. Please fasten your seatbelts.” USAF | EADS | Northrop Grumman | Cobham plc [PDF] | Boeing | Financial Times of London | Reuters | Infodefensa [Espanol] | Seattle Post-Intelligencer | Seattle Times | Times of Malta | Wichita Eagle (round-up of official statements, incl. politicians & unions) | Aviation Week (USAF’s fund) | AP, via Boston.com (Pratt & Whitney loses) | Seattle P-I (Gen. Mosely re: protest prospects) | Seattle P-I (inquiry possible) | USA Today (“How Boeing blew the deal…”, cites Northrop’s political lobbying) Wichita Business Journal (lawmakers will protest).

    A330 / KC-45 wins

    Japan’s KC-767s
    (click to view full)

    Feb 20/08: Boeing announces delivery of the first KC-767 tanker to its Japanese partner Itochu Corp., which landed at Gifu, Japan, near Nagoya following a final review by Japan Ministry of Defense (MoD) Air Staff. Itochu will deliver the KC-767 Tanker to the Japanese MoD in March 2008, following in-country acceptance processes.

    Feb 13/08: Boeing announces that its KC-767J has received a Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) from the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA previously certified the KC-767 for everything except passengers and main deck cargo, and this additional certification clears the way for Japan to receive its first 2 of 4 KC-767s as planned. It will also help Boeing obtain FAA certification for Italy’s KC-767s, and deliver their first 2 tankers later in 2008. George Hildebrand, Boeing KC-767 Japan program manager, said that:

    “The Japan Air Self-Defense Force asked us to complete passenger and main deck cargo certifications beyond what is normally performed on military aircraft, and we have received our FAA STC for those capabilities.”

    Feb 12/08: Let the political lobbying begin! Defense News reports that the Pentagon is delaying the KC-X’s Defense Acquisition Board review slated for Feb 13/08, owing to “inquiries from the Hill and elsewhere” about the program. No date has been set, but Lawmakers’ lingering questions about the service’s KC-X program prompted Pentagon acquisition officials to postpone a Defense Acquisition Board review slated for Feb. 13, said James Finley, deputy undersecretary of defense for acquisition and technology, still anticipates a KC-X award by the end of February 2008. Time will tell.

    Feb 7/08: Aero News Network notes that “Boeing, EADS Employ ‘Guerilla’ Marketing For KC-X“:

    “Tactics employed by both parties include “sending blast e-mails to reporters and trade journals widely read by Air Force officials and by advertising in specialty publications, on buses and subways and local radio stations,” reports The Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Special publications aimed at Congressional staff and leaders in Washington, such as “The Hill,” have been on the receiving end of full page ads from both parties (as have ANN inboxes — Ed.) Radio airwaves and Metro subway stops are also not immune to the fight for the estimated $40 billion contract.”

    Jan 30/08: Defense Aerospace reports that the late March 2008 delivery of 2 KC-767s to Japan represents an additional 2-month slippage, as Boeing must still complete remaining Federal Aviation Administration certifications to allow the tanker to carry passengers and cargo before Japan will accept the planes. The March 2008 delivery is about 3 years later than initially planned.

    Delivery of 2 similar aircraft to Italy will now take place in the Q2 2008, about 2 years later than planned. As annoying as these delays have been to its customers, the key question for Boeing now is whether these delays have sufficed to iron out the KC-767’s technical risks in advance of the much larger American KC-X competition.

    Jan 29/08: Boeing announces a successful night-time refueling mission, using the main refueling boom on a KC-767 that will be delivered to Japan early in 2008. The aircrew connected the KC-767s’s fly-by-wire, remote vision refueling boom to an F-15E Strike Eagle 11 times during dusk and night conditions, and successfully offloaded fuel before returning safely. Airbus’ KC-30 competitor has yet to perform a ‘wet’ boom refueling, even during the day.

    Right now, however, Boeing’s biggest technical risk factor is its hose-and-drogue system, not its boom. Boeing release.

    Jan 28/08: EADS is also conducting testing, using A330/KC-30B MRTT aircraft destined for Australia, an F/A-18 fighter, and an A310 tanker equipped with EADS’ ARBS advanced refueling boom. During testing with the F/A-18 fighter, the KC-30 Tanker’s all-digital FRL 905E-series hose-and-drogue refueling pods deployed to lengths of 75, 82, and 90 feet during multiple deployments at altitudes from 10,000 – 35,000 feet, at airspeeds ranging from 180 – 300 knots, while in level flight and while banking. The Sargent Fletcher FRL 905E reportedly “exhibited total and complete stability, which is critical for successful refueling of probe-equipped receiver aircraft.” Nevertheless, EADS’ biggest technical risk factor is its advanced refueling boom, which is required by many USAF aircraft.

    Testing also took place regarding EADS’ advanced ARBS refueling boom, which was extended to various points throughout the refueling envelope as the Australian A330 MRTT moved to within 6″ of the all-electric fly-by-wire boom to test its suitability for large aircraft. “In the next few days, the [KC-30/A330 MRTT’s] Civil Certification flight tests with the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) are scheduled to be performed.”

    It should be noted that neither the hose-and-drogue test, nor the refueling boom test, involved actual contact, let alone a ‘wet contact’ refueling. Unlike its Boeing competitor, the ARBS refueling boom has yet to demonstrate contact with a large aircraft, or actually passed fuel to any aircraft. EADS release | EADS North America release.

    Jan 16/08: The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW) throws its support behind Boeing’s KC-X bid, citing the WTO case re: European government subsidies, 40%+ production in Europe, and recent scandals involving insider trading and foreign practices.

    “The IAM fundamentally believes in fair competition in government contracting. But fair competition means that all vendors must play by the rules. Yet all available evidence – including a consistent bipartisan chorus from the Congress and our US Trade Representative – indicates that Northrop’s majority partner, EADS, continues to skirt the rules of fair play at the expense of US jobs.”

    Whatever one may thing of the substantive merits of these objections, the IAMAW will be a factor re: support once the battle shifts to Congress. As it surely will. Aero News story.

    Jan 15/08: The Lexington Institute think-tank looks at the KC-X competition once more, and explains why they believe the USAF already has a very good idea of who the winner is. They add:

    “Beyond the operational merits of the two planes, a political minefield lies ahead for the Air Force and whichever contractor it selects. If the Northrop plane wins, buy-America sentiment will surge on Capitol Hill, potentially blocking a purchase. If the Boeing plane wins, legislators from the South whose region stood to benefit from tanker assembly will seek to split the buy between both teams. The Air Force will get its tanker in the end, but which contractor benefits may ultimately come down to a test of political skills, and there is no guarantee new tankers will reach the fleet before old ones begin failing.”

    Jan 14/08: Readers may recall Airbus CEO Louis Gallois’ comments about setting up “in a dollar zone” (see Dec 3/07 entry). Now Airbus announces that it will establish an A330 Freighter aircraft final assembly line (FAL) in Mobile, AL if its KC-30 team wins. The A330F currently has an order book of over 66 aircraft, and production capacity would be increased to 4 aircraft per month in order to handle civilian construction as well. Aircraft sections would be delivered to Mobile from their respective Airbus production facilities elsewhere in the world, assembled into the final freighter aircraft, and delivered to customers from Mobile, AL. EADS CEO Thomas Enders was careful to make the offer conditional on a KC-X win, however, claiming that:

    “The Dollar-Euro exchange rate makes it advantageous for us to expand our operations in the United States. While it would be difficult to overcome the cost of building a final assembly line in the U.S. strictly for commercial aircraft, it would make good economic sense to invest the incremental cost of expanding the facility that would already exist for assembling tanker aircraft.”

    That rationale may or may not be exactly true, given that Airbus is said to lose $1 billion every time the USD-EUR exchange rate drops 10 cents, and its dollarized customer contracts must be met with Euro production costs. New commercial aircraft assembly facilities are not a common occurrence for the industry, however, and this would be the first Airbus manufacturing facility in the U.S. By proposing the A330F, Airbus takes advantage of the dollar, offers added civilian work that helps it close the American jobs gap with Boeing’s KC-767, and blunts “Buy American” moves. The A330F is a less popular model than the A330 passenger variants, however, and the move also hopes to provoke less reaction in Europe as a result. earlier version of the EADS release at Defence Aerospace.

    Jan 14/08: Boeing takes the unusual step of releasing the Conklin & de Decker Aviation Information study that led to the cost savings claims in its Jan 3/08 release. Specifically, the study measures:

    “…the additional fuel consumption and the resulting extra cost incurred by a fleet of 179 Airbus 330-200 when compared with the Boeing 767-200ER where both fly similar commercial mission profiles, both fly 750 hours per year over a 40 year service life and both are operated at or near their maximum take-off gross weight. Take off at or near the maximum take off gross weight reflects the fact that aircraft on a tanker mission tend to take off with as much fuel as possible to permit the greatest mission flexibility.”

    Note, however, that operating cost per plane is very different from operating cost per mission; the latter must also factor in the number of planes and flights required to complete that mission (likely Airbus advantage), the flight routes and distances they must fly given basing options (likely Boeing advantage), et. al. Release | Full Report [PDF]

    Jan 3/07: Boeing announces that it has submitted its final bid for the KC-X program. Its release is unusually direct and specific in its comparisons, something Boeing has shied away from in the past:

    “Boeing’s tanker also will carry three times more cargo and passengers than the KC-135 without sacrificing the operational flexibility delivered by a medium-sized aircraft. In contrast, the competitor’s offering would be the second largest aircraft in the Air Force’s inventory and provide unnecessary capacity… Burning 24 percent less fuel than its competitor, the KC-767 will save the service and American taxpayer an estimated $14.6 billion. The KC-767 also will save approximately $4 billion if selected since it costs 22 percent less to maintain than its competitor.”

    Jan 3/08: Northrop Grumman announces that it has submitted its final bid for the KC-X program, in partnership with EADS Airbus. In contrast to other releases, this one is understated in terms of comparisons with the KC-767.

    ARBS connects
    (click to view full)

    Dec 18/07: Northrop Grumman announces an extension of USAF Air Mobility Command’s Consolidated Air Mobility Planning System (CAMPS) contract. This software is used to plan, manage, and track AMC’s aircraft, providing an overall view of where its transports and tankers are and where their missions plans are taking them. NGC has served as CAMPS’ primary contractor for 15 years, and they are partnered with Mosaic, Inc. of Oak Hill, VA.

    Together, they will continue maintaining and upgrading CAMPS software, providing on-site customer support and training, and software and hardware fielding support. The team is also charged with implementing a service-oriented, scalable and expandable architecture; network-centric data solutions; develop software in accordance with Air Mobility Command enterprise requirements; and provide a scalable and expandable architecture, Web applications, and consistent access across the Defense Department.

    Dec 5/07: The EADS Aerial Refueling Boom System (ARBS) performs its first in-flight contacts with an aircraft. The initial refueling contacts used the advanced ARBS installed on an A310 testbed aircraft, which conducted multiple boom hook-ups with an F-16 receiver aircraft flying at 27,000 feet. The ARBS’ 40 foot boom was deployed to its operational length and inserted into the F-16 receiver aircraft’s dorsal refueling receptacle. Note that this was a “dry contact” that did not transfer fuel in the air – as Boeing’s KC-767 did back in January 2007.

    ARBS uses fly-by-wire technology and an automatic load alleviation system for enhanced controllability, and can offload up to 1,200 gallons of fuel per minute. Today’s flight test was the 60th for the boom, totaling more than 160 flight hours. ARBS will equip Australia’s 5 KC-30B MRTT tankers, the UAE’s 3 A330 MRTT aircraft, and the similar KC-30/ FSTA aircraft offered to the US and Britain. EADS release | NGC release.

    Dec 3/07: EADS Airbus CEO Louis Gallois calls for increased American production of Airbus aircraft, in response to the business problem of build costs in Euros and buyer contracts in US dollars. Reportedly, every 10 cent drop in the US dollar costs EADS over $1 billion. His statements provoke a reaction in France. Can Airbus do it? And if they can, would the offered US content level in Airbus’ KC-X bid be the first place one might see those indications?

    Read “Cost Pressures Force European Aerospace to Look Outside Europe.”

    Nov 29/07: A Boeing release conveys the fact that its KC-767s still have some loose ends to tie up. While Boeing recently flight tested a newly designed pylon that attaches the Wing Air Refueling Pod (WARP) to each Italian KC-767 tanker wing, and completed Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certification testing for the KC-767 mission control system, other tasks remain:

    “In the months ahead, Boeing will transfer fuel to a receiver aircraft using the Italian KC-767 WARP and centerline Hose Drum Unit (HDU) refueling systems, accomplish night refueling on the Japan tanker using the fifth-generation boom with upgraded software and complete any remaining FAA certifications.”

    As of Jan 3/08, when both competitors announced the submission of their final bids, Boeing had yet to pass fuel to a flying aircraft from its WARP pods, or accomplish night refueling with its advanced boom. Meanwhile, its KC-30 competitor has yet to pass fuel to a flying aircraft at all from its own EADS ARBS advanced refueling boom.

    Nov 23/07: Gen. Arthur Lichte, the commander of USAF Air Mobility Command, places the stakes behind this contract in perspective, and discusses past aerial tanker program issues, as he addressed the Logistics Officer Association. He said that it currently costs $8.5 million per year to keep 85 unflyable KC-135s maintained per Congressional rules, and added that even if the first KC-X aircraft is delivered on time in 2011, and 15 a year are delivered after that, the last KC-135 will leave the fleet in 2048, at an age of about 87 years. However, if the program runs into any problems and slips by just 3 years, and Air Force officials are unable to procure 15 aircraft a year, the last KC-135 could retire in the year 2082, when it would be more than 120 years old.

    “AMC Commander Discusses: KC-X, C-5 Programs” takes a critical look at the calculations involved, and notes the General’s other statements concerning failed KC-10 modernization programs and the C-5M refurbishment program.

    Italian KC-767A
    (click to view full)

    Nov 23/07: A Defense News report points to the refueling booms as a potential risk issue for the KC-X program:

    “The new refueling boom for the KC-30 has been installed on the Australian version of the plane but remains untested. And only after an expensive two years of re-engineering has Boeing solved aerodynamic problems with the underwing refueling pylons on tankers for the Italian air force, the same version of the plane being offered to the U.S. air service.”

    Nov 20/07: The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports that the USAF has delayed its choice again, and now plans to award the contract in February 2008 at the earliest, instead of January. Sue Payton, the Air Force’s top acquisition official, said that final proposals aren’t expected until December 2007 or January 2008:

    “We are giving [Boeing and NGC/Airbus] every opportunity to substantiate how they are going to improve their weaknesses and mitigate risk… We will not award the tanker until we are absolutely positive we have assessed all of their inputs and they have given us their best and final offer… I cannot say that we are going to get this done in January. I think we are looking more at the February time frame…”

    Nov 19/07: If the Airbus KC-30 is selected, it will fly with upgraded GE engines. Recently, Finnair selected GE’s CF6-80E1 engines to power their A330-300s, incorporating the Tech CF6 program’s new high-pressure turbine upgrade. Since the KC-30 also plans to use this engine, and has a later delivery schedule, the USAF would also receive Tech CF6 engines.

    GE launched the Tech CF6 program in 2006; its new technologies include high-pressure turbine airfoil cooling advancements that will enhance operational reliability, lower maintenance costs and improve fuel burn retention. Tech CF6 enhancements will be standard on CF6-80E1 production engines beginning in mid-2008. GE release.

    Oct 11/07: Boeing announces a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with Cobham plc subsidiary Sargent Fletcher, Inc. of El Monte, CA, to provide the body fuel tank system for the KC-767 Advanced Tanker (AT). Mark McGraw, vice president, Boeing Tanker Programs said that: “With these body fuel tanks, the KC-767’s usable fuel capacity exceeds what the U.S. Air Force requires. Sargent Fletcher’s system extends the KC-767’s range and off-load capacity without sacrificing size.”

    Boeing’s choice of Sargent Fletcher followed a best-value source selection process that focused on technical readiness, price and supportability. The MOA provides the terms under which Sargent Fletcher may be awarded subcontracts for the fuel tank system if the KC-767AT is selected in the U.S. Air Force’s KC-X tanker competition. Boeing release.

    Oct 2/07: Northrop Grumman Corporation announces that it has selected Melbourne, FL-based BRPH Companies, Inc. to lead a multi-firm team to design the KC-30 Production Center in at Mobile’s Brookley Industrial complex, directly adjacent to EADS’ Final Assembly Line where the A330 airframe will be assembled and flight-tested.

    BRPH is leading a team consisting of KBR’s Mobile, AL office and Thompson Engineering, which is headquartered in Mobile. The team will design the production facility, and will also provide ongoing technical support throughout construction if and when it goes ahead.

    FY 2007

    Bidding teams, submissions. X-48B BWB
    (click to view full)

    Sept 25/07: A BWB for KC-Y? Boeing may have a game-changer up its sleeve for stage 2. The US Air Force Association’s Air Force Magazine reports that:

    “Boeing is hoping to have its Blended Wing Body X-48 demonstrator technology ready in time to compete for the Air Force’s second big buy of aerial refueling replacement aircraft, slated for about 2020 and dubbed KC-Y. (The service plans a three-phase replacement effort, starting with the current KC-X competition and followed by KC-Y and KC-Z.) A subscale BWB demonstrator with a 21-foot wingspan recently flew, and Boeing said full-size types could fill a wide variety of passenger, cargo, or tanker functions. It expects to be able to make a proposal on a full-size tanker by about 2015. Besides offering far more internal volume than today’s tube and wing configurations, a BWB tanker could also fly with two refueling booms, doubling the speed at which USAF aircraft could gas up. The program is teaching Boeing how to build rectangular pressure vessels versus the standard tubes and about the BWB flight control laws. However, the BWB would not be a candidate for a long-range strike aircraft. With three engines mounted on top of the rear of the aircraft, it wouldn’t be very stealthy. The placement of the engines does make it quieter than today’s airliners and cargo aircraft, says Boeing.”

    Sept 25/07: A Flight International report says that Northrop Grumman will switch KC-X airframes from the Airbus A330-200 converted passenger model to the A330-200F freighter model. The current proposal adds a cargo door and localized strengthening to the upper floor of the A330-200, because the A330-200F had not received a launch customer, and would have increased the cost of the original bid. “I think [the switch to the freighter model] is inevitable, but right now it’s not in our proposal,” says Paul Meyer, Northrop’s vice-president and general manager for the KC-30 program.

    GE, who had declined to offer an engine for the A330-200F, might be the biggest winner of any switch. Winning the KC-X contract would mean that the USAF would pay GE to certify their engine on the freighter, effectively re-introducing it as an option for civilian A330-200F models alongside P&W and Rolls Royce engines.

    Sept 25/07: Advance production and the promise of early delivery worked very well for EADS Eurocopter’s EC145 in the US Army’s LUH competition. Along similar lines, Team KC-30 announces that the first KC-30 Tanker aircraft, successfully executed a nearly 4-hour flight after completing assembly in less than 75 days. “The aircraft will be ready for installation of refueling and military systems in November… and will be the first aircraft delivered to the U.S. Air Force if the Northrop Grumman team is awarded the KC-X contract.”

    Aug 30/07: Boeing announces that the Japan Air Self-Defense Force’s (JASDF) first KC-767 Tanker has resumed flight testing following the completion of scheduled ground modification work. See release for details.

    Aug 23/07: Northrop Grumman announces that EADS’ advanced Aerial Refueling Boom System (ARBS) has successfully completed ground-based electrostatic discharge tests, which ensure that the boom and its fly-by-wire control system will not malfunction if an electrostatic current is created during contact with a receiver aircraft. Electrostatic build-up can occur on any airplane because of in-flight atmospheric conditions.

    The tests involved an instantaneous electrical charge of 200,000 volts on the boom’s nozzle, and were performed with a fully functional ARBS installed on an Airbus A310 demonstrator aircraft.

    Aug 8/07: KC-Y and KC-Z. The US Air Force Association’s Air Force Magazine reports that:

    “About 2023, the Air Force plans to contract for a second batch of tankers, dubbed KC-Y, and in 2033, it goes for the third or KC-Z batch, ultimately retiring all KC-135s along the way. At no time are tanker purchases expected to exceed $3 billion a year in current dollars; that’s all the Air Force expects to be able to spend… For that money, the service expects to be able to buy between 12 and 18 per year, replacing the entire tanker fleet over 40 years.”

    Aug 6/07: USAF acquisition chief Sue Payton is quoted in the Financial Times of London as saying that splitting the deal for an initial 80 tankers would prove too costly:

    “Because we are trying to do so much, we don’t have the money upfront that it would take to carry two or three [tankers] through development and then into procurement.”

    Aug 3/07: Reuters reports that Jacques Gansler, a defense undersecretary for acquisitions during the Clinton administration who is now at the University of Maryland, has issued a study arguing that the USAF could save up to 30% on the KC-X program with a split buy. His point of comparison is the successful PW F100/ GE F110 dual fighter engine program for F-16s, and now F-15s as well. Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute notes that the study refers only to procurement costs, however, not development costs or maintenance & operations. Gansler described himself as an independent third party, but his study is partially funded by EADS, which views a split-buy as a certain smaller win vs. a larger potential win against much higher odds.

    At the same time, USAF Lt. Gen. Donald Hoffman told the US House Armed Services’ air-land subcommittee that changing the winner-take-all strategy now would delay the contract by 12 to 18 months, and would double the cost of development to $4 billion.

    June 12/07: The first militarized KC-30B MRTT is rolled out. The rollout clears the way for a series of flight validation tests, including refueling contacts with a variety of receiver aircraft, prior to the KC-30B’s delivery to the Royal Australian Air Force’s 33 Squadron.

    May 7/07: USAF Link’s “Air Force officials evaluating KC-X proposals” describes the staffing, acquisition system, and some of the mechanisms that the USAF has set up to get through the KC-X acquisition process… and protect it from challenges later on.

    April 12/07: Boeing successfully extends and retracts the left and right Wing Aerial Refueling Pod (WARP) hose-and-drogue refueling systems for the first time. The flight marks the beginning of a series of in-flight tests –at various speeds and altitudes –that will demonstrate the hose’s stability and result in using the WARP hoses to offload fuel to various aircraft. That last test hasn’t happened yet, however, and the competition’s KC-30s use more mature and tested technology.

    KC-X tankers, and the Italian KC-767As will carry both a refueling boom that works with most USAF aircraft and fits into the aircraft’s back, and a hose-and-drogue system favored by the US Navy and a number of NATO countries. When using the WARPs, the tanker aircraft trails a hose from either wing with a drogue (basket) attached to the end. The receiver aircraft uses a probe to connect to the basket and take on valuable fuel. When fully functional, the KC-767’s WARPs can offload 400 gallons of fuel per minute each. Boeing release.

    April 17/07: Boeing adds Delta TechOps, a division of Delta Air Lines, to their bid team as a provider of parts support and fleet management services for the KC-767 Advanced Tanker. As a result, Delta TechOps becomes eligible to supply interim contractor support for commercial aircraft parts if Boeing is awarded the U.S. Air Force KC-X Tanker contract.

    April 11/07: Boeing announces their bid submission, and touts their key selling points. Note the length of the bid…

    “The 7,000-page KC-X proposal describes a tanker uniquely designed for its primary air refueling mission, but also capable of moving cargo, passengers, patients and medical crewmembers…Right-sized to enable access to 1,000 more bases than the KC-135, this robust aircraft allows commanders to deploy more tankers, ensures more booms are in the sky, covers more refueling orbits and offloads more fuel.

    The Boeing KC-767 Advanced Tanker will be designed, built and supported by 44,000 Americans and 300 U.S. suppliers and save taxpayers nearly $10 billion in fuel costs compared to the competitor. Boeing will produce the tanker at its facilities in Everett, Wash., on the existing commercial line where it has built more than 950 highly reliable and maintainable 767s. Installation of military refueling systems and flight test activities will take place at the company’s finishing center in Wichita, Kan.”

    April 10/07: Northrop Grumman and EADS announce their bid submission, and tout their key selling points:

    “The competition to build the KC-X is as much a competition of vision as it is of aircraft,” said Scott J. Seymour, corporate vice president and president of Northrop Grumman Integrated Systems sector. “The KC-30 Tanker will provide our Air Force leaders and combatant commanders everything they have asked for in air-to-air refueling and more. More refueling capacity, more versatility against an uncertain future; more capability and more value per aircraft… Northrop Grumman’s KC-30 Tanker carries 45,000 more pounds of fuel than a KC-135, providing a significant boost to the U.S. Air Force’s global reach. The KC-30 is also designed to refuel Navy and coalition aircraft, and to serve as a multi-role transport aircraft to move passengers, cargo and medical evacuation patients.”

    KC-30 Concept
    (click to view full)

    March 28/07: Northrop Grumman announced its full KC-30 team.

