Defence`s Feeds

GBU-53/B, aka. SDB-II
(click to view full)

The 250 pound GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb gives American fighters the ability to carry more high-precision GPS-guided glide bombs, without sacrificing punching power against fortified targets. The initial award to Boeing was controversial, and the Darlene Druyun corruption scandal ultimately forced a re-compete of the Increment II development program. Whereas the initial GBU-39 SDB-I offered GPS-guided accuracy in a small and streamlined package, the goal of the GBU-53 SDB-II competition was a bomb that could hit moving targets in any weather, using a combination of guidance modes.

For the SDB-II competition, Boeing found itself allied with Lockheed Martin, its key opponent for the initial SDB-I contract. Its main competitor this time was Raytheon, whose SDB-II bid team found itself sharing its tri-mode seeker technology with a separate Boeing team, as they compete together for the tri-service JAGM missile award against… Lockheed Martin. So, is Raytheon’s win of the SDB-II competition also good news for its main competitor? It’s certainly good news for Raytheon, who wins a program that could be worth over $5 billion.

Raytheon’s GBU-53 Small Diameter Bomb SDB-II: cutaway
(click to view full)

Raytheon’s GBU-53/B SDB-II is 7″ in diameter around the tri-mode (laser, IIR, radar) seeker, with a clamshell protective door that comes off when the bomb is dropped. A GPS receiver adds a 4th targeting mode. The bomb tapers to about 6″ diameter beyond the pop-out wings, and is about 69.5″ long. The wings remain swept back when deployed, and are about 66″ across with a 5 degree anhedral slope. The bomb weighs about 200 pounds, and all of these dimensions are important when trying to ensure that the US Marines’ F-35B, with its cut-down internal weapon bays, can still carry 4 of them per bay.

The US Navy is developing a Joint Miniature Munitions BRU to address internal F-35 carriage, and SDB-II also fits on BRU-61 external bomb racks. No word yet on whether the JMM BRU will also fit in the USAF’s F-22A, which is also slated to deploy this weapon.

Range is expected to be up to 40 nautical miles when launched at altitude, thanks to a high lift-to-drag ratio in the design. Since SDB-II is an unpowered glide bomb, its actual range will always depend on launching altitude and circumstances. An F-22A would be able to extend that range significantly by launching at supercruise speeds of Mach 1.5, for instance, as long as the bomb proves safe and stable at those launch speeds.

SDB-II’s Attack Modes: Seekers & Sequences SDB-Is on F-15E
(click to view larger)

Once a target is picked by the pilot, initial communication and GPS coordinates are transmitted between the aircraft and the SDB-II bomb using the Universal Armament Interface (UAI) messaging protocol, which was designed to make integration of new weapons easier. The post-launch datalink will be Rockwell Collins’ TacNet, a 2-way, dual band link that enters the network quickly using encrypted UHF radio frequencies from the ground or secure Link-16 from the launching aircraft, and provides both weapon and target status to the shooter. TacNet’s datalink software is programmable if other frequencies/waveforms need to added in future, and Raytheon cites a message speed of 38 messages per minute as further evidence of the system’s ability to keep pace with future needs. Link-16 makes the weapon part of a much larger system, and gives SDB-II the ability to be dropped by one platform and then targeted or re-targeted by another. The bomb can also be sent an abort command, if necessary. If the link is lost, the bomb will continue with its mission, using its own on-board seekers.

Raytheon’s SDB-II contender uses a close precursor of the tri-mode seeker technology featured in the joint Raytheon/Boeing bid for the JAGM missile, which adds some refinements. The SDB-II uses jam-resistant GPS/INS targeting like Boeing’s GBU-39 SDB-I, but its added seeker features 3 modes of operation: semi-active laser, millimeter-wave radar, and uncooled imaging infrared. By combining these 3 modes, the GBU-53 can have excellent performance against a variety of target types, under any weather conditions, while making it much more difficult to use countermeasures or decoys successfully:

GBU-53 uses IIR/MMW
click for video

Semi-active laser guidance. This is standard for a wide range of missiles and rockets, and offers the best on-target accuracy and assurance, especially in urban environments. Its flip side is problematic performance through heavy fog, sandstorms, etc. That’s where GPS/INS guidance to a specified coordinate, and the next 2 fire-and-forget modes, come in.

Millimeter wave radar will operate through any weather. It’s especially good at distinguishing metal targets and noting movement, and is used in weapons like AGM-114 Hellfire Longbow missiles to give them “fire and forget” capability. These days, most people probably hear the term and think of airport scanners.

Imaging infrared (IIR) This was adapted from the much larger AGM-154 JSOW glide bomb, and uses high-resolution thermal scans to create a target picture. It also helps with target identification, and offers better performance against some kinds of targets like humans. By using an uncooled IIR seeker, the bomb lowers both its cost and its maintenance requirements. The uncooled seeker also allows snap-attacks against targets that present themselves quickly, since the it doesn’t need any time to cool down before it begins to work.

GBU-53 uses laser
click for video

Once launched, the SDB-II relies on a sophisticated package of internal computing and algorithms that are designed to get the most out of its tri-mode sensors, and make the process of launch and targeting as simple and flexible as possible for the pilot. The GPS/INS system or datalink messages guide the bomb toward the target during the initial search phase, while the tri-mode seeker gathers initial data. A revisit phase combines information from all of its sensor modes to classify targets. That’s especially useful because the SDB-II can be told to prioritize certain types of targets, for example by distinguishing between tracked and wheeled vehicles, or by giving laser “painted” targets priority.

SDB-II warhead test
(click to view full)

Different targets require different warhead types, which is why the GBU-53 contains a warhead from General Dynamics Ordnance & Tactical Systems that delivers shaped charge, blast and fragmentation effects all at once. A scored blast and fragmentation warhead makes it deadly against buildings and people as well.

This warhead was actually redesigned mid-way through the development phase, as the USAF added a requirement to destroy main battle tanks. That initial hardship became a positive experience, as the redesign actually ended up shrinking Team Raytheon’s bomb’s size, and improving its manufacturing costs.

SDB-II: The Program

As of 2013, the Boeing SDB-I/ GBU-39 Small Diameter Bob program was finished production at 12,300 weapons, and 2,000 BRU-61 bomb racks. Another 350 specialized Focused Lethality Munitions use carbon fiber bodies to deliver more near-field blast and less collateral damage; their last order was in FY 2012. Going forward, SDB-II is expected to be the default buy.

The overall program target for SDB-II is about 17,000 weapons over about 11 years: 12,000 bombs for the USAF, and 5,000 for the US Navy. Initial fielding will take place on USAF F-15E Strike Eagles, and F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets, even though the USMC and US Navy’s F-35B/C Block 4s are technically the program’s 2nd “threshold aircraft. Software development issues are likely to push F-35 fielding to 2022 or later in practice. Planned candidates for future fielding include F-16, F-22A, and F-35A multi-role fighters; B-52, B-1B, and stealth B-2A bombers; and MQ-9 Reaper drones.

Special Operations Command is even considering it for their AC-130 gunships, though they aren’t an official “objective” platform just yet. SDB-II was also supposed to equip the USAF’s A-10C close support planes, but the Pentagon is battling Congress to cancel the program.

The GBU-53 may also feature integration with other fighters, if the bombs are sold abroad. Raytheon isn’t in discussions with any foreign buyers yet, and doesn’t foresee the US government releasing the weapon for export discussions and sales before Low-Rate Initial Production begins in late 2014.

SDB-II schedule, 2010
(click to view full)

The SDB II Program is currently a $450.8 million Fixed Price Incentive Firm-type Engineering and Manufacturing Development contract. F-15E integration is being accomplished by Boeing in St. Louis, MO through the F-15 Development Systems Program Office using Air Force SDB II funding. The F-35B and F-35C aircraft integration contract will be awarded to Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, TX by the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter JPO using Department of the Navy SDB II funding.

Elements of the SDB-II design have been tested, but putting the entire weapon together with its carrying aircraft and declaring the combination ready for fielding is still a development effort. Although many military development efforts are “cost-plus” (contractor’s costs plus an agreed percentage), the US military issued the SDB-II EMD Phase development contract as a fixed-price contract with incentives. The targeted flyaway cost per unit during Full Rate Production was $FY05 62-81k, but that doesn’t include amortized development costs; just the bomb, container, and shipping. Current Pentagon documents indicate that $FY19 100-125k per unit is likely.

Right now, the key challenge is making it through the development process successfully. The program is progressing well, but in FY 2011 it hit a funding shortfall from Congress that has crimped its progress. Past and projected budgets include:

Raytheon’s Industrial Approach

Before it won the SDB-II development contract in 2010, Raytheon had secured firm-fixed price quotes in for 90% of required materials from its suppliers, and conducted detailed planning for whole program that includes reservations for setbacks and project margins. These are necessary steps for any fixed-price development program, but this is a good illustration of the fact that it’s often the work done before contracts are signed that determines a program’s fate.

In terms of the industrial team, Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ will be the final assembly center, with key items and assemblies coming in from several supply-chain partners:

• General Dynamics OTS: Fuze and dual-mode shaped charge blast/fragmentation warhead.
  
• Klune Industries: Overbody.
  
• Rockwell Collins: TacNet dual-band (Link-16, UHF), 2-way datalink.
  
• Raytheon Dene at NAPI, NM: Aft section.
  
• Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ: Tri-mode seeker.
  
• The program also uses Goodrich and Cobham to make the bomb’s deployment mechanisms, and Celestica will be manufacturing circuit cards.

Raytheon executives said that they took a somewhat different supply-chain approach to the SDB-II, picking suppliers early and then working directly with them to improve productivity at every step. While Raytheon prototyped their final assembly line, and began using lean production techniques to reduce the amount of “touch labor” and improve productivity, they brought in suppliers to do the same thing. For instance, Celestica engineers were embedded with the team, in order to run their own producibility tools on circuit card designs and refine them to improve yield and costs. Rockwell Collins, who makes the datalink, did the same thing. This is not uncommon in general manufacturing, but defense manufacturing has traditionally been more stovepiped.

Within Raytheon itself, another key industrial choice involved the uncooled infrared seeker. As noted above, uncooled infrared has lower performance than cooled infrared designs, in exchange for snap-attack capability, better reliability, and lower production and maintenance costs. If Raytheon wanted to use this aproach, they would have to begin early, and take a risk. Their engineers worked to adapt the IIR seeker in their 2,000 pound AGM-154 JSOW as a starting point, and they did eventually produce a version that fit SDB-II, was cheaper to manufacture, and more than met government requirements.

Raytheon’s initial team during development will be about 300, but this is expected to drop below 50 for production phase – in part because Raytheon has already used lean techniques, and focused from the beginning on creating a design that was simpler to manufacture.

Minimum Sustaining Rate for production is just 30 weapons/ month, with normal production at 117 and maximum surge production rising to 250/ month. Projected American buys through FY 2019 never top 140/month, which should leave plenty of room for export orders.

Contracts and Key Events FY 2012 – 2014

Cheaper than expected – but F-35 lateness could endanger that; F-35 is biggest risk; Phase 1 testing done; GAO Report. The biggest risk
(click to view full)

Oct 28/14: JMM. Raytheon Technical Services LLC in Indianapolis, IN a sole-source $35 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for F-35 integration of the Joint Miniature Munitions Bomb Rack Unit (JMM BRU), including integration and life cycle technical support throughout the technology development and engineering, manufacturing and development (EMD); and EMD F-15 flight test and production phases.

Work will be performed at Indianapolis, IN and is expected to be complete by Aug 31/21. USAF Life Cycle Management Center at Eglin AFB, FL manages the contract (FA8672-15-D-0054).

June 26/14: Testing. Raytheon and the USAF have concluded a series of SDB-II GTV flight tests using the IIR/MMW seeker, culminating in direct hits on stationary land targets. Those can be harder to hit than moving targets, which naturally stand out more against fixed object ground clutter.

The GTVs are full GBU-53 rounds, but with telemetery in place of the warhead. Raytheon says that there have been other Guided Test Vehicle shots between October 2013 and this announcement, including moving target shots, as part of the testing program. Live-fire shots with full warheads are expected in August or September 2014. Sources: Raytheon, “Small Diameter Bomb II nears end of development phase”.

April 16/14: Exports. The Pentagon releases is next set of Selected Acquisition Reports, which includes a reference to exports:

“SDB II is a Defense Exportability Features (DEF) pilot program and meetings were held on January 15, 2014 with the DEF Program Office, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics), Office of the Director, International Cooperation and Raytheon Missile Systems (RMS). The Program Office is working with RMS to incorporate a Phase II approach for implementing design changes to support exportability requirements. The Program Office briefed the Tri-Service Committee on January 16, 2014 and a favorable decision memorandum was received on February 4, 2014.”

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. Our program dashboard has been updated accordingly. SDB-II still has good looking cost figures and a stable design, with 11/12 sub-system (all but the seeker) passing qualification testing. Bad news? There are a couple of flaws that need to be fixed, and its schedule is out of margin.

The System Verification Review has slipped 7 months to August 2014, due in part to 2 test failures (cover stuck on seeker, navigation error). They’ve also found a leak in the warhead case, and seeker encoders that died under vibration testing. The seeker encoders have a fix ready by the time the GAO report closed, but not the case leak. Meanwhile, the program resumed testing again in October 2013, and the 3 tests since went well. They need 11 total successful flight tests to pass Milestone C into low-rate production, including 2 live fire events. It amounts to 7 successful flight tests remaining over 5 months.

March 4-11/14: FY15 Budget/ R&D. The US military slowly files its budget documents, detailing planned spending from FY 2014 – 2019. The “flyaway” cost per SDB-II is expected to hover around $242,000 in FY 2014, but costs are expected to drop to around $125,000 by FY 2018. Totals are reflected in the chart above. The reports also call attention to the development of an new internal bomb rack for the Navy, which is considered to be part of the program’s overall R&D:

“The Joint Miniature Munitions Bomb Rack Unit (JMM BRU) is an Air Force (AF) led ACAT III program. It is required for the Department of the Navy’s (DoN) carriage of the SDB II weapon in the internal bay of the F-35B and F-35C…. The BRU-61/A, currently in production in the AF, does not meet the needs to operate with SDB II within the F-35 internal bay in the DoN environment. The JMM BRU, designated BRU-61A/A, fills the capability gap….”

No US Navy buy totals are given in the detailed budget justifications, but the Budget Briefing contains the expected figures for FY 2017 – 2019; which indicates that the USN will be buying SDB-II at the USAF’s flyaway cost. This USAF budget justification excerpt is also relevant:

“As a result of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) (F-35) programs restructure, SDB II integration was moved from the JSF Operational Flight Plan (OFP) Block 3 to Block 4. IOC is FY2020.”

The program office hasn’t officially changed the date, in other words. F-35 OFP Block 3F operating software might be ready by 2020, but the Norwegians have been told to plan for 2022 – 2024 as the window for actual fielding of F-35s with operational Block 4 software, and hence Kongsberg’s new JSM anti-ship missile.

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 SDB-II is included in passing:

“This project addresses the inaccuracies in engineering models to predict sympathetic detonation of solid rocket propellant when subjected to non?reactive fragments and shaped charge threats. The Air Force 780th Test Squadron tested the ability of the small diameter bomb [DID: SDB-II in the labeled picture] warhead to detonate 122 mm rocket motors. The test results were compared with predictions from Sandia National Laboratories’ Combined Hydro and Radiation Transport Diffusion Hydrocode by Applied Research Associates. Analysis is ongoing, and is expected to enable further development of concepts and methodologies for enhanced vulnerability, lethality, and survivability in the area of insensitive munitions and non-reactive materials.”

Oct 29/13: Testing resumes. Raytheon announces that the USAF has concluded its series of test flights with the SDB-II GTV, using the bomb’s Imaging Infrared and Milimeter-Wave Radar guidance and culminating in “direct hits on targets moving at operationally representative speeds.” Next? System Verification Review and a Milestone C decision, which is behind schedule.

This is actually the 1st set of tests following a 6-month testing moratorium, which was prompted by seeker cover and navigation failures in previous tests. The firm says that the USAF has invested over $700 million in the program so far. Sources: Raytheon, Oct 29/13 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. Overall, SDB-II is a stable design with maturing technologies. It successfully completed a test in its most difficult Immediate Attack sub-mode, but another test failed when the front sensor’s protective dome cover refused to come off.

They’re working on that urgently, as more delays to the Milestone C/ LRIP (Low-Rate Initial Production) decision risk re-negotiation of the Pentagon’s LRIP-1 through LRIP-5 production contract years. If so, it would raise costs that had come in substantially under budget. Meanwhile, Raytheon will build 50 GTV bombs for testing and live fire before beginning Low-Rate Initial Production, which is expected to involve a whopping 40% of planned GBU-53 lifetime orders (math says about 6,800 bombs).

Unfortunately, SDB-II/ GBU-53 has been affected by the F-35’s lateness, which has forced postponement of SDB-II’s Full Rate Production decision by another 2 years, to 2020. The GPS-only SDB-I will now integrated with the F-35 2 years ahead of the SDB-II, and so will other weapons with more sensitive thermal and vibration requirements. That will help the Pentagon discover whether the F-35s conform to their design documents, or whether weapon changes will be required in several weapon types including the GBU-53. Meanwhile, SDB-II will deploy aboard the F-15E.

Jan 22/13: Testing. Raytheon touts a successful fit check of the GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb II in the F-35A, with 4 GBU-53s loaded alongside an AIM-120 AMRAAM missile. Essentially, the 4 SDB-IIs replace one 2,000 pound JDAM.

The weapons seemed to have adequate space, though flight testing will be needed to be sure. The F-35B will be a more challenging test, because its internal bay is smaller.

July 17/12: Testing. An F-15E Strike Eagle flying over White Sands Missile Range, NM launches a GBU-53/B, which successfully engages and hits a moving target using its tri-mode seeker’s IIR and radar sensors. Raytheon.

March 30/12: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” for 2012, which include the GBU-53. Overall, the GAO sees good progress, with 97% of design drawings releasable by the 2011 Critical Design Review, and serious efforts to achieve manufacturing maturity before production. As with any early stage EMD program, however, risks remain. The biggest may be Congressional management of weapons procurement:

“A postdesign review identified several risks related to weapon effectiveness verification, target classification, seeker reliability, and JSF [F-35B/C Block 4] integration. The program office is working to address each of these risks… However, the program’s biggest risk – integration with the JSF – will not be resolved until after [low-rate initial] production begins… The SDB II program office is managing a $53 million funding shortfall in fiscal year 2011, which could have programmatic and contractual implications. The SDB II contract is an incrementally funded, fixed-price incentive contract, and program officials stated that the funding shortfall could mean that the next part of the work will have to be deferred or the contract will need to be renegotiated or terminated.”

