Defense Industry Daily

E-3F AWACS
(click to view full)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Contracts and Key Events 2012 – 2014

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

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

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

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

1st re-delivery

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2006 – 2011

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

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

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

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

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

Through-Life Support continued

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

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

Installation contract

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

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

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

E-3F upgrade contract

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

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

DSCA request:

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

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

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

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

Upgrade to Block 30/35

Additional Readings

• Boeing – E-3 AWACS

RFS Vladivostok,
DCNS concept
(click to view full)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ka-29K
(click to view full)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Other Russian Modifications Vladivostok launch

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

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

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

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

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

Contracts and Key Events 2014-2015

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sebastopol under construction

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Uliss Bay, 1908

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

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

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

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

32 Ka-52K helicopters

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

MH17 shot down

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Crimea annexed by Russia

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

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

2013

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2012

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Keel-laying: Vladivostok

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Variant’s PDR

2011

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

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

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

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

Contract re: ships 3 & 4?

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

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

See: RIA Novosti | UPI.

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

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

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

Vysotsky:

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

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

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

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

Joint shipyard deal

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

The total project cost appears to be EUR 1.7 million for these 2 ships, with an option for another 2 ships that would be assembled in Russia. The sale of these 2 ships to Russia represents more than 1,000 full-time jobs in France over a period of 4 years.

The unanswered questions revolve around the transfer of French military technology, esp. the SENIT-9 combat system and SIC-21 fleet command system. State-controlled United Shipbuilding Corp. spokesman Roman Trotsenko told Rossia 24 television that Russian industries will produce about 40% of the first 2 ships, which could suggest significant insertions of Russian technology. On the other hand, he also said that the command and control system would come from France.

The US House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R-FL-18], blasted the sale, arguing that it threatened regional security even as Russia was becoming more threatening toward its neighbors. DCNS | STX Europe | Moscow Times | RIA Novosti op-ed | Voice of Russia | Expatica France | Radio France International | MarineLog | US House Foreign Affairs Committee statement.

Contract for first 2 ships

June 14/11: RIA Novosti reports that the governments of Russia and France signed a protocol of intent for the Mistrals, but not a final contract, on June 10/11.

It adds that electronics continue to be an issue. France is reportedly not comfortable delivering the Mistral’s NATO-standard SENIT-9 naval tactical data system with a production license, and doesn’t want to include its SIC-21 fleet command system at all.

May 27/11: At a G8 press conference, French President Sarkozy discusses the Mistral sale. He portrays the Russian situation as stable with the end of the Cold War, and the sale of a ship like the Mistrals as normal within the current relationship. Key excerpts:

“…la Russie est un grand pays avec des matières premières. L’Europe a beaucoup de technologies, nous avons tout à construire ensemble… Voilà, donc, soit on est ami, soit on ne l’est pas. Mais si on est ami, si on est partenaire et si on est allié, je ne vois vraiment pas pourquoi on ne devrait pas avoir des projets ensemble… Vous savez il y a une chose dont je suis sûr, si ce n’est pas nous qui les avions construit, d’autres, y compris en Europe, auraient été heureux de les construire. Je pense notamment à nos amis espagnols.”

May 3/11: RIA Novosti notes that former senior Navy official Nikolai Borisov (“internal reasons”) and first deputy defense minister, Vladimir Popovkin (to head Roskosmos) eere relieved of their duties in late April 2011, and quotes an unnamed Russian defense ministry source as saying that:

“New representatives will take part in the next round of Russian-French Mistral talks… At the moment, they are receiving the necessary documentation on the contract… The replacement of the negotiation team is just a technicality… The negotiation process has made great progress, and the sides are well aware of each other’s stance. The question now is whether France will sell Russia ships with all systems and equipment.”

March 15/11: France’s Le Figaro reports that Mistral negotiations are starting to produce friction within the French government, who see allied pressure continuing and issues with Russia over price and technology transfer. An excerpt:

“Aujourd’hui, la France serait prêt à vendre à la Russie presque toute la technologie qui équipe le Mistral, l’un des fleurons de la marine nationale… Mais le Mistral possède des technologies sensibles sur lesquelles seule la France a autorité. Selon les informations obtenues par Le Figaro, Paris aurait ainsi accepté de céder les systèmes de communication et de commandement. Avec leurs codes. Or l’un des systèmes de communication ultrasophistiqués du Mistral, Sinik 9, est un dérivé direct de Sinik 8, celui qui équipe le Charles de Gaulle ! Même le directeur des chantiers navals de Saint-Nazaire a reconnu qu’il existait «un risque» lié aux transferts de technologie… Paris et Moscou ont encore quelques semaines pour trouver un compromis. Mais à Paris, cette histoire finit par mettre mal à l’aise les plus fidèles partisans de l’accord, qui commencent à trouver le prix à payer bien cher.”

To summarize: according to Le Figaro’s sources, Russia has pushed through an important change in the intergovernmental agreement, replacing French “assistance” in technology transfer to Russia with a “guarantee” of technology transfer, involving almost every one of the Mistral’s systems. For instance, France has reportedly agreed to transfer the Sinik 9 control & communications system to Russia, which builds on the Sinik 8 system installed on the nuclear aircraft carrier FS Charles de Gaulle. This is seen as a risk, and when coupled with price and diplomatic issues, even the sale’s supporters are beginning to question the price. Le Figaro [in French] | RIA Novosti.

March 3/11: Russia’s Kommersant business daily reports that Russia and France have deadlocked on price negotiations, but official Russian sources deny it. Which they would anyway. France is expected to put forward the final commercial proposal on March 15, and the 2 sides are reportedly over $250 million apart.

Time may reveal the truth. According to reports, the deputy chief of the Russian Navy, Vice Adm. Nikolai Borisov, signed a EUR 1.15 billion protocol with France in December 2010: EUR 980 million for the 2 ships built by STX in France, plus EUR 131 million in logistics expenses and EUR 39 million in crew training expenses. Construction licenses and technical documentation to build the next 2 ships at Admiralty Shipyards in Russia would add EUR 90 million, bringing the total to EUR 1.24 billion.

Russia reportedly says that Borisov had no authority to sign the document, and did it without consulting with Rosoboronexport and the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation. They want the entire deal for EUR 980 million. In response to the Kommersant reports, however, the spokesman for the Russian prime minister downplayed the seriousness of the situation, while acknowledging differences. Dmitry Peskov told Ekho Moskvy radio that “Mistral contract working problems really exist, which is quite natural for such a large scale project.”

To add to the uncertainty, First Deputy Defense Minister Vladimir Popovkin tells the Military-Industrial Courier that the Mistral contract involves: “two ships built by France’s DCSN and the licenses for construction of two additional ships in Russia for at least 1.5 bln euros,” adding that the ships would include all the original navigational and other technical equipment, including the SENIT 9 naval tactical data system. ITAR-TASS | RIA Novosti || defpro | South Africa’s TNA | UPI.

Feb 9/11: Basing & helicopters. Itar-Tass reports that Russia will use 2 of the Mistral ships in the Pacific Fleet, including protecting the South Kurile Islands, which are disputed territory with Japan. An “informed source at the Defence Ministry” is quoted as saying that:

“Considerable appropriations will be made for improving the infrastructure of military compounds and garrisons of the 18th Artillery Division in the Eastern Military District, which are deployed on the islands of the Kurile Ridge. The division stationed in the South Kurile Islands has not undergone any organisational changes during military reform in Russia… We plan to replace the division’s weapons and hardware that have expended their service life with one ones.”

As for the ships’ complement and design, Helicopters of Russia Holding Company Deputy Director-General Andrei Shibitov says that:

“Ship versions of the Ka-27K, Ka-29K and Ka-52K helicopters will be used. Their number on each ship will be determined by the Defence Ministry.”

Another Russian official states that using those coaxial rotor helicopters will require a slight elevation of the ship’s deck, to ensure enough clearance height in the hangars. Use in northern latitudes will also require some reinforcement within the ship, in order to make it more survivable against threats like ice. This is not expected to require a major redesign.

Basing plans: Pacific Fleet

Feb 8/11: RIA Novosti relays reports from Kommersant that state-run arms exporter Rosoboronexport will represent Russia in direct talks with France’s DCNS from now on.

“Kommersant speculates that the removal of the USC from the talks could be the result of the company’s aspirations to acquire a status of an “independent dealer” on the lucrative arms exports market. Rosoboronexport, backed by the Russian Defense Ministry, has almost monopolized Russia’s arms exports and apparently does not want new players to bite into its share in enormous profit…”

USC removed from talks

Jan 25/11: Agreement signed. Neither Russia nor France are transparent about sale details, but published estimates of the sale price revolve around RIA Novosti’s report of around EUR 1.37 billion euros ($1.9 billion) for the first 2 ships. One of the reasons for that vagueness may involve the nature of the deal. Rosoboronexport head Anatoly Saikin says the agreement is only a framework, without firm deadlines or costs: “A contract is still a long way off. Only an intergovernmental general agreement has been signed.”

Despite Saikin’s cautions, reports place the 1st Russian Mistral’s delivery in December 2013, and there is general agreement that it would be 80% built in France and 20% in Russia. The 2nd ship will reportedly use 40% Russian components. The 3rd and 4th ships will be built in Russia, with 80% Russian workshare. Noted cruise ship builder STX Europe estimates its Saint-Nazaire yard’s work share at 2.5 million man-hours.

In America, meanwhile, Sen. John McCain [R-AZ] said:

“I strongly oppose France’s sale of the Mistral to Russia… This ship is a threat to some of America’s friends and NATO allies, and I worry that this decision could set a troubling precedent within NATO of advanced weapons sales to the Russian government.”

See: French President | Agence France Presse | Le Figaro | ITAR-TASS | Moscow News | Moscow Times | Pravda | RIA Novosti | La Tribune | UPI || Outside reactions: Bloomberg | AFP | Civil Georgia | Expatica France re: Lithuania | Trend in Azerbailjan | China’s Xinhua.

Framework, but not a contract

Jan 12/11: Basing, New Shipyard. Russian media reiterate reports that their 1st Mistral Class ship will be based in Vladivostok with the Pacific fleet, while the 2nd will be based at Severomork on Russia’s northern Peninsula. The Severomorsk ship will reportedly require special piers and additional anti-submarine and air defence systems on site. These basing choices lessen the communication of direct threat to Baltic countries like Latvia, or Black Sea countries like Georgia, while the ships are being built n France. There is no word on where the final 2 ships would be based, though the Baltic and Black Sea fleets would be logical possibilities.

What’s new, is a quote from a Russian navy spokesman that “a decision has been adopted to build Mistral Class vessels at a new shipyard to be constructed on the Kotlin Island near St. Petersburg, but still under the structure of the large Admirality Naval yards.” That’s a shift away from Sergei Pugachyov’s United Industrial Corporation Baltiisky Zavod shipyard, marking the latest in a string of setbacks for the financier. Barents Observer | Moscow Times.

2010

International controversy; Tech transfer issues; Planned helicopters; French-Russian JV. FS Tonnerre [BPC 2],
during sea trials
(click to view full)

Dec 24/10: Russia’s ITAR-TASS reports that Russian President Dmitry Medvand French President Nicolas Sarkozy:

“…made a joint statement, which reads, “Russian President Dmitry Medvedev informed French President Nicolas Sarkozy that a consortium of the French company DCNS and the Russian United Shipbuilding Corporation won an international tender for the delivery of two helicopter ships to the Russian Defense Ministry announced on October 5.” Two helicopter ships will be built jointly at first, and another two will be built in the future, the statement said.”

Key industrial players will be France’s DCNS and STX of France, and of course Russia’s United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC). See also: Voice of America.

Dec 9/10: During a visit to Moscow, French Prime Minister Francois Fillon says of the Mistral deal that:

“There is no question about the technology transfer, no problem regarding technology transfers… We are discussing the price and Vladimir Putin is not the easiest person to talk to about this question.”

Nov 1/10: USC-DCNS consortium Agreement.

Russia’s state-controlled United Shipbuilding Corporation and France’s state-controlled DCNS sign an agreement, setting up a consortium to build “military and civilian ships.” Noises are being made about building Arctic supply ships and icebreakers, and Russian firms are also becoming a bigger presence at events like Euronaval 2010, but the initial focus is likely to be Russia’s order for Mistral Class helicopter carriers.

DCNS Chairman Patrick Boissier added that it is also ready to compete in all military tenders. Beyond the Mistral, Russia will need to build corvettes and frigates very quickly, in order to avoid having key regional fleets in the Black Sea and beyond rust out to almost nothing. RIA Novosti | RIA Novosti op-ed | AP | China’s Xinhua.

Consortium

Sept 21/10: Competition? Russia’s Interfax news agency quotes an unidentified senior Russian Navy official as saying the ship tender would be a mere formality “formed in such a way as to practically predetermine the victory of the French ship” while getting the best price, adding that Russia and France had already agreed on the parameters of the rumored deal.

Construction terms appear to have followed the French proposals, with 2 ships built in France and 2 in Russia, rather than the 1 and 3 pattern Russia had been asking for. If true, that would leave the issue of technology transfers and cost as the biggest unanswered questions. The figure of EUR 600 million (about $765 million) is mentioned in reports, but that’s much too low for 4 Mistral Class ships. It’s about right for DCNS’ share of a deal for 4 ships, however, if the French are building 2, and key electronics and weapons are being provided by Russia. Voice of Russia | Agence France Presse via Defense News | Reuters via Malaysia Star.

Sept 13/10: Competition? UPI reports that despite an apparently open tender, Russia and France are still conducting exclusive talks regarding DCNS’ Mistral Class LHDs. It also quotes an ITAR-TASS report where Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov told them that the Kremlin was “expecting the detailed financial conditions” from France to push the deal to its final stages. UPI.

Aug 20/10: Competition. Russia’s amphibious ship purchase becomes an open tender competition, assuming that other governments allows their shipbuilders to participate. Ouest France reports that the key sticking point was France’s refusal to include the Mistral’s combat system and NATO C4I systems.

Navantia makes the Spanish BPE, and its counterpart the Canberra Class LHD for Australia. It’s larger than the Mistral, and features a “ski jump” on deck that can help it launch fixed wing UAVs and short or vertical takeoff fighters. Russia’s neighbors would likely consider it even more destabilizing than the Mistral Class, but Spain’s commitment to NATO has never been strong, and the country currently faces depression-level unemployment. Political interference will probably be low, but the combat and C4I systems could easily become the subject of pressure from other NATO states, and Navantia’s dependence on exports within NATO would give that pressure weight.

Damen Schelde makes a slightly different kind of ship with a much more conventional profile, but its Rotterdam/ Johann de Witt Class LPDs are considered to be excellent examples of their type, and very good value for money. The firm also worked with BAE on the UK Royal Navy’s new Bay Class LSDs. These “Enforcer Series” ships are all smaller than Mistral, but the firm is also designing a 28,000t Zuiderkruis Class Joint Support Ship. Political approval may be an issue with the Dutch, however; their Parliament is divided, weapons exports are challenged, and Russia’s invasion of Georgia did not sit well there.

Other contenders may include Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems and their MHD 200 LPH (Landing Platform, Helicopter) concept. Time will tell. See Defense News | Information Dissemination | Ouest France [in French] | Reuters.

July 26/10: Tech Transfer. In an interview with Ekho Moskvy radio, Russian Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky said the Mistral purchase hinged on the “transfer of key, fundamental technologies,” or it would be pointless. Russia’s political leaders may or may not share that view. More to the point, NATO countries are likely to have limits on what they will or will not transfer. UPI.

July 23/10: French President Nicolas Sarkozy tells shipyard workers at STX that:

“Avec nos amis russes, vous allez fabriquer les deux BPC. Le contrat, on est en train de le négocier, mais la decision de le faire, elle est certaine.”

In other words, the French yards will build 2 ships, and though the contract is still under negotiation, the decision to go ahead is a done deal.

The same MdlD release also places the cost of FS Dixmude [BPC 3] at about EUR 300 million, but any Russian ships will have additional costs from 2 sources. One is any Russian electronics and weapons, which will have to be integrated with the rest of the ship. That will take time, and costs money, unless Russia opts for some export variant of the ship’s native French electronics and weapons. The other source of added costs is tied to reports that Russia wants to strengthen the ships’ hulls at Russian shipyards after construction, so they’ll be able to cope with the ice around its northern ports. French Ministère de la Défense.

July 5/10: Helicopters. A RIA Novosti report may provide some insights into the new ships’ helicopter complements [DID: links added]:

“Vyacheslav Kovalyov, the first deputy director of the Kumertau Aviation Production Enterprise… added that the Russian Air Force was planning to buy the Ka-52 Alligator, Ka-226 Hoodlum helicopters and a new modification of the Ka-27 helix helicopter, the Ka-27M, the development of which is now in its final stage. A high-ranking source in Russia’s United Industrial Corporation (OPK) confirmed that the country’s Air Force was going to buy up to 100 Ka-class helicopters, including some 70 Ka-27M choppers, to equip Mistral ships.”

June 21/10: Software. RIA Novosti reports that Parametric Technology Corporation (PTC), headquartered in Massachussets, USA, intends to participate in software development if Russia orders the Mistral Class, creating links that bridge exportable French ship systems with Russian counterparts. PTC VP Paul Grenet cites 20 years of firm experience working with DCNS, and similar work done for past French warship sales to Brazil and Morocco:

“The same warship for a national navy or for export has certain differences due to secrecy and national security… PTC specializes in the development of export options that are compatible with the standards of a customer.”

PTC is headquartered in the USA, but its global offices include Moscow and St. Petersburg.

May 26/10: A RIA Novosti report outlines the shape of the Mistral deal, while repeating past reports that Russia is also in discussions with Spain and the Netherlands. According to the Barents Observer translation, however, negotiations with the French are in their final stages.

As reported, the deal would see the first ship built entirely abroad. Russian shipbuilders would participate in manufacturing ships 2 & 3, and the 4th ship would be built entirely in Russia. Minister of Defense Anatoly Serdyukov appears to be trying to allay concerns over Georgia by saying that the first 2 ships will be deployed in the Northern and the Pacific Fleets. This will not make NATO members like the Baltic states feel any better.

April 20/10: Rosoboronexport’s Russia is quoted as saying that Russia has made the political decision to purchase the Mistral-class warships, and expects that the agreement with France will be signed by the end of 2010. Time will tell. Defense News.

Feb 10/10: NATO waffles. NATO spokesman James Appathurai offers an official alliance view:

“The Secretary General has said he does not consider Russia a threat and he hopes Russians don’t think of NATO as a threat. He takes it for granted, of course, that any arms sale would fully respect international rules and conventions, but the anxieties of some allies are, of course, real and they are understandable for historical reasons, geographic reasons and so this is the context which has to be taken into account.”

When closely parsed, it offers no firm position.

Feb 9/10: Lithuania cites EU. NATO and European Union member Lithuania weighs in publicly on the Mistral sale, as the Minister of National Defence pledges to raise the issue at the next EU Defence Ministers meeting. Mr. Dainius Zalimas, Law Adviser to the Minster, adds this statement:

“We think that the said sale is inconsistent with criteria II, III, IV, V and VI of Article 2 of EU Council Common Position 2008/944/BUSP that describe common rules of export control of military technology and equipment. Therefore, the execution of the sale may violate the principle of solidarity of member states which has been embedded in the Treaty of the EU and the responsibility of member states to ensure that the national policy must be in line with the position of the Union as it has been stipulated in Article 29 ( former 15) of the Treaty.”

Feb 8/10: Approval? Widespread media reports say that France has approved in principle the Russian request for 1 ship, and expects to decide in the “next few weeks” whether to approve the sale of 3 additional Mistral Class LHDs to Russia. The DGA’s head of international development, Jacques Lajugie, reportedly added that if Russia were to buy the Mistral, France would expect at least the first 2 units to be built in French yards. Russia has sated a preference for 1 ship from France, and 3 built in Russia’s less-than-reliable shipyards under the state-run United Shipbuilding Corporation.

The deal is somewhat controversial in Russia, where industrial groups see the move as a declaration of non-confidence in Russia’s own shipbuilding industry, and a diversion of money to foreign industries. The issue has also become a topic of concern in Washington over the ships’ potential uses against allies like Georgia, with Senators writing letters, and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates expressing his “deep concern” directly to French officials. Since the ships do not use American military technologies, there is currently no legal mechanism that would allow the USA to hold up the sale. Diplomatic concerns are being expressed nonetheless. A U.S. diplomatic official reportedly said that:

“We have a lot of questions for the French. Mr Gates made it clear that a lot of people are very worried about this – not just in Washington, but among other NATO allies like Britain and in the east too.”

See: Radio France International | RIA Novosti | Russia Today | CNBC | Defense News | Daily Mail, UK | NY Times | Georgian Daily: Part 1 | Part 2 | Reuters | Scotland on Sunday | Washington Post.

Jan 31/10: On Georgia’s mind. Information Dissemination reports that Eutelsat’s cancellation of Georgia’s First Caucasian Channel stems directly from this proposed sale:

“Gia Chanturia, general director of the Georgian Public Broadcasts was in Paris this weekend seeking answers from Eutelsat and French government officials. He is unlikely to like what the French tell him, because my sources both in Washington, DC and Paris have confirmed that Moscow has made cancellation of the First Caucasian Channel by Eutelsat a condition of the Mistral sale… As we watch Russia leverage their unequal national power to influence France, keep an eye on eastern European countries like Poland. This will get bigger than Russia, Georgia, and France before it is all over, and the potential for long term consequences in Eastern Europe is not trivial.”

2009

Negotiations; FS Mistral visits; New foreign options? Ka-52 on FS Mistral
(click to view full)

Dec 23/09: Wider talks? UPI reports that Russia is also considering amphibious ships from Navantia in Spain, and Damen Schelde in the Netherlands. Russian navy chief Vladimir Vysotsky was quoted as saying:

“Yes, we are holding talks, and not just with the French, but with the Netherlands and Spain, about the acquisition of a ship of this class.” …But observers say the 650-foot Mistral is still favored to win the contract.”

See also Foreign Policy Magazine: “Russia’s New Arms Dealers.”

Nov 27/09: FS Mistral visit. During the FS Mistral’s visit to St. Petersburg, Russia, the amphibious assault ship holds a “cross deck” exercise with Russian Navy helicopters. They include landings by a Ka-29 utility helicopter with a French officer on board, as well as landings using a Ka-27 Helix anti submarine warfare helicopter and the first deck landing for the Ka-52 scout/attack helicopter, which also simulates a refueling on the flight deck. French Navy [in French].

Oct 3/09: Russia Today provides an update on the Mistral controversy in Russia. Negotiations are underway, but buying ships from abroad does not sit well with many in Russia. On the other hand, senior officials openly acknowledge that Russian shipbuilding is in crisis, and it could not build an LHD itself.

Sept 19/09: Russia’s RIA Novosti confirms that talks are underway, quoting Defense Ministry official Vladimir Popovkin. Popovkin is not making any commitments, however, telling Ekho Moskvy radio that “We are holding talks, but no purchases have yet been made.” RIA Novosti adds that: “A Russian source close to the negotiations hinted on Tuesday that technical bilateral discussions should be completed soon.”

Sept 15/09: A RIA Novosti report lays out the expected process for any Mistral ship buy:

“We are holding technical consultations, which are expected to be completed by the end of September. The results will be reported to Russia’s military-industrial commission in order to determine the viability of the purchase… The officers [who recently inspected a French ship of class in Toulon] were shown the interior of the ship and provided with technical data.”

A decision is expected some time in October 2009, if all goes as planned.

Aug 26/09: Intent. RIA Novosti reports that Russia is planning on a EUR 300-400 million contract by the end of 2009 to buy a French Mistral Class amphibious assault ship (LHD). The outlet quotes Chief of the Russian General Staff Gen. Nikolai Makarov, who said that: “We are negotiating the purchase of one ship at present, and later planning to acquire 3-4 ships [of the same class] to be jointly built in Russia.”

Additional Readings The Ships and Equipment

• DCNS – Mistral Family LHD. Its inability to operate fixed-wing aircraft has caused some to classify it as an LHA instead, alongside offerings like South Korea’s Dokdo Class, but distinct from US Wasp Class or Spanish Juan Carlos/ Canberra Class LHDs.

• Naval Technology – Mistral Class – Amphibious Assault

• Russia – United Shipbuilding Corp. In Russian.

• Naval Technology – CNIM – Landing Craft and Multipurpose Patrol Craft. Makers of the L-CAT.

• YouTube – EDA-R / L-CAT (Landing Catamaran). Enthusiast video, very good at showing the key features.

• DID – Russia’s Ka-52 Alligator Scout-Attack Helicopters

• RIA Novosti (Infographic) – The Kamov Ka-52 Alligator/ Hokum-B

• Aviastar – Ka-27. Includes variants.

• Air Force Technology – Ka-27/28 and Ka-29 Helix Multirole Naval Helicopter, Russian Federation

Other News

• DID – Russia’s Military Spending is Jumping – But Can Its Industry? The Mistral buy is closely related to many of the issues explored here.

• Vice Magazine (June 7/14) – Why Is France Building Warships For Russia? Article mirrors the points made here, with additional data re: the overall French shipbuilding industry.

• Foreign Policy Magazine (Jan 6/10) – Russia’s New Arms Dealers

• Information Dissemination (Nov 25/09) – Wanted: Big Amphibious Ships

• Le Figaro, via WayBack (Sept 7/09) – Vente de Mistral à la Russie : les dessous d’un marchandage

• Information Dissemination (Aug 27/09) – Thoughts on the Russian Mistral

End Notes

• = DCNS itself refers to the Mistral Class in its marketing materials as an LHD. A Navantia-sponsored IDS study referred to the Mistrals as LHAs, and so have several Russian media reports. DID will generally use the manufacturer’s designation unless there is a compelling reason not to, hence the references to Mistral-derivative ships as LHDs.

Americas

• The Marine Corps has begun testing its F-35Bs aboard USS Wasp (LHD-1), with these tests set to last two weeks. Six of the aircraft are being tested for specific abilities as part of Operational Testing (OT-1); these include digital interoperability between aircraft and ship systems, something particularly sensitive given the aircraft’s recent software problems. The USMC decided to push ahead regardless of 2B software issues, with the intention of hitting IOC in July.

• Raytheon has further complicated the Air Force’s $1 billion 3DERLL radar program by appealing a federal judge’s decision last week to allow the Air Force to re-evaluate bids. The company previously filed a lawsuit when the Air Force tried to re-open the competition as a result of challenges by competitors Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin.

• The Air Force is planning on launching two X-37B Orbital Test Vehicles into orbit on Wednesday, which will see the testing of a plasma-based propulsion system previously reported here. This will be the fourth X-37 mission, with the mission also testing materials for NASA. The the third mission lasted 674 days, with no information on how long this latest will last.

• The Navy has laid down the keel of SSN 789 at Huntington Ingalls Industries. The Virginia-class fast attack sub is the newest of the class, following on the tails of the Colorado, which was laid-down in March. This new boat – the sixteenth – will be named the Indiana. Navy leader have been pushing for the Virginia-class to possess more firepower.

• On Tuesday the Army awarded LockheedMartin a $30 million modification to convert 200 ATM-114Q-6 Hellfire training missiles to ground-attack missiles (AGM-114R-9B-1), with the work set to last two years. Also on Tuesday the Navy awarded Whiting Turner Contract Co a $30.3 million contract to construct a power and propulsion high bay test facility at Philadelphia Navy Yard. The work is expected to run until November next year.

• The aircraft of the Navy’s Naval Air Arm in one graphic.

Europe

• Airbus has ordered software checks on the A400M aircraft following the crash of one of the aircraft earlier this month during a test flight. The company announced that it has released a notice to A400M customers asking them to inspect the aircraft’s Electronic Control Unit, which help control its Europrop International TP400-D6 turboprop engines. Europe’s largest defense project, the aircraft has been grounded by many users following the crash which killed four people. The aircraft has been ordered by eight nations.

• Russia will close [Russian] NATO’s supply line through its territory to Afghanistan. The rationale given is the end of provisions given under UN Security Council Resolution 1386, which cleared international troops to operate in the country, with this resolution expiring at the end of 2014. Although the number of NATO troops operating in the country is reduced from the number at the peak of the conflict and the use of Russia’s Ulyanovsk as a transit hub has subsided considerably, this closure will complicate the logistical resupply of the thousands of troops and support personnel remaining. The principle supply line is now through Pakistan. Russia threatened to close the supply line before in 2011, in an attempt to pressure NATO to limit its missile defense coverage.

Asia

• On Tuesday the Australian Defense Ministry announced a $61.4 million contract with Harris Corporation’s Australian subsidiary for tactical radio support, which will see the company maintaining 15,000 radios previously sold through various follow-on contracts in addition to an original 2010, $112 million contract.

• India is planning on deploying its SU-30MKI fighters to Britain later year, with a potential deployment to the US pencilled in for next year. The fighters will be accompanied by Il-78 refuelers, with the jets scheduled to take part in joint exercises with the Royal Air Force in July and August. If they head to the US, the Flankers may take part in the Air Force’s Red Flag exercise.

• However, one of the Indian Air Force’s Flanker fleet went down on Tuesday, with the pilots ejecting safely. The Indian fleet of SU-30MKIs has been plagued with reliability issues, with the entire fleet grounded in October last year following a similar crash.

Today’s Video

• Jumping out of a CH-47…

F-35B: off probation
(click to view full)

The $382 billion F-35 Joint Strike fighter program may well be the largest single global defense program in history. This major multinational program is intended to produce an “affordably stealthy” multi-role fighter that will have 3 variants: the F-35A conventional version for the US Air Force et. al.; the F-35B Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing for the US Marines, British Royal Navy, et. al.; and the F-35C conventional carrier-launched version for the US Navy. The aircraft is named after Lockheed’s famous WW2 P-38 Lightning, and the Mach 2, stacked-engine English Electric (now BAE) Lightning jet. Lightning II system development partners included The USA & Britain (Tier 1), Italy and the Netherlands (Tier 2), and Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Turkey (Tier 3), with Singapore and Israel as “Security Cooperation Partners,” and Japan as the 1st export customer.

The big question for Lockheed Martin is whether, and when, many of these partner countries will begin placing purchase orders. This updated article has expanded to feature more detail regarding the F-35 program, including contracts, sub-contracts, and notable events and reports during 2012-2013.

The F-35 Lightning II Fighter Family F-35 Family Variants: Door A, B, or C? Figure 1: F-35 Variants.

The above table illustrates the key differences between the baseline F-35A, the Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing (STOVL) capable F-35B, and the catapult-launched F-35C naval variant. Additional explanations follow.

The F-35A CTOL F-35A, doors open
(click to view full)

The F-35A is sometimes called the CTOL (Conventional Take-Off and Landing) version. It’s the USAF’s version, and is expected to make up most of the plane’s export orders. It’s also expected to be the least expensive F-35, in part because it will have the largest production run. The USAF currently estimates its average flyaway cost after 2017 at $108.3 million, but early production models ordered in FY 2012 will cost over $150 million.

Its main difference from other versions is its wider 9g maneuverability limits, though its air-air combat flight benchmarks are only on par with the F-16. Canard equipped “4+ generation” adversaries like the Eurofighter, and thrust-vectored fighters like the F-22A, MiG-35, SU-35, etc., will still enjoy certain kinetic advantages. The F-35 hopes to mitigate them using its improved stealth to shrink detection ranges, the lack of drag from weapons in its internal bays, and its current electronic superiority.

The second major physical difference between the F-35A and the rest of the Lightning family is its internal 25mm cannon, instead of using a weapons station for a semi-stealthy gun pod option. The USAF removed guns from some of its planes back in the 1960s, and didn’t enjoy the resulting experiences in Vietnam. It has kept guns on all of its fighters ever since, including the stealthy F-22 and F-35. Many allies wanted the 27mm Mauser cannon installed instead, as it’s widely believed to offer the world’s best combination of firing rate and hitting power. In the end, however, ammunition standardization benefits involving 25mm land and sea platforms trumped pure performance.

The 3rd difference is that the F-35A uses a dorsal refueling receptacle that is refueled using an aerial tanker boom, instead of the probe-and-drogue method favored by the US Navy and many American allies.

The F-35A was the first variant to fly, in 2009. Unfortunately, it looks like it won’t reach Initial Operational Capability (IOC) until 2017 or 2018.

The F-35B STOVL (Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing) F-35B features
(click to view full)

The F-35B is expected to be the most expensive Lightning II fighter variant. According to US Navy documents, even planes bought after 2017 are expected to have an average flyaway cost of $135 million each. It will serve the US Marines, Royal Navy, other navies with ski-ramp equipped LHDs or small carriers, and militaries looking for an “expeditionary airplane” that can take off in short distances and land vertically. To accomplish this, the F-35B has a large fan behind the cockpit, and nozzles that go out to the wing undersides. Unlike the F-35A, it will use a retractable mid-air refueling probe, which is standard for the US Navy and for many American allies.

Those capabilities gives the plane a unique niche, but a unique niche also means unique challenges, and the responses to those challenges have changed the aircraft. In 2005, the JSF program took a 1-year delay because the design was deemed overweight by about 3,000 pounds. The program decided to reduce weight rather than run the engine hotter, because the latter choice would have sharply reduced the durability of engine components and driven life cycle costs higher. Weight cutting became a focus of various engineering teams, with especial focus on the F-35B because the weight was most critical to that design. Those efforts pushed the F-35B’s design, and changed its airframe. The F-35B gives up some range, some bomb load (it cannot carry 2,000 pound weapons internally, and the shape of its bay may make some weapons a challenge to carry), some structural strength (7g maneuvers design maximum), and the 25mm internal gun.

The F-35B completed its Critical Design Review in October 2006, and the 2nd production F-35 was a STOVL variant. Per the revised Sept 16/10 program plan, the USMC’s VMA-332 in Yuma, AZ must have 10 F-35Bs equipped with Block IIB software, with 6 aircraft capable of austere and/or ship-based operations, and all aircraft meeting the 7g and 50-degree angle of attack specifications, in order to declare Initial Operational Capability.

Flight testing began in 2009, and IOC was expected by December 2012, but flight testing fell way behind thanks to a series of technical delays. By 2013, the first operational planes were fielded to the USMC at Yuma, AZ. The USMC is currently aiming for a 2015 IOC, but it would involve just Block 2B software loads that will limit the F-35B’s combat capability. Even then, the Pentagon’s 2012 DOT&E report isn’t grounds for software schedule optimism. Planes with full Block 3 initial combat capability are unlikely to be fielded before 2018.

The F-35C carrier-based fighter USN F-35C
(click to view full)

The F-35C is instantly recognizable. It features 30% more wing area than other designs, with larger tails and control surfaces, plus wingtip ailerons. These changes provide the precise slow-speed handling required for carrier approaches, and extend range a bit. The F-35C’s internal structure is strengthened to withstand the punishment dished out by the catapult launches and controlled crashes of carrier launch and recovery, an arrester hook is added to the airframe, and the fighter gets a retractable refueling probe. According to US Navy documents, average flyaway costs for F-35Cs bought after 2017 will be $125.9 million each.

The US Navy gave up the internal gun, and the aircraft will be restricted to 7.5g maneuvers. That’s only slightly lower than the existing F/A-18E Super Hornet’s 7.6g, but significantly lower than the 9g limit for Dassault’s carrier-capable Rafale-M.

The F-35C is expected to be the US Navy’s high-end fighter, as well as its high-end strike aircraft. This means that any performance or survivability issues will have a disproportionate effect on the US Navy’s future ability to project power around the world.

The F-35C will be the last variant designed; it passed its Critical Design Review in June 2007, and the first production version was scheduled to fly in January 2009. The F-35C’s rollout did not take place until July 2009, however, and first flight didn’t take place until June 2010. Initial Operational Capability was scheduled for 2014, but looks set to slip to 2019.

F-35s: Key Features F-35 Variants
(click to view full)

Stealth. The F-35 is designed as an ‘affordable stealth’ counterpart to the F-22 Raptor air dominance fighter, one that can share “first day of the war” duties against defended targets but can’t perform air-air or air-ground missions to the same standard. The F-35 has a larger single engine instead of the Raptor’s twin thrust-vectoring F119s, removing both supercruise (sustained flight above Mach 1) and super-maneuverability options. The F-22A is also a much stealthier aircraft from all angles, and independent analysis & modeling has concluded that the F-35’s stealth will be weaker from the sides and the rear. Even so, the F-35 is an improvement over existing ‘teen series’ fighters and even beats Generation 4+ options like the Eurofighter, Rafale, and JAS-39 Gripen.

Engine. The F-35 was set to offer interchangeable engine options. That has been an important feature for global F-16 and F-15 customers, improving both costs and performance, and providing added readiness insurance for dual-engine fleets. Pratt & Whitney’s lobbying eventually forced GE & Rolls-Royce’s F136 out of the F-35 program, and made their F135-PW-100 engine the only choice for global F-35 fleets. A special F-135-PW-600 version with Rolls Royce’s LiftFan add-on, and a nozzle that can rotate to point down, will power the vertical-landing F-35B.

The US military had better hope that an engine design problem never grounds all of their fighters. While they’re at it, they should hope that maintenance contracts somehow remain reasonable in the absence of any competitive alternative.

F-35’s APG-81
AESA Radar
click to play video

Sensors. The Lightning II will equipped to levels that would once have defined a high-end reconnaissance aircraft. Its advanced APG-81 AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) radar is smaller and less powerful than the F-22A’s APG-77v1; but still offers the strong AESA advantages of simultaneous air-air and air-ground capabilities, major maintenance & availability improvements, and secure, high-bandwidth communications benefits. The F-35 also shares a “sensor fusion” design advance with the F-22, based on sensors of various types embedded all around the airframe. This sensor set is even more extensive than the F-22’s. Both planes will be able to perform as reconnaissance aircraft, though the F-35 will have superior infrared and ground-looking sensors. Both aircraft will also have the potential to act as electronic warfare aircraft.

These sensors are connected to a lot of computing power, in order to create single-picture view that lets the pilot see everything on one big 20″ LCD screen and just fly the plane, rather than pushing buttons to switch from one view to another and trying to figure it all out. As part of that sensor fusion, the F-35 will be the first plane is several decades to fly without a heads-up display. Instead, pilots will wear Elbit/Rockwell’s JHMDS helmet or BAE’s HMSS, and have all of that information projected wherever they look.

Maintenance. The F-35 has a large number of design features that aim to simplify maintenance and keep life cycle costs down. Since operations and maintenance are usually about 65% or more of a fighter’s lifetime cost, this is one the most important and overlooked aspects of fighter selection.

Stealth aircraft have always had much higher maintenance costs, but the F-35’s designers hope that new measures can reverse that trend. Some of the plane’s stealth coatings are being baked into composite airplane parts, for instance, in the hope that customers will need fewer “Martians” (Materials Application and Repair Specialists) around to apply stealth tapes and putties before each mission. Technical innovations like self-diagnosing aircraft wiring aim to eliminate one of the toughest problems for any mechanic, and the fleet-wide ALIS information and diagnostic system is designed to shift the fleet from scheduled maintenance to maintenance only as needed.

Despite these measure, March 2012 operations and maintenance projections have the F-35 at 142% O&M cost, relative to any F-16s they’ll replace. It remains to be seen if the advantages of F-35 innovations manage to fulfill their promise, or if projections that they’ll be outweighed in the end by increased internal complexity, and by the proliferation of fault-prone electronics, come true. That has certainly been the general trend over the last 50 years of fighter development, with a very few notable exceptions like the F-16, A-10, and JAS-39.

Pimp My Ride: Weapons & Accessories Initial hopes – changed
(click to view full)

The F-35’s internal weapon bay gives it the ability to carry larger bombs and missiles, but the price is that F-35s can carry just 2 internal air-to-air weapons, instead of a maximum of 8 on the F-22A. As the F-35 variant table (Fig. 1) shows, development, testing, and software issues have also combined to give initial F-35 fleets a very narrow set of weapons. The initial operational set that comes with Block III software has about the same weapon options as the single-role F-22A.

That’s expected to change, eventually. A large order base, and a wide international client base, will provide considerable incentive for manufacturers to qualify their weapons for the F-35. MBDA has already pledged a compatible version of its long-range Meteor air-air missile, for instance, and Britain wants to add MBDA’s SPEAR medium-range strike missile as soon as possible. Other manufacturers can be expected to follow. Norway is already developing its stealthy Joint Strike Missile with the F-35 as its explicit target, including the ability to fit the missile into the plane’s internal bays. Denmark’s Terma has turned their 25mm gun pod into a multi-mission pod that can accept a variety of sensors and equipment. Lockheed Martin’s Israeli customer is already incorporating its own electronic counter-measures systems in their F-35i, and they are certain to push for a range of Israeli weapons, including the Python-5 SRAAM(Short Range Air-to-Air Missile) and various other smart bombs and missiles.

The bottlenecks will be two-fold.

The 1st bottleneck is American insistence on retaining all source codes, and having Lockheed Martin perform all modifications at their reprogramming facility. Unless Lockheed produces a full development environment workaround, dealing with the growing queue of requests can easily become a problem. The firm’s new Universal Armament Interface could offer the foundation for a way forward, if they decide to take it. The other question involves conflict-of-interest issues, in which Lockheed Martin or the US government decides to use the bottleneck as a way of shutting competitors out of a potential export market. These kinds of concerns have already led to pushback in Australia, Britain, and Israel.

The 2nd bottleneck involves testing resources. The F-35 testing program has fallen significantly behind schedule, and IOCs for some versions have already slipped by 5-6 years. Test time required to qualify new equipment is going to be a very secondary priority until 2018-2019, and even the few customers buying their own Initial Operational Testing & Evaluation (IOT&E) fighters are going to need them for their assigned training roles.

The F-35 Family: Controversies and Competitions See me, hear me?
(click to view full)

The program’s biggest controversies revolve around 3 issues: effectiveness, affordability, and control. A 4th issue, noise, isn’t significant yet, but could become so.

Effectiveness: When the F-35 Lightning II is compared with the larger and more expensive F-22A, the Raptor is a much stealthier aircraft, and its stealth is more uniform. The F-35’s design is optimized for “low-observable” stealth when viewed from the front, with less stealth to radars looking at it from the sides, and less still when targeted from the rear. It also lacks the Raptor’s supercruise (sustained flight above Mach 1) and super-maneuverability thrust-vectoring options, which work with stealth to help the F-22 engage and disengage from combat at will. Lockheed Martin claims that the F-35 design is optimized for trans-sonic acceleration, but testing results question those claims, and the Raptor can cruise without afterburners at the F-35’s theoretical maximum speed. That’s important, because fuel usage skyrockets with afterburners on, limiting total supersonic time for fighters like the F-35.

These relative drawbacks have led to questions about the F-35’s continued suitability against the most modern current air defense threats, and against the evolved threats it can expect to face over a service lifetime that’s expected to stretch until 2050 at least.

F-35 EO DAS
click for video

Where the F-35 does come out ahead is internal carriage space. F-35A/C variants will offer larger capacity internal bays for weapons, allowing a wider selection of stealth-preserving internal ordnance. The price is that slight bulges were added to the production F-35’s underside profile in order to accommodate that space, making them less stealthy from the side than the original X-35 designs.

Sensors are another F-35 advantage. All F-35s also boast more embedded sensors than the F-22, with an especial advantage in infrared and ground-looking sensors. Though this feature has yet to be tested in combat, the F-35’s all-aspect Distributed Aperture Sensors (DAS) reportedly allow 360-degree targeting of aircraft around the F-35. If that works, the inertial guidance and datalink features of modern infrared missiles like the AIM-9X Sidewinder and AIM-132 ASRAAM can already take full advantage of it.

Which customers can live with these relative disadvantages as an acceptable trade-off, and which will be badly hurt by them? Will the F-35 be a fighter that’s unable to handle high-end scenarios, while also being far too expensive to field and operate in low-end scenarios? Even if that’s true, could countries who want one type of multi-role fighter still be best served by the F-35, as opposed to other options? That will depend, in part, on…

F-35 commonality
(click to view full)

Affordability: The F-35 family was designed to be much more affordable than the F-22, but a number of factors are narrowing that gap.

One is cost growth in the program. This has been documented by the GAO, and statements and reports from the US DoD are beginning to follow the same kind of “rising spiral of admissions” pattern seen in past programs.

The 2nd is loss of parts commonality between the 3 models, which the GAO has cited as falling below the level required to produce significant savings. In March 2013, the JSF PEO placed the figure at just 25-30%.

A 3rd is production policy. The US GAO in particular believes that the program’s policy of beginning production several years before testing is complete, only adds to the risks of future price hikes and operating cost shocks. It also forces a lot of expensive rewaork to jets that are bought before problems are found. Part of the rationale for accepting concurrency risks and costs involves…

The 4th factor: lateness. The program as a whole is about 5-7 years behind its ideal point, relative to the replacement cycle for fighters around the globe. F-35 program customers thus find themselves in the unenviable position of having to commit to a fighter that hasn’t completed testing, and doesn’t have reliable future purchase or operating costs, while buying the expensive way from early production batches. The program office hopes to drop the flyaway price of an F-35A to $90 million by 2020, but current Pentagon budget documents list an average production cost of $105-120 million per F-35A-C, from 2017 to the end of the program.

Control: This has been a big issue in the past for customers like Britain and Australia, and has now become an issue for Israel as well. Without control over software source codes, integration of new weapons and algorithms can be controlled by the whims and interests of American politicians and defense contractors. On the other hand, America sees wider access to those fundamental building blocks as a security risk. Arrangements with Britain and Australia appear to have finessed this debate, without removing it.

Noise: The F135 engine’s size and power are unprecedented in a fighter, but that has a corollary. Environmental impact studies in Florida showed that the F-35A is approximately twice as noisy as the larger, twin-engine F-15 fighter, and over 3.5 times as noisy as the F-16s they’re scheduled to replace. That has led to noise complaints from local communities in the USA and abroad, and seems likely to create a broad swathe of local political issues as customers deploy them. In some countries, it may add costs, as governments are forced to compensate or even to buy out nearby homeowners affected by the noise.

Each customer must weigh the issues above against its own defense and industrial needs, and come to a decision. In-depth, updated DID articles that address some of these issues in more detail include:

• The F-35’s Air-to-Air Capability Controversy. A comprehensive look at the issue, and its consequences.

• F-35: I am Fighter, Hear Me Roar. Noise could become a serious political issue for the F-35.

• The Great Engine War II The Pentagon finally canceled GE/RR’s F136 alternative engine project to rely entirely on Pratt & Whitney’s F135, over the objections of its GAO auditors.

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: The Program 1st British F-35B
(click to view full)

Is the F-35 an industrial program for a fighter, or a fighter with an industrial program? Beyond the initial competition between Lockheed Martin’s X-35 and Boeing’s X-32, the Joint Strike Fighter was envisioned from the outset as a program that would make sense using either interpretation. A wide set of consortium partners and national government investments would form an interlocking set of commitments, drawing on a wide range of global industrial expertise and making the program very difficult for any one party to back out of or cancel.

The JSF program is ‘tiered,’ with 4 possible levels of participation based on admission levels and funding commitments for the System Design & Development (SDD) phase. All Tier 1-3 nations have also signed MoUs for the Production Phase. This is not a commitment to buy, just the phase in which production arrangements are hammered out – subject to revision, of course, if that country decides not to buy F-35s. Consortium partners and customers to date include:

• Tier 1 Partners: The USA (majority commitment), Britain
  
• Tier 2 Partners: Italy; The Netherlands
  
• Tier 3 Partners: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Turkey
  
• Security Cooperative Participants status: Israel (20-75), Singapore.
  
• Exports: Japan (42).

Italy has expressed an interest in a Lockheed-Martin Final Assembly and Check Out (FACO) plant for European orders, and Fellow Tier 1 partner Britain is examining a FACO of its own for BAE. The Netherlands, meanwhile, wants to be a center for engine sustainment and heavy maintenance. The Dutch have signed an agreement with Italy to help each country get what it wants; Norway was added to that agreement in June 2007.

Lightning II official rollout
(click to view full)

The first test aircraft, an F-35A model AA-1, had its formal rollout on July 7/06. The F-35’s forced redesign for weight reasons has led to F-35 AA-1 being a unique airframe used to validate design, manufacturing, assembly and test processes. A total of 23 test aircraft will be built for various purposes (15 flight, 7 non-flight, 1 radar signature), but the exact order of build for the variants involved has shifted several times.

The testing phase was originally supposed to end in 2013, but is now officially scheduled to continue until 2018. Funding for the first sets of production-model aircraft is approved, parts fabrication began in June 2007, and component assembly began later in 2007. F-35As have already been delivered to the USAF – a sore point with the US Congress’ Government Accountability Office, which believes this dual-track approach overlapping testing with production increases project risks. Production will continue to ramp up year-to-year, and by the time the F-35 is expected to reach Full-Rate Production, the program intends to build 240 F-35s per year.

To do that, they’ll need orders. So far, only the USA, Israel, and Japan have placed orders for production F-35s that go beyond training & test aircraft.

Delays in fielding the initial set of test aircraft, fewer than expected flights, and questions about that ambitious ramp up schedule have reportedly led the Pentagon to re-examine these schedules. Development is now expected to last into FY 2019 or later.

Industrial Innovation F-35B JSF Cutaway
by John Batchelor
(click to view full)

At present, F-35 production is led by Lockheed Martin, with BAE and Northrop-Grumman playing major supporting roles, and many subcontractors below that.

BAE Systems is deriving substantial benefits from Britain’s Tier 1 partner status, and Northrop Grumman is responsible for the F-35’s important ‘center barrel’ section, where the wings attach to the fuselage, and also provides many of the aircraft’s key sensors.

F-35 main production and final assembly is currently slated to take place in Lockheed Martin’s Fort Worth, TX plant. To cut F-35 production cycle time, the team produces major sections of the aircraft at different feeder plants, and “mates” the assemblies at Fort Worth. This is normal in the auto industry, but it’s a departure from the usual fighter-building process.

AF-1 center barrel
(click to view full)

The precise tolerances required for a stealthy fighter, however, are much more exacting than even high-end autos. In order to avoid subtly mismatched seams, which become radar reflection points, parts need to fit together so precisely that some machines are compensating for the phases of the moon!

Even the best machines won’t do any good if the various components aren’t already an excellent fit. To cope, Manufacturing Business Technology reports that the JSF manufacturing team has turned to an integrated back-end IT system. It begins with 3D engineering models (Dassault Systemes CATIA CAD), and extends into production management, where the company has rolled out a manufacturing execution system to handle electronic work instructions, workflow and process modeling, serialized parts data, quality records tracking, etc. (Visiprise).

This combination has enabled greater use of techniques like automated drilling, even as other software (Siemens PLM, TeamCenter) enables product record management and electronic collaboration around designs. On the back-end, the team uses a custom system it calls Production & Inventory Optimization System (PIOS) for manufacturing resources planning and supply chain management; it began using ERP software (SAP) in January 2008 for financials, and may eventually use it to handle supply-chain functions too.