    March 15/07: Some of the relevant excerpts from “DoD News Briefing With Undersecretary Of Defense For Acquisition, Technology And Logistics Mr. Ken Krieg From the Pentagon“:

    “But we’ve spent a lot of time talking about, you know, how we, first of all, get the right capability… we especially wanted to make sure that our — the request for a proposal we put out there was for a product that we wanted, not for a product that ensured a competition, but for a product we wanted. And we worked a lot at that over the period, thinking about it not only from an Air Force perspective, but from a joint perspective as well. And I mean, I feel pretty good about where it came out. It was that transparent of a development of an RFP as one could ever expect…

    Look, I’d always like a competition, but having to have a competition for something I don’t want is not of interest. And you always — you know, when you’re down to handfuls of suppliers on — you’re always working that balance… more competition is better than less competition, but to have to go to a competition for something you don’t want then sends you off into an environment you don’t want to be in either…

    When we did the Mobility Capability Study… one of the conclusions we came to as we looked at alternatives in that space was that as the nation looked at a follow-on tanker, that if the price was right for doors and floors, that the agility that that would create in terms of being able to have additional palette capability, additional personnel capability, you’ll pick up some additional medical capability… additional flexibility in lift, that, you know, we didn’t do a cost-benefit… But in any sustaining operation, the capability to do palettes and people through more and varied types of airplanes was worth a fair amount. It wasn’t worth building a tanker for, but if you could get it for a reasonable investment, it made a lot of sense to do it because — oh, by the way, right now we’re sending lots of palettes to places around the world, lots of palettes to the theater, in particular. We’re moving lots of people back and forth. Some of that’s on commercial carriers, some of that’s on C-17s, some of that’s hopping on C-130s.

    …it was very clear not in the first seven days of the conflict or the first limited engagement because at that time tankers are doing their tanker mission — I mean, that’s — we’re principally buying tankers to be tankers — but in a sustaining operation over time, the agility that being able to make them a cargo carrier — as long as you are trying to optimize the airplane as a cargo carrier — that that agility made a lot of sense inherently and analytically… putting pallets on a C-17 is extremely inefficient, just — I mean, it’s built for large cargo, not for pallets.”

    Consider in light of the Lexington Institute’s November 2006 brief “Fate of Huge Tanker Program Could Hinge on Cargo Role.” Note, however, that Krieg is still performing the balancing act here. Implementation of his description can mean more tankers in the air to cover a larger number of tasks, with less cargo space and better short field performance to land in more places for delivery (KC-767), or fewer aircraft available, but with more cargo and/or fuel capacity per plane (KC-30).

    March 12/07: Boeing reaches agreement with United Technologies subsidiary Pratt & Whitney on the price and terms under which it will supply its PW4062 engines to their KC-767 program. While GE’s CF6-80C2 engines power the Italian and Japanese KC-767s and many commercial models, Boeing announced in 2004 that the PW4062 would be its future platform choice for the USAF KC-767.

    The PW4062 engines have between 52,000-62,000 pounds certified thrust; they also power A310-300 and A300-600 aircraft, the Boeing 747-400, 767-200/300s, and MD-11 commercial jets.

    March 9/07: USAF Chief of Staff General Michael Moseley offers a CSAF’s Scope message to the Air Force re: The New Tanker:

    “The KC-X, our new tanker, is our number one procurement priority. The single point of failure for an air bridge, the single point of failure for global ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance & Reconnaissance) and the single point of failure for global strike is the tanker. And this is not just an Air Force issue – it is a joint and coalition force issue as well. Tankers are crucial to the deployment and employment of joint and coalition combat power and are central to rapid response for humanitarian relief operations. Our KC-135 inventory has an average age of over 45 years, and all were delivered to the Air Force between November 1957 and December 1964 — seven years before I came on active duty!

    It isn’t just the age of the aircraft that concerns me. They also suffer from corrosion, structural fatigue, and deterioration in wiring, fuel systems components, and ducting — all while operating at high OPTEMPO (OPerational TEMPO) in a time of war. We recently released our KC-X Request for Proposals, which asks industry to submit proposals that meet our strict tanker requirements. Even though we have started the replacement process, the mother of the last KC-135 pilot has not yet been born. With the funding currently planned it will take over 30 years to replace the entire KC-135 inventory. We can’t buy and field the KC-X fast enough.”

    KC-767 & B-52H
    (click to view full)

    March 5-6/07: Boeing announces that an Italian KC-767 Tanker transferred fuel in flight from its advanced refueling boom to a B-52H bomber (10,000 pounds, March 5), and an F-15E fighter (5,500 pounds, March 6), under a cooperative research and development agreement with the U.S. Air Force.

    EADS’ ARBS boom for the KC-30 has yet to meet this milestone, but its hose-and-drogue refueling technology is more reliable at present.

    Feb 12/07: Boeing announces that it will offer the KC-767 Advanced Tanker for the U.S. Air Force’s KC-X Tanker competition. No 777 aircraft – just the 777 commercial digital flight deck in the USAF’s 767-200s. Their Global Tanker Team for the KC-767 includes Smiths Aerospace, Rockwell Collins, Vought Aircraft Industries, Honeywell and the newest member – Spirit AeroSystems. They are the largest airframe supplier to Airbus, manufacture the 767’s leading edges, and have contributed advanced tooling and other work to Boeing’s 777, 787 Dreamliner, and 737 Next Generation programs.

    Feb 8/07: Northrop Grumman and EADS announce that they’ll bid on the program.

    Jan 30/07: Lt. Gen. Donald Hoffman, the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, announced today the posting of the KC-X Aerial Refueling Aircraft Request for Proposal to the Federal Business Opportunities website, signaling the official launch of the Air Force’s #1 acquisition priority program. The release notes that “The KC-X program is the first of three acquisition programs the Air Force will need to replace the entire fleet of aging KC-135 Stratotankers…” The RFP stipulates 9 primary key performance parameters:

    # Air refueling capability
    # Fuel offload and range at least as great as the KC-135
    # Compliant Communication, Navigation, Surveillance/Air Traffic Management (CNS/ATM) equipment
    # Airlift capability
    # Ability to take on fuel while airborne
    # Sufficient force protection measures
    # Ability to network into the information available in the battle space
    # Survivability measures (defensive systems, Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) hardening, chemical/biological protection, etc)
    # Provisioning for a multi-point refueling system to support Navy and Allied aircraft

    The USAF says that final RFP defines an integrated, capability-based, best-value approach, and includes specific factors for assessing the capability contribution of each offeror, along with cost and assessments of past performance and proposal risk. DID’s initial reading is that the RFP does support “objective requirements” above the minimum. Does it set them high enough and weight them strongly enough to interest Airbus? We shall see. USAF release.

    Jan 24/07: Boeing announces that its KC-767 Tanker used the fifth generation, fly-by-wire refueling boom for the first time, to make a series of aerial “dry contacts” with a B-52 bomber assigned to the Air Force Flight Test Center at Edwards Air Force Base, CA.

    Both Boeing and EADS are offering advanced refueling booms, design to improve refueling control and visibility. Boeing’s advanced boom can transfer 900 gallons/ 3,400 liters of fuel per minute, uses advanced cameras to give the boom operator a better view, and automatically corrects its position to reduce potential damage to the receiver aircraft. With 2,600 fewer parts than previous booms, it also is easier to maintain.

    As a point of comparison, EADS’ ARBS advanced refueling boom claims a capacity of 1,200 gallons/minute, but is at a less advanced stage of development. It would not undertake a similar trial until December 2007, as had yet to pass fuel to an aircraft in flight as on the Jan 3/08 final bid submissions.

    Appendix A: The KC-X Competitions

    “US Debating Aerial Tanker Types, Mix” offers in-depth coverage of the lead-up to the KC-X RFP, explaining many of the military & policy issues in play as the USA contemplates its own choices. Then came the contractor decisions, and responses. What would Boeing propose? The KC-767, the KC-777, or both? Would Northrop and EADS elect to play, bringing their Airbus KC-30/A330 MRTT?

    In the end, Round 1 was Team Boeing’s KC-767 Advanced (767-200 derivative) vs. Team Northrop Grumman’s victorious KC-30B (Airbus A330-200 derivative). Each aircraft system has its strengths, and each system also had risk factors as lobbying continued right down to the wire. Boeing claimed lower KC-767 operating costs and better infrastructure commonality, and received a union endorsement. EADS offered greater fuel and cargo capacity, and promised to open production of A330F civilian jets in the USA if it won.

    The Airbus A330 MRTT was picked as the “KC-45A”, but an explosive GAO decision brought the competition to a halt.

    USAF articles tried to sell the idea that: “…the department has gone through a rigorous review process for KC-X and has validated that the RFP accurately reflects the requirements as laid out by the warfighter… The RFP includes specific factors for assessing the capability contribution of each offeror” along a set of 9 weighted performance parameters.

    That didn’t stop the contract protests, and subsequent revelations that the USAF hadn’t even followed its own guidelines destroyed the decision.

    As the clock ran out on the Bush administration’s 2008 tenure, Secretary of Defense Gates decided to give his new employers in the Obama administration an opportunity to chart their own course on this issue. The KC-X v1.0 competition was canceled. A v2.0 RFP was released in February 2010, but the decision took until February 2011.

    Boeing’s 767-based “KC-46A” won that v2.0 competition, and the way they did it was simple: they underbid several hundred million dollars below cost on a fixed-price contract. In exchange, they avoided a dent in their prestige, kept their 767 production line open, opened the door to more KC-767 exports, ensured a lucrative stream of future “KC-46A” maintenance revenue, and prevented Airbus from gaining a major industrial foothold in the USA.

    KC-X RFP v2.0 – The New Structure KC-X Round 2:
    Refueling bonus requirements
    (click to view full)

    In the wake of their initial win, Airbus and Northrop Grumman’s primary challenge was to ensure that their own potential industrial base was strongly mobilized, in order to raise the political costs of an all-Boeing reversion. Their secondary goal was to improve their position for KC-X v2.0, including blunting protectionist sentiment that opposes any purchase of Airbus planes. Declarations that they’d accept a “split buy” outcome, so long as they were left with production of 12 planes per year, were a step in that direction.

    Boeing’s challenge was simpler, and more straightforward: get at least a majority share of the USAF’s KC-X tanker order.

    The USAF stated its opposition to a split-buy proposal many times, and worked hard to avoid that outcome. They might have been convinced to pay that price, if they believe that the alternative would be a program that remains stalled for a long time. Events showed them moving toward that conclusion, albeit slowly and fitfully – but then the Round 2 RFP came out, with a clear “winner take all” approach.

    The Round 2 RFP certainly clarifies the nature of the competition. Round 1 featured 37 mandatory requirements, and 771 optional requirements that could affect evaluations. Round 2 reverses that ratio, with 373 “go to war on Day 1″ requirements that must be met to qualify, and 93 “trade space” requirements that earn extra points.

    The resulting RFP is best described as a cost-driven, best-value competition, using fixed-price bids. It’s worthy of note that the prices aren’t entirely fixed, for good reason. Imagine, for instance, that the US dollar devalued sharply over the contract’s life and imported materials became more expensive, or inflation skyrocketed and labor rates changed accordingly. Forcing the manufacturers to absorb those losses would be unfair, and could induce serious financial problems for the company. Provision 836 AESG/H025 provides a formula for adjusting prices if key inputs fluctuate, in order to create an adjusted payment price. With this safety valve acknowledged, the “fixed-price” bids as submitted will form the baseline.

    Those bids are just the starting point. “Total Adjusted Price” (TAP) reflects bid price as adjusted through 3 main filters: the same IFARA model used in Round 1 to evaluate the contenders, fuel efficiency, and military construction.

    The IFARA model will use updated scenarios to cover the expected range of contingencies, and there are several ways to have one’s costs adjusted. A larger plane that could cover a given scenario with fewer planes, for instance, might get its TAP lowered. A smaller competitor might gain under another scenario, where range, basing, and capacity suit it better. Those adjustments will be summed, and applied.

    Fuel burn will use 489 average flight hours per year rather than 750 in Round 1, as 489 is the actual average flown by the KC-135 fleet to date. This may seem to disadvantage the KC-767 slightly, but there’s another key variable that makes the effect far less clear. Fuel burn will also use the mission profiles and mission percentages laid out in the IFARA model. Again, contenders will have their bid price adjusted accordingly, depending on their fleet’s estimated fuel burn costs over a 40-year cycle.

    For military construction, the USAF picked 11 relevant KC-135 bases – which are not necessarily the tankers’ future homes, since that’s a separate decision. Aircraft that would require changes or improvements to ramps, taxiways runways, hangars, at those 11 air bases would have their bid price changed accordingly in their TAP. Actual aircraft of the submitted types will be used at these locations, in order to make the evaluations.

    If there’s more than 1% difference in the TAPs, the government buys the ‘cheaper’ airplane, which is exactly what happened. If there had been 1% or less difference, the USAF would have been directed to look at the 93 optional “trade space” requirements and their accompanying points, adjusting the TAP accordingly, and then buy the ‘cheaper’ airplane. Each trade space item is worth a certain number of points, and is either met or not met. The one exception is fuel offload, which gives between 2-10 points as different levels of capability are reached (total extra weight is therefore 1/10%). There are 103.05 total trade space points, which includes 4 requirements worth 10 points each, 6 worth 4 points, 19 worth 1 point, 49 worth 0.333 points, and 15 worth 0.25 points. The result would be a new adjusted price, and, again, the ‘cheapest’ bid selected.

    Because IFARA also ties into fuel burn, and additional range and fuel offload capacity do not factor in except through IFARA, the IFARA model looked set to be the hinge on which this competition will turn. In addition, all qualified bid teams will have access to the IFARA model. Which means one could expect arguments about some of the parameters, once the contending teams have crunched their performance through the models and gone over the criteria. Instead, Boeing decided to more or less nullify IFARA with a bid price that rendered it irrelevant.

    On another likely lobbying front, the KC-X v2.0 RFP took no position with respect to the ongoing Boeing-Airbus trade subsidies dispute at the World Trade Organization. This refusal is explicitly stated, and was fiercely defended and maintain. The RFP does include the 836 AESG/H018 clause. It states that any financial or other penalties assessed by the WTO are entirely the manufacturers’ responsibility, and cannot be passed on to the USAF in any way.

    Appendix B: The Contenders and The Cargo Factor – KC-30B, KC-767… KC-777? USAF KC-10
    (click to view full)

    During the now-canceled round 1 competition, Airbus’ A330 was matched against Boeing’s 767. In a new wrinkle, Air Mobility Command was brought into the RFP draft process, and the USAF said that:

    “the Air Force also intends to take full advantage of the other capabilities inherent in the platform, and make it an integral part of the Defense Transportation System.”

    Both contending aircraft offer substantial improvements over the KC-135’s extra capacity for cargo or people, in addition to their tanker roles.

    The KC-135s can carry up to 6 standard 463L cargo pallets, 53 people, or about 18 medical litters. Just under 2% of American aerial tankers currently carry cargo loads, but that number is likely to increase. The existing aerial tanker fleet is being handled gently, given its age and the consequences of structural issues. Once those issues are removed, however, the frequency of current C-17 flights involving people and standard pallets rather than heavy cargo, will make more frequent tanker/cargo flights an attractive trade-off, despite the additional fuel costs.

    Airbus’ A330/ KC-30/ KC-45 A330 MRTT concept,
    hose-and-drogue
    (click to view full)

    According to the EADS/NGC KC-30 team’s official Round 1 brochure [PDF], the A330-200 derivative can carry up to 226 passengers, or 108 medical litters, or up to 32 standard 463L cargo pallets, or some combination of the above, in addition to its full fuel load. At over 250,000 pounds capacity, it also carries more fuel than the 767, which is a particular advantage in the Pacific sector with its wide over-water expanses. On the other hand, its advanced 1,200 gallon/minute ARBS refueling boom did not actually transfer fuel to another aircraft in the air until March 2008. Competition delays have allowed Airbus to improve this gap, and an A330 conducted boom refueling in 2009.

    On the flip side, the KC-30 is a larger aircraft than the 767, which requires a slightly longer runway at full load, takes up more “footprint” on limited-space tarmacs, and costs more to operate on a per-plane basis. In response, Team KC-30 stresses costs and efficiency on a per-mission basis, such as deploying a full fighter squadron with personnel and equipment, or deploying an Army combat team using transport aircraft with tanker accompaniment. They argue that if larger tanker aircraft, with more fuel and cargo space, mean fewer sorties required, the cost figures may look more equal once the mission the tankers are supporting is complete. There had also been some speculation that Airbus might be prepared to offer a very heavily discounted price, in order to close the buying price gap between the cheaper 767 and the A330. Some post-competition reports even pegged the KC-30 offer as cheaper.

    The RFPs included more exacting data as each team made its case to the USAF, as well as final pricing. For example, Fleet Effectiveness Value (FEV), one of the 5 key source-selection evaluation criteria, is designed to communicate aerial refueling performance. The current KC-135 fleet is the baseline, with an FEV of 1.0. Calculated over 5 mission scenarios specified by the USAF, and using prescribed airbases, ramp space and resources, Northrop’s air mobility sector vice-president Paul Meyer says the FEV submitted with its KC-30 Round 1 bid was 1.62.

    There had been some talk at Northrop Grumman of using the A330-200F freighter version instead as the base KC-X aircraft, which would be a departure from KC-30s bought to date. A switch would add new timeline risk and certification issues, as well as fuel efficiency penalties, in exchange for much better cargo performance. A330-200F aircraft add 11,000 pounds of zero-fuel weight to the base A330-200 design, and cut fuel capacity by 12,000 US gallons, in exchange for boosting cargo weight capacity by 60,000 pounds to 141,000. The type first flew in late 2009, and began service with UAE Eithad Airways in September 2010. So far, the 200F has only been suggested as a potential improvement or variant option after the contract is won.

    Boeing’s KC-767 Advanced/ KC-767 NewGen/ KC-46A KC-767 Round 1 features
    (click to view full)

    Team Boeing’s KC-767 Advanced in Round 1 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 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.

    The KC-767’s advanced refueling boom had a 900 gallon/minute capacity, and had been tested successfully in live air-air refueling, including night operations. On the other hand, Boeing’s hose-and-drogue system was a technical risk factor that had undergone almost 2 years of redesign, and been a persistent problem for the Italian tanker order. That was a potential risk, and Round 1’s optimization had also penalized Boeing, due to the additional risk and certification work involved.

    Their KC-767 “NewGen” (now the KC-46A) is a sharp contrast, as Boeing decided not to discuss their plane’s features – a stance it has maintained even after the award. This made assessments of Boeing’s Round 2 offering inexact and approximate. Earlier Round 2 comments from Boeing indicated a more standard 767, but pictures and videos appear to show lengthened wings and wingtip winglets, in order to deal with previous “flutter” issues and add cruise efficiency. What is known, is that Boeing is keeping the PW4062 engines. The firm still says it’s using a new fly-by-wire boom design, but the structure is now based on the larger KC-10 boom, in order to meet the fuel offload target of 1,200 gallons/minute. At the same time, GE’s refueling pods were replaced by the same Cobham products found on the A330 MRTT. The other clear change involved replacement of the 400ER’s 777-derived flight deck with one from the new 787 Dreamliner that includes 15.1″ LCD flight display screens.

    As their relative capacities demonstrate, the KC-767 is a smaller aircraft than the KC-30. One positive consequence is that it can take off from slightly shorter runways. The USAF requires the ability to take off from an 8,000 foot runway, but would prefer 7,000 feet as this makes more runways available. The KC-767’s size can also mean the difference between, say, 5 or 7 aircraft that can fit on the tarmac at a forward base. Boeing touts the KC-767 as 22-24% cheaper to operate and maintain than the KC-30 on a per-plane basis, and its base aircraft is cheaper to buy on the civilian market.

    767-200ER based planes can carry up to 190 passengers (-16% vs. KC-30), or 54 medical litters (-50%, NGC claim)/ 97 patients (-11.3%, Boeing claim), or up to 19 standard 463L cargo pallets (-41%), or some combination of the above, in addition to its full fuel load that is now confirmed at 212,000 pounds, slightly above the KC-135. The company claims that its strengthened floors allow the KC-767 to carry a similar weight of cargo to the A330, however; it would be interesting to see validated statistics compared to the A330F. Boeing could have submitted the 767-300 in Round 1, which is 19 feet longer, but their calculations determined that the extra capacity didn’t justify the extra procurement and operating expenses. That turned out to be a mistake, but they proceeded to win Round 2 with a 767-200 freighter derivative.

    Northrop Grumman calculated a Round 1 Fleet Effectiveness Value score of 1.35 for the rival KC-767 in Round 1 (vs. 1.62 for Airbus), but Boeing did not release its number.

    Boeing’s 777 Option KC-767 refuels KC-777
    (click to view full)

    For Round 2, Boeing was openly contemplating a KC-777 offering, depending on the RFP’s criteria weightings. A KC-777 would offer 22.5% – 30% more offloaded fuel than the A330/KC-30 at 1,000 nautical miles, with the ability to carry up to 320 passengers (+42.6% vs. KC-30), or 156 patients (+44.4% vs. KC-30), or up to 38 standard 463L cargo pallets (+18.75% vs. KC-30), or some combination of the above, in addition to its full fuel load.

    These statistics are impressive, but Boeing would have faced 3 big hurdles if it wished to offer a KC-777.

    One is the 777’s cost, given the way the v2.0 RFP is structured. Boeing has almost certainly run the IFARA model to make sure, but on the face of it, the renewed RFP made a KC-777 offering unlikely. The RFP’s focus on cost, and lower value placed on extra points for the 777’s additional cargo, transport, and fuel capabilities, made the KC-777 look like a losing game. The 2nd issue was timeliness. Unlike the KC-767 and A330 MRTT, any KC-777 would have to be designed, built, tested, and certified from scratch. To add to that timeliness risk, Boeing already has a backlog of commercial orders for the 777. That 3rd issue leaves Boeing with choices that include some combination of: adding time and risk by investing or partnering to expand their production rate, convincing commercial customers to accept delays, or facing constraints on their delivery rate to the KC-777 military conversion and fit-out line.

    In the end, those hurdles convinced Boeing to offer the KC-767 once again, with modifications that made it different from the KC-767s flying for Japan and Italy.

    Appendix C: Airbus KC-30/ KC-45A Team

    (lost Round 2)

    RAAF A330 rollout
    (click to view full)

    Before its KC-X win, the KC-30/A330 MRTT had been ordered by Australia, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as Britain’s unusual FSTA public-private aerial tanker partnership. None of these aircraft have entered service yet, but the ARBS full refueling boom system finally completed its first live “wet transfer” from an A310 aircraft in March 2008. The first live “wet transfer” from an A330-MRTT boom finally took place in October 2009.

    EADS’ goal was 60% American content, to which one must add American content for corollary sales of civilian A330F freighters as production moves to Alabama. Other national beneficiaries of a US A330 MRTT order, in declining order of impact, would have been Spain, Germany, the UK, and France.

    There are differences between the consortium that bid on the KC-X v1.0 proposals, and the team that bid on the v2.0 RFP. The v2.0 team is quite extensive; main players include:

    EADS North America – American lead and systems integrator. Replaced Northrop Grumman in this role for the v2.0 bid.

    EADS – A330 aircraft, and Air Refueling Boom System (ARBS). Key American locations: Mobile, AL, Bridgeport, WVA (ARBS and SF hose-and-drogue), and Arlington, VA. Aircraft would be militarized and final assembly would take place in Mobile, AL, which would also become an assembly center for worldwide civilian A330-200F freighter sales.

    EADS-CASA in Spain is responsible for the design, testing and production of the ARBS boom, and is also likely to see work at its facilities near Seville, Cadiz, and Madrid. Manufacture of the Airbus aircraft is conducted all over Europe, with integration at Toulouse, France and/or Bremen, Germany. If final integration of the A330-200F freighters switches to Mobile, AL as promised, and the KC-45 program ends up substituting the A330-200F for the A330-200 as the base airframe, the amount of American content would rise slightly.

    ARBS at work
    (click to view full)

    GE Aviation – CF6-80E1 engines. The CF6-80E1 is rated at 67,500 pounds of thrust, and power a number of commercial A330-200/300s. Key locations: Evendale, OH. Estimated total value for GE units from the KC-45 program: $5 billion. Unchanged in Round 2.

    GE subsidiary Smiths Aerospace – Flight Management System; indeed, they are the supplier of choice for common Flight Management Systems for the KC-X tanker, no matter who wins. Key locations: Grand Rapids, MI.

    Cobham plc subsidiary Sargent Fletcher Inc. – Air refueling hose and drogue systems; their products are also used on the KC-135, KC-10, KC-130J, MC-130H and F/A-18 E/F. The pods carry their own power system, and their 90 foot long hoses can offload approximately 420 gallons of fuel per minute. Key locations: El Monte, CA; Bridgeport, WVA. Estimated total value of Cobham win: $1 billion. Unchanged in Round 2.

    Eaton Corp. – Actuators, pumps, valves, nozzles and other aerial refueling equipment. Mentioned in Round 2 team.

    Goodrich Corporation – “Various aircraft systems”. Mentioned in Round 2 team.

    Honeywell – Radio Management System, Mission Avionics Suite, and Mechanical Systems. Key locations: Albuquerque, NM; Phoenix, AZ; Redmond, WA; and Torrance, CA. Unchanged in Round 2.