March 30/12: SAR shows success. The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 31/11 includes the SDB-II, and validates many of Raytheon’s releases:

“Small Diameter Bomb Increment II (SDB II) – Program costs decreased $994.1 million (-19.1%) from $5,206.6 million to $4,212.5 million, due primarily to a decrease in the estimate to reflect actual contract pricing (-$994.3 million).”

That’s 23.6% less than the baseline estimate, a very impressive achievement for any weapons program.

Good contract

Nov 16/11: Testing. Raytheon says that things are going very well for the SDB-II’s warhead, and the entire program is on cost and ahead of schedule:

“After building the test warheads on the production line, engineers put the warheads through an accelerated conditioning regime equivalent to 500 flight hours and 20 years of aging in a bunker, followed by live detonation testing… [It] performed at twice what was required…”

Nov 8/11: Industrial. Raytheon announces that its engineers have used design changes and other improvement approaches to cut the time for building SDB-II uncooled tri-mode seekers almost in half, from more than 75 hours to 40 hours. This is part of Raytheon’s efforts to meet their promised prices.

FY 2010 – 2011

Raytheon wins; Program baseline set; Early industrial work & tests. SDB-II test pod
(click to view larger)

Aug 16/11: Industrial. Raytheon announces that they’ve built their 5th GBU-53 tri-mode seeker in its new automated factory, which is dedicated to tri-mode seekers. That specialization may be helpful to other programs as well. Tom White, Raytheon’s SDB II program director, says that:

“Building integrated tri-mode seekers is much more complicated than just putting together three unrelated sensors, and our fifth build proves Raytheon is the only company with the technical expertise to manufacture [them]… We’re meeting predicted component build times, and as we continue to mature the program, we will find other efficiencies and cost savings we will pass on to the customer.”

Aug 8/11: Testing. Raytheon says that a series of laboratory tests on the SDB-II’s tri-mode seeker “demonstrated that it exceeds anticipated performance parameters.” Good job.

July 28/11: Support. Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ receives a maximum $70 million firm-fixed-price contract to provide Small Diameter Bomb II technical support. The AAC/EBMK at Eglin Air Force Base, FL manages the contracts (FA8672-11-D-0107).

April 4/11: CDR. Raytheon announces that the SDB II program completed a USAF critical design review (CDR), clearing the way for the weapon to begin captive flight testing later in 2011.

CDR

Nov 15/10: SAR Baseline. The Pentagon releases its Selected Acquisition Report for the September 2010 reporting period. With respect to SDB-II, the total expected program cost is listed as $5.21 billion, if it continues through planned production:

“This was the initial SAR following Milestone B approval authorizing the program to enter the engineering manufacturing and development (EMD) phase in August 2010. The EMD phase contract was awarded to Raytheon Missile Systems for $450.8 million. [The gating decision for] Low Rate Initial Production (Milestone C) is planned for August 2013.”

Program baseline

Nov 2/10: Sub-contractors. Rockwell Collins announces what Raytheon had already confirmed: its TacNet datalink will be part of the GBU-53.

Rockwell Collins’ TacNet data link system is a small form factor, dual-channel, 2 waveform terminal that enables in-flight target updates, retargeting, weapon handover coordination, bomb hit assessments and better cooperation with other networked platforms.

Aug 9/10: Contract. Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ receives a $450.8 million contract to cover the GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb Increment II program’s engineering and manufacturing development phase. Delivery is expected to begin in 2013, with a required availability date in late 2014.

At first, the SDB-II will be integrated on the USAF’s F-15E Strike Eagles, the US Marines’ F-35B, and the US Navy’s F-35C aircraft. The F-35Bs should just be entering service by 2013, but the F-35Cs aren’t expected to enter service until after SDB-II deliveries begin. Raytheon Missile Systems president says that their design “fully meets the load-out requirements for all versions of the fifth generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter’s internal weapon bays.” SDB-II integration is also expected to extend to other USAF and US Navy aircraft and UAVs over time. At this time, $23.5 million has been committed by the Miniature Munitions AAC/EBMK at Eglin AFB, FL (FA8672-10-C-0002).

During the fly-off’s technical demonstration program, Raytheon had to prove that its compact tri-mode seeker could seamlessly transition between guidance modes, and demonstrate claimed performance and reliability. Raytheon says that their GBU/53-B seeker flew 26 missions in 21 days, without a single hardware failure. Raytheon.

Raytheon wins EMD Phase

FY 2009 and Earlier

Protest derails; New early-phase awards; Big design changes. SDB-I: separated.
(click to view full)

2008: Design shifts. Mid way through the 38-month risk reduction program, Team Raytheon is faced with challenges on 2 fronts. One challenge was the need to carry 8 SDB-II bombs in the cut-down internal bomb bay of the F-35B STOVL (Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing) fighter. That meant the weapon had to become shorter, always a challenge when space is at a premium. The second challenge came from the USAF, which wanted a weapon that could disable main battle tanks. That meant the blast & fragmentation warhead the team had begun with wasn’t going to work.

In response, GD OTS started work on an innovative ‘multi-effects’ warhead. It would use a shaped charge plasma jet to kill tanks, and a scored case design improved fragmentation effects to the point that USAF engineers reportedly dubbed it “the shredder.” Meanwhile, seeker electronics had to be repackaged in a way that provided a clear path for the plasma jet. As it happens, the warhead and seeker changes allowed the bomb to become shorter, and the seeker changes made it easier and cheaper to manufacture. Raytheon would go on to win the competition. Aviation Week.

April 17/06: Contracts. The Headquarters Air-To-Ground Munitions Systems Wing at Eglin Air Force Base, FL awards 2 cost-plus fixed-fee R&D contracts under the Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) Increment II, 42-month Risk Reduction Phase. The purpose of the Risk Reduction phase is to define and validate a system concept that meets the performance requirements outlined in the SDB II System Performance Specification. Successful tests with modified JDAM recently, and weapons like Israel’s Spice GPS/INS/EO “scene-matching” bombs, strongly indicate that success is possible. Solicitations began December 2005, negotiations were complete in March 2006, and work will be complete in October 2009. The 2 winners will be competing for selection in 42 months as the prime contractor for the SDB II program, which has a potential value of $1.3-1.7 billion.

Boeing subsidiary McDonnell Douglas in St. Louis, MO receives a $145.8 million contract (FA8681-06-C-0151). This is actually a Boeing/Lockheed venture as of October 2005; prime contractor Boeing will supply the weapon and data link system, while principal supplier Lockheed Martin provides the multi-mode seeker that lets it hit moving targets. That leaves Boeing’s original Small Diameter Bomb partner, Northrop-Grumman, out in the cold.

Raytheon Co. in Tucson, AZ received its own $145.8 million contract (FA8681-06-C-0152), and is competing on its own.

Risk Reduction Phase

Feb 18/05: GAO protest. The Congressional Government Accountability Office (GAO) sustains Lockheed Martin’s protest. It finds that Darlene Druyun had played a role in the bid process that led to changes in the bomb’s technical requirements, and the deletion of related evaluation criteria. The GAO recommends a re-opened competitive procurement for the program’s $1.7 billion second phase, which had previously been awarded to Boeing and Northrop-Grumman along with SDB-I.

In September 2005, the USAF decided to re-open the Small Diameter Bomb Increment II competition. Increment II was originally awarded to Boeing and Northrop-Grumman as part of the overall SDB award.

Protest sustained

Additional Readings

DID thanks Raytheon Missile Systems, including SDB-II Deputy Program Director Murali Krishnan and Jeff White of Air Warfare Systems, for their assistance. Any errors are our own damn fault.

• Raytheon – Raytheon GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb II (SDB II). Mini-site, including CONOPS videos.

• Stars and Stripes, via WayBack (Dec 6/11) – Some weapons too important to lose in DOD cuts.

• Raytheon (Aug 24/10) – Raytheon presentation and press conference [dead link, see event release]. Contained extensive discussion of their SDB-II design.

• Aviation Week, via WayBack (Aug 24/10) – Winning SDB II: Innovation in Action. By Raytheon’s Harry Schulte.

Nato has successfully completed its anti-submarine warfare (ASW) exercise, Dynamic Mongoose, off the west coast of Norway, with the support of ten allied nations alongside partner nation Sweden.

Newport News Shipbuilding (NNS), a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries (HHI), has achieved a milestone in the construction of the US Navy's Virginia-class submarine Indiana (SSN 789), with the keel laying ceremony.

The European Union has reportedly approved plans to conduct a military operation to tackle the human trafficking networks that smuggle migrants through the Mediterranean Sea.

The US Navy's P-8A Poseidon integrated test team (ITT) has successfully carried out air-to-air refuelling (AAR) ground testing.

Defence Ministers today formalised their contribution in view of the European Council at the Steering Board of the European Defence Agency (EDA). It complements the contributions from the High Representative /Head of Agency Federica Mogherini and Commissioner Bieńkowska. Among others, Ministers agreed on analysing the implications of hybrid warfare for European defence capability development, on further incentivising defence cooperation including the Preparatory Action on CSDP-related research, on a SME Action Plan, on potential basic principles, objectives and actions for a Security of Supply regime as well as future priorities of the Agency. 

Capability development

During today’s meeting, Defence Ministers welcomed the progress achieved in the implementation of the 2013 European Council Conclusions. The four capability programmes on Air-to-Air Refuelling, Cyber Defence, Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems and Governmental Satellite Communications endorsed by the European Council in 2013 are making good progress in line with their roadmaps. 

Cooperative programmes are important for enhancing capabilities in Europe, but also for clarifying priorities for industry. Defence Ministers agreed that potential additional priority capability areas could be investigated using the Agency’s Capability Development Plan, an assessment of cooperative opportunities derived from the Collaborative Database (CODABA) and EU wider policies. 

The Agency was also tasked to conduct an analysis of the implications of hybrid warfare for European defence capability development in light of the changed security environment to the East and South. The analysis might form part of wider efforts, co-ordinated by the External Action Service and also including the Commission, to analyse the impact of hybrid warfare on the European security environment and to identify, and recommend improvements to existing EU tools and instruments that are best suited to counter this threat.

 

Incentives for defence cooperation

While Member States spent 26% of their defence equipment budget in collaborative procurement in 2011, this ratio was 16% in 2013. There is a need to spend better on defence, and to do more together. 

Defence Ministers today confirmed the need for  EDA to work on  non-market distorting fiscal and financial measures to further incentivise defence cooperation. Tangible progress has been achieved on VAT exemption for ad hoc projects in EDA, with the support of the Commission and the Belgian authorities. Three pilot cases currently benefit from VAT exemption. Formalisation of this VAT exemption is pending the currently ongoing review of the EDA Council Decision.

EDA is investigating with Member States financial engineering mechanisms in support of defence cooperation, including a potential European investment fund for defence, for example to improve the availability of funds and the synchronisation of budgets allocated to cooperative programmes. This fund could be part of the pooled procurement mechanism. In addition, EDA has initiated contacts with the European Investment Bank to investigate potential financial support to the industrial sector and cooperative programmes of a dual-use nature.

In November 2014 the EDA proposed and Member States approved a Policy Framework for long-term and systematic cooperation. Its objective is to provide a coherent basis for defence cooperation in Europe, from priority-setting through in-service support to disposal/decommissioning.

 

Preparatory Action on CSDP-related research

There is a need to halt the continuing decline in investment of defence R&T and maintain competence in areas of critical technologies. The Preparatory Action on CSDP-related research, and its potential follow-on action in the next Multiannual Financial Framework, could provide fresh impetus. Ministers of Defence supported the progress achieved towards the development of the Preparatory Action by the European Defence Agency and the European Commission in close cooperation with the Member States.  They endorsed consolidated views pushing for a defence-oriented and CSDP-related Preparatory Action. The European Council in June 2015 is expected to provide further guidance. 

SME Action Plan

Defence Ministers furthermore agreed on revised guidelines for facilitating access to the defence market for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), supporting the implementation of the  Agency’s SME Action Plan. SMEs are considered to be the backbone of the EU economy in terms of jobs creation, growth and innovation. The role of SMEs in the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) has gradually increased over time, partly as a result of greater outsourcing. The non-binding guidelines were prepared in close cooperation with the Member States and the European Commission. They contain recommendations dedicated to access to supply chain, access to finance, support to innovation, competitiveness and industrial performance, and security of supply aspects. 

Security of Supply

Security of Supply arrangements are indispensable for the sustainment of operations, the development of long-term planning and cooperation, and the functioning of the internal market for defence. The December 2013 European Council called on the Commission to develop with Member States and in cooperation with the High Representative and the EDA a roadmap for a comprehensive EU-wide Security of Supply regime, which takes account of the globalised nature of critical supply chains. Due to the significance and multi-dimensional nature of the Security of Supply and taking into account experience gained from its work and activities, the EDA has together with its Member States identified potential basic principles and objectives of such a  regime as well as actions that could be taken at the intergovernmental level. Proposed actions include establishing specific measures to ensure access  to critical capabilities and technologies, e.g. through an early-warning or prioritisation mechanism, developing a mechanism to address concrete short term shortfalls, promoting cross-border cooperation, and bringing the supply and demand side closer together, for example through user-clubs.

 

Future priorities of EDA 

Ministers of Defence today endorsed the future priorities of the EDA including three core activities to further strengthen defence cooperation: support the development of capabilities and military cooperation; stimulate defence R&T to prepare the capabilities of tomorrow and support the EDTIB; and ensure that the interests and specificities of defence are taken into account in wider EU policies.

Under the authority of Federica Mogherini, the Head of the Agency, EDA is a key instrument for supporting and facilitating defence cooperation in Europe. EDA’s strength is that it is Member State-owned and -driven. To date, EDA has managed around 150 R&T projects with a total aggregate budget of almost €500m. 

Our Colonel returns this week to inspire the conversation. In this installment he considers the decline and fall of the foot inspection. Once a regular part of British Army leadership practice, he views its demise against the backdrop of the changes it represents for service and officership. As well as any soldier, the military historian is familiar with the practice, as well as the foot’s larger influence in war. The Romans built their empire upon the Legion’s march. And even in this age of high speed travel, the foot manages to retain its influence upon events. However, as a metaphor for the creeping technocracy within the armed forces, the changing terms of its care as a matter of military concern is illuminating. Read the post, consider the questions, join the discussion on Twitter at #CCLKOW. — JSR 

 

The Royal Military Academy Sandhurst issued us many things in our year long sojourn there. Some would prove invaluable (our copy of Sidney Jary’s book “18 Platoon”), some would prove tragic (our unfeasibly bulky purple polyester track suits) and some just muddled in between. In this latter category there sits a slim blue pamphlet that still haunts a box in my attic, “The Army Foot: Its Conditions and Cures”.

I do not think that I have ever had recourse to use said pamphlet although the subject is one of acute interest to most infantry officers, for the infantry foot in particular is both an ugly and indispensable object. I have however carried out an inordinate number of foot inspections. Sandhurst was very good at foot inspections, and feet were inspected after exercises and after road marches and this habit carried through to when I was a platoon commander. Feet inspections were the norm and the platoon commander carried them out. When I left my last command some seven years ago however, foot inspections were not the norm. Indeed when, after our first road march, we warmed down and I briefed my command team “Right – foot inspection! I’ll do the HQ you do your teams, let me know when you’re done!” I was met with incredulous looks by the assembled officers. Foot inspections it seems are no longer the norm in the British Army.

This passing of an era seems to me a great shame on a number of fronts. It also seems to me to reflect something of a gradual change in command ethos within the British Army. The reasons for this change are complex but ultimately boil down to two primary factors.  Primarily changes in the character of the society we are drawn from and whom we serve, exacerbated by the steady erosion of the British regimental system in successive defence reforms since 1990.

When I joined it seems to me that the leadership ethos was somewhat paternalistic in nature. As junior officers we were expected to care for our men and it was made clear to us that their problems were very much our problems. I advised on finances and relationships as well as courses and careers, the approach seemed almost Edwardian in character. Despite being a mere slip of a lad myself, my soldiers were referred to affectionately as “my boys”. Not only was I expected to know what was happening in their lives I was expected to be actively involved. I would attend court if they were up on charges (officers still do), write to the bank manager on their behalf if needed and consult (or console) on their marriage plans as required. If the leadership ethos was strongly paternalistic, the character of the unit and sub-unit was equally familial.

This familial character was reinforced by the nature of my battalion, a close knit county regiment with strong local and family links amongst both officers and men.  In my first platoon I found myself commanding one distant cousin, one school friend and two men from my village. People had grown up together and families had served together over generations. Not only did the regiment have a history and character, but it shared regimental families in both the Officers’ and Sergeants’ Messes; families who had grown up and then served alongside each other over the generations.

It is the case today that not only have the geographical and familial links been strained by successive eroding of the British regimental structure (which has been most acutely felt in the line infantry units), but also that the ethos of command has moved away from its former paternalistic nature. Partly this is as a result of legislative change (I am not qualified to give financial or relationship advice and therefore would be liable if I did so) and partly because society has changed; the Baby Boomers generation has given way to Generation X and now we in turn are ceding to the Millennials. Perhaps today’s soldiers see a clearer delineation of responsibilities than they did 20 years ago and what was appropriate then is no longer appropriate now? I sense that today junior officers still care for their men, but that perhaps their willingness and definitely their latitude to get actively involved in providing care is more limited than in my time.

Now barring National Guard and Reserve units US Army units have no geographical affiliations for recruiting, and so while there are a great many ‘Army families’ where generations have served in turn this is not necessarily expressed in unit character for Active Component units. Bearing this in mind there is not a direct read across from my experiences of the familial nature of the command care relationship to the US Army.  However US officers will have seen the changes over the years over what they used to do and what they do now, between what was appropriate and what is no longer appropriate.

So my questions for this week are:

What are the parameters of care to which a leader should adhere?

How has the practical application of leadership care changed since you joined and what does this say about your organisation and people?

When did you last do a foot inspection?

Despite the changing times, I remain a firm fan of foot inspections, not only on a pragmatic basis but as a tangible demonstration of care to those under command.  You can learn a lot about a man by how he cares for his feet and what state they are in, you can also learn a lot about a leader through the care and attention that he gives your feet.