This ‘digital thread’ has been very successful for the team, with part fits showing incredible precision, and successful coordination of plants around the end schedule for key events like the Dec 18/07 F-35B rollout. The system’s ultimate goal is to cut a plane’s production cycle time from the usual 27-30 months to about 12 months, and shrink a 15-20 day cycle to just 6-8 days from order creation to printed & matched manufacturing orders.

Testing, Testing F-35C weapon carriage
(click to view full)

The F-35’s development and testing program was originally supposed to end in 2013. Current estimates involve a 2018 finish for all 3 models, with Block 3F software installed and a smaller set of integrated weapons than initially planned.

The F-35’s development schedule has steadily slipped, and a combination of development and production difficulties left Lockheed Martin significantly behind their planned testing schedule. The company has made a point of highlighting testing progress in 2012, as they finally got ahead of the annual curve:

F-35 JSF family: Testing statistics
(click to view full) Excel
download

Staying ahead of planned testing points and flights is laudable, but it doesn’t guarantee that the fighter itself is ahead of where it should be on the development curve. Bringing test points forward from future years can keep the numbers even. It won’t solve issues like late software delivery, which is preventing F-35s from fulfilling a number of planned testing points, and makes any combat related testing useless. The F-35s will also need changes in a number of areas, from their horizontal stabilizers to the F-35B’s complex system of lift fans and doors. Those changes will require further testing afterward, adding more test points to the program each time an issue is found. The table below outlines key issues as of 2012, and both of these testing-related datasets are available for download by subscribers:

F-35 JSF family: DOT&E’s key 2012 findings
(click to view full) F-35 JSF: Programs by Country Joint Strike Fighter
(click to view full)

The F-35 is a multinational program, and one of its challenges involves keeping all of the program’s partners moving forward. Each partner has its own issues, and increasingly, its own timeline.

Since early-production fighters can add 50-100% to the cost of full-rate production planes, most of these timelines are determined by how cost-sensitive each customer is.

Home Base: The American Program

In many ways, the American F-35 program sets the tone for all others. Countries that want the F-35, like Japan, are already seeing price hikes because of American decisions to slow initial F-35 production. Current per-plane costs are over $120 million, with initial spares and training infrastructure added on top of that. That price is expected to come down, but it requires volume orders. That means someone has to spend the money, and right now, that someone is the USA.

This leaves the United States on the horns of a dilemma.

One nightmare scenario is a fate similar to the high-end F-22A Raptor, which was initially supposed to field 1,000 fighters, but ended up producing just 183 thanks to spiraling development costs, unexpected upgrade costs, and production costs that never benefited from full economies of scale. Cuts led to continued high prices, which led to more cuts. That scenario would spell disaster for other F-35 customers, who would end up paying far more per plane than they had expected. Some would then defect, driving up prices again for the countries who remained.

The other nightmare scenario for the USA involves significant problems discovered in testing, which then require costly and extensive retrofits to the 400+ F-35 fighters that will be produced before the test program ends. This parallel test/production model has been the subject of heavy criticism from the US government’s GAO auditors. It’s a form of “political engineering” designed to make cancellation too expensive for politicians, even if it leads to sharply higher final costs, or hurts the future fleet.

F-35A
(click to view full)

American purchase decisions can be described as a balancing act between these nightmares. If they spend too much money ramping up production, other countries are more likely to buy as prices drop, but the USAF could be on the hook for a huge retrofit bill that it can’t afford. If they throttle their efforts back too far in order to avoid retrofit risk, it makes defections by existing JSF partners more likely, and hurts the fighter’s chances of landing export sales.

Lockheed Martin has tried to thread this needle by getting multiple JSF consortium members to commit to a joint buy, in order to create a big enough pool of secure orders to drive down purchase costs for everyone. So far, they’ve been unable to get the signatures they need.

Excel
download

Meanwhile, past and planned American F-35 budgets for all variants are graphed below, with an Excel download as a bonus. Note that R&D forecasts aren’t yet published as a single figure beyond FY 2013:

USAF: F-35A
(click to view full) USN: F-35B & F-35C
(click to view full) Australia (Tier 3) The legacy roster
(click to view full)

Australia was originally going to replace its long-range F-111 fighter-bomber and F/A-18 AM/BM Hornet fighter fleets with a single fleet of 100 F-35A aircraft. Current plans for the F-35 are less clear. A change of governing parties hasn’t shifted Australia’s long-term commitment to the F-35A yet, but rising costs could do so.

In November 2009, the Government approved funding for Phase 2A/B (Stage 1) to acquire 14 F-35As, at a cost of about A$ 2.75 billion. In October 2010, they formally submitted a Partner Procurement Request (PPR) to the US Government, and expect a FY 2012 order for 2 initial F-35As, for delivery in 2014-15. Those 2 planes will remain in the United States for testing and pilot training. The next 12 planes would have been based in Australia, and their Year of Decision will now be 2014-15, which may also cover the Stage 2 buy of 58 planes (TL: 72). Deliveries of operational fighters aren’t expected until 2017-2019 now, which means that RAAF F-35As won’t be flying in Australia until around 2020. The AIR 6000 Phase 2C decision to add another 24 F-35s or so, and raise Australia’s total buy to 96+, won’t happen until 2018-19 at the earliest.

As of 2014, The Royal Australian Navy will begin receiving Canberra Class LHD ships that could deploy F-35Bs, but at present there are no plans to host fighters on board. If those plans change, the AIR 6000 Phase 2C decision is the likely inflection point.

The inflection point for a single fighter fleet has already passed. In May 2007, delays to the F-35 program pushed the RAAF to buy 24 F/A-18F Block II Super Hornets as an interim capability. Those aircraft have all been delivered now, and 12 of them are set to convert to EA-18G Growler tactical jamming fighters. F-35 delays may push Australia to order more Super Hornets, and the hard reality is that each new Super Hornet bought probably subtracts an F-35A from future orders.

Britain (Tier 1) RN CVF Concept
(click to view full)

Britain is the only Tier 1 partner outside the USA, and they have invested about $2 billion equivalent in the F-35’s development. They took delivery of their 1st IOT&E training and test aircraft in July 2012.

Britain’s original plan involved buying 138 F-35B STOVL planes for deployment on land and on their new aircraft carriers, but that will now shrink to an undetermined number.

The UK MoD has also switched back and forth between the F-35B and the catapult-launched F-35C. The F-35C’s range and weapon capacity give it significant time-over-target advantages in a Falkland Islands kind of scenario. On the flip side, the F-35B can fly from forward operating bases in situations like Afghanistan, allowing fewer planes to generate more sorties in the same time frame. The determining factor that switched Britain back to the F-35B was the cost of modifying its aircraft carriers.

Canada (Tier 3) CF-18, 20-year colors
(click to view full)

In July 2010, Canada committed to buy 65 F-35As as its future fighter force, with an envisioned budget up to C$ 9 billion for the fighters, plus C$ 7 billion for 20 years of support. All without a competition. That decision has been beset by controversy ever since, and the Conservative Party government claims that they aren’t committed to buy the F-35A yet. On the other hand, they haven’t made any substantive concessions, or meaningful changes to their plans, aside from promising that if F-35 costs continue to rise, Canada will just buy fewer planes within its budget.

Canada will probably sign a contract by 2015, which would make it too expensive for any successor governments to cancel the program. If the Conservative Party government doesn’t sign a contract before the next election, they had better win again. Otherwise, the conduct of this acquisition program has so antagonized the opposition Liberal and NDP parties that the F-35 buy will be a priority target for cancellation.

In November 2012, the first cracks appeared in the government’s stone wall. The Public Works ministry took over the lead role from DND, and said that the military’s original statement of requirements would be suspended while the government reviewed fighter options. Read full coverage, including industrial participants, over at “Canada Preparing to Replace its CF-18 Hornets.”

Denmark (Tier 3) Danish F-16 MLU
(click to view full)

Denmark is a consortium member, but they threw their F-16 fighter replacement order open to competition in 2007. The F-35A was competing against Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet and Sweden’s JAS-39E/F Gripen, but an April 2010 decision delayed the competition. The Danes reportedly have about 30 operational F-16s in 2013, with another 15 stored in reserve.

The F-16 replacement process has started again as promised, with EADS’ Eurofighter Typhoon added to the mix of invitees. A decision to buy 24-32 fighters is now expected by June 2015.

Italy (Tier 2) CVH Cavour
(click to view full)

Italy has made significant investments in JSF development, and the country intends to host a European Final Assembly and Check-Out (FACO) production line in Cameri, near Milan.

The navy’s ITS Cavour aircraft carrier will need at least 22 F-35Bs to replace its AV-8 Harrier fighters, but Europe and Italy’s slow-motion fiscal calamity makes the rest of its buy far less certain. The original plan involved 131 F-35s for the Army and Navy, but a February 2012 decision has scaled plans back to 90 fighters. The Italians are still discussing whether to buy a mix of F-35As and F-35Bs for the air force, but cost pressures are likely to push the Aeronautica Militare toward F-35As.

Given Italy’s rising borrowing costs, and the air force’s modern fleet of 96 Eurofighter Typhoons, further cuts in Aeronautica Militare F-35 purchases would be a reasonable expectation.

The Netherlands (Tier 2) Dutch F-16s,
Afghanistan
(click to view full)

The F-35 is the Ministerie van Defensie’s choice, but instability in successive Dutch governments has prevented a clear decision. The Netherlands plans to buy up to 85 fighters, and as one of the two JSF Tier 2 partners, they want to place a European maintenance hub in the Netherlands. Industry benefits figure heavily in their decision, and participation in the JSF program was structured as a payback scheme. That has sometimes created a strained relationship between the government and participating firms.

Cost is a serious issue. A September 2009 media report revealed that Saab submitted a bid for 85 ready-to-fly JAS-39NL Gripen fighters, at a reported cost of EUR 4.8 billion. In contrast, a December 2010 report to the Dutch Parliament placed the expected purchase cost of 85 F-35As at EUR 7.6 billion, and the government has said that if costs continue to rise, the only change will be fewer fighters bought.

Costs have risen, even as budgets shrank. A 2012 Rekenkamer report revealed that the MvD was admitting a ceiling of just 56 F-35As, given their EUR 4.05 billion budget. That isn’t enough for their current responsibilities, and their notional EUR 68.6 million/ $89 million per plane figure is significantly less than the Pentagon’s post-2017 average cost projection of $108 million – which allows just 48 Dutch F-35As. Throw in the 21% Dutch Value Added Tax, and the real number could be as low as 33-38 F-35As.

Keeping its F-16s flying until the required 2027 date is expected to cost another EUR 335 million, and must be figured into the total cost, even if it comes from a separate budget item. A slip to 2029, or another fighter option that took that much more time, brings that total added cost to EUR 515 million.

Finally, F-35 maintenance and operating costs are expected to be higher than either the current F-16s (+42% American projection), or the Gripen. That affects the number that can be kept flying under future budgets. The 2012 Rekenkamer report says that estimates for 30 years of F-35A operations & maintenance, exclusive of fuel, have risen from EUR 2.9 billion for 85 planes in 2001, to EUR 14.2 billion. Buying 68 aircraft only drops this estimate to EUR 13.2 billion, and that non-linear drop makes it likely that O&M costs for a fleet of 42-48 F-35As, over 30 years, would be well over EUR 200 million per-plane.

A final decision is scheduled for 2015, but successive coalition governments have been pushing through contracts for initial F-35 test aircraft, as a way of entrenching their country’s commitment. A July 2012 vote left only the center-right VVD and Christian Democrats supporting an F-35 buy, and after the elections, a coalition with the opposition PvdA Labour party changed the process for reaching that 2015 decision. Whether it will change anything else remains to be seen.

Norway (Tier 3) RNoAF F-16,
off to Libya
(click to view full)

Norway picked the F-35A in November 2008, after a competition that Wikileaks documents suggest was a sham. Parliamentary opposition finally caved in July 2011, and purchases began in 2012. They will buy 46-52 F-35s, with an initial 4 training aircraft slated to begin delivery in 2015. Another 42-48 planned fighters are slated to begin turning into contracts as of 2017, and the program’s official overall cost currently lists as NOK 60 billion/ $FY12 10 billion. Basing will be at Orland AB, with a satellite forward operating base up north at Evenes.

As part of their program, Norway’s Kongsberg is developing a stealthy, sub-sonic Joint Strike Missile (JSM/NSM) that will be able to hit ships or land targets, and can be carried inside the F-35A/C weapons bay. Its positioning as an internally-carried cruise missile will be unique, and Australia has already indicated interest. At present, however, there’s no firm date for integration.

Read “F-35 Lightning II Wins Norway’s (Fake) Competition” for full coverage.

Turkey (Tier 3) TuAF F-16s
(click to view full)

Turkey had talked about ordering up to 100 F-35A fighters, as the long-term replacement for its 240-plane F-16 fleet. beyond the program’s industrial benefits, they also have a geopolitical rationale. Turkey’s main rival, Greece, has been crippled by its fiscal situation, and is not an F-35 program participant. They’re unlikely to field any fighters with technology beyond their existing F-16s for quite some time, and Turkey wants an edge. The Turks are also beginning to project influence into Central Asia, have neighbors in Syria, Iraq and Iran that bear watching, and are stoking a growing level of friction with Israel, an F-35 customer.

In the near term, a combination of new buys and upgrades will ensure a long life for Turkey’s F-16s. Current plans still involve 100 F-35s, and 2012 saw the first contract – but by January 2013, Turkey was postponing its purchase of 2 training and test aircraft. The overall program is expected to cost around $16 billion.

Israel (Security Cooperation Partner) Israeli F-16C
(click to view full)

With 326 F-16s in the IAF (224 F-16A-D, 102 F-16i), Israel is the largest F-16 operator outside of the United States. Their commitment to regional superiority made them the first country outside the USA to commit to a production F-35 buy in October 2010, with a contract for 20 “F-35is” and options to raise that number to 75 planes. The F-22 Raptor had been their preferred choice, but America refused to export it.

The Israelis got some concessions from Lockheed Martin and the US government, including the ability to insert their own ECM(Electronic Counter Measures) defensive equipment. Their F-35i will also carry compatible communications equipment and some avionics, and the Israelis are expected to push for early integration of their own weapons, like RAFAEL’s Python 5 short-range air-to-air missile and Spice GPS/IIR guided smart bomb. F-35i system development contracts began in August 2012.

Read “Israeli Plans to Buy F-35s Moving Forward” for full coverage.

Singapore (Security Cooperation Partner) RSAF F-16D
(click to view full)

Singapore expects to replace its 74-plane F-16 fleet with F-35s, but they have a lot of timing flexibility. A program of significant fleet upgrades to F-16V status is expected to begin within the next year, giving them a plane that’s more advanced than USAF F-16s. Their new fleet of 20 high-end F-15SGs are already more advanced than the USAF’s Strike Eagles, and their combined fleet size and quality is expected to keep them comfortably ahead of their neighbors for a while.

In the nearer term, their fleet of about 34 upgraded F-5S/T fighters will need replacement. Singapore is reported to be about to announce an order for 12 F-35Bs, as part of a larger export approval request that could go as high as 75 planes. Their alternative would be to order more F-15SGs as F-5 replacements, and wait until it was time to begin replacing their F-16s. An order of 12 Strike Eagles would cost less, and would offer a much wider array of capabilities until about 2025 or later. F-35Bs would offer more risk, and would enter service much later, in exchange for stealth and the ability to take off and land from damaged runways.

Exports: Beyond the Program Team

Japan F-4EJ “Kai(zen)”
(click to view full)

The F-22 Raptor had been Japan’s preferred choice, but America refused to export it. In December 2011, therefore, Japan picked the F-35A over Boeing’s F/A-18E Super Hornet International, and the Eurofighter Typhoon. The F-35A was said to have the best capabilities, based only on mathematical analysis of the paper submissions Japan received. It eked out a narrow “Gilligan win” on overall cost by offering dorsal aerial refueling and finishing 2nd in both sub-categories, and was even with the others in terms of maintenance contracts offered. The only major category it lost was domestic industrial participation, but the winning Eurofighter bid had cost issues with that aspect of its submission.

The JASDF has an approved Foreign Military Sale request for 42 F-35As, and has committed to 4 so far. This set of 42 F-35As will replace its fleet of 91 upgraded F-4 “Phantom Kai” fighters. Eventually, Japan will also need to replace about 213 F-15J Eagle air superiority fighters with at least 100 new planes, but the F-35 will have to compete for that.

Past fighter orders from Japan have involved extensive license production. So far, reports and documents indicate that Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. will be involved in work on F-35 aircraft bodies, Mitsubishi Electric Corp. on mission-related avionics, and IHI Corp. on F135 engines.

Read “Japan’s Next Fighters: F-35 Wins The F-X Competition” for full coverage.

Future Sales Opportunities F-15 Silent Eagles
Boeing concept
(click to view full)

Lockheed Martin continues to promote the F-35 in the international market, but its priority is securing production orders from the countries that are already part of the JSF consortium.

South Korea’s F-X-III fighter competition is probably the F-35’s biggest near-term export opportunity. The F-35 is competing against Boeing’s stealth-enhanced F-15SE Silent Eagle and the Eurofighter Typhoon for that 60-plane order.

A number of Middle Eastern countries are shopping for fighter jets, including the UAE, Oman, and Qatar. Kuwait is expected to join them soon. So far, the F-35 hasn’t featured prominently in reporting about these competitions. It isn’t a contender in Oman, and the UAE’s focus appears to be fixed on either France’s Rafale or the Eurofighter Typhoon.

In Europe, Belgium and Portugal will need to replace their F-16s pretty soon, but political and fiscal woes make such buys unlikely. Eastern European countries either have medium-to-long term commitments in place, or are too small and poor to be likely F-35 customers. Lockheed Martin’s brightest hope beyond its existing consortium partners is probably Spain. Like Italy, Spain will eventually need to either buy the F-35B as its only real option to replace the AV-8 Matadors (Harriers) on the Juan Carlos I, or downgrade the ship to a helicopter and UAV carrier. Europe’s slow-motion collapse has pushed its fiscal difficulties close to their limit, however, and there are no Spanish plans at present for an F-35 buy.

The F-35 has been promoted to India, especially as a naval fighter option for its new carriers. It was not a contender for India’s M-MRCA buy, however, and prospects for a future sale seem dim due to competition from a range of existing naval (MiG-29K, Tejas naval) and air force (SU-30MKI, SU-50i FGFA) program commitments.

F-35 Contracts & Decisions

LRIP = Low Rate Initial Production. Unless otherwise noted, US Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) in Patuxent River, MD manages these contracts.

FY 2013 – 2015

F-35A & F-22A,
Eglin AFB
(click to view full)

May 20/15: The Marine Corps has begun testing its F-35Bs aboard USS Wasp (LHD-1), with these tests set to last two weeks. Six of the aircraft are being tested for specific abilities as part of Operational Testing (OT-1); these include digital interoperability between aircraft and ship systems, something particularly sensitive given the aircraft’s recent software problems. The USMC decided to push ahead regardless of 2B software issues, with the intention of hitting IOC in July.

March 26/13: Singapore. AOL Defense is reporting that Singapore will order 12 F-35Bs within 10 days, while others take a more measured tone. Agence France-Presse cite Singaporean sources as saying they’re in the final stages of evaluating the F-35, which tracks with statements by Defence Minister Dr Ng Eng Hen. Even so, the plane’s very incomplete capabilities mean that part of Singapore’s evaluation is just paper and promises at this point. Singapore’s RSIS points out that the country has traditionally been cautious in its defense buys, restricting themselves to proven platforms.

Singapore’s fleet of about 34 upgraded F-5S/T fighters were bought in the 1970s, and they do need replacement. The RSAF’s alternative would be to order more F-15SG Strike Eagles as F-5 replacements, and wait several years before ordering F-35s. The Strike Eagles would cost less at present, and would offer a much wider array of weapons until about 2025 or later. F-35Bs would offer more risk, and would enter service much later than F-15SGs, in exchange for better stealth, and the ability to take off and land from damaged runways. Either way, a DSCA-approved export request would be required before any order can be placed. The most we can expect within 10 days is a State Department announcement. AOL Defence | AFP | Reuters | Eurasia Review.

March 26/13: UK. The Ministry of Defence announces that RAF Marham, which had hosted Tornados until the fighters were retired to save on support costs, will become Britain’s main base for F-35s. It will also act as a support center, performing depth maintenance. RAF | BBC.

March 25/13: Engine. Bloomberg reports that Rolls-Royce was an average of 160 days late with its F135-PW-600 LiftFan engine parts deliveries in 2012. Subcontractor errors were part of the problem:

“There have been issues such as corrosion on some of the gears and some undersized holes,” Jacqueline Noble, a spokeswoman for the defense agency, said in the [emailed] statement [to Bloomberg]. While London-based Rolls-Royce and its subcontractors have made progress, the need to fix fan parts that don’t meet specifications “is still a concern,” she said.”

March 25/13: Japan LRIP-8. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $40.2 million fixed-price-incentive (firm-target), contract to provide long lead-time parts, materials and components required for the delivery of 4 Japanese F-35As, as part of Low Rate Initial Production Lot 8. See also June 29/12 entry.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to be complete in February 2014. All funds are committed immediately, and this contract was not competitively procured by US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD, who is acting as Japan’s agent through the FMS process (N00019-13-C-0014).

March 21/13: Netherlands. The 2 Dutch IOT&E F-35As are already slated to go into storage until 2015, because the jets aren’t fit for purpose yet (q.v. Feb 11/13). Now Reuters reports that the Dutch are looking to cut their planned order of 85 F-35As by 17-33 planes. On the surface, this isn’t exactly news, as the MvD was known to be looking at a 56 plane order (-29 aircraft) when the Oct 24/12 Rekenkamer report came out. Reuters gives a figure of 52-68 planes and a budget of EUR 4.5 billion, but full replacement of the RNLAF’s reduced fleet of 68 F-16s with F-35As doesn’t square with that budget. A “defense source close to the talks” is quoted as saying that an F-35A order could drop as low as 33-35 planes (-50 or more aircraft), based on Rekenkamer estimates.

That can’t be welcome news to the F-35 program, which expects to have foreign orders making up half of production after LRIP Lot 8 in 2014 (q.v. March 12/13). For the RNLAF, Defense Aerospace cites Dutch Parliamentary documents which size their operational F-16 fleet at just 24 / 68 planes, due to maintenance issues and lack of spare parts. That’s a bit of a crisis; meanwhile, the larger question is whether 24-35 fighters is even close to adequate for future needs.

The new coalition, sworn into office in November 2012, expects to finalize a new defense policy and fighter purchase plans later in 2013. Defense Aerospace reports that the Dutch Parliament’s Standing Committee on Defence has already scheduled presentations from Boeing (F/A-18 Super Hornet family) and Saab (JAS-39E/F Gripen), and the Eurofighter consortium has told the publication that they’re keeping an eye on developments. Reuters | Defense Aerospace.

March 20/13: Australia. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives an unfinalized, not-to-exceed $9.8 million modification for Australian-specific non-recurring support activities. It includes ALIS equipment and sustainment and logistics support, and will be bought under the LRIP Lot 6 contract. $4.9 million is committed immediately.

Australia was set to buy 2 F-35As for IOT&E preparation under LRIP Lot 6. The timing of their follow-on buy of 12 F-35As may be uncertain, but this contract seems to indicate that they’ll buy the 2 IOT&E jets (see also March 5/13). Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in January 2019. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-C-0083).

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

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

March 12/13: Issues & allies. JSF PEO Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher C. Bogdan, USAF, offers a number of important pieces of information at the Credit Suisse/McAleese defense programs conference in Washington, DC. One is that he hopes to have unit cost, including the engine, down to $90 million by 2020 – about 10% lower than current Pentagon estimates beyond 2017. Allies “need to know where their money is going”, especially since orders after LRIP-8 (2014) are expected to be about 50% allied buys. Unfortunately there’s an issue with IOT&E processes, which has been left unaddressed until the issue became a source of buying uncertainty:

“Adding insult to injury, the JSF program office classified all documents as “U.S. only,” which upset partner nations. Even if they are all buying the same aircraft, each country has its own air-worthiness qualification processes and other administrative procedures that require they have access to the aircraft’s technical data. JSF officials are working to re-classify the documentation, Bogdan said.”

Regarding Operations & Support costs, which are over 2/3 of a weapon system’s lifetime cost: “If we don’t start doing things today to bring down O&S now, there will be a point when the services will see this aircraft as unaffordable.”

Most of those costs trace back to design, so changes at this point are possible, but difficult. One design and support issue is that the 80% commonality between variants envisaged at the program’s outset is now closer to 25-30%. That means more expensive non-common parts due to lower production runs, larger inventories for support of multiple types in places like the USA and Italy, more custom work for future changes, etc. Information Dissemination | National Defense.

March 11/13: GAO Report. The GAO releases its annual F-35 program report: “Current Outlook Is Improved, but Long-Term Affordability Is a Major Concern“. Some manufacturing indices like labor hours per jet delivery rate are getting better, but operations and maintenance costs are a serious problem, and F-35 acquisition funding requirements average $12.6 billion annually through 2037.

There’s much, much more. It’s difficult to summarize this report, and worth reading it in full.

March 9/13: Cost sensitivity. Reuters gets their hands on an advance draft of a GAO report, which looks at the F-35’s sustainment and purchase costs. The GAO’s estimate to refurbish produced F-35s to incorporate fixes required by discoveries during testing? $1.7 billion. That’s a lot, but it’s a decision that touches on the next area they examine: what happens if some countries don’t buy, or the USA buys fewer?

Current American plans will average $10.6 billion per year until 2037 [DID: it turns out to be $12.6 billion]. Average costs have already climbed from $69 million to $137 million, and would rise by another 9% if the USA dropped its orders from 2,443 – 1,500 (to $150 million). They would rise by 6% (to $145 million) if all 8 foreign partners cut their planned 697 orders, but the USA kept its own. The combination? More than additive, at 19% (to $163 million).

Here’s the thing. The GAO is calculating averages, but all F-35 partners including the USA, have a limited window of safe remaining life for their fighter fleets. That forces them to place earlier orders, which can cost a lot more than “average over all production” estimates. They’re also more price sensitive to production cuts, since fewer planes per year are being built at this stage. A design that isn’t done testing adds another disincentive, and the combination of unready planes and spiraling costs for near-term buys can force quite a few cancellations and reductions. Each cancellation may be minor in the long term, but it’s a larger cost hike in the short term, which ensures that the long term production figure never arrives.

One response just starts production earlier, and lets the main partner eat most of the concurrency costs. So, was the $1.7 billion concurrency cost worth it, in order to speed up the purchase schedule and production ramp-up by 5-6 years? That’s an individual judgement. Reuters | IBT.

March 6/13: DOT&E OUE. The POGO NGO gets its hands on a copy of the Pentagon’s Operational Utility Evaluation for initial F-35A training, dated Feb 15/13. While DOT&E cautions that you can’t draw any meaningful conclusions from a system this immature, some of their observations and trends are relevant and concerning.

Not training ready. To begin at the beginning, current F-35s aren’t even close to suitable for new-pilot training, and are very marginal even for experienced pilot training. This situation, and the long list of accompanying flight restrictions, is normal for an aircraft mid-way through its testing phase. What’s different is that continued program delays would leave the US military unable to stream new pilots to its production aircraft.

Touch screens. A notable but less urgent design deficiency involves the touch screen display, which may need to be used less. Using it to control radios, for instance, is a bad idea, especially at high Gs and under stress. To duplicate this feeling, have a jumpy 3-year old grab and flail at your arm while you’re trying to operate a computer mouse. MIL-STD-1472G already prohibits this sort of thing as a sole option, and voice recognition is intended to fix the problem. Until it’s ready, of course, we won’t know if it has its own issues.

Visibility. The most serious deficiency remains technical problems with the pilot’s ambitious Helmet-Mounted Display, coupled with a designed-in lack of rear visibility that HMDS needs to overcome using the plane’s embedded sensors. The visibility is poor in order to improve stealth vs. a full bubble canopy; and also to keep design commonality with the STOVL F-35B, which mounts its lift fan and doors behind the pilot. The OUE’s experienced F-16 and A-10 pilots were universal in their criticism, saying that poor to no rear visibility made basic tasks like keeping formation more challenging, and was a deficiency in combat situations.

It’s also a maintenance risk, of course, since all associated systems must be working or the planes will be at a large combat disadvantage. The likely result? Either lower readiness rates, higher maintenance costs, or both. Those are both areas where the F-35 remains behind the curve, with potentially dire fiscal consequences. POGO summary | Full Report [PDF]

March 5/13: LRIP-6. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $72.2 million unfinalized LRIP Lot 6 contract modification. It buys F-35A support equipment for Luke AFB’s Pilot Training Center 1. It also covers associated Data Quality Integration Management supplier support tasks, and all other sustainment data products for the USAF and the governments of Italy and Australia. The contract is split-funded by the USAF ($55.0M/ 76.2%); Italy ($10.3M/ 14.3%); and Australia ($6.9/ 9.5%).

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in August 2014. $36.1 million is committed immediately (N00019-11-C-0083). This brings total LRIP-6 contracts to $5.674 billion.

March 1/13: Return to flight. The Pentagon lifts the grounding order on its F-35 fleets, after inspecting fleet engines. The engine in question belonged to a plane used for flight envelope expansion testing, and had been operated for an extended time at high temperatures.

“Prolonged exposure to high levels of heat and other operational stressors on this specific engine were determined to be the cause of the crack [as opposed to high-cycle fatigue, which would force a redesign].”

The engineers believe no redesign is needed. Pentagon | Reuters.

Grounding lifted

Feb 28/13: Block 8 long-lead. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $333.8 million fixed-price-incentive (firm-target), advance acquisition contract, covering early equipment buys for 35 LRIP Lot 8 planes: 19 USAF F-35As ($155.2M/ 46%), 6 USMC F-35Bs ($85.4M/ 26%), and 4 USN F-35Cs ($27.5M/ 8%); plus 4 F-35B STOVLs for Britain ($45M/ 14%), and 2 F-35As for Norway ($20.7M/ 6%). All contract funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to be complete in February 2014. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 (N00019-13-C-0008).

Feb 27/13: Unhappy relationship. F-35 PEO Executive Officer Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan criticizes some important decisions, such as concurrent testing and production, and he’s also unhappy with the vendors. There’s some back-and-forth in the news reports regarding production cost, which he pegs at about $120 million for a Lot 5 F-35A with engine, and whether cost reductions per lot have been adequate. His AuBC interview also includes this remark, which got less attention but is more important:

“The real big elephant is how much it costs over the life of this plane to maintain it, and sustain it…. I think today, looking at what we have, the cost to maintain and sustain this plane is too high…. What I’ve told Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney is “you have yet to earn the right to become the product support integrator for the life of this program.” So what I’ve done is, I’ve tried to take pieces of the life cycle, and I’ve tried to introduce some competition [from domestic and foreign companies]….”

The decision to use only 1 engine also comes into play, as he describes the 6 month negotiations to finalize the F135 engine LRIP Lot 5 contract (vid. Feb 6/13 entry), which began shortly after their F136 competitor had been eliminated:

“Now, you would think a company like Pratt & Whitney that was just given the greatest Christmas gift you could ever, ever get for a company would act a little differently…”

In truth, the full tone of Gen. Bogdan’s remarks isn’t fully captured in written reports. He’s adopting classic crisis management recommendations, acknowledging known problems rather than being dishonest, placing them in context when he can, then promising to fix what’s left and deliver a successful jet. The comments in Australia were made shortly after the DOT&E report (vid. Jan 13/13). They’re aired a month or so later in the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s “Reach for the Sky” documentary on the program, just before Australia submits a formal request to buy another 24 Boeing Super Hornet family fighters. Center for Public Integrity | Fox News | TIME | AuBC’s Reach for the Sky.

Feb 22/13: Engine. A crack in an F135-PW-100 engine blade grounds the entire F-35 fleet. The fault was found in an F-35A, but this part of the engine is common to all 3 variants. No one wants to have a blade break off inside and destroy the engine or the plane on its way out the back, hence the grounding.

These kinds of problems aren’t unheard of during testing, but the incident raises 2 big questions. One is the Pentagon’s flawed policy of ordering operational planes during the testing phase, which multiplies the cost of fixes during a fiscal crunch. The other involves the DoD’s decision to have just 1 engine manufacturer for the F-35, unlike its existing fighter fleets. Imagine exactly this sort of fleet-wide grounding, when the F-35 is the main fighter of all 3 armed services. DoD | Reuters.

Engine problems ground the whole fleet

Feb 13/13: Australia. Australian MP Dennis Jensen [Lib-Tangney, near Perth] chronicles the key assertions, decisions, and official reassurances made in Australia concerning the F-35, most of which have turned out to be somewhere between inaccurate and untrue. It’s a sobering account of how far program timelines and costs have gone awry, and effectively eviscerates the credibility of official ADF and DoD analysis.

The former defense research scientist also has the brass to point out that while the military has been busy missing the mark, independent analysts like Air Power Australia laid down key cost and performance markers that are now being vindicated by official reports.

Jensen is a long-time critic of the F-35. His 2009 guest article for DID focused on the F-22 as a better solution for Australia, and one wonders if he still has that view in light of recent events. His skepticism concerning the F-35 has remained, as evidenced by his March 2012 release, “Joint Strike Fighter lemon“. That release goes a step beyond most political releases, whose authors aren’t likely to confront a senior air force officer with step by step analysis of hypothetical 8 vs. 8 air combat engagements. Australian parliamentary transcript | JSF Nieuws has added sub-headers for easier reading.

Feb 13/13: Lot 6 Engines. United Technologies’ Pratt and Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT receives a $65 million cost-plus-incentive-fee modification to a previously awarded advance acquisition contract for ongoing sustainment, operations, and maintenance to LRIP Lot 6’s F135 engines. This contract combines purchases for the USMC ($43.8M / 69%); the USAF ($17.8M / 26%); and the US Navy ($3.3M / 5%). $55.3 million in FY 2012 and 2013 contract funds are committed immediately, and $11.8 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13.

Efforts include labor and materials required to maintain and repair F135 propulsion systems; sustainment labor consisting of fleet and material management, sustaining engineering, and joint services technical data updates; and material required to support fielded propulsion systems and support equipment after unit and depot activations at production, training, and operational locations.

Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT (54%); Indianapolis, IN (31%); and Bristol, United Kingdom (15%), and is expected to be complete in December 2013 (N00019-12-C-0090).

Feb 12/13: F-35B flying. The Joint Strike Fighter Program Office clears the F-35B variant to resume flight operations. Within the fleet, all affected hoses have been inspected, and the ones that are out of tolerance will be replaced beginning in about a week. F-35Bs with properly crimped hoses can resume flying now. Yuma Sun.

F-35B cleared to fly

Feb 11/13: Dutch IOT&E. Minister of Defence Mrs. JA Hennis-Plasschaert sends a written brief to Parliament, covering recent developments with the F-35. It outlines the recent American DOT&E report, and also discusses developments in Canada, where the F-35 decision is under review. With respect to their own order, the first Dutch F-35 is ready, and the 2nd will arrive in summer 2013, but the project’s lateness has started to affect the RNLAF.

The original plan was to use their IOT&E jets with Block 3 software for testing and tactics development from April 2012 – August 2014, and pay EUR 27.1 million. Because the program is so far behind on Block 3 software delivery, per DOT&E, the Dutch will have to store their jets in the USA at their own expense until 2015, run their IOT&E from 2015-2018, and pay EUR 47 – 55 million. All on top of buying their jets several years earlier than they needed to, which raised their cost by many millions of euros.

Turkey was probably thinking of these kinds of issues when they postponed their planned IOT&E buy in January. JSF Nieuws has excerpts from the letter, which has not yet been published on the government’s web sites, and also showed us the full copy.

Dutch IOT&E

Feb 6/13: The Pentagon’s F-35 Joint Program Office and Pratt & Whitney announce an agreement in principle regarding the final engine contract for LRIP Lot 5’s planes.

An unfinalized version of that contract was announced on Dec 28/11, and the new contract is reportedly about $20 million lower than the $1.122 billion quoted at that time. Even with that reduction, adding the engine contract to other fighter-related Lot 5 announcements would give an average Lot V flyaway cost across all types of around $170 million per plane. It’s important to note that the engine contract includes things besides fighter engines, but even with no engines at all, Lot V announcements sum to a cost per fighter of $137.5 million.

Final engine figures and divisions won’t be forthcoming until the official Pentagon announcement. Note that some media reports don’t match up with the 32 planes known to be in Lot V (vid. Dec 14/12 entry). American Machinist | Reuters.

Feb 5/13: Britain’s switch costs. The British House of Commons Defence Committee says that the government’s shift from the F-35B STOVL to the F-35C and back cost the country GBP 100 million (vid. section 2, #14 & 15). Most of that money was spent on budgets related to Britain’s new carriers, and the committee faults the government for rushed work on the October 2010 SDSR.

That is quite a lot of money to waste, and it’s true that after the Conservative/ Lib-Dem coalition took power, there was a strong push to get the SDSR out the door in a short period of time. These kinds of decisions are very complex, and the committee faults the Ministry for going along with this recommendation, without really understanding the changes involved.

The Ministry’s defense is that their CVF/ Queen Elizabeth Class carriers had been touted as “future proof”, able to include catapults if that became necessary during the ships’ lifetimes. That proposition was put to the test early with the F-35C switch. The Ministry’s retrospective conclusion is blunt, and discomfiting on its own terms: “It is not my belief that [the carriers] were genuinely designed for conversion, or that the contract allowed them to be designed for conversion.” One wonders, then, why they were touted that way. UK Commons Defence Committee Acquisitions Report | Flight International.

Britain’s type-
switching costs

Feb 2/13: A USAF presentation to Congress says that if sequestration takes effect, F-35 order will be reduced (duh). They add that the program may need to be restructured, too, along with the KC-46A aerial tanker and MQ-9 Reaper Block 5. That would make a few allies grumpy. Flight International.

Jan 31/13: Personnel. AviationWeek reports that Tom Burbage, the executive vice president and general manager of program integration for the F-35, will retire in March 2013, after 32 years at the firm. He had been appointed in that position in 2000.

Jan 30/13: DOT&E – Pilot views. Flight International interviews both experienced pilots and Lockheed Martin personnel, in the wake of the turning & acceleration performance downgrades announced by DOT&E’s 2012 report. One experienced pilot flatly says that those performance figures put the F-35 Lightning in the same class as the 1960s-era F-4 Phantom fighter-bomber, rather than modern high-performance fighters. The Lightning does retain some kinetic strengths, but the overall picture isn’t encouraging when examined closely.

Then a Lockheed test pilot with broad experience takes up the gauntlet, to say that the F-35 is actually kinetically better than other 4+ generation fighters. Some of his fellow test pilots question those claims. Read “The F-35’s Air-to-Air Capability Controversy” for in-depth coverage of this issue.

Jan 30/13: Japan problem. If Japan wants to make parts for all F-35s, they’re going to have to do something about one of their “3 principles” on arms exports. Those restrictions won’t allow exports to communist countries, countries subject to arms export embargoes under U.N. Security Council resolutions, or countries involved in or likely to be involved in international conflicts. Unfortunately, many potential F-35 customers, especially in the Middle East, fall into the 3rd category.

We’re sure Israel would be perfectly happy to simply have all of the affected parts made in Israel instead, but this is going to be a wider issue. The program could always go to a “second supplier” arrangement for all Japanese parts, and Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said maintaining consistency with the ban is “under discussion within the government.” Asashi Shimbun.

Jan 30/13: Industrial. Lockheed Martin says that there are 88 F-35s of all versions in various stages of completion on the program’s production lines. When it’s delivered, AF-41 (a USAF F-35A) will become delivery #100.

Jan 28/13: Fueldraulic fault found. Flight International reports that the failure of an F-35B’s Stratoflex fueldraulic line has been traced to a failure to properly crimp it. The F-35 Program Office says that Stratoflex, Rolls-Royce and Pratt &Whitney, have “instituted corrective actions to improve their quality control processes and ensure part integrity.”

The same problem was found on 6 other aircraft, and all 7 will need to be fixed. Until a Return to Flight plan is approved, however, all 25 F-35Bs will remain grounded.

Jan 18/13: F-35B grounded. The F-35B fleet is grounded, after a fueldraulic line (q.v. DOT&E report) fails and forces the pilot to abort a takeoff. There was no danger, and the pilot simply moved his airplane off of the flight line after it happened.

The F-35A and F-35C fleets are unaffected. Bloomberg | Defense News | Flight International.

F-35B Grounded

Jan 13/13: DOT&E Report. The Pentagon’s Department of Operational Test & Evaluation submits its 2012 report, which includes 18 pages covering the F-35. The fleet continues to work through significant technical challenges, which isn’t unusual. What is unusual is the steady stream of deliveries that will have to be fixed later, in order to address mechanical and structural problems found during testing. A summary of the key statistics & challenges can be found above, in the Testing section, but 2 issues deserve special mention.

One issue is software, which may be more important to the F-35 than it is to any other fighter aircraft. Unfortunately, the software development program is late, and is straining to fix and test issues across several developmental versions. Block 1.0 software capability is only 80% delivered, and the Block 2A software for training is under 50%. Block 2B, which adds rudimentary combat capabilities for serious training, was under 10% as of August 2012. Test resources and personnel are both limited, so this problem is likely to get worse.

The other issue is weight. The F-35 was designed with little margin for weight growth, but new capabilities and fixes for testing issues often add weight. One frequent consequence is higher costs, as very expensive but lightweight materials are used to save an extra pound here and there. Another consequence reduced performance, as seen in the F-35B’s drop to 7.0 maximum Gs after its aggressive weight reduction effort. A third consequence involves ruggedness and survivability. The F-35B faced a suspension of structural fatigue life stress testing in 2012, after cracking was discovered in several places. Even this pales in comparison, however, to the fleet-wide problem created by saving just 11 pounds in all variants. Without fuelstatic flow fuses and Polyalphaolefin (PAO) coolant shutoff valves, DOT&E estimates that these flammable substances make the F-35 25% less likely to survive enemy fire. DOT&E report [PDF] | Lockheed Martin re: 2012 testing | Reuters | TIME magazine. | Washington Post.

Jan 5/13: Turkey. The Turkish SSM procurement agency decides to postpone its initial buy of 2 training and test aircraft, which were supposed to be part of the Lot 7 order (q.v. Sept 27/12 entry). The SSM cites capabilities that are behind scheduled expectations and not ready for full training, and cost concerns, while reaffirming Turkey’s long-term commitment to 100 F-35As.

The Pentagon DOT&E report is quite specific about the plane’s delivered software being unsuitable for any combat-related training or test. Block 2B software would be required for that at least, but the program has yet to deliver parts of Block 1, and the Block 2A software on current planes is also just a partial implementation. In light of that information alone, Turkey’s decision to wait seems prudent. Why incur higher costs from an earlier production lot, if the plane isn’t going to be fully useful in its intended test and training role? Turkish SSM [in Turkish, PDF] | AFP | Washington’s The Hill magazine | Turkish Weekly.

Turkey postpones planned IOT&E buy

Dec 28/12: LRIP-6. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $3.678 billion unfinalized modification to the low rate initial production lot 6 advance acquisition contract. It covers 29 American planes: 18 F-35As, 6 F-35Bs, and 7 USN F-35Cs, plus “all associated ancillary mission equipment.” LRIP-6 contracts total $5,729.6 million, and include:

• March 20/13: $9.8 (support for Australia)
  
• March 5/13: $72.2 (support infrastructure for USA, Australia, Italy)
  
• Feb 14/13: $65.0 (engine maintenance)
  
• Dec 28/12: $3,677.9 (USA 29: 18 F-35A, 6 F-35B, 7 F-35C)
  
• Dec 28/12: $735.4 (support, unfinalized)
  
• Dec 6/12: $386.7 (long-lead)
  
• March 12/12: $38.6 (F-35A long-lead)
  
• Feb 9/12: $14.6 (F-35B long-lead)
  
• Jan 6/12: $194.1 (engines)
  
• Aug 8/11: $535.3 (38 long-lead: USA 19 F-35A, 6 F-35B, 7 F-35C; Italy 4 F-35A, Australia 2 F-35A)

Long-lead items contracts can include JSF partner and foreign buys, since the material buys are basically the same. Main contracts for customers outside America are often announced separately, which explains why some are missing from the Dec 28/12 announcement. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in February 2015. $1.839 billion is committed immediately (N00019-11-C-0083).

LRIP Lot 6 main

Dec 28/12: LRIP-6 support. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $753.4 million unfinalized modification to the LRIP-6 advance acquisition contract, for one-time sustainment and logistics support. This modification also includes site stand-up and depot activation activities, Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) hardware and software, training systems, support equipment, and spares.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in December 2015. $375.2 million is committed immediately (N00019-11-C-0083).

Dec 28/12: LRIP-6 & 7 support. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $374.5 million unfinalized modification to the LRIP-6 advance acquisition contract. It covers initial spares in support of 60 F-35s from LRIP Lot 6 and LRIP Lot 7: 37 F-35As, 12 F-35B STOVL, and 11 F-35Cs.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in November 2015. Contract funds in the amount of $374,495,232 is committed immediately (N00019-11-C-0083).

Dec 28/12: Studies. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $48 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract to perform engineering, programmatic, and logistics tasks supporting investigations or studies covering various systems in the F-35 Lightning II.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to be complete in December 2015. $7.2 million is committed at the time of award. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 (N00019-13-D-0005).

Dec 28/12: LRIP-5 support. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $17.1 million unfinalized modification the LRIP Lot 5 contract. This modification buys initial air vehicle spares for LRIP-5 F-35As.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in November 2015. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13 (N00019-10-C-0002).

Dec 14/12: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $127.7 million fixed-price-incentive-fee and cost-plus-incentive-fee modification, finalizing the F-35’s LRIP Lot 5 contract for 32 planes. This contract also includes funds for manufacturing support equipment; 2 program array assemblies; ancillary mission equipment, including pilot flight equipment; preparation for ferrying the aircraft; and redesign to change parts with diminishing manufacturing sources.

Some news reports place the contract’s figures at $3.8 billion, but a review of past contracts, and conversation with Lockheed Martin, show that the entire LRIP-5 is actually $6.459 billion so far. The distribution also differs from Reuters’ report: it’s 21 F-35As, 4 F-35Bs, and 7 F-35Cs. Past awards, in millions, include:

• Dec 14/12: $127.7 (finalize)
  
• Aug 6/12: $209.8 (spares)
  
• Apr 13/12: $258.8 (add 1 F-35B, 1 F-35C for USA)
  
• March 12/12: $56.4 (support of delivery schedule)
  
• Dec 28/11: $1,122.3 (30 engines – unfinalized)
  
• Dec 27/11: $485 (production requirements, incl. some tooling)
  
• Dec 9/11: $4,011.9 (initial 30: 21 F-35A, 3 F-35B, 6 F-35C)
  
• Sept 27/11: $187 (system engineering & sustainment support)

$598.2 million in long-lead time item contracts were omitted ($522.2 million on July 6/10, and $76 million on Dec 8/10); Lockheed Martin informs DID that they were superseded by the Dec 9/11 contract for a different number of planes. So $6.459 billion is the entire LRIP-5 set so far, including planes, spares/support and tooling/ manufacturing investments (PNR). The engines, support, and PNR pieces are still unfinalized and in negotiations. For the planes themselves, the announced figures add up to about $4.398 billion ($4,011.9 + 258.8 + 127.7). That’s an average of $137.45 million per plane without engines.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be completed in October 2014. All contract funds were committed on award, and $112.9 million will expire on Sept 30/12 (N00019-10-C-0002).

LRIP Lot 5 finalized

Dec 6/12: LRIP-6 lead-in. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $386.7 million contract modification for the LRIP Lot 6 Advance Acquisition Contract. This will ease some of Lockheed Martin’s cash flow concerns, and funds ground maintenance activities; depot activation activities; ALIS operations and maintenance; reliability, maintainability and health management implementation and support; supply chain management; action request resolution; activities to provide and support pilot and maintainer initial training; and procurement of replenishment spares and depot level repairs in support of flight operations.

Work will be performed in Eglin AFB in Orlando, FL (35%); and in Ft. Worth, TX (25%); El Segundo, CA (8%); Warton, United Kingdom (5%); and various locations throughout the United States (27%); and is expected to be complete in October 2013. $193.3 million is committed immediately, $58,378,517 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-11-C-0083).

Nov 30/12: Reuters reports that the US government and Lockheed Martin have reached a preliminary $3.8 billion deal for 32 F-35s: 22 F-35As, 3 F-35Bs, and 7 F-35Cs. A deal would safeguard that contract from any sequestration cuts, but engines and some other items would still need to be bought separately.

Lockheed spokesman Michael Rein quoted a 14% reduction in labor costs from LRIP Lot 4 to Lot 5, and said that the overall cost would be lower in total. That second assurance is important, because materials costs are subject to inflation. He also said that Lot 5 aircraft would be over 50% less expensive than LRIP-1’s $220.8 million figure, which doesn’t square with the $118.8 million average cost of the reported Lot 6 deal. F-35B/C aircraft will push the price up, however, so Lot 1 vs. Lot 5 isn’t an apples to apples comparison.

Lockheed Martin has delivered 48 F-35s so far (19 development, 29 LRIP), and is pushing to meet its goal of 30 delivered in 2012. Near-term funding for Lot 6 remains a concern, however (q.v. Oct 25/12 entry).

Nov 20/12: 1st Front-Line Squadron. Marine All Weather Fighter Attack Squadron 121 (VFMA-121), formerly an F/A-18 Hornet squadron, is re-designated as the world’s first operational F-35 squadron, of any type. For now, the “squadron” is just 3 F-35Bs, but that will grow. They will be part of the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, AZ. MCAS Yuma.

1st F-35 Squadron

Nov 22/12: Canada. Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose tells Canada’s House of Commons that Canada’s “review of options will not be constrained by the previous statement of requirements.” That seems minor, but it isn’t. DND’s requirements had been crafted to make the F-35 the only available choice, per the department’s standard pattern. Breaking that lock opens up other options like the Eurofighter, Super Hornet, etc.

Subsequent reports that Canada has canceled the F-35 are premature. Much will depend on the people picked to conduct the review of options. See “Canada Preparing to Replace its CF-18 Hornets” for full coverage.

Nov 16/12: ALIS. Reuters reports that ALIS is at 94% of final capability, but a changing computing landscape has bitten it. A Navy “Red Team” hacked into the ALIS system. ALIS reportedly includes both classified and unclassified data streams, and the 2001 specifications didn’t require separating them to prevent intrusions. That kind of failure to plan for computer attacks doesn’t reflect especially well on all concerned, and it was reportedly all the Navy team needed.