    Moog, Inc. – Flight control systems. Mentioned in the Round 2 team.

    Parker Aerospace – Air Refueling Receptacle, a.k.a. Universal Aerial Refueling Receptacle Slipway Installation (UARRSI). This allows the KC-30 itself to be refueled in the air. Similar Parker UARRSI systems are currently used on the U.S. Air Force’s B-1B bombers, C-130 & C-17 transports, and KC-10 tanker aircraft. Also providing hydraulic system equipment, fluid conveyance products and fuel components. Key locations: Irvine, CA.

    Vought Aircraft subsidiary Triumph Aerostructures – Wing structures. Mentioned in the Round 2 team.

    Additional Readings The USA’s Aerial Tanker Fleet

    Related Studies and Reports

    Ongoing News and Views

    • Rockwell Collins’ Horizons magazine (Vol. 16, #4) – Refueling Innovation [PDF]. Discusses their development of the KC-46A’s flight controls and refueling systems.

    • Forbes Business and the Beltway blog, via WayBack (Feb 28/11) – How Boeing Won The Tanker War. By the Lexington Institute’s Loren Thompson, who had been predicting a Boeing loss.

    • Los Angeles Times, via WayBack (Feb 28/11) – How one lawmaker gave Boeing a boost in tanker contest. That would be Rep. Norm Dicks [D-WA].

    • Teal Group – March 2010 Letter. RE: KC-X politics in America, and the European trade angle.

    • Leeham News and Comment (Jan 4/10) – Outlook for Airbus, Boeing in 2010. Aerospace analysts at Leeham look at a number of programs, including KC-X, and set them in context with respect to the firms’ overall transport/passenger aircraft portfolios. They believe that Boeing is trying to keep Airbus from establishing a dollar zone production foothold, as much as it’s trying to win the military contract.

    • Lexington Institute (Nov 2/09) – Tanker Wars: Why Northrop Grumman Thinks It Can’t Win

    • Aviation Week (Sept 21/09) – New Players Poised for Next KC-X Duel [dead link]. Looks at the people involved in the USAF, Boeing, and NGC.

    • Aviation Week (Sept 15/09) – USAF Worries About Refueler Repair Costs “…maintenance crews sometimes work 7 hr. for every hour of KC-135 flight… 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… 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.”

    • NDIA National Defense magazine, via WayBack (June 2009) – Defense Department Can Split Tanker Buy, And Still Save Money

    • Col. Ken Allard (June 16/08) – Air Force Tanker Contract Will Test Alabama Legal Infrastructure. An under-appreciated element. “If Boeing Co. had won the tanker contract, most of the manufacturing work would have been done in the Seattle area. EADS proposes building the aircraft at a new plant in Mobile, Ala. But are the supporting legal infrastructures in Seattle and Mobile roughly equal? Such concerns are vital, given the usual propensities for fraud and malfeasance in any $50 billion contract…”

    • Lexington Institute (March 12/08) – Boeing Fights Back: How it Plans to Prevail

    • Flight International (Jan 21/08) – Size matters in US Air Force KC-X contest. As DID noted earlier: “Is bigger always better? This is at the heart of the battle between Boeing and Northrop Grumman…” A Northrop Grumman release later elaborates on the model used by the KC-30 consortium to derive relative performance figures.

    • Flight International (Jan 16/08) – Airbus sees strong rise in widebody sales but Boeing remains stronger. Gives exact breakdowns for Boeing and Airbus’ sales across all passenger aircraft they produce. Airbus’ complete redesign of the A350 is the big reason for their rise – the original A350’s features, and the uncertainty created by the move, had slashed their 2006 widebody sales.

    • The Woracle (Jan 14-16/08) – Flight International editor Graham Warwick attends briefings from Boeing and from Northrop Grumman/Airbus, then offers a synopsis of the points being made by each side.

    • Flight International (Nov 26/07) – Boom or bust time for US tankers. Interesting comments re: political/geographic bases of support for each team.

    • AFA’s US Air Force Magazine, via WayBack (Feb 13/07) – Why the 767? As opposed to the KC-777, or even the KC-767-300. Boeing explains its choice.

    • USAF, via The Free Library (March 10/07) – Logistics officials discuss Stratotanker sustainment. Apparently, the aircraft need more spares than the USAF had planned. Real fatigue problem, or just encouraged to report, as an advert by the USAF for the KC-X’s necessity?

    • Flight International (Feb 13/07) – Crucial contests: US tankers and transport aircraft

    • Lexington Institute (Nov 28/06) – Fate of Huge Tanker Program Could Hinge on Cargo Role. “The wild card is cargo-carrying capacity, because if the request for proposals sets a modest goal, that will tend to favor the 767, and if it sets an ambitious goal that will tend to favor the A330. With cargo thresholds potentially driving the competitive outcome, Congress will be watching closely for any sign of bias. If it doesn’t like what is sees, tanker modernization could be delayed yet again.”

    • Special Operations Technology, via WayBack (Nov 19/06) – KC-X. Very good summary of all of the tankers’ envisaged roles and key capabilities, then adds: “Equally important as the strategic KC-X program, if not more so, is an ever-growing urgency to bring relief to the AFSOC tanker aircraft. The KC-Xs will keep the MC- and HC-130s topped off, but they too need attention.

    • Seattle Post-Intelligencer, via WayBack (June 1-2/06) – Landing the Tanker article series.

    KC-X: The Competition

    KC-X: The Protest Wars

    KC-X: The Lobbying War

    All sites presented in archived form via the WayBack Machine.

    • Build Them Both, via WayBack. A lobbying group that favored a dual-buy program, with accelerated deliveries.

    • Boeing – Global Tanker: KC-X Competition. It evolved over time. In 2007, it listed both a 767 and 777 option. This article offers a good KC-767 vs. KC-777 comparison. By 2009, it has evolved to focus on the “KC-767AT,” and included bid protest documents.

    • Boeing – Tanker Facts. Protest blog, launched after the loss, and discontinued mid-2009. See also UnitedStatesTanker.com, launched as a lobbying platform in advance of Round 2. It terminatedaround the end of 2011, after Boeing had secured their win.

    • US Tanker 2011, a Boeing-allied lobbying effort. Web site still up in 2013.

    • KC-45 Now. EADS North America’s lobbying site for the KC-X competition. See also the allied “Keep Our Tanker” site, and EADS’ Tanker Activity Update dedicated to news developments re: its various Airbus aerial tanker offerings. All of these sites were defunct by mid-2011.

    • Northrop Grumman & EADS – KC-30 official site. The planes would be assembled in Mobile, AL, and the Northrop Grumman – EADS consortium promised that “More than 50 percent of the aircraft’s content – from engines to avionics and systems – will come from American companies.”

    • Northrop Grumman – America’s New Tanker. Launched after the win, includes features designed to help people take political action. Effectively ended in 2008.

    Categories: Defence`s Feeds

    F-35 Engine Incident Cost About $50 Million | Super Hornets Too to Get SDB II Integration | Kuwait Kicks Wheels of both Super Hornets and Eurofighters

    Tue, 09/06/2015 - 05:42
    Americas

    Europe

    • As the British Army’s Thales WK450 Watchkeeper UAV heads toward Full Operating Capability, the responsibility for personnel training on the system is being transitioned from contractor services to the Army’s own program. The first course run by British Army personnel will take place in October, with the Watchkeeper deployed to Afghanistan last year, equipped with new synthetic aperture radar and ground moving target indication capabilities.

    • Airbus is reportedly planning to resume test flights of its A400M transport aircraft, following the crash of one aircraft during a test flight on 9th May. The aircraft saw three engines freeze as a result of a software problem, with the resulting crash killing four crew members.

    • As part of the British government’s push for privatization in the nation’s defense apparatus, the UK’s Ministry of Defence has invited bids from industry as it seeks to privatize the British Armed Forces’ fire and rescue services. The Defence Fire Risk Management Organisation is the organization in question, with industry teams competing against an internal MoD bid. The publicly-owned Defence Support Group was sold to Babcock International in December last year, whilst the Government Pipeline and Storage System was sold to a Spanish company earlier this year.The government is also mulling the sale of some of its Defence Equipment & Support (DE&S) arm, the multi-billion dollar procurement agency which it attempted to partially privatize in a 2013. That effort failed and has subsequently been heavily criticized.

    • Work has begun on the second of three Royal Navy Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs), with BAE Systems cutting steel at the firm’s Glasgow shipyard. The first OPV has been under construction since October, with the River-Class Batch II vessels an important bridge-buy prior to the introduction of the Royal Navy’s future Type 26 Frigates, with the $560 million construction contract sustaining industry capability in the interim.

    Middle East

    Asia

    Today’s Video

    • Iraq’s first batch of Mi-28NEs…

    Categories: Defence`s Feeds

    Super Hornet Fighter Family MYP-III: 2010-2015 Contracts

    Tue, 09/06/2015 - 02:30
    Breakthrough…
    (click to view full)

    The US Navy flies the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet fighters, and has begun operating the EA-18G Growler electronic warfare & strike aircraft. Many of these buys have been managed out of common multi-year procurement (MYP) contracts, which aim to reduce overall costs by offering longer-term production commitments, so contractors can negotiate better deals with their suppliers.

    The MYP-II contract ran from 2005-2009, and was not renewed because the Pentagon intended to focus on the F-35 fighter program. When it became clear that the F-35 program was going to be late, and had serious program and budgetary issues, pressure built to abandon year-by-year contracting, and negotiate another multi-year deal for the current Super Hornet family. That deal is now final. This entry covers the program as a whole, with a focus on 2010-2015 Super Hornet family purchases. It has been updated to include all announced contracts and events connected with MYP-III, including engines and other separate “government-furnished equipment” that figures prominently in the final price.

    Hornet MYP: Aircraft Types Hornet vs. Super Hornet
    (click to view full)

    Super Hornets are flown by the US Navy, replacing the service’s retired F-14 Tomcat fighters, and by Australia’s RAAF. The US Marines fly smaller, earlier-generation F/A-18 C/D Hornets that are no longer in production, and will replace them with F-35B STOVL (Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing) Lightning IIs when the time comes. While both F/A-18A-D and F/A-18E/F fighters are referred to as Hornet family planes, the Super Hornets have less than 40% commonality with previous F/A-18A-D versions. The F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets have been enlarged in all dimensions and fitted with 2 extra weapons pylons. The new design created pylon vibration problems early on, which explains the new “dogtooth” design on the wings’ leading edge. Super Hornets also have more powerful GE F414 engines, instead of the F404s that equipped the Hornets. The air intakes have been modified to accommodate the new engine’s demands and lower the plane’s radar signature, and other “signature shaping” measures have been employed around the plane.

    The F/A-18E is a single-seat Super Hornet. The 2-seat F/A-18F sacrifices some range, carrying only 13,350 pounds of fuel – 900 fewer pounds than the F/A-18E. In exchange for this reduced range, it adds a 2nd crewman with an advanced attack station cockpit to assist in strike roles.

    In addition to its strike role, both versions of the Super Hornet are also taking over the tactical refueling role from the retired S-3 Viking sea control aircraft. Any F/A-18E/F can do this, as long as they have the specially-equipped drop tanks that can extend refueling hoses. This isn’t an operationally efficient option, compared to the retired S-3s or A-6s, as the Super Hornet’s capacity is very limited. Nevertheless, there are situations where it is helpful and effective.

    Super Hornet Block II F/A-18E & F-14:
    passing gas
    (click to view full)

    Beginning with Lot 26 (FY 2003), Boeing began building Block II Super Hornets, with a re-designed forward fuselage and a number of electronic enhancements. The most important upgrade involves the AN/APG-79 AESA radar which can perform simultaneous air and surface scans, and is likely to offer advanced improved reconnaissance, jamming, and even communications capabilities. Plus other capabilities the government may wish to add. Electronic Countermeasures are upgraded by replacing the AM/ALQ-165 with the AN/ALQ-214 IDECM jammer, which can work with ALE-50 or ALE-55 towed decoys.

    Block II also includes the Advanced Crew Station (ACS), complete with Advanced Mission Computers and Displays (AMC&D) that offer more screen area (8″x10″ Display), and upgrade the mission computers from an assembly language to an open architecture higher order language (Lot 25+). A Fiber Channel Network Switch and Digital Video Map Computer round out the ACS improvements.

    The EA-18G: Electronic Attacker EA-18G: key systems
    (click to view full)

    The EA-18G Growler is based on the F/A-18F. It removes the 20mm cannon in the nose, adds new electronics, and mounts special electronic warfare pods on the aircraft’s underwing (AN/ALQ-99) and wingtip (AN/ALQ-218) pylons. Typically, the EA-18G retains 2 fuselage slots and 2 underwing slots for weapons carriage, though the wing pylons can also be used to hold extra fuel. Typical weapon loads will include anti-radar missiles like the AGM-88 HARM/AARGM family on the 2 free underwing pylons, plus 2 AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles on the fuselage slots for aerial self-defense.

    The EA-18G Growler will replace the old EA-6B Prowler aircraft, whose airframes date from the Vietnam era. With the retirement of the USAF’s EF-111 Ravens, the Prowlers are now the only dedicated jamming aircraft in America’s inventory that can accompany tactical strike missions. They are also called upon for a wide variety of other missions, including missions over Iraq to cover convoys and jam remotely-triggered IED land-mines. See “EA-18G Program: The USA’s Electronic Growler” for full in-depth coverage.

    Can the Super Hornet Keep Up? Chinese J-20
    (click to view full)

    At present, Super Hornets are multi-role fighters that can compete against contemporary designs, albeit with some drawbacks. The key question for the US Navy, which intends to keep them in service to 2030 and beyond, is how long they can remain competitive.

    Despite a switch to higher-thrust F414-GE-400 engines, the Super Hornet family’s added size and weight gives it poorer acceleration than the older F/A-18 C/D Hornet, which was already middle of the pack in that category. One compensation is that Hornet family designs have traditionally excelled in “low and slow” dogfights, but that edge is being eroded or reversed by external competition from 4+ generation opponents like the thrust-vectoring Russian SU-30MKI/A/M, SU-35, and MiG-35; from agile European opponents like the Eurofighter Typhoon, France’s Rafale, and Sweden’s JAS-39 Gripen; and from the next generation of full-stealth planes like the super-maneuverable Russian PAK-FA/ “SU-50? and China’s J-20.

    For now, the Super Hornets can rely on next-generation AESA radars, JHMCS helmet-mounted displays (HMDs), and pilot-friendly controls and software, in order to maintain their status as air superiority fighters. Issues with APG-79 AESA radar reliability, and lack of testing for multi-shot engagements using medium-range missiles, thin their margin of error. Even if those issues are fixed someday, the Super Hornet’s overall electronic advantages are beginning to erode as rivals field AESA radars, HMDs, and other advanced electronics of their own. Expected and fielded upgrades to existing rivals, and new designs like the Russian-Indian PAK-FA/ “SU-50?, and China’s J-20, will reach electronic parity well within the Super Hornet’s operational lifetime.

    Malaysian SU-30MKM
    (click to view larger)

    Most rivals were also were designed with IRST (InfraRed Search and Tracking) to allow no-warning passive targeting, an area where the Super Hornet is just starting to catch up. As aerodynamically better fighters gain similar electronic suites, and exports make those fighters more common, it’s logical to be concerned that the Super Hornet will be pushed away from air superiority roles against advanced opponents.

    If so, the Super Hornet would be forced into a more limited strike fighter role, only to be challenged by very dangerous modern long-range air defense systems. Which is why the EA-18G is so important to the fleet.

    What’s Next for the Super Hornet? CBC: Boeing’s pitch
    click for video

    In the immediate term, a special centerline fuel tank with an embedded IRST sensor pod is being developed to give the Super Hornet some parity with peer fighters, albeit at the cost of extra drag.

    Immediate improvements are also being made to ground attack, via a Distributed Targeting System (DTS) that brings together data feeds from different sensors, and adds a pre-loaded, high-resolution imagery database to overlay on top of the sensor data. The idea is to be able to fire ground attack weapons with more certainty about the target, and less delay from navigating through multiple screens, handing off coordinates, etc.

    F/A-18F Advanced
    (click to view full)

    In order to compete farther into the future, Boeing invested in private development alongside its partners, and created a Super Hornet Roadmap centered around 3 areas: (1) doubling down on electronic advances, (2) trying to improve flight performance in strike or air superiority roles, and (3) improving the design’s radar signature (RCS).

    Electronics. A new cockpit based on large touch-screen technology and more advanced computers is designed to bring the Super Hornets closer to sensor fusion parity with the F-35, without relying on a helmet-mounted-display as their single point of failure. An internal IRST will detect infrared emissions from enemy aircraft, replacing the current drag-inducing IRST/fuel centerline tank option, and addressing a disadvantage vs. the F-35 and contemporary European and Russian fighters. Full spherical laser and missile warning systems would be added to improve survivability.

    The EA-18G, which is built around and for electronics, will receive special upgrades of its own if the USA’s Next Generation Jammer goes into production.

    Performance.On the performance side, improved engines would offer the Super Hornet family either better fuel use and range (F414 EDE), or more power (F414 EPE).

    Up top, new dorsal Conformal Fuel Tanks (CFT) are shaped to add lift, adding 3,500 pounds of fuel for strike and EW missions, but creating almost zero net drag at sub-sonic cruising speeds. Boeing engineers are quite proud of the CFTs, which are actually a Northrop Grumman product. The net extension is some combination of up to 130 nautical miles of combat radius (+260 nmi range), or 30 minutes of extra station time. That gives the “Advanced Super Hornet” a maximum base combat radius of 700 nautical miles with unmodified F414-GE-400 engines.

    In an era where the Navy is emphasizing the Pacific theater and its vast distances, while inheriting carrier-based fighters with a shrunken strike reach, upgrades to add the CFTs could represent a huge return on investment. The EA-18G will appreciate this range boost the most, because the fighter’s canted pylons mean that each of its 3 required drop tanks generates a lot of drag.

    On the flip side, the CFTs do add weight and some transonic drag, hurting already-marginal transonic acceleration. Missions like Combat Air Patrol would probably accept the extra cruising drag inherent in multiple droppable tanks, in order to make full use of a cleaner configuration and improved engines in dogfights.

    “Stealth” F/A-18E
    (click to view full)

    Stealth. The final set of upgrades involve stealth. The Super Hornet will never be as stealthy as an F-35, but it has a notably smaller Radar Cross Section than earlier F/A-18s, even though it’s a bigger plane. Advanced Super Hornets can widen that advantage by adjusting the design a bit, adding special RCS-reducing coatings, and carrying up to 3 enclosed and specially-shaped weapon pods. Each pod could carry up to 4 x AMRAAM missiles, or 2 x 500 pound/ 1 x 2,000 pound bomb each.

    Combat radius with the CFTs and a centerline weapon pod, but no external ordnance, rises by 130 nautical miles to around 700 nmi. If the plane stays within the existing 570 nmi circle, it adds 30 minutes of station time instead.

    Testing also showed that a “clean” F/A-18F Advanced with CFTs and a single centerline weapons pod dropped radar cross-section by 50%, compared to a Super Hornet whose external pylons had to be loaded with fuel tanks and the same weapons.

    Will that be enough?

    Boeing and Northrop Grumman have been funding the testing, and investing along with Hornet Industry Team partners GE Aviation and Raytheon. As of August 2013, Boeing says that these enhancements are ready for inclusion as new-build options, or as retrofits to existing fighters. That’s an attractive proposition.

    Boeing’s customers will decide if it’s enough. The US Navy would like to keep buying Super Hornet family planes beyond 2014, but the most likely path for upgrades is some kind of retrofit program. Australia has ordered 12 more EA-18Gs soon, which could keep the line running at reduced output into early 2016. After that, Canada, Denmark, Malaysia, and the Gulf Cooperation nations Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar are seen as the most likely export prospects.

    The USA’s Super Hornet Family Program (click to view full) Excel
    download

    The EA-18G Growler is bought under the same multi-year contract, and uses the F/A-18F Block II’s base airframe and equipment. As noted above, some equipment is swapped out, and other internal equipment is added for the conversion. Then jamming pods, fuel tanks, and weapons are hung on the fighter’s hardpoints to create a fully mission-ready plane. Australia was initially going to buy just the basic EA-18G with internal equipment, but decided to buy the full array of specialty stores. That pushed their costs up by about $1.25 billion for 12 fighters.

    Fortunately for the US Navy, it can re-use existing AN/ALQ-99 underwing jamming pods from its EA-6B Prowler fighters. Unfortunately for the US Navy, those pods are wearing out fast, have reliability issues, and use technology that will have trouble coping with mid-band threats beyond 2018. A separate program called the Next Generation Jammer will have to survive, and start delivering gear, in order to fix that; its totals are not listed here.

    The MYP-III Buy F/A-18E, Parked
    (click to view full)

    Unlike countries like France, the USA sets its defense budget on a year-by-year basis. Multi-year contracts are not a new concept in American defense procurement, however, and they are often used to save money. Contractors get the predictability of production and deliveries over 4-5 years, which allows them to negotiate with their sub-contractors for quantity discounts, make longer term investments, and pass some of the savings along. The down-side from the government’s point of view is that if requirements change, or circumstances intervene, these contracts are much more expensive to cancel or restructure. Most of the Super Hornet program has been made up of multi-year contracts:

    After the first 62 Super Hornets were bought under Low Rate Initial Production, the first multi-year Full Rate Production contract bought 210 Super Hornet fighters from FY 2000-2004 inclusive. MYP-II bought 230 Super Hornet family fighters from FY 2005-2009 inclusive, and deliveries from those contracts will continue into 2011. Boeing claims that these 2 multi-year contracts saved the US Navy about $1.7 billion.

    Initially, the plan was to replace MYP-II with single year procurements in 2010, 2011 and 2012, in order to finish up the program. Congress was less certain. Concerns about the F-35 program’s timing, and the Navy’s fighter gap as older aircraft retire, led to pressure for another multi-year contract. In order to qualify for a multi-year deal, however, any proposed buy must first meet several legislative criteria. In My 2010, the Pentagon certified that a Super Hornet family MYP-III would meet those criteria, paving the way for the current MYP-III contract. It covers FY 2010-2014 buys, with deliveries through to August 2015.

    MYP-II and MYP-III have produced the entire planned program of EA-18G electronic warfare fighters, with MYP-III having a very slight edge at 50.9% of those aircraft. MYP-III comprises a much smaller percentage of overall F/A-18E/F Super Hornet production for the USA, and its percentage would be even lower if delays to the F-35C program hadn’t forced emergency Super Hornet buys.

    Sharp-eyed readers will note a big difference between these budgets, and the announced MYP-III multi-year contract figure with Boeing. Once a multi-year contract is signed, it’s important to understand how fighters are bought, in order to understand the difference. The $5.3 billion MYP-III contract, like its $8.56 billion MYP-II predecessor, covered only the airframes, which are used by the Super Hornet and Growler programs alike. Engines, radars, jamming devices, and other equipment are installed under these MYP contracts, but they are usually specified, designed, and paid for under separate contracts, as “government furnished equipment.” This drives the final cost of fielding operational fighters much higher than any initial MYP contract would suggest, though reports seem to settle around a $60 million flyaway cost for the F/A-18E/F.

    To highlight GFE’s range and importance, a section below tracks items that are directly traceable to F/A-18E/F family purchases in general, which is inevitably just a subset of the real total.

    Contracts & Key Events, FY 2010-2015 F/A-18F, landing
    (click to view full)

    The EA-18G Growler electronic warfare aircraft has a history and role that extend beyond this MYP contract. It’s covered separately in its own FOCUS article, though its base airframes come from this contract.

    Unless otherwise specified, The Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) in Patuxent River, MD, USA manages these contracts, and Boeing subsidiary McDonnell Douglas Corp. in St. Louis, MO is the contractor. Northrop Grumman is the original creator of the YF-17 that spawned the F/A-18 series, and manufactures about 40% of each Super Hornet (center & aft fuselage, vertical tails) or 50% of each EA-18G (above plus Electronic Attack systems). All work performed in “El Segundo, CA” is almost certainly NGC’s work.

    Finally, note that any links in this section are not updated if their owners allow them to lapse.

    June 9/15: Raytheon has been awarded a $10.6 million contract to provide testing equipment for assessing the Small Diameter Bomb II on the FA-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft, including jettison test vehicles and instrumented measurement vehicles, with these presumably to assess the future viability of using the SDBII with Super Hornets. The SDBII recently passed Milestone C, facilitating its progression to low rate initial production by manufacturer Raytheon.

    FY 2014

    USN debates its future options; Loss in Brazil, Preliminary work to integrate Kongsberg’s new JSM naval strike missile; Australian ANAO report cites platform issues – US DOT&E report explains them; Advanced Super Hornet prototype flies. F/A-18E
    (click to view full)

    Aug 7/14: Iraq. With thousands of Yezidis trapped on Mt. Sinjar, and The Islamic State threatening the Kurdish capital of Erbil with captured heavy equipment from the Iraqi army, the US President orders USAF relief airdrops and limited airstrikes from American carriers.