 

 

SA Electrónica Submarina (SAES), specialist in underwater electronics, is participating in the Spanish Pavilion (INKA Pavilion 174-176), which brings together other Spanish companies belonging to TEDAE, the Spanish Association of Defence, Aeronautics…

The European Defence Agency (EDA) and the European Space Agency (ESA) agreed to kick-off on 9 April 2015 a new project in accordance with their demonstration roadmap to support the development of governmental, institutional and commercial services provided by Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) flying in non-segregated airspace.

The DeSIRE II demonstration is expected to run for 18 months with a total budget of €2,6 million. An industrial consortium led by Telespazio, one of the world’s leading company in space applications and end-to-end satellite communications services, will act as prime contractor and system integrator. The main results and recommendations coming out of the project will be disseminated to support European standardisation and regulatory activities, especially for the definition of future satellite-based command & control datalinks.

During DeSIRE II, a Piaggio Aero P.1HH HammerHead will be used as a flying testbed for the development, integration and testing of a set of capabilities designed to allow safe RPAS operation in civilian airspace in support of missions such as environment monitoring, maritime surveillance or crisis management. The joint EDA-ESA project will also aim at characterising Satcom command and control datalinks in different frequency bands through simulation, emulation and flight demonstration campaigns. Meanwhile, DeSIRE II will be also be supported by end users (Italian Coast Guard, Italian Civil Protection Department, Guardia di Finanza, European Fisheries Control Agency, Ceren and Armasuisse) who will consolidate their operational and regulatory requirements to operate RPAS in non-segregated airspace. 

This new project is a follow-on to the first DeSIRE demonstration, an EDA-ESA project led by Spanish company Indra which ran from 2011 to 2013. It culminated with a series of successful test flights demonstrating the ability of a RPAS using a satellite link to safely share the sky with other airspace users. 

Out of the €2,6 million project budget, €1,2 million will be invested by ESA, €600.000 by the EDA on its operational budget and €800.000 by the industrial consortium composed of Telespazio, e-GEOS, Selex ES, Piaggio Aero, ViaSat, Skyguide and Ædel Aerospace GmbH. 

More information

• EDA and ESA sign DeSIRE II project arrangement
• DeSIRE project page on ESA website

 

Betw

Download this      

Download this

Betw

To t

Americas

• The Air Force is reportedly set to award a contract for the next-generation Long Range Strike Bomber “within one to two months”. The competition between Northrop Grumman and a Lockheed Martin/Boeing team will lead to a program valued at between $44 and $55 billion, with this equating to between 80 and 100 bombers. The LRS-B program will realign from from Air Combat Command to Air Force Global Strike Command from October.

• General Electric and Pratt & Whitney were both awarded $105 million modifications on Friday to cover a potential contract award for the Adaptive Engine Technology Development order, with the Air Force also reportedly looking to open future competition for F-35 upgrades.

• The Navy announced Friday that it has achieved Initial Operating Capability with the Block II Rolling Airframe Missile aboard the USS Arlington (LPD 24). The joint program with Germany was recently included as part of a $1.6 billion overhaul package by the US Navy intended to provide improved protection to carriers and amphibious ships.

• In other Navy news, the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) has been successfully “no-load” tested on CVN-78. The system – manufactured by General Atomics – uses electricity as a propulsion system, as opposed to current steam-based catapults. The new system will offer improved performance, reduced stress on aircraft and other benefits. EMALS will be complemented by the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) – also manufactured by General Atomics – with this system seeing schedule delays and reportedly likely to miss its March 31st deadline next year.

• On Friday, 21 firms were awarded a $7.9 billion IDIQ contract for Network-Centric Solutions-2 (NETCENTS-2) network operations and infrastructure solutions, with an initial period of 3 years.

• Peru and Russia are reportedly in talks regarding potential modernization of the South American state’s approximately 200 T-55 main battle tanks. With previous reports suggesting that the Russians would be willing to sell the more advanced T-90S to the Peruvians, the reports regarding the T-55s also stated that Peru is not considering any new procurement contracts.

Europe

• The German Defense Ministry has reportedly selected the MEADS system as a replacement for its existing Patriots. The Defense Ministry has neither confirmed nor denied the reports circulating in German media, with an official decision expected to be announced in June. MEADS – Medium Extended Air Defense System – has been jointly developed by Lockheed Martin and MBDA, with funding received from three partner nations; the US, Germany and Italy. If the system has been selected over competitor Raytheon – who are offering upgrades to the in-service Patriots – then this would be a much-needed boost to the MEADS consortium, which urgently needs a buyer having failed to impress the US Army owing to cost and schedule overruns.

• Latvia has installed a NATO air defense system to improve air surveillance over the Baltic states. The TPS-77, manufactured by Lockheed Martin, is a mobile Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA), with the new system set to complement two existing systems currently in operation in order to monitor the entirety of Latvia’s eastern border. Those were ordered in 2007.

• Turkey is reportedly looking to equip its domestically-produced UAVs with indigenous Bozok missiles, set for serial production by Tubitak SAGE. The Turkish Aerospace Industries Anka UAV is the most likely candidate for the new missiles.

Asia

• India’s fourth Komrota-class ASW corvette is set to be launched on Tuesday, with the INS Kavaratti the last of the Indian Navy’s Project 28 ships. The ships – built by Garden Reach Ship Builders and Engineers (GRSE) – have been designed to succeed the Kora-class. Russia also recently unveiled a new destroyer design – the Project 23560E Shkval destroyer.

Today’s Video

• The Anka UAV in action…

MEADS: air view
(click to view full)

The Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) program aimed to replace Patriot missiles in the United States, the older Hawk system in Germany, and Italy’s even older Nike Hercules missiles. MEADS will be designed to kill enemy aircraft, cruise missiles and UAVs within its reach, while providing next-generation point defense capabilities against ballistic missiles. MBDA’s SAMP/T project would be its main competitor, but MEADS aims to offer improved mobility and wider compatibility with other air defense systems, in order to create a linchpin for its customers’ next-generation air defense arrays.

The German government finally gave their clearance in April 2005, and in June 2005 MEADS International (MI) formally signed a contract worth approximately $3.4 billion to design and develop the tri-national MEADS system. In February 2011, however, events began to signal the likely end of the program. Since then, the US Administration has been battling with Congress where there is little support for a continued American participation.

MEADS: The System MEADS concept
click for video

MEADS was intended to match up against foreseeable enemy aircraft over the next 30 years, as well as stealthier and/or supersonic cruise missiles, UAVs, and even ballistic missiles. The system will incorporate its own 3-radar set, along with networked communications for use as either a stand-alone system, or a component of larger air defense clusters that include other missiles.

The core vehicle for the US MEADS program appears to be the USA’s FMTV 6×6 trucks. These 5-ton capacity vehicles will carry the radars, containerized Tactical Operations Center (TOC), launcher, and reload packs. FMTVs can be carried in C-130 aircraft, and MEADS International has already tested some of the prototype systems for fit. Italian and German test vehicles have used their own national truck brands, and the Germans in particular appear to leaning to larger vehicles.

During the MEADS SDD phase, MEADS International was asked finalize designs for equipment and complete their integration into the system. The system’s 6 major equipment items are:

US TOC, ItAF launcher
(click to view full)

[1] Netted and distributed Battle Management, Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence (BMC4I) Tactical Operations Center (TOC). The 3-workstation TOC shelter is a joint project of EADS, Lockheed Martin, and MBDA. It can be carried by 3 different trucks to meet national preferences, and adapter systems could probably be built to widen the number of compatible wheeled and/or tracked vehicles.

[2] Two 360-degree, Multifunction Fire Control Radars (MFCRs). The X-band MFCR employs active phased array technology, using transmit/receive modules developed in Germany. It also incorporates advanced identification-friend-or-foe (IFF) sensors with improved capabilities. As a point of comparison, the G-band AN/MPQ-65 radar used in the PATRIOT Config-3 system has a 120 degree field for horizontal coverage, narrowing to 90 degrees for engagement. Raytheon has begun studies toward a rotating 360-degree version, but MEADS has one now.

[3] Surveillance radar. These “Low Frequency Sensor” UHF radars will have self-diagnostic capability, to ease the extra maintenance load caused by replacing 1 MPQ-53/65 Patriot radar with 3 improved MEADS radars.

[4] Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) certified missile round based on the current PAC-3 missile, augmented by Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) technologies that will give it greater range, and possibly greater performance.

[5] Light weight launcher, mounted on a truck with a built-in winch to auto-load the missile packs.

[6] Reloader truck.

MEADS components
click for video

Lockheed Martin’s PAC-3 MSE is still a hit-to-kill missile, with upgraded batteries, an 11-inch dual-pulse solid fuel rocket motor, a thermally hardened front end, a enlarged fins and better control surfaces to improve maneuverability, upgraded guidance software. The desired end result is a longer range missile that is more agile, and able to counter both tactical ballistic missiles and more conventional threats. It’s also being designed to cost less than existing PAC-3 missiles, and time will tell if it succeeds.

The missile has survived MEADS’ demise, and US Army budget documents indicate that production will begin in FY 2014. It will be added to existing PATRIOT batteries, and current plans call for 1,680 missiles to be produced.

MEADS: Mobility and Employment Harpy UAV’s dive attack
(click to view full)

As attack drones like Israel’s anti-radar Harpy long-loiter UAV, loitering precision missiles, and improved anti-radar missiles like the Italo-American AGM-88E AARGM come into service, air defense assets will also find themselves needing to use “switch-on/ switch-off” and “shoot and scoot” tactics to survive. This was certainly the pattern used by one successful battery in Serbia which not only survived the NATO air campaign, but used its 1970s-era SA-3 missiles to down an American F-117 stealth fighter. The idea is to have MEADS elements or other air defense systems “plug and fight,” joining in or breaking off from a common-picture air defense network as needed, in order to protect or reposition themselves.

Existing Patriot systems have some mobility to provide this kind of self-protection, but they aren’t really designed to maneuver with attacking US forces. Indeed, during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003, the Patriot system’s heavy HEMTT trucks and other large equipment found themselves hard-pressed to keep up with the US military’s rate of advance.

Early C-130 test
(click to view full)

MEADS would be better than that, but it isn’t really a forward air defense system for mobile units. It was originally envisioned to be transportable by C-130 or equivalent medium transport aircraft, able to roll off the transport and begin operations very shortly thereafter. At present, most elements are designed to be compatible with the USA’s 5-ton capacity FMTV 6×6 trucks; depending on their final weight, FMTV-mounted MEADS components may even be transportable as underslung loads on medium-heavy helicopters like the CH-47 Chinook, CH-53 Super Stallion, and the notional Franco-German Heavy-Lift Helicopter. Even the container-sized Tactical Operations Center (TOC) is being designed to be able to drive on and drive off the C-130, or serve as an underslung load on CH-47/ CH-53 class helicopters.

Cutting set-up time and adding air-transportability should help MEADS improve on the Patriot system’s deployability into theater, and mobility within it. Even so, MEADS will retain mobility limitations of its own, due to the terrain limits inherent in all trucks. German forces will have options like their short-range LeFlaSys armored vehicle system for full front-line mobility, while US forward units on the move may end up relying on equally short range Stinger-based systems like hand-held FIM-92 missiles, Avenger Hummers, LAV-II ADs, or Bradley M6 Linebackers for short-range air defense. Note that a number of Bradley M6 and Hummer Avenger systems have been converted out of the air defense role, weakening US forward-based air defense options.

MEADS is designed to operate behind those forward defense systems, and its broader goal was an open architecture system that can plug into broader defensive systems, working with shorter-range systems like the USA’s SLAMRAAM/CLAWS vehicle-mounted AMRAAMs, Italy’s Spada 2000, etc.; with wider surveillance systems like the JLENS tethered blimps; and with longer range theater-defense systems like the Lockheed/ Raytheon/ Northrop-Grumman THAAD, IAI/Boeing’s Arrow-2, or even Raytheon’s naval SM-3 missiles, connected to a common view of the battlefield via Co-operative Engagement Capability. That open architecture’s first big test, will be much simpler, however: integrating a vertical launch version of the European IRIS-T short-range air-to-air missile alongside the longer-range, radar-guided PAC-3 MSE.

Plug-and-Fight
click for video

MEADS International claims that this emphasis on open architecture, plug-and-fight system capabilities in MEADS’ requirements has led to a MEADS Tactical Operations Center (TOC) that can support other MEADS stations, or even other air defense systems. Normal operations require only 2 of the 3 workstations, leaving an additional seat that lets the MEADS TOC be used as a wider task force level TOC, complete with German, Italian, U.S, and NATO command and control functionality. Germany planned to use this capability to integrate MEADS with ground-launched IRIS-T short range infrared guided missiles.

Lockheed Martin is even touting the MEADS BMC4I TOC as a key component of the US Army’s competition for an IBCS system that would integrate all anti-aircraft defenses in a sector.

MEADS: The Program MEADS fire unit
(click to see whole)

In September 2004, the NATO MEADS Management Agency (NAMEADSMA) awarded MI a Design & Development letter contract valued at approximately $2.0 billion + EUR 1.4 billion (about $3.7 billion total at the time). Because Germany hadn’t signed yet, the initial letter contract involved preliminary funding to proceed on a “limited basis,” under the authority of the American-Italian MEADS Design and Development Memorandum of Understanding. Germany’s acceptance and signature in April 2005 enabled NAMEADSMA to sign the full MEADS D&D risk-reduction contract.

The MEADS venture is being led by Lockheed Martin Corp. and includes MBDA Italia, French-German aerospace firm EADS and Germany’s MBDA-LFK (LenkFlugKorpersysteme). Together, these companies have focused an international engineering team in Orlando to develop systems and technologies for the MEADS program. Development work was allocated in accordance with national funding: USA 58%, Germany 25%, and Italy 17%.

• Lockheed Martin: Orlando, FL; Dallas, TX; Huntsville, AL; and Syracuse, NY.

• MBDA-LFK: BMC4I control suite, launcher, Surveillance Radar; and Multifunction Fire Control Radar (MFCR) elements at plants around Munich, Germany.

• MBDA’s Italian operating company MBDA Italia will perform work on the BMC4I, MFCR, and launcher/reloader elements in Rome, Italy.

MEADS MFCR radar
(click to view full)

The original 1990s plan for MEADS was for production by 2007, but the 2004 Memorandum of Understanding resulted in a late start, and envisioned System Design & Development until 2014. The US Army intended to see benefits before that 9-year period was over, revising its MEADS acquisition strategy to combine management, development, and fielding of both the MEADS and PATRIOT systems. Under this spiral development approach, the Patriot/PAC-3 system would evolve toward MEADS through the early introduction of the MEADS Major End Items (MEI).

Key milestones for MEADS included a systems requirements review, followed by subsystem and system-level preliminary design reviews from about February 2007 to August 2007. Subsystem critical design reviews (CDR) were finished in 2009, followed by a system-level CDR that finished in 2010. A series of 9 flight-tests were planned from 2011 – 2013, and deployment was scheduled for 2018.

That won’t happen in the USA. By 2009, the US Army had examined its budgets, and declared that it didn’t want the system. They also added a long string of extra requirements, involving expensive integration with back-end command and control systems. The US Missile Defense Agency might have picked MEADS up instead, but by 2011, MEADS production date with all the new requirements had slipped to 2018 at the earliest, and the Pentagon had reservations about MEADS ability to meet even that. The program’s cost estimate was around $4.2 billion, and revised estimates threatened to push it even higher. In response, the USA moved toward ending the program at the end of the Design and Development MoU. Later in 2011, Germany also announced that it would stop at the end of the MoU, as part of their ongoing budget austerity program.

Lockheed Martin has pinned some hopes on its eventual revival if tests go well, and they have. Germany and Italy are reconsidering a European Follow-On Program (EFOP), and interest from Japan may yet help to save MEADS. Russia has also provided considerable assistance, by reigniting an atmosphere of threat and crisis in Europe, and China has done the same in Asia. Their inadvertent cooperation may yet prove to be as pivotal to MEADS as the USA’s.

If Not MEADS, What? Aster-30 launch
(click to view full)

In MEADS’ absence, the US Army intends to continue relying on its existing PATRIOT batteries, with some system upgrades and the new PAC-3 MSE missile. The MEADS LFS surveillance radar, developed under a separate contract with Lockheed Martin, may be the next PATRIOT addition.

Germany and Italy would have several options, if they wish to continue air defense modernization. MEADS will finish its reconfigured development program, but it will do so with key technologies unfinished.

One option would be to finish MEADS and buy it. Drumming up export interest elsewhere is critical, and they’ve reportedly received some interest in via Poland’s WISLA national air and missile defense program, and from Japan.

Italy would like to field a single MEADS battery around Rome, as the best point defense system they can afford. Or, they could simply delete the requirement for a MEADS battery, and rely on their high-end modern SAMP/T Aster-30 systems, which are BMD-capable against short range missiles.

NASAMS launch
(click to view full)

Germany has several options of its own. One possibility would be to take the same approach as the USA, and upgrade their existing PATRIOT batteries. They’re already in talks to do so, and would like to add some MEADS technologies, just as the USA is doing. If they do, the BMC4I command system and links to IRIS-T SL/SLS missile launchers are likely to join whatever systems the USA integrates with PATRIOT.

If Germany wanted to reach for more range than MEADS, and better ballistic missile defense than PATRIOT, they could buy EuroSAM/MBDA’s SAMP/T systems of their own as a new customer. Adding Germany to create a customer core of France, Germany and Italy would improve export prospects in Europe and abroad, while offering useful industrial spinoffs as the system becomes the core of Europe’s missile defense. SAMP/T’s down side is its high cost, a potentially fatal problem given the Euro-zone’s fiscal woes and Germany’s budget austerity. On the other hand, Iran’s continued development of longer-range missiles and nuclear weapons is likely to continue ratcheting up the pressure for European missile defense. If Europe decides not to rely wholly on America’s “phased adaptive approach” of off-continent THAAD systems and land-based SM-3 missiles, SAMP/T would be the logical choice.

Another option for Germany would be to sacrifice ballistic missile defense capability, and field less expensive replacement systems like the AIM-120 AMRAAM-based NASAMS from Kongsberg and Raytheon, already employed by Dutch, Norwegian, and Spanish forces within NATO. NASAMS already employs the AIM-120 AMRAAM missile used by the Italian and German air forces. It can be supplemented with short-range, radar-independent missiles like the IRIS-T SL which Germany intended to add to MEADS, or NASDAMS can extend its overall range by adding the RIM-162 ESSM that serves on German ships. To date, however, NASMS installations have been fixed sites. Mobility is possible, but some work would be required.