Lockheed Martin was surprised by the result, but say that they’ve developed a “fairly straightforward fix” that did not require major adjustments to ALIS. The bad news? The political exercise of choosing F-35 suppliers in nearly every U.S. state, and beyond the USA, increases general exposure to cyber attacks.

The latest version of ALIS has been in use at Edwards AFB, CA for several months. It’s also scheduled to be used by the Marines at Yuma, CA this year, and by Nellis AFB, NV when Lockheed delivers 4 F-35s for testing within the next month or 2. Meanwhile, The Pentagon is looking to compete ALIS operation, and F-35 maintenance, beyond Lockheed Martin, in an attempt to drive down rising Operations & Maintenance cost projections. Reuters.

Nov 5/12: Affordability. USN Rear Adm. (ret.) Craig Steidle pens an op-ed in Aviation Week. Steidle was the 2nd director of the JSF Program Office, from August 1995 – August 1997. He writes:

“…as the program moved on, the focus on affordability atrophied. Both the government and contractor were at fault. What began as a core pillar didn’t evolve into a culture… In 2008-10, I had the privilege to chair several Independent Manufacturing Review Team (IMRT) assessments of the F-35 program… The kind of cost-avoidance program that should have encompassed lean and producibility initiatives and other affordability improvements did not exist, nor was it asked for. The statements of work that we reviewed did not incorporate cost reduction. Difficulties were to be expected, but resolving development issues had diverted attention from cost control.”

He does say that the current F-35 program leadership has made progress, adding that the F-35 will have “a system performance beyond our initial expectations.” Time will tell.

Oct 30/12: Dutch delay. Instead of trying to gather a majority among the second-tier parties, the Dutch VVD and its largest opponent, the PvdA Labour Party, elect to form a national unity coalition with 79/ 150 seats.

They don’t agree about the F-35, but they do agree that the recent Rekenkamer report requires a full reconsideration of Dutch defense policy and commitments by the end of 2013. Once that’s done, there’s reportedly some language about a “competitive” evaluation of alternatives in 2014, leading to a contract in 2015 as planned. The parties agreed that the 2014 evaluation will include operations and support (O&S) costs, while a 2nd agreement will create a forensic inquiry into why Parliament wasn’t informed of the 390% cost explosion between 2001 and 2012 for 30 years of F-35 O&S (q.v. Oct 24/12 entry).

Depending on the exact wording of the coalition agreement, and on how vigorously the PvdA asserts itself, those agreements may just be a stalling tactic toward lock-in, and a drastically reduced fighter fleet with much smaller responsibilities. There are a number of ways to blunt the accuracy and impact of an O&S assessment, and true competition in 2014 requires a specific procedure. The forensic inquiry will put the MvD in the spotlight, and the VVD party is also at risk, but the VVD would not have accepted a suicide pact. The best bet is an inquiry that mirrors the recent farce in Canada: bureaucratic stonewalling, and refusal of responsibility by all parties. In the meantime, more contracts let to Dutch firms could have the effect of raising termination costs if the country pulls out of the F-35 program. Atlantic Sentinel | defense-aerospace.com

Oct 26/12: EVM penalty. The Pentagon is withholding $46.5 million from Lockheed Martin over Earned Value Management system deficiencies, subtracting 5% of periodic billings against the LRIP-4 and LRIP-5 contracts, and Israel’s F-35i development contract.

Lockheed Martin’s EVM certification at Fort Worth, TX was yanked in October 2010. They have a corrective plan to return to full EVM compliance, but haven’t restored their certification yet. Bloomberg.

Oct 25/12: LMCO 10-Q. Lockheed Martin’s 10-Q filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission says that they are still working to restore the Defense Contracting Management Agency’s (DCMA) earned value management system (EVMS) at the Fort Worth, TX facility. Relations with the US government are actually quite tense overall, and the firm mentions the ongoing failure of contract restructuring negotiations to tie fees to milestones. Not to mention disagreements between contractor and government assessments for the milestones that already exist. Then there’s the issue of payment risk hanging over the program:

“The development portion of the F-35 program is expected to continue into 2017 and currently has approximately $530 million of incentive fees remaining… While our customer has delayed funding for LRIP Lot 6 until the LRIP Lot 5 contract is negotiated, we and our industry team have continued to work in an effort to meet our customer’s desired aircraft delivery dates for the LRIP Lot 6 aircraft. As a result, we have approximately $400 million in potential termination liability exposure as of September 30, 2012. If we are unable to obtain additional funding by year-end, the potential termination liability exposure is estimated to be $1.1 billion and our cash exposure would be approximately $250 million… In the quarter ended September 30, 2012, 12 LRIP Lot 3 aircraft were delivered to the U.S. Government. We have received orders for 95 production aircraft, of which 26 have been delivered through the quarter ended September 30, 2012.”

Lockheed Martin received a $489.5 million contract for Lot 6 long-lead parts on June 15/12. It isn’t clear if those funds have been released, or are being held up over negotiations. See: 10-Q SEC filing | Reuters.

Oct 24/12: Dutch Report. The Dutch Rekenkamer national auditing office releases their report covering the proposed F-35 buy. A decision to buy or reject the F-35A must be made by 2015, per earlier agreements with the US government and Lockheed Martin, but the F-35A IOT&E and arrival of operational Block 3 software will take until 2019, which means another round of testing after 2019. Initial Operational Capability (IOC) would wait until 2022, and it would be at least 2027 (a 6-year slip from 2021) before the Dutch could retire their F-16s.

The bottom line is that even in a study that confined itself to unaudited figures provided by the Dutch government and industry, it’s clear that the planned EUR 4.05 billion Dutch buy won’t be able to afford 68 F-35s, let alone the 85 planned. The MvD is now talking about just 56 planes, and extrapolation using the report’s own charts and Pentagon figures suggests a figure closer to 42-48 F-35As. As the Rekenkamer points out, it isn’t possible to execute the Luchtmacht’s current responsibilities with those numbers. Which means the Netherlands will need to rethink and reduce its long-term defense and alliance commitments. Operations & support (O&S) projections, exclusive of fuel, add even more weight to that conclusion. The 30-year figure has risen from the initial 2001 figure of EUR 2.9 billion for 85, to the 2012 figure of EUR 14.2 billion. It only drops to EUR 13.2 billion at 68 aircraft, and that non-linear drop makes it likely that O&M costs for a fleet of 42-48 F-35As, over 30 years, would be well over EUR 200 million per plane.

Option #2, which involves withdrawing from the testing phase, gets a negative recommendation. The Rekenkamer thinks it wouldn’t make operational or financial sense, since monies “saved” would just create new costs later in the F-16 fleet. They’re almost certainly correct.

Option #3 would involve withdrawing from the F-35 program before 2015, and buying another fighter off the shelf. This could expose the government to termination claims, with Dutch firms filing claims against major F-35 contractors under US Federal Acquisition Regulations, who will go to the US government for payment, who would go to the Dutch government under the JSF program’s 2010 MoU (pp. 28, 117). The Rekenkamer believes that taking this option would also require a reconsideration of the Luchtmacht’s medium-term responsibilities, since it would require operating the F-16 fleet for longer.

That last conclusion may not be correct. The most likely alternative that could offer more fighters, the JAS-39E/F Gripen, isn’t scheduled to enter Swedish service until 2023. Which would push full retirement of the Dutch F-16s beyond 2027. The Swiss are getting leased JAS-39C/Ds as a bridge to their 22 JAS-39Es, however, and Saab could conceivably make the Dutch a similar offer that let them retire the Luchtmacht F-16s in 2027 as planned. The Eurofighter or Rafale would offer similar or greater costs compared to the F-35A, but either aircraft could be delivered and operational several years earlier than the F-35A or the JAS-39E/F. DID’s estimate is that a 2015 contract signing could give the Dutch a Rafale/ Typhoon IOC of 2018, and full retirement of Dutch F-16s by 2022-23. “Uitstapkosten Joint Strike Fighter,” incl. links to full reports [all in Dutch] | JSF Nieuws [in Dutch] | DID thanks VNC Communication for their assistance.

Dutch F-35 report

Oct 19/12: Engines. United Technologies’ Pratt and Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT wins an $81.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for services and materials for the preliminary design, detailed design, and engine performance testing in support of the F135 Fuel Burn Reduction Program. The objective of the program is to demonstrate a 5% mission weighted fuel burn reduction in a F135 experimental engine configuration.

Competition can produce the same kinds of benefits, of course, but the Pentagon has chosen not to do that.

Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete in July 2016. This contract was competitively procured via Broad Agency Announcement, and 3 offers were received by the US Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Lakehurst, NJ (N68335-13-C-0005).

Oct 9/12: Italy. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX received a $28.6 million advance acquisition contract modification, buying long lead-time parts, material and components required to protect the delivery schedule of Italy’s 4 F-35As in LRIP Lot 7 (FY 2013).

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be completed in June 2013. Note that El Segundo is Northrop Grumman’s work, and Warton is BAE’s (N00019-12-C-0004).

Sept 27/12: LRIP-7 Engine lead-in. United Technologies’ Pratt & Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT receives an estimated $89.2 million for long-lead components, parts and materials associated with the 37 engines in LRIP Lot 7. The rest of the contract will follow, but initial purchases involve:

• USAF: 19 F135-PW-100 base model ($38 million, 43%)
  
• Italy: 3 F135 CTOL ($6 million, 7%)
  
• Norway: 2 F135 CTOL ($4 million, 4.5%)
  
• Turkey: 2 F135 CTOL ($4 million, 4.5%)
  
• US Navy: 4 F135-PW-100 Carrier Variant ($35.2 million, 39% for US/ USMC)
  
• USMC: 6 F-135-PW-600 Short Take-off and Vertical Landing with Roll Royce’s LiftFan
  
• Britain: 1 F135 STOVL ($2 million, 2%)

Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT (67%); Bristol, United Kingdom (16.5%); and Indianapolis, IN (16.5%), and is expected to be complete in September 2013. This contract was not competitively procured (N00019-12-C-0060).

FY 2012

F-35A armed test
(click to view full)

Sept 26/12: LRIP-3 changes. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $25.9 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification to add authorized concurrency changes for USAF F-35As in LRIP Lot 3. Many concurrency changes are going to involve software, but they can also involve mechanical changes. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to span multiple years (N00019-08-C-0028).

Sept 26/12: Simulators & RCS. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $79.9 million advance acquisition contract modification to buy 6 F-35 Lightening II Full Mission Simulators, and a radar upgrade at Hill AFB, UT to support of F-35 radar cross section testing.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in April 2015. $716,700 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-10-C-0002).

Sept 20/12: Sub-contractors. Northrop Grumman Corporation enters into a long-term agreement (LTA) with Denmark’s Terma A/S, worth more than $95 million through 2019. The LTA covers production of 34 unique F-35 Lightning II composite components, including doors, panels, skin assembly, and straps through 2019.

This is actually an extension of a partnership that began in 2006. Terma A/S has been producing F-35 components since the LRIP-1 order in 2007. NGC.

Sept 12/12: Dutch Elections. Elections leave the pro-JSF coalition slightly ahead in some respects, but the VVD (+10 seats) and CDA (-8 seats) end up needing 22 more votes to have a 76-vote majority in favor of the F-35. Support from Geert Wilders’ PVV, plus the Christian Democratic leaning CU and SGP, could get them to 77. Wikipedia.

Sept 6/12: Japan’s 4, for much more. More cost hikes for Japan, as Defense Ministry officials cite “lower production efficiency” as the reason its first 4 F-35As will soar again to YEN 15.4 billion (about $195 million) per plane. As a result, the ministry is looking to find the full YEN 30.8 billion, in order to cover the 2 fighters planned for the FY 2013 budget request. The Japan Times.

Aug 28/12: Israel. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Ft. Worth, TX receives a $206.8 million cost-reimbursement contract modification to pay for Phase I Increment 1, of Israel’s F-35i System Development and Demonstration. This modification includes the development of hardware and software, from the initial requirements development to the Preliminary Design Review (PDR). In addition, a hardware-only post PDR will continue through finalized requirements, layouts, and build to prints, including production planning data.

Note that Pentagon contract announcements are often for the 40-50% of the total expected costs, in order to get work underway. As such, previous figures of $450 million to add Israeli radio, datalink, and electronic warfare systems could still be true. Work will be performed at Fort Worth, TX (60%); Los Angeles, CA (20%); Nashua, NH (15%); and San Diego, CA (5%), and is expected to be complete in May 2016. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD will manage this effort, on behalf of its Israeli Foreign Military Sale client (N00019-12-C-0070).

F-35i SDD begins

Aug 7/12: LRIP-5. United Technologies subsidiary Pratt & Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT receives a $9.6 million contract modification to LRIP Lot 5/ FY 2011 fixed-price incentive and cost-plus-incentive contract line items. It funds part of the cost of 2 F135 engines, plus associated engineering assistance to production, a mock-up engine, slave modules for engine depot test cells at Tinker Air Force Base, initial stand-up repair capabilities at Hill Air Force Base; and additional contractor logistics support. Support will take place at the Fort Worth, TX, and Palmdale, CA, production sites, and at Eglin AFB, Yuma AFB, Nellis AFB, and Edwards AFB.

Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT (67%); Bristol, United Kingdom (17%); and Indianapolis, IN (16%), and is expected to be complete in February 2014.Funding will be released as needed (N00019-10-C-0005).

Aug 6/12: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a not-to-exceed $209.8 million contract modification for initial spares to support 32 F-35 LRIP Lot 5/ FY 2011 fighters.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%), and is expected to be complete in June 2015 (N00019-10-C-0002).

June 20/12: LRIP-7 Norway. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $20.1 million advance acquisition contract to provide long lead-time parts, material and components required for Norway’s 2 F-35As ordered in LRIP-7/ FY 2013.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%). Work is expected to be complete in June 2013. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 (N00019-12-C-0004).

July 2-5/12: Netherlands. A parliamentary majority opposed to buying the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter has emerged in the Netherlands. Despite lobbying from the MvD, and 2 planes ordered already, the issue came to a vote, and the motion to withdraw from the program was upheld.

Because the government has technically dissolved, this vote doesn’t pull the Netherlands out yet. What it does say is that unless the VVD and SDA parties can form a majority in the next election, the Dutch F-35 buy is in serious danger. The cost of ending the country’s Tier 2 participation in the program could hit EUR 1 billion. Then again, if reported figures regarding Saab’s JAS-39E/F Gripen offer are true, Dutch government budgets could still come out ahead. Industry may be less happy.

June 29/12: Japan. Buy 4, for more. Officials from Japan’s defense ministry say that they have agreed to terms for their first 4 F-35As. Delayed American orders for 179 planes mean that Japan’s planes will reportedly cost 9.6 billion yen (about $120 million) each, up from the original plan of $110 million. That makes the Japanese contract a good bellwether for the real base cost of an F-35A in the near future.

Fortunately for the Japanese, the overall contract remained at the expected YEN 60 billion (about $752.4 million). The cost of the 2 simulators and other equipment dropped to YEN 19.1 billion ($240.83 million) from the expected YEN 20.5 billion. Read “Japan’s Next Fighters: F-35 Wins The F-X Competition” for full coverage.

Japan: 4 of 42

June 15/12: LRIP-6. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $489.5 million advance acquisition contract to provide long lead-time parts, material and components required for the delivery of 35 LRIP-6 fighters. The order involves 19 USAF F-35As, 3 F-35As for the government of Italy, 2 F-35As for the government of Turkey, 6 USMC F-35B STOVL(Short Take-Off Vertical Landing) fighters, 1 F-35B for Britain, and 4 F-35Cs for the US Navy.

This contract also funds long lead-time efforts required for the addition of a drag chute to Norway’s F-35As, which will be ordered as part of LRIP-7 in 2013. Drag chutes are especially useful when landing in cold climates, where runways and tires may fail to provide the same level of traction.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%); and is expected to be complete in June 2013. This contract was not competitively procured, pursuant to US FAR 6.302-1, by US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD (N00019-12-C-0004).

June 15/12: Norway OK. Norway takes the next step, and formally authorizes the purchase of 2 F-35A fighters, which are intended for delivery in 2015. They will be based in the United States as part of a joint partner training center, which almost certainly means Eglin AFB, FL. The 2 aircraft authorized today are expected to be joined by a second pair in 2016. They are to be followed by up to 48 additional aircraft orders from 2017, which will be based at Orland AB and Evenes FOB in Norway.

This is not a contract yet, but one can be expected in FY 2013. Meanwhile, American support for internal F-35 integration of the JSM strike missile allows Norway to begin preparing it for deployment.

The overall cost of Norway’s F-35’s procurement phase is estimated at NOK 60 billion/ $FY12 10 billion in real terms. This is very good news for Lockheed Martin, which is working through a 2-month long extended strike by its machinists, and a harsh US GAO report concerning the F-35’s progress. Norwegian MoD | Business Insider | Fort Worth Star-Telegram | WFAA Dallas.

Norwegian go-ahead

June 14/12: Norway. Norway’s Storting (parliament) approves a significant increase in defense spending, with the F-35 purchase playing a central role. The country will also be making investments in modernizing and adding CV90 tracked armored vehicles, and purchasing UAVs.

Overall, Norway will see a budget increase of 7% by 2016. Monies spent of the Afghan deployment will be continued and redirected, while “significant” supplementary funds will be added for the F-35 purchase. Source.

June 14/12: US GAO Report. Congress’ Government Accountability Office delivers a report on the F-35 program. Key excerpts from GAO-12-437: “Joint Strike Fighter – DOD Actions Needed to Further Enhance Restructuring and Address Affordability Risks” :

“The new program baseline projects total acquisition costs of $395.7 billion, an increase of $117.2 billion (42%) from the prior 2007 baseline. Full rate production is now planned for 2019, a delay of 6 years from the 2007 baseline. Unit costs per aircraft have doubled since start of development in 2001… Since 2002, the total quantity through 2017 has been reduced by three-fourths, from 1,591 to 365. Affordability is a key challenge… Overall performance in 2011 was mixed as the program achieved 6 of 11 important objectives… Late software releases and concurrent work on multiple software blocks have delayed testing and training. Development of critical mission systems providing core combat capabilities remains behind schedule and risky… Most of the instability in the program has been and continues to be the result of highly concurrent development, testing, and production activities. Cost overruns on the first four annual procurement contracts total more than $1 billion and aircraft deliveries are on average more than 1 year late. Program officials said the government’s share of the cost growth is $672 million; this adds about $11 million to the price of each of the 63 aircraft under those contract.”

June 13/12: Infrastructure. R.L. Reed, Inc. in Las Vegas, NV wins an $11.1 million firm-fixed-price contract, to build an F-35A aerospace ground equipment facility at Nellis AFB, NV. Work is expected to finish by Dec 10/13. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 15 bids received by The US Army Corps of Engineers in Los Angles, CA (W912PL-12-C-0010).

June 4/12: Support. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives an $111.6 million cost reimbursement contract modification, which adds more funding for recurring support activities such as initial training, aircraft maintenance operations, stand-up of sustainment capability at specified locations, technical data management, and sustaining engineering for the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force.

Work will be performed at Eglin AFB, FL (60%); and in Fort Worth, TX (15%); El Segundo, CA (5%); Warton, United Kingdom (5%); Orlando, FL (5%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%). Work is expected to be complete in October 2012, but $45.2 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-10-C-0002).

May 31/12: Norway JSM. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $19.8 million contract modification, funding a Joint Strike Missile (JSM) Risk Reduction Study for the Norway Ministry of Defence. Efforts include physical fit checks, wind tunnel tests, engineering analysis, and designing and building of an emulator and adapter to determine next steps in integrating the JSM into the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

These monies will be applied to the fixed-price-incentive-fee, firm target F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter LRIP-4/ FY 2010 contract. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (70%); Arnold AFB in Tullahoma, TN (20%); and Kongsberg, Norway (10%); and is expected to be complete in May 2014 (N00019-09-C-0010).

May 7/12: LRIP-4 Concurrency. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $237,740,000 fixed-price-incentive-fee, firm target contract modification to the LRIP-4/ FY 2010 contract, in order to raise the limit for government-authorized changes to the plane’s configuration baseline hardware or software. This modification increases the concurrency cap for the USAF’s and Netherlands’ F-35As; USMC’s and Britain’s F-35Bs; and US Navy F-35Cs.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to span multiple years, but $222.6 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. This contract modification combines purchases for the Navy ($153.2M/ 64.5%); USAF ($69.4M/ 29%); the United Kingdom ($8.2M/ 3.5%); and the Netherlands ($6.9M/ 3%), under contract N00019-09-C-0010.

May 10/12: Britain. Britain’s government confirms long-standing rumors that it would abandon the F-35C and its associated catapult modifications to 1 carrier, returning to the ski-jump deck and F-35B STOVL variant. That will mean reversions and changes to the carriers’ evolved design and lighting, some of which were described in the Jan 25/12 entry. Aircraft are less affected. The UK had already ordered and paid for an F-35B test plane, before the switch to the F-35C. Those flights will now continue, and F-35B flight trials are scheduled to begin from a British carrier in 2018.

A DSTL report has explained some of the capabilities Britain would lose by abandoning the F-35C, but the government justifies their decision by saying that the F-35C’s improved capabilities and compatibility with American and French carriers would come at too steep a cost. Staying with the F-35C, they say, would delay Britain’s return to carrier capability from 2020 – 2023 or later, cost nearly GBP 2 billion to modify 1 of their 2 carriers, and leave the Royal Navy with no carrier capability if their converted ship needs maintenance. In contrast, the F-35B will be compatible with the US Marines and with Italy, and gives Britain the option of taking its 2nd CVF carrier out of strategic reserve, and using it when the primary carrier is out of service for long refits or maintenance dockings. UK MoD.

Britain back to F-35B

May 3-9/12: Australia. Australia’s Defense Force will delay buying 12 new F-35As by 2 years (Project AIR 6000, Phase 2A/B, Stage 2), and delay the 4th Australian squadron (Phase 2C) by one more year, under the Labor Party government’s deficit-reduction plan.

They’ve committed to buy 2 initial F-35As for delivery in 2014-15, but those 2 will remain in the United States for testing and pilot training. The next 12 planes would have been based in Australia. Their Year of Decision will now be 2014-15 for the next 12, which may also cover the Phase 2B buy of 58. Delivery of those planes isn’t expected until 2017-2019 now, which means that RAAF F-35As won’t be flying in Australia until around 2020. The AIR 6000 Phase 2C decision to add another 24 F-35s, and raise Australia’s total buy to 96, won’t happen until 2018-19. Australian DMO Project page | Australian Aviation | Australian Aviation follow-up | The Australian | Bloomberg | Canada’s Globe & Mail.

Australia delays

May 1/12: Japan. May 1/12: The US DSCA formally announces Japan’s official request for an initial set of 4 Lockheed Martin F-35As, with an option to buy another 38 and bring the deal to 42 aircraft. “The Japan Air Self-Defense Force’s F-4 aircraft will be decommissioned as F-35’s [sic] are added to the inventory.”

The estimated cost is $10 billion, which works out to $238.1 million per plane. Until a set of contracts are signed, it’s hard to split that accurately between purchase and support costs, and long support deals can add a lot to costs. Japan is also interested in considerably more local assembly than most of F-35 buyers, which is likely to add a number of unique costs of its own. Read “Japan’s Next Fighters: F-35 Wins The F-X Competition” for full coverage.

Japan request

April 24/12: LRIP-2 Concurrency. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $68.3 million modification to the previously awarded cost-plus-incentive-fee F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) LRIP-2/ FY 2008 contract, to raise the limit for government-authorized changes to the plane’s configuration baseline hardware or software. This contract combines purchases for the USAF ($37.7M/ 55.2%) and the US Navy ($30.6M/ 44.8%)

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to span multiple years. (N00019-07-C-0097)

April 24/12: LRIP-3 Concurrency. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $45.9 million modification to the previously awarded cost-plus-incentive-fee LRIP-3 contract, to raise the limit for government-authorized changes to the plane’s configuration baseline hardware or software. This contract combines purchases for the US Navy ($37.5M/ 77.8%) and the United Kingdom ($10.2M/ 22.2%).

At this point, both navies were still committed to the F-35C. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX and is expected to span multiple years (N00019-08-C-0028)

April 13/12: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $258.8 million not-to-exceed undefinitized modification to the LRIP-5/ FY 2011 contract adding 1 USAF F-35A and 1 USN F-35C. The modification includes undefinitized line items, which will be finalized as fixed-price-incentive-firm contract line items.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%); and is expected to be complete in February 2014. Funds will be released as needed (N00019-10-C-0002).

April 3/12: F-35 schedule & costs. Aviation Week’s Bill Sweetman takes a deep look into the Pentagon’s latest Selected Acquisition Reports, which was released on March 30/12. Excerpts:

“Another three-year slip to initial operational test and evaluation, the culmination of system development and demonstration, which now is due to be complete in 2019 – the target date is February but the threshold date is October… it appears that the main culprit is software and hardware, mainly in terms of… sensor fusion and emission control – that take place in the fighter’s main processor banks… In what follows, I’m going to use average procurement unit cost (APUC)… recurring flyaway is the lowest cost, but neither the US nor anyone else can put an aircraft on the ramp for that money. And all numbers are base-2012… The APUC for the F-35A in 2013-14 is $184-$188 million, versus $177m (2009 dollars) for the last F-22s. And that is at a much higher production rate.”

Most ominously for the F-35’s future cost structure:

“Although the basis of the numbers has been changed, the SAR still compares the F-35A with the F-16, and shows that the estimated CPFH [DID: Cost Per Flight Hour] for the F-35A has gone from 1.22 F-16s in the 2010 SAR to 1.42 today – versus 0.8 F-16s, which was being claimed a few years ago. Where is that operations and support money going to come from?”

SAR: dates slip, O&M rises

April 2/12: The Future of Stealth? A Japan Today article goes straight to the main military point at stake: the future effectiveness of stealth technologies:

“As more nations develop stealth fighters, then the use of radar as the main target acquisition device will be taken over by infrared, wake tracking, electro-optics, and radio/electronic chatter detection – thereby side-stepping radar stealth features – in short order.”

It’s a bit more complex than that, especially given the fact that stealth tends to be optimized for certain frequencies, so radars will still play a role. Still, the falling cost of high-bandwidth networking, and the need for a counter to stealth technologies, does suggest a range of countermeasures over the coming decades.

March 30/12: Infrastructure. Small business qualifier Head, Inc. in Columbus, OH receives a $17 million firm-fixed-price contract to build 5 vertical landing pads and associated supporting taxiways at Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, SC, which will base F-35Bs.

Work is expected to be complete by August 2013. This contract was competitively procured via the Navy Electronic Commerce Online website, with 12 proposals received by Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southeast in Jacksonville, FL (N69450-12-C-1758).

March 20/12: Infrastructure. Harper Construction Co., Inc., San Diego, CA wins a pair of firm-fixed-price task order under a multiple award construction contract, to build the 2-story aircraft maintenance hangars at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, AZ. The buildings will include a high bay space for F-35Bs, crew and equipment space, administrative space and Special Access Program Facility areas for the Automatic Logistics Information System (ALIS) fleet maintenance program.

Task order 003 for the south hangar is $33.2 million, and a planned modification could increase the contract to $35 million (N62473-10-D-5406, 0004).

Task order 004 for the north hangar is $36.7 million, and a planned modification could increase the contract to $38.6 million (N62473-10-D-5406, 0004).

Work is expected to be complete by May 2014, and 9 proposals were received for each task order by US Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southwest in San Diego, CA

March 12/12: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $56.4 million cost reimbursement contract modification, adding funding for support efforts necessary to meet F-35 LRIP Lot 5’s requirements and delivery schedule.

Work will be performed in Eglin Air Force Base, FL (60%); Fort Worth, TX (15%); El Segundo, CA (5%); Warton, United Kingdom (5%); Orlando, FL (5%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%); and is expected to be complete in May 2012. $18.7 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-10-C-0002).

March 12/12: LRIP-6. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $38.6 million modification to the previously awarded low rate initial production Lot 6 advance acquisition contract to provide additional funding for the procurement of long lead items for F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter low rate initial production conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) aircraft for the USAF, and for the governments of Italy and Australia.

Work, which will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, is necessary to protect the delivery schedules of CTOL aircraft planned for delivery through January 2015 (N00019-11-C-0083).

March 9/12: Reprogramming Lab. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $24.1 million cost-reimbursement contract modification to develop a data farm for the Joint Strike Fighter US Reprogramming Laboratory at Eglin AFB, FL. It will take feeds from the lab’s existing equipment, and store software and data from the F-35’s mission data testing.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (95%), and Orlando, FL (5%), and is expected to be complete in November 2014. Contract funds will be released as needed (N00019-02-C-3002).

Feb 23/12: Turkey. Turkish Defence Minister Ismet Yilmaz says that they’re sticking to plans to buy 100 of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jets for $16 billion, but could change those numbers or the timing of their orders, depending on how negotiations go.

Turkey’s development phase payments have reportedly hit $315 million so far. Reuters.

Feb 15/12: Italian cuts. Italian Defense Minister Giampaolo Di Paola tells a joint defense committee of both houses of parliament that Italy is cutting its planned F-35 purchases from 131 to 90, as part of a range of military austerity measures. A review had indicated 1/3 fewer planes would do, but given Italy’s needs all of those cuts are almost certain to be air force jets.

Di Paola said that Italy had spent EUR 2.5 billion/ $3.3 billion on the program so far. Bloomberg.

Italy cuts

Feb 9/12: LRIP-6. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $14.8 million contract modification, to buy long lead items for the USMC’s LRIP-6/ FY 2012 buy of F-35B fighters. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX, and is necessary to protect the delivery schedules of STOVL aircraft planned for delivery through December 2014 (N00019-11-C-0083)

Jan 6/12: LRIP-6 engines. United Technologies subsidiary Pratt & Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT receives a $194.1 million advance acquisition contract with fixed-price line items for long lead components, parts, and materials required for the delivery of 37 LRIP Lot 6 engines. They will equip the USMC (6 F-135-600s with LiftFan, $84.7M/ 43.6%); USAF (18 F135-100s, $54.9M/ 28.3%); USN (7 F135-100 naval, $37.1M/ 19.1%); Italian Air Force (4 F135-100s, $11.6M/ 6%); and Royal Australian Air Force (2 F135-100s, $5.8M/ 3%); and associated spares.

Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT (64%); Bristol, UK (25%); and Indianapolis, IN (11%), and is expected to be complete in September 2012. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 USC. 2304c1 (N00019-11-C-0082).

USN F-35C & F/A-18E,
jet blast testing
(click to view full)

Dec 28/11: LRIP-5 engines. Pratt & Whitney Military Engines in East Hartford, CT receives a $1.122 billion unfinalized, not-to-exceed contract modification for LRIP Lot V’s engines. The contract includes both fixed price incentive and cost plus incentive contract line items, and covers 21 F135 engines for the USAF’s F-35As ($520.7M / 46.3%), 3 F135 LiftFan engines for the USMC’s F-35Bs ($387.1M / 34.5% is the figure given), 6 F135s for the Navy’s F-35Cs ($166.7M/ 14.9%), plus the usual support and spares for the US and F-35 Co-operative Partners ($47.8M Co-operative Partner Participants/ 4.3%). A total of $358.6 million is committed immediately.

One wonders if the USN & USMC figures were transposed, but the finalized contract will offer more clarity. Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT (67%); Bristol, United Kingdom (16.5%); and Indianapolis, IN (16.5%), and is expected to be complete in February 2014 (N00019-10-C-0005).

Dec 27/11: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $485 million not-to-exceed cost-plus-fixed-fee unfinalized contract modification, with $131.5 million obligated at time of award. The contract covers LRIP Lot 5 production requirements, including special tooling/special test equipment, and subcontractor technical assistance. This contract combines purchases for the USAF ($186.7M/ 38.5%); the US Navy ($186.7M/ 38.5%); and JSF Cooperative Partner participants ($111.5M/ 23%).

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (30%); El Segundo, CA (20%); Wharton, United Kingdom (20%); Turin, Italy (15%); Nashua, NH (8%); and Baltimore, MD (7%); and is expected to be complete in December 2013 (N00019-10-C-0002)

Dec 27/11: LRIP-4. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $253 million cost-plus-incentive-fee and cost-plus-fixed-fee modification to finalize the previous LRIP-4/ FY 2010 support contract. This contract covers the US Navy ($140.3M/ 55.5%), the USAF (89.1M/ 35.2%), and the JSF “Cooperative Program participants” ($23.6M/ 9.3%).

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (35%); El Segundo, CA (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, FL (10%); Nashua, NH (5%); and Baltimore, MD (5%); and is expected to be complete in May 2014. $169.7 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-09-C-0010).

Dec 20/11: Japan win. Japan’s Ministry of Defense announces that Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II has won the F-X competitive bid process for 42 planes. The initial contract will be for 4 F-35A jets in Japan Fiscal Year 2012, which begins April 1/12. Deliveries are expected to begin in 2016. Read “Japan’s Next Fighters: F-35 Wins The F-X Competition” for full coverage.

Japan win

Dec 9/11: LRIP-5. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $4.0119 billion fixed-price-incentive, firm target, FPIF contract modification for 30 LRIP Lot 5 fighters for the USAF (21 F-35As, $2.644 b/ 65.9%); the US Navy (6 F-35Cs, $937.3M/ 23.3%) and the US Marine Corps (3 F-35Bs, $426.2M/ 10.6%). In addition, this modification funds associated ancillary mission equipment and flight test instrumentation for those aircraft, and flight test instrumentation for the United Kingdom ($4.1M/ 0.1%). All efforts will be contracted for on a FPIF basis, with the exception of work scope for the incorporation of certain specified concurrency changes that will be contracted for on a cost-sharing/no-fee basis.

Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX (67%); El Segundo, CA (14%); Warton, United Kingdom (9%); Orlando, FL (4%); Nashua, NH (3%); and Baltimore, MD (3%), and is expected to be complete in January 2014 (N00019-10-C-0002).

LRIP Lot 5 main

Additional Readings & Sources Aircraft Background

• DID FOCUS Article – F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: 2009-2010. At present, there is no coverage for 2011.

• DID FOCUS Article – F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: Events & Contracts 2007-08

• DID FOCUS Article – F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: SDD Contracts & Events FY 2006.

• F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program site. For other news that includes testing results and other areas not covered by contracts, see the news section.

• JSF Program Office – JSF Production, Sustainment and Follow-on Development MoU [PDF], update 4.

• Lockheed Martin – F-35 Lightning II. Includes sections covering topics such as Earned Value Management, testing, partnerships, manufacturing, etc.

• Air Force Technology – JSF (F35) Joint Strike Fighter, International

• Aerospaceweb – F-35 JSF Weapon Carriage Capacity. Good discussion of the 3 versions and their specific limiting factors.

• JSF UK Industry Team site.

• UK Parliamentary Defence Committee. An important source of information re: Tier 1 partner Britain’s future participation in the F-35 program.

• Pratt & Whitney – F135. The F-35’s current engine.

• DID – The F136 alternative engine was eventually terminated, over the objections of the government’s GAO auditors.

• Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine (May 15/08) – X to F: F-35 Lightning II And Its X-35 Predecessors.

Aircraft Ancillaries

• DID – You Can Track Your F-35s, At ALIS’ Maintenance Hub. Possibly the F-35’s most important ancillary system.

• Martin Baker – US16E – JSF. The plane’s ejection seat. See the “F-35 Program: Ancillary and Sub-contracts” section’s Nov 12/07 entry for further details that explain why this was such a challenging design.

• Lockheed Martin Code One magazine (Q2 2006) – The New Front Office: A Whole New View For Joint Strike Fighter Pilots. Describes the new cockpit and its related technologies.

• Vision Systems International – F-35 Gen II HMDS. Helmet Mounted Display System.

• Siemens – F-35 Case Study. Involves their FiberSim product, which helps with the design & coordination of composite parts.

• Fighter Country – Hundreds of F-35 aircraft suppliers coordinate with Teamcenter

Official Reports

• US GAO (March 11/13, #GAO-13-309) – Current Outlook Is Improved, but Long-Term Affordability Is a Major Concern.

• Pentagon OT&E (Feb 15/13) – F-35A Joint Strike Fighter: Readiness for Training Operational Utility Evaluation [PDF]

• Pentagon OT&E (Jan 17/13) – FY2012 Annual Report: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter [PDF].

• Dutch Rekenkamer Audit Agency (Oct 24/12) – Uitstapkosten Joint Strike Fighter,” incl. links to full reports [all in Dutch].

Other Perspectives

• War Is Boring (Jan 1/14) – Is the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter the New F-4?

• Vanity Fair (Sept 16/13) Will It Fly? A long look at the F-35 program, and at issues with key components.

• ELP (July 19/13) – UPDATE – F-35 Gun Concerns. Links back to USAF Col. Charles Moore’s 2007 essay “The Need for a Permanent Gun System On the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter” [PDF], which includes analysis of front-line fighter gun use. An email from POGO’s Winslow Wheeler reiterates that the F-35A’s 25mm cannon has just 180 rounds, compared to the F-16’s 510 x 20mm or the A-10’s 1,174 x 30mm rounds, and references inherent gun pod accuracy issues from in Vietnam and Desert Storm.

• Offiziere.ch (March 6/13) – Jet Fighter Influence: How Lockheed’s Public Relations Efforts Keep the F-35 Sold. Offers a glimpse at Lockheed Martin’s lobbying beyond Washington, including mutually-referencing paid-for groups.

• US National Public Radio (Jan 3/13) – The F-35 Fighter Jet: The Cost And Controversy

• AOL Defense (Nov 27/12) – Will Stealth Survive As Sensors Improve? F-35, Jammers At Stake

• Aviation Week Ares (April 3/12) – JSF – SAR Discloses Another Three-Year Slip.

AN/TPS-75
(click to view full)

The US Air Force’s AN/TPS-75 radar has been in service since 1968. Threats have evolved, and they want to replace it as their main long-range, ground-based radar for detecting, identifying and tracking aircraft and missiles, then reporting them through the Ground Theater Air Control System. The US Marines are considering a similar move, to replace their own AN/TPS-59s. Hence the USA’s Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DELRR, pron. “Three Dealer”).

3DELRR is intended to provide up to 35 radars for long-range surveillance, air traffic control, and theater ballistic missile detection. It will correct AN/TPS-75 shortfalls by being easier to maintain, thanks to AESA technology, and by detecting and reporting highly maneuverable and/or stealthy targets. Its improved resolution may even allow it to classify and determine the type of non-cooperative aircraft that cannot or do not identify themselves – a trait that allows faster engagement of hostile planes, and reduces the odds of friendly fire incidents. As long as the program itself can avoid friendly fire from the USA’s budget wars.

3DELRR: Mission & Program

The FBO.gov solicitation for 3DELRR defines its purpose as follows:

“The primary mission of the 3DELRR will be to provide long-range surveillance, control of aircraft, and theater ballistic missile detection. The 3DELRR will provide air controllers with a precise, real-time air picture of sufficient quality to conduct close control of individual aircraft under a wide range of environmental and operational conditions. In the case of theater missile defense operations, the new radar will have the capability to detect, track, and disseminate target information to respective command and control nodes such as the USAF Control and Reporting Center to disseminate for warning and engagement. Similarly, the joint targeting process will benefit from trajectory information provided by the 3DELRR, which will include launch and impact location. The 3DELRR will correct current radar system shortfalls by providing the capability to detect and report highly maneuverable, small radar cross section targets as well as discriminate the type of a non-cooperative aircraft. It will also mitigate most of the sustainability and maintainability concerns which plague the current system.”

Once the Technical Development Phase was complete, the USAF initially intended to award the System Design & Development (SDD) to the winning team around 2011, but a combination of budget cuts and new procurement philosophies forced a shift.

(click to view full)

By September 2011, that shift had become pronounced. By March 2012, the entire acquisition plan had changed, all the way through development of the operational system (EMD), and initial production & fielding (LRIP). The design and development award didn’t take place until 2014.

2012: A Change in Plans Old Plan, New Plan

Click here for the full-size graphic of plan changes.

Instead of awarding a Technology Development (TD) Phase 2 contract to either Sensis or Lockheed Martin, with built-in options to take the radar all the way into production, a contract around the end of FY 2012 threw the competition open again, awarding 3 fixed-price TD contracts worth $106 million in total.

That fixed-price type contract approach continued in the next 2 phases, then a single contractor was chosen in the project’s 3rd competition, and given a contract to take the project beyond Milestone B into production and fielding. That winning choice was based on “lowest price technically acceptable” criteria, rather than “best value.”

In sync with that shift, one of the TD Phase’s goals was to understand the cost/capability tradeoffs. Most cost is always tied up in design, which is to say in specifications. The Requirements Analysis in SOW Para 1.9.19 tried to reorder or change specifications, in order to eliminate requirements that drive high costs but don’t change the radar’s capabilities enough. The Army saw the cost drivers as “Mobility, Accuracy, False Alarms, Surveillance Volume, and Range,” but they were prepared to be surprised by industry offerings.

That decision pushed the competition toward existing designs and technologies, given the need for assured costs inherent in a fixed-price bid. Northrop Grumman certainly hoped so, as they believe that their existing USMC G/ATOR battlefield radar solution could be upgraded to handle 3DELRR as well. The Marines could then take advantage of the program, replacing existing AN/TPS-59 radars with the same technology used by their shorter-range G/ATOR companion.

Once this new “TD Review E” was done, a final specification allowed final Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) Phase bids to be solicited from any qualified source, not just the TD Phase 2 winners.

These decisions were significant, because they opened the door for Raytheon to win.

The Milestone B decision to begin EMD development of the final 3DELRR system didn’t take place until Q1 FY 2015, and was delayed by a GAO protest. The Critical Design Review is expected in after a winner has been picked, instead of at the end of a single-contractor TD Phase.

The single EMD winner is expected to continue development into the end of 2017 (Q1 FY 2018), and the fall Milestone C decision that authorizes Low-Rate Initial Production. A new twist was introduced in early 2013 as the program office went beyond the EMD-LRIP scope of its RFP, and added a full rate production option that could raise the program’s value to $1.3 billion in total sales over the next 10 years.

Initial Operational Capability with the USAF is now tagged at fall 2019 (Q1 FY 2020).

Contracts and Key Events

Unless otherwise noted, contracts for the 3DELRR program are awarded by the Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA.

2014 – 2015

Raytheon Wins; GAO challenge.

May 13/15: Raytheon has further complicated the Air Force’s $1 billion 3DERLL radar program by appealing a federal judge’s decision last week to allow the Air Force to re-evaluate bids. The company previously filed a lawsuit when the Air Force tried to re-open the competition as a result of challenges by competitors Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin.

May 13/15: Raytheon suffered a setback this week, with a federal judge freeing the Air Force to re-evaluate bids for the 3D Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DERLL), with the company initially winning the lucrative contract in October last year. Raytheon filed a lawsuit against the Air Force when it tried to open up the competition through re-evaluating its original decision, with competitors Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman protesting the initial contract award. The value of the program could reach $1 billion, with the Air Force planning to buy sixty of the new radar systems.

Jan 21/15: Air Force Reconsiders.
Reuters quoted a source indicating that the Air Force was to take some form of corrective action in a renewed consideration.

Oct 21-22/14: GAO Protests. The USAF confirms that Northrop Grumman has formally issued a protest against the USAF’s 3DELRR award to Raytheon. The next day, Lockheed Martin confirms that they are also filing a protest.

That halts the program until the challenge receives a ruling, which could take up to 100 days. In order to succeed, the challengers need to show that either Raytheon’s radar isn’t technically acceptable, that it wasn’t the lowest priced – or that something in the process went awry, ensuring that that competitors were treated differently or criteria weren’t applied fairly. Sources: See DID’s GAO Primer | Defense News, “Northrop Challenges 3DELRR Contract Award” | Reuters, “UPDATE 1-Lockheed Martin challenges contract to Raytheon”.

Oct 6/14: Raytheon wins. Raytheon is on quite the radar streak lately, adding the USAF’s 3DELRR to its naval AMDR win. Raytheon IDS in Sudbury, MA receives a $19.5 million fixed-price-incentive-firm contract for 3DELRR’s initial EMD (engineering, manufacturing and development) phase. This base contract includes the purchase of 3 radar systems, and $11 million in FY 2014 USAF RDT&E budgets are committed immediately. Options could bring the total initial EMD contract to $71.8 million for 6 radars, plus product support.

Production orders for the other 29 can follow after that, but it’s also worth noting that 3DELRR is one of the first programs under the DoD’s Better Buying Power initiative to be designed for exportability.

Raytheon’s 3DELRR solution is a C-band radar that builds on their investments in gallium nitride (GaN) electronics, which offer better performance than conventional GaAs circuits at similar power levels. While radars like UHF/VHF are emphasized for detection of stealthy targets within the atmosphere, Raytheon says that they picked the C-band for “increased flexibility because that portion of the spectrum is relatively uncongested.” It should work fine against ballistic missiles, and the ability to avoid spectrum frequency conflicts with potential export customers may also become a selling point.

Work will be performed at Sudbury, MA and Andover, MA and the current contract award is expected to be complete by Oct 31/18. Their sub-contractor Saab Defense (formerly Sensis) will also benefit, and will add about 100 jobs at its DeWitt, NY facility. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition, with 3 offers received by the USAF Life Cycle Management Center’s Theater Battle Control Division at Hanscom AFB, MA (FA8730-15-C-0004). See also Raytheon, “Raytheon awarded contract to build new U.S. Air Force radar” | Syracuse.com, “Raytheon, Saab Defense of DeWitt win U.S. Air Force radar contract worth up to $1.3 billion”.

Raytheon wins EMD

FY 2012-2013

TD Phase 2. EMD-LRIP-FRP RFP; Demonstrations by Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon. ATREX Twilight zone…
(click to view full)

Aug 26/13: NGC. Northrop Grumman announces that they completed their 3DELRR demonstration back in July. They refer to it as “The U.S. Air Force system variant of the Department of Defense AN/TPS-80 radar…” but unlike the USMC’s current G/ATORs, this S-band radar uses Gallium Nitride transmit/receive modules. That technology is in the USMC’s plans, and the development work may pay off for the Marines, just as all the work on the USMC’s TPS-80 G/ATOR would offer dividends to the USAF.

As one might expect, given their design’s lineage, Northrop Grumman also touts “successful system ambient air cooling under extremely hot operating conditions,” as well as the radar’s well-developed system self-test and calibration capabilities. Sources: Northrop Grumman Aug 26/13 release.

July 29-30/13: Lockheed & Raytheon. Lockheed Martin and Raytheon announce that they’ve completed their 3DELRR radar demonstrations.

Lockheed Martin’s radar detected required targets of opportunity launched from the Syracuse airport and surrounding areas. They even hired additional test aircraft, in order to perform more advanced performance detection and tracking scenarios.

Raytheon’s C-band offering with GaN-based electronics was put through the same basic tests, and also demonstrated integration into the Air Force’s next-generation Command and Control system. Gallium Nitride electronics can get more performance from the same power inputs, which is an exceptionally helpful feature for radars. The flip side is that they cost more than conventional Gallium Arsenide electronics. Raytheon has made significant investments in GaN, and hopes to reap a competitive advantage by moving farther down the cost curve and higher up the performance curve than its rivals. Sources: Lockheed Martin July 29/13 release | Raytheon July 30/13 release.

March 29/13: Iterating through drafts. The program office is requesting participating contractors to review draft Revision F of their Technical Requirements Document (TRD), which supports Revision B of the draft RFP introduced in January. Sections L and M of this latest revision, reflecting instructions to offerors and evaluation factors for award, respectively, will be posted later. The TRD is available for parties under a Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement. So far, this looks in line with the plan they announced 2 months ago. FBO.gov.

March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” for 2013. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish.

For 3DELRR, the GAO estimates the total program cost at $FY13 2.1131 billion: $771.1 million RDT&E, plus $1.3421 billion for 35 systems and associated gear. The program still hopes to start system development by December 2013 (Q1 FY 2014), with Full Operational Capability still scheduled for late 2019 (Q1 FY 2020).

Cost & schedule estimates

March 27/13: NGC. Northrop Grumman touts a recent demonstration, in which a G/ATOR radar with some software modifications tracks 5 NASA ATREX suborbital rockets fired from Wallops Island, VA. The rockets release chemical tracer clouds into the high altitude jet stream, in order to exercise mind control through tinfoil hats help scientists study the jet stream’s flow 60-65 miles above the earth.

Northrop Grumman is touting G/ATOR’s ability to evolve into 3DELRR’s requirements (q.v. Readings), and this announcement is part of that campaign. The question that Northrop Grumman wouldn’t/ couldn’t answer for us involves whether the radar tracked the rockets as they were launched and boosting (easier technical problem, classic counterfire/ air defense, and Wallops is also a major radar test site), or picked up the rockets in mid-flight at high altitude (harder/ higher-power problem, classic BMD). NGC | NASA.

Jan 24/13: Draft RFP reshaped. In Industry Day briefing materials [PDF], program manager Lt. Col. Brian McDonalds explains that the scope of RFP R2278 (first released in June 2012) now includes Full Rate Production. With this new approach, the EMD+FRP RFP is expected to be finalized by July 2013, with an award in March 2014.

This resets the counter on draft revisions, with the most current material again dubbed Revision A. FRP would be contracted as Fixed Price Incentive Firm (FPIF) with 6 priced options. 3 radars would be delivered during EMD, 3 others during LRIP (FY18-FY20), and 29 at the full rate pace (FY19-FY24). Requirements are expressed in TRD Rev E, another iteration to Ref F is expected by the time the request is final.

The program office acknowledges that funding remains uncertain, and that there’s a lot of work ahead in order to finalize the new RFP terms without blowing the schedule.

August 20/12: TD Phase 2. All 3 firms receive firm-fixed-price contracts for continued 3DELRR technology development, and a Preliminary Design Review and Capability Demonstration for their radar prototypes. The contracts run until Nov 20/13.

Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Liverpool, NY receives $36 million (FA8707-12-C-0018).

Northrop Grumman’s Electronic Systems Division in Linthicum Heights, MD receives $34.8 million (FA8707-12-C-0019). NGC release.

Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Sudbury, MA receives $35.2 million (FA8707-12-C-0020).

Sensis is no longer part of the competition as a lead, but Raytheon had been producing their AESA, so they could be included in the Raytheon team.

TD Phase 2

June 20/12: EMD-LRIP RFP. Air Force Materiel Command posts solicitation R2278 for the next stage of the program.

March 6/12: New approach. At an Industry Day, the 3DELRR program lays out its new program approach. It’s driven by $80 million in budget cuts over the next 5 years and, they say, by the readiness of current technologies. The 3DELRR Program Office is planning for a Defense Acquisition Board in late April 2012, and an initial set of contracts to develop AESA radars with Gallium Nitride transistors is expected by the end of FY 2012.