    The aircraft use Paveway laser-guided bombs, but this is exactly the kind of environment and situation that’s well suited to MBDA’s Brimstone missiles (q.v. July 20/14) under analysis by the Navy. Sources: White House, “President Obama Makes a Statement on the Crisis in Iraq”.

    July 20/14: Weapons. Navy Recognition reports that the US Navy is “beginning environmental and integration analysis” of the dual-mode laser/MMW radar Brimstone 2 missile, as a potential option for Navy Super Hornets. Brimstone was originally developed as a close air support weapon, but MBDA has also been touting Brimstone 2’s naval capabilities, including demonstrations against fast boat swarms.

    Adding Brimstones would give the Super Hornet a comparable capability to the AGM-65 Maverick carried by Navy F/A-18C/D Hornets, plus more weapons on station. Unlike Lockheed Martin’s Hellfires or Raytheon’s SeaGriffin, Brimstone is designed and qualified for use from fast jets, offering a strike missile that can replace the AGM-65 Maverick on a 3-for-1 basis at each hardpoint. Laser-guided rockets like APKWS could one-up that to 7-for-1 replacement, but only the shelved Navy LOGIR program’s imaging infrared guidance mode would match Brimstone’s fire-and-forget targeting/ salvo firing capabilities.

    Positive reports from Congressional committees that want to “counter high-speed, erratically maneuvering targets on land and at sea” may give the Navy another $10 million in FY 2015 to pursue the idea. Sources: Navy Recognition, “U.S. Navy is evaluating MBDA’s Dual Mode Brimstone for its F/A-18 Super Hornet jets”.

    July 16/14: Industrial. Super Hornet program manager Capt. Frank Morley says that the U.S. Navy might agree to accept slower deliveries than 2 planes per month to help extend the company’s production line by a year to the end of 2017. On the other hand, “my marching orders are not to do that at any additional cost to us.”

    He adds that Boeing has already used some of its own funds to pay early procurement costs for another 12 EA-18G jets, which does seem to be the way things are working out in Congress. Sources: Reuters, “AIRSHOW-U.S. open to slower Boeing deliveries, but no extra cost”.

    June 30/14: +11. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $1.939 billion fixed-price-incentive-fee contract for full rate production of 11 FRP Lot 38 F/A-18E aircraft for the US Navy, and 33 EA-18G aircraft for the US Navy (21) and the government of Australia (12 for $533.4 million, which is 27.3% of the total). The USN’s total is $1.406 billion, using USN FY 2013 (F/A-18E) and 2014 (EA-18G) aircraft budgets (72.7%).

    The extra F/A-18Es come from a $605 million Congressional markup in FY 2013. Which is why FY 2014 may not be the very last Super Hornet family order, if Congressional mark-ups of the 2015 National Defense Authorization bill or defense appropriations bill survive the budget process. The House Armed Services Committee has approved 5 Growlers, and the House Appropriations Committee has approved funds for 12 Growlers.

    Work will be performed in El Segundo, CA (46%); St. Louis, MO (30%); Fort Worth, TX (2%); East Aurora, NY (1.5%); Irvine, CA (1percent); Ajax, Ontario, Canada (1%), and various locations within the United States (18.5%), and is expected to be complete in December 2016. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 USC. 2304(c)(1). US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contracts for the US Navy, and acts as Australia’s agent (N00019-14-C-0032). See also US NAVAIR, “Contract awarded to produce F/A-18 Super Hornets, EA-18G Growlers” | Seapower, “Boeing Awarded to $1.94 Billion Contract for F/A-18 Super Hornets, EA-18G Growlers”.

    44 bought: 11 F/A-18Es, 33 EA-18Gs

    May 22/14: Support. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $9.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order modification to an existing performance based logistics contract, covering F/A-18E/F supply chain management of spares and repairs. All funds are committed immediately.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (40%), and Jacksonville, FL (60%); and is expected to be complete by December 2015. US NAVSUP Weapon Systems Support in Philadelphia, PA manages the contract (N00383-06-D-001J-0014).

    May 6/14: Politics. House Armed Services Committee (HASC) chair Buck McKeon [R-CA] is proposing to add $450 million to fund 5 EA-18Gs and their equipment in the FY 2015 budget, instead of the 22 on the unfunded priorities list. The committee’s proposed changes would also preserve all F-35 funding, while cutting the Navy’s unmanned UCLASS R&D budget in half to $200 million.

    Meanwhile, Missouri Lawmakers say that they’ve already gathered over 80 signatures from Republicans and Democrats in the House of Representatives, and the International Association of Machinists will be weighing in. The HASC markup will make the lobbying job more challenging, and they’ll need to more than triple that number of allies in order to get the full 22 planes. As the saying goes – show me. Sources: Flightglobal, “House bill promotes EA-18G and U-2S, but hits UCLASS” | Reuters, “Boeing, backers to fight for funding for 22 Boeing jets”.

    May 5/14: Sharp-eyed readers might note that the last full contract for Super Hornet family jets was in FY 2012. That isn’t an accident. Boeing program manager Mike Gibbons says that they’ve finally hammered out a contract for 47 planes: 11 F/A-18E/F Super Hornets (FY 2013) + 21 EA-18G Growlers (FY 2014) + 3 EA-18Gs included in a legal settlement with the US government + 12 EA-18G Growlers for Australia. If so, there should be an announcement shortly.

    It’s worth emphasizing that all of these planes are long-planned buys, it just took a while to come to terms on this batch. If the FY 2015 budget funds another 22 EA-18Gs, they would be the subject of a separate contract negotiation. Sources: Reuters, “Boeing sees contract soon for 47 more F/A-18, EA-18G fighters”.

    May 5/14: EA-18G #100. Boeing [NYSE: BA] delivers the 100th EA-18G Growler to the US Navy, and the ceremony was turned into one more element of Boeing’s push to increase the Navy’s buy from 114 to 136. Sources: US Navy, “Navy’s Newest Electronic Attack Aircraft Reaches Centennial Milestone” | Boeing, “Boeing Delivers 100th EA-18G Growler to US Navy”.

    100th EA-18G

    March 11/14: Budgets. CNO Adm. Jonathan Greenert has confirmed that the Navy has placed 22 more EA-18Gs on their FY15 unfunded request submission. The Pentagon’s FY14 budget already contains a $75 million option for advance procurement, as a result of Congressional additions. If the Navy’s FY15 suggestion is approved for inclusion by the Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff, the $2.14 billion request would receive more momentum toward a possible Congressional insert in FY15.

    The unfunded requests list has a number of items on it. If Congress does decide to fund 22 EA-18Gs as one of their choices, the US Navy would use it to raise some squadron rosters to 7 jets, while Boeing would use it to extend the Super Hornet production line by a year or more. Sources: Reuters, “UPDATE 1-U.S. Navy confirms Boeing jets on ‘unfunded’ priority list”.

    March 4/14: FY15 Budget. The Navy unveils a preliminary budget request briefing. It doesn’t break down individual programs into dollars, but it does offer planned purchase numbers for the Navy’s biggest programs from FY 2014 – 2019. Short answer: no plans to buy any more Super Hornets or EA-18Gs, but that doesn’t mean that Congress couldn’t add some later. This interesting tidbit came from the US Navy’s detailed RDT&E justifications for PE 0204136N:

    “Delays in the schedule for IRST [pod] are due to technical challenges with the Fuel Tank which led to additional flight test requirements.”

    Source: US Dept. of the Navy, PB15 Press Briefing [PDF] | US Navy, detailed budget justification.

    Feb 28/14: Support. A $22.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order against a previously issued basic ordering agreement for supplies and services to support follow-on test and evaluation of the F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G aircraft.

    All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 Navy aircraft budgets. Work will be performed at the Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD (76%), St. Louis, MO (22%), El Segundo, CA (1%), and Bethpage, N.Y. (1%) and is expected to be complete in January 2015 (N00019-11-G-0001, 0166).

    Jan 31/14: Support. A $38.1 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order for F/A-18E/F logistics support and associated material requirements.

    All funds are committed immediately, using USN FY 2014 budgets. Work will be performed at St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/15. The contract was not competitively procured in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c)(1) by US Naval Supply Systems Command’s Weapon Systems Support group in Philadelphia, PA (N00383-06-D-001J, 0017).

    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 Super Hornet family is included, and as is often the case these days, software at various levels is the main issue.

    Quick background: All F/A-18E/F Block II Super Hornets and EA-18Gs use high-order language or “H-series” software, and will carry the APG-79 AESA radar. Their current “OS version” (System Configuration Set, or SCS) is H8E Phase I, and Phase II is in testing. F/A-18A-D Hornets and F/A-18E/F Block I Super Hornets (to Lot 26) use “X-series” software, currently SCS 23X, with SCS 25X in testing. These USN aircraft use the APG-73 radar.

    SCS 25X has been delayed for a year, with system qualification testing only beginning in FY 2014. SCS H8E has also hit delays, to the point where 6 of its 14 new capabilities were stripped out: AESA electronic warfare capability, integrated ESM and high-gain ESM to detect emitters using only onboard sensors, the ability to identify specific emitters, single-ship geolocation, integration of the ALQ-214(V)4 defensive jammer, and RNAV (Area Navigation) for GPS civil airspace navigation instead of using TACAN. They’ll presumably be pushed back to SCS H9, along with AGM-154C-1 JSOW integration (q.v. Nov 17/13). Testing for the remaining 8 H8E enhancements is expected to end in March 2014.

    The biggest news for the Super Hornet family, however, is the 2 major weaknesses that H8E will not correct. One is the APG-79 AESA radar, whose software instability has been a problem for 7 years. That wasn’t even on the agenda for SCS H8E. Neither was “an end-to-end multi-AIM-120 missile shot” to take on multiple opponents, which has never been successfully operationally tested. That isn’t a good statement to make about a nation’s core naval fighter, and the Navy doesn’t plan to fix that until SCS H12 in FY 2016-2017. Those situations, and these statements from DOT&E, are legitimately concerning:

    “…operational testing has yet to demonstrate a statistically significant difference in mission accomplishment between F/A-18E/F aircraft equipped with AESA and those equipped with the legacy radar…. Overall, the F/A-18E/F/G is not operationally effective for use in certain threat environments, the details of which are addressed in DOT&E’s classified report….”

    Jan 22/14: SLEP. Boeing in Jacksonville, FL receives a $17.8 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity delivery order under the F/A-18 A-F Depot Level Service Life Extension Program, for remanufacturing activities and associated maintenance and sustainment.

    $249,399 in FY 2014 USN aircraft budgets is committed immediately. Work will be performed in Jacksonville, FL (92%) and St. Louis, MO (8%), and is expected to be complete in September 2014. This contract was not competitively procured, pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 (N00019-14-D-0001).

    Jan 22/14: Support. Boeing in Jacksonville, FL receives a $17.8 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity delivery order contract to support the F/A-18 A-F Depot Level Service Life Extension Program, including both maintenance and remanufacturing work.

    Around $250,000 in FY 2014 USN aircraft budgets is committed immediately. Work will be performed in Jacksonville, FL (92%) and St. Louis, MO (8%), and is expected to be complete in September 2014. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 (N00019-14-D-0001).

    Dec 30/13: Support. A $22.2 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for Super Hornet Family automated maintenance environment integrated software. Your car dealer has these for your machine, and the US Navy has them for its machines. The difference is that new software capabilities can also deliver enough maintenance savings to justify development, and the military’s fighters change more than your car does. This contract combines purchases for the U.S. Navy ($19.25M / 86.6%) and the government of Australia ($3M / 13.4%).

    All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 US Navy aircraft budgets and FMS funding from Australia. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in December 2015 (N00019-11-G-0001, DO 0140).

    Dec 30/13: Support. A $46.7 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order against a previously issued basic ordering agreement for integrated logistics support and sustaining engineering for F/A-18A-D, F/A-18E/F, and EA-18G aircraft for the U.S. Navy ($36.6M / 78.3%) and Australia ($7M / 15.1%); plus $501,289 / 1.1% each from Canada, Finland, Kuwait, Malaysia, Spain, and Switzerland. Support will include logistics, engineering, provisioning, information systems, technical data updates, support equipment engineering, training and software integration support.

    All funds are committed immediately. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (70%); El Segundo, CA (15%); Oklahoma City, OK (6%); Bethpage, NY (5%); and San Diego, CA (4%), and is expected to be complete in December 2014 (N00019-11-G-0001, 0110).

    Nov 25/13: ECP. A $37.3 million delivery order modification to a delivery order for F/A-18E/F and EA-18G Trailing Edge Flap engineering change proposal retrofit kits. They’re buying 48 Trailing Edge Flap Redesign kits, 48 left hand units, and 48 right hand units.

    All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 USN aircraft budgets. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in July 2017. Fiscal 2014 aircraft procurement, Navy contract funds in the amount $37,338,608 will be obligated at time of award; none of which expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-G-0001, DO 007302).

    Nov 17/13: ANAO Report. Australia’s National Audit Office releases their 2012-13 Major Projects Report, which includes some interesting notes concerning the JSOW-C1/ Block III. Australia to place an interim buy of AGM-154Cs in time for the F/A-18F’s planned December 2010 Initial Operating Capability, and they did. But the AGM-154C-1s that are effective against ships and moving targets won’t be done until at least February 2016, because software and integration issues forced the US Navy to delay adding JSOW-C1 until the next core software release. The USN also canceled the planned September 2014 tests. Other issues and notes:

    “The Super Hornet is meeting its capability objectives. Identified anomalies, limitations and improvements of the USN common aircraft software, radar, electronic warfare, mission planning, and training devices are being fed back into the USN spiral development program as part of Super Hornet sustainment, and RAAF/DMO are accessing opportunities to influence USN decision makers on the priority for addressing these areas under a RAAF/USN common paradigm.

    ….Spares availability has been affected by late delivery of spares because of Original Equipment Manufacturer delays and USN delays in award of Supplier contracts leading to an impact on performance, supportability and schedule.

    ….There is a possibility that the Forward Looking Infra Red performance will be degraded. This was identified as an emergent risk in the 2011-12 MPR and has now been realised. Engineering Change Proposal No 35 will introduce an Electronic Image Stabilisation Card. This issue has been transferred to Air Combat and Electronic Attack Systems Program Office Risk and Issues Log for management.”

    Dec 18/13: Brazil. Saab picks Saab’s Gripen NG as their future fighter in a surprise announcement, shortly after reports that a deal for Super Hornets was killed by public revelations that the NSA had spied on Brazil’s presidency and government (q.v. Aug 12/13). The 36 plane contract will be worth about $4.5 billion, which is about 29% less than Boeing’s reported $5.8 billion bid. A final contract and financing deal is expected in December 2014, along with a long-term maintenance deal estimated at around $1.5 billion. Deliveries are expected to begin 4 years later.

    The Brazilian Air Force has a dedicated website to explain its choice. Dassault issued a terse statement pointing out the presence of US parts on Gripens, and positioning the Rafale in a different league. Which may or may not be true, but it’s indisputably true that global fighter buys have historically been heavily weighted toward a less-expensive league. Gripen and the Super Hornet are just within that low to mid price range. Rafale isn’t. Indeed, its reported $10.2 billion purchase + maintenance costs would have been 70% more expensive than the Gripen. Sources: Brazil MdD, “FX-2: Amorim anuncia vencedor de programa para compra de novos cacas” | MdD, “Perguntas & Respostas sobre a definição do Programa F-X2″ (Q&A) | Dassault, “FX2 contest – 2013/12/18″ | Folha de Sao Paulo, “Dilma agradece Hollande por apoio contra espionagem dos EUA”.

    NSA spying loses Brazil deal

    Dec 9/13: Industrial. Boeing’s VP in charge of the Super Hornet family, Mike Gibbons, sees USN fleet upgrade funds to add Advanced Super Hornet features as “a given.” He says that Boeing is “extremely bullish about how much of a future we think we have on Super Hornet and Growler production,” and cites recent multi-million dollar investments in their St. Louis production line as proof of the firm’s belief that local and export orders can keep it open to 2020 and beyond. USN Program Director Capt. Frank Morley says the Navy has taken delivery of 490/ 563 planned Super Hornets, and 90/ 135 planned EA-18G Growlers.

    Barring further orders, Gibbons says that March 2014 is the industrial deadline for Boeing to decide whether it will invest its own funds to keep supplier orders coming. The firm has studied C-17 program lessons on how to cut production rates in half, leaving Super Hornet capacity at 24/year without increasing costs. Gibbons gives Boeing a $37 million share of the flyaway cost for a ~$50 million F/A-18E/F, while placing EA-18G flyaway cost at ~$60 million.

    On the other hand, Gibbons concedes that Boeing was waiting until the US Navy’s FY 2015 budget request comes out before buying long-lead items, and another set of mandated across-the-board cuts would likely cement the program’s termination. One option to keep the plane as an option beyond 2016 would involve combining the adjacent F/A-18 and F-15 production lines into a single flexible line. That would require serious investment, but it would extend the production life of both planes. Aviation Week, “Boeing Faces March Funding Decision On Super Hornet, Growler” | Reuters, “Boeing must decide on F/A-18 production in March 2014: executive”

    Dec 5/13: Politics. House Armed Services Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Chair Rep. Randy Forbes [R-VA-04] sends a letter urging the Pentagon to buy more Super Hornets beyond 2014, or find other ways to keep the line open (q.v. upgrade option Nov 4/13) past 2016. His argument is fairly straightforward:

    “With future carrier-based aircraft still in development until 2019, I strongly believe that creating a single U.S. tactical aircraft supply chain at this time is too great a risk…. will eliminate vital competition that could result in spiraling costs…. also eliminate competition among aircraft radar and engine producers. In other instances, the Department has taken steps to appropriately ensure multiple manufacturers in the shipbuilding and submarine industries. The Navy and the Department should nurture its tactical aviation manufacturing in the same way.”

    Despite Rep. Forbes’ title, he’s going to have a very hard time prevailing amidst current budget cuts. Reuters offers some hope, saying that the USN is very interested in buying more, but had no funding available. In other words, “let’s see if rumblings among some Republicans are followed by actions that ease the sequester’s disproportionate effect on defense.” If not, the US Navy’s proposal to deal with further sequestration cuts by pausing F-35C production and pushing its IOC to 2021 creates strong pressure in the Pentagon to end Super Hornet buys now, lest continued production begin eating into F-35 purchases and encourage further F-35B/C cuts. Sources: J. Randy Forbes letter, “Forbes: Continuation of F/A-18 Production Line Crucial for Strength of Tactical Aircraft Industrial Base” | Reuters, “U.S. lawmaker urges continuation of Boeing F/A-18 fighter line”.

    Nov 6/13: Weapons. Boeing and Kongsberg take the 1st step toward Joint Strike Missile integration with the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighter family. All they did was ensure that the weapons fit on the aircraft’s external pylons. Next, they have to conduct wind tunnel tests in early 2014, to assess the effect of the missiles on the plane’s aerodynamics, and likely stress on the pylons. That has to be followed by live captive carry testing to verify their conclusions, and of course full integration with the aircraft’s electronics will be its own separate effort.

    Norway doesn’t fly Super Hornets, but potential JSM partner Australia does (q.v. May 16/13), and so does the US Navy. F-35 integration won’t be ready until 2021-2022, but successful F/A-18 integration would give the JSM an early deployment option with any future Super Hornet customers, such as Kuwait, Brazil, or Denmark. It would also provide an incentive for Australia to commit to JSM early and deploy the missiles well before 2025, by offering them a much more immediate fleet upgrade. Finally, Super Hornet integration would provide an opening to put JSM forward as an AGM-84 Harpoon missile replacement for the US Navy, if the higher-end LRASM program falls to coming budget cuts. Sources: Boeing, Nov 6/13 release.

    Nov 4/13: USN Upgrades? US Navy F/A-18 and EA-18G Program Manager, Capt. Frank Morley, discusses the Advanced Super Hornet with Defense Tech:

    “We’re getting good performance numbers on it and good signature measurements. These are items the Navy is considering…. We reduced the signature of the aircraft by over 50-percent. We added low-signature treatments to specific areas of the airplane and then when we designed the conformal fuel tanks and enclosed weapons pod….”

    Oct 31/13: Trick, or Treat? An FBO.gov Pre-solicitation notice for up to 36 Super Hornet family fighters in FY 2015 is cancelled. This effectively terminates media speculation concerning the potential for additional US Navy orders, in light of added F-35 delays resulting from R&D budget cuts.

    On the other hand, FY 2014 may not be the Super Hornet family’s last order year. Australia has confirmed plans to buy another 12 EA-18Gs, and the official request to negotiate that deal is already cleared. Denmark intends to make a decision concerning 24-32 fighters in mid-2015; the Super Hornet is competing against Lockheed Martin’s much more expensive F-35A, and Saab’s JAS-39E/F Gripen. Brazil was reportedly ready to buy 36 Super Hornets in 2013; NSA spying scandals torpedoed negotiations, but the competition hasn’t been closed. In the Middle East, Kuwait and Qatar are both evaluating future fighters, and preparing to order new planes.

    Australia’s 12-plane order is very likely to arrive before supplier shutdowns begin; after that, timing will begin to matter to Boeing. FBO.gov | Breaking Defense | Flight Global.

    FY 2013

    Another 15 extra bought; 2014 budget switches final production to EA-18Gs from Super Hornets. F/A-18F & EA-18G
    (click to view full)

    Sept 23/13: ECP. A $38.2 million award for fixed-price, incentive-fee delivery order for F/A-18E/F and EA-18G trailing edge flap retrofit kits. The flaps were redesigned as part of an engineering change proposal, and the order includes 48 trailing edge flap kits, 48 left hand units, and 48 right hand units. All funds are committed immediately.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be completed in July 2017 (N00019-11-G-0001, 0073).

    Aug 12/13: Brazil – NSA fallout. Reuters reports that revelations of NSA spying may have damaged the Boeing Super Hornet’s chances in Brazil. US Secretary of State John Kerry’s October meeting with Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff won’t discuss the deal, and the unnamed political source was blunt: “We cannot talk about the fighters now… You cannot give such a contract to a country that you do not trust.”

    In July, the O Globo newspaper published documents leaked by Edward Snowden that revealed U.S. surveillance of Internet communications in Brazil and other Latin American countries. Nobody who has been paying attention can possibly be surprised, given concerns regarding transnational drug cartels, Brazil’s close relationship with Iran, and the growth of Islamist activities in the “triple border” junction area of Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay. Brazilian senators may not have been paying attention, or may just have been playing their expected role when they questioned President Rousseff’s visit to Washington in toto.

    Brazil could just go ahead and pick another plane, but fighters seem to be dropping down the government’s priority list. Huge protests against corruption and misuse of public money have left the government skittish about big outlays, and another government source tells Reuters that they no longer expect a decision in 2013. With 2014 as an election year, that means 2015 for any fighter decision. The Brazilian government isn’t exactly responding with denials following the Reuters report, and for Boeing, later is better than sooner. Reuters, “Spying scandal sets back U.S. chances for fighter jet sale to Brazil”.

    May 24/13: SAR. The Pentagon finally releases its Dec 31/12 Selected Acquisitions Report [PDF]. The EA-18G is included, thanks to the 2014 budget switch that shifted the final Super Hornet buy and added a few more:

    “EA-18G Growler Aircraft – Program costs increased $2,023.9 million (+18.3%) from $11,060.3 million to $13,084.2 million, due primarily to a quantity increase of 21 aircraft from 114 to 135 aircraft (+$1,752.1 million) and associated schedule and estimating allocations (-$60.7 million). There were also increases in support costs for integrated logistics support/reliability demonstration, production engineering, and developmental testing) (+$306.6 million).”

    SAR – Super Hornet switch

    May 9/13: Testing. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives an $18.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery to support Follow-On Test and Evaluation of the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft.

    Work will be performed at the Naval Air Station, Patuxent River, MD (78%); St. Louis, (21%); El Segundo, CA (0.5%); and Bethpage, NY (0.5%), and is expected to be complete in February 2014. All contract funds are committed immediately by US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD (N00019-11-G-0001).

    April 10/13: FY 2014 budget. The Obama administration finally releases its budget proposals, including the Pentagon’s FY 2014 requests. One of the most notable changes in the Navy’s “Procurement by Weapon” file is the addition of 21 more EA-18Gs, with a $2 billion budget. At the same time, plans to buy 13 F/A-18E/F fighters for around $1.14 billion were canceled. The $274 million in FY 2014 involves spares, and shared costs related to the EA-18G. In effect, the Super Hornet order was transmuted into Growlers, raised pro rata by about $375 million total for that switch, then had 8 more planes added to it.

    The shift into an all-Growler buy was helped by the Australian purchase of 12 Airborne Electronic Attack kits, which lowered costs for added US orders. Strike while the iron is hot, and all that. The other story associated with this shift involves the F-35B/C. The F-35 program is improving, but it has basically stood still or even gone backwards over the last 5 years. That means late introduction, and even later Initial Operating Capability. Especially given the poor progress of software development, and the additional progress required to create a combat-ready F-35. Not having stealth-enhanced F-35s is more than a fighter gap – it’s also a strike gap against improving air defenses. The most obvious way to close that gap is to add to the EA-18G fleet, in order to help existing naval fighters get through enemy defenses before F-35s start contributing sometime in the early 2020s. Even after F-35s arrive, EA-18Gs will remain invaluable to coalition warfare for a long time, and have real utility in small wars that feature remotely-detonated bombs.