Contracts & Key Events

Beyond 2011, PAC-3 MSE related contracts are covered under DID’s general PATRIOT program coverage, as the missile gears up for production beginning in FY 2014. This article will only cover new MSE contracts in the context of MEADS purchases.

FY 2014-2015

Odds improving in Polish competition; Twin-kill test; IFF Mode 5 certification. Test preview
click for video

May 18/15: The German Defense Ministry has reportedly selected the MEADS system as a replacement for its existing Patriots. The Defense Ministry has neither confirmed nor denied the reports circulating in German media, with an official decision expected to be announced in June. MEADS – Medium Extended Air Defense System – has been jointly developed by Lockheed Martin and MBDA, with funding received from three partner nations; the US, Germany and Italy. If the system has been selected over competitor Raytheon – who are offering upgrades to the in-service Patriots – then this would be a much-needed boost to the MEADS consortium, which urgently needs a buyer having failed to impress the US Army owing to cost and schedule overruns.

June 30/14: Poland. Poland’s MON announces the Wisla program’s finalists: Raytheon, and EuroSAM. Poland won’t become part of the MEADS program, nor will it buy Israel’s David’s Sling. The 2-stage technical dialogue led Poland to conclude that they required an operational system, and valued prior integration into NATO systems. Accordingly, MEADS and David’s Sling failed to qualify. Sources: Poland MON, “Kolejny etap realizacji programu Wisla zakonczony”.

Loss in Poland

June 16/14: Germany. MBDA Deutschland spokesman Wolfram Lautner says that Germany is considering MEADS adoption, even if it means going it alone on a EUR 2.5 – 3.5 billion program. A decision is expected by the end of 2014:

“The money would be spent on aligning MEADS with German standards and adapting it to fire the Iris-T missile, and it would start to go operational by 2018-19…. There is a requirement, and an RFP could be issued either to MEADS or for an updated version of the Patriot system Germany operates…. After that, there will be a negotiated contract and parliament will decide since the cost will exceed [the legal threshold of EUR] 25 million.”

Sources: Defense News, “Germany Could Spend €3 Billion To Get MEADS Going”.

May 21/14: IFF certification. MEADS gets full Mode 5 Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) certification from the United States Department of Defense International AIMS (Air Traffic Control Radar Beacon System, Identification Friend or Foe, Mark XII/Mark XIIA, Systems) Program Office. The certified IFF system is used in both MEADS radar types: the UHF Surveillance Radar, and the X-band Multifunction Fire Control Radar.

Mode 5 is NATO’s most secure IFF mode, and certification is a big deal to European NATO countries who might wish to go forward with MEADS. Sources: MBDA, “MEADS System Gains Full Certification For Identifying Friend Or Foe Aircraft”.

IFF Mode 5 cert.

May 14/14: Poland. The USA has reportedly used export clearance to block Israel’s David’s Sling system from WISLA consideration, and France’s continued willingness to sell Russia amphibious assault helicopter carriers is hurting them. Which leaves a strong likelihood that WISLA will be American-made.

At the same time, Lockheed Martin’s Marty Coyne told Reuters that the US government had “supported the MEADS bid by giving Lockheed permission to offer producing its baseline PAC-3 missiles in Poland, and to help Polish industry set up production of its own long-range missile.” If the winner is MEADS, that would mean either a PAC-3 downgrade within the more advanced MEADS system, or full local production of the PAC-3 MSE, which is the USA most advanced air defense missile. Read “Alone, If Necessary: The Shield of Poland” for full coverage.

Nov 6/13: Twin-kill. MEADS testing provides an impressive swan song, as the system destroys a circling QF-4 Phantom drone to the south, while simultaneously nailing a Lance tactical ballistic missile coming in from the north at White Sands Missile Range, NM. The test used 3 PAC-3 MSE missiles, as planned, using semi-automatic mode to direct 2 missiles at the Lance and 1 at the QF-4.

The deployed system included all MEADS elements: The two 360-degree radars for Surveillance (UHF-band) and Multifunction Fire Control (X-Band), the Battle Manager, and a pair of launchers in the Italian and German configurations. Now it’s up to the USA to decide if it wants to add key MEADS technologies like the UHF VSR to PATRIOT, while Italy, Germany, and other potential buyers need to decide whether they want to buy the entire system. Sources: Lockheed Martin, Nov 6/13 release.

All tests finished

October 21/13: Testing. Lockheed Martin announces another successful test at White Sands, NM using the MFCR radar. Whereas the 1st test in April consisted of the (easy) tracking of a small aircraft, this time the result is more significant as the target was a 20 ft Lance tactical ballistic missile (TBM). Next month there is a final, more momentous test scheduled to wrap up 2013, which will combine the interception of a TBM with an air-breathing target. Source: Lockheed Martin, “MEADS Multifunction Fire Control Radar Tracks Tactical Ballistic Missile for First Time.”

FY 2013

Germany and Italy pursue EFOP follow-on, may have partners; MEADS cruise missile test is a kill; PAC-3 MSE missile aces high-low intercept test, MEADS wants its last test to be harder. Test launch #1
(click to view full)

June 19/13: Testing. During NATO’s Joint Project Optic Windmill (JPOW) exercises in May-June 2013, a MEADS tactical battle management command, control, communications, computers and intelligence (BMC4I) tested its ability to operate with other NATO systems. That’s important, because Germany, Italy, and others would need to use MEADS with NATO’s overarching command and control systems, in order to be most effective against ballistic missiles.

It was something of a lab test, and also somewhat limited. MEADS demonstrated the ability to transmit, receive and process Link 16 messages, as well as “other elements of threat engagement and target intercept.” It needs Link 16 and full threat engagement and target intercept data sharing. Lockheed Martin.

June 18/13: Testing & Future Plans. After the successful high-low test of PAC-3 MSE missiles mounted on a PATRIOT system (q.v. June 7/13), MEADS wants to use the same kind of challenging test for its last scheduled full-system test, with the 2 targets arriving almost simultaneously and 120 degrees apart, and 2 launchers participating together. That’s outside the PATRIOT’s capabilities, but proving MEADS this way means that the added cruise missile drone and accompanying test changes need to be funded. Which means they have to ask the USA, Germany, and Italy.

The Europeans may be interested in paying, even if the USA isn’t really sure what it wants to do with MEADS. That kind of demonstration would help their European Follow-on Program (EFOP) get traction with partners like Poland, and talks to lay out an EFOP plan are expected this fall. As things stand, it looks like the Europeans will get the BMC4I control centers to form the core of any further testing and development, a fire-control radar each, and 2 launchers. The United States really wants the surveillance radar. Aviation Week | Military.com.

June 16/13: Germany. Raytheon’s VP of Integrated Air and Missile Defense, Sanjay Kapoor, tells Bloomberg that Germany is discussing an upgrade of its own PATRIOT systems, and wants to incorporate elements of MEADS after spending all that R&D money. Bloomberg.

June 7/13: MSE Splash 2. The improved PAC-3 MSE aces a big test at White Sands Missile Range, NM, killing both a tactical ballistic missile (TBM) target and a cruise missile. The missile is fired as part of a PATRIOT system, as opposed to its more advanced MEADS counterparts.

The TBM was assigned 2 ripple-fired missiles, but the 1st hit so #2 self-destructed. Missile #3 took out the BQM-74 jet-powered target drone. Preliminary data indicates that all test objectives were achieved. Lockheed Martin | Raytheon.

May 15/13: Export interest. Aviation week quotes Italian National Armaments Director Lt. Gen. Claudio Debertolis, and Lockheed Martin Missiles & Fire Control EVP Rick Edwards, to confirm that 2 new nations are interested in MEADS. One of them is Poland, and the other is said to be Japan.

Poland is in the process of building a national air and missile defense system, and MEADS offers them a very strong air defense system with a BMD point defense option. Beyond its performance premium over PATRIOT, MEADS can also offer workshare benefits from early involvement.

Lt. Gen. Claudio Debertolis adds that Italy would like to deploy a single MEADS battery around Rome, as the most capable BMD solution that Italy can afford, given its poor fiscal situation. When one counts MBDA’s Aster-30 missiles deployed by Italian Horizon Class ships and SAMP/T army units, Rome could have a 2 layer BMD system. Aviation Week.

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. MEADS gets no FY 2014 funding, as expected. The $400.9 million budgeted in FY 2013 is designed to finish development, and meet all contractual obligations.

PAC-3 MSE missile production would begin with a budget of $540.5 million, covering 56 missiles plus long-lead time items for FY 2015’s 72 missiles. DID budget coverage.

April 9/13: Testing. MEADS tests continue under the development program, and Lockheed Martin continues to highlight progress in hopes of drumming up interest. During a recent test that tracked a small test aircraft near Syracuse, NY, MEADS’ UHF Low-Frequency Sensor radar succeeded in cueing its companion MFCR X-band fire-control radar, via the MEADS Battle Manager.

It’s a very basic test. Upcoming tests in a NATO exercise, and firing test #2 at White Sands missile range, will be much more significant. Lockheed Martin.

March 28/13: The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” for 2013. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish. With respect to the “Patriot/Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) Combined Aggregate Program (CAP) Fire Unit,” the report pegs funding from all parties through FY 2013 at $3.3255 billion, including $781.9 million from the Pentagon during FY 2012 and 2013.

Development of the system support vehicle, MEADS network radio, and reloader has been cut, focusing efforts on the 360-degree MFCR fire control radar; near-vertical launcher; and battle management system. Program officials cite all 3 as having met or exceeded predicted performance. So, which technologies are likely to find their way into other programs, other than the PAC-3 MSE missile? The volume search radar is cited as the leading candidate, followed by the near-vertical launcher, and the cooling technology used for its rotating phased array radars.

The system’s final test in late 2013 will involve a ballistic missile, against a MEADS system that accompanies the MFCR with a low-cost (just 50% of T/R arrays) version of the surveillance/ volume search radar design.

March 26/13: Politics. MEADS survives another Senate vote, with $381 million included in the Continuing Resolution to finish development. It’s the usual argument: the contention that cancellation would cost as much as finishing funding, while eliminating all of the associated jobs early and preventing the Army from picking up some MEADS technologies for future use.

The Council for Citizens Against Government Waste adds an interesting wrinkle, leaking a confidential Pentagon report that says it might not have to pay termination costs. It cites the 2005 MoU clause that makes MEADS activities subject to “the availability of funds appropriated for such purposes.” If Congress cuts off funding, does that mean the Army can exit the program with no penalty? Sen. Kelly Ayotte [R-NH] led the charge to reapportion MEADS funding to pay for operations and maintenance. Sens. Chuck Schumer [D-NY-LMCO], Senate Appropriations Chair Barbara Mikulski [D-MD], and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-NV] worked to keep Ayotte’s amendments from ever coming to the floor, believing that if they did, they’d probably pass.

In response, Sen. Ayotte has placed a hold on Alan Estevez’s nomination to be the next Principal Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics. She contends that MEADS was funded even though the NDAA prohibits such MEADS funding, via a provision that prevents the Pentagon from funding systems that won’t ever reach the battlefield. Sen. Ayotte in New Hampshire Sentinel Source | CNB News | Defense News Intercepts.

Jan 29/13: Italy & Germany letter. The German and Italian defense ministries send a formal letter to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, pressing the USA to continue MEADS funding through development. Excerpts:

“The results of the Design and Development (D&D) phase of the MEADS program remain vital for both Germany and Italy as they will be the basis for our future Air and Missile Defense System Architecture…. If the US does not fulfill its funding commitment for 2013, Germany and Italy would need to interpret this as a unilateral withdrawal. Under the terms of the MoU, Germany and Italy expect formal notification of the US intent to withdraw…. In a first estimate the current US position results in an economic damage to Germany and Italy of more than 400 Mio. US$…. In addition, there are wider implication of the US withdrawing or breaking the MoU and this would set a bad precedent for future transatlantic cooperation in principle.”

See: MEADS AMD [PDF].

Nov 29/12: Intercept. A partial MEADS configuration with a networked MEADS battle manager, a lightweight launcher firing the PAC-3 MSE, and a 360-degree MEADS Multifunction Fire Control Radar (MFCR) intercept and kill an MQM-107 target drone simulating a cruise missile.

This is MEADS’ 1st intercept test; a 2nd is planned for late 2013. Lockheed Martin | MEADS, incl. more photos etc.

Cruise missile intercept

FY 2012

MEADS: ground view
(click to view full)

Aug 21/12: US Army Brig. Gen. Ole Knudson, Program Executive Officer Missiles and Space, said during a conference that the surveillance radar is the piece of MEADS most worth salvaging. The Army has already turned the PAC-3 MSE missile into its own program, so perhaps he means “the next piece of MEADS most worth salvaging.” AviationWeek.

July 2012: Difficult funding. So far this fiscal year, reviving support in the US Congress for the program has been rocky. The Administration asked for $400M in its February budget request. In response, the House voted a bill that would prohibit obligating or expending funds for MEADS. Later the Senate Armed Services Committee concurred. In its statement of policy [PDF] issued in June in response to the House NDAA FY13 bill, the OMB wrote that it:

“strongly objects to the Committee’s decision to omit funding for MEADS. If the Congress does not appropriate the funding in the FY 2013 Budget request, there is a high likelihood that this action would be perceived by our partners, Italy and Germany, as breaking our commitment under the Memorandum of Understanding. This could harm our relationship with our Allies on a much broader basis, including future multinational cooperative projects. It also could prevent the completion of the agreed Proof of Concept activities, which would provide data archiving, analysis of testing, and software development necessary to harvest technology from U.S. and partner investments in MEADS.

SecDef Panetta wrote to SAC Chairman Inouye to ask for his support. That seemed to help as the Senate Appropriations Defense subcommittee maintained $380M for MEADS funding in its markup. However, given far from universal support in the Senate and opposition in the House, this will be hard to push through the eventual bill, whenever that happens given the likelihood of a Continuing Resolution in the fall. Scenarios to terminate MEADS were already floated in a CBO report on deficit reduction [PDF] and by the Pentagon (see Feb 14/11 entry) in early 2011.

July 9/12: MSS-M. Lockheed Martin deploys an 18-wheeler rig with its MEADS System Stimulator – Mobile (MSS-M) to White Sands Missile Range, NM. Its’s a way of reducing costs, and lowering risks, both of which are critical to a program whose funding is running down, with no buyer in sight.

Without MSS-M, they’d be limited to hardware-in-the-loop simulations in a laboratory environment. With it, they can do the same work in the field, running simulations and checking performance by the same live systems that will be used in firing tests. They will be very busy as the first MEADS target intercept test, scheduled for later in 2012, approaches. Lockheed Martin.

June 12/12: Testing. The 1st MEADS power and communications unit hass finished acceptance testing in Germany. The truck-mounted power and communications unit provides power for the MEADS fire control and surveillance radars. It includes a diesel-powered generation unit. A separate commercial power interface unit permits radar operation using commercial power (50 Hertz/60 Hertz). Lockheed Martin.

April 19/12: Testing. The 1st MEADS X-band Multifunction Fire Control Radar (MFCR) has begun system-level testing with a MEADS battle manager and launcher at Pratica di Mare AFB near Rome, Italy. Lockheed Martin.

Feb 22/12: Testing. Lockheed Martin announces that they’ve begun integration testing on the 3rd completed MEADS battle manager at its facility in Huntsville, AL. This one will be used as part of the ballistic missile intercept test planned for 2013 at White Sands Missile Range, NM. The other 2 are already supporting system testing at Pratica di Mare AFB, Italy and Orlando, FL.

Nov 17/11: The 1st full MEADS firing test successfully engages an “over the shoulder” target approaching from behind at White Sands Missile Range, NM. The test used the PAC-3 MSE missile, lightweight launcher and BMC4I battle manager, and the nature of the test required a unique sideways maneuver from the missile. Since the threat was not an actual target drone, the missile’s self destruct was triggered at the end. Lockheed Martin.

1st full firing test

Nov 10/11: Testing. In a simulated test at at Pratica di Mare, Italy, the MEADS BMC4I battle manager demonstrates the “plug and fight” concept, including attaching and detaching the launcher from the MEADS plug-and-fight network; configuring and initializing the MEADS launcher and simulated sensors; performing track management functions, threat assessment and identification; and transmitting a valid launch command to the launcher.

NAMEADSMA General Manager Gregory Kee adds that “Because of its advanced capabilities, there is international interest in MEADS.” Technicaly, that’s already true, due to its program structure. The question is whether there’s interest from an outside country with the funds to integrate MEADS into an existing air defense command-and-control framework, conduct further tests, and begin manufacturing. MEADS’ current publicity campaign is partly designed to help it find that buyer – if that buyer exists. Lockheed Martin.

Nov 3/11: The National Armaments Directors of Germany, Italy and the United States approve a amendment that lays out the rest of the MEADS System Development & Demonstration contract, which ends in 2014. Lockheed Martin will say only that MEADS “remains within the funding limit authorized… in the 2004 MEADS [MoU].” Testing will include engagement using remote tracks, plug-and-fight capabilities for MEADS components, the system’s netted/distributed operation, and interoperability through Link 16. In addition:

Fall 2011 will see a launcher missile characterization test, demonstrating MEADS’ 360 degree capability with an over-the-shoulder launch of a PAC-3 MSE missile, against a target approaching from behind.

Late 2012 will see an intercept flight test against an air-breathing (as opposed to rocket powered) threat.

Late 2013 will see a sensor test, followed by the grand finale: a tactical ballistic missile intercept test. Lockheed Martin.

Revised MEADS program

Nov 1/11: PAC-3 MSE. Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $16.1 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification to cover PAC-3 MSE follow-on flight tests.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX; Chelmsford, MA; Camden, AR; Huntsville, AL; Pinellas, FL; Vergennes, VT; Hollister, CA; Torrance, CA; and Wichita, KS; with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W31P4Q-07-G-0001).

Oct 24/11: Testing. Lockheed Martin announces that a MEADS launcher has arrived at White Sands Missile Range, NM, after system integration testing, to begin live fire testing. While PAC-3 MSE missiles have been fired before, it was done from existing launcher systems.

Integration and checkout tests are continuing in preparation for a November flight test, where the MEADS system will demonstrate an unprecedented over-the-shoulder launch of a PAC-3 MSE missile, against a simulated target that attacks from behind.