The 3DELRR program has also been selected as a “designated system” to participate in the Defense Exportability Features Pilot Program. Focusing on exportability tends to keep costs down, and successful exports will produce both economic and military benefits. See details, above. FBO.gov, incl. Presentation [PDF] | USAF.

New plan

FY 2009-2011

Technology Development; Review is positive. Sensis prototype
(click to view full)

April 2011: Tech review. An independent review team reports that 3DELRR successfully demonstrated its 8 critical technologies in a relevant environment during its initial prototyping effort. That’s a good sign; many Pentagon weapons programs don’t get to this point until late in System Design & Development/ EMD. Source: GAO.

Jan 6/11: Sensis. Sensis Corp. announces that its 3DELRR full-scale prototype have successfully completed testing, achieving all TD phase milestones after a development period of 19 months.

Sensis founder and CEO Jud Gostin was the principal system architect for the Marines’ AN/TPS-59. Raytheon IDS is responsible for the development and production of the team’s Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA). Moog Inc.’s Space and Defense Group, a leader in precision motion control solutions, is producing, testing and integrating the team’s 3DELRR’s motion control subsystems.

Jan 21/11: The USAF offers a program update:

“The Air Force plans to buy 35 new radars to replace the existing TPS-75s. As the 3DELRR is intended to be a joint materiel solution, the Marine Corps is also contributing to its development and looking at the system for future production buys. In fact, the earliest origins of the 3DELRR program can be traced back to the Marine Corps-led Highly Expeditionary Long Range Air Surveillance Radar (HELRASR) that was discontinued in the Fiscal Year 2008 budget cycle.

In February, two 20-month contracts for the initial technology development phase of the 3DELRR, which were awarded to Lockheed Martin Corp. and Sensis Corp., will conclude…. “We anticipate release of the RFP to occur at or near the end of March 2011,” said Major McDonald. “It will be a full and open competition with a single contract award…. if the government elects to exercise all options, the value could approach $740 million.”

Sources: USAF, “Long-range radar program moving forward”.

Dec 16-17/10: LMCO. Lockheed Martin completes the 2nd and final demonstration under its May 2009 3DELRR contract, following an initial demonstration of critical technology elements in March 2010, and a Preliminary Design Review in October 2010.

During the demonstration, Lockheed Martin unveils a functioning system prototype to USAF and Marine Corps officials, to prove the radar’s maturity. The firm says that their radar “addresses 100 percent of 3DELRR requirements, including critical extended air surveillance reach for early warning from threats, such as aircraft and ballistic missiles.” Lockheed Martin.

Dec 21/09: Sensis. Sensis announces that it has completed the System Requirements Review (SRR) for the US Air Force’s 3DELRR program. During SRR, the U.S. Air Force, along with industry organizations, conducted a comprehensive review of the Sensis 3DELRR systems engineering, integration and test processes against overall systems requirements to ensure that the program meets U.S. Air Force requirements.

Oct 29/09: RFP. The Air Force launches the THREE-DIMENSIONAL EXPEDITIONARY LONG-RANGE RADAR Solicitation Number: R2278 formal solicitation for 3DELRR.

3DELRR: LMCO concept
(click to view full)

May 12/09: The US Air Force awards [PDF] a firm-fixed-price $24.9 contract to Lockheed Martin in Liverpool, NY to provide radar engineering and design support to the government during the technology development phase of 3DELRR program. The Lockheed Martin team includes BAE Systems, Computer Sciences Corp., and ManTech. At this time, $9.9 million has been obligated (FA8722-09-C-0003). See also Lockheed Martin release.

May 12/09: The US Air Force awards [PDF] a $21.9 million firm-fixed-price contract to Sensis Corp. in East Syracuse NY to provide radar engineering and design support to the government during the technology development phase of 3DELRR program. The Sensis team includes Raytheon and Moog. At this time, $9.9 million has been obligated (FA8722-09-C-0001). See also: Sensis news release.

TD contracts

Additional Readings

Readers with corrections, comments, or information to contribute are encouraged to contact DID’s Founding Editor, Joe Katzman. We understand the industry – you will only be publicly recognized if you tell us that it’s OK to do so.

• US FBO.gov (Oct 29/09, #R2278) – Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar. Very long-running solicitation, last update was March 2013. See esp. the March 2012 Industry Day slide presentation [PDF].

• USAF Electronic Systems Center – Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar [dead link].

• GlobalSecurity.org – Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar.

• Lockheed Martin – Three Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DELRR).

• Northrop Grumman – Three-Dimensional Long-Range Radar (3DELRR) See also this 2012 snapshot re: G/ATOR for 3DELRR.

• Raytheon – Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DELRR).

• Microwave Journal (July 2009) – Lockheed Martin to Develop Long-range Radar for US Air Force.

Americas

• Boeing Phantom Work’s President wants to put solid-state lasers on the company’s Phantom Eye developmental UAV. Darryl Davis stated that the UAV could operate at stratospheric heights with the lasers used for intelligence gathering and potentially missile defense. However, that would depend on significantly increased funding for the immature technology – something which doesn’t appear to be happening in the short term.

• On Monday, Raytheon was awarded a $7 million contract modification in support of the UAE’s Patriot systems, with this totaling 138 man-months of work. The GCC member state first procured the systems in 2008, with the country operating the PAC-3 variant.

• Raytheon announced on Monday the Small Diameter Bomb II has achieved Milestone C, with the SDB II now set for Low Rate Initial Production. The Milestone C achievement is the result of eleven flight tests, including two live-firings. The bomb’s System Verification Review slipped last year, a result of two failed tests, with the bomb initially scheduled to enter LRIP in January 2014 [p. 117].

Europe

• The Defense Ministers of three European states signed a Declaration of Intent on Monday for a two-year Medium Altitude Long Endurance UAV definition study. Germany, Italy and France are funding the collaborative work between Dassault, Airbus and Finmeccanica, which will form the basis of a decision in two years time on whether to begin development of the system. Airbus, Dassault and Alenia Aermacchi are likely to compete for production contracts if this green light is given.

• The European Defence Agency and the European Space Agency also announced on Monday that the launch of the DeSIRE II project, which is intended to use satellite communications to integrate remotely-piloted aircraft into civilian airspace. The $3 million contract with Telespazio is using a Piaggio Aero P.1HH Hammerhead UAV as a flying testbed, with a consortium of European firms working on the project,including Telespazio, e-GEOS, Selex ES, Piaggio Aero, ViaSat, Skyguide and Aedel Aerospace.

• Following the selection in April of the Airbus H225M Caracal by the Polish Defense Ministry for its tri-service helicopter modernization requirement, the helicopter is now confirmed to be undergoing evaluation and verification against Poland’s requirement set. Photos have emerged from Powidz 33rd Transport Aviation Base showing the helicopter undergoing testing to evaluate 32 requirements set by the Defense Ministry’s Armament Inspectorate.

• With rumors having circulated for some time now regarding the French-Russian Mistral issue, the French Ambassador to Russia reportedly announced on Monday that the two sides are engaged in discussions on how best to resolve the situation. The French are unlikely to go ahead with the deal, which would see two of the LHDs delivered to the Russian Navy, instead most likely seeking to repay what the Russians have invested in the contract. This will most likely be a disputed, messy affair forecast to last at least several weeks.

• Poland has released a tender for one million non-ricocheting bullets. The 5.56 x 45mm rounds are destined for GROM Special Forces units, with the tender scheduled to conclude between July and November.

Asia

• South Korea’s Defense Ministry has stated that the country is THAAD system, while US Secretary of State John Kerry again hinted at a possible deployment of US THAAD systems to the country. The issue of ballistic missile defense in South Korea has become increasingly politicized in recent weeks, with China vehemently opposing the stationing of THAAD in the country, despite the North recently conducting missile launch tests.

• Indian firms are pushing for a greater slice of the M777 contract pie awarded last week. The prospect of a much larger order than the 145-gun contract – potentially reaching around a thousand guns if the Indian Army replaces all its current legacy systems – would be boost to the Indian defense industry, with manufacturer BAE System likely to increase the Indian work share of a larger future contract.

• An Australian pilot has flown a Royal Australian Air Force F-35A for the first time, with the country a Tier 3 partner in the program.

Africa

• Airbus is reportedly talking with the South African Air Force regarding the firm’s C-296, A400M and A330MRTT aircraft. The SAAF C-130BZ fleet is currently highly inefficient, with around a third of its fleet operational at any given time. The country previously cancelled an order for eight A400M transporters in 2009. A joint procurement of A330 MRTT tankers is expected by three European states (Poland, Norway and the Netherlands) soon, to complement the aircraft’s six international customers.

Today’s Video

• Small Diameter Bomb II, introduced by the Smithsonian…

M777: dragon’s breath
(click to view full)

The M777 ultra-lightweight towed 155mm howitzer has an integrated digital fire control system, and can fire all existing 155mm projectiles. Nothing new there. What is new is the fact that this 9,700 pound howitzer saves over 6,000 pounds of weight by making extensive use of titanium and advanced aluminum alloys, allowing it to be carried by Marine Corps MV-22 tilt-rotor aircraft or medium helicopters, and/or airdropped by C-130 aircraft. The new gun is a joint program between the US Army and Marine Corps to replace existing 155mm M198s, and will perform fire support for U.S. Marine Air Ground Task Forces and U.S. Army Stryker Brigade Combat Teams.

Britain is the USA’s M777 LWH co-development partner, but Canada became the first country to field it in combat, thanks to an emergency buy before their 2006 “Operation Archer” deployment to Afghanistan. Customers now include the US Army & USMC, Australia, and Canada – but not Britain.

M777: Capabilities and Upgrades M777 parts
(click to view full)

The M777 offers significant advances in 2 areas. One is obviously weight.

Weight matters. The M777’s weight and profile allows 2 M777 howitzers to be fitted into a C-130 Hercules tactical transport, instead of just one equivalent-caliber M198. Previous howitzers could be lifted by heavy helicopters like the CH-47 Chinook or CH-53E Super Stallion, but the M777 expands those options to include carriage under a V-22 Osprey, or a medium class helicopter like the EH101.

Weight has increased slightly over the initial specification, but this is largely attributable to over 2,000 design changes from the original shoot-off specification to today’s gun. Run-flat tires added over 100 pounds, while a cradle assembly that went from 400 components to 5 main castings trades some added weight for significantly improved maintenance and reliability.

The gun remains stable when firing, despite its light weight, by being out of balance. The barrel is mounted low and forward, which keeps the gun from overturning. Even so, these are not the gun’s most significant features.

M777: bulls-eye
(click to view full)

There’s also a front-line payoff to the new howitzer. Rate of fire is 4-8 rounds per minute in bursts, or 2 rounds per minute sustained fire.

When using previous generations of artillery, units like the US Marines had to communicate with the fire direction center through radio, and use iron sights to aim at targets. The M777 is equipped with iron sights as a backup, but the military doesn’t expect those sights to see much use outside of training. Modern artillery has features like data distribution systems, self location via INS and/or GPS, automatic or assisted gun-laying, and other add-ons that automate the process of receiving fire orders and acting on them. Coordinates can be usually transmitted digitally from tactical air controllers, UAVs, or other platforms, and the M777’s own display can be used to send text messages to other cannoneers.

These advances improve efficiency, and survivability. Instead of being forced to cluster together near communications nodes, artillery pieces can be spread out over a larger area, with each gun executing “shoot and scoot” tactics using the M777’s fast 2-3 minute set-up and displacement times. This compares to its predecessor the M198, which has a 6.5 minute emplacement time and 10.5 minute displacement time.

The key to this capability is called Towed Artillery Digitization (TAD). General Dynamics ATP’s TAD includes sensors like the integrated muzzle velocimeter, vehicle motion sensor, and ammunition inventory capability; mission computer with on-board ballistic computation and Joint Variable Message messaging format capabilities; GPS receiver which works with the Inertial Navigation System and motion sensor to provide self-location within 10m and gun pointing within 1 mil RMS azimuth and 0.5 mil elevation.

The M777-A1 version used the TAD Block 1 set. Communications and other key features like self-location are present, but it uses manual target entry instead of direct digital transmission from tactical air controllers, UAVs, or other platforms.

The M777-A2 incorporates more advanced TAD capabilities, including a software update that enables the howitzer to program and fire the M982 Excalibur GPS-guided shell. That shell improves the gun’s maximum range from 30km/ 18 miles to 40km/ 24 miles, with official accuracy on target to within 10 meters, and unofficial reports of about half that figure. The M777-A2 is the version issued to all U.S. Army and USMC units, and previously-equipped M777-A1 howitzer units are receiving a software upgrade to bring their systems to A2 standard.

Canadian M777s are currently equipped to fire the Excalibur shell, but use their own LINAPS fire control system.

On the foreign export front, Australia has joined Canada as a buyer, and Denmark, India, Oman, Thailand, and Saudi Arabia have all reportedly shown interest.

M777: Program M777: Chinook pick-up
(click to view full)

The M777 was originally a trilateral program involving the USA, Britain, and Italy, with a Memorandum of Understanding signed in March 1999. Italy ended up backing out of the development program due to budget issues, leaving the USA and UK to fund development efforts.

Within the USA, the US Marines funded development of the weapon, while the US Army funded development of the Towed Artillery Digitization system. The M777 is currently managed by US Army Program Executive Office (PEO) Ammunition in Picatinny Arsenal, NJ, under “Project Manager Towed Artillery Systems”. Before January 2011, it had been managed by PEO Ground Combat Systems in Warren, MI, under “PM Lightweight 155″; the latest restructuring placed the US Army’s artillery tubes, ammunition, propellants, and associated aiming hardware & software under the same organization.

BAE Systems Global Combat Systems’ facility at Barrow-in-Furness is responsible for M777 prime contract management, including direct customer liaison, control of the trans-Atlantic supply chains, engineering design authority, and manufacturing and assembly of the complex titanium structures and associated recoil components. Final integration and test of the weapon system is undertaken at BAE’s Hattiesburg, MS plant.

Ironically, M777 development partner Britain has yet to buy any. Indeed, the first use of M777 howitzers in combat came from a country who hadn’t even been involved in the development partnership. Canadian forces in Afghanistan found the howitzer’s weight and range to be just what they needed, and an emergency buy led to fast fielding. While they aren’t a national program partner, the US and Canada took steps in the 1950s to create a North American defense industry, and so some Canadian firms were already involved in the program when Canada made its initial purchase.

M777 Industrial participants include:

• US Army Light Weight 155mm Joint Program office: program management (Picatinny Arsenal, NJ)
  
• BAE Systems: Prime Contractor, Elevating Mass & Cradle Assembly, (Barrow-in-Furness, England and final assembly Hattiesburg, MS)
  
• General Dynamics: Digital fire control (Burlington, VT)
  
• General Dynamics Canada: Mission computer software and displays (Ottawa, ON, Canada)
  
• Howmet Castings: Upper carriage (Whitehall, MI)
  
• Hydro-Mill Co.: Body assembly (Chatsworth, CA)
  
• Mitchell Canada: Aluminum castings (St. Laurent, PQ, Canada)
  
• Precision Castparts Corp.: Lower carriage (Portland, OR)
  
• RTI International Metals: Titanium (Niles, OH)
  
• Seiler Instrument: OFC (St. Louis, MO)
  
• Wegman USA: Elevating Gear (Lynchburg, VA)
  
• Watervliet Arsenal: Cannon assembly (Watervliet, NY)
  
• Selex Galileo: LINAPS gun management system, see PDF (Edinburgh, UK – Canadian orders)

Canada was the 1st country to field the M777 in combat, firing them in Afghanistan in February 2006.

The US Army’s 2nd Battalion 11th Field Artillery Regiment at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii was equipped with M777A1 howitzers in January 2007, but were converted to the A2 version later in 2007 and used the guns in Iraq. As of July 2007, initial units also included both the 11th Marine Regiment and the 10th Marine Regiment; they had received the M777A2 version. The 3rd Battalion, 321st Field Artillery Regiment at Fort Bragg, NC; and the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team fielded the M777A2 for the U.S. Army in Afghanistan. Deliveries and fielding continued from there.

As of October 2012, total orders stood at 1,090 guns for the US Army, US Marines, Australia, and Canada.

M777: Contracts and Key Events FY 2013-2015

Australia; India. ADF M777
(click to view full)

May 19/15: India. Indian firms are pushing for a greater slice of the M777 contract pie awarded last week. The prospect of a much larger order than the 145-gun contract – potentially reaching around a thousand guns if the Indian Army replaces all its current legacy systems – would be boost to the Indian defense industry, with manufacturer BAE System likely to increase the Indian work share of a larger future contract.

Feb 25/14: M777. With elections looming, India’s Ministry of Defence clears a whole series of defense projects, worth up to INR 130 billion. The M777 isn’t among them:

“The M-777 howitzer contract, which is a direct government-to-government deal under the US foreign military sales programme, has been hanging fire since January 2010. Due to the long delay, the American Defence Security Cooperation Agency has hiked the cost of the M-777 deal from the earlier $ 647 million to $885 million now. The Army wants these 155mm/39-calibre howitzers since they can be swiftly deployed in high-altitude areas in Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh by helicopters and aircraft to counter China.”

China has been seizing Indian territory again in this high-altitude region, but apparently that isn’t urgent enough to prompt action. Thermal imagers and light machine guns are useful, but they aren’t going to change the situation anywhere. Sources: Times of India, “Decision on four key defence deals put off”.

Aug 7/13: India. The US DSCA publishes [PDF] an official follow-on export request from India for 145 M777 guns, under modified terms compared to the Jan 26/10 request, which is superseded by this one.

The Indian guns will use the same Laser Inertial Artillery Pointing Systems (LINAPS) equipment as Canada’s M777s, and the estimated cost for the guns plus warranty, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, publications and technical documentation, training, and other US government and contractor support has risen from $647 – $885 million.

The other item that has changed is the acknowledgement of a 30% industrial offsets contract, in conformance to India’s official Defense Procurement Procedure (DPP). That has to be part of a negotiated contract, which can be signed within 30 days of this notice.

The principal contractors haven’t changed: BAE of Hattiesburg, MS; Watervliet Arsenal of Watervliet, NY; Seiler Instrument Company of St Louis, MO; Triumph Actuation Systems of Bloomfield, CT; Taylor Devices of North Tonawanda, NY; Hutchinson Industries of Trenton, NJ; and Selex in Edinburgh, United Kingdom. Likewise, implementation of this proposed sale will still require annual trips to India involving up to 8 U.S. Government and contractor representatives for technical reviews/support, training, and in-country trials, over a period of approximately 2 years.

DSCA: India Request, Revised

Aug 3/13: India. Negotiations are still underway in India. So what’s new? According to the Business Standard, the expected price is now INR 40 billion due to the falling rupee, and the industrial offsets issue is almost resolved. If India can manage to finalize the sale, the Mountain Strike Corps that they announced in July 2013 would receive the 145 guns.

The key seems to be offsets. The initial DSCA announcement (q.v. Jan 26/10) didn’t include offsets, but BAE sees the potential to equip artillery regiments in up to 7 more Indian corps, given deployment patterns and India’s mountainous borders. As such, they’ve accepted a standard 30% offset liability of about $195 million. About $58.5 million can be discharged by transferring technology, as India badly needs to field bi-modular charge systems (BMCS) for artillery. If they hadn’t blacklisted Denel and Israel Military Industries, they’d have BMCS already. The rest will reportedly be discharged by manufacturing some components in India, including work for “future artillery gun” and “future naval gun” programs.

India’s challenge is to break with its general practice and place a timely order. BAE’s Mississippi plant is being kept active in anticipation of an Indian order, but if India dithers much, the price will rise sharply to pay production line restart costs. On the other hand, early execution could see India field the new gun by early 2014. India’s Business Standard.

Feb 6/13: India. India Strategic quotes Chief of the Army Staff Gen Bikram Singh as saying that “whatever the reasons earlier [for delaying the M777 purchase], there would be no delay now.” India has held its firing trials, asked for some changes, and verified that BAE has made them. The Maintainability Evaluation is done, and negotiations are now focused on the price of 145 of the 155mm/ 39 caliber guns, plus a support package.

India’s 2004 buy of counter-fire artillery radars in 2004 reportedly omitted support considerations, and they don’t want to have to go through that problem again. India Strategic writes:

“Senior officers of the Army are confident that the acquisition of M-777 will not go beyond 2013, and if there is a delay, it would not be beyond the coming fiscal year April 2013-March 2014. That is, a delay of not more than three months beyond 2013.”

Oct 16/12: Australia. The Australian government had approved another 2 artillery batteries of Lightweight Towed Howitzers, comprising 19 M777A2s, for A$ 70 million (about $72 million). In response to queries, BAE confirms that the actual contract still has to go through a Foreign military Sale case.

They will be a substitute for the self-propelled howitzers the Army had initially included under its LAND 17 Phase 1C program, and “Government will consider additional support and facilities costs associated with this acquisition later in the 2012-13 Financial Year.” Australia DoD | DID’s LAND 17 Spotlight.

FY 2011 – 2012

Saudi Arabia. USA. Alaska cold trial
(click to view full)

July 17/12: Sub-contractors. Finmeccanica’s DRS Tactical Systems in Melbourne, FL receives a $22 million firm-fixed-price contract for ongoing design, development and integration services in support of the M777A2 digital fire control system.

Work will be performed in Melbourne, FL with an estimated completion date of July 13/17. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 6 bids received by Army Contracting Command in Picatinny Arsenal, NJ (W15QKN-12-D-0088).

May 11/12: India. CNN-IBN reports that India’s MoD has cleared a Rs 3000 crore deal to buy 145 of BAE’s M777 ultra-light 155mm howitzers, as a government-to-government deal through US Foreign Military Sale channels. They’re careful to note that this isn’t a contract yet, which may explain the absence of any announcement from BAE. At current conversion rates, the deal would be worth around $557 million, but exchange rates may change when and if negotiations produce an actual contract. Read “Murky Competitions for Indian Howitzer Orders May End Soon… Or Not” for the whole sorry story.

Oct 4/11: +70. BAE announces that the US military has placed a $134 million order for 70 more M777 howitzers, “to begin equipping the U.S. Army’s Infantry Brigade Combat Teams (IBCTs).”

This is almost certainly the M777A2 variant, and the order takes the production to a total of 1,071 guns. The manufacturing line has enough orders at present to run until October 2013, with additional orders expected from the USA, and potential orders from customers like India and Saudi Arabia waiting in the wings.

USA – 70

Sept 19/11: The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces Saudi Arabia’s formal request for up to $886 million of equipment to augment the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s existing light artillery capabilities. The Royal Saudi Land Forces already have towed 155mm and 105mm howitzers and support vehicles and systems, but the 54 105mm M119A2 systems and 36 M777A2s would be an upgrade over the Royal Saudi Land Forces’ existing M102 105mm guns. The Saudis are also looking to buy C3 systems, artillery locating radars, and Humvees as part of this buy.

DSCA: Saudi request

May 18/11: In “India’s consolation prize to US,” The Times of India reports that India is close to an M777 buy, pursued as government-to-government Foreign Military Sale. The Times of India reports that:

“…the Army has dispatched a team to the US to carry out quality assurance assessments of maintenance and other technical specifications of M777… Once the team returns, “it wouldn’t take much time to conclude the deal”, sources said, adding that a June-end deadline was being looked at. He also hinted that this order too could go up, now that the government is expected to approve Army’s recommendation to raise a dedicated mountain strike corps for China border.”

Feb 22/11: +46. BAE Systems announces that an American order for 46 more M777 howitzers brings the total number of M777 guns ordered so far to 1001. The firm is still producing weapons for Canada and Australia, and is also “responding to a range of enquiries.”

USA – 46

Jan 20/11: Program shifted. US Army Acquisition Executive Malcolm O’Neill approves the immediate transfer of the Program Manager Lightweight 155 office from US Army Program Executive Office (PEO) Ground Combat Systems in Warren, MI, to US Army PEO Ammunition in Picatinny Arsenal, NJ. O’Neill also approves the immediate renaming of “PM Program Manager Lightweight 155″ to “Project Manager Towed Artillery Systems.”

The M777 was 1 of 6 programs shifted in the restructuring, which places the Army’s artillery propellant, fuses, primers, munitions and now guns at the same place. US Army.

FY 2009 – 2010

Australia, Canada, India, USA. M777 in Afghanistan
(click to view full)

July 19/10: +93. BAE systems announces 3 contracts related to its M777 howitzers. For starters, the US Army and U.S. Marine Corps are buying another 58 guns.

Australia is buying 35 guns as US Foreign Military Sales (FMS), under the ADF’s LAND 17 program. The order makes Australia the 3rd M777 customer, after the USA and Canada, and the program’s total budget is A$ 493 million (q.v. Oct 20/09).

The 3rd order is an USD $18 million support package with Canada, for their 37 ordered M777 guns (q.v. May 28/09). The contract covers the supply of spares and engineering support. The firm adds:

“The U.S. government is currently discussing the provision of 145 systems to India as well as several other countries. In parallel, BAE Systems is responding to requests for information from a large number of countries wishing to expand their indirect fire capability.”

USA, Australia, Canada – 93 TL.

Jan 26/10: The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces [PDF] India’s formal request to buy 145 M777 155mm Light-Weight Towed Howitzers with Laser Inertial Artillery Pointing Systems (LINAPS), warranties, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, publications and technical documentation, maintenance, personnel training and training equipment, and U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance and support.

The estimated cost is $647 million, but a DSCA announcement is not a contract. In this case, it may not even be an intended sale. Read “Murky Competition for $2B India Howitzer Order May End Soon… Or Not” for more.

DSCA: India request

Oct 20/09: Australia’s Defence Minister John Faulkner announces that BAE Systems’ M777 has won the towed portion of Australia’s LAND 17 competition, whose total value is placed at A$ 493 million.

Phase 1 will provide the Army with 35 M777A2 guns, equipping 4 batteries of towed 155mm howitzers. An earlier DSCA request specified up to 57 systems, which allows Australia to order more guns later if it decides that’s necessary.

July 21/09: +62. BAE announces that the U.S, Department of Defense has ordered 62 more M777 howitzers under its existing contract, in a delivery order worth GBP 71 million/ $117 million.

May 28/09: +38. BAE Systems announces 3 more M777 contracts, worth a total of $118 million.

The USA is buying 38 guns for the Marine Corps and Army. A $3 million contract will RESET 33 U.S. howitzers returning from operations in Afghanistan to like-new condition. And Canada is acquiring 25 more M777s, to add to the 12 it already has in service. According to BAE, these 63 additional howitzers bring their order total to date to exactly 800 guns.

USA – 100

April 16/09: #500. BAE systems delivers the 500th M777 howitzer to the US military. In the BAE Systems release, Artillery Programmes Director Ian McMillan says that:

“M777 follows two other Anglo-U.S. weapon success stories – the 105mm Light Gun and the 81mm mortar are both British BAE Systems designs which have been adopted by the U.S.”

A report in the British North West Evening Mail added that:

“The substantial and complex cradle and saddle is made in Barrow and shipped out at the rate of 14 a month… Mr McMillan said with the main US order running out in less than two years, BAE would be looking for M777 orders from more countries, and for other projects to keep the Barrow factory busy… However BAE revealed yesterday it is expecting at orders for at least 150 more M77s from the US, Canada and Australia combined. They will be built by the same plants in Barrow and the US and would stretch work to 2012.”

#500 delivered

FY 2007 – 2008

Australia, Canada. The business end at
Camp Taji, Iraq
(click to view full)

Aug 14/08: +43. BAE Systems has received additional orders from the U.S. Department of Defense for 43 more M777 lightweight towed howitzers.

The GBP 42.8 million ($85.6 million) contract brings the number of M777s ordered by the US military to 719, and brings the total value of M777 orders in 2008 to GBP 147 million ($294 million). BAE release | NW Evening Mail, UK | Hattiesburg American, MS.

USA – 43

July 17/08: Australian request. The US DSCA announces [PDF format] Australia’s official request for 57 of BAE Systems’ M777A2 howitzers, 57 of ITT’s AN/VRC-91F Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio Systems (SINCGARS), plus integration services, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is USD$ 248 million.

Note that a DSCA request is not a contract, merely a step that’s required for export approval.

DSCA: Australia request

June 19/08: Canadian follow-on. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Canada’s official request for 37 additional M777 howitzers, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, publications and technical documentation, maintenance, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, engineering and logistics support services, and other related elements.

The estimated cost is $114 million (about C$ 116 million). The prime contractors will be BAE Land Systems in Hattiesburg, MS and Alcoa business Howmet Castings in Whitehall, Michigan. See also Jan 9/08 entry re: the Canadian MERX Letter of Intent, which sets out a timeline for the process: Statements of Interest and Qualification are to be received by the end of 2008, RFP issued in early 2009, and a contract awarded in autumn 2009.

DSCA: Canada request

April 1/08: +87. BAE Systems announces a new $176 million order from the U.S. Department of Defense for 87 additional M777A2 155mm towed howitzers. The order adds to the 589 M777A2 howitzers already on order for the U.S. armed forces, of which more than 300 have been delivered. The 155mm towed howitzers purchased under this contract will be delivered in 2010. BAE Systems release.

USA – 87

March 2008: M777 + Excalibur for Canada. The new M982 Excalibur precision-guided projectile is cleared for use by the Canadian Forces’ M777 guns in Afghanistan. Source.

Feb 25/08: Combat. Soldiers of Charlie Battery, 3rd Battalion, 321st Field Artillery Regiment, fires the USA’s first 155 mm global positioning system-guided Excalibur artillery round in Afghanistan. The round was fired from an M777A2 howitzer in Kunar Province, and reportedly hit its target. DVIDS story.

Jan 9/08: Canada. The Canadian government issued a request for Letters of Interest (LOIs) for 34 new 155mm Light Weight Towed Howitzers. The M777 is the current incumbent, and Canada must have exercised an option because the solicitation states that “The CF has 12 M777 LWTH howitzers currently in-service.”

Those guns have performed very well, making the M777 the favorite to win. The contract is expected in late 2009. MERX LOI notice, Ref# PW-$$RA-002-16420, Solicitation# W8476-08PM01/A.

Canada – 12 TL. now, LoI for more

Jan 2/08: Combat. The US military announces that The Soldiers from the 25th Infantry Division’s Battery B, “Banditos,” 2nd Battalion, 11th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team became the first US Army unit to fire the 155 mm M777A2 Light Weight Howitzer in Iraq. DVIDS story.

Banditos M777A2
fires Excalibur
(click to view full)

December 2007: Combat. Commanders in the US Army’s 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team’s Task Force Bayonet receive M777A2 lightweight 155 mm Howitzers. CH-47 Chinook helicopters flew in the new M777A2s to various forward operating bases the last 2 weeks of December.

Dec 23/07: USMC. The USMC reveals that the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit in Okinawa, Japan received its first M777 Lightweight Howitzers recently on Camp Hansen as part of a Marine Corps-wide artillery upgrade. Field artillery cannoneers with L Battery, arriving from Twentynine Palms, CA inspected the M777s before accepting the new guns from the Camp Pendleton, CA- based E Battery, 2nd Bn., 11th Marines, 1st MarDiv.

June 2007: Combat. The USMC’s 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit says that Marines from Bravo Battery 1st Battalion, 11th Marines are making history as the first American unit to use the new M777A1 Howitzer in combat, though the Canadians beat the to the punch overall. The 13th MEU is deployed to Anbar province in western Iraq.

March 20/07: Australia. Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and BAE Systems Australia team for LAND 17. KMW will offer the PzH-2000 to the team, while BAE Systems Australia adds their M777 ultra-lightweight howitzers to the partnership, for a combination towed/ self propelled solution. LAND 17 is Australia’s program to replace its 105mm howitzers with modern equipment.

March 18/07: Excalibur 155mm. Excalibur 155mm GPS-guided shells complete final testing by the US military. An order is placed soon afterward. DID coverage.

FY 2005 – 2006

LRIP then FRP. Canada. Canadian M777s
(click to view full)

May 15/06: Canada. StrategyPage:

“When discussing relationships with local tribal leaders, Canadian commanders have sometimes had an M777 put a shell in a nearby field or hill side, on command, to demonstrate what the Canadians have at their disposal. Afghans understand that sort of thing. U.S. Marines and British troops have also used the M777 in Afghanistan.”

See also the Canadian Forces’ movie clip report about the M777 in Afghanistan, featuring CF Major Steve Gallagher.

March 9/06: Canada. SELEX Sensors and Airborne Systems of Edinburgh, UK, working together with BAE Systems Land Systems, has secured a contract with the Canadian Department of National Defense (DND) for 6 LINAPS (Laser INertial Automatic Pointing System) Gun Management Systems (GMS), plus spares, for their M777 Howitzers. The systems were deployed to Afghanistan until late fall 2006, however.

The DGMS is integrated with the Indirect Fire Control Computer System (IFCCS) and the Raytheon MicroLight digital radio to provide a digital link from the Command Post to the guns, self-positioning and boresighting, etc. Finmeccanica Inc News blog | Space Daily | See also follow-on Canadian DND release | DND Video.

Feb 20/06: Canada in combat. The Canadian Forces fire their M777s for the first time in combat near Gumbad, 60 kilometres northeast of the city of Kandahar, Afghanistan. Illumination rounds are used to turn the tables on a night attack with RPGs.

It’s the 1st combat firing of the M777. National Post.

1st combat use

M777 arrives
(click to view full)

Dec 2/05: Canada. The 1st Regiment Royal Canadian Horse Artillery conducts an inaugural firing of the first 155mm, M777 towed howitzers delivered to the Canadian Department of National Defence (DND). BAE release.

Nov 26/05: Canada takes delivery of its first M777 howitzers. DND:

“Major Paul Payne, Chief Instructor in Gunnery at the Field Artillery School in Gagetown says “With the equipment we’ve been using until now, it would sometimes take up to 8 minutes after receiving a fire-mission request to have effective rounds hitting the target. With a digitized Triple 7 effective fire can be achieved in under 2 minutes.”

November 2005: Canada. As part of its preparations for Operation Archer in Afghanistan, the Canadian Forces orders 6 BAE Systems M777 Lightweight towed howitzers with precision-guided Excalibur 155mm shells and digitized fire control systems (C$ 70 million). The howitzers are to arrive by February 2006, and Excalibur shells by May 2006. See “Canada Purchases $200M in Equipment for Operation ARCHER in Afghanistan“

Canada – 6

Oct 2005: USMC 3/11 Mike battery returns from their second deployment to Operation Iraqi Freedom, mostly in infantry roles, to begin training on the M777. USMC release.

August 2005: 2nd Battalion, 11th Marine Regiment, is firing the M777 Howitzer at USMC Camp Pendleton for the first time. USMC release.

May 2005: The cannoneers of Kilo and Lima Batteries, 11th Marine Regiment, are the US Marine Corps first 2 artillery batteries to field and fire the M777.

In December 2005, however, 3/11 Kilo Battery are scheduled to deploy to Okinawa, Japan, as part of the Unit Deployment Program. Okinawa does not have the M777, so Kilo Battery begins fielding their older M198s to refresh their skills. US Marine Corps.

M777
(click to view full)

March 24/05: +495. Following additional system development, BAE Systems announces an $834 million dollar contract for full-rate production of the M777A1 155mm howitzer. Under the production contract, issued by the Joint Program Office in Picatinny, NJ, BAE Systems will manufacture 495 howitzers between 2005-2009. The howitzer is assembled at BAE Systems’ integration facility in Hattiesburg, MS, and incorporates components manufactured in 10 states and the U.K.

Full-rate
production – 495

Dec 2/02: +94. The U.S. Marine Corps has awarded a $135 million contract to BAE SYSTEMS for low rate initial production (LRIP) of the M777 lightweight 155mm howitzer. Under the initial phase of the LRIP contract, BAE SYSTEMS will manufacture 94 howitzers for the Marine Corps over the next 2 years. Initial deliveries will begin in February 2004 from the company’s Hattiesburg, MS facility. Approximately 70% of the M777 is manufactured in the USA, as BAE SYSTEMS has assembled an industrial team that includes 9 suppliers located in 9 states. Business Wire..

Initial
production – 94

Additional Readings & Sources

• Military.com Soldier Tech – Massive Attack: The M777 Ultralightweight Field Howitzer

• Army Technology – M777 Ultralightweight Field Howitzer, BAE Systems:
• GlobalSecurity - M777 Lightweight 155mm howitzer (LW155). Formerly known as the Advanced Towed Cannon System (ATCAS).

• CASR – Background – Artillery – BAE M777 155mm Towed Howitzer

• USMC – M777 Lightweight 155mm Howitzer NETT. See presentations from this page. Note 2004 date, however.

• BAE Systems – M777 – 155mm Lightweight Field Howitzer

• Azom – M777 Howitzer Cannon – A Titanium Design Study

• Journal of the Minerals, Metals and Materials Society (November 2004) – The near-net-shape manufacturing of affordable titanium components for the M777 lightweight howitzer

• DID – TLDHS & StrikeLink Urgent as Excalibur Approaches. These ancillary items ensure that the M777 can be used with GPS-guided Excalibur shells.

• Armed Forces Journal (October 2007) – The Case for Cannons. “In May, soldiers from the Army’s 1st Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery Regiment, fired two XM982 Excalibur precision-guided, extended-range 155mm artillery rounds that consecutively penetrated the roof of a single house known to be a terrorist haven in the northern region of Baghdad…”

• BAE Systems (July 25/07) – M777 Lightweight Howitzer Update Gives More Range And Accuracy. Describes the minor modifications that make up the M777A2, which will be the fielded version.

• Canadian Parliament (June 2007) – CANADIAN FORCES IN AFGHANISTAN: Report of the Standing Committee on National Defence [PDF, 174 pages]. Mentions the M777, and confirms negotiations for 6 more guns (to make 12), with an option for another 15.

• DID (March 12/07) – Lots Riding on V-22 Osprey. Describes the Marines’ artillery programs, most of governed by the V-22 Osprey’s capabilities, and explains where the M777 fits into the USMC’s overall plan.

• M777 starts fielding in the 11th Marines.

• BAE Systems (March 24/05) – BAE Systems Awarded $834 Million Contract For Lightweight Howitzer.

Patriot system

The USA’s MIM-104 Phased Array Tracking Radar Intercept On Target (PATRIOT) anti-air missile system offers an advanced backbone for medium-range air defense, and short-range ballistic missile defense, to America and its allies. This article covers domestic and foreign purchase requests and contracts for Patriot systems. It also compiles information about the engineering service contracts that upgrade these systems, ensure that they continue to work, and integrate them with wider command and defense systems.

The Patriot missile franchise’s future appears assured. At present, 12 nations have chosen it as a key component of their air and missile defense systems: the USA, Germany, Greece, Japan, Israel, Kuwait, The Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan and the UAE. Poland, Qatar, and Turkey have all indicated varying levels of interest, and some existing customers are looking to upgrade their systems.

The Patriot Missile Family PATRIOT Ground Systems BBC: 2013 report
click for video

A Patriot firing battery includes several components: an antenna mast group, radar, electric power station, launchers, ECC command center, and maintenance center. They are carried on a mix of heavy and medium trucks.

The OE-349 antenna mast group is usually carried on a M927 5-Ton truck.

The radar set is either an AN/MPQ-53 radar for PAC-2 systems, or an AN/MPQ-65 for PAC-3 systems, and is carried by a 10-ton M983 HEMTT truck pulling a M860 semitrailer. That equipment needs a lot of power, hence the truck mounted electric power plant, with 2 150kW generators on a modified HEMTT.

An AN/MSQ-104 engagement control station acts as the command center, pulled by a 5-ton FMTV or similar truck, and a semi-trailer maintenance center rounds out the battery. A battalion is usually made up of 4-6 batteries, with a command center and maintenance center of its own. It can include up to 600 soldiers including command, maintenance, and other roles.

With the other ground elements deployed, the battery’s 8 x M901 launching stations can be effective, deploying over a wide area on fully self-contained M983 HEMTT trucks pulling M860 semitrailers. In a PAC-2 battery, each launching station has 4 missiles, for a total of 32. In a PAC-3 battery, each launching station has 16 missiles, for a total of 128.

Raytheon is the prime contractor for the Patriot system as a whole. The most current standard for the Patriot’s ground systems is known as “Configuration 3″, and is compatible with both PAC-2 and PAC-3 launchers.

Raytheon recently completed a major upgrade to the ECS’ interface and computing, is currently testing Gallium Nitride radar semiconductor components that would improve performance at all power levels, and has proposed a rotating radar with 360-degree field-of-view, instead of the current 120 degree regard and 90 degree fire control cone.

PATRIOT Missile Variants PAC-3 test launch
(click to view full)

PAC-2 GEM. In 2002, Raytheon completed a separate upgrade of their PAC-2 missiles, which became known as Patriot Guidance Enhanced Missile Plus (GEM+). GEM missiles, including next-step upgrades like GEM-C/T, are essentially PAC-2 systems that still use the larger PAC-2 fragmentation missiles, but have a range of improvements to their guidance systems, fuzes, etc. GEM-T is optimized against tactical ballistic missiles, while GEM-C is optimized against cruise missiles. They’re fielded by the USA and by foreign militaries, such as Israel and South Korea. In 2003, the U.S. military launched approximately 20 PAC-2 missiles during Operation Iraqi Freedom, the majority of which were GEM interceptors.

PAC-3.The current US standard for new-build Patriot Missiles is the Patriot Advanced Capability 3. While Lockheed Martin’s missile is as long as previous Raytheon versions, it’s thinner and weighs only 30% as much (688 vs. 2,000 pounds). PAC-3 uses a “hit-to-kill” approach, instead of the PAC-2’s large fragmentation warhead, which allows it to packs more missiles per launcher (16 instead of 4). Its enhanced capabilities also allow it to be used for point defense against ballistic missiles, and its Config-3 ground systems also feature a range of improvements to the battery’s radar, communications, electronics, and software.

Lockheed Martin produces the PAC-3 missile, including the hit-to-kill interceptor, the missile canister 4-packs, a fire solution computer, and an Enhanced Launcher Electronics System (ELES). It has been exported to Germany, Japan, Kuwait, Netherlands, Taiwan, and the UAE. The latest PAC-3 variant is the PAC-3 CRI (Cost Reduction Initiative).

Beyond the USA, America is working with Japan on missile defense. Japan’s system will use the long-range naval SM-3 missiles as the outer layer, and Patriot PAC-3s as the point defense component. Japan has been licensed to produce its own Patriot PAC-3s.

A subsequent variant called the PAC-3 MSE was originally part of a canceled system called MEADS, but has been incorporated into the USA’s future plans. It’s covered as part of the USA’s ongoing PATRIOT programs.

The USA’s Patriot Programs Pure Fleet, etc. Patriot operation
(click to view full)

Budgets for PATRIOT systems as a whole are difficult to quantify, as recent years have seen them fully conflated with the separate MEADS program. Beyond MEADS, however, the U.S. Army has 2 important Patriot programs underway: “Pure Fleet” and “Grow the Army.”

Pure Fleet involves upgrading all its ground systems to Configuration-3. It will not necessarily replace all missiles in these batteries, which are often a mixed PAC-3/PAC-2 fleet, and are expected to remain so. What it will do, is make all batteries capable of firing the latest missiles, and ensure that the system’s technologies are kept up to date. This involves upgrades of multiple ground systems, and will be coupled with PAC-2 GEM-T missile upgrades under “continuous technology refreshment” programs.

Grow the Army was set to add 2 PAC-3 battalions to the Patriot force structure.

Lockheed Martin’s PAC-3 Patriot-based air-launched hit-to-kill (ALHTK) concept was a much more radical concept. It would be launched from fighter jets, and used to target ballistic missiles during their vulnerable but hard-to-reach launch phase. Initial studies were conducted, but neither this variant, nor Raytheon’s internally-mountable NCADE, managed to gain much traction.

Beyond Patriot, the USA has also been involved in the tri-national American/ German/ Italian MEADS project. Pentagon documents started to lump the Patriot and its successor MEADS together after 2006, making it difficult to track each system. The 2 air defense systems use very different technologies, but the Pentagon’s treatment of MEADS in its documents may have been prescient. MEADS became an R&D-only effort in 2011, and looks set to feed in some of its technologies as future PATRIOT upgrades. Patriot system production appears to be secure for the near future.

Even so, American production has tailed off, and the production line has been weighted in favor of foreign orders:

After 2013’s orders are delivered, foreign orders will be the only thing sustaining PAC-3 missile production. The reason for that is a new missile. The multinational MEADS R&D program looks set to end, but it produced a PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) design that will become part of existing PATRIOT batteries.

Over the Horizon: PAC-3 MSE PAC-3 MSE drawing
(click to view full)

One element that will survive from MEADS is the improved PAC-3 MSE missile, which is becoming its own program. PAC-3 MSE is designed to be a longer range missile that is more agile, and able to counter both tactical ballistic missiles and more conventional threats. Improvements begin with a higher performance, dual-pulse, 11″ diameter Solid Rocket Motor (SRM) design, a thermally hardened front end for longer fly out, enlarged fixed fins, more responsive control surfaces, upgraded guidance software, an improved Hit-To-Kill system, and upgraded batteries. They’re also pushing toward Insensitive Munitions (IM) compliance in order to lower safety risks, and a more compliant SRM propellant is being developed. The missile’s “single canister” design concept is similar to the Navy’s approach with its “all-up-rounds” for delivery, transport storage, and firing.

The MSE takes the PAC-3 Cost Reduction Initiative (CRI) missile design as its base, and the Army hopes this will lower its overall cost per missile. By 2015, the Army expects the more capable PAC-3 MSE to cost less per missile (around $7.5 million) than the current PAC-3 (about $7.6 million), with costs continuing to drop toward an average of about $5.5 million over the life of the program. The USA plans to order 1,680 of them in the coming years.

Patriot Engineering Services Contracts ECS command vehicle
(click to view full)

PATRIOT Engineering support is a sole source contract initiated on Aug 26/03 by the Army Aviation and Missile Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-04-C-0020). A follow-on contract was issued in FY 2009 (W31P4Q-09-C-0057).

Raytheon releases note that “engineering support” includes system and software engineering, hardware engineering, system testing, quality assurance, configuration management, logistic support and program management. The contract also funds specific tasks, including the implementation of the architecture for the first phase of the Combined Aggregate Program (CAP), CAP phase 2 studies, system of system architecture studies, Patriot Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3) missile integration and missile segment enhancement, and conducting annual service practice missile firings. The CAP program aligns the Patriot system to incorporate and field Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) Major End Items (MEIs) as they become available.

Excel
download

The overall program is an international cooperative effort, in which foreign partners both fund and benefit from common support. The FY 2004 – 2009 umbrella contract called for engineering services tasks to be performed specifically for Germany, Greece, Israel, Japan, Kuwait, the Netherlands, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Spain, and Taiwan. Beginning in 2009, South Korea and the UAE added themselves to that list.

What follows are all of the publicly-announced disbursements since the FY 2004 base award:

Work on PATRIOT Engineering Services is generally performed at Raytheon IDS HQ in Tewksbury, MA; its Integrated Air Defense Center in next-door Andover, MA; its Missile Defense Center in Woburn, MA; its Integrated Force Protection and Security Center in Huntsville, AL; its Mission Capability Verification Center at White Sands Missile Range, NM; and additional Raytheon facilities that include Burlington, MA and El Paso, TX. The vast majority of work is done in Tewksbury and Andover, MA. These facilities also process Patriot Advanced Configuration-2 (PAC-2) and Guidance Enhanced Missile-T (GEM-T) missiles for stockpile reliability testing, recertification and repair in support of the Patriot Field Surveillance program.

Other PATRIOT-Related Contracts & Events

Unless otherwise specified, contracts are awarded by the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL.

FY 2015

Purchases: Kuwait, Taiwan, Qatar, UAE; Requests: Saudi Arabia. PAC-3 MSE
(click to view full)

May 19/15: Raytheon was awarded a $7 million contract modification in support of the UAE’s Patriot systems, with this totaling 138 man-months of work. The GCC member state first procured the systems in 2008, with the country operating the PAC-3 variant.

April 24/15: The undisclosed customer in Raytheon’s $2 billion contract announced earlier this week for Patriot air defense systems is now thought to be Saudi Arabia. The company secured a multi-billion dollar contract with Poland this week, with the Patriot system also a contender for Germany’s air defense modernization requirement.

April 20/15: On Friday, Raytheon announced the award of a $2 billion contract to an undisclosed international customer for the supply of new-production Patriot systems, training and support. The precise variant of the system was not revealed, however the new systems will include the “latest technology for improved threat detection, identification and engagement,” which sounds like the PAC-3 variant.

Nov 5/14: Korea. The US DSCA announces South Korea’s official export request for PAC-3 missiles to upgrade its Korea Air Missile Defense (KAMD) system from its existing PAC-2 GEM-Ts. This will create better interoperability with American forces in theater, while enhancing the country’s ballistic missile defenses (q.v. March 12/14). The estimated cost is up to $1.405 billion, and includes:

• 136 PAC-3 Missiles with containers
  
• 2 Patriot-As-A-Target (PAAT) Flight Test Targets with 2 PAC-3 Telemetry Kits
  
• 10 Fire Solution Computers
  
• 18 Launcher Station Modification Kits
  
• 8 Guided Missile Transporters
  
• 8 Missile Round Trainers
  
• 8 PAC-3 Slings
  
• 13 Installation Kits for TPX-58 Identification Friend or Foe with KIV-77 crypto
  
• PAC-3 Ground Support Equipment (GSE)
  
• 10 Shorting Plugs
  
• 77 Defense Advanced Global Positioning Receivers (DAGR GPS) and Installation Kits
  
• Patriot Fiber Optic Modem
  
• 4 AN/VRC-90E Radios with Installation Kits
  
• 10 Patriot Automated Logistics System Kits
  
• Plus the usual spare and repair parts, support equipment, communication equipment, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, and US Government and contractor support.

The principal contractors will be Raytheon Corporation in Andover, MA (config-3 ground systems); and Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas, TX (PAC-3 missiles). Implementation of this proposed sale won’t require the assignment of any additional US Government or contractor personnel to Korea, beyond temporary in-country visits to meet program technical and management oversight and support requirements. Sources: US DSCA #14-52, “Republic of Korea – Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC-3) Missiles”.

DSCA request: South Korea (136 PAC-3 & Config-3 upgrades)

Oct 14/14: PATRIOT. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $595.5 million foreign military sales contract modification, covering FY 2014 production for Kuwait, Taiwan, Qatar, and the UAE. They’re selling 152 PAC-3 cost reduction initiative missiles, 15 PAC-3 launcher modification kits, and the associated ground equipment, tooling, and initial spares. $543 million is committed immediately.

The PAC-3 CRI missile was used as the base for the PAC-3 MSE missile, but the MSE also adds a number of new technologies, and changes the missile’s structure. In contrast, PAC-3 CRI missiles offer PAC-3 performance at a slightly lower cost.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, Lufkin, and El Paso, TX; Camden, AR; Chelmsford, MA; Ocala, FL; Huntsville, AL; and Anaheim, CA; and will continue until May 31/16. Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-14-C-0034, PO 0008).