    FY 2014 is expected to end Super Hornet family orders, barring exports outside the USA. That leaves the USN’s Super Hornet program finishing with 552 fighters bought (though DID’s records show 549), and the EA-18G program finishing with a higher-than-expected 135 planes. Recall that at one time, the planned buy of EA-18Gs was just 80.

    April 3/13: Embraer. Embraer’s CEO Luiz Carlos Aguiar talks to Defense News about F-X2 and other subjects. Regarding the fighters:

    “I think [the decision is] going to be in the next months, this year, I would say. Our role in that depends… on who is going to win. We have a memorandum of understanding with all three of the contenders. Each of them offers an offset program, but we prefer not declaring publicly our preference…. Whatever they choose, we’re going to be in the process. They need to make this decision because Brazil needs that…. With the F-X, we can even go further in terms of technology, and even some new products could come up with one of these three contenders. That’s what I can tell you, I can’t go further than that.”

    Given Embraer’s dominant position in the Brazilian aerospace industry, it would be shocking if any of the contenders had chosen not to sign industrial partnership MoUs with Embraer. In light of the April and August 2012 agreements, the “new products” comment suggests that Boeing may have replaced Saab as Embraer’s preferred choice. That isn’t at all certain, however – as Aguliar surely intended. Defense News.

    March 13/13: Denmark. The Danes pick up their fighter competition as promised, following their announced hiatus in April 2010. Invited bidders include the same set of Lockheed Martin (F-35A), Boeing (Super Hornet), and Saab (JAS-39E/F) – plus EADS (Eurofighter), who had withdrawn from the Danish competition in 2007. The goal of a 2014 F-16 replacement decision has been moved a bit farther back, and now involves a recommendation by the end of 2014, and a selection by June 2015.

    The Flyvevabnet are reported to have 30 operational F-16s, with 15 more in reserve, out of an original order of 58. Past statements indicate that they’re looking to buy around 25 fighters as replacements, but there are reports of a range from 24-32, depending on price. Danish Forsvarsministeriet [in Danish] | Eurofighter GmbH | Saab | JSF Nieuws.

    March 8/13: Brazil. Brazil has asked the 3 F-X2 finalists to extend their bids for another 6 months from the March 30/13 deadline, as the Brazilian commodity economy remains mired in a 2-year slump. The competitors had hoped for a decision by the time the LAAD 2013 expo opened in April.

    The length of the cumulative delays could create changes for the bids, and it effectively squashes any faint hopes that the new jets would be able to fly in time for the 2014 World Cup. Reuters.

    Dec 28/12: Support. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives an $81.75 million firm-fixed-price delivery order covering integrated logistics support and sustaining engineering services for the F/A-18 A-D Hornet and F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet fighters, and EA-18G Growler tactical jamming aircraft. They’ll provide in-service engineering, information systems, automated maintenance environment, technical data updates, support equipment engineering, training, and software integration support for the US Navy ($69.5M / 85%); and the Governments of Australia ($9.0M / 10.98%); Canada ($544,992 / .67%); Finland ($544,992 / 0.67%); Kuwait ($544,992 / 0.67%); Malaysia ($544,992 / 0.67%); Spain ($544,992 / 0.67%); and Switzerland ($544,992 / 0.67%)

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (70%); El Segundo, CA (15%); Oklahoma City, OK (6%); Bethpage, NY (5%); and San Diego, CA (4%), and is expected to be complete in December 2013. This contract combines purchases under the Foreign Military Sales Program. All contract funds are committed immediately, and only $342,372 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00383-06-D-001J).

    Nov 30/12: +15. A $687.6 million ceiling-priced fixed-price-incentive-fee contract modification for 15 Production Lot 37 (FY 2013) F/A-18E Super Hornet airframes “in accordance with the aircraft variation in quantity clause.” Which is to say, beyond planned multi-year orders. This follows a similar Jan 25/12 order from Production Lot 36.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (45.2%); El Segundo, CA (44.6%); Hazelwood, MO (3.4%); Cleveland, OH (1.7%); Torrance, CA (1.4%); Vandalia, OH (1.0%); Ajax, Canada (1.0%), and various other sites within the continental USA (1.7%), and is expected to be complete in July 2015. $645.5 million is committed on award (N00019-09-C-0019).

    FY 2012

    Japan loss; 15 extra bought; MYP-II deliveries done; Boeing lobbying to extend MYP-III. Australian F/A-18Fs
    (click to view full)

    Sept 10/12: A $12 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order, to perform requirements planning and analysis “necessary to identify Production Transition Support for the F/A-18 E/F and E/A-18G aircraft programs”. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be completed in May 2013 (N00019-11-G-0001).

    Aug 23/12: Australia. Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare announce their decision to proceed with the conversion of 12 Super Hornets into Growlers for about $1.5 billion, with availability expected for 2018.

    This doesn’t affect MYP-III, since all 24 of Australia’s F/A-18F Block II Hornets were bought under MYP-II (vid. Feb 22/12 entry), and all of them have already been delivered. This conversion order takes the 12 Australian F/A-18Fs that were pre-wired for EA-18G conversion, and adds the internal electronics and pods. Australia DoD.

    Australia EA-18G conversion

    April 1/12: Raytheon in El Segundo, CA receives a $7 million order for 13 ECP-6279 retrofit kits in support of F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G aircraft. ECP = Engineering Change Proposal, a design alternation. Work will be performed in Forest, MS (80%), and El Segundo, CA (20%), and is expected to be complete in December 2013 (N00019-10-G-0006).

    March 30/12: Extend MYP-III? That’s what Boeing is lobbying for. The $2.5 billion add-on would extend production by as many as 37 Super Hornet family fighters, beginning with a $60 million increase in the Navy’s FY 2013 budget for advance purchases.

    Boeing’s document claims that the Super Hornet program supports 100,000 direct and indirect jobs and has 1,900 suppliers across the US. Additional orders beyond 2014 would keep the line open past 2015. In return, they’d keep the Navy from suffering a fighter shortfall due to the F-35B/C program’s extended delays. The F-35s aren’t likely to see Initial Operational Capability before 2018, and could run later than that. Bloomberg | DoD Buzz.

    Feb 22/12: MYP-II done. Final delivery of all orders under the previous MYP-II contract, which Boeing says covered 233 aircraft for the USA (210 + 23 added options), and another 24 F/A-18Fs for Australia. Boeing.

    MYP-II final delivery

    Jan 31/12: Support. A $48.1 million firm-fixed-price delivery order contract modification for integrated logistics support and sustaining engineering services in support of US Navy F/A-18 A-D, F/A-18 E/F, and EA-18 G aircraft. This includes in-service engineering, information systems work, technical data updates, support equipment engineering, training and software integration support.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (70%); El Segundo, CA (15%); Oklahoma City, OK (6%); Bethpage, NY (5%); and San Diego, CA (4%); and is expected to be complete in December 2012 (N00383-06-D-001J).

    Jan 25/12: +15. A $687.5 million ceiling-priced modification to the MYP-III fixed-price-incentive-fee multi-year procurement contract buys another 15 FY 2012 Super Hornets in Full-Rate Production Lot 36, using the variation in quantity clause: another 14 single-seat F/A-18Es, and an F/A-18F.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (45.2%); El Segundo, CA (44.6%); Hazelwood, MO (3.4%); Cleveland, OH (1.7%); Torrance, CA (1.4%); Vandalia, OH (1%); Ajax, Canada (1%); Irvine, CA (0.7%); Johnson City, N.Y. (0.5%); and Grand Rapids, MI (0.5%); and is expected to be complete in October 2014 (N00019-09-C-0019).

    15 more added

    Dec 20/11: Japan loss. Japan’s F-X competition picks Lockheed Martin’s F-35 over Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet International, and EADS’ Eurofighter.

    Japan

    FY 2011

    More for USN; More for Australia?; #500 delivered; USN’s long-term maintenance planning. F/A-18Es over Afghanistan
    (click to view full)

    Sept 30/11: Support. A $22 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to provide non-recurring engineering in support of the F/A18E/F and EA-18G multi-year procurement. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in October 2014 (N00019-09-C-0019).

    Sept 29/11: Support. A $298.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order for logistics support and associated material requirements for the F/A-18E/F aircraft. This effort also includes the government of Australia (3%, $8.96M) under the Foreign Military Sale Program.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is to be complete by December 2014. US Naval Supply Systems Command Weapon Systems Support in Philadelphia, PA manages this contract (N00383-06-D-001J, #0014).

    Sept 12/11: Australia. During a joint press conference with Canada’s defense minister Peter MacKay, Australian Minister for Defence Stephen Smith says that they might buy more Super Hornets – but no decision has been taken. The window is closing, however, unless the USA extends production beyond MYP-III. So:

    “Our position on Joint Strike Fighters I’ll restate. We’ve committed ourselves to 14. The White Paper or the Defence Capability Plan talks in terms of ultimately a number up to or around 100, but we’ve committed to 14… we’ll do an exhaustive risk assessment in the course of next year and make a judgment next year about whether we need any transition capability… The last thing I will allow will be a gap in our capability for our air combat capability. And if I am concerned or worried or not persuaded there won’t be a gap in terms of delivery of the Joint Strike Fighters, then an obvious option for us is more Super Hornets. We’ve made no decision to that effect.”

    July 12/11: Former USAF F-16 pilot Mike Gerzanics pens “Testing the new-generation Super Hornet“, documenting his experience flying an F/A-18F Block II simulator. Overall, he was impressed by the radar and liked the aircraft, but said:

    “My overall feel for the pilot/vehicle interface, while it is effective and combat proven, was that it lags newer aircraft. Tactical information, for the most part, is presented on separate displays, forcing the pilot to do much of the fusion. This federated arrangement is no different from what I experienced when I flew a Block 60 F-16 simulator… [In contrast,] The F-35’s level of integration and sensor fusion was a generation ahead of what I experienced in the Block II Super Hornet and Block 60 F-16 simulator sessions… A next-generation [Super Hornet] cockpit is also under development and has a very large 19in x 11in touch-sensitive display. I was able to fly a cockpit built around this display and can confirm that it provides an ideal palette to display fused tactical information.”

    June 13/11: +9. A $408.8 million ceiling-priced fixed-price-incentive-fee contract modification for 9 single-seat F/A-18Es from Full-Rate Production Lot 35, in accordance with clauses that let the US Navy add aircraft above baseline FY 2011 purchases.

    As usual, note that these contracts are for airframes and integration, leaving out purchases of minor accouterments like radar, engines, etc. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in December 2013 (N00019-09-C-0019).

    9 more added

    April 20/11: #500. Boeing and the U.S. Navy celebrate the induction of the 500th Super Hornet family fighter (F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and EA-18G Growlers) into the US Navy. Boeing.

    #500

    April 15/11: SAR – more planes. The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 30/10 includes the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. While EA-18G plans rise to 114 aircraft:

    “F/A-18 E/F – Program costs increased $2,888.8 million (+6.0 percent) from $48,091.4 million to $50,980.2 million, due primarily to a quantity increase of 41 aircraft from 515 to 556 aircraft (+$3,105.4 million) and associated schedule, engineering, and estimating allocations

    • (+$208.6 million), the application of revised escalation indices (+$392.2 million), and an increase in initial spares for the additional 41 aircraft (+$94.1 million). These increases are partially offset by a reduction due to multi-year procurement contract award (-$390.4 million), adjustments for current and prior escalation (-$397.8 million), and decreases in other support costs (-$56.5 million).

    • Note: Quantity changes are estimated based on the original SAR baseline cost-quantity relationship. Cost changes since the original baseline are separately categorized as schedule, engineering, or estimating “allocations.” The total impact of a quantity change is the identified “quantity” change plus all associated “allocations.”

    See also April 1/10 entry.

    SAR – more planes

    March 3/11: Support. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives an $8.8 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for integrated logistics support; in-service engineering; information systems; technical data; support equipment engineering; automated maintenance environment; training/software integration support; provisioning; and A-D sustaining engineering services in support of the F/A-18 A-D Hornet, F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, and EA-18G Growler aircraft.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (70%); El Segundo, CA (15%); Oklahoma City, OK (6%); Bethpage, NY (5%); and San Diego, CA (4%), and is expected to be complete in December 2011. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00383-06-D-001J).

    Feb 14/11: FY 2012 request. The Pentagon releases its FY 2012 budget request: $2.662 billion for 28 Super Hornets ($153 million RDT&E, $77.2 million spares, $2.432 billion procurement), and $1.125 billion for 12 more EA-18Gs ($1.108 billion procurement, $17.1 million RDT&E).

    Note that this funding also provides the advance procurement resources for 28 FY 2013 aircraft, continues research into planned spiral upgrades of F/A-18E/F onboard systems, and funds common shared cost between the EA-18G and F/A-E/F programs out of the F/A-E/F budget. The EA-18G buy is very much in line with the FY 2011 request, while the Super Hornet order rises sharply from the FY 2011 request of $1.976 billion for 22 aircraft ($148.4 million RDT&E, $41.2 million spares, $1.787 billion procurement). The F-35 program’s lateness is making itself felt here, otherwise the Super Hornet buy would actually have fallen from FY 2011 – 2012.

    Jan 18/11: Support. US NAVAIR discusses its efforts to create a 6-year Planned Maintenance Interval (PMI) site for Super Hornet aircraft. With large numbers of Navy Super Hornets near their scheduled deep inspections and maintenance, they plan to use the Fleet Readiness Center Southeast (FRCSE) hangar at Cecil Commerce Center, near Jacksonville, FL, as an overflow and companion facility for NAS Oceana, VA.

    This is a boring sort of detail that ensures the continued viability of a fighter fleet intended for operations, not just for show. FRCSE has to tow the aircraft over in NAS Oceana, but the Florida facility will be fly-in/fly-out. Airplanes progress through 4 work cells: disassembly and inspection, repair, final assembly and operations, and flightline preparation for the Functional Check Flight. FRCSE is working on 4 prototypes in FY 2011, with a goal of 16 planes per year.

    Jan 6/11: More F/A-18s. The Pentagon announces a number of changes, instead to take $150 billion from administration and weapons programs, and shift them into higher priority weapon programs. The F-35B goes on probation, and F-35 production is cut by over 100 planes during the 2012-2016 period.

    In exchange, the Navy will order 41 more F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, using MYP-III options. That means another 15 in FY 2012 & 2013, and another 11 in FY 2014, on top of existing order plans. Pentagon release re: overall plan | Full Gates speech and Gates/Mullen Q&A transcript | F-35 briefing hand-out [PDF] || Atlanta Journal Constitution | The Atlantic | The libertarian Cato Institute | Defense Update | Fort Worth Star-Telegram’s Sky Talk blog | The Hill | NY Times | Politico | Stars and Stripes || Agence France Presse | BBC | Reuters | UK’s Telegraph | China’s Xinhua.

    More Super Hornets

    Dec 30/10: FIRST. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $69.1 million delivery order under the F/A-18 Integrated Readiness Support Team (FIRST) Program for continued support of F/A-18 A-D Hornet, F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, and EA-18G Growler fleets of the U.S. Navy ($64.6M/ 93.6%); and the governments of Australia ($1.7M/ 2.5%), Canada ($513,996; 0.7%), Spain ($513,996/ 0.7%), Finland ($513,966/ 0.7%), Switzerland ($513,996; 0.7%), Kuwait ($513,996; 0.7%), and Malaysia ($256,998/ 0.4%).

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (70%); El Segundo, CA (15%); Oklahoma City, OK (6%); Bethpage, NY (5%); and San Diego, CA (4%). Work is expected to be complete in December 2011. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages this contract (N00383-06-D-001J). See also Jan 3/06 entry, in this section.

    Dec 22/10: Support. An $11.7 million fixed-price-incentive-fee contract modification for one-time engineering in support of the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G Multi-Year III buy. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in February 2012 (N00019-09-C-0019).

    Dec 6/10: Support. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $17.6 million modification to a delivery order, for supplies and services in support of the follow-on test and evaluation of the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft.

    Work will be performed in Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD (77%); St. Louis, MO (21%); El Segundo, CA (1%); and Bethpage, NY (1%), and is expected to be complete in October 2011. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year (N00019-11-G-0001).

    FY 2010

    Program expands; MYP-III contract; FY 2010 budget adds more; Super Hornet International. F/A-18F over CV-63
    (click to view full)

    Sept 28/10: A $5.297 billion modification, converting a previous advance acquisition contract (N00019-09-C-0019) to a fixed-price-incentive-fee multi-year contract. Over its lifetime to May 2015, MYP-III will supply 124 base airframes: 46 single-seat F/A-18Es, 20 two-seat F/A-18Fs, and 58 of the EA-18G electronic attack airframes for the US Navy. Deliveries will begin in 2012. Boeing F/A-18 and EA-18 Programs Vice President Kory Mathews:

    “Procurement of these 124 aircraft through a multi-year contract… will generate more than $600 million in cost savings for U.S. taxpayers… Boeing and its Hornet Industry Team suppliers have delivered every Super Hornet and Growler on schedule to the warfighter and on budget for the taxpayer from the first Super Hornet delivery… The first two F/A-18E/F multi-year contracts generated more than $1.7 billion in savings for the United States.”

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (45.2%); El Segundo, CA (44.6%); Hazelwood, MO (3.4%); Cleveland, OH (1.7%); Torrance, CA (1.4%); Vandalia, OH (1%); Ajax, Ontario, Canada (1%); Irvine, CA (0.7%); Johnson City, NY (0.5%); and Grand Rapids, MI (0.5%). Work is expected to be complete in May 2015. See also Boeing.

    MYP-III

    Sept 28/10: Support. A $249 million delivery order under a firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract covers logistics support and associated materials for F/A-18E/F aircraft. Work will be performed in St Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete by September 2011.

    This effort combines purchases for the US Navy (99%) and the government of Australia (1%), and was not competitively awarded. The Naval Inventory Control Point in Philadelphia, PA manages this contract (N00383-06-D-001J, #0010).

    Sept 24/10: Support. A $21.6 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for integrated logistics support, in-service engineering, information systems, technical data, support equipment engineering, automated maintenance environment, training/software integration support, provisioning and sustaining engineering in support of F/A-18 A-D, E/F, and EA-18G aircraft. This modification combines purchases for the U.S. Navy ($18.5 million; 85.7%) and the governments of Australia ($2.5 million, 11.5%); Canada ($212,300, 1%); Spain ($147,700, 0.7%); Finland ($98,500, 0.5%); Kuwait ($61,500, 0.3%), Switzerland ($52,300, 0.2%), and Malaysia ($12,300; 0.1%), under the Foreign Military Sales program.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (70%); El Segundo, CA (15%); Oklahoma City, OK (6%); Bethpage, NY (5%); and San Diego, CA (4%); and is expected to be complete in December 2010. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00383-06-D-001J).

    Aug 10/11: Support. A $9.3 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for organizational level peculiar support equipment in support of 4 emerging F/A-18E/F aircraft squadron stand-ups (VFA-25, VFA-146, VFA-192, and VFA-151). Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in July 2013. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11. The US Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Lakehurst, NJ manages the contract (N68335-10-G-0012).

    July 20/10: Super Hornet International. Boeing’s VP and General Manager of Global Strike Systems, Shelley Lavender, announces a “Super Hornet International Road Map” at Farnborough 2010. Technology modifications would include internal IRST to detect infrared emissions from enemy aircraft (instead of the US Navy’s current retrofit approach using a modified centerline fuel tank), an enclosed weapon pod to lower radar signature, full spherical laser and missile warning systems, a new cockpit based on large touch-screen technology, improved F414 engines (EDE/EPE), and conformal fuel tanks mounted up top to boost range.

    These enhancements are described as an “international road map,” reflecting ongoing competitions in Brazil, Denmark, India, and elsewhere. These same modifications also have the potential to become part of a US Navy multi-year buy agreement with Boeing, if the Navy is willing. Presentation [PDF] | See also “Future Hornets?” section, below.

    June 17/10: Exec change. Boeing announces that 26-year veteran Kory Mathews will serve as program vice president of F/A-18 and EA-18 Programs within Boeing’s Global Strike Systems division. The VP is responsible for customer satisfaction and the quality, cost, and schedule performance of every facet of the F/A-18A-F and the EA-18G family, and leads all activities associated with program development, production, and support.

    Mathews moves from his role as VP and Chief Engineer for Boeing Military Aircraft. He succeeds Bob Gower, who has been named to the new position of VP Boeing Military Aircraft (BMA) India.

    May 19/10: MYP? As part of its revisions to the FY 2011 defense budget, the House Armed Services Committee’s summary is vocal and insistent about their request for another multi-year buy program:

    “…the Committee is extremely concerned by the Navy and Marine Corps managing and accepting an unprecedented level of operational risk within their tactical air force structure while waiting for the completion of the F-35B and F-35C. The Committee estimates that by FY 2017, the Navy and Marine Corps inventory could be at least 250 aircraft short of requirements – the equivalent of five carrier air wings. This is an unacceptable outcome, and the Committee will not support future budget requests [emphasis DID’s] that fail to address the factual realities of a naval strike fighter shortfall. Barring a complete reversal of the development and performance failures in the Joint Strike Fighter program, the Committee expects future budget submissions to continue the production of F-18s to prevent our naval airpower from losing significance in our nation’s arsenal. Because of the Navy’s inability to meet required reporting dates, the bill makes technical corrections to the multi-year authority provided in the FY10 NDAA and requires the Secretary of the Navy to use the savings garnered from the multi-year procurement contract for 124 aircraft, over the previously planned annual procurement contracts, to procure additional F/A-18E or F/A-18F aircraft up to the quantity that the savings would enable.”

    See House Armed Service Committee: Chairman’s statement | Summary [PDF] | Tables [PDF].

    May 14/10: MYP? The Pentagon takes a big step closer to a multi-year contract for Super Hornet family fighters:

    “[Ashton Carter] certified to Congress that the proposed F/A-18 multiyear procurement met statutory requirements, including substantial savings, for 124 F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft. The proposed agreement will run for four years, from fiscal 2010 through 2013… the Department of the Navy will continue to work with Congress to gain necessary legislative authorities required before the Navy may enter into a multiyear contract… [to] acquire the remaining program of record for the 515 F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and 114 EA-18G Growlers.

    The Navy’s fiscal 2011 budget request, sent to Congress Feb. 1, includes $1.9 billion to buy 22 Super Hornets and $1.1 billion for 12 Growlers. In fiscal 2012, the Navy plans to buy 24 more Growlers and one Super Hornet, with 25 more Super Hornets in fiscal 2013.”

    See: US DoD | Rep. Todd Akin [R-MO-2] | Sen. Kit Bond [R-MO] statement and Letter to SecDef Gates [PDF] | DoD Buzz.

    May 1/10: MYP? Two months after its 1st request, the Pentagon asks for a second extension of 5 months, in order to negotiate a 3rd multi-year procurement deal for Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet family fighters. Tough sledding, or just bureaucrats stalling? The Hill.

    April 6/10: Support. FBO Pre-solicitation #N0001905G0026Phase4ModLine

    “The Naval Air Systems Command intends to issue a cost plus fixed fee order under existing basic ordering agreement N00019-05-G-0026 with The Boeing Company in St. Louis, Mo for the procurement of over and above support during the Phase 4 mod line on a sole source basis. Boeing will be installing multiple engineering change proposal kits into F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G aircraft during the phase 4 mod line. The Boeing Company is the sole designer, developer, manufacturer ad integrator of the F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G aircraft and is the only source with the knowledge, expertise and on-site personnel base necessary to accomplish this effort.”

    AMRAAM from F/A-18F
    (click to view larger)

    April 1/10: SAR – more planes. The Pentagon releases its April 2010 Selected Acquisitions Report, covering major program cost changes up to December 2009. All Super Hornet family aircraft are included, because the Pentagon plans to buy more of them:

    “EA-18G – Program costs increased $2,901.0 million (+33.5%) from $8,649.1 million to $11,550.1 million, due primarily to a quantity increase of 29 aircraft from 85 to 114 aircraft (+$2,342.5 million) and associated schedule and estimating allocations

    • (+$7.8 million), and an increase in support costs for 26 expeditionary aircraft associated with the quantity increase (+$547.6 million).

    F/A-18 E/F – Program costs increased $1,746.6 million (+3.8%) from $46,344.8 million to $48,091.4 million, due primarily to a quantity increase of 22 aircraft from 493 to 515 aircraft (+$1,872.9 million), and increases in other support costs and initial spares associated with the quantity increase (+$427.9 million). These increases were partially offset by a reduction in the estimate for foreign military sales (-$198.3 million) [DID: which would have helped defray some American costs] and the estimate for actual contract costs and efficiencies (-$208.6 million), and the application of revised escalation indices (-$131.9 million).”