Oct 21/11: Deutschland raus. Germany changes its mind about termination, as it continues to cut its already weak defense sector. Under the new plan, Germany will also pull out of MEADS, and will cut its Patriot systems in half from 29 to 14.

This move virtually ensures the end of MEADS. If Italy also decides to pull the plug, as now seems likely, there will be no termination costs to fellow partners for shuttering the program. Depending on how they choose to go about closing things down, however, there may be termination costs to the contractors. Aviation Week.

Germany out

Oct 17/11: MICS. Lockheed Martin announces the early delivery of MEADS’ intra-fire unit communications kits for the MEADS Internal Communications Subsystem (MICS).

MICS provides secure communications between the MEADS sensors, launchers and battle managers across a high-speed internet protocol network. That network can have MEADS elements removed and added with no delay, and can be expanded to include other elements using a “plug-and-fight” architecture.

Oct 12/11: Battle Manager. MEADS International announces that they’ve begun integration testing on the first completed MEADS battle manager system (BMC4I TOC), which provides overall control and configuration of MEADS intended “plug and fight” system. The Battle Manager, mounted on back of an FMTV truck, completed acceptance testing in May 2011 at MBDA in Fusaro, Italy, and arrived at the MEADS Verification Facility in Orlando, FL in July 2011.

The Florida facility is putting the new system through its paces using the MEADS system stimulator, in preparation for a system live-fire in November at White Sands Missile Range, NM. In these simulated scenarios, the MEADS battle manager will configure the other major end items and receive Surveillance Radar tracks for simulated threats, cue the Multifunction Fire Control Radar, send launch commands, and complete interceptor launches and target intercepts.

FY 2011

MEADS BMC4I-TOC
(click to view full)

Sept 13/11: Lockheed Martin announces that MEADS’ Integrated Launcher Electronics System (ILES) has successfully executed a simulated missile launch, as they prepare for MEADS first major live-fire test in November at White Sands Missile Range, NM.

Aug 16/11: Battle manager. MEADS’ Battle Management Command, Control, Communications and Computers and Intelligence (BMC4I) “battle manager” successfully completes its software design review in Huntsville, AL. Lockheed Martin.

July 21/11: Unhappy partners. Italy and Germany are rattling cages in the USA, in response to FY 2012 budget committee votes. Germany is saying that they won’t agree to joint termination, while Italy’s undersecretary for defense, Guido Crosetto, sends a letter to the Pentagon saying:

“I expect that the U.S. DOD will put in place all the necessary actions to ensure that U.S. Congress will provide the required funds to complete the Meads development and meet our mutually agreed commitments within the limits… [otherwise] the U.S. shall then be required to bear all the resulting contract modifications and cancellation costs up to the total financial contribution established.”

Given the likely size of those contract penalties, that really does sound like an offer the USA can’t refuse. Bloomberg.

July 5/11: At least we’re secure. MEADS International wins its 3rd James S. Cogswell Outstanding Industrial Security Achievement Award. It’s presented by the U.S. Defense Security Service (DSS), who has responsibility for more than 13,000 cleared contractor facilities, during the National Classification Management Society’s Annual Seminar in New Orleans, LA.

Less than 1% are considered for Cogswell recognition, but MEADS International also won in 2000, and in 2007. Their 2011 Cogswell Award includes recognition for 7 consecutive years of Superior security ratings. Lockheed Martin.

June 21/11: Revised objectives. The National Armaments Directors of Germany, Italy and the United States have approved a revised set of MEADS development objectives, including 2 intercept flight tests by 2014. To support final system integration and flight test activities, MI has taken ownership of facilities at White Sands Missile Range, NM. Lockheed Martin.

June 15/11: Zero-out? Bloomberg reports that some members of the US Senate Armed Services committee are looking to zero-out MEADS funding in the FY 2012 budget. That happens the day after the US House Appropriations Committee approves a 2012 defense-spending draft that cuts $149.5 million from MEADS’ FY 2012 budget, and the SASC would go on to remove the MEADS’ request entirely.

The Pentagon has proposed funding MEADS development, due in part to MEADS’ termination costs. It remains to be seen whether that becomes a factor in debate.

May 4/11: PAC-3 MSE. Raytheon’s Patriot system successfully test fires Lockheed Martin’s PAC-3 MSE at White Sands Missile Range, NM. This is another step forward for MEADS development program. It also shows that the missile can be incorporated into existing Patriot systems, as an upgrade that stops short of full MEADS capabilities. Raytheon.

March 2011: Testing. The 2nd MEADS Launcher Platform Group (LPG) completes formal acceptance testing in Dello, Italy, after demonstrating capabilities including automatic upload/offload, switch from emplacement to mobile configuration, and detachment of components from the MAN truck carrier to allow helicopter transport.

Following integration with an Integrated Launcher Electronics System, Launcher Power System and Internal Communication System (MICS), the completed launcher will begin system-level integration with other MEADS elements, then begin flight tests at White Sands Missile Range, NM later in 2011. Lockheed Martin.

March 21/11: DOD Buzz reports from AIAA’s annual missile defense conference that MEADS may have bought itself the time it needs to survive, as the participants work to complete development instead of paying termination fees:

“Lockheed Martin believes there is a good chance the US will recommit to the tri-nation MEADS missile defense program, driven by its smaller manpower requirements, ease of transport and higher [8x – 10x higher] reliability. And Germany and Italian officials told a senior Lockheed official that they remain committed to MEADS and other countries may well join the program sometime in the next two years. Mike Trotsky, Lockheed’s vice president air and missile defense systems, told reporters during that adding more countries could substantially lower the price of American participation…”

April 15/11: The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 30/10 includes the “Patriot/Medium Extended Air Defense System Combined Aggregate Program (MEADS CAP) Fire Unit – Program”:

“…costs decreased $18,661.8 million (-85.0 percent) from $21,965.3 million to $3,303.5 million, due primarily to the Department’s decision to remove the production funding for the fire unit from the program and modify the design and development phase to continue as a proof of concept effort ending in fiscal 2014.”

SAR – termination

March 21/11: Testing. Lockheed Martin announces that a MEADS launcher and accompanying BMC4I Tactical Operations Center (TOC) have entered system test and integration at Pratica di Mare Air Force Base in Italy. Later additions of the Multifunction Fire Control Radar (MFCR) and a MEADS System Stimulator will enable demonstration of the full MEADS system in simulated engagements of live target aircraft. After pre-integration at Pratica di Mare, the MEADS system will complete integration at White Sands Missile Range, NM, and begin flight testing in 2012.

March 3/11: PAC-3 MSE. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $7 million incremental-funding, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to eliminate obsolete materials in the PAC-3 and PAC-3 MSE solid rocket motor, in support of the United States and Taiwan.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX, with an estimated completion date of June 30/14. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W31P4Q-07-G-0001).

March 2/11: BMD firing test. Lockheed Martin announces that a PAC-3 MSE missile successfully intercepted a “threat representative” tactical ballistic missile target at White Sands Missile Range, NM. Richard McDaniel, director of PAC-3 Missile Programs at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control:

“We continue to test the PAC-3 MSE Missile at higher altitudes and against more challenging targets, and it continues to meet expectations…”

Feb 16/11: Germany wobbles. Media reports confirm that Germany will not pursue MEADS beyond the development phase. A Feb 15/11 letter from the Germany defense ministry to its parliamentary budget committee was leaked to Reuters, and it reportedly states that:

“With the closing of the planned development of MEADS … between the United States, Germany and Italy,… a realisation or acquisition of MEADS will not be carried out in the foreseeable future…”

That doesn’t mean an immediate pullout. Announcements of the kind the Pentagon just made only happen after long and close consultation with partners, and agreement behind the scenes on what to do. All 3 countries will almost certainly be financing MEADS development instead of paying termination costs, before going their separate ways. Reuters.

Feb 16/11: Pentagon program suicide? DoD Buzz has a take on MEADS from Frank Cevasco. While a senior Pentagon official at the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Cevasco and co. pushed a future extended air defense program, which eventually became MEADS. His thoughts on what followed:

“I was told that doesn’t make sense [to want to replace Patriot units 1:1] as a MEADS fire unit has substantially greater geographic coverage than Patriot [but the Army did]. I agree there would be additional costs associated with integrating MEADS with a separate Army command and control system, a requirement that was levied on the program unilaterally by Army about two years ago. Moreover, a portion of the cost overruns and schedule slippages can be attributed to the Army and DoD technology disclosure community who refused to allow the MEADS industry team to share key technology. The matter was resolved but only after intervention by senior OSD officials and the passage of considerable time; and, time is money with major weapons system development programs… Army has done its best from the every beginning to sabotage the program, preferring to develop a US-only solution funded by the US (with funds provided by the good fairy).”

Feb 15/11: Germany. German lawmakers are pushing to follow the US lead and drop MEADS, but so far, Germany seems to be taking the same position as the US. Which isn’t really surprising, since the American decision would have been discussed extensively before it was made public. Opposition is coming from the Free Democrats and Greens, both minor players. The cost of continuing existing MoU commitments is about EUR 250 million for Germany, while the cost of cancellation is currently unknown. Bloomberg reports that:

“Germany will continue its commitments for the development phase of the project, according to a Defense Ministry official who declined to be identified in line with government rules. The official wouldn’t comment when asked about the government’s intentions beyond the development phase.”

Feb 14/11: Pentagon comptroller Robert Hale tells a budget briefing that the USA will fund MEADS up to its $4 billion cap and into FY 2013. After that?

“Yes, our proposal would be that we would invest no more U.S. funds in MEADS after 2013, fiscal year ’13. We will – we will let the program run out under its current plan so we don’t incur any termination liability. But we wouldn’t spend money beyond there. And we would try to harvest some of the technology, and we may use that in other programs, and our partners may go forward with some MEADS. But it is not our plan to do so.”

At present, the USA is committed to spending another $804 million under the current MEADS MoU. With MEADS behind on cost and schedule targets, a recent restructuring proposal would have reportedly added another 30+ months (to the existing 110 month development period) and another $974 million – $1.16 billion of American funding to the program. The Pentagon estimates that another $800 million would be needed to certify MEADS and integrate it into existing US air defense systems. In addition, MEADS lateness meant that the USA would have to spending more money than they had planned on new Patriot missiles and system modernization. That burden, on top of existing MEADS overruns and fielding costs, is what pushed the Pentagon to the breaking point with MEADS. Hence the current proposal, which will spend the committed $804 million or so on MEADS development instead of termination costs, produce prototypes and limited integration, and look to incorporate anything promising into existing systems.

The odds that Italy or Germany would pick up the system are poor, given Germany’s ongoing disarmament and austerity program, and Italy’s slow-motion budget crisis. The FY 2013 date is significant for the USA, however, as it leaves the next Presidential administration the option of deciding to keep MEADS going. Hale briefing transcript | Pentagon’s MEADs Fact Sheet [PDF] | Bloomberg | DoD Buzz | Gannett’s Army Times | Reuters.

US backing out

Feb 14/11: US Budget. The Pentagon unveils the official FY 2012 budget request, which amounts to $570.5 million for MEADS components.

$406.6 million would be dedicated to MEADS development, down from $467.1 million requested in FY 2011, and $571.0 appropriated in FY 2010.

The FY 2012 request also includes $163.9 million in PAC-3 MSE missile work ($89M RDT&E, $75M procurement), up from FY 2011’s request for $62.5 million.

Jan 31/11: Radar. Lockheed Martin announces that the MEADS Multifunction Fire Control Radar (MFCR) subteam at LFK in Germany completed integration of the antenna array in 2010, clearing the way for assembly-level testing of the Transceiver Group. Coolant pressure testing was completed, and cooling distribution was demonstrated at the slip ring and antenna rotary joint. Final rotation tests at both 15 and 30 rpm were successfully completed.

The X-band MEADS MFCR has not yet begun full system tests at Pratica di Mare air force base in Italy. The program is now completing final build, integration and test activities, hopefully leading to flight tests involving all system elements at White Sands Missile Range in 2012. If, that is, the program survives.

Jan 4/11: Passed but frozen. The FY 2011 US defense “budget” is passed in a very odd way, but it has a provision in it that’s specific to MEADS. About 75%, or $350.2 million of the approved $467 million annual funding, is frozen until a firm decision is made to either continue or cancel the program. There were also requirements in the Senate’s S.3454 bill, Sec. 233 around decisions by Germany and Italy regarding funding and production, and a variety of certifications and cost estimates. But the final bill passed was H.R. 5136.

Through June 30/10, the USA has approved spending about $2 billion on the program. So far, MEADS program estimates have grown in cost by about $900 million (to $4.2 billion), and its overall schedule has been delayed by 18 months. Bloomberg.

Dec 13/10: PAC-3 MSE. Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $9.1 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to design obsolete materials out of the PAC-3 and MSE solid rocket motor. These sorts of moves can improve performance, but their most important function is to ensure ongoing availability of spares and new-build components.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX, with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/13. One bid was solicited and one bid was received. by the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command Contracting Center in Huntsville, AL (W31P4Q-07-G-0001).

Nov 9/10: PAC-3 MSE. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas, TX receives a $7.3 million cost-plus-incentive fee contract for PAC-3 MSE contract overrun funding.

Work is to be performed in Dallas, TX (95.74%); Camden, AR (0.25%); and Ocala, FL (4.01%), with an estimated completion date of Feb 29/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received by the U.S. Army’s AMCOM Contracting Center at Redstone Arsenal, AL (DAAH01-03-C-0164).

Oct 25/10: MICS. Lockheed Martin announces delivery of the first 2 MEADS Message Routing Subsystem units, as essential elements of the MEADS Internal Communications Subsystem (MICS) hardware, which will provide IP-based secure tactical communications between the launcher, surveillance radar and multifunction fire control radar across a high-speed network.

The Message Routing Subsystem supports the networked exchange of command, control and status data between the major components and the Tactical Operations Center.

FY 2010

MEADS elements
(click to see whole)

Sept 30/10: PAC-3 MSE. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas, TX receives an $11.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for the Patriot PAC-3 MSE missile program.

Work is to be performed in Dallas, TX (95.74%), Camden, AZ (0.25%), and Ocala, FL (4.01%), with an estimated completion date of Feb 29/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command’s AMCOM Contracting Center at Redstone Arsenal, AL (DAAH01-03-C-0164).

Sept 22/10: O&S costs. Lockheed Martin touts the MEADS program’s estimate of its required life cycle costs, which has been submitted to the governments of the USA, Germany, and Italy as cash-strapped European governments and the US Missile Defense Agency decide whether to use their funds to put MEADS into production. The assumptions and data used in that estimate aren’t discussed in any depth, but they contend that:

“MEADS will especially reduce operation and support (O&S) costs. Ordinarily, over two-thirds of the total cost of ownership is spent in this area, but MEADS O&S costs are about half [DID: which would be a 37% reduction – unless the absolute total is 37% or more higher than previous systems]. Savings result from features of the MEADS design that include high reliability, automated fault detection, prognostics, two-level maintenance and a reduction in the number of system elements. Additionally, MEADS was shown to defend up to eight times the coverage area with far fewer system assets… [DID: vs. Hawk? Nike Hercules? Patriot? Doesn’t say.]

NAMEADSMA General Manager Gregory Kee said, “The combination of advanced 360-degree sensors, near-vertical launch capability and the improved PAC-3 MSE Missile gives MEADS a far greater defended area. MEADS active phased array, digital beamforming radars make full use of the extended range of the PAC-3 MSE Missile.”

Sept 21/10: PAC-3 MSE. Lockheed Martin in Dallas TX receives $6 million in contract overrun funding for the Missile Segment Enhancement program’s cost-plus-incentive-fee contract.

Work will be performed at Dallas, TX; Camden, AZ; and Ocala, FL, and is expected to be complete by Feb 29/12. One bid was solicited, with one received by the US Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (DAAH01-03-C-0164; Serial #1971).

Aug 26/10: CDR. MEADS completes its final Critical Design Review, leaving the United States, Germany and Italy to make decisions about moving on to low-rate production in October 2010. The government-industry team had to demonstrate 1,100 elements of design criteria during 47 separate critical design reviews, and the week of Aug 23/10 featured the final summary critical design review.

The next step will involve the NATO MEADS Management Agency, who will conduct an October 2010 program review during which decisions are expected concerning production rates and sizes during the LRIP and production and sustainment phases. The question is whether MEADS will continue beyond the development phase, and in what form. The US Army no longer wants the system, Germany’s Bundeswehr is in the midst of savage budget cuts, and Italy is finding it difficult to meet its existing budgetary commitments.

Meanwhile, the program’s initial phase continues, and MEADS International is now producing test hardware and prototypes. Current plans call for Practica di Mare AFB, Italy to begin receiving the system’s first battle management and command and control system in late 2010, followed by launcher and fire control radar hardware in early 2011. Surveillance radar integration activities will take place in Cazenovia, NY, before all of the hardware is shipped to White Sands Missile Range, NM for 3 years of flight testing, beginning early in 2012. Space News | Aviation Week | defpro | Lockheed Martin.

Critical Design Review

July 2010: Battle manager. MEADS battle management element demonstrates interoperability with the NATO Air Command and Control System (ACCS) during the Joint Project Optic Windmill (JPOW) test, which used NATO’s Active Layer Theatre Ballistic Missile Defense (ALTBMD) Integration Test Bed. During Optic Windmill, MEADS systems shared simulation and military communications data, including track reports for different tactical ballistic missile threats. The test represents the 1st time that the MEADS program has been authorized to exchange data outside of its 3 partner nations.

MEADS is designed to work with a wide range of platforms and command and control structures, and NATO interoperability is especially important to Germany and Italy. NATO ACCS is its overarching tactical command and control element for theater missile defense. NATO’s ALTBMD program is tasked with designing a theater missile defense architecture that will include MEADS as a key component.

Lockheed Martin’s Sept 27/10 release says that MEADS system elements are continuing integration and testing at system integration laboratories in the U.S. and Europe, and are on track for flight tests at White Sands Missile Range, NM, starting in 2012.

March 10/10: Army antagonism. The meeting, involving senior Army officers and the US Missile Defense Agency, produces no resolution concerning the potential transfer of MEADS to the US MDA. Instead, senior officials from both organizations reportedly agreed that follow-up questions needed to be answered, and additional analysis was needed first. Defense News.