PAC-3 missiles: Kuwait, Qatar, Taiwan, UAE

Oct 1/14: Saudi Arabia. The US DSCA announces a Saudi Arabian export request for more PATRIOT PAC-3 missiles, with Lockheed Martin in Dallas, TX and Raytheon in Tewksbury, MA as the designated contractors to negotiate with. the contract could be worth up to $1.75 billion, on top of previous request and sales involving a $1.7 billion upgrade of PATRIOT systems to Config-3 status for PAC-3 missile use (q.v. Nov 30/11), high-end maintenance and re-certification contracts (q.v. Dec 23/11, Nov 28/12), and a national C4I system (q.v. Nov 26/12).

This time, they want to buy up to 202 PATRIOT PAC-3 Missiles with containers, and 1 Patriot as a Target (PAC-2 Guidance Enhanced Missile GEM Flight Test Target). They also want up to 36 Launcher Station Modification Kits, 6 Fire Solution Computers, 6 Patriot Automated Logistics Systems Kits, 2 PAC-3 Telemetry Kits, 2 Missile Round Trainers, 2 PAC-3 Slings, 6 Shorting Plugs, spare and repair parts, lot validation and range support, ground support equipment, repair and return, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, a Quality Assurance Team, and other US Government and contractor support.

“The proposed sale will help replenish Saudi’s current [PAC-2] Patriot missiles which are becoming obsolete and difficult to sustain due to age and the limited availability of repair parts. The purchase of PAC-3 missiles will support current and future defense missions…. Although [industrial] offsets are requested, they are unknown at this time and will be determined during negotiations between the KSA and contractor.”

Implementation of this proposed program will require 1 additional US contractor to travel to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for a period of 3 years for equipment fielding and system checkout. Sources: US DSCA #14-43, “Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) – Patriot Air Defense System with PAC-3 Enhancement”.

DSCA request: Saudis (202 PAC-3s)

FY 2014

Purchases: USA, Kuwait, Qatar; Requests: Saudi Arabia, South Korea; 2 batteries deployed to Turkey; DOT&E highlight reliability issues with radar, Raytheon crafts significant system upgrades for Polish competition, becomes a finalist; South Korea buys PAC-2 GEM-Ts, will upgrade to PAC-3/Config-3. Greek PAC-2
(click to view full)

July 16/14: Upgrades. Raytheon announces a $235.5 million full rate production contract for Radar Digital Processor (RDP) kits, to upgrade PATRIOT systems for the USA and 2 partner nations. The changes will also allow support for the new PAC-3 MSE missile. As DID discussed when covering industrial process and component increases (q.v. May 10/14):

“The introduction of the new Radar Digital Processor in the Configuration-3 radar eliminates older components, provides a 12x improvement in mean time between failure, and increases radar processing efficiency. Innovations include radar system chips that have shrunk by 87.5%, and would almost fit into the grooves on a dime’s side. Meanwhile, Radar Digital Processor has dropped from 435 circuit cards to 5 in one of its assemblies, 16 power supplies have been combined into 1, and wiring that used to require 31 cables now takes 10. The space this opened up could house some refrigerator models, and is available for future upgrades.”

Raytheon also expects 40% improvement in Mea Time Between Failure, and notes that reducing the number of battery replaceable units from 759 to 56 should provide some maintenance savings. US Army Aviation and Missile Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL manages the contract. Sources: Raytheon, “US Army awards Raytheon $235.5 million contract for Patriot”.

July 15/14: R&D. Raytheon touts successful prototyping of Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) and Gallium Nitride (GaN) technologies into the PATRIOT system’s radar. It’s part of a wider, privately-developed upgrade that will also include 360 degree coverage (q.v. June 12/14), and goes beyond extensive manufacturing and design improvements within the existing technology framework (q.v. May 10/13):

“…these technologies will significantly increase the defended area and decrease the time to detect, discriminate and engage threats. The introduction of GaN-based AESA technologies will also further improve reliability and lower the life cycle costs for the Patriot radar, beyond what has already been achieved with other recent Patriot radar improvements.”

Raytheon has made significant investments in GaN as a better base for semiconductors, and is also working with materials like synthetic diamond’s improved heat dissipation for denser circuits. GaN is more expensive than standard Gallium Arsenide, so for the moment it’s restricted to high-value applications like radars that appreciate its performance boost. Sources: Raytheon, “Raytheon demonstrates successful prototyping of AESA/GaN technologies into Patriot radar”.

July 14/14: Qatar. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel hosts Qatar’s Minister of State for Defense Affairs Hamad bin Ali al-Attiyah at the Pentagon, where they sign letters of offer and acceptance worth around $11 billion for AH-64E Apache helicopters, Patriot PAC-3 air and missile defense systems (q.v. March 27/14, July 8/14), and FGM-148 Javelin Block 1 anti-tank missiles.

Details remain scarce, but their Nov 7/12 DSCA request covered up to 11 fire units, using Config-3 ground equipment and a combination of PAC-2 GEM-T (246) and PAC-3 (768) interceptor missiles. Lockheed Martin’s Oct 15/14 release only says that the initial contract “…is for missile and command launch system production.” Sources: Pentagon, “U.S., Qatar Sign Letters on $11 Billion in Helicopters, Defense Systems” | Lockheed Martin, “Qatar Becomes 8th International Customer for Lockheed Martin’s PAC-3 Missile”.

Qatar PATRIOT systems

July 14/14: Kuwait. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $28.5 million modification for PATRIOT PAC-3 Launcher Modification Kit Phase II Redesigns, on behalf of Kuwait. All funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed at Grand Prairie, TX; Clearwater, FL; Minneapolis, MN; and Aguadilla, PR; and is expected to be complete by Sept 30/17. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, is the contracting activity (W31P4Q-12-G-0001, PO 0007).

July 8/14: Sub-contractors. Japan’s new relaxation of its self-imposed arms export ban may be about to benefit Qatar, via a sub-component of Qatar’s PAC-2 GEM-T missiles. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries already manufactures the PAC-2 GEM missile and related ground equipment for Japan, under a license agreement with Raytheon. They also assemble PAC-3 missiles under an agreement with Lockheed Martin.

The report said that MHI would produce a “key component of the infrared seeker set into the tip of the missile to identify and track incoming targets,” but Raytheon has confirmed that the PAC-2 GEM-T has no such infrared component. They’ve also confirmed that this is still just a discussion about incorporating components manufactured by MHI, rather than a hard agreement. Sources: Raytheon | Channel NewsAsia, “Japan reportedly set for first arms export under new rules”.

June 30/14: Poland. Poland’s MON announces the Wisla air and missile defense program’s finalists: Raytheon (q.v. June 12/14), 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 that “znajdowac sie na uzbrojeniu panstw NATO.” Once those requirements were set, MEADS and David’s Sling failed to qualify. Sources: Poland MON, “Kolejny etap realizacji programu Wisla zakonczony”.

June 12/14: Poland, Upgrades. Raytheon Company and Bumar Elektronika announce a partnership to design and develop a modernized Patriot Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) antenna that can upgrade previous ground systems. Meanwhile, Raytheon has begun laying out its broader vision for WISLA.

The IFF system will be used as part of an “advanced Patriot 360 degree radar.” Raytheon says that it would be based on the current AN/APG-65 with the new Radar Digital Processor, but it would carry an all-new antenna, and rotate for full hemispheric coverage. The result would also be an attractive upgrade for customers whose emplaced PATRIOTs are currently limited to a 120 degree field of regard. It would also bring Raytheon closer to parity with Lockheed’s MEADS, which substitutes three 360-degree radars (2 X-band MFCR, 1 UHF-band VSR) in place of the PATRIOT system’s single G-band MPQ-53 (PAC-2) or MPQ-65 (PAC-3).

A new open-architecture, NATO-compatible Common Command and Control (CC2) system would be a joint Raytheon-Polish development, incorporating PATRIOT fire control software, but allowing the integration of options like NASAMS and other systems. CC2’s design, development, and testing would be done in partnership with Polish industry, with the final product produced in Poland.

Missile choice would be up to Poland. Raytheon makes PAC-2 GEM missiles, while Lockheed Martin makes PAC-3 and PAC-3 MSE missiles. To flank their rival at the high end, Raytheon is offering a “new advanced Low Cost Interceptor (LCI)” option. This refers to Raytheon’s PAAC-4 offering, which can add RAFAEL’s Stunner missiles from the competing David’s Sling air defense/ ABM system. If previous reports are true (q.v. May 14/14), Raytheon has effectively recruited their Israeli competitor into their team. The final LCI missile solution would be based on Polish requirements, and it’s worth noting that Raytheon is also RAFAEL’s partner for the famous Iron Dome counter-rocket system. Sources: Direct discussions | Raytheon, “Poland’s Bumar Elektronika and Raytheon Partner to Develop New Patriot IFF Antenna”.

May 19/14: Support. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $212.3 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity foreign military sales contract, for the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) Missile Support Center’s services to PAC-3 customers.

Funding and work location will be determined with each order, from customers including Japan, Taiwan, Germany, Netherlands, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates. Estimated completion date is Dec 31/17. This contract is for 3.5 years instead of 1, but it’s a full order of magnitude larger than similar contracts since 2006. The US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL acts as their agent (W31P4Q-13-D-0030, PO 0006). See also Lockheed Martin, “Lockheed Martin Receives $212 Million Contract for PAC-3 Missile Support”.

April 28/14: South Korea. South Korea’s defense establishment formally confirms their intent to upgrade existing PATRIOT systems to PAC-3/Config-3 status (q.v. March 12/14). The budget is WON 1.3 – 1.4 trillion (about $1.25 billion), and they aim to deploy the system between 2016 – 2020. Sources: The Korea Herald, “Seoul to upgrade missile defense”.

March 31/14: Support. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives an $8.3 million contract modification for the repair and return of PATRIOT Missile parts pertaining to Israel, Kuwait, Taiwan, Japan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Holland and the United Arab Emirates.

All funds are committed, using FY 2013 – 2014 budgets. Estimated completion date is June 30/15. Work will be performed in Andover, MA. US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL manages the contract on behalf of its FMS clients (W31P4Q-13-C-0111, PO 0008).

March 28/14: PAC-3 MSE Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $610.9 million “modification to a foreign military sales contract” for the PATRIOT system advanced capability production to include 92 one pack Missiles, 50 launcher modification kits and associated ground equipment, tooling, and initial spares.

Only the PAC-3 MSE is a “one pack” missile, and an April 29/14 release from Lockheed describes this as “…the first production order of the PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) following the Army’s successful Milestone C decision earlier this year.” It would appear that the Pentagon’s wording to imply exports was misleading – the contract number, which is associated with Kuwait, may be as well.

The effect of the contract is to commit a total of $873.8 million in FY 2013 – 2014 budgets. The estimated completion date is May 31/16. Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, Lufkin, and El Paso, TX; Camden, AR; Chelmsford, MA; Ocala, FL; Huntsville, AL; and Anaheim, CA. US Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, AL manages the contract as an agent of their FMS customer (W31P4Q-14-C-0034, PO 0003). See also Lockheed Martin, “Lockheed Martin Receives $611 Million Contract for Production of First PAC-3 MSE Missiles”.

1st PAC-3 MSE order

March 27/14: Qatar. At DIMDEX 2014 in Doha, the Emirate announces $23 billion worth of military contracts, including a PATRIOT missile system contract related to its Nov 7/12 DSCA request. Sources: Al Defaiya, “Qatar Announces Big Defense Deals at DIMDEX 2014″ | Arabian Aerospace, “Qatar in $23bn arms order including Apache and NH90 helicopters” | Reuters, “Qatar buys helicopters, missiles in $23 billion arms deals”.

March 12/14: Korea. DAPA spokesman Baek Youn-hyeong announces that South Korea has decided to shift its missile defense into higher gear. They’ll push for a full upgrade of their ex-German PATRIOT PAC-2/ Config-2 batteries to Config-3 ground systems, then buy PAC-3 missiles to switch in for existing PAC-2s. An anonymous official said that their goal is to sign a contract by December 2014, and begin to take deliveries in 2016.

Costs haven’t been negotiated yet, and another export request will be necessary, but the ministry reportedly set aside around KRW 1.5 trillion ($1.34 billion) in an earlier arms procurement plan. It isn’t clear whether DAPA would still seek to add another 112 PAC-2 GEM-T missiles (q.v. Dec 23/13), but PAC-3/ Config-3 naturally positions itself as a replacement rather than a supplement.

The ROK will also be pursuing related offensive and defensive systems, in the wake of recent North Korean rocket launches. DAPA intends to develop its MLRS rockets for ranges beyond 70-80km, in order to match the North’s 300mm systems, and one can expect precision guidance for lethal counterfire capabilities. On the defensive front, DAPA intends to spend KRW 200 billion ($186 million) in the next 5 years to field a tracked short-range gun/missile system based on the Bi-Ho, with twin-30mm guns and the SA-18 derived Chiron/ Shin-Gung missile. That won’t kill rockets, but it will add air defense resources. Alongside the ROKAF’s modern qualitative edge in the air, their SAM system seems to be evolving toward Biho Hybrid LLAD, plus short range Chun Ma/ Crotale NG missiles, plus remaining MIM-23 Hawk batteries which will be replaced by the K-SAM/ Cheongung cooperative effort with Russia. That’s an effective layered system, reducing reliance on PATRIOT batteries for conventional air defense. Sources: IMINT & Analysis, “The South Korean SAM Network ” | Arirang, “South Korea seeking Patriot missile upgrade by end of year” | Chosun Ilbo, “S.Korea to Upgrade Patriot Missile Defense” | Korea Herald, “Korea to buy PAC-3 missiles next year” | Reuters, “South Korea says seeks Patriot missiles upgrade deal by December”.

March 4-11/14: Budgets. The US military slowly files its budget documents, detailing planned spending from FY 2014 – 2019. For the PAC-3 MSE missile, there have been several notable changes.

The first is a sharply increased initial FY14 buy of 86 missiles, instead of 56. After that, the amounts are slightly below previously projections. The 2nd change is that the projected cost per missile drops sharply from $8 million in FY15 to around $5.5 million in FY16, and every year thereafter. $5.5M had been the program’s goal, but FY14 documents didn’t expect to get there until after FY18. The 3rd noticeable change may be related, and involves R&D spending dropping off a cliff beginning in FY15.

Feb 28/14: Kuwait. Raytheon in Andover, MA was awarded a $655.4 million firm-fixed-price, sole-source contract from Kuwait for 2 new-build Patriot fire units and associated initial spares. The new systems include recent upgrades to the PATRIOT’s ground systems, including increased computing power and radar processing efficiency, and a better interface for the operators. These new systems are part of Kuwait’s PAC-3 missile orders, and seem especially linked to their July 25/12 DSCA request, but note that the PAC-3 missiles themselves are a separate Lockheed Martin product (q.v. Dec 31/13).

All funds are committed immediately, and the contract runs until April 30/18. Work will be performed in Andover, MA, Chatsworth, CA, and in Greece. One bid was solicited with 1 received by US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, A. They’re acting as Kuwait’s FMS agent (W31P4Q-14-C-0052). Sources: Pentagon DefenseLINK | Raytheon, “Raytheon Awarded $655 Million Contract for Patriot”.

Kuwait: PATRIOT Fire Units

Jan 29/14: R&D. Raytheon in Andover, MA receives a $107.9 million in FY 2014 RDT&E funds for work on the Patriot missile system.

All funds are committed immediately. Work will be performed at Andover, Billerica, Burlington, and Tewksbury, MA; El Segundo CA; El Paso TX; Huntsville AL; Norfolk VA; Pelham NH; and White Sands, NM until July 31/14 (W31P4Q-09-C-0057, PO 0108).

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), which features the PAC-3 & MSE. It was a good year for PATRIOT testing, with 5 PAC-3 & MSE tests that killed 4 ballistic missiles and 3 cruise missiles. The Army also addressed 14/21 recommendations from last year’s report, but there are still a few areas of concern.

The latest overall system version is Post Deployment Build-7 (PDB-7), which offered improvements against some threats compared to PDB-6.5 (q.v. Jan 17/12), and a step back against others. Those details are classified, but Army engagement procedures are said to be part of the problem. At the same time, DOT&E publicly spotlights reliability issues with the PATRIOT’s radar, which doesn’t collect key reliability data from the field, and training that isn’t adequate for complex engagements.

On the other hand, PATRIOT testing against radar-killing ARM missiles is only models and simulations. Those are the most common air defense killers, so a real test or 2 seems like a good idea. DOT&E also wants the Army to conduct PATRIOT testing during joint and coalition exercises that include large numbers of different aircraft types, sensors, battle management elements, and weapons systems, while conducting cyber-penetration testing of the system. Having PATRIOT act as a live interceptor backup while testing other systems like THAAD could be helpful, especially in cases like the FTI-01’s SM-3 test failure.

Nov 14/13: R&D. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $16.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for “the design, development, production, and fielding of a mobile capability outside the continental United States for reconstitution of 4-pack PAC-3 launcher assemblies.”

$4.2 million in FY 2014 funds is committed immediately. Estimated completion date is Nov 30/15. Work location is Grand Prairie, TX. One bid was solicited and one received (W31P4Q-14-C-0022).

Dec 31/13: Kuwait. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $263.4 million firm-fixed-price contract from the Emirate of Kuwait for 14 Patriot missile 4-packs and 7 launcher modification kits. Kuwait operates PATRIOT PAC-2 batteries, and is in the process of converting some of them to the PAC-3/Config-3 standard (q.v. July 25/12, July 2/13), while enhancing others with PAC-2 GEM-T missiles.

$23.8 million is committed immediately. Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX; Lufkin, TX; Camden, AR; Chelmsford, MA; Ocala, FL; El Paso, TX; Huntsville, AL; and Anaheim, CA; and will run until June 30/16. One bid was solicited with one received by US Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL, who acts as Kuwait’s agent (W31P4Q-14-C-0034).

Oct 25/13: South Korea. The US DSCA announces South Korea’s official request to buy 112 Patriot Anti-Tactical Missiles (basically PAC-2), which will be upgraded to the GEM-T configuration via a follow-on Direct Commercial Sale. They’ll also buy test equipment, spare and repair parts, personnel training, publications and technical data, and other forms of Government and contractor support. The estimated cost is up to $404 million.

Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA will be the prime contractor, and would also be the contractor for any DCS GEM-T upgrade. No additional US Government or contractor representatives will be deployed long-term, though teams will travel to the country on a temporary basis for logistics support. Sources: US DSCA #13-55 | NTI, “S. Korea Seeks More Patriot Missiles as N. Korea Eyes Rocket Launches”.

DSCA: South Korea PAC-2/GEM-Ts

Oct 17/13: Support. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives a $17.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, multi-year foreign military sales contract modification for PATRIOT repair and return services. This FMS contract is in support of Israel, Kuwait, Taiwan, Japan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Netherlands and the United Arab Emirates. US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL will act as their FMS agent (W31P4Q-13-C-0111, PO 0004).

FY 2013

Annual order; Kuwait begins PAC-3 orders; Raytheon discusses major upgrades to ground systems; New PAC-3 MSE aces twin-kill; South Korea pushed to PAC-3 by PAC-2’s BMD performance; Deployment to Turkey; Corruption investigation in Greece; Good PAC-3 performance in varied FIT-01 BMD test. New MMS Interface
(click to view full)

Sept 23/13: MMS upgrades. Raytheon in Andover, MA received a $44.9 million firm-fixed-price contract to buy PATRIOT MMS (modern manstation) upgrade kits for the USA and Kuwait.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA as a non-competitive acquisition, with 1 bid received by US Army Contracting Command (Missile) at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-13-C-0017).

Sept 9/13: Support. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA, was awarded a $9.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee multi-year contract modification of contract for foreign military sales for repair and return of Patriot missile parts. This contract was a foreign military sale to: Israel, Kuwait, Taiwan, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Korea, Republic of the Netherlands and United Arab Emirates.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA as a non-competitive contract, with the US Army Contracting Command – Missile at Redstone Arsenal, AL acting as the program agent for these countries (W31P4Q-13-C-0111, PO 0003).

Aug 31/13: PAAC-4? Raytheon’s partnership with Israel’s RAFAEL is about to result in a challenge to Lockheed Martin’s PAC-3/MSE missiles. Raytheon is RAFAEL’s US marketing partner for the well-known Iron Dome, and RAFAEL’s development partner for a different, longer-range system called David’s Sling. It will replace Israeli MIM-23 Hawk and PATRIOT PAC-2 batteries, and the US military has expressed cautious interest. The firms’ American proposal would integrate the 2-stage, EO and radar-guided, hit-to-kill Stunner/ Magic Wand missile into PATRIOT Config-3 ground systems.

What’s the attraction of a “Patriot Advanced Affordable Configuration 4″? Cost. The new PAC-3 MSE missile is just starting production, and budget figures show a production cost of about $6.3 million each in 2018. That’s expected to drop, but even a standard PAC-3 missile at full-rate production costs around $3.3 million. Raytheon and RAFAEL are touting Stunner cost figures that amount to less than $500,000 per missile, assuming 60% production in the USA, and the savings would be noticeable even if they doubled that cost. For $20 million, they’re prepared to prove their claims and build a prototype.

There are 2 catches here. The first is operational. David’s Sling won’t be fielded in Israel until 2014, and its initial block won’t have key capabilities like cruise missile/ UAV interception, or the ability to hit maneuvering ballistic targets. The 2nd catch is that the PAC-3 is well tested by the Army, and the MSE variant that begins production in FY 2014 is a derivative successor with full-spectrum capabilities. Unless further cuts really bite the Army hard, they’re going to be reluctant to embrace a less proven missile with fewer capabilities, even if the cost savings are significant. Sources: Defense News, “Raytheon-Rafael Pitch 4th-Gen Patriot System” | RAFAEL: Stunner (David’s Sling).

Aug 30/13: R&D. Lockheed Martin in Grand Praire, TX receives a $44.1 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification to redesign the PAC-3’s tactical telemetry.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie and Lufkin, TX; Chelmsford, MA; Ocala, FL, and Camden, AR, with funding from FY 2013 other authorization funds. One bid was received (W31P4Q-12-G-0001, PO 006).

Aug 26/13: Support. Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a maximum $7.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for PAC-3 and MSE engineering services, support for launchers’ ELES and fire solution computer software, and hardware post deployment.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX using FY 2012 “other procurement” funding. This contract was a competitive acquisition via the web with one bid received – though realistically, it’s unlikely that any other firm could have won. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Missile at Redstone Arsenal, AL manages the contract (W31P4Q-12-G-0001).

Aug 23/13: Support. Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a maximum $20.5 million cost-plus-incentive fee contract to redesign the PAC-3 and MSE’s Simplified Inertial Measurement Units (SIMU) and remove obsolete/ out-of-production parts. Inertial measurement uses very accurate accelerometers to help the missile know where it is in space, relative to its launch point.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX; Clearwater, FL, Minneapolis, MN, and Aguadilla, Puerto Rico, using FY 2013 Other Procurement funds. This contract was a non-competitive acquisition, with 1 bid solicited and 1 received. The U.S. Army Contracting Command ? Redstone Arsenal (Missile), Redstone Arsenal, Ala., is the contracting activity (W31P4Q-12-G-0001, Order 0004).

Aug 15/13: Testing. Another PAC-3 test against a ballistic missile target. Two missiles ripple-fired at White Sands, NM, and the target is destroyed by the 1st missile. Sources: Lockheed Martin Aug 15/13 release.

July 2/13: FY 2013. Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $308.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification from the USA and Kuwait. The Gulf Emirate becomes the PAC-3 missile’s 6th export customer, alongside Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Taiwan, and the UAE. Discussions with Lockheed Martin confirm that the total for the Jan 3/13 order and this one amount to 244 PAC-3 tactical missiles and 72 PAC-2 to PAC-3 launcher modification kits. The cumulative total face value of this contract is now $1.063 billion.

PAC-3 launchers mount 16 missiles instead of just 4 PAC-2s per launcher, and use some different systems. The modification kits include 4 PAC-3 Missile quad-pack canisters, a fire solution computer, an ELES (Enhanced Launcher Electronics System), and launcher support hardware.

The implication is that Kuwait is ordering 48 modification kits, but the missile buys don’t add. US Army budget FY 2014 justification documents show just 84 PAC-3 missiles, as the USA’s final order for the type. FY 2013 documents show 40 missiles for Taiwan, completing their multi-year order for 386, and FY 2014 documents show 60 missiles for Kuwait, beginning in that fiscal year. Lockheed Martin’s Jan 10/13 release left 44 missiles unaccounted for (168 – 40 = 128), and this release raises that number to 60, even if we presume that Kuwait has moved its entire FY 2014 buy into FY 2013 (244 – 84 – 40 – 60 = 60). DID is seeking to clarify.

$151.1 million is committed immediately, and the US Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL both manages American buys, and acts as Kuwait’s agent for those sales. Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, Lufkin and El Paso, TX; Camden, AR; Chelmsford, MA; Ocala, FL; Huntsville, AL; and Anaheim, CA (W31P4Q-13-C-0068, PO 0002). Deliveries will begin in 2014. See also: Lockheed Martin Aug 12/13 release.

FY 2013 PAC-3, Part 2: USA & Kuwait

Aug 1/13: Testing. Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $25.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for the new PAC-3 MSE missile’s follow on test program. $6.1 million is committed immediately, and the cumulative total face value of this contract is now $51 million (W31P4Q-07-G-0001, #001213).

Aug 1/13: Support. Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $9.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for unscheduled maintenance at the PAC-3 Missile Support Center. This brings the contract’s total value so far to $29.5 million (W31P4Q-13-D-0030, #0005).

July 25/13: Support. Raytheon in Huntsville, AL receives a modification to their $16.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, option-filled, multi-year contract, paying for PATRIOT depot-level diagnostics and repair. The cumulative total face value of this contract is now $31.1 million. Work will be performed in Fort Sill, OK; El Paso, TX; Fort Bragg, NC; and Fort Hood, TX (W91P4Q-12-C-0238, PO 0004).

June 27/13: Training. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives a maximum $19.6 million firm-fixed-price contract for PATRIOT Mobile Flight Simulators. $9.6 million in FY 2013 RDT&E funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed in White Sands Missile Range, NM, and Andover, MA. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-13-C-0018).

June 18/13: Upgrades. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives a $10.4 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, for PATRIOT Radar Digital Processor Upgrade Kits (q.v. May 10/13 entry), bringing the contract’s cumulative total value to $21.2 million. FY 2013 Procurement funds are being committed (W31P4Q-13-C-0016).

June 16/13: Kuwait, Germany. Raytheon’s VP of Integrated Air and Missile Defense, Sanjay Kapoor, tells Bloomberg that negotiations to sell Kuwait its next set of PATRIOT equipment and missiles (q.v. July 25/12 entry) are almost done.

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 its 1st major test at White Sands Missile Range, NM, killing both a tactical ballistic missile (TBM) target and a cruise missile.

The TBM got 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.

June 3/13: Support. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX receives a maximum $12 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for PAC-3 field support services.

Fiscal 2013 Procurement funds this award, and work will be performed in Dallas, TX; Kuwait; El Paso, TX; Killeen, TX; Lawton, OK; Fayetteville, NC; Bahrain; Germany; Japan; Korea; Qatar; Turkey; and the United Arab Emirates. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-13-C-0100).

May 10/13: Support. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $32.1 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification, extending recertification and repair services in support of the PAC-3 Missile Support Center program. The cumulative total face value of this contract is now $91 million. FY 2013 Operation and Maintenance funds are being used to find this award (W31P4Q-12-C-0100, PO 0014).

Upgrades
click for video

May 10/13: Raytheon’s Upgrades. Raytheon discusses major design and manufacturing changes to the PATRIOT Config 3 ground systems, and PAC-2 GEM missiles, over the last few years. The firm says that designers have invested more than $400 million over the last 4 years to change manufacturing, improve performance, and make the system more reliable. That’s a big deal, after a DOT&E report (q.v. Jan 17/12 entry) that slammed the system’s “poor radar reliability and system availability”.

First, the components themselves have changed. The introduction of the new Radar Digital Processor in the Configuration-3 radar eliminates older components, provides a 12x improvement in mean time between failure, and increases radar processing efficiency. Innovations include radar system chips that have shrunk by 87.5%, and would almost fit into the grooves on a dime’s side. Meanwhile, Radar Digital Processor has dropped from 435 circuit cards to 5 in one of its assemblies, 16 power supplies have been combined into 1, and wiring that used to require 31 cables now takes 10. The space this opened up could house some refrigerator models, and is available for future upgrades. Similar changes have taken place within the PAC-2 GEM-T missile, even as the Config-3 control room got a big makeover with color touch screens, faster computers, etc.

In tandem with that, the manufacturing processes have changed, as work crews ripped out whole sections of the factory to installed brand-new machinery. New ceramics are used in the missile’s radome. Computer-controlled tools that can compensate for room temperature and other factors cut beams to support the radar’s antenna. “Chip shooter” machines install 30,000 components an hour, making cleaner connections.

The first new GEM-T missile was fired at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico in August 2011, followed by a test firing of the first complete, new-production Patriot system in 2012 (q.v. March 29/12 entry). Raytheon: Release | Feature | Infographic [PDF, view at 200+%]

Raytheon’s Config-3 & PAC-2 upgrades

April 12/13: PAC-3 Testing. Lockheed Martin’s PAC-3 Missile successfully detects, tracks and intercepts a tactical ballistic missile (TBM) in a Lower Tier Project Office flight test at White Sands Missile Range, NM. The 1st missile kills it, and so the 2nd one self-destructs.

It’s one of the steps along the path to the PAC-3 MSE’s big test at White Sands, later this year. Lockheed Martin.

April 10/13: FY 2014 Budget. The President releases a proposed budget at last, the latest in modern memory. The Senate and House were already working on budgets in his absence, but the Pentagon’s submission is actually important to proceedings going forward. See ongoing DID coverage. FY 2014 is a big transition for PATRIOT, as PAC-3 missiles are no longer being ordered, and PAC-3 MSE missile production begins in earnest. Relevant figures can be found in the article’s charts.

April 1/13: PAC-2 GEM-T Recert. Raytheon announces that its PAC-2/ GEM-T missiles have received US Army approval for a 2nd recertification, extending the world-wide fleet’s operational life from 30 – 45 years. Recertification and upgrades can be done at a fraction of replacement cost, and since replacements are likely to be Lockheed Martin’s PAC-3s, that’s a very good selling point for Raytheon.

The decision comes on the heels of a recent $46.7 million U.S. Army contract awarded to Raytheon to recertify and upgrade Patriot missiles to the latest GEM-T configuration, as part of the continuous Patriot modernization effort. Raytheon.

Feb 11/13: Sweden. Sweden’s deputy prime minister and Liberal Party leader Jan Bjorklund thinks Sweden’s military capabilities have hit a dangerous level, and believe the country needs to place national defense priorities before international missions as Russia begins to re-arm.

What’s unusual is that he openly suggested buying PATRIOT missiles from the USA during an interview with Svenska Dagbladet, and proposed to base them on the Baltic island of Gotland as forward air defense. MBDA probably feels slighted that their longer-range Aster-30 SAMP/T wasn’t mentioned.

The comments come about a month after Swedish Armed Forces commander-in-chief Sverker Göransson said that the country could only defend itself for about a week under sustained attack. It probably didn’t make things any more comfortable when Danish NATO head Anders Fogh Rasmussen told the same annual security conference that Sweden couldn’t count on NATO coming to their defense, despite Swedish membership in NATO’s Partnership for Peace. The Local.

Jan 7/13: Testing. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $12.5 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to establish a PAC-3 MSE Missile Field Test Program.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX, with an estimated completion date of March 31/14. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-13-C-0094).

Jan 3/13: PAC-3. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $755.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for PAC-3 missiles and related services, which includes support for Foreign Military Sales to Taiwan.

The contract covers 168 hit-to-kill PAC-3 Missiles, 27 launcher modification kits and associated tooling, and program management and services. This is the US government’s 14th production buy of the PAC-3 Missile. US Army budget documents place Taiwan’s FY 2013 order at 40 missiles, completing their multi-year order for 386.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie & Lufkin, TX; Camden, AR; Chelmsford, MA; and Ocala, FL; with an estimated completion date of July 31/15. One bid was solicited, with one bid received. US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL manages the contract (W31P4Q-13-C-0068). See also Lockheed Martin 2013-01-10 release.

FY 2013 PAC-3

Jan 3/13: Taiwan. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives a $72.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for PATRIOT Config-3 spares in support of Foreign Military Sales. Raytheon confirms to DID that these are spares for Taiwan.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA, and El Paso, TX, with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/15. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-09-G-0002).

Jan 3/13: Taiwan. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives a $22.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for PATRIOT Technical Refresh Spares. Raytheon confirms to DID that these are for Taiwan.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/14. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-09-G-0002).

Jan 3/13: Kuwait. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives a $22.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification buying PATRIOT Spare Parts. Raytheon confirms to DID that these are are for Kuwait.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W31P4Q-09-G-0002).

Dec 20/12: CTR. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives a $46.7 million firm-fixed-price contract. The award will provide for the modernization of the PATRIOT Advanced Capability missiles through the continuous technology refreshment program.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA with an estimated completion date of Dec 17/16. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received. US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL manages the contract (W31P4Q-13-C-0088).

Nov 28/12: Saudi Arabia. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Saudi Arabia’s official request to buy technical services and re-certify up to 300 PATRIOT PAC-2 GEMs (MIM-104D Guidance Enhanced Missiles). They also want to perform some modernization of existing equipment, and receive spare and repair parts, support equipment, and other forms of US Government and contractor support. The estimated cost is up to $130 million.

The DSCA says that proposed re-certification program will allow the Royal Saudi Air Defense Forces to extend the shelf life of the PAC-2 missiles for another 12 years. Raytheon Corporation in Andover, MA will be the prime contractor, but the US Army’s Letterkenny Army Depot in Chambersburg, PA will perform the re-certification. Implementation of this proposed sale will require 1 Raytheon representative to travel to the Missile Assembly Disassembly Facility in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia on an extended basis for missile assembly/disassembly support, system checkout, training and technical and logistics support.

DSCA: Saudis request PATRIOT PAC-2 re-cert

Dec 14/12: To Turkey. The USA will send 2 batteries of Patriot missiles and 400 troops to Turkey, as part of a NATO force meant to protect Turkish territory from potential Syrian missile attack. Germany and the Netherlands had already agreed to provide 2 PATRIOT batteries each, along with 400 German and 360 Dutch troops, bringing the total number of Patriot batteries slated for Turkey to 6. Yahoo! News.

Nov 7/12: Qatar. The US DSCA announces that Qatar is looking to buy up to 11 PATRIOT Configuration 3 fire units, at a cost of up to $9.9 billion. The PAC-2 GEM-T and PAC-3 missiles would serve as the country’s lower BMD tier, beneath the requested (q.v. Nov 5/12) THAAD exo-atmospheric interceptors. The request includes up to:

• 11 AN/MSQ-132 Engagement Control Systems
  
• 11 AN/MPQ-65 Radar Sets
  
• 11 Electrical Power Plants (EPPII)
  
• 30 Antenna Mast Groups
  
• 44 M902 Launching Stations
  
• 246 PATRIOT MIM-104E Guidance Enhanced Missile-TBM (GEM-T) with canisters
  
• 2 PATRIOT MIM-104E GEM-T Test Missiles
  
• 768 PATRIOT Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3) Missiles with canisters
  
• 10 PAC-3 Test Missiles with canisters
  
• 8 Multifunctional Information Distribution Systems/Low Volume Terminals (MIDS/LVTs)
  
• Plus communications equipment, tools and test equipment, support equipment, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, spare and repair parts, facility design, and other Government and contractor support.

The prime contractors will be Raytheon Corporation in Andover, MD (Config-3 ground systems and GEM-T missiles), and Lockheed-Martin in Dallas, TX (PAC-3 missiles). If a sale is concluded, the Qataris will need about 30 U.S. Government and 40 contractor representatives in Qatar for an extended period for equipment de-processing/ fielding, system checkout, training ,and technical and logistics support. Sources: US DSCA #12-58.

DSCA: Qatar request

Oct 29/12: Greece. Up to 8 Greek arms deals signed since the late 1990s are the subjects of investigations into illegal bribes and kickbacks, and Greece’s purchase of US-made Patriot missiles has advanced to the docket of an investigating magistrate. Investigators are probing bank accounts and offshore companies, and some cases involve more than 1 defense minister.

There is a precedent in former PASOK (socialist) Defense Minister Akis Tsochatzopoulos, who sits in Korydallos Prison awaiting charges for money laundering during his 1996 – 2001 term. ekathimerini.

Oct 28/12: South Korea. A joint study by the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses and the US Missile Defense Agency concludes that the PATRIOT PAC-2 system has an interception success rate of below 40% against ballistic missiles. South Korea’s government looked at that, then concluded that they need to buy PAC-3 batteries, in order to push their odds above 70% for covered areas.

The PAC-3 systems appear to be a priority, with deliveries to begin in 2014. To achieve that, a DSCA export request will need to be issued in the very near future. As PAC-3 systems arrive, South Korea reportedly plans to divert their billion-dollar buy of German PAC-2 batteries to defend against aircraft and cruise missiles. ROK’s Yonhap News Agency | Chosun Ilbo.

Oct 25/12: FIT-01 Test. Pacific Chimera (aka. Flight Test Integrated-01) features a combination of land and sea missile defense systems, who go 4/5 against a combination of ballistic missile and cruise missile targets. The USA’s Command and Control, Battle Management, and Communications (C2BMC) system acted as FIT-01’s command and control backbone.

The Medium Range Ballistic Missile E-LRALT (Extended Long Range Air Launch Target) was launched out of a C-17, tracked by a US Army AN/TPY-2 radar on Meck Island, and destroyed by its companion THAAD missile.

A pair of Short Range Ballistic Missile targets were launched from a platform in the ocean. One was destroyed by a US Army PATRIOT PAC-3 system, but the USS Fitzgerald’s [DDG 62] attempt to intercept the 2nd SRBM target with a long-range SM-3 Block 1A missile failed. They’re still trying to figure out why, because there were no obvious malfunctions.

The USS Fitzgerald had better luck with an SM-2 missile against a low flying cruise missile target, and the Army’s PATRIOT PAC-3 battery racked up a cruise missile kill of its own. Final tally: 80%. US MDA | Lockheed Martin | Raytheon.

Oct 5/12: Infrastructure. Raytheon in Andover, MA receives a $7.9 million firm-fixed-price contract to upgrade PATRIOT depot maintenance plant equipment.

Work will be performed in Tewksbury, MA, and White Sands, NM, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/16. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-12-C-0287).

FY 2012

Annual order; Big Taiwan order for PATRIOT/PAC-3 systems; Export request from Kuwait; Successful test using JLENS aerostat for cueing; BMD test for new PAC-3 CRI missile variant; New PAC-3 MSE missile kills “over the shoulder”; Testing milestones for new-build Config-3 ground systems; PATRIOT shipment to Korea gets much more exciting than intended; Pentagon testers highlight poor system reliability. Patriot Radar
(click to view full)

July 25/12: Kuwait. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Kuwait’s official request to add to its PATRIOT assets. The request begins by asking for 60 more PAC-3 missiles, a request that has been made before (q.v. Dec 4/07 – 80 PAC-3 missiles). Kuwait has also added a stock of PAC-2 GEM-T missiles (vid. Dec 11/10 and Jan 24/11 entries).

Beyond the missiles themselves, this request requests ground equipment for 2 more fully modern (Config-3) batteries, plus additional equipment to extend existing infrastructure: 4 PATRIOT radars, 4 PATRIOT Engagement Control Stations, 20 PATRIOT Launching Stations, 2 Information Coordination Centrals, 10 Electric Power Plants, communication and power equipment. The Dec 4/07 request has already ordered Config-3 upgrades to 6 radars and associated equipment. Personnel training and training equipment, spare and repair parts, facility design and construction, and other forms of U.S. Government and contractor support round out the possible order. The estimated cost is up to $4.2 billion

The principal contractors will be Raytheon Corporation in Tewksbury, MA and Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas, TX. Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of 3 contractor representatives to Kuwait on a temporary basis for program, technical support, and management oversight.

DSCA: Kuwait PAC-3/Config-3 request

Sept 13/12: Testing. A pair of PAC-3 missiles are successfully ripple-fired at a tactical ballistic missile (TBM) target at White Sands Missile Range, NM. The first interceptor destroyed the target and the second PAC-3 Missile self destructed as planned. Lockheed Martin.

July 16/12: CTR. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA received a $7.5 million firm-fixed-price export contract for new modern adjunct processor upgrade kits. The recipients were not discussed.

Work will be performed in Phoenix, AZ; El Segundo, CA; Anaheim, CA; Fremont, CA; Charlottesville, VA; and Andover, MA; and will run until Nov 30/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-10-C-0301).

July 13/12: Getting MSE ready. Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $69 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to support of PAC-3 MSE Initial Production Facilities. Work will be performed in Grand Prairie and Camden, AR; Lufkin, TX; and Ocala, FL; with an estimated completion date of July 2/14. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-12-C-0001).

The contract is pretty explicit about getting the new PAC-3 MSE missile ready for production, which is set to begin in FY 2014 with orders for 56. The US Army plans to order a total 1m680 PAC-3 MSE missiles over the lifetime of that program, which will be worth $9.114 billion. By 2015, the Army expects the more capable PAC-3 MSE to cost less per missile (around $7.5 million) than the current PAC-3 (about $7.6 million), with costs continuing to drop for the MSE after that. Time will tell if beginning MSE’s design from the PAC-3 Cost Reduction Initiative (CRI) blueprint will deliver on its promise, or not. See also Lockheed Martin release.

May 6/12: Support. Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX wins a $34.7 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract, to fund the PAC-3 Missile Support Center. Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX until Dec 31/13. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 1 bid received by the US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-12-C-0100).

April 30/12: JLENS/ PATRIOT test. The promised firing test takes place during an exercise at the Utah Training and Test Range. The JELNS high-altitude aerostat picked up the target on radar, and provided tracking data to the PATRIOT system. Raytheon says that:

“In addition to destroying the target drone, initial indications are that the JLENS-Patriot systems integration met test objectives.”

That will help make the case for JLENS as a very low operating cost option for cruise missile defense, but is it too late? The Pentagon has decided to remove the program’s production phase, leaving just the 2 testing “orbits”. Raytheon | Lockheed Martin.

April 13/12: Support. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $7.6 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract, to support the PAC-3 Missile Support Center. Work will be performed in Dallas, TX, with an estimated completion date of March 30/13. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 1 bid received by the US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-12-C-0100).

April 9/12: Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $45.4 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for PAC launcher modification kits. Lockheed makes the PAC-3 missile, which demands a different launcher system than Raytheon’s larger PAC-2.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX; Camden, AR; Lufkin, TX; and Ocala, FL, with an estimated completion date of July 31/14. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-11-C-0001).

April 2/12: UAE. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives a $67.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for UAE Patriot spares. Work will be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-09-G-0002).

March 30/12: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” for 2012. It places the current total PAC-3 sub-program cost at $11.581 billion in FY 2012 dollars. That number has risen just 14.1% over the past 5 years, though the change from the initial program estimate is a bit more radical: 122.2%.

March 30/12: SAR. The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 31/11. The overall program cost for the PAC-3 sub-program stands at $10.205 billion in base-year dollars.

March 29/12: New-production tests. Raytheon announces a series of testing milestones involving new-production PATRIOT Config. 3 systems, as opposed to upgraded systems. One is the successful firing of 2 PAC-3 missiles to engage a tactical ballistic missile (TBM) at White Sands Missile Range, NM. Surprisingly, this is the 1st firing of PAC-3s from a new-build system.

This test comes on the heels of a successful March 21/12 system-level guided flight test of the new-production Patriot system, and the successful test of the first ground-up production PAC-2 GEM-T missile in October 2011. Raytheon.

Feb 15/12: New BMD target. The U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command and Army Forces Strategic Command successfully complete a test flight of the new Economical Target-1 at Eglin AFB, FL. ET-1 is a threat representative tactical ballistic missile that could be used to test PATRIOT missiles going forward. It’s a combination of excess body and motor assemblies from the government, and a nose and tail assembly made at Holloman AFB, NM.

The ET-1 was launched using SMDC’s new 25K Transportable Target Launcher, a mission-configurable rail launcher with 25,000 pounds-capacity that complies with applicable treaties, and lets the Army simulate a number of incoming missile flight geometries. It can be carried inside C-17 and C-5 aerial transports for fast shipping, and expands the number of available launch sites for Short Range Ballistic Missile Defense testing. US Army.

Feb 13/12: The USA’s FY 2013 budget documents include $646.6 million to buy 84 PAC-3 missiles and 38 Enhanced Launcher Electronic Systems (ELES). It adds $12.85 million to finish preparations for PAC-3 MSE missile manufacturing; production orders will begin in FY 2014.

Feb 13/12: Support. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Andover, MA receives a $15.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, to support of the Patriot Missile Support Center.

Work will be performed in Chambersburg, PA; Andover, MA; Burlington, MA; and Germany; and the contract runs until Jan 31/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0156).

Jan 17/12: Testing report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2011 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). All PATRIOT missile variants are included, even the MEADS’ PAC-3 MSE, which gets a good review:

“The first MSE intercepted the [ballistic missile] target and the second intercepted debris from the first intercept… performance was consistent with preflight predictions and body-to-body impact was achieved… The system met the mission objectives.”

The report also notes a series of GEM-T tests, which have generally been successful, though firings of 2 missiles generally have just 1 successful intercept by the 1st missile. Proximity fuzes can be like that, if the 1st hit doesn’t leave much of a proximity target to trigger. Unfortunately, this next excerpt is much more disturbing, given PATRIOT’s status as the main modern air defense weapon for the USA and several of its key allies:

“Based on the PDB-6.5 LUT conducted during FY10, DOT&E assesses the current Patriot system as effective against some threats and partially suitable due to poor radar reliability and system availability. There has been substantial variance in Patriot’s reliability and resulting availability as observed during testing. The causes of this variance are unknown.”

The Army has updated the PATRIOT’s Test and Evaluation Master Plan, which DOT&E approved on Sept 1/11.

Jan 17/12: An $11.3 million firm-fixed-price contract “for the procurement of Patriot missiles and spares.” DID is given to understand that this Pentagon description of the items bought is in fact a mistake, but official clarification has yet to arrive.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W31P4Q-12-D-0009).

Jan 5/12: CTR. Raytheon in Andover, MA receives a $51.3 million firm-fixed-price contract, to modernize Patriot PAC-2 missiles to the GEM-T configuration. Raytheon says that this is a follow on to AMCOM’s PATRIOT missile continuous technology refreshment program, initiated in 2000.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of Feb 28/15. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-12-C-0079).

Dec 30/11: US FY 2012 & Taiwan. Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $606 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for FY 2012 PATRIOT requirements – which includes missiles, launchers, and ground support for Taiwan. Within the PATRIOT system, Lockheed Martin produces the PAC-3 missile, the missile canister 4-packs, a fire solution computer, and the Enhanced Launcher Electronics System (ELES).

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX; Camden, AR; Lufkin, TX; Chelmsford, MA and Ocala, FL, with an estimated completion date of July 30/15. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, AL manages the contract for the USA, and as Taiwan’s FMS agent (W31P4Q-12-C-0002).

FY 2012 PAC-3

Dec 30/11: Taiwan. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Andover, MA receives a $34.3 million firm-fixed-price contract, providing initial funding for 3 Taiwanese Patriot fire units and training equipment. DID is investigating possible connections to the Dec 16/11 announcement.

Work will be performed in several locations within Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Washington, Italy, Greece, and Canada, with an estimated completion date of Dec. 31, 2016. One bid was solicited, with one bid received. US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL manages the contract, incl. services as Taiwan’s agent (W31P4Q-12-C-0069.

Dec 23/11: Saudi request. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Saudi Arabia’s official request to buy continuing services for the PATRIOT Systems Engineering Services Program (ESP). Also included: modification kits, engineering changes, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, and other forms of US Government and contractor support. The estimated cost is up to $120 million, but no duration is specified.

Saudi Arabia has had a Shared Engineering Services Program (SESP) with the USA for the past 20 years; this just extends it. The prime contractor will be Raytheon Integrated Defense in Andover, MA, and implementation won’t require the assignment of any additional U.S. Government or contractor representatives to Saudi Arabia, beyond those already there.

DSCA: Saudi support request

Dec 23/11: Support. Raytheon in Andover, MA receives a $13.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for PATRIOT training services. Work will be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of Dec 15/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Ala., is the contracting activity (W31P4Q-12-C-0102).

Dec 21/11: Thor & bothered. Finnish Detective Superintendent Timo Virtanen says that they have detained 2 crew members of the M/S Thor Liberty, an Isle of Man-flagged vessel that left Emden, Germany en route to China but had 69 Patriot surface-to-air missiles and 160 tons of explosives on board. Virtanen said that “the missiles did not have the appropriate transit papers.”

Which sounds alarming, but a spokesman for Germany’s Defense Ministry said the missiles were an official shipment to South Korea that was fully declared, and had all necessary clearings from German authorities. The ship is eventually allowed to sail, and the German story proved to be true, but some members of the crew were kept for questioning. BBC | Sacramento Bee | Voice of Russia | Washington Post World.

Dec 16/11: Taiwan order. Raytheon announces a $685.7 million Foreign Military Sales (FMS) contract from Taiwan for additional PATRIOT fire units, featuring current electronics, an improved man-machine interface, and claims of lower life-cycle costs. The firm adds that this award is in addition to the 2009 contract for new systems, and the 2008 contracts to upgrade Taiwan’s existing systems. Work under this contract will be performed at Raytheon’s Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA; El Paso, TX; and Huntsville, AL.

When queried, the firm clarified that this order will be built from the ground up as PATRIOT PAC-3, and that “fire unit” means the complete system, including radars, generators, antenna, ECS command module, and missile launchers. Taiwan is already beginning to build experience with the equipment, as Raytheon recently delivered the first upgraded Configuration-3 radar system, 10 months ahead of the original requested program plan.

Dec 7/11: Taiwan order. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Sudbury, MA receives a $42.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price contract for the Surveillance Radar Program. Specifically, this system includes a UHF phased array radar integrated with Taiwan-furnished Identification Friend-or-Foe beacons; 2 Missile Warning Centers; and communications and interface architecture and protocols to specific nodes within Taiwan’s military communications infrastructure, consistent with US restrictions

The SRP is a Foreign Military Sales Program managed by the USAF Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom AFB, MA, to provide Taiwan with the elements of a missile and air defense capability. Work will be performed in Sudbury, MA, and is expected to be complete by Nov 9/12 (FA8722-05-C-0001, PO 0062).