    SAR – more planes

    March 1/10: MYP? Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn asks for an extension on the deadline to notify Congress of a new multiyear Super Hornet family deal. Lynn reportedly told the congressional defense committees that the Pentagon had recently received “a viable offer” from Boeing for 124 of the fighters, but would need more time to evaluate the contract offer. The Hill.

    July 30/09: The US House of Representatives passes its defense budget (H.R. 3326) by a crushing 400-30 vote. The FY 2010 Super hornet buy had been cut to 9 fighters in the Pentagon request, in order to fund the F-35 program. Both the House and the Senate promptly added $560 million and 9 more Super Hornets to their bills, bringing the FY 2010 total to 40 planes: 18 Super Hornets and 22 EA-18G electronic warfare aircraft.

    This is in line with past years, and avoids a production line slowdown at Boeing. It also addresses expressed concerns about a naval fighter numbers gap created by the retirement of older fighters, and the uncertainty of the F-35C’s on-time arrival. The House also appears to be gearing up for another 5-year procurement contract for 150 more Super Hornet family planes, instead of reverting to year-by-year buys.

    Reconciliation eventually took place with the Senate’s counterpart S. 1390 bill, and the final total of 40 Super Hornet family planes remained.

    June 23/09: MYP? Government Executive magazine reports that Boeing has submitted an unsolicited offer to the US Navy for an MYP-III program that would build 149 Super Hornet family aircraft over the next 5 years for $50 million each base cost, instead of the planned Navy buys of 89 aircraft over the next 3 years. As always, key government-furnished equipment like engines, radars, the EA-18G’s electronic warfare equipment, etc. would fall under their own separate contracts, so actual cost per operational plane will be higher.

    Present studies indicate that age and retirement, coupled with the F-35C program’s long lead time, will leave the Navy below its planned number of operational carrier-based fighters, rising to a maximum of 69 planes in 2017.

    Feb 3/10: MYP? Ranking House Armed Services Seapower subcommittee Rep. Todd Akin [R-MO] publicly supports building more Super Hornet family aircraft, and advocates a multi-year buy approach for the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G, similar to the 2005-2009 contract. In Rep. Arkin’s release, he says that:

    “I remain concerned that the Department of Defense is not taking the Navy’s strike fighter shortfall seriously… The Super Hornet is an active production line, and is dramatically cheaper than the JSF, which may not deliver anywhere close to on time… In this case, a multi-year procurement could save hundreds of millions of dollars, but the DoD seems to have their head in the sand. Secretary Gates mentioned that he thinks we need to have a 10% savings before we use a multi-year agreement. However, the Congress already gave DoD the authority to use a multiyear in this situation, even if the savings is less than 10%… A multiyear procurement could save nearly half a billion dollars over the next few years. To not pursue that savings is just irresponsible.”

    FY 2009 and earlier

    FY 2010 order raised; F-35 issues; FIRST support contract. F/A-18E, armed
    (click to view full)

    June 2/09: Budget battles. US Navy CNO Adm. Roughead defends the FY 2010 budget decision to request only 9 F/A-18E/F Super Hornets instead of 18 ($1.19 billion, incl. $127.7 million RDT&E), alongside the planned 22 EA-18G Growlers ($1.69 billion, incl. 55.4 million RDT&E). The decision was made in order to speed up F-35 fielding and procurement, though the F-35C carrier model isn’t scheduled for fielding until 2015. The US Marines’ F-35B STOVL(Short Takeoff, Vertical Landing) variant still hopes to begin fielding in 2012. Current FY 2010 plans call for 30 F-35s: 10 USAF F-35As, 16 USMC F-35Bs, and 4 USN F-35C test aircraft.

    Gannett’s Navy Times quotes Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway re: Future plans:

    “The initial vertical flight has slid right six or seven months… going to happen this fall… But the most recent information we have out of Fort Worth is that the engine is developing even more power than we thought it might for vertical lift, so we’re encouraged… We reach initial operating capability in 2012… We are the first of the services… We’re anxious to put it aboard ship and see how it performs there. Then we will make a joint Navy-Marine Corps decision in terms of what the resulting numbers of our buy needs to look like. But we’re fairly encouraged by what we see.”

    They weren’t successful. Both the House and Senate defense bills went on to add $560 million for 9 more F/A-18 E/F aircraft, raising the FY 2010 buy to 18. There is also talk of a follow-on MYP-III contract.

    FIRST: the goal
    (click to view full)

    Sept 26/07: FIRST prize. The F/A-18 Integrated Readiness Support Teaming (FIRST) program receives the system-level award for excellence in the field of performance-based logistics from the U.S. Department of Defense and the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA). Under FIRST, the US Navy pays for a set level of aircraft readiness, not individual spare parts or services. Industry has the incentive to make parts and systems more reliable, while the customer enjoys increased readiness at a lower cost of ownership.

    FIRST has improved the Super Hornet’s mission capable rate from a problematic 57% in 2000 to 73% thus far in 2007, while providing significant cost savings. In Boeing’s press release, FIRST program manager Larry Sellman is quoted as saying something the British already knew, which is that:

    “We continue to prove that streamlining the support for a major weapons system through a public/private partnership is the best solution for everyone.”

    Jan 3/06: Boeing announces a long-term, $995 million performance-based logistics contract from the US Navy for the F/A-18E/F Integrated Readiness Support Teaming (FIRST) program. FIRST consolidates a number of existing Naval Inventory Control Point (NAVICP) contracts into one, and adds new services including an automated maintenance environment with an integrated software program that improves maintenance data, fault diagnosis and decisions; as well as integrated electronic technical manuals for F/A-18A-D Hornet models.

    Under FIRST, Boeing will manage and forecast spares and repairs, oversee spares inventories, make supportability improvements within the budget in order to meet its availability targets, and handle obsolescence management and technology insertion. Like the British “contracting for availability” agreements, the objective is to improve fleet support and aircraft readiness while reducing costs. Boeing will be rewarded for having the aircraft meet in-service readiness targets, rather than getting paid for spare parts or hours worked.

    Boeing currently provides field service representatives on site at aircraft bases in California and Virginia under the Hornet support network concept, and this infrastructure will be leveraged for the new contract. Several original equipment manufacturer suppliers, along with Navy depots in California, North Carolina and Florida, will also be used to perform FIRST repairs.

    FIRST began in 2001 with annual contracts, and the program is projected to provide approximately $1.0 billion in cost avoidances and savings over the 30-plus-year life cycle of the Super Hornet. FIRST was nominated for the Department of Defense awards program for excellence in performance based logistics by the Navy’s Program Executive Office for Tactical Aircraft in Patuxent River Naval Air Station, MD, USA.

    FIRST support contract

    GFE: Ancillary Contracts & Developments

    As noted above, multi-year procurement buys don’t extend to all Super Hornet and Growler components, many of which are provided as “Government Furnished Equipment.” Nor do they cover many fixes and changes to the fighter family’s design. This section includes some of those ancillary items, from FY 2010 onward. It isn’t 100% comprehensive, but may help readers understand the scope involved.

    Additional GFE coverage can be found in DID’s separate Spotlight article covering the AN/APG-79 AESA radar, and an effort to develop long-range Infrared Scan & Track capabilities as a bolt-on addition; those contracts are not included here. Nor are specific items unique to the EA-18G, like jamming equipment, which is covered in the Growler’s own FOCUS article.

    FY 2014

    AIM-120C7 onto LAU-116
    (click to view full)

    Sept 19/14: Support. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $9.4 million delivery order for engineering and logistics support services to improve F/A-18A-F and E/A-18G readiness, expand Interactive Electronic Technical Manual/Structural Repair Manual work packages, and perform maintenance planning. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 US Navy O&M funds.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, Missouri, and is expected to be complete in September 2015 (N00019-11-G-0001, 0211).

    Sept 19/14: Support. Boeing in Jacksonville, FL receives an $8.8 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee to a previously awarded indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract modification, exercising an option for depot-level service life extension and remanufacturing activities, including associated maintenance support and sustainment in support of the F/A-18E/F aircraft. Funds will be committed as needed.

    Work will be performed in Jacksonville, FL (92%), and St. Louis, MO (8%), and is expected to be complete in September 2015 (N00019-14-D-0001).

    Aug 28/14: HARM computers. Raytheon in Tucson, AZ receives $24.6 million for a firm-fixed-price delivery order to provide 158 High Speed Anti-Radiation Command Launch Computers for the U.S. Navy (121) and the government of Australia (37) for F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G aircraft. These CLCs work with AGM-88 HARM and AARGM missiles, which are designed to destroy enemy air defense radars. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2012 – 2013 US Navy ($20.5M / 83.5%) and Australian ($4.1M / 16.5%) budgets.

    Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete in February 2018. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-10-G-0006, DO 0060).

    Aug 18/14: AMC. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems in Minneapolis, MN receives a $16.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for the full-rate Lot 38 production of 60 Advanced Mission Computer Type 3s for E/A-18Gs ordered by the US Navy (48 AMCs / $9.8 million / 60%) and the government of Australia (12 AMCs / $6.5 million / 40%). All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 US Navy aircraft budgets and Australian FMS funds.

    Work will be performed in Bloomington, MN and is expected to be complete in August 2016. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 USC 2304 (c)(1) by US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD (N00019-14-C-0068).

    Aug 11/14: Engines. General Electric Co. in Lynn, MA receives a $311.5 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 75 F414-GE-400 engines and associated devices: 48 production installs for the US Navy ($194.9 million / 63% / all production installs), and 27 for Australia ($116.6 million / 37% / 24 EA-18G production installs and 3 spares), under Production Lot 14. In addition, this modification provides for spare after burner modules, fan modules, high pressure combustor modules, combustor modules, and high and low pressure turbine modules for the US Navy and the government of Australia. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013-14 US Navy aircraft budgets, and Australian funds.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (59%); Hooksett, NH (18%); Rutland, VT (12%); and Madisonville, KY (11%), and is expected to be complete in September 2016. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contracts (N00019-11-C-0045).

    July 23/14: Training. L-3 Communications Corp. in Arlington, TX, receives a $14.1 million firm-fixed-price delivery order modification to improve F/A-18E/F and EA-18G Tactical Operational Flight Trainers (TOFT). The update reduces host/instructor operator station hardware, centralizes software storage in a SAN and provides expandable software storage for future TOFT enhancements, allows for multiple software configurations, and updates all analog Mission Management System (MMS) video output to digital. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 US Navy aircraft budgets.

    Work will be performed in Lemoore, CA (20%); Miramar, CA (20%); Whidbey, WA (15%); Oceana, VA (15%); China Lake, CA (10%); Arlington, TX (10%); and Atsugi, Japan (10%), and is expected to be complete in June 2016. The Us Navy’s Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division in Orlando, FL manages the contract (N61340-12-G-0001).

    July 23/14: Support. Boeing in Jacksonville, FL receives a $7.7 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract modification for additional FY 2014 F/A-18A-F depot-level service life extension and remanufacturing activities, including associated maintenance support and sustainment. Funds will be committed as individual delivery orders are issued.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, Missouri (61%), and Jacksonville, FL (39%), and is expected to be complete in July 2015. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00019-14-D-0001).

    July 14/14: Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $6.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to a previously awarded for aircraft armament equipment items: SUU-789A/A centerline pylons for the US Navy (35) and Royal Australian Government (15); and ALE-50 well covers for the U.S. Navy (11). All funds are committed immediately.

    Work will be performed in El Segundo, CA (95%); Irvine, CA (4%); and St. Louis, MO (1%), and is expected to be complete in May 2017. This contract combines purchase for the U.S. Navy ($4.9 million / 70%) and the government of Australia ($2 million / 30%) under the Foreign Military Sales Program. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00019-14-C-0032).

    May 14/14: Ejection seats. Martin Baker Aircraft Co., Ltd. in Higher Denham nar Uxbridge, Middlesex, England receives a $26.4 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to exercise an option for the procurement of 89 Navy aircrew common ejection seats for F/A-18 series and EA-18G aircraft for the U.S. Navy (65) and the government of Australia (24). In addition, this option provides for associated hardware, equipment, technical data, and production support services for the US Navy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the governments of Australia, Switzerland, Malaysia, and Canada. All funds are committed immediately, using a variety of FY 2013 and 2014 budgets.

    Work will be performed in Johnstown, PA (60%) and Higher Denham, England (40%), and is expected to be complete in May 2016. This contract combines purchase for the US Navy and Marine Corps ($18.8 million, 71%), NASA ($4,985; 0.2%) and the governments of Australia ($6.9 million, 26%); Canada ($538,347; 2%); Switzerland ($154,525; 0.6%); and Malaysia ($39,878; 0.2%) under the Foreign Military Sales Program. US Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-12-C-0066).

    Feb 3/14: A $42.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for F/A-18E/F and EA-18G jumper bundles, pylons, and bomb racks.

    All funds are committed immediately, using USN FY 2013 aircraft budgets. Work will be performed in Meza, AZ (71%) and St. Louis, MO (29%), and is expected to be complete in May 2018 (N00019-09-C-0019).

    Jan 29/14: Raytheon Technical Services Co. LLC in Indianapolis, IN receives a $17.3 million firm-fixed-price delivery order from Australia and the USN for missile launchers. The government of Australia ordered for 28 LAU-115D/A and 30 LAU-116-B/A launchers ($11.4 million / 66%), while the USN ordered 34 LAU-116-B/A missile launchers ($5.8 million / 34%). LAU-115s are used carry air-ti-air missiles like AIM-120 AMRAAM and AIM-9 Sidewinder. LAU-116s are mounted on the undersize of the aircraft, and allow it to carry AIM-120 AMRAAMs there.

    All funds are committed immediately, using USN 2013-2014 aircraft budgets and funds from Australia. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, IN, and is expected to be complete in September 2016 (N00019-10-G-0006).

    Jan 28/14: Marvin Engineering Co., Inc. in Inglewood, CA receives a $7.4 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 156 BRU-32 Ejector Bomb Racks in support of the F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G aircraft.

    All funds are committed immediately, using USN aircraft budgets. Work will be performed in Inglewood, CA, and is expected to be complete in July 2016 (N00421-13-C-0002).

    Nov 6/13: F414. General Electric in Lynn, MA receives an $8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, for F414-GE-400 engine long-lead materials.

    All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 budget dollars. Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (59%); Hooksett, NH (18%); Rutland, VT (12%); and Madisonville, KY (11%), and is expected to be complete in October 2015 (N00019-11-C-0045).

    Nov 5/13: Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $13.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for Super Hornet family equipment: 270 station control units, 13 aerial refueling stores (ARS) air probes, 13 ARS fuel probes, 26 ARS suspension lugs, 168 chaff dispenser cover, 26 ALE-50 towed decoy dispensers, 26 ALE-50 decoy protectors, 26 ALE-50 decoy chassis, 26 ALE-67 Radar Warning Receiver mounting bases, 26 mounting retainers, and 12 centerline feed-thru plates.

    All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 budget dollars. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in August 2015 (N00019-09-C-0019).

    FY 2013

    China Lake TOFT
    (click to view full)

    Sept 23/13: Avionics. A $12.9 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for 114 Super Hornet advanced navigation system retrofit kits. $2.8 million is committed immediately. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in May 2017 (N00019-11-G-0001, 0164).

    Sept 23/13: ECP – DTS. A $24.6 million for firm-fixed-price delivery order for Distributed Targeting System B kits (modification kits), bulk data cartridge units and mass storage units. It’s part of the F/A-18E/F Full Rate Production I aircraft Distributed Targeting System engineering change proposal. The DTS is discussed in the “Future Hornets” section.

    This contract combines purchases for the U.S. Navy ($17.75M/ 72%) and the Government of Australia ($6.83M/ 28%). All funds are committed immediately.

    Work will be performed in Melbourne, FL (75%); St. Louis, MO (21%); North Reading, MA (1.6%); and various other locations in the United States (2.4%); and is expected to be completed in August 2015 (N00019-11-G-0001, 0161).

    July 18/13: F414. General Electric in Lynn, MA receives an $87 million firm-fixed-price contract modifications, exercising an option for 22 Full Rate Production Lot 17 F414-GE-400 install engines to equip 11 F/A-18E/F aircraft. Other Lot 17 engine buys have included 18 engines (EA-18Gs, Dec 28/12) and 52 engines (Nov 30/12). All funds are committed immediately from Navy FY 2013 procurement budgets. A Sept 26/12 contract set the maximum at 83 engines, and they’ve now ordered 82 engines for 41 planes.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (59%); Hooksett, NH (18%); Rutland, VT (12%); and Madisonville, KY (11%), and is expected to be complete in October 2015. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-C-0045).

    July 17/13: ECP. Boeing in St. Louis, MO, is being receives an $8.1 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for 84 F/A-18E/F retrofit kits (ECP 6282, AYC 1439 A1). All funds are committed immediately.

    Engineering Change Proposals are long-term modifications to the aircraft, involving very specific parts of the plane. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (80%), and St. Charles, MO (20%), and is expected to be complete in February 2016. T US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-G-0001, #0141).

    June 13/13: Radar. Raytheon in El Segundo, CA receives a $22.4 million order, covering 53 ECP-6279 retrofit kits for F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G aircraft. ECPs involve aircraft or component modifications, and the announcement doesn’t explain which one, but our coverage elsewhere shows that it involves improvements to the APG-79 AESA radar. All funds are committed.

    Work will be performed in Forest, MS (80%), and El Segundo, CA (20%), and is expected to be completed in July 2015. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-10-G-0006; delivery order 0036).

    June 13/13: Radar. Boeing St. Louis, MO receives a $9 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for 30 ECP-6038 R2/R3 retrofit kits for the F/A-18 E/F aircraft, including radomes for the AN/APG-79 active electronically scanned array radar. A fighter’s radome nose cone is very specialized. It needs to allow the right radiation wavelengths to pass in and out easily, while remaining durable enough to handle the shocks and stresses of flight.

    Work will be performed in Marion, VA (57%) and St. Louis, Mo. (43%), and is expected to be completed in January 2016. Fiscal 2013 Aircraft Procurement Navy contract funds in the amount of $8,996,280 are being obligated on this award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-G-0001).

    May 29/13: Avionics. Honeywell Aerospace Defense & Space in Albuquerque, NM receives a $9 million firm-fixed-price contract for 121 F/A-18E/F and EA-18G advanced multi-purpose displays. All funds are committed immediately.

    Work will be performed in Albuquerque, NM, and is expected to be complete in January 2015. This contract was not competitively procured, pursuant to FAR 6.302-1. The Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-13-C-0048).

    May 9/13: Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $6.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for F/A-18E/F and EA-18G armament equipment, including SUU-78A/A Pylons and well covers. All funds are committed immediately.

    Work will be performed in El Segundo, CA (85%); St. Louis, MO (9%); and Irvine, CA (6%), and is expected to be complete in January 2016. US Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD, is the contracting activity (N00019-09-C-0019).

    May 9/13: F414. General Electric Co. in Lynn, MA receives a $22.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 6 F414-GE-400 engines, pre-installed in 3 EA-18Gs.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (59%); Hooksett, NH (18%); Rutland, VT (12%); and Madisonville, KY (11%), and is expected to be complete in March 2015. Contract funds in the amount of $22,237,386 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD, is the contracting activity (N00019-11-C-0045).

    May 6/13: F414. General Electric Co. in Lynn, MA receives a $45.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 7 F414-GE-400 spare engines, 1 fan module, 13 high pressure compressor modules, 9 high pressure turbine modules, and 8 low pressure turbine modules.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (59%); Hooksett, NH (18%); Rutland, VT (12%); and Madisonville, KY (11%), and is expected to be complete in November 2015. Fiscal 2013 Aircraft Procurement Navy funds in the amount of $45,156,940 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD, is the contracting activity (N00019-11-C-0045).

    May 6/13: Seats. Martin Baker Aircraft Co. Ltd. in Upper Denham, Middlesex, England receives a $25.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 100 Hornet/ Super Hornet family Navy Aircrew Common Ejection Seats (NACES), on behalf of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps. In addition, this contract provides for NACES hardware, equipment, technical data, and production support services for the US Navy, US Marine Corps, NASA, and the government of Finland. The contract breakdown is: US Navy and Marine Corps ($25M / 99%); NASA ($4,389 / 0.3%, F/A-18 Hornet only); and the government of Finland ($184,379 / 0.7%, F/A-18C/D Hornets only).

    Work will be performed in Johnstown, PA (60%), and Upper Denham, Near Uxbridge, Middlesex, England (40%), and is expected to be complete in April 2015. All funds are committed immediately, with $2.9 million expiring at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13. It’s managed by US Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD (N00019-12-C-0066).

    April 26/13: Weapons. Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ receives a $12.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order to integrate the new AGM-154C-1 JSOW into the F/A-18E/F aircraft’s H10E Operational Flight Program (core operating system) software. This JSOW variant can hit moving naval targets, turning the stealthy glide bomb into a short range anti-ship missile.

    Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete in February 2015. $7.7 million in FY 2013 Navy Weapons Procurement funds are committed immediately, with the rest available as needed. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD, is the contracting activity (N00019-10-G-0006, #2002).

    April 19/13: Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a maximum $14.8 million contract for airframe structural support components. The award is a firm-fixed-price, sole-source, definite quantity type contract with no quantity options for the USAF.

    Work will be performed until Aug 31/18. The contract is managed by the US Defense Logistics Agency Aviation in Richmond, VA, (SPM4A1-09-G-0004-865W).

    March 22/13: Gun. General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products in Williston, VT receives a $7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 19 M61A2 Lightweight 20mm Gatling Gun Systems in support of FY 2013 F/A-18 E/F aircraft. EA-18Gs don’t carry the cannon.

    Work will be performed in Williston, VT and is expected to be complete in March 2015. All funds are committed immediately, from the FY 2013 Aircraft Procurement, Navy budget line. The US Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Patuxent River, MD (N00421-10-C-0024).

    Feb 27/13: AMC. Harris Corp. in Palm Bay, FL receives a $10.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for the obsolescence upgrade to the Fibre Channel Network Switch (FCNS) used in the Advanced Mission Computer & Displays (AMC&D) system on board US Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, EA-18G Growler, and E-2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft.

    Work will be performed in Melbourne, FL and is expected to be complete in September 2015. The USN is using funds from its FY 2012 Aircraft Procurement and FY 2013 Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation accounts, and all funds are committed immediately. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to the FAR 6.302-1. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-13-C-0039).

    Jan 10/13: AMC. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems in Minneapolis, MN receives a $19.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 76 forward fit Type 3 Advanced Mission Computers for the F/A-18E/F and E/A-18G aircraft. All contract funds are committed immediately.

    Work will be performed in Bloomington, MN (80%) and Albuquerque, NM (20%), and is expected to be complete in December 2014. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-10-C-0014).

    Dec 28/12: F414. General Electric Co., Lynn, MA receives a $67.1 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 18 F414-GE-400 Production Lot 17 install engines, and 24 “devices”. They’ll be used in EA-18Gs.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (59%); Hooksett, NH (18%); Rutland, VT (12%); and Madisonville, KY (11%), and is expected to be complete in March 2015. Contract funds in the amount of $67,141,518 will be obligated on this award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-C-0045).

    Dec 19/12: Avionics. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives an $8.9 million firm-fixed-price delivery order against a previously issued Basic Ordering Agreement for 285 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) retrofit kits in support of F/A-18C and F/A-18F aircraft.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (56%); Meza, AZ (37%); and El Paso, TX (7%), and is expected to be complete in June 2015. All contract funds are committed immediately, of which $1.35 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract.

    Dec 19/12: F414 ECIP. General Electric Aviation in Lynn, MA receives a $17.5 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order for engineering and engine system improvement services, as part of the F414 and F404 Engine Component Improvement Programs. $10.8 million are committed immediately, of which $6 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 13/13 (N00019-11-G-0001).

    This contract combines purchases for the U.S. Navy ($13.3M / 75.6%) and the Governments of Sweden ($1.3M / 7.4%); Australia ($832,277 / 4.8%); Canada ($516,877 / 3.0%); Spain ($514,156 / 2.9%); Finland ($380,856 / 2.2%); Korea ($225,793 / 1.3%); Kuwait ($233,955 / 1.3%); Switzerland ($204,030 / 1.2%), and Malaysia ($48,967 / 0.3%), under the Foreign Military Sales Program. Work will be performed in Lynn, MA, and is expected to be complete in December 2013. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-09-G-0009).

    Dec 18/12: Raytheon Technical Services Co. LLC in Indianapolis, IN receives a $17.3 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for 102 LAU-115B/A missile launchers to equip US Navy F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft (86 / $15.1M), and Australian F/A-18Fs (16 / $2.2M). These launchers are used with various adapters for air-to-air missiles: short range AIM-9 Sidewinder/ AIM-132 ASRAAM, or medium range AIM-7 Sparrow/ AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles.

    Work will be performed in Indianapolis, IN in and is expected to be complete in October 2015. All contract funds are committed (N00019-10-G-0006).

    Nov 30/12: F414. General Electric in Lynn, MA receives a $197.5 million modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract, exercising an option for the procurement of 52 Production Lot 17 F414-GE-400 install engines and devices, used in F/A-18E/F family fighters. That many installed engines would equip 26 planes.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (59%); Hooksett, NH (18%); Rutland, VT (12%); and Madisonville, KY (11%), and is expected to be complete in March 2015. All contract funds are committed with this award, which is managed by US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD (N00019-11-C-0045).