March 9/10: Army antagonism. The Washington Post reports that the US Army wants to cancel MEADS:

“After several failed attempts, the Army is trying again to cancel a $19 billion missile defense system that the United States is developing in partnership with Italy and Germany… the Army says MEADS has become too expensive, is taking too long to produce and is difficult to manage because any changes in the program require German and Italian approval. “The system will not meet U.S. requirements or address the current and emerging threat without extensive and costly modifications,” an internal Army staff memo concluded last month in recommending the cancellation of MEADS… Officials said a primary reason for sticking with the project is that it would be too expensive to stop. If the Defense Department were to cancel the system now, it would be required to pay $550 million to $1 billion in penalties… [and could] undercut the Pentagon’s relations with Germany and Italy, which need to replace their own aging missile defense systems… The Army is scheduled to decide this week whether it will continue to oversee the development of MEADS or hand over responsibility to the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency.”

Feb 1/10: US Budget. The Pentagon releases its FY 2011 budget request, and begin to break out MEADS-related spending from its Patriot programs, instead of aggregating them.

The FY 2011 request is for $467.1 million, down from FY 2010’s $566.2 million budget, but still above FY 2009’s $454.7 million.

Oct 6/09: Foreign crypto. The MEADS program has received approval to use a European cryptographic device to implement SELEX Sistemi Integrati’s Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) in its radars, via a waiver from the U.S. National Security Agency. This makes MEADS the first American system ever to incorporate a foreign cryptographic device.

SELEX’s IFF will be packaged into MEADS’ UHF Surveillance Radar, and its X-Band Multifunction Fire Control Radar (MFCR) used for missile targeting. Selection of the SELEX unit means that the MEADS IFF subsystem is available to begin testing this fall at Pratica di Mare AFB near Rome, Italy, ahead of schedule. Lockheed Martin describes SELEX’s products as:

“…more robust than current implementations of U.S. IFF systems…SELEX leads U.S. industry in IFF development because Europe has already adopted new standards for radar operation and civilian aircraft. The U.S. is moving to adopt these standards in the future.”

FY 2009

PAC-3 MSE drawing
(click to view full)

Sept 15/09: T/R acceptance. EADS Defence & Security announces that its transmit/receive (T/R) modules for MEADS’ Multifunction Fire Control Radar (MFCR) have passed all required acceptance tests “with margin,” paving the way for integration into the 1st of 3 planned prototypes. The firm says that it has produced more than 10,000 of these modules already, which are core elements of the MFCR’s AESA radar. During the Design and Development phase, Defence Electronics will produce thousands of additional T/R modules, including the associated control electronics, under a EUR 120 million sub-contract.

These EADS DS T/R modules are the only ones in Europe which are certified in accordance with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard – as is the “Microwave Factory” clean room facility in Ulm, Germany. These modules and technologies are mature, and have already been used in other EADS SMTR family radars, including the TerraSAR space radar, the BUR vehicle-mounted ground and air surveillance radar, and the Eurofighter‘s developmental E-Captor radar. EADS release.

Aug 5/09: Component CDRs. MEADS International announces that they has successfully completed Critical Design Reviews (CDRs) for all major components, clearing the way for production of radars, launchers, tactical operation centers, and reloaders needed for the system.

Under its design and development contract, this clears the way for MEADS International to provide 6 Battle Management, Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence Tactical Operations Centers, 4 launchers, 1 reloader, 3 surveillance radars, 3 multifunction fire control radars, and 20 PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement missile rounds for system tests at White Sands Missile Range, NM.

The next stage is a set of CDRs for the system as a whole, instead of just its individual components. A total of 15 system-level CDR events will be completed in the year ahead, leading to final evaluations of MEADS’ survivability, logistics, safety, integration and test, life cycle cost, and performance. The final system-level CDR event is expected in August 2010, and initial flight tests are planned for 2012.

Feb 2/09: MEADS + IRIS-T. Lockheed Martin announces Germany’s request to add the IRIS-T SL (Surface Launched) as a secondary MEADS missile for German fire units. The request will involve software adaptation to integrate the missile and launcher Via a standardized plug-and-fight data interface, and incorporation of the second missile into existing MEADS simulations. This will be an early test of the system’s open architecture electronics. Incorporating the missiles themselves will not require any redesign of MEADS hardware.

The IRIS-T SL system is based on the concept of the short-range, infrared guided IRIS-T air-to-air missile, adding a larger solid-propellant rocket motor, a data link, and a nose cone for drag reduction. The combination of radar-guided PAC-3 MSE and infrared-guided IRI-T SL missiles would expand MEADS’ options by allowing for engagements even with the tracking radar shut down as a result of command decisions or damage. Competing launchers like Israel’s Spyder-MR (Derby radar-guided and enhanced Python-5 missiles) and France’s MICA-VL (MICA-IR and MICA-RF missiles) employ similar philosophies. Lockheed Martin.

Adding IRIS-T SL

FY 2008

BMC4I TOC
(click to view full)

March 28/08: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX received a $6.7 million cost-plus fixed fee contract finalizing the change order for the CLIN 0002 PAC-3 missile segment enhancement, effort, and making changes to the PAC-3 MSE master test plan. See Jan 16/08 for more.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX and is expected to be complete by March 31/09. One bid was solicited on July 30/07 by the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (DAAH01-03-C-0164).

Feb 18/08: Nav. Northrop Grumman Corporation announces that MBDA Italia chose their navigation and localization system for NATO’s MEADS program within the design and development phase.

Feb 11/08: Lockheed Martin announces that the MEADS project has completed its System Preliminary Design Review (PDR), which tests whether the basic design of MEADS is ready to move forward into detailed design. Over the 6-month period leading to the PDR summary event on December 18, transatlantic review teams attended 27 multi-day design reviews to ensure that the needs of the three3 partner nations are being met.

The MEADS team will now focus on detailed design work for the system, with the Critical Design Review (CDR) scheduled for 2009, leading to initial MEADS flight tests in 2011. Lockheed Martin release.

Preliminary Design Review

Jan 16/08: PAC-3 MSE. Lockheed Martin announces that NATO’s MEADS Management Agency awarded them a $66 million contract to develop the Lockheed Martin PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) Missile as the baseline interceptor for the tri-national program. The baseline PAC-3 Missile was selected as the primary missile for MEADS when the design and development program began in 2004, but PAC-3 MSE adds additional range and coverage by using larger folding control surfaces, and a more powerful rocket motor designed to boost range by up to 50%, to about 30 km/ 18 miles.

The MEADS Steering Committee, composed of 1 government representative from each of the 3 participating nations, recommended the change following submittal of a study by MEADS International, Inc. that assessed the principal technical, schedule, cost, contract and program implications of integrating the PAC-3 MSE Missile instead. MEADS International Technical Director Claudio Ponzi:

“Changing the baseline interceptor during our Preliminary Design Review keeps risk to a minimum and keeps us on track to provide the three nations with the 21st century air and missile defense system they have requested.”

PAC-3 MSE development

Nov 15/07: Security. For the third consecutive year, MEADS International receives Superior ratings in an annual audit by the U.S. Defense Security Service (DSS). DSS has responsibility for approximately 12,000 cleared contractor facilities, and fewer than 5% demonstrate the top-rated “Superior” performance for an industrial security program. It’s reserved for contractors that consistently and fully implement the requirements of the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual in a documented fashion that provides a superior security posture, compared with other contractors of similar size and complexity.

In announcing the results, DSS team leader Rob Gerardi noted that although MI received a Superior rating in 2006, the inspection team found several improvements to the security program this year. Lockheed Martin release.

FY 2007 and earlier

Aug 14/07: TOC. MEADS International releases more details concerning its Tactical Operations Center (TOC). With a large US Army contract on the horizon for an IBCS system that would integrate all anti-aircraft defenses in a sector, MI President Jim Cravens adds that:

“We have invested years of architectural and conceptual work to meet these requirements via an open, modular set of software that gives MEADS great flexibility to accommodate additional requirements. This flexibility offers the U.S. Army an opportunity to leverage the MEADS Battle Manager functionality as a backbone for its IBCS (common TOC) initiative.”

Lockheed Martin joined Northrop Grumman’s IBCS bid team in April 2007, becoming the 3rd member alongside NGC & Boeing. Their team’s main competitor is Raytheon, who is partnered with General Dynamics as well as Davidson Technologies, IBM, and Teledyne Brown Engineering.

Aug 7/07: Lockheed Martin announces that MEADS recently completed its 2-day Start of System Preliminary Design Review (PDR), which allows the project to continue on to detailed design.

The Start of System PDR marks the end of 33 months of Design and Development effort. It summarized previous Major End Item-level PDRs, including allocated baseline documentation, and addressed a set of operational and performance analyses. The PDF kicks off a series of 29 reviews over the next 4 months, leading to a Summary System PDR in late October 2007. Initial flight tests are still scheduled for 2011.

June 19/07: Security Award. MEADS International announces that The US Defense Security Service (DSS) has announced that MEADS International is one of 30 companies to receive the James S. Cogswell Outstanding Industrial Security Achievement Award, the most prestigious honor DSS may bestow on a cleared facility. To be a candidate for the award, a facility must receive a minimum of two consecutive Superior industrial security review ratings and show sustained excellence and innovation in their overall security program, including a security program that goes well beyond basic National Industrial Security Program requirements.

This is MEADS International’s second James S. Cogswell award, and follows implementation of a transatlantic NATO classified network that enables MI’s 7 work locations to collaborate in designing the MEADS system. MEADS International release.

Jan 16/07: Lockheed Martin announces a $3 million contract from the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to continue the Air-Launched Hit-to-Kill (ALHTK) initiative, which would enable fighter aircraft to carry and launch Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) Missiles to intercept hostile ballistic and cruise missiles.

Since a modified PAC-3 is slated to act as the MEADS system missile, and air-defense batteries can share information with fighters via channels like Link 16, the announcement has implications for future MEADS capabilities as well.

Feb 9/06: Management. MEADS International announces 2 changes within its management organization on the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) program, adding a finance director/ treasurer, and a planning manager.

Aug 4/05: Management. MEADS International announces the expansion of its Orlando technical management organization to lead development of the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) with a multinational set of appointments. In addition, 3 new positions have been added to the program management Team. See MEADS International release for more details.

June 17/05: MBDA buys LFK. MBDA buys a 100% stake in LFK, which used to be owned jointly by EADS and MBDA.

June 1/05: MEADS International Signs $3.4 Billion Design and Development Contract. The D&D contract extends the period of performance of a previous letter contract that was awarded to MI by the NATO MEADS Management Agency (NAMEADSMA) in September 2004. Lockheed Martin release.

Final SDD contract

April 20/05: Germany approves involvement in MEADS missile. This clears the way for the signing of the full development contract.

September 2004: NATO’s MEADS Management Agency (NAMEADSMA) awards MEADS International a letter contract valued in then-year terms at approximately $2.0 billion plus EUR 1.4 billion euros to design and develop the system, with an initial period of performance for which the overall maximum financial ceiling was approximately $54.5 million plus EUR 54.8 million.

Initial SDD contract

Additional Readings The Program

• US Office of the Secretary of Defense (Feb 11/11) – Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) Fact Sheet [PDF]. Provides program background, and explains the decision to end funding in FY 2013.

• MEADS International Inc. See also MEADS Program Overview Presentation [PDF]

Background: MEADS Components

• Lockheed Martin – Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS).

• Lockheed Martin – PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement.

• Diehl BGT Defence – IRIS-T SL / IRIS-T SLS. Will serve as as the secondary missile in the German MEADS system.

• Army Technology – MEADS Medium Extended Air Defense System, Germany / Italy / USA.

• GlobalSecurity.org – Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) Corps SAM.

Background: Related Systems

• US Missile Defense Agency – Terminal Phase Defense. Includes THAAD, Arrow II, Patriot PAC-3 & MEADS.

• Designation Systems – Lockheed-Martin Patriot PAC-3.

• DID FOCUS Article – Keeping Patriots in Shape. The Patriot Engineering Support contract already included provisions for MEADS-related MEI work.

DID FOCUS Article – THAAD: Reach Out and Touch Ballistic Missiles. A ground-based complement to MEADS that offers the next step up in range.

News & Views

• DID – Alone, If Necessary: The Shield of Poland.

• SLD (Oct 28 – Nov 5/10) – Regional Missile Defense: The Challenge of Crafting Integrated Missile Defense in NATO and Other Allied Regions. Read Part One | Part Two.

• Air Defense Artillery Magazine (July-September 2005) – It’s Time to Start Thinking MEADS [PDF]

• Aviation Daily & Defense Report (Oct 27/04) – Germany Expected To Approve New MEADS Phase In December. Actually, it happened in late April, 2005.

• BASIC Publications (May 15/01) – European Missile Defense: New Emphasis, New Roles.

PW F119: Power!
(click to view full)

The Adaptive Versatile Engine Technology (ADVENT) program aims “to develop and demonstrate inlet, engine, exhaust nozzle, and integrated thermal management technologies that enable optimized propulsion system performance over a broad range of altitude and flight velocity.” That sounds boring, but what if we put it like this:

ADVENT aims to produce a revolution in jet engine design. Imagine the jet equivalent of a car engine that could give you Formula One performance or sub-compact mileage as required. ADVENT-equipped aircraft would have extra-long range, but be able to switch quickly to high-speed power maneuvers and still be comparatively efficient. The new engine design will use adaptive fan blades and engine cores to generate high thrust when needed, and optimize fuel efficiency when cruising or loitering, in order to combine the best characteristics of high-performance and fuel-efficient jet engines.

That certainly sounds much more exciting. Now, ADVENT also sounds very real – because the program is under way, with over $600 million in contracts to 4 different vendors… and 2 big losers.

GE Aviation won up to $325 million in additional funds in January 2015 to work on an adaptive cycle engine under phase three of the Versatile affordable advanced turbine engines (VAATE) program that preceded ADVENT.

In April, the Air Force also awarded a $325 million IDIQ contract to engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney for the Versatile Affordable Advanced Turbine Engines (VAATE) engine’s Phase III stage.

ADVENT, HEETE, and VAATE

GE90: Efficient!
(click to view full)

Project ADVENT is a actually the flagship effort under the Versatile, Affordable Advanced Turbine Engines Program, or VAATE. Managed by the Propulsion Directorate, VAATE’s goal is to increase turbine engine affordability tenfold while improving performance.

The VAATE program, structured around 4 focus areas, emphasizes specific themes important to achieving the affordability goal. The Durability Focus Area aims to develop, design, and test protocols to prevent component failure, increase life, enhance reparability, and perhaps improve performance. The Versatile Core Focus Area, will develop technologies for a multi-use, 4000-hour, maintenance-friendly engine core (compressor, combustor, and turbine). The third area, the Intelligent Engine Focus Area, will develop and integrate technologies that provide durable, adaptive, damage-tolerant engine health and life management features. Finally, engine-airframe integration technologies are key in attaining the significant cost and weight reductions required in order to achieve the VAATE tenfold goal.

The smaller Highly Efficient Embedded Turbine Engine (HEETE) program is a parallel and related effort, aiming to prove that a “quantum leap” in high-pressure compressor systems is possible. If that 3-year project proves successful, the AFRL would seek to integrate HEETE’s more advanced compressor systems into VAATE, incorporating these advances into the new engine cores developed under the ADVENT project.

The DefenseLNIK contract announcements states that:

“The ADVENT program will demonstrate integration technologies to Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 4-5 and engine technologies to TRL-6 in a large thrust class, with emphasis on multi-design point demonstration of significant advancements in thrust, fuel efficiency, development cost, production cost and maintenance cost characteristics over baseline engines.”

Technology Readiness Level 4-5 means lab tests where basic technological components are integrated to establish that the pieces will work together (TRL 4), with reasonably realistic supporting elements so that the technology can be tested in a simulated environment (TRL 5). Examples include ‘high fidelity’ laboratory integration of components. TRL 6 is a major step up, and involves a working prototype that can be tested in a relevant environment.

As for “significant advancements in… development cost, production cost and maintenance cost characteristics,” that will probably happen, but not in the way the USAF was thinking. Barring significant successes on ADVENT’s other fronts, variable engines are likely to be more complex to develop, may see higher production costs due to material requirements for higher temperature tolerances, and may also involve higher maintenance costs if the result is more moving parts. On the flip side, greater engine standardization might be possible, which may provide some maintenance savings.

VAATE seeks to transcend all of these limitations, but research programs rarely hit all of their goals. Even if all of the negative predictions above held true, however, an ADVENT-type engine would definitely save money on operating costs, while offering higher performance. This would still be worth the extra purchase investment for many airlines, and for some power generation applications as well. Those are considerable benefits all by themselves, and the Air Force’s need for extra power in life-or-death situations would make them the most obvious customer of all.

Contracts & Key Events

Smart Engines
(click to view full)

Unless otherwise specified, the Air Force Research Laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH issued the contracts.

May 18/15: General Electric and Pratt & Whitney were both awarded $105 million modifications on Friday to cover a potential contract award for the Adaptive Engine Technology Development order, with the Air Force also reportedly looking to open future competition for F-35 upgrades.

GE Aviation won up to $325 million in additional funds in January 2015 to work on an adaptive cycle engine under phase three of the Versatile affordable advanced turbine engines (VAATE) program that preceded ADVENT.

In April, the Air Force also awarded a $325 million IDIQ contract to engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney for the Versatile Affordable Advanced Turbine Engines (VAATE) engine’s Phase III stage.

Oct 18/09: Rolls-Royce North American Technologies, Inc. announces its selection to proceed with Phase II of ADVENT development. Next steps will include the integration of a variety of advanced technologies, component testing and development of a technology demonstrator core and engine. See also: Britain’s Times.

Oct 1/07: The AFRL rejected bids by United Technologies subsidiary Pratt & Whitney and by Honeywell to win the so-called Highly Efficient Embedded Turbine Engine (HEETE) contracts, one month after P&W was the sole losing bidder for the AFRL’s Adaptive Versatile Engine Technology (ADVENT) program. Flight International explains the implications:

“P&W’s loss of both ADVENT and HEETE means it must devote internal research and development funds to keep pace with its rivals after production of its latest generation fighter engine – the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter’s F135 – runs its course… The HEETE project is necessary because the commercial technology stops short of the military’s requirements for next-generation compressor systems, with the contract aiming to prove that a “quantum leap” in high-pressure compressor systems is possible. If the three-year project proves successful, the AFRL would seek to integrate HEETE’s more advanced compressor systems into the new engine cores developed under the ADVENT project.”

Sept 27/07: Northrop Grumman Integrated Systems Sector of El Segundo, CA received an indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for $40 million. The objective of the ADVENT program is to develop and demonstrate inlet, engine, exhaust nozzle, and integrated thermal management technologies that enable optimized propulsion system performance over a broad range of altitude and flight velocity.