Taiwan – adjunct radar & PAC-3 units

Dec 7/11: Support. Raytheon in Andover, MA received a $12.7 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee, and cost-reimbursable contract. The award will modify an existing contract for technical services in support of Taiwan’s PATRIOT air defense missile system.

Work will be performed in El Paso, TX, and Taipei, Taiwan, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/15. by the U.S. Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL, who is acting as Taiwan’s agent (W31P4Q-11-C-0317).

Nov 30/11: Saudi Arabia OK. Raytheon announces U.S. Congressional and State Department approvals for Saudi Arabia’s $1.7 billion Direct Commercial Sales contract to upgrade to PATRIOT Config. 3 (vid. June 21/11 entry).

Nov 21/11: Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $25.5 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification to support the “PAC-3 production requirement for 11 launcher mod kits.”

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX; Camden, AR; Lufkin, TX; Chelmsford, MA; and Ocala, FL, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0001).

Nov 17/11: MEADS test. The 1st full MEADS firing test successfully engages a simulated “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.

This matters to the larger Patriot program, because it’s very probable that PAC-3 MSE missiles will be incorporated into existing Patriot systems. That makes the “unique sideways maneuver” an item of interest. Lockheed Martin.

Nov 1/11: BMD test. Lockheed Martin announces a successful intercept against an aerodynamic tactical ballistic missile target at White Sands Missile Range, NM. The test included a ripple fire engagement, using a PAC-3 Cost Reduction Initiative (CRI) Missile as the 1st interceptor and a standard PAC-3 as the 2nd interceptor.

The CRI Missile includes block upgrades to the PAC-3 for performance improvement, as well as reduced costs.

Oct 24/11: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $33.3 million firm-fixed-priced and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, for 12 PAC-3 launcher modification kits.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX; Camden, AR; Lufkin, TX; Chelmsford, MA; and Ocala, FL, with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0001).

Oct 11/11: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $37.8 million firm-fixed-priced and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, for 11 PAC-3 launcher modification kits.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX; Camden, AR; Lufkin, TX; Chelmsford, MA; and Ocala, FL, with an estimated completion date of July 31/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0001).

Oct 5/11: CTR. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives a $7.1 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for PATRIOT Modern Adjunct Processor Upgrade Kits. Work will be performed in Andover, MA and El Segundo, CA, with an estimated completion date of May 3/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W31P4Q-10-C-0301).

Oct 5/11: Taiwan. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives a $20.4 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, to provide PATRIOT technical assistance services to Taiwan. Work will be performed in El Paso, TX; Taipei, Taiwan, and Andover, MA; with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/15. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0317).

Oct 5/11: Support. Raytheon IDS in Andover, MA receives a $6.6 million firm-fixed-price contract for “various PATRIOT Secondary Items.” Work will be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of July 31/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0349).

FY 2011

Annual buy; Big Saudi upgrade to ground systems; Kuwait orders GEM-T missiles; Shining as light on UAE industrial offsets; Korean experience shows importance of spares; PAC-3 motor redesign. PAC-2, Japan
(click to view full)

Sept 19/11: ROKy start. South Korea’s Chosun Ilbo reports that 3 of the key tracking radars that equip its 8 Patriot missile batteries have broken down, rendering their corresponding missile batteries useless for “a few months.” The information comes from Grand National Party lawmaker Kim Jang-soo.

One radar was reportedly failed by a power supply breakdown in March; a 2nd by an IFF system breakdown in March, followed by a frequency generator breakdown in June; and a 3rd by a broken compressor in April. Part of the problem is that the “SAM-X” project is still in early deployment stages, with just under 10% of the required 32,149 Patriot system parts in stock from Germany, and no proper maintenance float program in place yet. South Korea hopes to import replacement parts for the broken down systems by the end of 2011, allowing them to put the Patriot PAC-2 system into operation by early 2012 as planned.

Why spares matter

Sept 19/11: Support. Raytheon in Andover, MA receives an $8.4 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to fix and replace Patriot missile systems assemblies and sub-assemblies.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of Oct 14/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by the Directorate of Contracting at Letterkenny Army Depot, Chambersburg, PA (W911N2-09-D-0001).

Aug 30/11: Patriot spares umbrella. Raytheon in Andover, MA receives an initial $37.6 million delivery order for 15 additional NSNs (National Stock Numbers, individual items identified by a a 13-digit numeric code), that are being added to the basic firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract to support the Patriot Missile System.

Raytheon confirms that this is the new Patriot spares contract. The overall contract will run to May 1/14, and is managed by the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation at Redstone Arsenal, AL (SPRRA2-11-D-0012, PO 0001).

New Raytheon spares umbrella deal

Aug 3/11: Japan support. Raytheon in Andover, MA receives an $8.4 million firm-fixed-price cost-plus-fixed-fee contract from Japan for M818E3A fuzes, and upgrades of their existing Patriot missile M818E2 fuzes to M818E3A configuration. Though Japan does deploy PAC-3 systems among its air defenses, these fuzes are used in the larger PAC-2 missile.

Work will be performed in Lowell, MA, with an estimated completion date of Jan 31/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0224).

June 21/11: Saudi order. Raytheon announces a $1.7 billion contract to upgrade Saudi Arabia’s MIM-104 PAC-2 Patriot batteries to Config 3 status. The Direct Commercial Sale (DCS) includes ground-system hardware, a full training package and support equipment upgrades. As noted above, PAC-3 hit-to-kill missiles are made by Lockheed Martin, and improved Raytheon PAC-2 GEM-T missiles can also be part of a Config 3 system. Reports thus far have been silent on the Saudis’ chosen missile path.

Because the Saudis chose a DCS contract, instead of a Foreign Military Sale contract process, they will manage it themselves. Subject to customary U.S. DCS regulatory approvals, work under this contract will be performed by Raytheon at the Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA and in Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia’s air defense network relies on MIM-23 I-Hawk and MIM-104 Patriot PAC-2 batteries, concentrated around key sites within the kingdom. Since their initial 1990, Patriot order, they are believed to have received 21 Patriot batteries, and to field 11 operational batteries at 15 prepared, hardened sites. They are joined by 10 operational I-Hawk batteries; advanced MIM-23K/J Hawk variants have some ballistic missile defense capability, but all Hawk missiles have shorter ranges than Patriot, and the exact variant fielded by Saudi Arabia is not certain. Raytheon | Saudi Arabia’s Arab News | US-Saudi Arabian Business Council | IMINT on the Saudi SAM Network.

Major Saudi upgrade

June 20/11: Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives an $18 million firm-fixed-price contract, with some cost-plus-fixed-fee contract line item numbers. It covers FY 2011 U.S. Patriot capability production: 5 launcher mod kits, ground support equipment, and a parts library.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX; Lufkin, TX; and Ocala, FL, with an estimated completion date of July 30/14 (W31P4Q-11-C-0001).

June 7/11: Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Andover, MA receives a $6.8 million contract, for 10,500 antenna elements used in the Patriot missile system. Work will be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of May 25/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by the U.S. Army Letterkenny Army Depot in Chambersburg, PA (W911N2-11-C-0021).

June 3/11: UAE support. Lockheed Martin in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $17.6 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for the integration support of Post Deployment Build-7 software in the UAE’s PAC-3 Ground System Engagement Control System.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX, and White Sands Missile Range, NM, with an estimated completion date of May 31/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by the U.S. Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-07-G-0001).

May 27/11: Sub-contractors. Boeing announces a $274 million firm fixed price sub-contract from Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, to produce more than 300 seekers for PAC-3 missiles.

This is Boeing’s 9th consecutive PAC-3 seeker production award, and the largest PAC-3 contract received by Boeing to date.

May 4/11: PAC-3 MSE test. Raytheon’s Patriot system successfully test fires Lockheed Martin’s enhanced PAC-3 MSE missile at White Sands Missile Range, NM. This is another step forward for the 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.

May 2/11: Support. Raytheon announces a $15.7 million contract to provide material and technical services in support of the Patriot Missile Field Surveillance Program. This is a follow-on to the 3-year contract awarded in January 2008, and this one runs through 2013. Raytheon IDS VP for Patriot programs, Sanjay Kapoor:

“This work supports all Patriot customers, U.S. and our 11 international partners, who have selected the combat-proven Patriot… The Field Surveillance Program is a key part of Raytheon’s commitment to ensuring system performance…”

Work will be performed at Raytheon’s Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA; at Raytheon IDS Headquarters in Tewksbury, MA; at Raytheon Technical Services Company in Burlington, MA, and at Letterkenny Army Depot in Chambersburg, PA.

April 26/11: CTR. Raytheon announces a $58.3 million contract to upgrade 131 PAC-2 missiles to the PAC-2 GEM-T configuration.

This is a follow-on contract as part of AMCOM’s Patriot missile continuous technology refreshment program, which was initiated in 2000.

April 21/11: FY 2011 order. Lockheed Martin announces a set of contracts totaling $1.06 billion from the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command. It covers the USA’s FY 2011 PAC-3 missile production, as well as follow-on sales to international partners. The contracts include PAC-3 missile production, launcher modification kits, spares and other equipment, as well as program management and engineering services. Production of all equipment will take place at Lockheed Martin manufacturing facilities in Dallas and Lufkin, TX; Chelmsford, MA; Ocala, FL; and the PAC-3 All-Up Round facility in Camden, AR.

Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor on the PAC-3 Missile Segment upgrade, which consists of the PAC-3 Missile, a highly agile hit-to-kill interceptor, the launcher’s 4 PAC-3 Missile canisters (which each hold four PAC-3 Missiles, instead of 1 PAC-2), a fire solution computer and an enhanced launcher electronics system.

FY 2011 PAC-3

March 3/11: Motor redesign. 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: Support. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, for Patriot PAC-3 Missile Support Center work that includes technical and consumable material support, planning, management, failure analysis, quality reliability assessment, maintenance of the Certified Round Data Management system, and maintenance support.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX; Camden, AZ; and Lufkin, AR, with an estimated completion date of Jan 31/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0180).

Feb 21/11: UAE Industrial. UAE’s The National reports on Raytheon’s industrial offset commitments, which are attached to the UAE’s 2008 Patriot missile buy (vid. Dec 17/08 entry). The firm is waiting for the UAE’s Offset Program Bureau to approve 2 new facilities:

• A joint venture with Abu Dhabi Ship Building to build an intermediate level maintenance facility for missiles used by the UAE Navy, incl. Raytheon’s RIM-116 RAM and RIM-162 ESSM ship defense missiles

• A 3 way joint-partnership with Lockheed Martin and Emirates Advanced Investment’s Global Aerospace Logistics, to build a consolidated maintenance facility for Patriot missiles. Since The UAE ordered both PAC-2 GEM and PAC-3 missiles, both Lockheed and Raytheon need to participate.

The latter facility could quickly become a regional asset, speeding maintenance turnaround for Patriot missiles bought by nearby Arab states.

Feb 1/11: UAE. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX receives an $18.1 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for PAC-3 software modernization development on behalf of the United Arab Emirates.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX, with an estimated completion date of Aug 31/13 (W31P4Q-07-G-0001).

Jan 24/11: Kuwait order. Raytheon announces a $145 million production contract from Kuwait, for Patriot GEM-T missiles. The new missiles will work with Kuwait’s upgraded Configuration-3 radar systems, and that upgrade work is already underway at Raytheon. See also Aug 11/10 entry.

Kuwait – GEM-T missiles

Dec 28/10: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $209.1 million firm-fixed-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for 58 tactical Patriot (PAC-3) missiles; 5 launcher mod kits; ground support equipment; and contractor field support.

Work will be completed in Grand Prairie, TX; Camden, AR; Lufkin, TX; Chelmsford, MA; and Ocala, FL, with an estimated completion date of July 30/14. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0001).

PAC-3s

Dec 28/10: CTR. Raytheon Co. in Andover, MA received a $58.3 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, to upgrade 131 PAC-2 missile forebodies to GEM+ status.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of March 31/14. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0072).

Dec 20/10: Support. Raytheon Co. in Andover, MA receives a $20.1 million firm-fixed-price/cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for support of Foreign Military Sales. Raytheon will provide advice and assistance in all areas of the Patriot air defense system, associated equipment, and logistics support.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA, and will run until Dec 31/15. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W31P4Q-11-C-0112).

Dec 10/10: Japan. Kyodo News reports that Japan’s 5-year National Defense Program Guideline (NDPG) may involve deploying PAC-3 interceptor missiles at air bases nationwide.

Kyodo cited government and defense officials as saying the missiles will be deployed on ships as well as air bases, but that’s almost certainly a mistake. At sea, Japan is an active participant in the Standard Missile 3 program, and has already conducted successful SM-3 test firings from its Kongo class AEGIS destroyers. Reuters.

Oct 22/10: Support. A $7.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to repair and recapitalize Patriot missile system assemblies and sub-assemblies. Work is to be performed at Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of Oct 14/12. One bid was solicited and one received by the Letterkenny Army Depot in Chambersburg, PA (W911N2-09-D-0001).

Oct 19/10: Sub-contractors. Raytheon announces an agreement with Aselsan of Ankara, Turkey to co-develop of the antenna mast group for the UAE’s PATRIOT Configuration-3 systems. Raytheon.

FY 2010

Major order from Taiwan; Annual buy; Export requests from Kuwait, Taiwan; Control station improvements unveiled; JLENS aerostat integration; PAC-2 GEM missile #1,000 produced; MEADS cancellation likely to extend PATRIOT. Launcher w. PAC-3s
(click to view full)

Sept 21/10: ECS MAP. Raytheon in Andover, MA receives a $16.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for Patriot MAP upgrade kits, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/13. In response to questions, Raytheon said that the Modern Adjunct Processor used in the engagement control stations of new-build Patriot systems offers improved memory and speed, and will be required in order to host future revisions to the Patriot tactical software. Hence the importance of a command station upgrade track as well.

Work is to be performed at El Segundo, CA, and Andover, MA. One bid was solicited, with one received (W31P4Q-10-C-0301, Serial #1932).

Sept 20/10: GEM-T #1,000. Raytheon celebrates its 1,000th Patriot Guidance Enhanced Missile-Tactical (GEM-T) upgrade for the U.S. Army, a modernized PAC-2 missile with better capabilities against ballistic and cruise missiles, and refreshed electronics. GEM-T missile upgrades are still ongoing, and are performed at Raytheon’s Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA.

The firm also celebrates its progress as a result of 6 Sigma and Lean manufacturing principles, including cutting manufacturing cycle time in half, resulting in 77 consecutive months of on or ahead-of-schedule deliveries.

PAC-2 GEM-T #1,000

Sept 15/10: JLENS. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $7.1 million firm-fixed-fee and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for “PAC-3 Integrated Fire Control.” Lockheed Martin representative confirmed that this contract is “for integration of the PAC-3 Missile Segment with the Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor (JLENS), which is scheduled to run a live-fire test involving a PATRIOT missile in 2012.

Work is to be performed at Grand Prairie, TX; White Sands Missile Range, NM; and Chelmsford, MA, with an estimated completion date of Aug 30/12. One bid was solicited with one received (W31P4Q-10-C-0304; Serial #1936). See also FBO solicitation.

Sept 13/10: US & Taiwan. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas & Grand Prairie, TX received a $7.8 million firm-fixed-fee and cost-plus-fixed fee contract for PAC-3 FY 2010 subset efforts to include the following: United States enhanced launcher electronics system kit cables; Taiwan control interface circuit card assembly redesign; Taiwan power and control circuit card assembly redesign; Taiwan missile test set; Taiwan portable four-pack test set; Taiwan seeker digital processor parts; United Arab Emirates (UAE) portable 4-pack test set; UAE guidance processor unit redesign – tooling and test equipment.

The estimated completion date is Oct 31/12, with work to be performed at Dallas, TX (95.74%), Camden, AZ (0.25%), and Ocala, FL (4.01%). One bid was solicited and one bid received (W31P4Q-10-C-0002).

Aug 11/10: Kuwait request. The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces [PDF] Kuwait’s formal request to buy 209 MIM-104E PATRIOT GEM-T Missiles, for an estimated cost of up to $900 million.

The GEM-T missiles use the PAC-2 missile body and configuration, but have warhead and guidance upgrades that make them more effective against ballistic missiles. The prime contractor will be Raytheon Corporation in Tewksbury, MA. See also Arabian Aerospace.

DSCA: Kuwait GEM-T missile request

July 20/10: New MMS. At the 2010 Farnborough International Airshow, Raytheon shows visitors its new state-of-the-art Patriot modern man station (MMS) control station, with its touch-screen display, color graphical user interface, and improved ergonomics. Raytheon.

June 1/10: Kuwait & Taiwan. Raytheon Co. in Andover, MA receives a $21.3 million firm-fixed-price contract, covering spares for Taiwan’s PAC-3 configuration upgrade, and for Kuwait’s Patriot radar upgrade.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of June 30/13. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W31P4Q-09-G-0002).

April 30/10: Taiwan. BAE Systems in Sealy, TX received a $5.6 million firm-fixed-price contract for 8 of its M1086A1P2 and 9 of its M1A096A1P2 Patriot vehicles with Patriot kits installed for the country of Taiwan, as well as 7 M1088A1P2 FMTV tractor-trucks, for a total of 24 vehicles purchased with this modification. Work is to be performed in Sealy, TX, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/10. One bid was solicited with one bid received by the TACOM Contracting Center in Warren, MI (W56HZV-08-C-0460).

Taiwan appears to have chosen FMTV medium trucks, as opposed to the Oshkosh HEMTT heavy trucks used by the US Army. While Oshkosh will own the next FMTV medium truck contract as well, BAE Systems retains the rights to key variants, and are the only production source for FMTV vehicles at this point.

Taiwan – trucks

April 30/10: Support. Raytheon Co. in Andover, MA received a $13.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for Patriot on-site depot level diagnostic, fault isolation, clean and repair capability beyond the capabilities of battalion and intermediate support units. This includes depot level clean-up, repair, and maintenance of PATRIOT major items, including services required to return and maintain PATRIOT major items deployed in Southwest Asia, Germany, Korea, and locations inside the contiguous United States to maximize operational readiness.

Work is to be performed in Korea (39.1%); Qatar (5.7%); Germany (14.0%); El Paso, TX (18.6%); Killeen, TX (2.5%); Fayetteville, NC (1.8%); Lawton, OK (1.8%); Andover, MA (7.0%); Japan (4.5%); and Kuwait (4.9%), with an estimated completion date of June 16/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W31P4Q-06-C-0352).

April 9/10: Kuwait. Raytheon Co. in Andover, MA received a $16.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for Kuwait Patriot Radar upgrade spares, including fabrication, production, testing, and delivery. Work is to be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of Aug 31/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received by the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-09-G-0002).

March 9/10: MEADS endangered. The Washington Post reports that the US Army wants to cancel MEADS, the intended follow-on system to Patriot that uses a modified PAC-3 missile:

“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.”

Defense News reports that the meeting, involving senior Army officers and the US Missile Defense Agency, produced 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.

March 17/10: Support. Raytheon Company announces an $11.9 million award to provide material and technical services in support of the Patriot Missile Field Surveillance program. It modifies a 3-year award, under which Raytheon offers routine services to support the manufacture, assembly and testing of Patriot missiles through 2010. See also Apr 13/07 entry. Raytheon release.

Feb 24/10: To Poland. In the wake of a December 2009 agreement between the USA and Poland, the PAP news agency reports that an American Patriot battery will be headed into Poland:

“The Defense Ministry expects the first stage of the stationing of a Patriot air-defense battery and a 100-man service team to get under way in the [northern] town of Morag at the turn of April [2010].”

Jan 29/10: Taiwan request. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Taiwan’s official request to complete its Patriot upgrade plans, adding PAC-3 missiles and additional command equipment.

• 114 PATRIOT Advanced Capability (PAC-3) missiles
  
• 26 M902 Launching Stations
  
• 3 AN/MPQ-65 Radar Sets
  
• 1 AN/MSQ-133 Information and Coordination Center
  
• 1 Tactical Command Station
  
• 3 AN/MSQ-132 Engagement Control Stations
  
• 3 Communication Relay Groups
  
• 5 Antenna Mast Groups
  
• 1 Electronic Power Plant III (EPP)
  
• Plus battery and battalion maintenance equipment, prime movers, generators, electrical power units, trailers, communication equipment
  
• Also personnel training and equipment, tool and test sets, spare and repair parts, publications and technical documentation, Quality Assurance Team support services, and U.S. Government and contractor support.

The estimated cost is $2.81 billion, and the principal contractors will be Raytheon Corporation in Andover, MA, and Lockheed-Martin in Dallas, TX. “The recipient, which already has PAC-3 missiles in its inventory, will have no difficulty absorbing these missiles… Implementation of this proposed sale will not require the assignment of any additional U.S. Government and contractor representatives.” See also Dec 23/09, Oct 16/09, Jan 26/09, and Oct 3/08 entries.

DSCA: Taiwan PAC-3 request

Jan 26/10: UAE order. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX a $44.9 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for 16 PAC-3 launcher modification kits, and 16 PAC-3 motor control units, from the UAE.

Work is to be performed in Dallas, TX (82.8%), Camden, AR (0.2%), Lufkin, TX (10.9%), Ocala, FL (6.1%). One bid was solicited with one bid received by U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-09-C-0002).

UAE PAC-3

Jan 6/10: PAC-3. Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX receives a $968.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for the FY 2010 PAC-3 missile buy. It includes 253 tactical missiles, 5 test missiles, 20 launcher modification kits, 15 motor control units, 13 fire solution computers, 13 programmable array logic systems, 13 shorting plugs, 6 telemetry kits, and 1 lot each of the following: United States storage and aging, replenishment spares, obsolescence; United States/United Arab Emirates/Taiwan basic missile tooling upgrades, command and launch control tooling; United Arab Emirates unique cost; Taiwan unique cost; Taiwan spares, ground support equipment; German concurrent spares; and United States contractor field support and data items.

Work is to be performed in Dallas, TX (88.7%); Camden, AR (4.0%); Lufkin, TX (2.4%); Chelmsford, MA (3.5%); and Ocala, FL (1.4%), with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received by U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-10-C-0002).

FY 2010 PAC-3

Dec 29/09: CTR. Raytheon in Andover, MA received a $58.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price contract to upgrade 124 PAC-2 missile forebodies to the PAC-2 GEM-T/GEM+ standard. Work is to be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of March 31/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command’s Aviation and Missile Command Contracting Center in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-10-C-0132). Raytheon release.

Dec 23/09: Taiwan order. Raytheon announces Foreign Military Sales contract awards totaling $1.1 billion to fund new production of Patriot Air and Missile Defense System for Taiwan. The awards include ground-system hardware through an initial contract valued at $965.6 million, and an initial spares contract valued at $134.4 million.

See the Oct 3/08 DSCA release; this is the contract for the radars, ground stations, and other ancillary equipment besides the missiles themselves. The U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL manages this contract for new-production Patriot fire units, which will include new advances in technology, improved man-machine interfaces, and (hopefully) reduced life-cycle costs over earlier generations.

Major Taiwan order

Nov 16/09: Kuwait support. The USA’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces [PDF] Kuwait’s official request to purchase 4 years of Patriot sustainment, including repair/return programs, associated spare parts, modification kits, equipment, Liaison Office Support Services, and US government and contractor support worth approximately $410 million.

The principal contractor will be Raytheon Corporation in Tewksbury, MA. There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.

DSCA: Kuwait support request

Oct 16/09: Raytheon in Andover, MA receives a $77.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for Taiwan’s Patriot hardware upgrade program. Work is to be performed in Andover, MA (8%), and Burlington, MA (15%), with an estimated completion date of June 30/15. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W31P4Q-09-G-0001).

See also the Jan 26/09 and April 23/08 entries, below, and the Feb 22/08 engineering services contact, above.

Taiwan

Oct 6/09: Support. Raytheon announces a $64 million performance-based contract to establish and maintain inventory levels for select Patriot parts. Work under this contract will be performed by Raytheon IDS at the Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA, with support from Raytheon Technical Services Company locations in El Paso, TX and Norfolk, VA.

This sole-source, firm-fixed-price contract from the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM) at Redstone Arsenal, AL is a follow-on. Under the previous contract, Raytheon says that it increased parts availability by up to 40%, decreased response time for soldier requests, and reduced the overall inventory of parts required. Raytheon intends to drive further improvements in all 3 categories.

FY 2009

Annual order makes UAE a new customer; Kuwait begins ground system upgrades; Export requests from Taiwan, Turkey, UAE; South Korea starts receiving German PAC-2s. PAC-2 launch
(click to view full)

Sept 9/09: Turkey request. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Turkey’s official request for up to $7.8 billion worth of Patriot-related equipment. Note that this comes in the midst of its international competitions for medium (T-MALADMIS) and long-range (T-LORAMIDS) air defense systems (see April 29/09 entry); as such, this request is about assuring access to all elements of the offer, rather than indicating Turkey’s choice.

If Patriot does win, the principal contractors would be Raytheon Corporation in Andover, MA, and Lockheed-Martin in Dallas, TX. There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale. The order could include up to:

• 13 Patriot Fire Units
  
• 72 Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC-3) missiles
  
• 4 PAC-3 Lot Validation Missiles
  
• 197 MIM-104E Patriot Guidance Enhanced Missiles-T (PAC-2 GEM-T)
  
• 4 MIM-104E GEM-T Lot Validation Missiles
  
• 5 Patriot Digital Missiles
  
• 5 Anti-Tactical Missiles
  
• 13 AN/MPQ-65 Radar Sets
  
• 13 Battery Command Posts
  
• 13 Engagement Control Stations
  
• 4 Tactical Command Systems
  
• 6 Communication Relay Groups
  
• 8 AN/USQ-140V2c (RT-1785) or AN/USQ-140V11c MIDS/LVT-2 Link-16 terminals for a shared battlespace picture
  
• 48 M902 Launching Stations
  
• 52 Antenna Mast Groups
  
• 13 Electronic Power Plant III (EPP)
  
• 100 THALES 9310C Very High Frequency (VHF) Voice Radios
  
• 150 THALES 9310C VHF Data Radios
  
• Plus containers, battery and battalion maintenance equipment, prime movers, generators, electrical power units, personnel training and training equipment, trailers, communication equipment, tool and test sets, spare and repair parts, publications and technical documentation, and U.S. Government and contractor support services.

The DSCA notes that Turkey has not previously purchased PAC-3 missiles, but believes it will be able to absorb and effectively utilize these missiles. Support would include 26 contractor representatives in Turkey for training for a period of 24 months, major item repair for approximately 12 months, and several U.S. Government representatives who will participate in program management and technical reviews in Turkey for 2-week intervals twice annually.

DSCA: Turkey PAC-3 request

June 29/09: Kuwait order. Raytheon announces a $36.1 million Foreign Military Sales award to provide Kuwait with PAC-3 radar upgrade depot test equipment, training, and related technical services.

This depot test equipment contract complements a June 27/08 order placed with Raytheon to upgrade Kuwait’s Patriot system to Configuration-3. The June 2008 order covers the upgrades, while this order adds the equipment and services needed to maintain the upgraded equipment. Work under this contract will be done at 3 Raytheon centers in Massachusetts – Raytheon IDS headquarters in Tewksbury, the Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, and the Surveillance and Sensors Center in Sudbury; as well as at the Seapower Capability Center in Portsmouth, RI.

Kuwait – Config-3 support

May 20/09: Support. An $8.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for 3 Patriot missile depot test equipment upgrades, and new depot test equipment, including installation and training.

Raytheon is performing the work at the following MA facilities: Andover (50%), Tewksbury (20%), Sudbury (20%), and Burlington (10%), with an estimated completion date of June 08/15. Only one bid was solicited and received by U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command, Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-09-C-0321).

May 6/09: Pure Fleet. Raytheon announces a $115 million contract to upgrade 4 additional U.S. Army Patriot batteries to Configuration-3 status, via enhancements to its ground components and radar. The contract option supports the USA’s “Grow the Army” initiative, and will equip an additional Patriot battalion with the PAC-3 system.

May 1/09: Support. Raytheon announces an additional $9 million modification, under a 3-year contract previously awarded to Raytheon in January 2008. This brings the total value of the contract to $45 million, with the potential for additional funding through 2010. Work involves technical services like missile testing, data analysis, and spares. Work will be performed by Raytheon’s Integrated Air Defense Center, Andover, MA; at Raytheon Technical Services Company in Burlington, MA; and at various overseas locations.

The contract also provides funding for Raytheon to move Patriot maintenance operations and test equipment from Red River Army Depot in Texarkana, TX to Letterkenny Army Depot in Chambersburg, PA. That move was prompted by the 2005 BRAC(Base Relignment and Closure) process and plans.

April 29/09: UAE & Turkey. Raytheon names Roket Sanayii ve Ticaret A.S (Roketsan) of Ankara, Turkey as the sub-contractor who will integrate and test the control actuation system for the UAE’s Patriot GEM-T missiles. Roketsan will work with subcontractors throughout Turkey and the United States, coordinating and perform the major assembly work at its Ankara facility. The Raytheon release adds that:

“Roketsan is Raytheon’s first major trans-Atlantic supplier strategically located to support the 11 countries in Europe and Asia, including several in the Middle East, that have chosen Patriot as a key component of their air and missile defense programs.”

What it doesn’t add is that Turkey is preparing several competitions for surface to air missiles, which will include a number of Patriot competitors. A March 21/09 RFI from the Turkish SSM will by 3 medium-altitude air defense missile systems (T-MALADMIS) for the Land Forces, with responses due by June 29/09. Meanwhile, announced competitors for the SSM’s long-range air and missile defense systems (T-LORAMIDS) RFI for missile capable of ballistic missile defense include Boeing/IAI (Arrow), Lockheed Martin/ Raytheon (PAC-3), China’s CPMIEC (HQ-9, derivative of S-300), and local companies including Aselsan, FNSS and Roketsan.

April 27/09: Support. Raytheon in Andover, MA received a $14.8 million cost plus fixed-fee and cost reimbursable contract for an on-site depot level diagnostic, fault isolation, clean up, repair, and maintenance of Patriot-related items that are beyond the capability of the battery, battalion, and intermediate support units. It includes services required to return, and maintain, these items on deployment in Southwest Asia (SWA), Germany, Korea, and the USA, to maximum operations readiness.

Work is to be performed in Korea; Qatar; Germany; Japan; Kuwait; El Paso, TX; Killeen, TX; Fayetteville, NC; Lawton, OK; and Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of June 16/10. One bid was solicited and one bid received by the U.S. Army Aviation & Missile Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W32P4Q-06-C-0352).

April 7/09: PATRIOT AAM? Flight International reports that Lockheed is proposing a $137 million program to adapt its Patriot PAC-3 surface-to-air missiles for use on the USAF’s F-15C Eagle air superiority fighters. The missiles would reportedly be used to help the fighters kill ballistic missiles during the boost phase or mid-course phase, instead of hoping for a Patriot’s usual final phase intercept.

March 5/09: Support. Raytheon announces an $11 million option under a 3-year January 2008 contract to support Patriot missile facilities. A total of $35.5 million have now been awarded under this contract, with the potential for additional options through 2010.

Discussions with Raytheon reveal that the contract number is (W31P4Q-08-C-0025), which corresponds to the Feb 1/08 entry below.

March 2/09: Kuwait order. A $71.6 firm-fixed-price Letter Contract Modification contract to buy, install, and test 6 Radar Enhancement Phase 3 and Classification, Discrimination, and Identification Phase 3 modification kits for Kuwait’s Patriot radars.

Work is to be performed at Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of Oct 30/12. One bid was solicited and one bid received by the Aviation and Missile Command Contracting Center at Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-07-C-0151). This is part of Kuwait’s effort to upgrade its own systems to PAC-3 capability; see Dec 4/07 entry.

Kuwait – Radar upgrades

Feb 24/09: Pure Fleet. A $9.2 million firm-fixed-price contract for Patriot Pure Fleet Lot XII Add on Items. “Pure fleet” is the American program to bring all of its batteries up to PAC-3/ Config-3 capability.

Work is to be performed at Andover, MA with an estimated completion date of Feb 28/10. One bid was solicited and one bid received by the U.S. Army Contracting Command’s Aviation & Missile Command Contracting Center in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-07-C-0151).

Feb 9/09: UAE request. Raytheon announces a $246 million Foreign Military Sales contract from the United Arab Emirates (UAE), for Patriot system spares. The firm fixed price contract that is initially funded at $123 million, which represents the first delivery order awarded under a 5-year agreement for Patriot system spares. See Dec 17/08 for the main contract.

Work will be performed by Raytheon’s Integrated Defense Systems at its headquarters in Tewksbury, MA; its Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA; the Surveillance and Sensors Center in Sudbury, MA; and the Seapower Capability Center in Portsmouth, RI. The contract will be managed by the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal, AL.

UAE – PAC-3 Spares

Jan 26/09: Taiwan order. Raytheon announces a $154 million Foreign Military Sales contract to upgrade Taiwan’s Patriot Air and Missile Defense Systems from Configuration-2 to Config-3 standard, enhancing its ability to deal with targets like China’s growing array of ballistic missiles pointed at the island. See also the April 23/08 entry, below, and the Feb 22/08 engineering services contact, above.

Work under this contract will be performed by Raytheon IDS at the Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA; the Warfighter Protection Center in Huntsville, AL; the Mission Capability and Verification Center at White Sands, NM, and by Raytheon Technical Services Company in El Paso, TX.

Taiwan – Config-3 Upgrades

PAC-3 in flight
(click to view full)

Dec 24/08: FY 2009 order. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX received a $774.8 million firm-fixed-price (FFP) and cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) contract for the FY 2009 production buy of PAC-3 missiles. These orders include missile production for the U.S. Army as well as the first sale of the PAC-3 Missile Segment to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), who joins the Netherlands, Germany and Japan as PAC-3 version customers. Lockheed Martin expects in excess of $1.8 billion in PAC-3 Missile-related business over the life of the initial UAE program.

The DefenseLINK announcement says that the order is for 188 Missiles, plus associated work like tooling, maintenance of the parts library, storage and aging services, interim contractor depot support, and spares. Lockheed Martin’s release states 172 hit-to-kill PAC-3 Missiles, 42 launcher modification kits, plus other services as mentioned.

FY 2009 PAC-3

Work is to be performed at Lockheed Martin manufacturing facilities in Grand Prairie and Lufkin, TX; Chelmsford, MA; Orlando and Ocala, FL; and the PAC-3 All-Up Round facility in Camden, AR. Deliveries on the contracts will be completed by July 2011. One bid was solicited and one bid received (W31P4Q-09-C-0002). Lockheed Martin release.

Dec 19/08: Support. An $8.3 million cost plus fixed fee contract for U.S. PATRIOT new equipment training within and beyond the continental USA. Work is expected to be complete by Dec 14/11. One bid was solicited from the OEM on July 2/08 (W31P4Q-09-D-0001).

Dec 17/08: Big UAE order. Raytheon receives a not-to-exceed $3.3 billion order for Patriot Config-3 systems, including Patriot GEM-T and Lockheed PAC-3 missiles, whole life support, and training.

Raytheon and teammate Lockheed Martin have worked with the U.S. and UAE governments during the past year to develop this agreement. The initial request was for up to 9 full fire units, with a stated maximum value of $9 billion. See “Gulf States Requesting ABM-Capable Systems,” and the Sept 9/08 order, for more background.

Raytheon established its first office in the UAE in 1983, and began delivery and support of the medium range Hawk Air Defense System to the UAE in 1987. The Hawk has also been upgraded to have limited ABM capabilities, but the addition of Patriot 3 systems represents a major advance in capability for the UAE. Raytheon multimedia release.

UAE – PAC-3

Oct 3/08: Taiwan. Taiwan issues a series of DSCA-cleared official requests to buy $6.363 billion of equipment, thanks to Congress’ extended session. All export requests are listed in DSCA releases as being “…consistent with United States law and policy as expressed in Public Law 96-8. The U.S. is committed to providing military assistance under the terms of the Taiwan Relations Act.” Purchase requests include Patriot PAC-3 systems [PDF]:

• 330 PATRIOT Advanced Capability (PAC-3) missiles
  
• 24 Launching Stations
  
• 4 AN/MPQ-65 Radar Sets
  
• 2 Tactical Command Stations
  
• 2 Information and Coordination Centrals
  
• 12 Antenna Mast Groups
  
• 6 Communication Replay Groups
  
• 4 Engagement Control Stations
  
• 282 Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS) (115 AN/VRC-88E, 96 AN/VRC-90E, 13 AN/VRC-91E, and 58 AN/VRC-92E) radios
  
• 9 Electronic Power Plant III (EPP)
  
• 50 Multifunctional Information Distribution Systems (MIDS, provides Link 16 data sharing)
  
• Plus battery and battalion maintenance equipment, vehicles, generators, electrical power units, personnel training and equipment, trailers, communication equipment, tool and test sets, spare and repair parts, publications, supply support Quality Assurance Team support services, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics services, technical documentation, and other related elements of logistics support.

See also their Nov 9/07 request re: upgrading its Patriot PAC-2 batteries to be PAC-3 compatible. The estimated cost of this request is $3.1 billion, and the prime contractors will be Raytheon Corporation in Andover, MA and Lockheed-Martin in Dallas, TX. Taiwan has not previously purchased PAC-3 missiles, but they do use PAC-2s. They will require several U.S. Government representatives for 2-week intervals twice annually, to participate in program management and technical reviews.

DSCA: Taiwan PAC-3 request

Nov 28/08: South Korea. The South Korean Air Force formally receives the first shipment of Patriot missiles from Germany, after a series of performance tests since their delivery in August 2008.

The shipment is reportedly part of a EUR 551 million (about $710 million) second-hand deal signed in September 2007. The Patriot missiles will replace the country’s outdated Nike air defense missiles. They will be deployed by 2012, after 2 years of trial operation. Deutsche Welle.

Nov 21/08: CTR. Raytheon Co. in Andover, MA receives a $77.4 million firm-fixed fee price contract. It exercises an option for the ongoing “technology refreshment” of 166 Patriot PAC-2 missile forebodies to Guidance Enhanced Missile Plus (GEM+) standard.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA, with an estimated completion date of Aug 30/11. One bid was solicited and one bid was received by US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (DAAH01-00-D-004).

Oct 10/08: PAC-3 re-cert. Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX received a $5.4 million firm-fixed-price contract to support re-certification of 72 baseline PAC-3 missiles during each of the fiscal years of 2009 and 2010 (144 tl.), and 1 Lot of consumable material to support re-certification of 24 baseline PAC-3 missile during FY 2009.

A weapon’s certification for use does not last forever. Recertification is important to assure the Army that stored missiles remain fully operational, and will perform to standard if needed. Work will be performed in Huntsville, AL and will end on Sept 30/10 (W31P4Q-06-C-0180).

Oct 2/08: Pure Fleet. Lockheed Martin Corp. of Grand Prairie, TX received a $9 million firm fixed price contract on Sept 26/08, for add-on items to the Patriot Pure Fleet. Since Lockheed makes the PAC-3 missiles, the items are likely to be related. The work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX and will be complete by Feb 28/10 (DAAH01-03-C-0164).

FY 2008

South Korea buys German missiles, and new ground systems for “SAM-X”; Export requests from Israel, Kuwait, South Korea, Taiwan, UAE; Saudi support contract; Japanese PAC-3 test; Israel evaluates “Sniper” EO addition; Deployment in Poland. PAC-3, labeled
(click to view full)

Sept 30/08: Raytheon Co. in Andover, MA received a $11.3 million firm fixed price contract for 1,201 Patriot thread rings, part number 10272350. Work will be performed in Killeen, TX with an estimated completion date of May 31/11. One bid was solicited and one bid was received (W31P4Q-07-C-0159).

Sept 26/08: Pure Fleet. A $77.5 million firm-fixed-fee price contract for Patriot “Pure Fleet” conversion equipment. Work will be performed in Andover, MA with an estimated completion date of April 30/11. One bid was solicited and one bid was received (W31P4Q-07-C-0151).

Sept 17/08: Japan test. Members of the Japanese Self Defense Force conduct a successful interception of a tactical ballistic missile target (usually a Lance rocket) at White Sands Missile Range, NM, USA. They used the Patriot PAC-3 system, whose missiles are license-produced in Japan for the JASDF.

The PAC-3 system will provide the point defense component of Japan’s missile defense shield, while the jointly-developed SM-3 Standard Block IA naval missile provides wider theater-level coverage. Lockheed Martin release.

Sept 9/08: Israel Config-3. The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces [PDF] Israel’s official request to enhance 3 of its existing Patriot fire units to Config-3 status, while using the PAC-2 GEM+ missile. The request includes 3 Patriot System Configuration 3 Modification kits, which will upgrade 3 PATRIOT fire units to Radar Enhancement Phase 3 (REP-3) and Classification, Discrimination and Identification Phase 3 (CDI-3). The sale will also include communication support equipment, tools and test equipment, integration and checkout, spares and repair parts, installation and training, publications and technical documents, and other forms of support.

The estimated cost is $164 million, the contractor is Raytheon Corporation in Andover, MA, and Israel won’t need any US government or contractor representatives to help with the upgrades.

DSCA: Israel Config-3 request

Sept 9/08: UAE. The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces [PDF] the United Arab Emirates’s official request for 4 Patriot PAC-3 missiles with containers, 19 MIM-104D Patriot Guided Enhanced Missiles-T (GEM-T) missiles with containers, 5 Anti-Tactical Missiles, and 5 Patriot Digital Missiles. These missiles are for lot validation and testing of the PAC-3 missiles notified for sale in the $9 billion Dec 4/07 request noted below, which would equip 9 full fire units.

The estimated cost of this sale is $121 million, as it also includes AN/GRC-245 Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio Systems (SINCGARS Export), Power generation equipment, an Electric power plant, Trailers, Communication and support equipment, plus other related elements of support.

The principal contractors are the Raytheon Corporation in Andover, MA; and Lockheed-Martin in Dallas, TX (PAC-3 missiles). The purchaser intends to request industrial offsets, but these will be negotiated with each contractor. An in-country field office will likely be manned by 1-4 U.S. Government personnel who will remain in country for an undetermined length of time, and 65 contractor personnel are expected to be in country for an extended period for training purposes.

UAE – Test equipment

Aug 25/08: Poland. The US State Department announces a missile defense agreement with Poland, which includes the deployment of an American Patriot PAC-3 battery in country:

“We also talk about the desire of the United States and Poland to pursue cooperation involving air and missile defense cooperation. The United States is prepared, and we commit in this document to deployment of a U.S. Army Patriot battery in Poland. We’ll begin those deployments once, of course, we reach the necessary agreements with the Poles, and that could begin next year. And then we set the goal of establishing a garrison for the U.S. Army Patriot battery in Poland by the year of 2012.”

The battery will be redeployed from another location, and many analysts believe it will be removed from Germany. See: US Department of State briefing | Stars and Stripes | RIA Novosti, Russia | UPI.

Aug 6/08: Israel’s PATRIOT + Sniper. David Eshel reports that Israel is evaluating an electro-optical add-on system called “Sniper” that can scan for, find, and magnify targets out to the Patriot missile’s full range.

As Eshel explains, many surface-air missiles cannot take advantage of their range right now, because rules of engagement will not allow them to be fired without positive identification. IFF (Identification, Friend or Foe) technology is supposed to provide that, but it is not 100% reliable. This has led to “blue on blue” kills in the past, which have helped create the current restrictions.

July 15/08: South Korea. The second part of South Korea’s Patriot missile buy has now come through. Germany will be selling 64 Patriot PAC-2 missiles to Korea. Then, a joint venture between Raytheon and German MBDA subsidiary LFK called COMLOG will manage upgrades to PAC-2 GEM-T configuration, to give the missiles some anti-ballistic missile capabilities, and greater effectiveness against UAVs.

COMLOG has now issued a $38.5 million contract to Raytheon for this work, and Raytheon’s same-day release re: Kuwait places the total value of South Korea’s Patriot-related orders at $269 million so far. Raytheon release.

ROK buys missiles from Germany

June 27/08: Raytheon Integrated Defense in Andover, MA receives a $76.5 million firm fixed price / cost-plus-fixed-fee, level of effort contract to upgrade 6 Patriot Radar Sets to PAC-3-Kuwait configuration. Work will be performed at Raytheon’s Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA; its Warfighter Protection Center in Huntsville, AL; and their Mission Capability and Verification Center in White Sands, NM; with an expected completion date of July 31/13. One bid was solicited with 1 bid received (W31P4Q-07-C-0151).

This contract is related to the Dec 4/07 DSCA request; Raytheon’s July 15/08 release refers to it as a $156 million contract, which indicates that the DefenseLINK announcement covered the 50% initial payment, with the rest to follow. It also notes that the Kuwaiti upgrades are very similar to the upgrades the US Army is implementing under its “Pure Fleet” initiative.

A 2009 release later reports the value of this contract as $148 million.

Kuwait – Config-3

May 5/08: Raytheon – Integrated Defense Systems in Andover, MA received a $68.6 million firm-fixed price and cost-plus-fixed fee contract for “PATRIOT tactical assets.” Work will be performed in Andover, MA and is expected to be complete by Apr. 30, 2010. One bid was solicited on Dec 20/06 (W31P4Q-07-C-0151).

April 23/08: Raytheon announces a $79 million Foreign Military Sales award from the U.S. Army to provide Taiwan with Patriot Configuration-3 radar upgrade kits and related engineering and technical services. This is part of a much larger order; see Nov 9/07 entry for more.

Work will be performed by Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems at the Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA; the Warfighter Protection Center in Huntsville, AL; and the Mission Capability and Verification Center in White Sands, NM.

Taiwan – Config-3

March 31/08: ROK. A $118.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for the design, development, fabrication, production, training, integration, testing and delivery of PATRIOT hardware for the Republic of Korea Air Force. The firm will provide command and control, communications, maintenance support, and training equipment for Patriot systems. See Feb 4/08 entry.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/10. One bid was solicited on Feb 26/08 (W31P4Q-08-C-0288). See also Raytheon’s April 22/08 release, which places the total value of the effort at $241 million.

South Korea

Feb 4/08: SAM-X. Raytheon has announced an initial contract (amount undisclosed) for preliminary planning efforts aimed at integrating Patriot Fire Units into South Korea’s national command and control structure. This work is in preparation for a Foreign Military Sale of the Patriot air and missile defense system to South Korea under its $1.2-1.6 billion SAM-X program. Raytheon says that it expects significant follow-on awards to complete the system integration and to provide command and control, communications and maintenance support equipment, as well as the training of Korean operators and maintainers and technical assistance to the deployed systems.

Under SAM-X, up to 48 fire systems of Patriot PAC-3 missiles would replace South Korea’s aged Nike missiles; Raytheon has been the only contender since Russia’s Rosvoorouzhenie (S-300/SA-20) dropped out of the race in 2000. While the S-300 has longer range, that isn’t South Korea’s priority. The capital city of Seoul contains 25% of the country’s population, and is within range of at least 11,000 short-range missiles and artillery tubes on the other side of the Demilitarized Zone. South Korea’s Defense Ministry had originally planned to award the SAM-X contract to Raytheon by the end of 2001, but the negotiation broke up over funding approval, and price and the payments timetable issues. An attempt was made in 2007 to buy second-hand Patriot PAC-2 systems from Germany, and there are reports that this is still the plan – missiles and launchers from Germany, electronics and integration from Raytheon.

South Korea: Work on SAM-X begins

Jan 31/08: Support. An $11.4 million cost-plus-fixed fee contract for services in support of the Patriot Missile Support Center. Work will be performed in Andover, MA, and is expected to be complete by Jan 31/11. One bid was solicited on Dec 20/06, and 1 bid was received (W31P4Q-08-C-0025).

The contract was issued on Jan 31/08, so Raytheon’s March 5/09 release is correct in its timing. Subsequent discussions with Raytheon also place this contract’s value at $24.1 million, rather than $11.4 million.

Dec 19/07: Pure Fleet. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX received a $71.4 million firm-fixed-fee and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for a PAC-3 Fiscal Year FY 2008 production buy for pure fleet requirements. This involves supplying PAC-3 missiles, 4-box launchers, et. al. for retrofit onto Patriot PAC-2 systems, which are having their other components upgraded to PAC-3 status.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX and is expected to be complete by May 31/10. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. There was 1 bid solicited on Nov 24/06, and 1 bid was received (W31P4Q-06-C-0180).

Lockheed Martin’s Jan 8/08 release says that the Dec 18-19/07 contracts include production of 148 hit-to-kill PAC-3 Missiles, 17 launcher modification kits, spares and other equipment, as well as program management and engineering services. Production of all equipment will take place at Lockheed Martin manufacturing facilities in Dallas and Lufkin, TX; Chelmsford, MA; Ocala, FL; and the PAC-3 All-Up Round facility in Camden, AR. Deliveries on the contracts will be completed by July 2010.

Dec 18/07: Lockheed Martin Corp Missiles and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX received a $485.1 million firm-fixed price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC-3) missiles and associated systems. Note that this would be a FY 2008 order, and is likely to be an order for the full year’s planned procurement of 108 missiles and associated systems.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX and is expected to be completed by July 31/10. There was 1 bid solicited on Nov 24/06, and 1 bid was received (W31P4Q-06-C-0180).

FY 2008 PAC-3

Dec 14/07: Pure Fleet. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Andover, MA received a $155 million firm-fixed-price contract for Patriot “Pure Fleet” tactical assets. In English, they will upgrade additional tactical Patriot fire units from PAC-2 to PAC-3 standard, in order to meet current and emerging threats. Exact numbers were not mentioned by DefenseLINK, but a Feb 13/08 Raytheon release put the number at 8 Patriot fire units (includes radars, control stations, and launcher sets).

Work will be performed in Andover, MA, and is expected to be complete by Apr. 30, 2010. There was one bid solicited on Dec. 20, 2006, and one bid was received (W31P4Q-07-C-0151).

Dec 11/07: GEM-T. Raytheon Co. in Andover, MA received a $66.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for “Patriot PAC-2 frequency generator upgrades.” A Feb 13/08 Raytheon release described the work as “152 Patriot Guidance Enhanced Missile-Tactical (GEM-T) upgrades, the second of two large orders received in 2007 for GEM-T. The award increases the total number of GEM-T missiles ordered to 952 since program inception for a total contract value of $430 million.”

Work will be performed in Andover, MA and is expected to be complete by July 31/10. There was one bid solicited on June 30/99, and one bid was received by the US Army Aviation and Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (DAAH01-00-D-0004).

Dec 4/07: UAE. The United Arab Emirates moves to become a Patriot missile customer, officially requesting 9 full fire units with all equipment, plus 288 PAC-3 missiles, 216 PAC-2 GEM-T missiles, and support. The bill? Up to $9 billion.

See “Gulf States Requesting ABM-Capable Systems” for full details.