    Nov 15/12: Marvin Engineering Co. Inc. in Inglewood, CA receives a $17.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for 420 BRU-32 B/A Ejector Racks. These racks can be positioned on the Super Hornet family’s centerline or wing hardpoints, and are used as the base for many stores fittings. BRU-32s have 14- and 30-inch suspension hooks, and can hold single stores or BRU-33/A vertical ejector racks (VER). The 14-inch hooks add compatibility with LAU-115/A, LAU-117/A, and LAU-118/A missile launchers. Operation is via gas pressure, with a safety interlock and sway bracing. Sensing switches are incorporated to provide status information to the cockpit.

    Work will be performed in Inglewood, CA, and is expected to be complete in December 2015. All contract funds are now committed. This contract was competitively procured via an electronic request for proposals, with 2 offers received by the US Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Patuxent River, MD (N00421-13-C-0002).

    Nov 14/12: Training. Boeing discusses an ongoing project to allow flying Super Hornets and F-15E Strike Eagle fighters to interact with virtual opponents flown in simulators, as well as “constructive” threats created wholly by a computer. This will reduce the number of opposing “red” aircraft that have to fly real missions alongside the F/A-18E/Fs or F-15Es.

    Boeing began developing this modeling and simulation technology on its own in 2007, and a series of demonstrations with an F-15E through November 2009 verified key components. A Super Hornet recently completed its 1st flight tests with these new technologies, and the most recent flight tests, involved 2 F/A-18Es and 2 F-15Es simulating air combat against 2 live F-16s and 12 virtual aircraft, as well as multiple ground threats. A constructive E-3C Block 40/45 AWACS surrogate provided command and control.

    Under the current 3-year, $6.3 million contract with the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory, the pilot project will culminate with a capstone demonstration at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada in late 2013. Boeing.

    Nov 13/12: IFF. The US Naval Air Traffic Management Systems (PMA-213) program office plans to begin Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) Mode 5 testing aboard an F/A-18E/F Super Hornet this winter, as part of its effort to field the civil-military signal on nearly every surface, subsurface and airborne platform in the fleet.

    Compared to NATO’s Mode 4, it adds better encryption, spread spectrum modulation, time of day authentication, and a unique aircraft identifier. IFF Mode 5 level 2 adds aircraft GPS position information and other attributes, which can help IFF systems when aircraft are grouped closely together. Once fielded, Mode 5 IFF is expected to achieve Joint Initial Operational Capability in FY 2014. US NAVAIR.

    Nov 7/12: Training. L-3 Link Simulation & Training (L-3 Link) announces a contract from the US Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division to integrate SimuSphere HD-9 high-definition displays on 13 F/A-18E/F Tactical Operational Flight Trainers (TOFTs) at NAS Lemoore, CA; NAS Oceana, VA; and Naval Air Facility Atsugi, Japan. The Atsugi TOFTs will be new, and the others will be upgrades. This will be followed by upgrades to 4 existing EA-18G TOFTs at NAS Whidbey Island, WA.

    This award follows L-3 Link’s successful fielding of SimuSphere HD-9 systems on 4 existing F/A-18C TOFTs at Naval Air Station (NAS) Oceana, VA in April 2012. The changes will help the TOFTs take full advantage of L-3’s HD World simulation product line, which combines high-definition databases, image generation systems, physics-based processing and visual system display technologies. The upgraded TOFTs will support a full range of tactical training capabilities, including the ability to use their actual flight night vision goggles, and experience real-world performance over a 360-degree field-of-regard.

    FY 2012 F414-GE-400 engine
    (click to see in sections)

    Sept 26/12: F414. General Electric Co. in Lynn, MA receives a $327.5 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 80 Production Lot 16 F414-GE-400 engines, 2 F414-GE-400 spare engines, 1 high pressure turbine module, and long-lead materials for the FY 2013/ Lot 17 order of 83 F414-GE-400 engines.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (59%); Hooksett, NH (18%); Rutland, VT (12%); and Madisonville, KY (11%), and is expected to be complete in June 2014. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-C-0045).

    Sept 26/12: TOFTs. L-3 Link Simulation & Training Division in Arlington, TX receives a $46 million firm-fixed-price delivery order covering high definition visual systems for 23 F/A-18 and EA-18G Tactical Operational Flight Trainers (TOFTs), and installation of 2 government-owned F/A-18E/F TOFTs at the Naval Air Facility Atsugi, in Japan. Looks like the USN’s stock of government-owned TOFTs just hit 3 (q.v. March 1/12 entry).

    Work will be performed in Arlington, TX (92%), and Atsugi, Japan (8%), and is expected to be complete in May 2015. The US Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division in Orlando, FL manages this contract (N61340-12-G-0001).

    Sept 6/12: AMC-4. Boeing successfully flight tests General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems’ new Type 4 Advanced Mission Computer during a 90-minute flight at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, CA. Additional testing is planned, and Boeing is set to deliver Super Hornets and Growlers with the new computer in 2014.

    The AMC increases Super Hornet family computing power and accelerates image and mission processing functions, in order to support new functions like the Distributed Targeting System, Infrared Search and Track pod, and a new high-definition touch-screen display.Boeing.

    Sept 6/12: Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $21.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft armament equipment. It includes station control units, ALE-50 towed decoy protectors, dispensers and chassis, air probes, fuel probes, suspension lugs, mounting bases, mounting retainers and centerline feed thru plates.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO and is expected to be complete in October 2014. The US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-09-C-0019).

    Aug 29/12: Memory. A $10.6 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for engineering services required to retrofit a new Digital Memory Device in Production Lot 26-29 F/A-18E/F aircraft.

    Work will be performed in Melbourne, FL (78%); St. Louis, MO (19%); and Oklahoma, City, OK (3%), and is expected to be complete in December 2014. $1.2 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-G-0001).

    July 12/12: F414. General Electric in Lynn, MA receives a $13.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for F414-GE-400 engine support.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (90%) and Evendale, OH (10%), and is expected to be complete in December 2012. $274,986 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-C-0045).

    May 23-30/2012: SATCOM. Boeing and the US Navy’s VX-31 Squadron have successfully completed an in-flight satellite communications (SATCOM) system demonstration using an EA-18G. If the system is added to fleet F/A-18E/F Super Hornets as well, it would allow their aircrews to conduct 2-way, secure voice and data communications that reach around the globe.

    The test took place at the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division’s Advanced Weapons Lab at China Lake, CA, less than 90 days after the initial request. The secure voice & data transmissions were received by ground personnel at China Lake, and across the country at NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD.

    Boeing says they have delivered more than 480 F/A-18E/Fs to the U.S. Navy, adding that the fighters have logged more than 166,000 combat flight hours supporting operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Boeing.

    May 29/12: ECM. Raytheon in Goleta, CA receives a $9.4 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for the digital conversion and testing of 56 AN/ALR-67v3 radar warning receivers.

    Work will be performed in Forest, MS (48%), San Diego, CA (38%), and Goleta, CA (14%). Work is expected to be complete in September 2014, and US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract.

    May 7/12: Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $16.3 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive-fee contract modification for F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G aircraft armament, including jumper bundles, pylon attach fittings, sensor well covers, adaptors, and pylons.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be completed in May 2015. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-09-C-0019).

    May 1/12: Seats. Martin Baker Aircraft Co. Ltd. in Higher Denham near Uxbridge, Middlesex, England receives a $22 million firm-fixed-price contract for 88 Navy aircrew common ejection seats and associated hardware, equipment, technical data, and production support services for the US Navy ($21.9M / 99.69% / 12 F/A-18A+, 22 F/A-18E; 12 F/A-18F; and 24 E/A-18G) and the government of Kuwait ($69,121 / 0.31% / 18 F/A-18C).

    Work will be performed in Johnstown, PA (60%), and Upper Denham, Near Uxbridge, Middlesex, England (40%), and is expected to be complete in March 2014. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 2304c1. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-12-C-0066).

    April 4/12: F414 ECIP. General Electric Aviation in Lynn, MA receives an $8.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order against a previously issued basic ordering agreement for the F414 Engine Component Improvement Program, to include engineering and engine system improvement support. Work will be performed in Lynn, MA, and is expected to be complete in December 2012.

    This contract combines purchases for the US Navy ($8.3M / 93%) and the government of Australia ($578,616 / 7%). US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-09-G-0009).

    March 6/12: Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives an $8 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive-fee contract modification for 57 SUU-78 A/A pylons, and 40 ALE-50 towed decoy well covers.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in December 2014. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-09-C-0019).

    March 5/12: Gun. General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products in Williston, VT receives awarded a $7.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to exercise an option for 21 M61A2 20mm Lightweight Gatling Gun Systems in support of FY 2012 F/A-18 E/F aircraft.

    Work will be performed in Williston, VT, and is expected to be complete in February 2014. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00421-10-C-0024).

    March 1/12: TOFT. The US Navy has installed its only government owned and operated Super Hornet Tactical Operational Flight Trainer (TOFT) at its China Lake, CA facility, in order to save millions of dollars by avoiding shuttle flights to NAS Lemoore, CA.

    The TOFT takes up 1,800 square feet, and requires 30 tons of extra air conditioners, but it offers local VX-9 and VX-31 pilots an alternative for qualification training and mission rehearsal. It also allows Navy PMA-205 to conduct software upgrade tests locally, shortening turnaround times. China Lake’s TOFT is identical to those located at NAS Lemoore and NAS Oceana, except that the 9-panel Simusphere visual-display dome has been replaced by a 5 foot flat panel screen. If you try this at home, we want to see the pictures! Boeing.

    Feb 29/12: ECM. Raytheon Co., Space and Airborne Systems, Goleta, CA receives a $77.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for Full Rate Production Lot 14: 89 AN/ALR-67v3 radar warning receivers, and 9 countermeasure signal processor weapons replacement assemblies.

    The AN/ALR-67v3 is the standard RWR system for Super Hornet family fighters, and also equips some F/A-18 Hornets – Canada and Switzerland both operate earlier-generation F/A-18 Hornets, and Australia operates both Hornets and Super Hornets. This Radar Warning Receiver is more like mission central for defensive systems. It doesn’t just alert the pilot(s) that enemy radars are targeting their fighter; it provides accurate identification, lethality, and azimuth displays of both hostile and friendly emitters. In its spare time, it controls the electronic warfare data bus, and interfaces with electronic warfare systems, the onboard radar, the airborne mission computer, and the F/A-18 weapon systems. It’s the first deployed radar warning receiver to combine a fully channelized digital receiver architecture with the power of dual processors.

    Work will be performed in Forest, MS (34%); Lansdale, PA (18%); Goleta, CA (17%); Chatsworth, CA (11%); San Diego, CA (10%); Sydney, Australia (4%); Milwaukie, OR (3%); and McKinney, TX (3%). Work is expected to be complete in December 2014. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-09-C-0052).

    Feb 17/12: Boeing receives a $22 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order for F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G follow-on test and evaluation supplies and services (N00019-11-G-0001).

    Work will be performed at the Naval Air Station, Patuxent River, Md. (77%); St. Louis, MO (21%); El Segundo, CA (1%); and Bethpage, NY (1%), and is expected to be completed in February 2013. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-G-0001).

    Feb 16/12: Displays. Honeywell International Defense & Space Electronic Systems in Albuquerque, NM receives an $8.1 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 124 full rate production advanced multi-purpose displays (70 5″x5″ forward displays; 36 5″x5″ aft displays; and 18 8″x10″ displays) for Lot 35 F/A-18F and EA-18G aircraft.

    Work will be performed in Albuquerque, N.M., and is expected to be completed in December 2013. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md. manages the contract (N00019-10-C-0061).

    Feb 10/12: Raytheon in Goleta, CA receives an $11.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for 56,488 hours of sensor system software and hardware support in order to update, improve, and enhance F/A-18 Hornet & Super Hornet family aircraft, including the EA-18G.

    Work will be performed in Goleta, CA (59%), and El Segundo, CA (41%), and is expected to be complete in February 2015. This contract combines purchases for the U.S. Navy ($7.4M/ 64%); and, under the Foreign Military Sales Program, the governments of Malaysia ($1.3M/ 12%), Finland ($961,391/ 8%), Switzerland ($877,792/ 8%), Australia ($501,595/ 4%), and Kuwait ($501,595/ 4%). This contract was not competitively procured, pursuant to FAR 6.302-1, by the US Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division in China Lake, CA (N68936-12-D-0001).

    Feb 2/12: F414. General Electric Aviation in Lynn, MA receives a $7.5 million performance-based logistics requirements contract modification to supply repair & replacement consumables for 879 US Navy F414 engines, which equip its F/A-18 Super Hornet family planes.

    Work will be performed at Lynn, MA (90%), and Jacksonville, FL (10%), and will run until Dec 31/12. This was a sole source requirement by NAVSUP Weapon Systems Support in Philadelphia, PA (N00383-11-D-002M).

    Jan 27/12: Avionics. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems in Bloomington, MN received awarded a $20.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for the full-rate production of 80 Type 3 Advanced Mission Computers (AMC) for the US Navy’s F/A-18E/F and E/A-18G aircraft ($19.9M/ 96%), and 3 more Type-3 AMC spares for Australia ($0.7M/ 4%).

    Work will be performed in Bloomington, MN (80%), and Albuquerque, NM (20%), and is expected to be complete in December 2012. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-10-C-0014).

    Jan 12/12: A 5-year, $80.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for maintenance, manufacturing of parts, instrumentation and engineering support for all models of the F/A-18 & EA-18G aircraft including future variants for both domestic and Foreign Military Sales, to pay for ground and flight test programs at the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Patuxent River, MD. Funds will be obligated on individual task orders as they are issued, between now and January 2017.

    Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (97%), and St. Louis, MO (3%). This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 by the US Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Patuxent River, MD (N00421-12-D-0003).

    Dec 8/11: AMC-4. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $6.7 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive-fee contract modification for the Delta phase of the Advanced Mission Computer (AMC) Type 4 system, which finalizes development and prepares AMC Type 4 for production. See Sept 15/11 entry for background.

    Work will be performed in Bloomington, MN (71%); St. Louis, MO (24%); and Linthicum, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in December 2013. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-09-C-0019).

    Nov 18/11: Launchers. Raytheon Technical Services Co., LLC in Indianapolis, IN receives a $55.9 million delivery order modification, exercising an option for 237 LAU-116B/A and 213 LAU-115D/A launchers, for use on Super Hornet family aircraft. LAU-115 launchers sit under the wings, and mount 2 AIM-9 or AIM-120 air-to-air missiles each, if LAU-7 or LAU-127 launchers are bolted to its sides. They could also carry one past-generation AIM-7P Sparrow missile directly, but don’t. LAU-116 launchers are the ones that sit flush with the plane’s side body, and hold AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles.

    Work will be performed in Indianapolis, IN, and is expected to be complete in August 2015. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-10-G-0006).

    Nov 18/11: Maintenance Tech. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives an $11.2 million firm-fixed-price delivery order modification for the automated maintenance environment, data-at-rest, and similar automated maintenance environment in support of the F/A-18 A-D, F/A-18 E/F, and EA-18G aircraft. Your car’s mechanic uses this technology, and the people who maintain $60+ million fighter jets need it, too. It’s one of those “small ticket price, big difference” items.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in December 2012. $263,864 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00383-06-D-001J).

    Nov 9/11: Australia. Boeing had been working with Australia’s Production Parts to provide Super Hornet rudder pedal kits, but the firm entered receivership in August 2011. Managing these kinds of minor shifts and contingencies is one of the headaches of running a global supply chain, and foreign suppliers add an extra layer of difficulty, even as their presence helps firms retain international customers.

    Over 2 months later, Boeing has signed a contract with Ferra Engineering in Brisbane, Australia. Ferra will produce the rest of Production Parts’ order, as well as 123 additional kits for the global Super Hornet program. The switch has helped by the Australian government’s Global Supply Chain Program, which funded Boeing’s specialist team in its search for an alternative. Boeing works on a number of projects in Australia, and from 2007-2011, 24 Australian companies have won 101 Boeing sub-contracts worth A$ 256 million. Australian DoD.

    Oct 3/11: A Boeing video details changes made to the Super Hornet family’s “outer” wing frame design, which converted it from an assembly of many parts from different vendors, into a machined 1-piece frame with far fewer additions. Labor assembly time savings alone were about $16,000 per plane.

    Note that despite the name, the outer wing frame sits inside the visible wing. The flip side of this effort is that any cracks or serious damage to that now-larger part, involve replacing a larger and more expensive item, which also needs more storage room. Even there, however, faster replacement time and more certain quality may offer offsetting benefits.

    FY 2011 AN/ALR-67 V3
    (click to view full)

    Sept 29/11: DTS. A $12 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for the low rate initial production of 26 Distributed Targeting Systems and supporting equipment/documentation for the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft. Work will be performed in Melbourne, FL (85%), and St. Louis, MO (15%), and is expected to be complete in December 2013 (N00019-11-G-0001).

    The Distributed Targeting System improves onboard hardware and software processing, in order to produce precise ground targeting solutions. It’s part of the US Navy’s F/A-18E/F Network Centric Warfare Upgrades program, and is slated for operational testing in late 2011, and deployment in operational fighters in 2012.

    Sept 27/11: DTS. A $7 million firm-fixed-price delivery order against a previously issued basic ordering agreement for the design, development, and first article production of Operational Test Program sets 824, 825, and 560, in support of the F/A-18E/F Aircraft Distributing Targeting System.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in December 2014. The US Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Lakehurst, NJ manages the contract (N68335-10-G-0012).

    Sept 15/11: ECM. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $7.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G aircraft armament equipment, to include a number of systems. 174 station control units comprise the first set of capabilities.

    F/A-18E/F Super Hornets with tanks can act as low-capacity hose-and-drogue aerial tankers, and this order covers 22 aerial refueling store (ARS) suspension lugs; 12 centerline feed-through plates; 11 ARS air probes; and 11 ARS fuel probes.

    Self-protection items include 6 ALE-50 dispensers for those towed active missile decoys; 6 ALE-50 chassis towed decoys; and 6 ALE-50 protector towed decoys. They’re also ordering 4 sets of mounting bases and retainers for the plane’s ALR-67 radar warning receivers.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in December 2013. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD (N00019-09-C-0019).

    Sept 15/11: AMC-4. Boeing in St. Louis, MO received a $7.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to continue development of the new Advanced Mission Computer (AMC) Type 4 System for the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft. This modification will also begin the necessary customization of the AMC for use in existing Navy F-18s.

    Tom Mantia is Boeing’s AMC Type 4 program manager, and a production contract is expected in 2012. Boeing later adds that the new computers will “increase aircraft performance, address obsolescence issues, and improve image- and mission-processing functions.”

    Work will be performed in Bloomington, MN (66.5%); St. Louis, MO (25%); and Linthicum, MD (8.5%), and is expected to be complete in October 2012. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages this contract (N00019-09-C-0019).

    Sept 13/11: Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $46.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order 0014 for new spare parts to support the USA’s F/A-18E/F aircraft.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be completed in Dec 30/13. This was a non-competitive requirement, and one offer was received in response to the solicitation by NAVSUP Weapon Systems Support in Philadelphia, PA (N00383-06-D-001J, #0014).

    Sept 13/11: F414. General Electric Aircraft Engines in Lynn, MA receives a $38.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 3 F414-GE-400 spare engines; 15 combuster modules; 20 high pressure turbine modules; 15 high pressure compressor modules; and 10 low pressure turbine modules. All will support American Super hornet family aircraft.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (51.9%); Madisonville, KY (20.9%); Hooksett, NH (12%); Rutland, VT (4.6%); Dayton, OH (2.5%); Jacksonville, FL (1.8%); Muskegon, MI (1.6%); Terre Haute, IN (1.6%); Bromont, PQ, Canada (1.3%); Asheville, NC (1.2%); and Evendale, OH (0.6%), and is expected to be completed in March 2013. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-06-C-0088).

    Aug 30/11: ECP. A $16.9 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price -incentive contract modification for non-recurring and recurring engineering in support of Engineering Change Proposal 6213R2, “Trailing Edge Flap Honeycomb Redesign” for the F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G aircraft. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in May 2015.

    The “honeycomb” is the flap’s internal structure. The April 27/10 entry documents structural issues discovered in long-term fatigue testing, which have led to this redesign. When combined with the $25 million in the June 17/11 entry, this ECP has reached $41.9 million (N00019-09-C-0019).

    Aug 1/11: F414. General Electric Aircraft Engines in Lynn, MA is being awarded a $71.5 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for supplemental engine purchases of 18 F414-GE-400 engines and associated device kits. That would equip 9 Super Hornet family planes, which are seeing more orders due to the F-35C Lightning II’s development delays.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (44.8%); Madisonville, KY (18.1%); Evandale, OH (14.1%); Hooksett, NH (10.4%); Rutland, VT (3.9%); Dayton, OH (2.2%); Jacksonville, FL (1.5%); Muskegon, MI (1.4%); Terre Haute, IN (1.4%); Bromont, Canada (1.2%); and Asheville, NC (1%). Work is expected to be complete in July 2013 (N00019-06-C-0088).

    July 13/11: Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $53.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for Super Hornet family “armament equipment,” including jumper bundles, pylon attach fittings, sensor well covers, adaptors, pylons, and tooling.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in February 2015. $19.3 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract.

    June 30/11: F414. GE Aviation Engines in Lynn, MA receives a 3.5 year, performance based logistics contract to support the F414 engine components used on the F/A-18E/F, and EA-18G aircraft. The contract is worth up to $414.6 million, and GE will be responsible for engine repair, engine replacement, consumables support, and program support as required.

    Work will be performed in Jacksonville, FL, and is expected to be complete by December 2014. This contract was not awarded through full and open competition, but only 1 firm (the engine manufacturer) was solicited, and 1 offer was received by the US Naval Inventory Control Point in Philadelphia, PA (N00383-11-D-002M).

    May 12/11: F414. General Electric Aircraft Engines Business Group in Lynn, MA receives a $9.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 1 spare F414-GE-400 engine; 8 combustion modules, 7 fan modules, and 1 high pressure turbine module.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (51.8%); Madisonville, KY (20.9%); Hooksett, NH (12%); Rutland, VT (4.6%); Dayton, OH (2.5%); Jacksonville, FL (1.8%); Muskegon, MI. (1.6%); Terre Haute, IN (1.6%); Bromont, QB, Canada (1.4%); Asheville, NC. (1.2%); and Evandale, OH (0.6%), and is expected to be complete in December 2012. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-06-C-0088).

    April 21/11: ECM. Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems in Goleta, CA receives an $84.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 87 Full Rate Production Lot 13 AN/ALR-67v3 radar warning receivers for the U.S. Navy (77/ $72.1M/ 85%) and the government of Switzerland (10/ $9.4M/ 11%). In addition, this option provides for the procurement of ALR-67 weapons replaceable assemblies for the governments of Canada ($2.5M/ 3%) and Australia ($762,842/ 1%).

    Work will be performed in Goleta, CA (41%); Lansdale, PA (18%); Forest, MS (12%); Chatsworth, CA (11%); San Diego, CA (10%); Sydney, Australia (4%); Milwaukie, OR (2%); and McKinney, TX (2%). Work is expected to be complete in December 2013. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract. See also Raytheon release.

    April 8/11: Boeing receives a $7.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order for supplies and services to support the F/A-18 E/F Structures Service Life Assessment Program. It’s very important to have a baseline for that, and to test for unexpected early fatigue spots within the fleet.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (82.8%); El Segundo, CA (14.6%); Bethlehem, PA (2.5%); and Lynwood, CA (0.1%); and is expected to be complete in December 2013. $101,924 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-G-0001).

    March 30/11: A $40 million awarded fixed-price-incentive-fee contract modification for one-time engineering services in support of the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G’s next generation advanced mission computer system.

    Work was performed in Bloomington, MN (53.7%), Baltimore, MD (33.3%), and St. Louis, MO (13%). This is a retroactive contract, with the Pentagon noting that “Work was completed in December 2010″ (N00019-09-C-0019).

    March 25/11: Avionics. Boeing receives a $10.6 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for 741 Honeywell model GG1320 ring laser gyros, to be installed in F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft for the U.S. Navy (714) and the government of Australia (27 spares).

    Work will be performed in Clearwater, FL (87%), and St. Louis, MO (13%), and is expected to be complete in April 2013. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-G-0001).

    March 22/11: F414. General Electric Aircraft Engines in Lynn, MA receives a $246.5 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 68 F414-GE-400 engines and device kits from Production Lot 15, to equip F/A-18E/F aircraft. That would equip 34 planes, without spares.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (44.8%); Madisonville, KY (18.1%); Evandale, OH (14.1%); Hooksett, NH (10.4%); Rutland, VT (3.9%); Dayton, OH (2.2%); Jacksonville, FL (1.5%); Muskegon, MI (1.4%); Terre Haute, IN (1.4%); Bromont, Quebec, Canada (1.2%); and Asheville, NC (1%); and is expected to be complete in April 2013. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages this contract (N00019-06-C-0088). See also The Daily of Lynn.