The ADVENT program will demonstrate integration technologies to TRL 4-5 [components tested] and engine technologies to TRL-6 [prototype] in a large thrust class (25,000 lbs.) with emphasis on multi-design point demonstration of significant advancements in thrust, fuel efficiency, development cost, production cost and maintenance cost characteristics over baseline engines. At this time $1,000 has been obligated (FA8650-07-D-2800).

Sept 25/07: The US Air Force Research Laboratory has awarded a total of $35.6 million in cost-share contracts to Rolls Royce-North American Technologies Inc., and General Electric Co. to begin developing a game-changing class of engines, known as Highly Efficient Embedded Turbine Engines (HEETE). Rolls Royce will be receiving $19.6 million in its portion of the contracts while General Electric will receive $16 million. Rolls Royce and GE will conduct high-pressure and high-temperature rig tests on the compression systems that are critical to the HEETE concept. Development work will be conducted at Rolls Royce’s Liberty Works facilities in Indianapolis, IN; and at General Electric’s Evendale, OH, facility. Rolls Royce release.

HEETE is a technology development program that pursues high temperature, high pressure ratio compressor technologies and their related thermal management features. While HEETE is currently focused on an advanced compressor demonstration, the goal is to define the next generation engine architecture for subsonic missions. This also involves active flow control inlets and exhausts, with a focus on 20,000-35,000 pound thrust class. There were also losers. Flight International adds:

“The US Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) announced on 25 September awarding contracts to General Electric and Rolls-Royce… However, the AFRL rejected bids by Pratt and Honeywell to win the so-called Highly Efficient Embedded Turbine Engine (HEETE) contracts.”

Sept 21/07:Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company-Fort Worth of Fort Worth, TX received an indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity, cost-reimbursement contract for $40 million (maximum) for the ADVENT program. The emphasis will be on multi-design point demonstration of significant advancements in thrust, fuel efficiency, development cost, production cost and maintenance cost characteristics over baseline engines. It covers demonstration of integration technologies to TRL 4-5 and engine technologies to TRL-6 in a large thrust class (25,000 lbs.). At this time $1,000 has been obligated (FA8650-07-D2798).

Aug 27/07: General Electric Aircraft Engines in Cincinnati, OH received a cost-sharing ADVENT contract for $231.2 million. At this time, $129,140 has been obligated. Solicitations began in March 2007, negotiations were completed in August 2007, and work will be complete in September 2012 (FA8650-07-C-2802).

The AFRL explained to DID that this award was originally announced at the same time as the Rolls Royce award, on Aug 15/07. In reality, however, it hadn’t been finalized yet. Hence the repeat announcement. We’ve revised the date accordingly.

Aug 15/07: Rolls-Royce Corp. in Indianapolis, IN received a cost-sharing ADVENT contract for $296.3 million. At this time, $98,770 has been obligated. Solicitations began in March 2007, negotiations were completed in August 2007, and work will be complete in September 2012 (FA8650-07-C-2803). Rolls Royce release.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Flight International (May 1/07) – Military engines: Power Surge

• US Air Force (March 27/07) – Air Force plans to develop revolutionary engine

• Aviation Week Ares (March 27/07) – Stop and go

• Air Force Research Laboratory, Horizons Magazine (December 2001) – Future Aircraft Jet Engines Will Think for Themselves

Mk-44 firing RAM
(click to view full)

The Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) MK-31 guided missile weapon system is co-developed and co-produced under a NATO cooperative program between the United States and German governments to provide a small, all-weather, low-cost self-defense system against aircraft and cruise missiles. The RIM-116 was later called RAM (Rolling Airframe Missile), because it spins during flight. To save costs, Designation Systems notes that the RAM was designed to use several existing components, including the rocket motor of the MIM-72 Chaparral, the warhead of the AIM-9 Sidewinder, and the Infrared seeker of the FIM-92 Stinger. Cueing is provided by the ship’s radar, or by its ESM signal tracing suite.

RAM is currently installed, or planned for installation, on 78 U.S. Navy and 30 German Navy ships, including American LSD, LHD, LPD and CVN ship types. This number will grow as vessels of the LPD-17 San Antonio Class and Littoral Combat Ships enter the US Navy, and the LCS will sport an upgraded SeaRAM system that will include its own integrated radar and IR sensors. Abroad, the South Korean Navy has adopted RAM for its KDX-II and KDX-III destroyers, and its LPX Dokdo Class amphibious assault ships; other navies using or buying RAM include Egypt, Greece, Japan, South Korea, Turkey, and the UAE/Dubai.

RAM Systems: Fast, Flat & Flexible From USS Kitty Hawk
(click to view full)

GlobalSecurity.orrg notes that The MK-31 RAM Guided Missile Weapon System (GMWS) is defined as the MK-49 Guided Missile Launching System (GMLS) and the MK-44 Guided Missile Round Pack (GMRP). The launching system and missiles comprise the weapon system. The RAM weapon system consists of a 21-round missile launcher, below-deck electronics, and a guided missile round pack. The round pack consists of a 5-inch supersonic missile and a launching canister, which slides into the launcher and provides the interface with the carried missile. The term “All-Up-Round (AUR)” is often used, as the canister is also used for storage/transport.

Raytheon’s partner is the German firm RAMSYS, a joint company of Diehl/BGT and EADS GmbH. These firms extended their agreement for another 10 years in June 2004.

System improvements continue. New MK-44 Guided Missile Round Packs and ORDALT kits are designed to upgrade current systems to RAM Block 1 missile configuration (RIM-116B) or above. Block 1 systems feature an image scanning infrared seeker that allows the missile to more easily counter helicopters and advanced anti-ship threats that do not employ active radar guidance. Another new feature is called IRDM (IR Dual Mode Enable). In that mode, the RAM missile is launched with IR guidance enabled, but can switch to passive radar homing when the target’s radiation becomes adequate to guide on. It also incorporates HAS (Helicopter, Aircraft, Surface) software that lets it prosecute a wider array of targets out to about 9 km/ 4.9 nm, including targets like speedboats that move at slower speeds in radar/IR clutter.

RAM Block 1. This system is installed or planned for installation on many U.S. Navy surface ships, including CV/CVN aircraft carriers, DD-963 Spruance Class destroyers, Oliver Hazard Perry Class FFG guided missile frigates, Littoral Combat Ships, the LHA Tarawa Class and LHD Wasp Class amphibious assault ships, the future LHA-R amphibious assault ships, and LSD and LPD-17 amphibious assault ships. The US Navy expects to buy around 2,000 Block 1 missiles in total.

SeaRAM
(click to view full)

Follow-on modifications include an upgraded missile, and the SeaRAM system.

RAM Block 2. A new version that is beginning production, with deliveries beginning in August 2014. The RIM-116 missile’s effective range gets a boost via a larger dual-thrust rocket motor, while an independent 4-canard control actuator system improves maneuverability. Other enhancements include an upgraded passive radio frequency seeker, a digital autopilot, and engineering changes in selected infrared seeker components. The Block 2 system demonstration and development (SDD) program was scheduled to reach initial operating capability in 2011, but it’s 2013 and the missile is still in testing. IOC will wait until 2014.

While most of the RAM Block 2 work is Raytheon’s, the effort is a partnership. Operating under a cooperative Memorandum of Understanding for the Block 2 SDD program, German industry partner RAM-System GmbH also received funds. They’re working to develop an evolved missile radio frequency sensor with better sensitivity and discrimination, in order to kill targets that are using more advanced guidance radars.

SeaRAM. RIM-116 Block 2 missiles, and Block 1 upgrades to the MK31 system, will both be incorporated into the new SeaRAM variant, also known as the “MK 15 MOD 31 PHALANX SeaRAM Close-In Weapon System.” Once it’s bolted on and installed, SeaRAM becomes a complete, self-cueing system that can work with existing systems, or operate on its own. It packages the RAM Block 1 upgrade’s infrared sensors and IR dual-mode with the radar dome mounted on top of the Mk15 Phalanx 20mm CIWS. The penalty for its bolt-on versatility is that it cuts the 21-round missile launcher down to an 11-missile load, in order to remain within the same space “footprint” as the Phalanx 1B. It will equip the USA’s new Littoral Combat Ships, among others.

Program and Budgets

While the number of RAM missiles procured by the USA has been relatively stable each year, Pentagon budget documents show US program spending fluctuating. That’s because some annual budgets also include funds for system upgrades (generally from Block 0 to Block 1) and things like Block 2 development work:

These budgets do not include international orders.

Contracts & Key Events

Unless otherwise stated, all contracts are awarded by the Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC to Raytheon Company in Tucson, AZ. It should be noted, however, that the RAM Guided Missile Weapon System is co-developed and co-produced under a NATO Cooperative Program between the United States’ and Federal Republic of Germany’s governments.

FY 2014-2015

RAM reload
(click to view full)

May 18/15: The Navy announced Friday that it has achieved Initial Operating Capability with the Block II Rolling Airframe Missile aboard the USS Arlington (LPD 24). The joint program with Germany was recently included as part of a $1.6 billion overhaul package by the US Navy intended to provide improved protection to carriers and amphibious ships.

May 11/15: The Navy is planning to spend $1.6 billion on carrier and amphibious ship defenses in order to protect the Service’s fleet of F-35s. The new defenses will focus on supersonic threats, with a series of overhauled technologies including new missiles and radars set to be integrated into Ship Self Defense Systems (SSDS). Key components of these future systems include the Rolling Airframe Missile and the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile.

Aug 27/14: Block 2. Raytheon delivers the 1st RAM Block 2 missile to the US Navy, as part of the company’s 2012 Low Rate Initial Production contract. Sources: Raytheon, “Raytheon delivers first Block 2 Rolling Airframe Missiles to US Navy”.

1st Block 2 delivery

July 30/14: GAO Report. The US GAO releases Report #GAO-14-749, “Littoral Combat Ship: Additional Testing and Improved Weight Management Needed Prior to Further Investments.” It looks at weight issues within the 2 Littoral Combat Ship classes. Though Freedom Class LCS 5 and beyond will make enough changes to meet their required design margin:

“Another proposed change would increase commonality and combat capability by replacing the Freedom variant’s rolling airframe missile system with the heavier [SeaRAM] missile system found on the Independence variant. While the specifics of this potential change have not yet been determined or approved, Navy technical experts told us that such a modification would subsequently increase the Freedom variant’s weight and could also result in center of gravity changes.”

June 24/14: FY 2014. A $73.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for FY 2014 rolling airframe missile (RAM) guided-missile round pack requirements for the U.S. and allied navies, including 23% of the contract’s value for Japan, spares for the Federal Republic of Germany, and testing equipment upgrade and replacement requirements. All funds are committed immediately.

This contract involves foreign military sales to Japan (23%). Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ (49.7%); Ottobrunn, Germany (42.7%); Rocket Center, West Virginia (4.5%), and Andover, Massachusetts (3.1%); it is expected to be complete by November 2016. This contract was not competitively procured (N00024-14-C-5417).

FY 2014: USA, Japan

Jan 3/14: Raytheon in Tucson, AZ receives a $52.1 million Design Agent Engineering and Technical Support Services modification for maintainence of, and improvements to, the Mk15 Phalanx, Land-based Phalanx, and SeaRAM weapon systems.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by January 2015. $12.5 million is committed immediately from a wide array of USN FY 2014 and FY 2013 R&D, weapons, and shipbuilding budget lines, plus a US Army budget. Of that, $4 million will expire on Sept 30/13 (N00024-12-C-5405).

Dec 9/13: Support. Raytheon in Tucson, AZ receives a $35 million contract modification, exercising an option for MK-31 RAM’s FY 2014 design agent engineering services. This will include improvement program support, guided-missile round pack support, and guided-missile launching system support.

$8.2 million in USN FY 2014 R&D, operations, and Deutsche Marine funding is committed immediately. Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by September 2014 (N00024-10-C-5432).

FY 2013

German multi-year order; Block 2 goes from tests to fleet firing; SeaRAM may now equip both LCS types. USN LPD 23 & 24
(click to view full)

Sept 10/13: SeaRAM. A $136.2 million contract to overhaul and upgrade 19 MK 15 Phalanx systems, and produce 4 new SeaRAM systems. This contract provides purchases for the U.S. Navy (80%), Japan (15%), the US Army (4%) and Pakistan (1%) under the foreign military sales (FMS) program; and all funds are committed immediately. $55 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13.

Another $94.8 million in options exist for a FY 2014 buy of 12 more Phalanx upgrades, and another 4 SeaRAM systems, to bring the total contract to $231 million.

Work will be performed in Louisville, KY (26%); Anaheim, CA (16%); Melbourne, FL (11%); Dayton, OH (11%); Syracuse, NY (10%); McKinney, TX (5%); Andover, MA (5%); Bloomington, MN (5%); Radford, VA (5%); Salt Lake City, UT (3%); and Tucson, AZ (3%), and is expected to be complete by September 2017. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(iii) “one responsible supplier” provisions (N00024-13-C-5406). Sources: Pentagon | Raytheon Sept 11/13 release.

Aug 6/13: Block 2. The US Navy has completed the first RAM Block 2 fleet firing with a pair of tests from USS Arlington [LPD 24] and the Navy’s Self Defense Test Ship. The missiles went 4/4 against sub-sonic and supersonic maneuvering targets. The USN intends to achieve Initial Operational Capability in 2014. Raytheon, Aug 6/13 release.

July 25/13: LCS standardization? During House Armed Service Committee hearings on the Littoral Combat Ship, Assistant Secretary of the Navy Sean J. Stackley says that the Navy is strongly considering standardizing both ship classes on the SeaRAM configuration. The Freedom Class currently uses the full RAM installation, while the Independence Class trimaran uses the SeaRAM system with an integrated radar but fewer missiles. HASC video.

F219 w. RAM
(click to view full)

March 28/13: Germany. The German government places a $343.6 million contract with Raytheon’s partner RAMSYS GmbH in Ottobrunn, Germany for 445 RIM-116 Block 2 All-Up-Round missiles between now and January 2019, to insert into their MK-44 Mod 4 RAM Guided Missile Round Packs. As one might expect, the Germans use RAM missiles on several of their ship classes. $1.3 million is committed immediately.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ (49.7%); Ottobrunn, Germany (42.7%); Rocket Center, WVA (4.5%); and Andover, MA (3.1%). This contract was not competitively procured (N00024-13-C-5459). See also Raytheon.

German multi-year order

Dec 20/12: USA FY 2013. A $45.6 million firm-fixed-price FY 2013 option for 61 Rolling Airframe Missile Block 2 (MK-44 Mod 4) guided-missile round pack all-up-round missiles. All contract funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed in Tucson, ArZ (49.7%), Ottobrunn, Germany (42.7%), Rocket Center, WVA (4.5%), and Andover, MA (3.1%), and is expected to be complete by February 2015 (N00024-12-C-5450).

Dec 14/12: Ship sets. Raytheon in Tucson, AZ receives a $12.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 4 refurbished and upgraded Rolling Airframe Missile MK 49 Mod 3 guided-missile launch systems and associated hardware. These 21-missile launch packs will equip the San Antonio Class LPD 27 John P. Murtha (2 systems), and the Freedom Class ships LCS 9 and LCS 11 (1 each). All funds are committed on award, and there are options for 4 additional launch systems.

At the time of award, a $5.5 million option is also exercised for 2 remanufactured MK 49 launch packs, with Mod 3 updates and associated hardware. They’ll equip the Freedom Class ships LCS 13 and LCS 15.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by December 2015. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 2304c1 (N00024-11-C-5448).

Nov 27/12: Support. Raytheon in Tucson, AZ receives a $12 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification to exercise an option for FY 2013 Design Agent Engineering Services for MK-31 RAM support services, providing maintenance and resolving issues through design, software maintenance, and engineering.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and will run until September 2013. $44,800 will be obligated at the time of award (N00024-10-C-5432).

Nov 9/12: Support. An $11.3 million contract modification exercises the FY 2013 option for MK-31 design agent engineering services. Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ and is expected to be complete by September 2013 (N00024-10-C-5432).

Oct 22/12: Test. Raytheon announces that its RAM Block 2 has successfully completed its 3rd guided test vehicle flight, using production-representative hardware, in a 2 missile salvo. The engagement resulted in a direct hit on the target.

“Raytheon was awarded a low-rate production contract this year calling for 51 RAM Block 2 missiles. The company is scheduled to deliver 25 [RIM-116] Block 2 missiles during the integrated testing phase of this program.”

FY 2012

Business as usual. RIM-116 Block 2
(click to view full)

July 30/12: FY 2012. A $51.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for 51 MK-44 Mod 4 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Block 2 guided missile round pack all-up-rounds. In other words, the missiles and storage/interface tubes that fit into the launchers.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ (49.7%); Ottobrunn, Germany (42.7%); Rocket City, WVA (4.5%); and Andover, MA (3.1%), and is expected to be complete by September 2014. This contract includes options which could bring the cumulative value of this contract to $105.8 million, and presumably about 105 missiles.

This contract was not competitively procured (N00024-12-C-5450).

May 17/12: Ship sets. Raytheon in Tucson, AZ receives a $57.9 million contract modification, covering FY 2012 requirements for MK 15 Phalanx Close-In Weapon Systems (CIWS). It includes MK 15 Mod 31 CIWS SeaRAM missile upgrade kits and conversions in support of Austal’s forthcoming LCS 10 and 12; as well as Phalanx Block 1B BL2 upgrade kits and conversions, 2 Phalanx Block 1Bs for the forthcoming DDG 116 destroyer, MK 15 CIWS hardware product improvements and ancillary equipment, Block 1B Ordalt (Ordnance Alternation) kits; and MK 15 CIWS Block 1B Class A overhauls.

Work will be performed in Louisville, KY (39%); Germany (12%); Palm Bay, FL (12%); Tucson, AZ (9%); Pittsburgh, PA (8%); Burlington, VT (6%); Andover, MA (4%); Syracuse, NY (4%); Long Beach, CA (1%); Radford, VA (1%); Bloomington, MN (1%); Salt Lake City, UT (1%); Norcross, GA (1%); and New Albany, IN (1%); and is expected to be complete by September 2015. $24.2 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00024-10-C-5427).

Jan 19/12: Support. A $30 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for the MK-31 RAM system’s FY 2012 design agent engineering services. they’ll work to maintain current system capability, as well as resolve issues through design, systems, software maintenance, reliability, maintainability, quality assurance and logistics engineering.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by September 2012. $342,272 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year (N00024-10-C-5432).