DSCA: UAE PAC-3/GEM-T request

Dec 4/07: The US DSCA announces Kuwait’s formal request to upgrade its Patriot systems to PAC-3 capability, upgrading 6 radar sets, bringing 60 PAC-2 missiles to GEM-T standard, adding 80 PAC-3 missiles, and more. The entire contract would be worth up to $1.363 billion. See “Gulf States Requesting ABM-Capable Systems” for full details.

DSCA: Kuwait PAC-3 upgrade request

Nov 9/07: The US DSCA announces [PDF] Taiwan’s formal request to upgrade and refurbish their 3 existing PATRIOT fire units’ ground support equipment to the latest Army Configuration 3 under a $939 million contract. Raytheon Corporation in Andover, MA will be the prime contractor, and the effect of the sale will be to add Patriot PAC-3 radar and communications enhancements to Taiwan’s existing Patriot batteries, turning them into a PAC-2 GEM-T type configuration in use by other US allies.

• 2 PATRIOT, MIM-104 (Patriot-As-A-Target)
  
• Radar Enhancement Phase 3 (REP-3)
  
• Classification, Discrimination and Identification Phase 3 (CDI-3)
  
• Remote Launch Communication Enhancement Upgrade (RLCEU)
  
• An Electric Power Plant.
  
• 36 AN/VRC-88E SINCGARS EXP Vehicle Short Range Radio Systems
  
• 32 AN/VRC-90E SINCGARS EXP Vehicle Long Range Radio Systems
  
• 4 AN/VRC-91E SINCGARS EXP Long Range Radio Systems
  
• 11 AN/VRC-92E SINCGARS EXP Dual Range Radio Systems

It also includes non-MDE (Military Designated Equipment under US Arms transfer laws) items such as all necessary modification kits, communication support equipment, tools and test equipment, integration and checkout, spares and repair parts, installation and training, publications and technical documents, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, other related elements of logistics and program support, and 4 telemetry kits for its live fire training.

DSCA: Taiwan Config-3 request

Oct 9/07: Dutch delivery. Lockheed Martin announces that it has delivered the first PAC-3 Missiles to government and military representatives of The Netherlands, during a ceremony held at its manufacturing facility in Camden, AR.

The Netherlands became the first international customer to buy the PAC-3 Missile in 2005, when it purchased missiles through a Foreign Military Sales contract with the U.S. government.

Oct 8/07: Pure Fleet Raytheon announces a $150 million U.S. Army contract to begin the Patriot “Pure Fleet” modernization program bringing all Army Patriot equipment to state-of-the-art PAC-3 status. “Pure Fleet” is the result of the Army’s decision in February 2006 to upgrade additional tactical Patriot fire units to the Config-3 standard, in order to meet current and emerging threats.

The new contract calls for Raytheon to provide hardware upgrades to 4 Patriot radars, engagement control stations and launchers as well as enhanced logistics capability through support to a common configuration. The initial contract provides for the upgrade of 1 battalion, consisting of 4 fire units, and work will be performed at Raytheon’s Integrated Air Defense Center, Andover, MA.

Oct 3/07: Saudi Arabia. Raytheon announces 2 contracts from The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia totaling more than $100 million. The awarded contracts include a multi-year contract to Raytheon to continue to provide technical, training and logistics support from 2007-2009 inclusive for the Kingdom’s Patriot and Hawk surface-air missile systems. The other is a contract extension to provide local support services for 2007. Raytheon release.

FY 2007

US Buys; Kuwait’s 4-year support contract; 500th PAC-3 missile delivered. Patriot PAC-2
(click to view full)

Aug 16/07: #500. A Lockheed Martin release celebrates their recent delivery of the 500th PAC-3 missile to the US military.

PAC-3 #500 to USA

April 24/07: Support. Raytheon Co. in Andover, MA received an $11.5 million modification to a cost-plus-fixed-fee and cost-reimbursable contract for an on-site depot level diagnostic, fault isolation, clean-up, and repair capability for the PATRIOT weapon system major items.

Work will be performed in Korea (39.1%), El Paso, TX (18.6%), Germany (14%), Killeen, TX (2.5%), Fayetteville, NC (1.8%), Lawton, OK (1.8%), Andover, MA (7%), Japan (4.6%), and Kuwait (4.9%), and is expected to be complete by June 16, 2010. This was a sole source contract initiated on Dec. 15, 2005 by the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-06-C-0352).

April 13/07: Support. Raytheon announces contract modifications totaling $13 million from the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command to continue to provide technical and material support of the Patriot Missile Field Surveillance program in the United States and at overseas locations. The facilities under contract process Patriot PAC-2 and Guidance Enhanced Missile-T (GEM-T) missiles for stockpile reliability testing, recertification and repair in support of the Patriot Field Surveillance program. The program is an international cooperative effort, in which foreign partners fund and benefit from common support. International partners include Germany, the Netherlands, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Japan, Israel, Kuwait, Taiwan, Greece, and Spain.

The contract modifications, which include options for up to $12 million, call for Raytheon to provide technical personnel and material to support the processing of Patriot missile rounds and the operation of the Patriot missile facilities, missile assembly/disassembly facilities and the Patriot missile transmitter facility. The modifications exercise $13 million in options for 2007 against the basic 2005-2006 contract award, that now totals $43 million. Raytheon release.

April 4/07: Support. Walton Construction Co. LLC in Kansas City, MO received a $13.5 million modification to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for FY07 PATRIOT engineering services. See this corporate list of projects for a better idea of their usual expertise.

Work will be performed in Burlington, MA (3.95%), Huntsville, AL (8.09%), Andover, MA (9.82%), Tewksbury, MA (76.44%), El Paso, TX (1.67%), and Norfolk, VA (0.03%), and is expected to be complete by Jan. 9, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on Aug. 26, 2003 by the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-04-C-0020).

This exact amount, contract number, and workshare is identical to the April 3, 2007 Raytheon award in all respects, so this may be a mistake. DID is treating it as one for the purposes of our FY 2007 calculations.

March 19/07: Lockheed Martin received a $376 million contract for hardware and services associated with the Patriot Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3) Missile program. The contract includes production of 112 hit-to-kill PAC-3 Missiles per the FY 2007 budget, launcher modification kits, spares and other equipment, as well as program management and engineering services.

Production of all equipment will take place at Lockheed Martin manufacturing facilities in Dallas and Lufkin, TX, and the PAC-3 All-Up Round facility in Camden, AR. See Lockheed Martin release.

FY 2007 PAC-3

March 12/07: Pure Fleet. Raytheon announces a $38.6 million US Army contract for test equipment upgrades and engineering as the first step in the upgrade of three Patriot battalions (12 fire units) from PAC-2 to the PAC-3 configuration. The intent of the so-called “Pure Fleet” effort is to upgrade Patriot fire units for the Army’s worldwide requirements, providing all fielded units with Patriot configuration-3 capability.

The initial work includes software and hardware upgrades to Patriot test stations, and engineering to address obsolescence in the factory and key suppliers (i.e. components that are no longer manufactured). The work will be performed at Raytheon’s Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA. Raytheon release.

March 1/07: Raytheon received an $18 million operation and maintenance support contract from the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command to provide Kuwait with Patriot system technical assistance. The firm will provide support to Kuwaiti operational and maintenance personnel at fire unit locations, and also at the depot in Kuwait. This program is a 4-year follow-on Foreign Military Sale award to continue a program that has been in place under various awards since 1996. Raytheon release.

Kuwait is also upgrading its Spada anti-aircraft missile systems to Spada 2000 configuration, a move that will offers these less advanced weapons similar range to Kuwait’s Patriots.

Kuwait – 4-year support

Feb 2/07: Support. Raytheon in Andover, MA received a $10.5 million modification to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for Patriot (PAC-2) Missile Support Center. Work will be performed in Andover, MA and is expected to be complete by Jan. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Nov 9/04 (W31P4Q-05-C-0033).

Feb 2/07: Support. Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX received a $5.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for Patriot PAC-3 Missile support services, Field Surveillance Program. Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX and is expected to be complete by Jan 31/10. This was a sole source contract initiated on July 3/06 (W31P4Q-07-C-0135).

Feb 1/07: CTR. Raytheon Co. in Andover, MA received a delivery order amount of $59.6 million as part of a $257.4 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for continuous technology refreshment of Patriot PAC-2 Forebodies to Guidance Enhanced Missile Plus (GEM+) Frequency Generator upgrade. Work will be performed in Andover, MA and is expected to be complete by April 30/09. This was a sole source contract initiated on June 30/99 (DAAH01-00-D-0004).

See our April 3/06 contract coverage. This would be the 12th delivery order for GEM+ upgrades. Raytheon release.

Jan 18/07: Upgrades abroad? As the 3rd Battalion, 43rd Air Defense Regiment deploys to Kuwait to accompany the USS John C. Stennis carrier strike group, the Boston Globe reports that Raytheon has been talking to 9 foreign customers about upgrading their existing Patriot systems. They would be upgrading from various versions of the larger, fragmentation warhead PAC-2, to the “hit to kill” Patriot PAC-3 system with more anti-missile capability.

Countries named by Raytheon executives included Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Spain, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Israel, Japan, and Taiwan. Raytheon also revealed that they are in discussions with several potential new customers, including Turkey and South Korea. See also Raytheon’s pointer, and the full Boston Globe article.

Dec 27/06: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX received a $376.9 million modification to a firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for the Patriot PAC-3 FY 2007 production effort.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX (53.6%), Lufkin, TX (2.6%), Camden, AR (4.4%), Huntsville, AL (28%), Chelmsford, MA (4.5%), Clearwater, FL (1%), and Atlanta, GA (5.9%), and is expected to be complete by July 31, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 24, 2006 (W31P4Q-06-C-0180).

FY 2007 PAC-3

Dec 27/06: Kuwait. Raytheon Southeast Asia Systems Co. in Andover, MA received an $18.1 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for technical assistance for the Kuwaiti Patriot missile system. Work will be performed in Kuwait, and is expected to be completed by Jan. 2, 2011. This was a sole source contract initiated on June 30, 2006 (W31P4Q-06-C-0232).

FY 2006

US orders; Export requests from Germany Japan, South Korea; Deployment to Japan; GEM+ missile BMD test. PAC-3 development
(click for video)

Sept 29/06: Support. Raytheon Co. in West Andover, MA received a delivery order amount of $223.6 million as part of a $600.3 million firm-fixed-price contract to buy new spares for the Patriot Missile System. Work will be performed in West Andover, MA and is expected to be complete by Sept 30/09. This was a sole source contract initiated on Sept. 3/03 (W31P4Q-05-D-0029).

Sept 29/06: The US DSCA (Defense Security Cooperation Agency) notifies Congress of Japan’s request for 16 PAC-3 sets (each cannister contains 4 missiles, so 64 total missiles) plus support equipment, modification kits, publications, spare and repair parts, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $144 million.

Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas, TX is the prime contractor, and implementation will involve up to 2 U.S. Government representatives and up to 8 contractor representatives in Japan for two weeks following delivery. See full DSCA release [PDF].

DSCA: Japan PAC-3 request

Sept 28/06: The US DSCA notifies Congress of South Korea’s request for up to $1.5 billion worth of SINCGARS and Patriot missile system support equipment as well as associated equipment and services.

In addition to a request for 58 AN/VRC-90E ITT Long-Range Radio System SINCGARS(Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System) vehicular systems, Korea is requesting two (2) 30 KW Electric Power Unit II, Patriot missile system support equipment including spare and repair parts, Information Coordination Centrals, maintenance equipment, transporters, calibration support, tools and test equipment, modification kits, system integration and check out, devices, documentation, personnel training and training equipment, technical support, and other related elements of logistics support.

Korea needs this surface-to-air equipment to continue the upgrade of its air defense capabilities, and implementation of this proposed sale will involve up to 24 U.S. Government and contractor representatives for up to 2 years to participate in training, maintenance, program management and technical reviews in Korea. See full DSCA release [PDF].

DSCA: South Korea request

Sept 6/06: Germany has requested a possible sale of 72 PAC-3 CRI (cost reduction initiative) missiles, and 12 each of Missile Round Trainers, support equipment sets, modification kits, publications, spare and repair parts, and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost if all options are exercised is $298 million.

Germany already operates Patriot missiles, and requires no technical or contractor assistance. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas, TX is the contractor for the missiles et. al. See DSCA release [PDF format].

DSCA: DSCA: Germany PAC-3 request

Sept 6/06: Support. A delivery order amount of $135.1 million as part of a $376.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for new spares to support and maintain the Patriot Missile System. Work will be performed in Andover, MA and is expected to be complete by Sept 30/09. This was a sole source contract initiated on Sept 3/03 (W31P4Q-05-D-0029).

August 24/06: Japan. Associated Press reports that the USA has offered Japan up to 80 Patriot PAC-3 missiles to boost its defenses following North Korea’s missile tests last month. Note that the report was very unclear re: the distinction between missiles and Patriot systems. Quoting NHK, AP noted that instead of deploying an unspecified number of locally produced missiles in 2008 or 2009, the missiles would be US-made and delivered to a Japanese military base in March 2007.

Japan’s Defense Agency will reportedly ask for an extra $100 million in the 2007 budget (219 billion yen or $1.87 billion for missile defense, up from 140 billion yen this year) to buy the missiles while local production gears up, in addition to the anticipated $1.88 billion Kyodo reported as the likely request for development and deployment of missile defenses. Kyodo adds that a supplementary budget will also be requested to speed up the deployment of the Patriot PAC-3 missiles.

June 30/06: Support. A $7.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee and cost-reimbursable contract for on-site depot level diagnostic, fault isolation, clean-up, and repair capability for the Patriot weapon system.

Work will be performed in Korea (19.14%), Germany (8.76%), Tacoma, WA (10.39%), Qatar (9.79%), Killeen, TX (15.14%), Lawton, OK (7.05%), El Paso, TX (17.88%), Fayetteville, NC (8.68%), and Andover, MA (3.17%), and is expected to be complete by June 16/10. Contract This was a sole source contract initiated on Dec 15/05 (W31P4Q-06-C-0352).

June 26/06: To Japan. AP reports that the U.S. military will deploy 3-4 Patriot PAC-3 batteries on the southern island of Okinawa by the end of 2006, and sending 500-600 additional U.S. troops. In related news, testing of the USA’s X-Band ABM radar at its new location in JASDF Shariki at Tsugaru, 360 miles northeast of Tokyo, has been moved ahead by several weeks. In addition, a previously negotiated agreement to expand cooperation on a joint ballistic missile defense shield and joint production of interceptor missiles was formally signed.

The moves come as North Korea prepares to test-fire a Taepodong-2 ballistic missile at a launch site on its northeastern coast. See Military.com for more details.

June 5/06: Testing. Raytheon’s Patriot PAC-2 Guidance Enhanced Missiles (GEM+) destroys 2 surrogate ballistic missile targets, highlighting a successful test flight at White Sands Missile Range, NM. This was the first of four development flight tests to be conducted by the Army’s Patriot Lower Tier Project Office using Raytheon’s newly developed Patriot system post deployment build-6 (PDB-6) software.

Many foreign militaries use the PAC-2 version, so these upgrades offer the potential for an immediate capability boost. See details in corporate release.

April 19/06: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX received a $379.8 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for 112 PAC-3 missiles, launcher mod kits, parts library, storage and aging, missile and midsection audits, interim contractor depot support, PALS FSC, shorting plugs, test set cables, concurrent spares, and replenishment spares for the PATIROT PAC-3. The PAC-3 Missile Segment upgrade consists of the PAC-3 Missile, the PAC-3 Missile canister (which holds four PAC-3 missiles), a Fire Solution Computer and an Enhanced Launcher Electronics System.

Work on this contract will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX (53.6%), Lufkin, TX (2.6%), Camden, AR (4.4%), Huntsville, AL (28%), Chelmsford, MA (4.5%), Clearwater, FL (1%), and Atlanta, GA (5.9%), and is expected to be complete by July 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 31, 2005 by the Army Aviation and Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-06-C-0180). See also: Lockheed Martin May 4/06 release. /p>

FY 2006 PAC-3

April 3/06: CTR. Raytheon Co. in Andover, MA received a delivery order amount of $46.9 million as part of a firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for the “Continuous Technology Refreshment of Patriot PAC-2 Forebodies to GEM+ Frequency Generator Upgrade.” Raytheon reports that this is the eleventh delivery order awarded for GEM+ upgrades, for a total contract value of $256 million. This was a sole source contract initiated on June 30/99 (DAAH01-00-D-0004).

GEM+ missiles are essentially PAC-2 interceptors that have been refurbished, modernized, and integrated with the PAC-3 system of radars, et. al. Since the program’s inception in 2000, Raytheon has received awards for 770 GEM+ upgrades and has delivered 515 consistently on or ahead of schedule, with the remainder on track for delivery in 2006 and 2007. Work will be performed in Andover, MA, and is expected to be complete by Aug 31/08. See also Raytheon press release.

April 3/06: Support. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX received a $6.1 million increment as part of a $36.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for Development and Maintenance of a PAC-3 Missile Support Center. Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX and is expected to be complete by Jan. 31, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on Dec. 13, 2005 by the Army Aviation and Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-04-C-0125).

March 21/06: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Grand Prairie, TX received a $250.1 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for production of PATRIOT PAC-3 missiles.

Work will be performed in Grand Prairie, TX (87%), Chelmsford, MA (7%), Camden, AR (4%), and Lufkin, TX (2%), and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2010. This was a sole source contract initiated on May 27, 2004 by the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W31P4Q-05-C-0051).

FY 2006 PAC-3

Feb 2/06: Support. Raytheon in Andover, MA received a $13.5 million modification to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for the Patriot (PAC-2) Missile Support Center. Work will be performed in Andover, MA and is expected to be completed by Jan. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Nov 9/04 (W31P4Q-05-C-0033). This 2-year award follows exactly one year after the original $7.1 million contract was issued for CY (calendar year) 2005.

Dec 1/05: Industrial. Northrop Grumman Space and Mission Systems in Redondo Beach, CA received a $6.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee R&D contract to develop and demonstrate a wafer-scale assembly (WSA) process for a batch fabricated SMART three-dimensional cell that will enable affordable, scalable, high performance architectures for millimeter-wave arrays.

Solicitation began March 2005, and 7 proposals were received. Negotiations were complete November 2005, and work will be complete by October 2007. The Air Force Research Laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH manages contract. (FA8650-06-C-7600). The Patriot system uses this technology.

Additional Readings Background: Missiles

• Designation Systems – Raytheon MIM-104 Patriot.

• Raytheon, via WayBack – Patriot Data Sheet. Excellent resource for identifying the exact improvements made for each new version of the Patriot PAC-2 and ground systems. GEM-Ts are PAC-2s improved for use against ballistic missiles, for instance, while GEM-Cs are improved for use against cruise missiles.

• Designation Systems – Lockheed Martin Patriot PAC-3.

• Lockheed Martin – PAC-3 Missile.

• Lockheed Martin – PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (PAC-3 MSE).

• GlobalSecurity.org – Patriot TMD.

Other PATRIOT Modifications

• DID – Getting More Value from Patriots: Israel’s Sniper EO Add-on. In practice, air defense units often require positive identification before they can fire. This Israeli system helps provide that, and can also lower the firing battery’s emissions signature.

• DID – Patriots for Eagles? Covers the ALHTK concept, which would mount PAC-3 derivative missiles on fighter jets for use as launch-phase missile interceptors.

News & Views

• DID – Alone, If Necessary: The Shield of Poland. Raytheon will offer PATRIOT Config-3 ground systems with PAC-3 MSE missiles, while MBDA & Lockheed will offer the successor MEADS system that developed the PAC-3 MSE.

• DID – Beyond Patriot? The Multinational MEADS Air Defense Program. PATRIOT’s intended successor. The US backed out, but Germany, Italy and Poland may carry it forward anyway.

• US DoD, via WayBack (Sept 17/09) – DoD News Briefing with Secretary Gates and Gen. Cartwright from the Pentagon. Cartwright cites a PAC-3 cost per-missile of $3.3 million, and compares it with other missile defense weapons like THAAD, SM-3, and GBI.

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.

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.

Americas

• The Air Force has launched a tender for the launch of a next-generation Global Positioning System satellite, releasing a RFP for the launch vehicle production, mission integration and launch operations. The latest Lockheed Martin GPS-III satellite was recently announced as being ready for system testing.

• The Pentagon is set to award $4 billion in contracts for modernization of the RQ-4 Global Hawk over the next five years, with the program funded to 2020. The program recently achieved milestone C, a key requirement for the platform to progress with modernization efforts.

• Raytheon has been awarded another contract for the Tactical Boost Guide program, with DARPA exercising a $19.5 million option, bringing the total value of Raytheon’s contract with the agency to $24,390,645. The TBG program seeks to develop air-launched tactical range hypersonic boost glide systems, with DARPA working in conjunction with the Air Force.

Europe

• Norway has requested 200 AIM-9X Block II missiles. The potential $345 million deal will likely see the missiles equip the Royal Norwegian Air Force’s (RNoAF) fleet of F-16s. The Norwegians helped develop the IRIS-T missile as part of a German-led multinational program, with this missile supposedly meant to replace the AIM-9 missiles in service with many NATO countries.

• The Spanish Air Force has taken over the investigation of the crashed A400M, which came down outside Seville. The government initially tasked civilians from the Defense and Transport Ministries to investigate, however that responsibility has passed to the Spanish Air Force’s CITAAM investigative body.

Middle East

• China is offering to sell Jordan armed UAVs, according to a California Republican. The Obama administration denied Jordanian requests for MQ-1 Predators last October.

Asia

• The State Department has approved a possible sale of 48 UGM-84L Harpoon Block II anti-ship missiles to Japan. The submarine-launched Block II version of the missile is designed to improve the missile’s ability to attack targets in congested littoral environments, where nearby land masses and other ships can provide cover for targets. The Foreign Military Sale would be worth $199 million, with the missiles manufactured by Boeing. The company is meanwhile offering the latest version of the missile – known as the Harpoon Next-Gen – to the US Navy.

• India has cleared three defense procurement deals worth a total value of $3.8 billion, media reported Thursday. These include 145 M777 howitzers through a government-to-government Foreign Military Sale with the US, with Indian firms set to provide maintenance and ammunition.

• The government also cleared the procurement of Russian Ka 226T light utility helicopters, following the restart of the program’s procurement process in March. The helicopters will be manufactured in India.

• Airbus and TATA have teamed to supply the Indian Air Force with new transport aircraft, edging out home side HAL in the process. The partners will supply 56 C-295 transporters, with that particular deal worth $1.89 billion. Forty of the planes will be manufactured in India, with the remainder purchased in ready-to-fly condition.

• The Indian Defence Acquisition Council also cleared the construction of India’s second domestically-manufactured aircraft carrier, to supplement the INS Vikrant currently under construction in Cochin Shipyard. The ship will be called the INS Vishal (Giant). In a further boost for the Indian Navy, the DAC cleared the procurement of six indigenously-developed BrahMos missile systems, with these set to equip Talwar and Delhi class ships.

• L-3 has been selected to supply the Australian Defence Force (ADF) with SATCOM terminals, according to a company press release. The $81.8 million contract, awarded by prime contractor Raytheon as part of Joint Project 2008 Phase 5B1, will enable more ADF units to connect to the Wideband Global SATCOM network, with this latest contract a follow-on to a similar 2013 contract to supply 51 Very Small Aperture Terminals (VSATs). This latest contract will see the firm supply 236 VSATs, with these split between the company’s Hawkeye and Panther systems.

Today’s Video

• The 155mm M777, soon to be in the hands of the Indian Army…

RQ-4A Global Hawk
(click to view full)

Northrop Grumman’s RQ-4 Global Hawk UAV has established a dominant position in the High Altitude/ Long Endurance UAV market. While they are not cheap, they are uniquely capable. During Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), the system flew only 5% of the US Air Force’s high altitude reconnaissance sorties, but accounted for more than 55% of the time-sensitive targeting imagery generated to support strike missions. The RQ-4 Global Hawk was also a leading contender in the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) UAV competition, and eventually won.

The Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration Program (GHM-D or BAMS-D) aims to use the proven RQ-4 Global Hawk airframe as a test bed for operational concepts and technologies that will eventually find their way into BAMS, and contribute valuable understanding to the new field of maritime surveillance with high-flying UAVs. It’s not just a test program, however, as its remaining drones also deploy to assist the fleet in active operations.

Contracts and Key Events BAMS-D to Pax River
click for video

All contracts are managed by The Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD. The US military lists Northrop Grumman Corp. Integrated Systems, Western Region in San Diego, CA as the contractor, which is technically true. While that was the original contract, NGC Integrated Systems was combined with NGC Space Technology to form Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems in January, 2009.

FY 2015

Increasing ops tempo.

May 15/15: The Pentagon is set to award $4 billion in contracts for modernization of the RQ-4 Global Hawk over the next five years, with the program funded to 2020. The program recently achieved milestone C, a key requirement for the platform to progress with modernization efforts.

May 6/15: The RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle has been given milestone C approval from the Defense Acquisition Executive. The Global Hawk demonstrated interoperability and software maturity prior to milestone C, with the program fully funded throughout the Future Years Defense Program.

Feb 4/15: Northrop Grumman starts production on four units to go to South Korea. In late 2014 the Republic of Korea awarded Northrop Grumman a contract for four RQ-4s, including two ground stations and various support equipment. This is the first Pacific sale for the Global Hawk under the Foreign Military Sales process. RQ-4s are already being procured by Australia and Japan.

FY 2013 – 2014

Increasing ops tempo. RQ-4A Global Hawk
click to play video

June 13/14: FY 2014. Northrop Grumman System Corp. in San Diego, CA receives a $61.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for BAMS-D operations and maintenance services: logistics support; field service representatives; and organization, intermediate, and depot-level maintenance. That’s a significant increase, compared to past years, but the Navy has been clear about their intent to raise operational tempo (q.v. Sept 6/13).

All funds are committed immediately, using US Navy FY 2014 O&M budgets. Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (70%); outside continental United States (25%); and Rancho Bernardo, CA (5%), and is expected to be complete in June 2015. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-12-C-0117).

Jan 23/14: The BAMS-D fleet hits 10,000 flying hours supporting missions in the Middle East. It has been helpful during movements of carrier and amphibious groups, and has reached its goal of 15 missions per month (q.v. Sept 6/13). Sources: NGC, “Northrop Grumman-Built Maritime Surveillance Demonstrator Unmanned Aircraft Surpasses 10,000 Combat Flying Hours”.

Sept 6/13: More missions. A maximum $10 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for additional BAMS-D/ GHMD operations and maintenance services. The goal is to increase BAMS-D operational tempo from the current 9 maritime intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions per month to a sustained level of 15 missions per month. That will require more people to handle maintenance and operations, rather than more UAVs. $3 million is committed immediately.

Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (70%), and outside continental United States (30%), and is expected to be complete in May 2014 (N00019-12-C-0117).

Aug 21/13: FY 2013. A $27.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, exercising an option for this year’s BAMS-D operations and maintenance services. All funds are committed immediately, and expire at the end of the fiscal year on Sept 30/13.

Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (70%), and outside the continental United States (30%), and is expected to be complete in May 2014 (N00019-12-C-0117).

Dec 18/12: Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems in Bethpage, NY receives a $7.2 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification to support new Airborne Recorder certification requirements for BAMS-D. The change was forced by an NSA Information Assurance Security and Requirements Directive.

Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA (75%); Bethpage, NY (20%); and San Diego, CA (5%), and is expected to be complete in December 2013. Funding will be committed as needed (N00019-08-C-0023).

FY 2011 – 2012

Crash. BAMS-D crash
click for video

Aug 29/12: FY 2012. Northrop Grumman in San Diego, CA receives a $40.1 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for continued operations and maintenance services in support of the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance – Demonstrator Unmanned Aircraft System, also known as the Global Hawk Maritime – Demonstrator.

Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (70%) and outside the continental US (30%), and will run until August 2013. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1 (N00019-12-C-0117).

June 11/12: Crash. An RQ-4A BAMS-D Global Hawk crashes into a marshy tributary of Maryland’s Nanticoke River, during a routine training flight from Naval Air Station Patuxent River. There were no injuries to civilians and no property damage, but the crash site has been blocked to recreational boat traffic while the agency investigates.

The crash leaves 4 UAVs in the program: 3 for testing, tactics, and doctrine development in the USA, and 1 deployed abroad with the 5th fleet. CNN | Wired Danger Room | WBOC.

Crash

Aug 23/11: FY 2011. A $35.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, exercise an option for another year of operations and maintenance services in support of the U.S. Navy Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration.

Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (75%), and outside the United States (25%), and is expected to be complete in September 2012. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (N00019-10-C-0018).

FY 2009 – 2010

Deployments. MP-RTIP radar. Global Hawk Cutaway
(click to view full)

July 23/10: FY 2010. Northrop Grumman Aerospace Sector in San Diego, CA receives a $29.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide operations and maintenance services for the U.S. Navy’s Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration.

Work will be performed outside the U.S. (50%); and in Patuxent River, MD (30%); and San Diego, CA (20%), and is expected to be complete in August 2010. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1.

July 15/10: A $5.5 million contract modification for software development to test maritime surveillance and maritime imaging modes for the MP-RTIP radar. At this time, all funds have been committed by the Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA (F-19628-00-C-0100; P00209).

The Northrop Grumman/Raytheon MP-RTIP is a 1.5 x 4 foot active, electronically scanned array (AESA) radar designed to provide better resolution than current ground-viewing systems. It will equip new Global Hawk Block 40s, but at the moment, it’s experiencing software challenges with “concurrent” mode, where the radar tracks moving targets (GTMI) while maintaining a high-resolution synthetic aperture radar (SAR) mapping scan. See also Aviation Week.

Oct 1/09: Deployment. One of the U.S. Navy’s 2 RQ-4 GHMD/ BAMS-D UAVs returns from service with Task Force 57, which operates in the Persian Gulf, Red Sea, Gulf of Oman and North Arabian Sea. The UAV conducted operational “field tests” that included over 60 flights over land and sea areas, and over 1,000 hours in the air, providing images to Task Force 57 in near real-time. The BAMS-D UAV was operated by navy personnel back in the United States at Patuxent River Naval Air Station, MD.

A team from Commander Patrol and Reconnaissance Wing 2, Commander Patrol and Reconnaissance Wing 5, NAVAIR, and Northrop Grumman Corporation conducted the deployment. A forward-deployed contingent of Northrop Grumman personnel, under oversight of Patrol Wings 2 and 5, provided maintenance for the aircraft, while working closely with counterparts on the USAF’s Global Hawk maintenance team.

The Navy’s 2nd BAMS-D UAV has now been sent overseas to continue field testing, while the returning aircraft returning aircraft undergoes depot-level maintenance and conducts other tests closer to home. US Navy NAVAIR, Oct 20/09 | StrategyPage.

Aug 17/09: Inside the Navy reports that the US Navy plans to use the GHMD in support of anti-piracy operations near Somalia, but satellite communication and control issues will need to be resolved first.

July 15/09: FY 2009. A $26.6 million modification to a previously awarded cost-plus-fixed-fee contract (N00019-05-C-0057) for additional operations and maintenance support for the Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration (GHMD) Program.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA, and is expected to be complete in August 2010. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/09.

April 23/09: FY 2009. An $8.7 million modification to a previously awarded cost plus fixed fee contract (N00019-05-C-0057) to provide additional operations and maintenance support for the Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration (GHMD).

Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (90%) and San Diego, CA (10%), and is expected to be complete in November 2009. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

March 24/09: Deployment. The Navy’s 1st unmanned Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Demonstrator “Global Hawk” Unmanned Aerial Vehicle lands in the 5th Fleet’s Area of Responsibility, completing its 17th successful operational mission. The UAV was flown by Commander, Patrol and Reconnaissance Wing FIVE and other P-3 aviators via a satellite link from a mission control station located at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD. Source [PDF].

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

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

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

Nov 10/08: Training. The USAF discusses some of the logistics involved. A cadre of USAF RQ-4 pilots from the 1st Reconnaissance Squadron at Beale AFB, CA are teaching a class of 3 active-duty P-3 Orion pilots and one civilian contractor how to fly the Global Hawk. Navy officials are looking to the Air Force to assist in expediting their pending RQ-4 Global Hawk deployment, one reason the normally 5-month course is being condensed to 4.

FY 2003 – 2008

GHM-D EMD . BAMS victory. P-8A MMA Concept
(click to view full)

Sept 18/08: FY 2008. A $12.6 million modification to a previously awarded cost-plus fixed fee contract (N00019-05-C-0057) for operations and maintenance support for the Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration (GHMD), including operation and sustainment, logistics support and sustaining engineering throughout the demonstration.

Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (90%) and San Diego, CA (10%), and is expected to be complete in September 2009. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

April 22/08: BAMS. Northrop Grumman Corp. Integrated Systems in Bethpage, NY wins a cost-plus-award-fee contract with an estimated value of $1.16 billion for the BAMS System Development and Demonstration (SDD) phase, which will create the MQ-4N Triton UAV companion to the P-8A Poseidon. The award later prevails over protests from the losing coalition of Lockheed Martin and General Atomics.

See DID’s BAMS FOCUS article for more.

RQ-4 wins BAMS

Dec 19/07: FY 2008. A $12.1 million modification to a previously awarded cost-plus-fixed-fee contract (N00019-05-C-0057) for operations and maintenance support for the Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration (GHMD), including operation and sustainment, logistics support and sustaining engineering throughout the demonstration.

Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (90%) and San Diego, CA (10%), and is expected to be complete in December 2008. Contract funds in the amount of $4.6 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

April 30/07: FY 2007. A $7.7 million modification to a previously awarded cost-plus-fixed-fee contract (N00019-05-C-0057) for operations and maintenance support for the Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration (GHMD), including operation and sustainment, logistics support and sustaining engineering throughout the demonstration.

Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (90%) and San Diego, CA (10%), and is expected to be complete in December 2007. Contract funds in the amount of $4.1 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

Nov 30/05: FY 2006. $10.5 million ceiling-priced modification to a previously awarded cost-plus-fixed-fee contract (N00019-05-C-0057). It exercises an option for operations and maintenance support of the Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration (GHMD), including operation and sustainment, logistics support and sustaining engineering throughout the demonstration. Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (79%) and Patuxent River, MD (21%), and is expected to be complete in November 2006.

Sept 20/05: Support. $27.1 million not-to-exceed delivery order against a previously issued basic ordering agreement (N00019-05-G-0009) for the procurement of initial spares in support of the Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration Program. Work on this contract will be performed in San Diego, CA (46%); El Segundo, CA (28%); Salt Lake City, UT (19%); Indianapolis, IN (4%); and Falls Church, VA (3%); and is expected to be complete in September 2007.

Oct 6/05: 1st flight. The first RQ-4A Global Hawk UAV slated for the Navy’s GHMD program made its first flight from Palmdale, CA, to Edward’s Air Force Base, CA. US Navy.

May 2/03: R&D. Raytheon Co. in Falls Church, VA receives a $5 million not-to-exceed order against a previously awarded basic ordering agreement N00019-02-G-0350 for requirements development and initial design of the Block 3 Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration (GHMD) data control processor, data link controls and payload processing. The contract also includes preparation of an engineering plan to integrate this system into existing ships. The TCS will provide a single unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) mission planning, command and control, data processing and dissemination system for operation of a whole range of UAV types. Work will be performed in Falls Church, VA (80%), and Rancho Bernardo, CA (20%), and is expected to be complete in December 2003.

Feb 5/03: EMD. $185.2 million cost-plus-award-fee using an undefinitized-contract-action contract modification. Provides for engineering and manufacturing development activities in support of the Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration.

Further funds will be obligated as individual delivery orders are issued, and work will be complete by September 2006 (F33657-01-C-4600, P00020).

GHM-D EMD contract

Additional Readings

• Northrop Grumman – Global Hawk Logistics Services.

• DII FOCUS – Kicking it Up a Notch: Poseidon’s Unmanned BAMS Companion.

• DII FOCUS – P-8 Poseidon MMA: Long-Range Maritime Patrol, and More. A Boeing 737 derivative.

• DID – UAV Data Management.

• DID (Aug 24/05) – Follow-Up: Rear Adm. Michael L. Holmes on The USA’s P-3C Force. Indicated that a significant portion of the P-3 Orion and EP-3 Aries’ roles would fall to the BAMS UAV.

• DID (June 13/05) – $230.5M in Contracts to Keep P-3 Fleet Flying. Stopgap replacements could be required sooner, rather than later.

GPS IIIA concept
(click to view full)

GPS-III satellites, in conjunction with their companion OCX ground control, system are the Global Positioning System (GPS) future. They offer big advantages over existing GPS-II satellites and GCS, but most of all, they have to work. Disruption or decay of the critical capabilities provided by the USA’s Navstar satellites would cripple both the US military, and many aspects of the global economy.

The time-based GPS service is the most-used application of Einstein’s Theories of Relativity. GPS has become part of civilian life in ways that go go far beyond those handy driving maps, including crop planting, timing services for stock trades, and a key role in credit card processing. At the same time, military class (M-code) GPS guidance can now be found in everything from cruise missiles and various precision-guided bombs, to battlefield rockets and even artillery shells. Combat search and rescue radios rely on this line of communication, and so does a broadening array of individual soldier equipment.

This DII FOCUS article looks at the existing constellation, GPS-III improvements, the program’s structure, its progress through contracts and key milestones, and extensive PTN (Positioning, Timing & Navigation)/ GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) research links.

GPS: The Existing Array A GPS primer
click for video

The GPS constellation needs to contain at least 24 evenly spaced satellites, though 27 is preferred to maintain proper global coverage from Medium Earth Orbit. USAF Space Command wants to have at least 30, in order to ensure that a quick series of on-orbit satellite failures, or problems caused by an orbit’s somewhat “dirty” status, don’t drop the constellation below 27. Those failures are possible, as a look at the current constellation demonstrates. At the end of 2012, there were 31 healthy GPS satellites on orbit:

Navstar II concept
(click to view full)

9 Block IIAs. Plus 4 more not in healthy shape, of 19 launched. Intended design life: 7.5 years. Due to good design, redundant components, and clever adjustments, these satellites have lasted significantly longer than that. The record is over 20 years.

12 Block IIRs. Intended design life: 10 years. Launches began in 1997, so some are already beyond that. Adds on-board clock monitoring. 21 GPS IIRs were built by Lockheed Martin, of which 8 were modernized to GPS IIR-M status.

7 upgraded Block IIR-Ms. Each IIR-M satellite includes a modernized antenna panel that provides increased signal power, 2 new military signals for improved accuracy to within 1 meter, enhanced military encryption, flexible power anti-jamming capabilities, and a 2nd civil signal (L2C) that will provide users with an open access signal on a different frequency. The additional signals make a difference, because it allows receivers to see the error created by the Earth’s ionosphere, then use advanced algorithms to refine positioning accuracy.

The 8th and final GPS IIR-M was launched in August 2009, but 2nd of type SVN-49 is “unusable”.

3 GPS-IIF. The next set of satellites are Boeing’s Block IIF. Intended life: 12 years. Their improvements include architecture updates; power, processor, and weight improvements; more accurate atomic clocks, better jamming resistance, and operational capability for a new military signal. On the civil side, there’s a 3rd “safety of life” civil signal (L5) in the aviation protection spectrum, which is expected to enable more widespread use of GPS for civil aviation, air traffic control, and high-precision measurement.

There will eventually be 12 GPS-IIFs in space, if all goes well.

GPS Control Segment
(click to view full)

Ground control: An updated ground control segment known as the Architectural Evolution Plan is also proceeding. On the control side, AEP adds a new Master Control Station at Schriever AFB, CO, and an alternate station at Vandenberg AFB, CA. More ground antennas have been added to control GPS satellites by using USAFSCN remote tracking stations, and monitoring was improved by cooperating with the US National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency’s MS network. With respect to its technical back end, AEP is designed to move control of the constellation off of 1970s-era mainframe computer systems, and onto a modern graphical interface. It will also add a distributed architecture that can run parallel applications, instead of putting everything in a single queue.

AEP first became operational in September 2007, and added the capability to control Block IIF satellites in March 2008. Nevertheless, it’s an interim solution with key limitations. It cannot put a navigation message onto, or control, modernized signals like the civil L2C, or the GPS IIR/M’s dedicated military coded signal. Nor will it be able keep up with growing demands for improved situational awareness and other required evolutions. That’s why it was considered for GPS III control, but rejected.

The GPS III Program

When fully deployed, the current vision for GPS-III is that the new satellites will feature a new L1C civil signal that will be compatible with Europe’s Galileo GNSS constellation; a cross-linked command and control architecture that allows the entire GPS constellation to be updated from a single ground station; and a spot beam antenna that provides resistance to hostile military jamming while improving accuracy and integrity.

The USAF has had issues with over-budget satellite programs in the past, in part because the technology requirements were often leaping ahead on too many fronts at once. This is a natural response to systems with a satellite’s large launch costs and long life cycle, but the lagging launch schedules and liberal cost overruns were becoming limiting. GPS III incorporates these lessons, and will be set up as an incremental acquisition, with a ground segment and 3 blocks of investment and inserts:

GPS Block IIIA. These satellites are larger than previous Navstar buses. Bigger size allows more power, which in turn creates a signal that’s easier to acquire. The wide-angle whole Earth antenna will be supplemented by a high-gain directional antenna, allowing +20db signals (roughly 105x power) to specific areas of the globe. The more sensitive a receiver must be, the easier it is to jam, and the wider the jamming radius at a specific jamming power. Additional satellite power, plus additional signals which offer signal gains of their own, plus a directional antenna boost, really adds up when you’re trying to make the signal robust.

On the civil side of the ledger, signal type gains and increased transmitting power mean something just as consequential: GPS receivers can become cheaper and more reliable. This will be especially true for high-end, high-precision civil GPS, once the new L5 signal is fully deployed.

On the signals front, initial GPS IIIA satellites will feature agreed-upon compatibility withEurope’s rival Galileo GNSS system, add a 4th civil signal (L1C) to the new L1A/ L2C/ L5 roster set; and add a stronger military GPS (m-code) signal that’s expected to deliver fourfold accuracy improvements and 3x-8x improvement in anti-jam capability. These simple requirements ensure that older GPS-IIA satellites can quickly be replaced by the newest proven designs.

The USAF would like to cap GPS IIIA satellites at 8 (2 R&D + 6 operational, all 8 will be launched), but the initial contract has provisions for up to 12 GPS-IIIA satellites if necessary.

GPS Block IIIB. The 2nd generation adds a cross-linked command and control architecture. In English, this means that the entire constellation of GPS IIIB+ satellites will be updated at once from a single ground station, instead of having to wait for each satellite to orbit in view of a ground antenna as is currently the case. These satellites are also expected to carry SAR/GPS, via a Canadian-Provided 406 MHZ Search And Rescue repeater. This used to be called the Distress Alerting Satellite System (DASS); it’s designed to improve combat SAR, and accommodate existing and planned 406 MHz beacons across the globe.

Up to 8 GPS-IIIB satellites are slated for launch.

Einstein? Really?
click for video

GPS Block IIIC. Adds a high-powered spot beam to deliver greater M-Code power, better resistance to hostile jamming, and improved accuracy. Other technologies that become mature during the development period could also be added. The USAF intends to launch up to 16 GPS-IIIC satellites.

The first launch of a GPS-IIIA satellite is expected in 2014, with all 32 GPS Block III satellites expected to be on orbit by 2022.

By 2016, the L2C signal will be aloft on 24 satellites for consistent global coverage: The GPS-IIR-Ms, the launched IIFs, and the 1st 2 GPS-IIIs.

The L5 signal is only aloft in test mode, and will take until around 2019 for global availability. That could happen earlier, or become more robust, depending on Europe’s Galileo program.

The L1C signal will only be aloft on GPS-III, so it’s likely to take until 2021 or later before it’s aloft with full GPS global coverage. L1C has been adopted beyond GPS-III and Galileo, however, which makes global coverage possible at an earlier date if the right configuration of cooperating satellites is aloft.

The new GPS-III M-Code signals won’t have full global coverage until around 2021, either, but directional antennas are likely to give the US military new options in targeted regions earlier than that.

OCX & MGUE: New Ground Control & Receivers Legacy system
(click to view full)

These systems will be accompanied by a next-generation global positioning system control segment (GPS OCX) intended to control both GPS II and GPS III satellites. OCX will deliver new GPS mission planning, constellation management, ground antenna, monitoring station, and satellite command and control capabilities, using open architecture electronics that allow faster improvements, and a service-oriented software architecture for much faster incorporation of its capabilities into other systems. Block I will also incorporate the new M-code military GPS signal.

The previous ground control segment incumbents both joined new bidding teams: Boeing bid as part of Raytheon’s team, while Lockheed Martin joined Northrop Grumman’s team in March 2008. Team Raytheon won the contract in 2010.

Unfortunately, software development has been a challenge, and key blocks will finish late. In response, the GPS directorate funded a stopgap Block 0 “Launch & Checkout” command and control capability, which wouldn’t work with the satellite’s jam-resistant M-code signal, or its 3 new civil signals. Block 0 won’t be an issue for long, though, because technical problems with the satellites themselves delayed initial launch by 2 years

Under the full OCX Block 1 contract, the Ground Control System will handle both existing GPS-II and new GPS-III satelites. Raytheon’s team will develop and deliver control segment hardware at Schriever AFB, CO, and Vandenberg AFB, CA, and update up to 17 monitoring stations around the globe by October 2016. The goal is to reduce the sustainment cost by 27%, then boost those savings to 50% within 3 years. When Block I’s software is done, it will also add the new M-code signal.

OCX Block 2, which will include the new L2C civil signals, has been moved back to June 2017.

DAGR drawn
(click to view full)

Outside OCX, a program called Modernized GPS User Equipment (MGUE) isn’t part of GPS-III directly, but it’s necessary in order to bring GPS III’s advantages to troops in the field. The program includes efforts like the ground-based GPS receiver application module (GB-GRAM-M), and takes advantage of GPS-III changes to the Signal-in-Space. MGUE aims to demonstrate the critical technology needed to incorporate a new M-Code military signal and security architecture, using precision-encrypted Y-code, M-Code, and coarse acquisition-code receivers that can process new and legacy signals.

GPS-III Budgets

Note that launch contracts are a separate item. The USAF is investigating the idea of cutting per-satellite launch costs by finding a way to launch 2 satellites in each boost from SV-5 onward. The question is whether evolving rocket technology and commercial competition will give them that option, without requiring expensive changes to the satellite design.

GPS-III: Industrial (click to view full)

Lockheed Martin’s program management and spacecraft development effort will be centered in Newtown, PA, with final assembly, integration and test located in Denver, CO. Their GPS Processing Facility (GPF) uses a former Atlas rocket assembly building, with nearly 40,000 square feet of spacecraft assembly and test area, including a clean room high bay designed for manufacturing efficiency by minimizing space vehicle lifts and distances between operations. The GPS team studied Lockheed Martin’s high-volume aircraft production lines, and used virtual reality modeling technology to lay out the factory floor. Each GPS III satellite will move through sequential work stations for various assembly and integration operations, much as a car or airplane does, culminating with environmental test procedures. The GPF has dedicated thermal vacuum and anechoic test chambers for that.

Outside Denver, Lockheed’s Sunnyvale, CA operations will provide various spacecraft components, and a launch support team will be based at Cape Canaveral, FL.

GPS-III: Contracts and Key Events FY 2014

Satellites #5 & 6 ordered; GPS-III and OCX reaching final testing stages: SV-1 delay. LMCO on GPS
click for video

May 14/15: The Air Force has launched a tender for the launch of a next-generation Global Positioning System satellite, releasing a RFP for the launch vehicle production, mission integration and launch operations. The latest Lockheed Martin GPS-III satellite was recently announced as being ready for system testing.

May 5/15: The first GPS-III satellite currently under construction by Lockheed Martin is now ready for system testing. The satellite was connected to its propulsion system on Monday and will undergo rigorous testing in coming months. The GPS-III contract covers eight satellites, which will bring improved accuracy and anti-jamming capabilities compared to current systems.

Sept 18/14: SV-1 delay. USAF Space Command officials tell Bloomberg’s Tony Capaccio that the navigation payload supplied by subcontractor Exelis has had technical problems, and GPS-IIA SV-1 is now scheduled for by the end of 2015. Lockheed has earned $42.1 million in bonus fees for SV 1-2 from May 2011 to May 2014, but the May 2013-2014 period’s $17.1 million bonus was forfeit as a result. Sources: Bloomberg, “Lockheed Lost $26.2m in Award Fee Over GPS III Satellite Delay”

May 14/14: MGUE. Raytheon in El Segundo, CA receives a $22 million modification for MGUE (military global positioning system user equipment) software coding and security, bringing the total cumulative face value to $51.8 million. They need to finish the GPS receiver cards software coding, and perform security certification. The GAO has explained why this component of GPS-III is so important (q.v. March 12/14).

$7 million in FY 2014 USAF RDT&E funds are committed immediately. Work will be performed at El Segundo, CA and is expected to be completed by Aug 31/15. USAF Space and Missile Systems Center Contracting Directorate in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8807-12-C-0012, PO 0015).

April 1/14: SV 7-8. Lockheed Martin announces a $245 million contract from the USAF, for GPS III satellites SV-7 and SV-8. This builds on previous contracts for long-lead time items (q.v. Feb 20/13, Feb 14/14). Sources: Lockheed Martin, “U.S. Air Force Awards Lockheed Martin Full Production Contracts For Next Two GPS III Satellites”.

GPS-IIIA: Satellites
7 & 8

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. GPS III’s 8 critical technologies have been assessed as mature, but 3 (incl. the timekeeping system and the key GPS signal generator) are late on qualification testing. In addition, issues identified in testing have forced fixes to components that include the mission data unit, and issues that include radio frequency isolation/ signal degradation. That forced later hardware delivery, so qualification testing is way behind. Result? a 2-year launch delay from April 2014 to April 2016.

The program is considering dual-launching GPS III satellites, potentially beginning as early as SV5. That would help to ensure a healthy constellation, but they’ll need rockets that can accomplish this. Preferably without requiring really expensive mid-stream design changes to the satellites.

On the ground, GPS III satellites will require OCX Block 1 control systems before they can be considered part of the constellation. At present, that’s a 6-month delay after SV1 launch, but additional OCX issues could push that back, wasting some of the 1st satellite’s useful time in orbit. Delays have already cropped up (q.v. March 30/12), and The 2nd GPS-IIIA satellite won’t even launch until OCX Block 1 is ready. At present, software development for OCX Block 0 is expected to finish testing by early 2015, and Block 1 development has begun development. Testing of the prototype, which requires Block 0/ Block 1 software and hardware components together, isn’t scheduled before December 2015. That’s 18 months after OCX’s Critical Design Review, and just 10 months before OCX Block 1 is supposed to be complete in October 2016. Overall, OCX will have just 7/14 technologies mature before October 2015, which is about 3 years after system development began.