    On the same day, GEAE also received a $453.1 million firm-fixed-price, sole-source, requirements-type contract for engine parts, from the US Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. This Defense Logistics Agency contract runs until March 31/12, and is almost certain to include some F414 related parts, but also includes engine types equipping other aircraft and helicopters: F/A-18 A-D Hornets, F-16s Falcons, large aircraft like the C-5 Galaxy and VC-25 Air Force One, and helicopters like the UH/AH-1, AH-64, H-60 family, etc. (SPM400-03-D-9404).

    March 7/11: Gun. General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products in Williston, VT received a $7.8 million firm-fixed price contract modification, exercising an option to buy 22 M61A2 lightweight 20mm Gatling gun systems in support of the F/A-18 E/F program. Note that EA-18Gs never mount the nose cannon, as the space is taken by electronics.

    Work will be performed in Burlington, VT (50%), and Saco, ME (50%), and is expected to be complete in April 2013. The US Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00421-10-C-0024).

    March 4/11: Seats. Martin-Baker Aircraft Co., Ltd. in Middlesex, England receives an $18.3 million firm-fixed price contract modification to exercise an option for 65 Navy Aircrew Common Ejection Seats (NACES). They will equip F/A-18 A+/C+ Hornets and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler aircraft flown by the U.S. Navy ($18.2M/ 99.4%), and the air forces of Australia (F/A-18A+ and F/A-18F; $51,920/ 0.27%) and Kuwait (F/A-18C+; $61,730; 0.33%). This option also buys associated hardware, equipment, technical data, and production support services.

    Work will be performed in Johnstown, PA (60%), and Middlesex, England (40%), and is expected to be complete in December 2012. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-07-C-0011).

    March 4/11: Avionics. Honeywell International Defense & Space Electronic Systems in Albuquerque, NM receives an $8.3 million modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-10-C-0061) to exercise an option for the procurement of 131 Advanced Multi-purpose Displays (68 of their 5″x5″ forward displays; 42 of their 5″x5″ aft displays; and 21 of their 8″x10″ displays) for Lot 35 F/A-18F and EA-18G aircraft.

    Work will be performed in Albuquerque, NM, and is expected to be complete in December 2011. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-10-C-0061).

    Feb 28/11: Boeing in St. Louis, MO, receives a $29.5 million fixed-price-incentive-fee contract modification for F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft armament equipment, including jumper bundles, pylon attach fittings, sensor well covers, adaptors, and pylons.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in December 2014. $27.2 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-09-C-0019).

    Feb 16/11: ECM. ITT Corp. Electronic Warfare Systems in Clifton, NJ receives a $14.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for 6 full rate production Lot 8 AN/ALQ-214v3 onboard jammer systems for installation on the F/A-18E/F aircraft. The AN/ALQ-214 is a major subsystem of the Integrated Defensive Electronic Countermeasures (IDECM) Radio Frequency Countermeasures (RFCM) Program, a self-protection electronic countermeasures suite designed for use against radar guided missiles. It’s integrated with ALE-50 and ALE-55 towed decoy systems.

    Work will be performed in Clifton, NJ, and is expected to be complete in November 2013. This contract was not competitively procured by US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD (N00019-11-C-0002). See also ITT on ALQ-214 | BAE on ALQ-214.

    Jan 7/11: F414. General Electric Aviation in Lynn, MA receives a 3-year, $576 million performance-based logistics contract for repair, replacement, and program support for F414 engine components used on F/A-18 E/F and EA-18G aircraft. This multi-year procurement arrangement is an availability-based contract, and works through the Navy’s Fleet Readiness Center – Southeast in Jacksonville, FL.

    Work will be performed in Jacksonville, FL (62%), and Lynn, MA (38%), and is expected to be complete by December 2013. Funding is provided by Navy Working Capital Funds, and this contract was not competitively awarded by the Naval Inventory Control Point in Philadelphia, PA (N00383-11-D-001M). The Jan 6-7/11 contracts build on the success of a series of previous F414 PBL contracts dating back to 2002. See also GE release.

    Jan 6/11: F414. General Electric Aviation in Lynn, MA receives a $58.4M, 6-month extension of its existing performance-based logistics contract for repair, replacement, consumables support, and program support for the F414 engine used on F/A-18 E/F, and EA-18G aircraft.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (96%), and Jacksonville, FL (4%), and is expected to be complete by June 2011. Funding is provided by Navy Working Capital Funds, and this contract was not competitively awarded by the Naval Inventory Control Point in Philadelphia, PA (N00383-08-D-002M).

    Dec 29/10: ECM. Raytheon in Goleta, CA receives a $7.8 million firm-fixed-price delivery order for the retrofit and testing of 33 digital [electronic] countermeasure receivers, in support of the F/A-18 E/F. ECM receivers capture opposing signals for analysis and subsequent jamming.

    Work will be performed in Forest, MS (65%), and Goleta, CA (35%), and is expected to be complete in February 2013. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-10-G-0006).

    FY 2010 F/A-18F w. tanks
    (click to view full)

    Sept 24/10: Tanks. GE Aviation Systems, LLC in Santa Ana, CA received a $21.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for 241 FPU-12/A 480 gallon external fuel tanks for the F/A-18 E/F (136) and the EA-18G (105) aircraft, including related program support. Work will be performed in Santa Ana, CA, and is expected to be complete in February 2012. This contract was not competitively procured by US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD (N00019-10-C-0076).

    Sept 24/10: A $28 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order against a previously issued order basic ordering agreement for Super Hornet and EA-18G aircraft armament equipment including pylons, well and chaff dispenser covers, station control units, protector and dispenser magazines, dispenser chassis, probes, lugs, plates, and mounting bases and retainers.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be completed in June 2013. $3.55 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-05-G-0026).

    Sept 23/10: Avionics. Honeywell International Defense and Space Electronic Systems in Albuquerque, NM received a $10.6 million firm-fixed-price contract for 185 advanced multi-purpose displays – 116 of the 5″ x 5″ forward displays; 46 of the 5″ x 5″ aft displays; and 23 of the 8″ x 10″ displays – for F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft.

    Work will be performed in Albuquerque, NM, and is expected to be complete in December 2011. This contract was not competitively procured by US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD (N00019-10-C-0061).

    Aug 19/10: F414. GE Aviation in Lynn, MA receives a $6.3 million order against a previously issued basic ordering agreement (N00019-09-G-0009) to work on the F414 Component Improvement Program. Work will be performed in Lynn, MA, and is expected to be complete in June 2011.

    July 28/10: F414. General Electric Aircraft Engines Business Group in Lynn, MA receives a $28.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for the procurement of 6 F414-GE-400 engines; 4 F414-GE-400 engine fan modules; 14 F414-GE-400 engine high pressure combustion modules; and 5 F414-GE-400 combuster modules, for installation in F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (49%); Madisonville, KY (21%); Hooksett, NH (12%); Albuquerque, NM (7%); Rutland, VT (5%); Dayton, OH (2%); Wilmington, NC (2%); Evendale, OH (1%); and Bromont, Canada (1%), and is expected to be complete in December 2011 (N00019-06-C-0088)

    July 8/10: IFF. Boeing in St. Louis, MO receives a $43.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to integrate IFF(Identification Friend or Foe) Mode 5 capability into the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G’s AN/APX-111 combined interrogator transponder (CIT), including upgrades to 3 Mode 5 CITs, buying 14 Mode CITs for test, and implementation of Mode 5 into automated test equipment.

    Identification friend or foe (IFF) systems aren’t foolproof, but they can reduce friendly fire dangers. IFF Mode 3/A is also required for flight in many regions of civilian airspace. BAE’s AN/APX-118 CITs provide both IFF coded query and IFF coded response. The new Mode 5 is a NATO IFF standard. Compared to NATO’s Mode 4, it adds better encryption, spread spectrum modulation, time of day authentication, and a unique aircraft identifier. IFF Mode 5 level 2 adds aircraft GPS position information and other attributes, which can help IFF systems when aircraft are grouped closely together. In this respect, Mode 5 shares some characteristics with the new civilian IFF Mode-S.

    Work will be performed in Greenlawn, NY (75%), and St. Louis, MO (25%), and is expected to be complete in September 2014. This contract was not competitively procured (N00019-10-C-0078).

    June 17/10: ECP. Boeing announces a $25 million modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-04-C-0014) to incorporate engineering change proposal 6213R2SOW, “trailing edge flap honeycomb redesign” into the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft. The “honeycomb” is the flap’s internal structure. Hints of why that might be underway can be found in the April 27/10 entry.

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in October 2013. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10 (N00019-04-C-0014).

    May 27/10: ECP. Boeing in St. Louis, MO received a $6.4 million firm-fixed-price delivery order against a previously issued basic ordering agreement (N00019-05-G-0026) for 144 kits in support of F/A-18E/F engineering change proposal #6282, “Fatigue Test Article 50/Fatigue Test Article 77 Post-Cost Reduction Initiative Inner Wing Retrofit Out of Warranty Kits.”

    Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in January 2015. The Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages this contract.

    May 21/10: Gun. General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products in Burlington, VT receives a $9.8 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for 30 M61A2 20mm lightweight gatling gun systems for the F/A-18E/F.

    Work will be performed in Burlington, VT (50%), and Saco, Maine (50%), and is expected to be complete in September 2012. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year, and this contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 by the US Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Patuxent River, MD (N00421-10-C-0024).

    May 5/10: F414 Improvements. GE describes 3 of the programs underway to improve its F414 engine, which powers all Super Hornet family fighters.

    The US Navy wants the F414 EDE (Enhanced Durability Engine), which uses an advanced high pressure turbine and 6-stage high pressure compressor (HPC) that offers a 2-3x hot-section durability gain, and reduced fuel consumption.

    The F414 EPE (Enhanced Performance Engine) is based on the EDE, but it has a new fan to increase airflow, and aims to increase thrust by 20%. It is explicitly “targeted for potential international customers,” but may also have applications in future Super Hornets. F414 EPE longevity and fuel gains will not be the same as the EDE on which it’s based, owing to its design differences.

    The 3rd program is a retrofittable F414 noise reduction kit project, with serrated nozzle edges where each “lobe” penetrates into or out of the primary airflow and generates a secondary flow, reducing jet noise by 2-3-decibels. The USN has identified funding for a program to further test and mature the technology to prepare it for incorporation in the USN F414 engine fleet, with work scheduled to continue through 2011. GE Aviation.

    April 27/10: ECP. FedBizOpps solicitation #20058-10:

    “The Naval Air Systems Command intends to place a Firm Fixed Price order under an existing Basic Ordering Agreement, N00019-05-G-0026 with The Boeing Company of St. Louis, Missouri 63166, for the procurement of 4 sets of Production Tooling and 4 sets of Retrofit Tooling associated with Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) 6213R2C1, “Trailing Edge Flap (TEF) Redesign” for the F/A-18 E/F and E/A-18G aircraft. ECP 6213R2 shall correct the deficiencies found during testing and teardown analysis: Cocure rib 1 shear clip failure, cracks in the inboard hinge area, cracks in the front spar, cracks in the splice rib, numerous fastener failures, cocure skin stability and rib pull off, micro cracking in the cocure rabbet. This ECP should result in an increase of the Safety Flight Hours on the TEF. This synopsis/solicitation is for the Non-recurring portion only. A new pre-award synopsis/solicitation shall be done for the recurring portion of this effort at a later date. Boeing is the sole designer, developer, manufacturer and integrator of the F/A-18 E/F and EA-18 G aircraft in its various configurations and is the only source with the knowledge, expertise and on-site personnel base necessary to accomplish this effort.”

    March 11/10: F414. General Electric Aircraft Engines in Lynn, MA received a $326.1 million modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-06-C-0088), exercising a US Navy option for 80 F414-GE-400 engines and modules, 2 spare engines, 1 engine fan module; 8 engine high pressure turbine modules; 33 combuster modules; and 80 engine device kits. The contract also includes advance procurement funding to buy long-lead material for future F414-GE-400 engines.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (49%); Madisonville, KY (21%); Hooksett, NH (12%); Albuquerque, NM (7%); Rutland, VT (5%); Dayton, OH (2%); Wilmington, NC (2%); Evendale, OH (1%); and Bromont, Quebec, Canada (1%), and is expected to be completed in May 2012. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages this contract.

    March 30/10: ECP. Boeing Co. in St. Louis, MO received a $6.4 million firm-fixed-price delivery order against a previously issued Basic Ordering Agreement (N00019-05-G-0026) under Engineering Change Proposal 6240R1, “FT 50 18K Main Landing Gear Sidebrace Fitting Failure – Revision for Retrofit”, covering 144 kits for the F/A-18E/F aircraft.

    Work will be performed in El Segundo, CA, and is expected to be complete in October 2014. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD issued the contract.

    March 26/10: Avionics. Rockwell Collins, Inc. in Cedar Rapids, IA receives a $5.9 million modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-priced contract (N00019-09-C-0069), exercising an option for 124 ARC-210 RT-1824C radio receiver transmitters for the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft.

    Work will be performed in Cedar Rapids, IA, and is expected to be complete in December 2010. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD.

    Feb 16/10: F414 Improvements. General Electric Aircraft Engines in Lynn, MA received a $7.3 million modification to a previously issued order under a basic ordering agreement. This money funds the demonstration of new technologies, with the goal of reducing the specific fuel consumption of the F414-GE-400 engine by 3%. This effort is in support of the “Near Term Energy Efficiency Technology Demonstration and Research Project,” under the USA’s 2009 economic stimulus funding.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (89%), and Evendale, OH (11%), and is expected to be completed in December 2010. $7.3 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages this contract (N00019-09-G-0009).

    Dec 4/09: F414. General Electric Aircraft Engines in Lynn, MA receives $28.1 million modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract, for engineering and integrated logistics services in support of the F/A-18E/F fighters’ F414-GE-400 engines.

    Work will be performed in Lynn, MA (78%); Evendale, OH (13%); Lemoore, CA (5%); and Jacksonville, FL (4%). Work is expected to be complete in December 2010, but $1 million in contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD issued the contract (N00019-06-C-0088).

    Future Hornets?

    This section will cover efforts that could make significant changes to the Super Hornet family as a whole. Unless otherwise noted, these efforts are not part of any multi-year buy contract.

    Super Hornet
    International tour
    click for video

    Aug 28/13: Advanced Super Hornet. Boeing and Northrop Grumman announce that initial flight tests of their “Advanced Super Hornet” have validated the Conformal Fuel Tanks, RCS (stealth) shaping, and Weapons Pod. Combat radius with the CFTs and pod, but no external ordnance, rises by 130 nautical miles to around 700 nmi. Meanwhile, radar cross-section vs. a Super Hornet carrying the fuel and weapons externally drops by 50%.

    Northrop Grumman designed and built the conformal tanks ahead of schedule, in less than 10 months, using rapid prototyping. The tanks can be used on all Super Hornet variants, and hold up to 3,500 pounds of additional fuel. That means a combat radius boost of up to 130 nautical miles, 30 minutes more station time, or some combination. The EA-18G will find the tanks especially helpful, as they reduce both overall weight and drag compared with the 2-3 external fuel tanks they’d otherwise carry.

    Best of all, from a business standpoint, these capabilities can be retrofitted to existing fighters. Orders from the USA or Australia would give the modifications a big boost, and improve Boeing’s standing in a number of international competitions. A similar F-15SE solution may be about to provide more validation by winning a big tender in South Korea, and competitions are afoot in Brazil, Denmark, Malaysia, several Mideastern countries, and possibly Canada. Boeing’s timing is good. Sources: Boeing feature, incl. video | Boeing Aug 28/13 release | Northrop Grumman Aug 28/13 release.

    Advanced Super Hornet

    March 26/13: F/A-18i. Malaysia’s Langkawi International Maritime & Aerospace (LIMA) exhibition includes many of the aircraft vying to replace its MiG-29Ns. The F/A-18 Super Hornet exhibit is especially interesting, as the mock-up includes Boeing’s conformal fuel tanks to extend its range. That’s a feature from the Super Hornet International concept, and Boeing is looking to take the tanks into flight tests by summer time. If all goes well, they hope to interest the US Navy in buying some, while offering the tanks to international customers.

    Boeing engineers are quite proud of the tanks. Their shaping is said to add lift, creating almost zero net drag at cruising speeds. If tests bear that out, it means that almost all 3,000 pounds of extra fuel could be used to extend range. With that said, nothing in physics comes without cost. The conformal tanks add weight and some transonic drag, reducing the Super Hornet’s already marginal transonic acceleration during missions that add them. This isn’t a fatal problem if the goal is long-range strike, but it could be an issue for air superiority missions like Combat Air Patrol. The logical solution would be to remove the conformal tanks for those kinds of missions, and accept the extra cruising drag inherent in multiple drop tanks. Flight International | DEW Line.

    July 10/12: Cockpit. Boeing and its partner Elbit Systems have been working to add wide screen touch displays for its next-generation fighters. The 11″ x 19″ displays themselves are almost as big as the F-35’s, without sacrificing the Head-Up-Display as the F-35 did. The display technology itself is conventional. Making sure that the display can work smoothly with all of a plane’s on-board system is the challenge. Once that’s done, pilots can tap to bring up displays, use fingers to zoom in, even customize which displays to show, how big they should be, and where they go. Sources: Boeing feature, incl. video.

    Feb 1/12: Distributed Targeting System. Boeing announces that it has started production of the Super Hornet family’s new DTS. The Navy granted approval for Low Rate Initial Production, following successful initial operational assessments at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, CA, and Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD. DTS is part of the US Navy’s F/A-18E/F Flight Plan, and Network Centric Warfare Upgrades program.

    DTS upgrades involve a module with its own advanced processor that brings together data feeds from different sensors, and a pre-loaded, high-resolution imagery database to help with geo-registration. The idea is to be able to fire ground attack weapons with more certainty about the target, and less delay from navigating through multiple screens, handing off coordinates, etc. DTS can be retrofitted during scheduled maintenance periods, or see a more aggressive rollout to front line squadrons if required. That will be up to the US Navy.

    Boeing representatives would not directly specify exactly which sensors would be integrated by DTS, beyond the APG-79 AESA radar and ATFLR targeting pod. It’s reasonable to believe that DTS will also include input from the plane’s threat monitoring and electronic warfare sensors, in order to backtrack those dangerous threats and quickly target them; the EA-18G already does some of that. Boeing representatives declined to discuss the exact difference in pilot response times enabled by DTS, aside to say that it was “significant” in tests, and noting that pilots seemed to like using the DTS’ pre-loaded high-detail map in the display next to their primary sensor feed. They wouldn’t say exactly why, but it’s certainly easy to see how that might help in any crowded targeting situation. In an urban battle, for example, where you want to make sure you have the right building in your geo-registered crosshairs.

    Nov 4/11: Super Hornet International. Boeing continues to discuss Super Hornet International designs. Not much has changed beyond earlier releases, though they do mention that the dorsal conformal fuel tanks will have a similar center of gravity to the aircraft, and that up to 3 weapon pods would be able to carry up to 4 x AMRAAM/ 2 x 500 pound/ 1 x 2,000 pound bomb each. That’s in line with earlier reports, which touted 2 x AMRAAMs and 2 x 500 pound JDAMs per pod, but the 2,000 pound JDAM option is new. So, too, is confirmation that the new design would have additional radar shaping to lower its cross section further.

    With the Super Hornet out of contention in India, Japan appears to be the main target, though the Super Hornet is also being marketed to Brazil, Greece, Denmark, Kuwait, and Qatar, among others. Aviation Week.

    F/A-18E/F International
    (click to view larger)

    July 20/10: Super Hornet International. Boeing’s VP and General Manager of Global Strike Systems, Shelley Lavender, announces a “Super Hornet International Road Map” at Farnborough 2010. Technology modifications would include internal IRST to detect infrared emissions from enemy aircraft (instead of the US Navy’s current retrofit approach using a modified centerline fuel tank), an enclosed weapons pod to lower radar signature that can carry up to 2 AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles and 2 JDAM 500 pound smart bombs, full spherical laser and missile warning systems, a new cockpit based on large touch-screen technology, improved F414 engines (EDE/EPE), and conformal fuel tanks mounted up top to boost range.

    These enhancements are described as an “international road map,” reflecting ongoing competitions in Brazil, Denmark, India, and elsewhere. These same modifications also have the potential to become part of a US Navy multi-year buy agreement with Boeing, if the Navy is willing. Presentation [PDF]

    May 6/10: Aviation Week’s Bill Sweetman details a number of proposed Super Hornet family improvements, unveiled by Boeing at the Navy League show in Washington DC. They include a big-screen cockpit like the F-35’s, but of one single screen; GE’s F414 engine programs; the Navy’s Next Generation Jammer program focused on the EA-18G; and potential integration of either MBDA’s long-range Meteor air-air missile or its own developmental Joint Dual Role Air Dominance Missile (JDRADM).

    April 22/10: Green Hornet. The US Navy’s F/A-18F “Green Hornet” test aircraft becomes the first plane to achieve supersonic flight using a biofuel blend fuel that combines 50% conventional JP-5 with 50% renewable additives. “Green Hornet” is actually a range of efforts ranging from test flights like this, to more energy efficient aircraft refueling policies at the Navy’s master jet bases, to ongoing research and development efforts by NAVAIR and General Electric to reduce Specific Fuel Consumption (SFC) for the F414 jet engine.

    The biofuel blend used in this Earth Day flight is derived from the camelina sativa plant, which is U.S.-grown, and not used for food. The objective was a flight showing no difference in performance between the biofuel blend and standard JP-5, with an ultimate goal to develop protocols to certify alternative fuels for naval use.

    The Navy Fuels Lab at NAVAIR Patuxent River, MD will develop those certification requirements for a variety of biofuel sources, while the USA’s Defense Energy Support Center awarded the $2.7 million contract to Sustainable Oils of Seattle and Bozeman, Mont. for 40,000 gallons of the camelina-based fuel. NAVAIR pre-release | NAVAIR release | Boeing.

    June 9/07: More Stealth? Defense Technology International claims that new computing capabilities may allow a stealthier “Block III” version of the Super Hornet, since it’s now possible to accurately model the radar cross section and aerodynamics of an aircraft when it’s loaded with external weapons etc. Boeing’s president for advanced systems, George Muellner, says. “It’s not the bombs and missiles – it’s the interactions between them and the airframe. Ten years ago, it would have taken you six months of Cray time to model it. Now you can do it on a distributed network of PCs.”

    Jane’s has also talked about the idea of a stealthier Super Hornet under development by Boeing’s Phantom Works, noting that the basic Super Hornet already incorporates some edge alignments, swept inlets, treated blocker vanes in front of the engines, and other stealth (“low observable”) features. Stealthier external weapons would definitely offer an important next step, since the F/A-18 E/F lacks the internal weapons bays found modern stealth fighters like the F-35 Lightning II and F-22A Raptor.

    Additional Readings

    These links are kept current by Defense Industry Daily, as they offer especially useful background and research resources. 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.

    Background: Aircraft

    Background: Program

    Background: Aircraft Ancillaries

    News and Views

    • Aviation Week (Nov 4/11) – Boeing Reveals Details Of International F-18 [dead link]. Not much change beyond earlier releases re: Super Hornet International: conformal fuel tanks, up to 3 weapon pods with 4 x AMRAAM/ 2 x 500 pound/ 1 x 2,000 pound bomb each, plus F414 EPE engines, and better radar shaping. Japan is seen as the main target.

    • Boeing (Oct 3/11) – Wings of change for F/A-18, EA-18G programs. Wing frame redesign project. Includes an embedded video.

    • Flight International (July 12/11) – Testing the new-generation Super Hornet. An F/A-18F Block II simulator, to be precise.

    • Aviation Week (April 22/11) – Rhino’s Revenge (Super Hornet upgrades). Dead link. At the time, it was the Super Hornet International Roadmap.

    • Boeing (Dec 13/10) – Ramping up for delivery. A video feature that looks at the final stages of integration and delivery for EA-18G Growler and Super Hornet jets.

    • Boeing (Sept 28/10) – A fighter jet rain check. “When it comes to the F/A-18 Super Hornet, Boeing engineers in St. Louis use a special process called the Water Check Test to rule out areas where moisture could seep into the aircraft and its electronics suite…”

    • Boeing Frontiers (July 2008) – Their ‘Flight Plan’ [PDF]. How to modernize the Super Hornet and keep it relevant. At this point, the focus is on the Block II model and new AESA radar, plus an undetermined IRST implementation and the ROVER datalink.

    • Flight International (March 13/07) – Ultra Hornet. Describes the updates to create the Hornet Block 30/Block II+; the performance enhancements are all electronic rather than aerodynamic. Interestingly, among future Flightplan enhancements is a limited electronic attack function for all APG-79 AESA radars.

    • DID (Oct 22/05) – Supersonic SIGINT: Will F-35, F-22 Also Play EW Role?

    Categories: Defence`s Feeds

    Pages