Dec 6/11: FY 2012. A $22.2 million contract modification for the production of 50 Block 1 MK-44 Mod 2 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) guided missile round pack all-up-rounds.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ (49.7%); Ottobrunn, Germany (42.7%); Rocket City, WVA (4.5%); and Andover, MA (3.1%), and is expected to be complete by February 2014 (N00024-08-C-5401).

FY 2010 – 2011

US orders; Major UAE order; Block 2 initial integration & tests. UAE’s Baynunah Class
(click to view full)

Sept 15/11: Block 2 tests. Raytheon and Germany’s RAMSYS announce that they have finished RAM Block 2 missile upgrade and integration testing in the 5 control test vehicle flights, meeting all upgrade requirements. They’re not done yet, however. The program will begin guided flight tests at the end of 2011, and is expected to enter low rate production in late 2012.

Aug 25/11: Ship sets. A not-to-exceed $161 million contract modification to previously awarded contract for MK15 Mod 31 SeaRAM systems in support of Independence Class ships LCS 6 Jackson and LCS 8 Montgomery, and Japan’s “DDH 2405 helicopter destroyer.” It will also buy Phalanx CIWS Block 1B class “A” overhauls, and land-based Phalanx Weapon System class “A” overhauls.

Japan’s “DDH-2405″ may be the first ship of Japan’s new “22DH” project to field 800 foot, 30,000t vessels that are larger than its existing 18,000t Hyuga Class. The Hyuga Class are properly characterized as LPH helicopter carriers, and 22DHs could be classed as escort carriers, but Japan’s constitution forbids them from owning aircraft carriers. The SH-60 Seahawk helicopters on board JMSDF Hyuga and JMSDF Ise certainly proved themselves in the wake of the 2011 tsunami, which should mute any domestic criticism.

Work will be performed in Louisville, KY (30%); Andover, MA (19%); Tucson, AZ (9%); Germany (7%); Syracuse, NY (7%); Long Beach, CA (6%); Radford, VA (6%); Burlington, VT (6%); Palm Bay, FL (2%); Pittsburgh, PA (2%); Bloomington, MN (2%); Salt Lake City, UT (2%); Norcross, GA (1%); and New Albany, IN (1%). Work is expected to be complete by September 2015, but $90.7 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (N00024-10-C-5427).

Aug 1/11: Ship sets. A $7.4 million contract modification for 3 refurbished and upgraded RAM MK 49 Mod 3 Guided Missile Launch Systems with associated hardware, for use on LHA 7 (unnamed, America Class escort carrier, 2) and LCS 5 (Detroit, Freedom Class Littoral Combat Ship, 1).

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by March 2013. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year (N00024-11-C-5448).

June 30/11: FY 2011. A $57.9 million contract modification for 90 Block 1 MK-44 Mod 2 RAM guided-missile round pack all-up-rounds, and 40 ordnance alteration kits. This contract modification includes options, which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value of this modification to $113 million.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ (49.7%); Ottobrunn, Germany (42.7%); Rocket City, WVA (4.5%); and Andover, MA (3.1%); and is expected to be complete by December 2013 (N00024-08-C-5401).

Feb 23/11: UAE. At IDEX 2011, the UAE announces an AED 800.5 million ($218 million) order for Raytheon’s RAM missile systems. The missiles equip the UAE’s new Baynunah-class corvettes, built in country by Abu Dhabi Ship Building (ADSB).

The initial ship of class UAENS Al Hesen was a significant exhibit at the show. Jane’s.

UAE order

Nov 23/10: Block 2 test. Raytheon announces that its RAM Block 2 missile has completed the 4th and final controlled test vehicle flight. This test measured kinematic performance and stability, with attention to the missile’s rocket motor, airframe, control section, and autopilot software. Raytheon will build 25 Block 2 missiles during the design and development test period, and expects a low rate initial production contract to follow.

Oct 29/10: Ship sets. A $17.7 million fixed-price contract for 2 refurbished and upgraded rolling airframe missile (RAM) MK 49 Mod 3 guided missile launch systems (GMLS) with associated hardware. They’ll be mounted on the USA’s LPD 26, a San Antonio Class large amphibious ship. The contract also involves 1 new MK 49 Mod 3 system, which will be mounted on Egypt’s new Ambassador III Class fast missile craft. Note that the MK 49 needs to add the MK 44 guided missile round pack to become a fully effective MK 31 RAM missile system.

This contract combines purchases for the U.S. Navy (37.1%) and the government of Egypt (62.9%) under the Foreign Military Sales program. It includes options which could bring the cumulative value of this contract to $32.8 million. Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by January 2013. This contract was not competitively procured (N00024-11-C-2404).

July 8/10: Sub-contractors. LaBarge, Inc. announces a $1.2 million contract from Raytheon to provide printed circuit card assemblies for the RAM missile system.

LaBarge already produces a variety of complex wiring harnesses for the system, and will perform this new work at its Tulsa, OK facility. Production is expected to begin in July 2010 and continue through June 2011.

July 2/10: Support. A $44.5 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for the MK-31 rolling airframe missile (RAM) guided missile weapon system’s FY 2010 design agent engineering services. The support covers maintenance, and adds design, systems, software maintenance, reliability, maintainability, quality assurance, and logistics engineering services as necessary. The contract includes options which would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $167.3 million, if exercised.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by September 2010. $2.25 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10. This contract was not competitively procured (N00024-10-C-5432).

May 24/10: LCS. Raytheon announces that its SeaRAM system successfully completed 2 blast test missile launches aboard the USS Independence [LCS 2], designed to test the structural integrity of both the weapon system and the ship. The launches clear the way for SeaRAM’s live-fire testing on that Littoral Combat Ship class later in 2010.

SeaRAM cuts the number of available missile pack rounds from 21 to 11, but marries the RAM launcher to the 20mm Mk15 Phalanx’s base structure and engagement radar, in order to create a truly bolt-on air defense option for ships. In the Independence Class, the system is also integrated into the ship’s wider combat system.

May 21/10: Block 2. A $10.8 million contract modification to increase the ceiling amount to previously awarded contract, for the “rebaselining of the system design and development” of the RAM Block 2 upgrade. Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ, and is expected to be complete by December 2011.

According to Raytheon representatives, what’s really happening is an extension of the program’s schedule, as well as about a year’s worth of added work from Navy requests. The net effect is to more or less restore the requirements that the program began with 4 years ago, with some changes in light of subsequent tests. Raytheon has now run 3 control test vehicle launches, with 1 to go. Guided test launches will be next, with Navy testing expected to begin with about 25 Design-Test/ Operational-Test missiles in Q1 2012 (N00024-07-C-5454).

RAM Block 2 rebaselined

March 23/10: Testing. A Germany Navy video shows an exercise held off the Cape of Good Hope, whose stormy seas keep the area clear enough to allow live missile tests. The video shows AS.34 Kormoran anti-ship missiles being intercepted by older RIM-7 SeaSparrow missiles… but the RAM system on F215 Brandenburg misses the target drone.

Missed

Oct 16/09: Block 2. A $7.7 million modification to previously awarded contract to increase the ceiling amount for System Design and Development of the RAM Block 2 upgrade. The funds will cover additional guidance section design verification testing, to ensure that the software interfaces properly with the missile’s hardware guidance section. Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ and is expected to be complete by August 2011 (N00024-07-C-5454).

FY 2008 – 2009

Orders: USA, Egypt. SeaRAM firing
(click to view full)

July 20/09: SeaRAM. A $16.8 million modification to a previously awarded contract for 2 more MK 15 Mod 31 CIWS SeaRAM weapon systems, ancillary equipment, spares, and support. Unlike the Mk 44 launchers, SeaRAM systems have only 11 missiles in the launcher, in order to fit within the self-contained Mk 15 Phalanx mounting.

Work will be performed in Louisville, KY (33%); Tucson, AZ (8%); Andover, MA (6%); Pittsburgh, PA (4%); Mechanicsville, MD (3%); Fort Defiance, AZ (3%); Bloomington, MN (2%); Santa Clara, CA (2%); Munich, Germany (37%); and Athens, Greece (2%), and is expected to be complete by September 2011. Contract funds in the amount of $9.2 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year (N00024-07-C-5444).

June 8/09: FY 2009. A $56.4 million modification to previously awarded contract for the production of 90 Block 1 MK-44 Mod 2 rolling airframe missile (RAM) guided missile round pack (GMRP) all-up-rounds (AURs), and 40 ordnance alteration kits. This contract modification includes options which would bring the cumulative value of this modification to $118 million, if exercised.

GMRPs are the 21-round missile launchers used by the RAM system, and 90 GMRP AURs is the standard annual American order. The total FY 2009 RAM missile budget is $70.8 million.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ (49.7%); Ottobrunn, Germany (42.7%); Rocket City, WVA (4.5%); and Andover, MA (3.1%), and is expected to be complete by December 2011 (N00024-08-C-5401).

Jan 16/09: Ship sets. Raytheon in Tucson, AZ receives an $18.8 million contract modification buy 4 of their Mk 49 MOD 3 Guided Missile Launcher Systems (GMLS), which hold the full 21-missile Mk 44 packs. The Mk 49 systems will be installed on the amphibious assault ship LPD 25 Arlington, and the first-of-class CVN 78 Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier. Another 10 ORDALT (ORDnance ALTeration) Mod 1 to Mod 3 GMLS Ordalt Kits will also be provided as part of this order, and will be used to upgrade a number of Mk49 systems around the fleet.

Work will be performed in Ottobrunn, Germany (50%), Louisville, KY (45%) and Tucson, AZ (5%) and is expected to be complete by February 2012 (N00024-06-C-5402).

Oct 15/08: Sub-contractors. BAE Systems spinoff Atlantic Inertial Systems (AIS) announces a production order from Diehl BGT Defence GmbH worth about $3 million for the second batch of its SiARS Micro-Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS) Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU). The order follows AIS’ successful completion of design, qualification and initial production deliveries.

IMU systems offer a way to precisely measure distance and vector from a known launch point, without requiring GPS or external aids that may not be available. MEMS technology helps this IMU perform that job reliably in a violently spinning missile like RAM.

AIS has been involved in the RAM program for a number of years, and their release says they anticipate receiving annual production orders into the next decade. The firm has facilities in Cheshire CT, USA, and in Plymouth, UK, employing over 800 personnel worldwide.

June 11/08: FY 2008. A $59.5 million contract for the production of 90 Block 1 MK-44 Mod 2 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Guided Missile Round Pack All-Up-Rounds, and 60 ORDALT(ORDnance ALTeration, usually means upgrades) Kits.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ (49.7%), Ottobrunn, Germany (42.7%), Rocket City, WVA (4.5%), and Andover, MA (3.1%) and is expected to be complete by May 2011. (N00024-08-C-5401).

Dec 31/07: Egypt. Egypt’s order comes in – see Sept 28/07, as Raytheon receives $72.5 million modification to previously awarded contract for 139 Block 1 MK-44, Mod 2 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Guided Missile Round Pack (GMRP) All-Up-Rounds.

Work will be performed in Ottobrunn, Germany (49%), Tucson, AZ (44%), Rocket City, WVA (6%), and Andover, MA (1%), and is expected to be complete by January 2011. This modification supports the Republic of Egypt (100%) under the Foreign Military Sales Program (N00024-04-C-5456).

Egypt

FY 2006 – 2007

Orders: USA, UAE, South Korea; Export requests: Egypt; RIM-116 Block 2 development contract; Shingo Prize for the factory; SeaRAM picked for LCS-2 trimarans. RIM-116 RAM Launch

Sept 28/07: The US DSCA announces [PDF format] Egypt’s formal request for up to 139 RIM-116B Block 1A Rolling Airframe Missiles (RAM) with MK-44 Guided Missile Round Packs, containers, support equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical data, maintenance, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government, contractor engineering and logistics technical support services, and other related elements of logistics support. The systems will be installed on Egypt’s new Ambassador MK III Fast Missile Craft [PDF format] boats for air defense, along with the 20mm Mk 15 Phalanx CIWS. See also Feb 10/06 entry.

The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $125 million. The prime contractor will be Raytheon Systems Corporation in Tucson, AZ. There are no offset agreements associated with this potential sale, and implementation will not require the assignment of any additional U. S. Government or contractor personnel in country.

DSCA request: Egypt (139)

Aug 15/07: LCS. A $5.8 million firm-fixed-price modification under previously awarded contract for the fabrication, test, and delivery of one (1) MK 15 MOD 31 PHALANX SeaRAM Close-In weapon System (CIWS). As noted above, the SeaRAM uses the Phalanx system’s integrated radar, and will equip the USA’s Littoral Combat Ships. Work will be performed in Louisville, KY, and is expected to be complete by September 2009 (N00024-04-C-5460).

June 5/07: Raytheon announces a contract for 7 RAM Block 1A systems with Abu Dhabi Ship Building of the United Arab Emirates. The direct commercial sale, valued at $76.5 million, calls for the systems to be delivered starting in December 2007, and installed on 6
of the UAE’s new 70m Baynunah Class corvettes. The agreement also provides for an on-shore Rolling Airframe Missile test and training system, spares support and other services. Raytheon release.

The RAM system was not originally slated to equip the UAE’s new corvettes, but in 2006 the UAE decided that escalating regional tensions and anti-ship missile proliferation required improved inner layer defenses. The system will be mounted near the ship’s rear, atop the helicopter hangar. Outer defense will be handled by Raytheon’s RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles fired from Mk56 vertical launchers, while last-ditch defense will rely on the corvette’s Oto Melara 76mm naval gun and 30mm secondary guns.

RAM backfit for UAE

May 24/07: Support. Raytheon Co. in Tucson, AZ received an $11.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for 70,590 engineering man-hour design agent engineering services for the MK-31 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) guided missile weapon system, and associated efforts. Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ and is expected to be complete by September 2007.

Support procured under this contract is required to maintain current weapon system capability, as well as resolve issues through design, systems, software maintenance, reliability, maintainability, quality assurance and logistics engineering services. The contract was not competitively procured by The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-07-C-5443).

May 8/07: Block 2. Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ received a $105.5 million cost-plus scheduled event-based incentive-fee contract for system design and development of the Block 2 upgrade to the RAM MK31 Guided Missile Weapon System, in support of the Program Executive Office-Integrated Weapon Systems. “The Block 2 upgrade will enable the RAM missile to more effectively counter the emerging threat of more maneuverable anti-ship missiles.” Details regarding the Block 2 upgrade are given in the RAM System section.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ and is expected to be complete by December 2010. The contract was not competitively procured by the Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-07-C-5454).

See also Raytheon’s June 27/07 release, which announces the contract as “$145.4 million… for production and enhancement of its Rolling Airframe Missile program. Nearly $105.5 million will go to the development of Rolling Airframe Missile Block 2…”

RAM Block 2 development

March 6/07: FY 2007. Raytheon Company in Tucson, AZ received a $39.9 million firm-fixed-price modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-04-C-5456) for production of 90 Block 1 MK 44 Mod 2 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Guided Missile Round Packs, and 90 MK 20 Mod 2 RAM Active Optical Target Detectors. This represents the full FY 2007 request.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ (50%) and Ottobrunn, Germany (50%), and is expected to be complete by March 2009. The Naval Sea System Command in Washington, DC issued the contract.

Feb 8/07: Shingo Prize. Raytheon Missile Systems’ (RMS) Louisville, KY facility has captured a prestigious Shingo Prize for Excellence in Manufacturing, marking the 4th consecutive year that various Raytheon facilities have won. The Louisville facility manufactures the Phalanx CIWS and RAM/SeaRAM systems. See full DID coverage.

April 11/06: South Korea. Raytheon announces a $17.4 million contract for production 30 RAM Block 1/HAS (helicopter, aircraft, surface) tactical guided missile round packs and test equipment design maintenance for the South Korean RAM program.

RAM Block 1/HAS is the ship self-defense weapon of choice for the country’s KDX II, or Chungmugong Yi Sunshin Class destroyers. Note that the KDX-IIs will also use longer range Standard SM-2 Block IIA missiles as part of their surface-air missile armament.

Raytheon reports that they also have contracts to supply launchers for South Korea’s future KDX III AEGIS destroyers and LPX Dodoko Class amphibious assault ships.

South Korea

April 4/06: RAM on LCS. Raytheon Company has announces that it will install the SeaRAM anti-ship missile defense weapon system on General Dynamics’ trimaran design for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). SeaRAM combines upgraded MK 15 Phalanx Block 1B close in weapon system’s radar & infrared sensors and Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Block 1A Helicopter, Aircraft, and Surface (HAS) guided missiles. Raytheon will work with General Dynamics to integrate SeaRAM with the LCS combat management system.

RAM for LCS-2 Class

April 3/06: FY 2006. Raytheon Co. in Tucson, AZ received a $77 million firm-fixed-price modification to previously awarded contract for production of 90 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Block 1/HAS MK-44, Mod 3 all-up-round tactical guided missile round packs (GMRP). This is the USA’s full procurement amount for FY 2006, similar to the 86 GMRP requested in FY 2005 and the 90 missiles in the FY 2007 budget request. This contract also covers 120 RAM Block 1/HAS MK-44, Mod 3 ordnance alteration (ORDALT) kits.

Work will be performed in Tucson, AZ (50%) and Ottobrunn, Germany (50%), and is expected to be complete by March 2009 (N00024-04-C-5456).

Feb 10/06: Egypt. Raytheon announces that the Egyptian navy will outfit its new Ambassador III Class Fast Missile Craft with Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) launching systems. Raytheon’s Mk49 RAM launchers and associated RAM Block 1A missiles will provide the primary ship self-defense capability for the Fast Missile Craft, built by VT Halter Marine in Gulfport, MS.

Approximately 50% of the production work will be performed at Raytheon Missile System facilities in Louisville, KY and Tucson, AZ with the remaining half to be completed by RAM-System GmbH of Ottobrunn, Germany.

Egypt picks RAM for FACs

Additional Readings

• Raytheon – Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Guided Missile System.

• Raytheon – SeaRAM Anti-Ship Missile Defense System.

The US Navy has successfully secured initial operational capability (IOC) for the Block 2 rolling airframe missile (RAM) aboard the San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ship USS Arlington (LPD 24).

The US Navy has successfully carried out the test of electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS) aboard the aircraft carrier pre-commissioning unit (PCU) Gerald R Ford (CVN 78).