March 12/14: GAO Report. The US GAO offers details of the USA’s major military space programs, in GAO-14-382T – “Space Acquisitions: Acquisition Management Continues to Improve but Challenges Persist for Current and Future Programs.” The cost figures for the GPS-IIIA and OCX programs are reflected in the charts above, and that growth has been under control. The challenge lies in the schedule, for reasons described above (q.v. March 31/14).

Overall, the OCX Block 1 ground control is slated to be ready for GPS III satellites by October 2016, 9 months after the first GPS IIIA satellite is available for launch (and 6 months after the revised launch date). The GAO adds that synchronizing receiver capabilities is equally important, via programs like MGUE:

“Satellites require ground control systems to receive and process information from the satellites, and user terminals to deliver that satellite’s information to users….. but development of satellites often outpaces the ground control systems and the user terminals…. lead to underutilized on-orbit satellite resources, and thus delays in getting the new capabilities to the warfighters or other end-users. In addition, there are limits to satellites’ operational life spans…. [so] they use up time in their operational lives without their capabilities being utilized…. budget authority for user terminals, ground systems, and satellites is spread throughout the military services, and no one is in charge of synchronizing all of the system components, making it difficult to optimally line up programs’ deliveries.”

March 4-11/14: FY15 Budget. The US military slowly files its budget documents, detailing planned spending from FY 2014 – 2019. The overall trend is slight cuts across the board for GPS-IIIA, OCX, etc. in FY 2013-2016, with ramped-up procurement spending beginning in FY 2017. That’s normally a bad sign for a program, but R&D, OCX, and MGUE spending will be declining at the same time, and GPS is vital enough that it may have better odds than most. One interesting note in the detailed budget documents:

“The Air Force is seeking authorization to exercise the contingency options for SV09-10 under the current contract. SV09-10 would utilize the same technical baseline as SV08. Additionally, the Department is investigating the future use of a multi-year procurement (MYP) strategy for GPS III which includes fixed-price contracting of multiple satellites to establish stable production and strategic sub-tier management…”

Feb 3/14: SV 7-8 long lead. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Newtown, PA receives a $14.4 million fixed-price-incentive-firm modification, providing long lead time materials for GPS III satellites 7-8. This would be on top of the Feb 20/13 contract.

All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 missile budgets. Work will be performed predominantly in Clifton, NJ, and is expected to be complete by June 2015. the USAF Space and Missile Systems Center Global Positioning Systems Directorate at Los Angeles AFB manages the contract (FA8807-13-C-0002, PO 0006).

Dec 12/13: SV 5-6. Lockheed Martin in Newton, PA receives a $200.7 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification to begin production of SV-5 and SV-6. All funds are committed immediately from FY 2013 missile budgets. This builds on previous contracts for long-lead time items in satellites SV-3 to SV-8 (q.v. Feb 8/13).

Work will be performed at Littleton, CO, and Clifton, NJ, and is expected to be complete by Dec 14/17 (SV-5) and June 14/18 (SV-6). USAF Space and Missile Systems Center Contracting Directorate at Los Angeles AFB, CA manages the contract (FA8807-08-C-0010, PO 0276).

GPS-IIIA: Satellites
5 & 6

Oct 17/13: Testing. Lockheed Martin’s full-sized GPS III Nonflight Satellite Testbed (GNST) at Cape Canaveral successfully communicates via cross-links with faithful USAF hardware simulators for the GPS IIR, GPS IIR-M, and GPS IIF satellites. It’s the 1st time GNST has communicated with flight-like hardware from the rest of the GPS constellation and with a navigation receiver. Got to keep checking off the boxes. Sources: Lockheed Martin, “Lockheed Martin GPS III Satellite Prototype Proves It Can Successfully Communicate With GPS Satellite Constellation”.

Oct 3/13: OCX. Raytheon Company announces that their OCX ground control system has completed its software Iteration 1.5 Critical Design Review (iCDR). It follows an Aug 1/12 announcement for Iteration 1.4’s iCDR. Iteration 1.5 software development brings OCX software development into the home stretch: it includes the mission-critical Launch and Checkout System (LCS) software, and serves as the cyber-hardened baseline to which additional capabilities will be added to complete OCX Blocks 1 and 2.

LCS recently received Interim Authority To Test certification for one year with no liens, which is a very good sign for information assurance. Full system test and evaluation will begin in late 2013, and early site integration is scheduled for early 2014 at Schriever AFB, CO and Vandenberg AFB, CA. That will be followed by acceptance testing in 2014, in preparation for an expected 2015 launch of GPS-III SV-1. Sources: Raytheon, “Raytheon completes critical design review for GPS OCX software Iteration 1.5″.

FY 2012 – 2013

Satellites #3 & 4 ordered; Satellites 5 & 6 begun; GAO says ground control is behind; Pathfinder satellite prototype/testbed is ready. How GPS Works
(click to view full)

July 19/13: Testing. Lockheed Martin’s full-sized, functional GPS III Non-Flight Satellite Testbed (GNST) prototype arrives at Cape Canaveral AFS, FL aboard a C-17 jet from Buckley AFB, CO. GNST will begin to dry run launch base space vehicle processing activities and other testing, before SV-1 arrives in 2014. Sources: Lockheed Martin, “Lockheed Martin GPS III Satellite Prototype To Help Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Prep For Launch”.

Feb 20/13: SV 7-8 long lead. Lockheed Martin Space System Co. in Newtown, PA receives a $58.2 million contract modification, covering long-lead materials for GPS-III satellites SV-7 and SV-8, using FY 2013 funds.

Work will be performed in Newton, PA, and is expected to be complete by June 30/17. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2013. The SMC/GPK at Los Angeles AFB, CA manages the contract (FA8807-13-C-0002). See also Lockheed Martin, “U.S. Air Force Awards Lockheed Martin Contracts to Begin Work on Next Set of GPS III Satellites”.

Feb 8/13: SV 5-6 long lead. Lockheed Martin Space System Co. in Newtown, PA receives a $62 million firm-fixed-price contract for GPS-III Space Vehicles 5 and 6. Lockheed Martin has confirmed that this is a long-lead time materials contract, to ensure that key materials and sub-components are ready when the main order is placed.

Work will be performed in Newtown, PA, and is expected to be complete by June 30/17. The SMC/GPK, Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA manages the contract (FA8807-13-C-0002).

Feb 6/13: Lockheed Martin announces that they’ve completed Software Item Qualification Testing (SIQT) for GPS-III’s spacecraft bus flight software, which controls the spacecraft on orbit and monitors the health and safety of the satellite’s subsystems.

The flight software has already been integrated and tested on the program’s GPS III Non-Flight Satellite Testbed (GNST) prototype, and now it will go on to integration and testing in SV 1, scheduled for “launch availability” in 2014.

Nov 27/12: OCX. Raytheon in Aurora, CO receives a $7.2 million contract modification to support the GPS Next Generation Operational Control System. Work will be performed in Aurora, CO, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/13. The USAF’s SMC/GPS group at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA manages the contract (FA8807-10-C-0001, PO 0079)

Nov 19/12: Testing. Team Lockheed Martin has completed thermal vacuum testing for the Navigation Payload Element (NPE) of their GPS-III Non-Flight Satellite Testbed (GNST). The milestone is one of several environmental tests, and verifies the equipment’s ability to survive the hostile space environment. Lockheed Martin.

Oct 11/12: OCX to EMD. The OCX (Next Generation Operational Control System) has successfully met all requirements to enter into the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase. Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Frank Kendall signs the memo. USAF.

OCX Milestone B

Aug 20/12: Launch Options. AviationWeek reports that the Air Force is considering dual or triple launches for GPS satellites. Operators such as Arianespace have argued in favor of their dual-payload capabilities, as it happens used by the USAF with its CHIRP piggybacked to the SES-2 commercial satellite last year. The CEO of International Launch Services (ILS) countered with arguments in favor of single-satellite launches. In any case the Pentagon and Air Force are watching how competitors abroad are ramping up their networks: Arianespace is making dual launches for Galileo while China is using triple launches for its Beidou positioning network.

The Air Force is also looking at SpaceX as a potential (multi) launch provider, following their joint announcement with NASA and NRO that they would consider options besides EELV.

Aug 1/12: Software. Raytheon announces that they’ve successfully completed OCX software iteration 1.4’s Critical Design Review (iCDR). Based on their description, this seems to be the stopgap Launch & Checkout capability, which won’t work with the satellite’s the jam-resistant M-code signal, or its 3 new civil signals.

May 31/12: Support. Lockheed Martin announces a $68 million contract to provide GPS-III mission readiness, launch, early orbit checkout, and on-orbit operations engineering support.

Under the contract, Lockheed Martin will provide technical support to the Air Force’s 2nd Space Operations Squadron (2SOPS), and provide the Launch and Checkout Capability (LCC) ground control system required to manage GPS III SV-1 in 2014. Lockheed Martin’s Newtown, PA facility will also support the operations of the 1st 2 GPS III satellites – from launches in 2014 – 2015, through their expected 15-year service lives in space.

May 29/12: Lockheed Martin announces that it has powered on the GPS III “Pathfinder” Non-Flight Satellite Testbed (GNST), with its Mission Data Unit and advanced atomic clocks on board. The rest of the GNST’s Navigation Payload Element is scheduled for delivery to the GPS Processing Facility in fall 2012.

The GPS III SV-1 satellite will follow Pathfinder, and Lockheed touts lessons learned that include:

• 50-80% reductions in labor hours and defect rates between similar activities on the GNST and SV-1.
  
• Identification of “tens of millions of dollars in cost savings” for the production satellites, based on process improvements recognized during GNST integration and test.
  

 

GNST “Pathfinder” testbed powered on

March 30/12: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” for 2012. With respect to the GPS III satellites:

“The GPS III is experiencing cost growth and the contractor is behind schedule, but the program does not expect these delays to affect the launch of the first satellite… In November 2011, the contractor’s estimated cost at completion for the development and production of the first two satellites was over $1.4 billion or 18 percent greater than originally estimated; the program office estimated the cost to be about $1.6 billion. [Reasons given included] including reductions in the program’s production rate; greater than expected efforts to produce engineering products compliant with more stringent parts, materials, and radiation testing requirements; test equipment delays; and inefficiencies in the development of both the navigation and communication payload and satellite bus.”

With respect to the OCX ground control system, the first 2 software packages have been completed, but the complexity of the software development effort has proven challenging. The problem is that of OCX’s 8 software iterations (6 Block I and 2 Block II), Block I phases 3 & 4 have started late, and will finish late.

The testing process is being tweaked to find defects earlier, which is standard practice in many modern methods. Even so, the bottom line is that GPS OCX Block I isn’t expected until August 2015. The first GPS III satellite launch is planned for in May 2014, so the GPS directorate is funding a stopgap “Launch & Checkout” command and control capability. Any delay in the delivery of the launch and checkout system could potentially cause the Air Force to delay the launch of the first GPS III satellite, and even if it launches on time, L&C won’t work with the satellite’s the jam-resistant M-code signal, or its 3 new civil signals.

GAO report

Jan 11/12: SV-3/SV-4 start. Lockheed Martin Space System Co. in Newton, PA receives a $238.5 million cost-plus-incentive-fee with award fee contract, exercising the option to begin production of GPS III satellites SV-3 and SV-4. It’s the 1st major GPS-III satellite contract since 2008.

Work will be performed in Newtown, PA, and is expected to be complete by Jan 24/16. The USAF’s. SMC/GPK in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8807-08-C-0010, CLIN 0016).

GPS-IIIA: Satellites
3 & 4

Jan 6/12: Lockheed Martin Space System Co. in Newtown, PA receives a $21.6 million cost-plus-incentive-fee with award fee and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for a launch checkout and capabilities system. It will perform launch and early orbit activities of the GPS-III satellites, from a co-located contractor facility.

Work will be performed in Newtown, PA and King of Prussia, PA, and is expected to be complete by Dec 18/20. The USAF’s SMC/GPK in El Segundo, CA manages this contract (FA8807-08-C-0010).

Jan 3/12: MGUE. L-3 Communications Corp. in Camden, NJ receives a $25.7 million cost-plus-award-fee and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, to correct MGUE receiver card deficiencies and complete the contract. They fell short during functional qualification testing, and these changes are needed for the cards to meet contract requirements. This modification also implements updated MGUE interface control documents, adds functionality to delivered Military-Code (M-Code) GPS receivers to provide additional military utility, and increases performance design margin in functions within receivers for future M-Code receiver developments.

Work will be performed at L-3 Communications Systems Co./Interstate Electronics Corp. in Anaheim, CA, and is expected to be complete by July 26/13. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8807-06-C-0003, PO 0088).

Dec 30/11: MGUE. Raytheon in Waltham, MA receives a $38.5 million cost-plus-award-fee and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, to correct MGUE receiver card deficiencies and complete the contract. They fell short during functional qualification testing, and these changes are needed for the cards to meet contract requirements (see also Dec 14/11 entry).

Work will be performed in El Segundo, CA, and is expected to be complete in November 2012. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8807-06-C-0004, PO 0073).

Dec 22/11: OCX. Raytheon Intelligence and Information Systems in Aurora, CO receives a $30 million cost-plus-incentive-fee and cost-plus-award-fee contract for the Launch and Checkout System element of OCX. The Launch and Checkout System is necessary to support the launch of the GPS III Space Vehicle I, which includes support exercises, rehearsals, launch, early orbit and checkout.

Work will be performed in Aurora, CO, and is expected to be complete by March 31/16. The USAF SMC in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8807-10-C-0001, PO 0054).

Dec 14/11: Lockheed Martin announces that they have delivered the GPS-III’s Non Flight Satellite Testbed (GNST) to Denver, CO. The full-sized, flight equivalent prototype will be mated with its core structure, navigation payload and antenna elements before completing pathfinding activities and environmental test checkouts. They also announce that their new GPS-III Processing Facility (manufacturing line, see program section) has opened.

Dec 13/11: MGUE. Rockwell Collins, Inc. in Cedar Rapids, IA receives a $20.8 million cost-plus-award-fee and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to complete the Modernized User Equipment (MGUE) effort, to correct MGUE receiver card deficiencies that were identified during functional qualification testing. It also implements updated MGUE interface control documents; adds functionality to delivered military-code GPS receivers to provide additional military utility; and increases performance design margin in functions within receivers for future military-code receiver developments.

Work will be performed in Cedar Rapids, IA, and is expected to be complete on Feb 28/13. USAF SMC/GPK in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8807-06-C-0001, PO 0060).

Oct 10/11: Lockheed Martin announces that it has turned on initial power to GPS-III’s Non Flight Satellite Testbed (GNST). The GNST contains power subsystem components, harnesses, plus tracking, telemetry and control hardware. Flight software versions have also been delivered for all of the spacecraft and payload computer processors. In parallel, GPS III teammate ITT is integrating the GNST Navigation Payload at their facility in Clifton, NJ.

The GNST will be shipped to Lockheed Martin’s GPS III Processing Facility in Denver before the end of 2011 to demonstrate Assembly, Integration and Test procedures. It will then be delivered to Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in the summer for 2012, for pathfinding activities at the launch site. Launch is currently scheduled for 2014.

FY 2010 – 2011

Team Raytheon wins OCX, finishes PDR; Layoffs at Lockheed.

Sept 26/11: OCX. Raytheon announces that its OCX control segment has been certified as completing its Preliminary Design Review.

Sept 6/11: OCX. Raytheon says that it has completed the action items that emerged from the USAF’s GPS-III OCX control segment’s June 2011 Preliminary Design Review.

Raytheon VP Bob Canty says that the design itself was assessed as architecturally and technically sound, adding that about 66% of the initial software is developed, but not all of it is tested. A good rule of thumb: until software is tested, it isn’t really developed. Aviation Week.

OCX PDR

June 14/11: Layoffs at Lockheed Martin Space Systems. this branch of the firm employs around 16,000 employees in 12 states, but intends to shed 1,200 employees by year-end, including a 25% cut in middle management to reduce impacts elsewhere. LMSS’ Sunnyvale, CA; Pennsylvania; and Denver, CO sites will be hardest hit, and the firm’s release says that it’s pushed in part by several of their major programs moving beyond the labor-intensive development phase.

Space Systems says it will offer “eligible” salaried employees an opportunity for a voluntary layoff, plus career transition support for all affected employees. Lockheed Martin.

Lockheed Martin Layoffs

March 15/11: Lockheed Martin announces that its GPS III team, has successfully completed the program’s first major flight software integration milestone, tying the initial flight software builds to the flight-like computer processors for the satellite bus On-Board Computer (OBC), the Navigation Payload Mission Data Unit (MDU), and the Communications Payload Thin Communications Unit (TCU).

The team at Lockheed’s software integration laboratory in Newtown, PA will now work to fully qualify the flight software, then load it on the GPS Non-Flight Satellite Testbed (GNST). Meanwhile, the firm says that their team has completed more than 50% of the GPS-III program’s Manufacturing Readiness Reviews (MRRs), and remains on track to deliver the first GPS IIIA spacecraft as planned in 2014.

Jan 19/11: OCX. Raytheon touts its new El Segundo, CA GPS Collaboration Center, opening in February 2011. The 17,900-square-foot center will include an executive presentation room, state-of-the-art operations and demonstration areas, high-definition video-teleconferencing capabilities, and the ability to interact with the GPS OCX system in an operations-like environment. Raytheon VP and GPS OCX program manager Robert Canty:

“Through the center, Raytheon and Space and Missile Systems personnel will be able to collaborate with the Air Force and program partners via virtual demonstrations from Raytheon’s other program locations in Aurora, Colo., and the Network Integration and Experimentation Center in Rosslyn, Va.

The Raytheon GPS OCX team has completed Phase A of the program, and is on schedule to complete the Phase B preliminary design review in winter 2011.

Nov 2/10: OCX. Raytheon announces completion of the software specification review for the GPS advanced control (OCX) segment, which will provide command, control, and mission support for the GPS Block II and Block III family of satellites. The review includes several analyses: the architecture; operations concept; segment, prime mission and interface requirements; and allocation to the software requirements specifications, interface requirements specifications, and operational concept document.

The next step for the OCX segment is the Preliminary Design Review, scheduled for spring 2011.

Sept 28/10: OCX. Raytheon team completes integrated baseline review for the $886.4 million GPS advanced control segment (OCX), which will provide command, control and mission support for the GPS Block II and Block III family of satellites. The OCX system will include anti-jam capabilities and improved security, accuracy and reliability and will be based on a service-oriented architecture to integrate government and industry open-system standards (see Feb 25/10 entry).

Sept 15/10: The US GAO issues report #GAO-10-636, “Global Positioning System: Challenges in Sustaining and Upgrading Capabilities Persist.” Some excerpts:

“The Air Force continues to face challenges to launching its IIF and IIIA satellites as scheduled… GPS IIIA appears to be on schedule and the Air Force continues to implement an approach intended to overcome the problems experienced with the IIF program. However, the IIIA schedule remains ambitious and could be affected by risks such as the program’s dependence on a ground system that will not be completed until after the first IIIA launch. The GPS constellation availability has improved, but in the longer term, a delay in the launch of the GPS IIIA satellites could still reduce the size of the constellation to fewer than 24 operational satellites [required for full global coverage]. Multiyear delays in the development of GPS ground control systems are extensive. In addition, although the Air Force has taken steps to enable quicker procurement of military GPS user equipment, there are significant challenges to its implementation… GAO recommended last year in terms of establishing a single authority responsible for ensuring that all GPS segments are synchronized to the maximum extent practicable… The GPS interagency requirements process… remains relatively untested and civil agencies continue to find the process confusing… Challenges remain for the United States in ensuring that GPS is compatible with other new, potentially competing global space-based PNT systems.”

Sept 10/10: GPS-III’s 1st contract deliverable goes out ahead of schedule, as the GPS III Bus Real Time Simulator (BRTS) shipped from its Newtown, PA, facility to Aerospace Corporation in El Segundo, CA. Acceptance testing for the BRTS was completed 7 days after delivery.

The BRTS is a risk reduction tool that will allow Aerospace Corporation to independently validate GPS III flight software for the USAF, as Lockheed Martin delivers bus flight software increments. Lockheed Martin.

Aug 31/10: MGUE. As an example of the system-wide harmonization the GAO refers to, officials at Rockwell Collins successfully delivers 21 modernized receiver cards for the prototype ground-based GPS receiver application module (GB-GRAM-M) under the GPS Wing’s Receiver Card Development program. These GB-GRAM-M receiver cards recently completed formal contractor qualification testing, and have been delivered to support the GPS Wing’s developmental test phase.

Asked about this effort, the USAF Space and Missile Systems Center’s GPS Wing responds that the cards will take advantage of the new capabilities that the GPS-III satellites will provide, and the receiver takes advantage of GPS-III changes to the Signal-in-Space but this is not part of the program directly.

The goal of their larger Modernized User Equipment (MGUE) program its part of is to demonstrate the critical technology needed to incorporate a new M-Code military signal and security architecture, using precision-encrypted Y-code, M-Code and coarse acquisition-code receivers that can process legacy signals as well. USAF.

Aug 20/10: Lockheed Martin announces that the GPS-III program has completed its Critical Design Review (CDR) phase 2 months ahead of the baseline schedule, after more than 350 representatives from the USAF GPS Wing, GPS III contractor team, and representatives from the Department of Defense, Air Force Space Command, the Department of Transportation and the Federal Aviation Administration participated in a 4-day Space Vehicle CDR at Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company’s new Patriot Center in Newtown, PA.

Completing the CDR enables the GPS-III team to move forward into production, and Lockheed Martin says that the program is still on track for an initial GPS-IIIA launch in 2014. Lockheed Martin.

Aug 18/10: Honeywell announces that its GPS-III On Board Computer (OBC), Reaction Wheel Assembly (RWA) and Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) have successfully completed Critical Design Reviews. The total contract value for these 3 sub-contracted components is more than $106 million through the life of the program.

Honeywell’s OBC is part of the telemetry, tracking and command subsystem, and runs flight software that provides attitude, power, and thermal control. It is the first radiation hardened high-speed processing system based on commercial PowerPC chip technology. Honeywell’s RWA provides momentum control for the space vehicle, which allows it to provide more accurate positioning. The IMU’s fiber optic gyroscopes provide attitude reference information for the space vehicle, extending mission capability by 50%. The RWA and IMU are part of the attitude control subsystem.

April 12/10: OCX. Boeing announces that it will develop portions of the U.S. Air Force’s new GPS OCX ground control segment, as a member of the Raytheon team. Boeing will provide infrastructure, development of the ground systems, and continued 24/7 operational and sustainment support, installing hardware and software at GPS control stations at Schriever AFB, CO; and Vandenberg AFB, CA.

Feb 25/10: OCX. Raytheon Co. in Aurora, CO won an $886.4 million contract to provide the GPS advanced control segment (GPS OCX), which will provide command, control and mission support for the GPS Block II and Block III family of satellites. The OCX development contract will be 73 months long, and will include development and installation of hardware and software at GPS control stations at Schriever AFB, CO and Vandenberg AFB, CA, deployment of advanced monitor stations at remote sites, and initial contractor support with sustainment options for 5 years. with If those sustainment options are exercised, the contract could be worth up to $1.535 billion.

The Raytheon team includes Boeing, ITT, Infinity Systems Engineering, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, SRI International and Braxton Technologies. ITT’s release sees their OCX contract as the continuation of an initial phase awarded in 2007, adding that ITT payloads have been on every GPS satellite ever launched, and have yet to experience a mission-related failure in orbit.

They beat out a Northrop Grumman-led team that included includes Lockheed Martin. The 55 CONS/LGCD at Offutt Air Force Base, NE manages the contract. Raytheon | Los Angeles AFB release | ITT release [PDF].

Raytheon wins OCX

FY 2004 – 2009

Initial development contracts for satellites & OCX; Lockheed Martin wins satellite contract; Can GPS-III deliver in time? USNO Atomic Clock
(click to view full)

July 22/09: OCX. The U.S. House Appropriations Committee cut $97.4 million from President Obama’s FY10 request for $486.8 million for development of the GPS III operational control segment (OCX). The committee attributed the cut to a “GPS control segment contract delay.”

The two prime contractors under Phase A of the GPS OCX development are Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. Responding to the funding cut, Raytheon said it “is committed to burning down risk in our current Phase A activities and looking forward to receiving an award for the GPS OCX program Phase B activities later this year.” Northrop Grumman said, “We will work through any impacts this could potentially have to the program with the Air Force.” The Phase A contract expires in September 2009. Both companies are leading teams that are bidding on the Phase B work, which is expected to be awarded in the Q4 2009.

June 20/09: OCX. Northrop Grumman’s GPS OCX team submits its proposal to the U.S. Air Force for the single-winner OCX Phase B contract, after working in parallel with Raytheon’s team on the 22-month Phase A contract. Presumably, Raytheon also submits its proposal, but no announcement was made. NGC release.

May 21/09: PDR. Lockheed Martin announces that the GPS III team has successfully completed the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) phase for the GPS III spacecraft segment. The milestone was the culmination of 70 subsystem and assembly PDRs that had been executed over the past 6 months by Lockheed Martin, ITT, and General Dynamics.

Nearly 150 representatives from the U.S. Air Force Global Positioning Systems Wing and user communities, including representatives from the Department of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Space Command, the Department of Transportation, and the Federal Aviation Agency participated in the 4 day Space Vehicle PDR at Lockheed Martin Space Systems facilities in Newtown, PA. The next major milestone is the Critical Design Review, and first launch is projected for 2014.

Satellite PDR

May 7/09: GAO Report. The US Government Accountability Office releases report #GAO-09-670T, “Global Positioning System: Significant Challenges in Sustaining and Upgrading Widely Used Capabilities.” The report questions the fundamental underpinnings of the GPS Block IIIA program:

“It is uncertain whether the Air Force will be able to acquire new satellites in time to maintain current GPS service without interruption… the current IIF satellite program has overrun its original cost estimate by about $870 million and the launch of its first satellite has been delayed to November 2009 – almost 3 years late. (2) Further, while the Air Force is structuring the new GPS IIIA program to prevent mistakes made on the IIF program, the Air Force is aiming to deploy the next generation of GPS satellites 3 years faster than the IIF satellites. GAO’s analysis found that this schedule is optimistic, given the program’s late start, past trends in space acquisitions, and challenges facing the new contractor. Of particular concern is leadership for GPS acquisition, as GAO and other studies have found the lack of a single point of authority for space programs and frequent turnover in program managers have hampered requirements setting, funding stability, and resource allocation…”

April 21/09: OCX. Raytheon announces a $21.5 million contract extension to perform additional risk-reduction R&D for the next-generation Global Positioning System Operational Ground Control (OCX) segment. To date, the release maintains that the program remains on budget and ahead of schedule. Nevertheless, Bob Canty, Raytheon GPS OCX vice president and program manager:

“We are working with our customer to continue to reduce program risk to ensure that we have the lowest-risk program going forward. What’s critically important on this program is to be able to deliver our team’s commitments fully and on-time.”

See also SatNews.

March 31/09: GAO Report. The US GAO audit office delivers its 7th annual “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs report. Despite GPS III’s status, it focuses instead on the prior GPS IIF program, including the interim Architectural Evolution Plan ground system upgrade:

“As a result of development and production problems, the program office now estimates the launch of the first Block IIF satellite will be delayed to October 2009 – almost 3 years later than its original launch date… technical problems discovered during thermal vacuum testing resulted in additional schedule delays and cost increases on the program… The Block IIF program is also experiencing other technical problems… The delivery of the first AEP segment allowed for the transfer of operations of current GPS satellites from the existing ground control system. In March 2008, AEP was upgraded to add the capability to control Block IIF satellites… the development schedule for the final AEP upgrade, which will ensure the integrity of the GPS signal, may not allow enough time for sufficient operational testing before the scheduled launch of the first Block IIF satellite.”

March 4/09: MGUE. The Air Force is modifying a contract with the Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC) in El Segundo, CA for $12.7 million, changing the original system engineering and integration services contract to expand the Modernized Global Positioning System User Equipment program.

This program is designed to ensure that American military forces have receiver equipment that can beginning taing advantage of new GPS features as they’re introduced. At this time $69,368 has been obligated by the USAF GPS Wing in El Segundo, CA (FAA807-07-C-002/P00019).

Feb 16/09: OCX. Northrop Grumman’s team successfully completes the System Design Review for the GPS OCX program. The System Design Review included a comprehensive exam of the total system architecture: software, hardware, processes, interfaces and operations by USAF program managers, operators and technical experts. This is the final major milestone under the Phase A contract, laying the foundation for the final decision on which team to pick: Northrop Grumman’s, or Raytheon’s.

Northrop Grumman’s release says that the team currently includes Harris Corporation; Integral Systems Inc.; Lockheed Martin Information Systems and Global Service; and Infinity Systems Engineering.

Feb 2/09: OCX. Northrop Grumman announces that its team has successfully demonstrated command and control of a GPS IIR-M satellite , using its GPS OCX Modernized Capability Engineering Model (MCEM) to successfully command and control a satellite test simulator located at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FLA, from a Northrop Grumman plant in Redondo Beach, CA. As part of the process, the USAF provided the Northrop Grumman team a data set embedded with several anomalies:

“The team initiated contact with the test satellite and commanded it through a series of complex procedures that demonstrated the ability to restore mission operations and the delivery of highly accurate position and time information for GPS users. The Northrop Grumman team successfully controlled a new secure military signal that will substantially improve the availability of accurate GPS data to U.S. forces.”

Dec 13/08: OCX. Raytheon’s team successfully completes GPS OCX’s System Design Review and modernized capability engineering model demonstration on time, and within budget. The team demonstrated the ability to command modernized GPS signals, provide situational awareness and expose data on the network during the modernized capability engineering model demonstration.

The originally announced team included Boeing, ITT Industries, Braxton Technologies, Infinity Systems Engineering and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory; but the Raytheon SDR announcement adds SRI International to the team. Raytheon | Braxton Technologies | GPS Daily.

Aug 18/08: The US DoD releases its latest Selected Acquisition Reports. GPS-III appears as a new program, and total program cost is baselined at $4.002 billion.

SAR baseline

July 21/08: Northrop Grumman announces that its GPS OCX team recently completed the Standard Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) software assessment, passing another significant milestone for the multi-billion dollar program and continuing Northrop Grumman’s enterprise-wide audit successes. NGC’s release adds:

“The government uses SCAMPI appraisals to identify strengths and weaknesses of software, engineering and management processes, and to reveal acquisition development risks for corrective action. These appraisals are frequently used as part of a process improvement program or for rating prospective prime contractors and their key subcontractors. The U.S. Air Force GPS Wing conducted a multi-week, comprehensive software appraisal, thoroughly examining more than 1,000 documents and measuring them against hundreds of criteria.”

July 18/08: Boeing wins an R&D contract for the “High Integrity GPS” project, which aims to leverage the Iridium constellation to improve military GPS accuracy and resistance to jamming. Victory of a sort, from the jaws of defeat?

Boeing’s HiGPS

May 21/08: After losing the GPS-III contract, Boeing will lay off 750 Southern California employees at plants in El Segundo and Seal Beach. This will reduce the staff of Boeing Space and Intelligence Systems from 7,200 employees to about 6,450. National Examiner.

Boeing layoffs

May 20/08: In “Who’s Leaking Air Force Procurement Information?“, the crew at the pro-Boeing Tanker War Blog raise a interesting question: was the result of the GPS-III contract effectively leaked to the public almost a month before the award? On April 29/08, Loren Thompson of The Lexington Institute published “Boeing and the Air Force at War: The Damage Spreads.” It included this quote:

“But the tone of Boeing’s tanker campaign has led at least some service officials to believe the worst about the company, a feeling that is spreading far beyond tankers. For instance, the service has probably delayed announcing award of the GPS III satellite contract in part because it fears another Boeing protest.”

There is more than one way to read that snippet, but the betting odds reading suggests that Boeing has lost this contract. The participants in Tanker War blog include legislative assistants on Capitol, and the post adds that:

“A number of people on the Hill tell us that they have very strongly believe a main source for these leaks [is]…”

May 15/08: Winner! Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. of King of Prussia, PA received a cost plus incentive fee/cost plus award fee contract for $1.46 billion for the first increment of the GPS III contract, covering 2008-2017. Lockheed Martin’s flight-proven A2100 satellite bus will serve as the base platform, and first launch is currently expected in 2014.

This initial contract funds 2 GPS IIIA research and development satellites (SV-1 and SV-2), a capability risk reduction and maturation effort to get key technologies ready for GPS IIIB and GPS IIIC, a GPS satellite simulator, “continue support for the Nuclear Detonation Detection System mission,” and a satellite bus real time simulator that lets the USAF test new electronics and additions. It also includes options for 10 additional GPS IIIA production satellites. At this time $96.8 million has been obligated. The Headquarters Space and Missile Systems Center in El Segundo, CA issued the contract (Lockheed Martin: FA8807-08-C-0010; Boeing: FA8807-08-C-0012). USAF release | Lockheed Martin release | ITT release copy [PDF format] | National Examiner.

Lockheed Martin wins GPS-III development, incl. Satellites
1 & 2

April 28/08: OCX. Northrop Grumman Corporation announces that Lockheed Martin has joined its Global Positioning System (GPS) Next Generation Control Segment (OCX) team.

Nov 21/07: OCX. The USAF awards a pair of a cost plus fixed fee, firm-fixed-price 18-month contracts to Northrop Grumman of Carson, CA ($160 million, FA8807-09-C-0001) and Raytheon Company of Aurora, CO ($159.8 million, FA8807-09-C-0003). At this time $16 million has been committed by the U.S. Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center. The firms will develop a new next-generation global positioning system control segment (GPS OCX) design with new anti-jamming technologies, more advanced predictive algorithms, and more frequent clock and ephemeris updates.

The dual award is designed to reduce risk, by introducing competition. Phase A is the competitive risk reduction effort which includes trade studies, requirements definition and engineering model development. That competition will include a system requirements and system design reviews, and creation of a modernized capability engineering model. These deliverables will support OCX “Key Decision Point B,” whereupon the USAF will decide on the single prime contractor to finish OCX development and field the system.

The previous GPS control segment incumbents each joined a team. Lockheed Martin lost the original bid, and eventually joined Northrop Grumman’s team. Boeing never competed alone, and was an early member of Raytheon’s team. Raytheon | Northrop Grumman | Inside GNSS.

OCX Ground control: Initial Development

Dec 16/06: Co-competitors Lockheed Martin Space Systems Corp. and Boeing Co. each receive a $50 million cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification to accomplish a GPS III system design review (SDR) in March 2007. The USAF’s Global Positioning Systems Wing at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA intends to reach its key decision point B single-selection in June 2007, when they will award the multi-billion dollar development contract for building GPS III.

In early 2005, the GPS III program was restructured from an FY12 first launch to no later than an FY13 first launch. It would eventually be moved again, to 2014. GPS World.

Phase B Development

Jan 7/04: The Headquarters Space and Missile Systems Center at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA awards a $20.8 million contract to Boeing in Seal Beach, CA, and $20.786 million to Lockheed Martin in King of Prussia, PA for GPS III Phase A acquisition. These 2 contractors have been selected to “competitively mature GPS III requirements for a successful system requirements review, in support of key decision Point B acquisition milestone.” In English, this means they’ll develop key technologies so the USA can make a strong case to begin the formal System Design & Development phase.

At this time, $10.3 million of the funds have been obligated; further funds will be obligated as individual delivery orders are issued. Solicitation began September 2003, negotiations were completed in December 2003, and work will be complete by December 2005 (FA8807-04-C-0001 [Lockheed]; FA8807-04-C-0002 [Boeing]).

Phase A Development

Additional Readings GPS Generally

• GPS.gov – Official US government site about GPS.

• NAVSTAR GPS Joint Program Office (SMC/GP)

• USAF – GPS Constellation Status

• The Aerospace Corp. FFRDC – GPS Primer – The Global Positioning System: An Amazing Tool

• USAF Space Command, High Frontier Journal (May 2008, Vol 4, #3) – Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing special issue [PDF format]. Probably the best depth introduction for laypeople looking to understand GPS’ role, challenges, and future plans.

• Astronautix.com – Navstar. Overview of the entire program, plus dates.

• Lockheed Martin – Global Positioning System

• Boeing – GPS IIF (Global Positioning System)

• DID – The GPS Constellation: Now and Future

• USAF Los Angeles AFB (Sept 17/07) – Air Force Completes Transition of GPS Fleet to Upgraded Control System. They mean AEP, though AEP will continue to receive improvements until it’s replaced by OCX.

GPS-III Program Background

• US Dept. of Commerce – GPS Modernization

• USAF Fact Sheets – GPS III

• Digital Trends (Dec 13/11) – GPS III explained: Everything you need to know about the next generation of GPS

• Inside GNSS (Sept/Oct 2011) – GPS III: Bringing New Capabilities to the Global Community

• Crosslink Magazine (Summer 2002) – Modernization and the Move to GPS III Excellent summary of GPS III’s planned improvements as of that date.

• USAF Fact Sheets – GPS Advanced Control Segment (OCX)

• Raytheon – Global Positioning System Next Generation Operational Control System (GPS OCX)

• Milsat Magazine (October 2007) – GPS OCX: The View From Raytheon. An Interview with Robert N. Canty

Official Reports

• US CRS (May 14/12) – Proliferation of Precision Strike: Issues for Congress. An inevitable corollary of proliferating GPS systems with improved civilian accuracy, and other tech and military trends are also pushing this. The report doesn’t quite grasp the real scope, but it’s a start.

• US GAO (Sept 15/10, #GAO-10-636) – Global Positioning System: Challenges in Sustaining and Upgrading Capabilities Persist

• US GAO (May 7/09, #GAO-09-670T) – Global Positioning System: Significant Challenges in Sustaining and Upgrading Widely Used Capabilities. Most important quote: “It is uncertain whether the Air Force will be able to acquire new satellites in time to maintain current GPS service without interruption.”

• Inside GNSS (July/Aug 2006) – The L2C Study: Benefits of the New GPS Civil Signal. Economic calculations.

• US Defense Science Board (October 2005) – The Future of the Global Positioning System

Other GNSS Systems – and Alternatives

• DID FOCUS – Galileo GPS Project Faces More Certain Future. Includes readings covering security-related issues, and China’s own GPS projects. China is also a member of the Galileo consortium.

• DID Spotlight – Boeing Wins R&D Contract for High Integrity GPS. Iridium as a GPS-enhancing overlay: a form of victory, from the jaws of Boeing’s defeat?

• GPS World (April 1/11) – Innovation: GLONASS: Developing Strategies for the Future

• RIA Novosti, via UPI (March 3-4/08) – Glonass Gloom: Part 1 | Part 2.

• BAE – Navigation Via Signals Of Opportunity (NAVSOP)

• Fox News (Nov 30/12) – Better than GPS? BAE navigator uses Wi-Fi, radio signals. NAVSOP.

News and Views

• James Hasik (Nov 20/12) – Roscosmos in the US? The concerns for and the benefits of better GLONASS guidance

• The Aerospace Corp FRDC (Dec 7/12) – GPS for Humanity

• Eric Gakstatter, CGSIC USS&L Meeting (Sept 20/10) – What’s Going to Happen When High Precision GPS is Cheap? Thanks to the L5 signal.

• Los Angeles Times (May 23/10) – GPS is getting an $8-billion upgrade

• GPS World (May 1/09) – L5 Demo Payload: From Concept to Capability in Less Than 12 Months. The demo payload flew on GPS IIR-20M. Dead link.

• GPS World (June 1/08) – AEP Goes Operational: GPS Control Segment Upgrade Details. Dead link.

• USAF, Los Angeles AFB (May 17/08) – SMC Announces Contract Award for Next Generation GPS Space Segment

• DID (May 30/06) – Lockheed & EADS to Ensure Navstar/ Galileo GPS Compatibility

• The Space Review (June 19/06) – Will China Compel the Development of GPS 4? “This will mean that the current GPS 3 program will have to be curtailed or modified beyond recognition. The generation after next of GPS satellites will have to include much more robust methods for overcoming or avoiding enemy interference… In the long term this could create some interesting opportunities for the Transformational Satellite (T-Sat) communications program to work with the designers of the future GPS system.”

Americas

• US arms sales experts are expected to travel to the Gulf following the President’s GCC summit on Wednesday and Thursday, which will include discussions on integrated defense systems. President Obama is expected to push for arms sales, particularly capable anti-ballistic missile capable defense systems, most likely to assure GCC member states of the US’s commitment to their security despite the recent framework agreement with Iran.

• DefSec Carter and DNI Clapper have urged Congress to allow United Launch Alliance, a Lockheed Martin/Boeing joint venture, to use Russian RD-180 engines for “assured access to space.” If the current law were to change from the current 2015 defense authorization law banning the use of Russian engines in US launches, ULA would be capable of competing for 18 out of 34 competitive launches between 2015 and 2022, versus the current 5 as the law stands, with the Air Force pushing for more launches by the private sector.

• It has emerged that a F/A-18F Super Hornet crashed on Tuesday , shortly after takeoff from the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71). The two aviators were recovered and are without serious injury, with the Super Hornet in question assigned to Strike Fighter Squadron 211. The carrier is in the Persian Gulf, with VFA 211 conducting operations against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Another Super Hornet was involved in a crash in January 2014, with that incident determined by the Navy to have been avoidable.

• Meanwhile, Raytheon announced that it has successfully flight-tested the APG-79(V) X AESA radar system, intended to extend the service lives of F/A-18C/D aircraft by 15 to 20 years. This latest test builds on a previous successful test in January, with new features such as Synthetic Aperture Mapping (SAR) announced with the company’s press release.

• The Air Force has test fired two AIM-9X Sidewinder missiles from a F-22 Raptor fighter. This test-firing is a step towards the F-22’s Increment 3.2B upgrade program, with Lockheed Martin awarded a contract last October to modify 220 F-22 Configurable Rail Launchers to accommodate the AIM-9X. Full operational fielding of the AIM-9X by the F-22 is not expected until 2017.

Europe

• France has reportedly offered Poland cruise missiles and submarines. The French have offered the Poles the MBDA Missile de Croisière Naval if they buy three Scorpene submarines. Poland is undertaking a substantial defense modernization program, with three submarines scheduled for delivery by 2023 under the country’s Orka program, which is reportedly already fully-funded. The evaluation of a tender for new submarines is expected to take place in Q4 this year.

• In conjunction to reports from earlier this week which stated that the Russian Defense Ministry is planning to procure new BMP-3 IFVs, new reports have stated that these will be augmented by 250 BMD-4M and BTR-MDM Rakushka armored personnel carriers. The first batch of these vehicles is thought to have been delivered already, with paratroop units set to receive a total of 62 BMD-4M and 22 BTR Rakushkas by the end of the year. The Russian President’s Office announced Wednesday that the country’s land forces would conduct training exercises with Chinese, Indian, Mongolian and Belorussian counterparts later this year.

• Denmark’s Terma has signed an memorandum of understanding with Turkish firm Aselsan to integrate radar and electronic warfare systems on fighter aircraft, including the transfer of ownership and intellectual property rights of Terma’s F-16 Modular Reconnaissance Pod from Terma to Aselsan. The latter opened a $157 million radar and EW manufacturing plant in March, with Terma opening an EW competence center in 2010.

• Dutch pilots are heading to Italy to train on the Italian Air Force’s fleet of Alenia Aermacchi T-346 trainers, following a cooperative agreement signed between the two countries’ air force chiefs. The Italian firm is still in the running for the Air Force’s T-X program, despite the company’s US prime contractor General Dynamics withdrawing itself from the competition in March.

Asia

• China has reportedly begun work on a Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing (STOVL) capability for the PLA Navy (PLAN). The equipping of the Liaoning carrier would free J-15 fighters tasked with air defense for strike missions. China has previously attempted to acquire STOVL-capable aircraft, with these previous projects dropped owing to cost and technical limitations. The J-15, a copy of the Russian Su-33, achieved its first carrier landing in 2012. Building on previous media coverage, these latest reports state that work on the future aircraft’s engine have begun, with AVIC Chengdu Engine Group and China Aviation Engine Establishment reportedly signing an agreement to cooperatively develop the engine, with this thought to have taken place in March. Northwestern Polytechnical University (NPU) in Xian is also thought to have developed a STOVL swivel nozzle last year.

• India is reportedly looking to acquire two Boeing 777-300 (extended range) aircraft as equivalents to Air Force One and Two. The aircraft will be bought from commercial airline Air India and fitted with self-protection technologies such as missile countermeasures by manufacturer Boeing, with the Defence Acquisition Council the contracting authority.

Today’s Video

• The T346 at Farnborough…

Into that good night
(click to view full)

The 5th-generation F-22A Raptor fighter program has been the subject of fierce controversy, with advocates and detractors aplenty. On the one hand, the aircraft offers full stealth, revolutionary radar and sensor capabilities, dual air-air and air-ground SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses) excellence, the ability to cruise above Mach 1 without afterburners, thrust-vectoring super-maneuverability… and a ridiculously lopsided kill record in exercises against the best American fighters. On the other hand, critics charged that it was too expensive, too limited, and cripples the USAF’s overall force structure.

Meanwhile, close American allies like Australia, Japan and Israel, and other allies like Korea, were pressing the USA to abandon its “no export” policy. Most already fly F-15s, but several were interested in an export version of the F-22 in order to help them deal with advanced – and advancing – Russian-designed aircraft, air-to-air missiles, and surface-to-air missile systems. That would have broadened the F-22 fleet in several important ways, but the US political system would not or could not respond.

This DID FOCUS Article tracks continuing maintenance and fleet upgrade programs, contracts, and timely news. A separate public-access feature offers a profile of the USAF’s most advanced fighter, and covers both sides of the F-22 Raptor program’s controversies.

The F-22 Raptor From YF-22 to F-22
(click to view full)

The Raptor had a long development history, in order to bring its unique capabilities together in one package. About 2 decades and 7+ quantum electronics leaps later, other countries are just beginning to test fighters with somewhat similar characteristics.

All-aspect stealth, supercruise, and thrust vectoring combine to give the F-22 unmatched abilities to engage or disengage in combat. A radar based on leap-ahead technologies, embedded sensors, and sensor fusion in the cockpit are designed to help the pilot use those capabilities wisely. The F-22’s astounding performance in competitive exercises suggests that they do, and history suggests that their intimidation value will add to their combat effectiveness.

The last Raptor
click for video

Even so, the Raptor has remained a focus for controversy, cost concerns, Congressional cutbacks, and program lessons learned the hard way. Ongoing health issues involving their pilots are equally troubling. The F-22 Raptor has racked up its share of critics, and a number of their points are valid ones. The F-22 has a limited weapon set, limited usefulness in conflicts short of full state warfare, high maintenance and readiness costs that affect training, and a very small pool of operational fighters.

Our background article, “F-22 Raptor: Capabilities and Controversies,” examines each of these factors in greater depth.

F-22 Raptor: Program F-22A over Alaska
(click to view full)

The F-22 program is led by Lockheed Martin. Boeing Integrated Defense Systems has responsibility for the avionics systems, and a Northrop Grumman-led joint venture with Raytheon produces the APG-77 radar, under contract to Boeing. The F119 thrust-vectoring engines are produced by United Technologies subsidiary Pratt & Whitney. As of 2011, order totals stand at 187. That number will not rise unless the production line is restarted, which means the 2009 and 2010 crashes will leave the USAF with a fleet of 185.

By the end of Lot 6 production (the FY 2007 batch), the Air Force and manufacturer expected to have all the major design changes to the Raptor worked out; there would be no major changes to the aircraft after that, unless the service wanted to produce an F-22B or F-22C model. Production of each F-22 took about 30 months from start to finish, as the various parts are sent to the Lockheed Martin facility in Marietta for final assembly. Within the final production line in Marietta, GA’s 3.5 million square foot main building, the “mate and final assembly” process took about 12 months.

Flyaway Costs & Budgets

When the final aircraft was delivered in May 2012, the F-22A acquisition program was complete. It cost $67.3 billion to develop the aircraft, establish the infrastructure, and buy 187 jets.

Lockheed Martin claims that their nationwide production team achieved Lot to Lot cost reductions greater than 10% for each set from Lot 1 to Lot 4. Larry Lawson, Lockheed Martin executive vice president and F/A-22 program manager, saw that trend slowing but not stopping, as the firm continued to focus on cost reductions and efficiency improvements. A June 23/06 US Air Force article added:

“The current cost for a single copy of an F-22 stands at about $137 million. And that number has dropped by 23 percent since Lot 3 procurement, General Lewis said. “The cost of the airplane is going down,” he said. “And the next 100 aircraft, if I am allowed to buy another 100 aircraft… the average fly-away cost would be $116 million per airplane.” “

Depending on which “dollar-year” those fly-away cost figures represent, actual amounts may vary, since current year dollars include inflation. Final-stage budgets suggest figures of $150-180 million per plane, but a July 2009 USAF response [PDF] gave the F-22A’s current flyaway cost as $142.6 million each. That no longer matters, since production stopped in 2012.

Raptor, Redux: Upgrading the Fleet F-22A vs. F-15 to -18
(click to view full)

Even though the F-22 is out of production, the program itself will continue to attract spending on maintenance, spares, and upgrades. The F-22A began as a single-step program, with no need for significant future modernization. Reality intervened, and the USAF came up with a $5.4 billion modernization plan in 2004. As of December 2011, the current total estimated cost of F-22A modernization had more than doubled, to $11.7 billion (+117%). Around $6.2 billion remained to be spent: $1.3 billion for Increment 3.2B, $3.6 billion to maintain modernization and support infrastructure, and $1.3 billion to complete RAMMP design-for-maintenance improvements and structural repairs.

Right now the Air Force operates mostly Block-20 aircraft. The Block 10s were used for training at Tyndall AFB. The Block 20s, produced from 2007 on, use “Increment 2″ hardware and software. That lets them launch GPS-guided JDAM bombs at supersonic speeds, and improves performance with the AIM-120C AMRAAM air-air missile. Increment 2 also helped fix some previous operations and maintenance issues.

Under the Common Configuration program, the F-22A Block 10s were retrofitted to Block 20/ Increment 2 status, but retain the original core processor. They could be used operationally as air superiority planes, but present plans call for them to remain as training and demonstration platforms. The USAF intends to retain 36 aircraft in this configuration.

As of 2012, the USAF intends to upgrade 143 aircraft with the full complement of modernized Block 35/ Increment 3 capabilities by FY 2020. The Raptor’s problem is that its Increment 3 set keeps changing, with items being added and subtracted while costs climb, and the schedule lengthens. Here’s the December 2011 timeline:

(click to view full)

Note the changes below…

F-22A with SDB-Is
(click to view full)

Increment 3.1 began development in 2006, and finally reached OpEval in January 2011. It finished testing in November 2011, and fielding is taking place from July 2011 (via USAF waivers) through 2016. Upgrades include new ground-looking synthetic aperture radar (SAR) modes for the AN/APG-77, some electronic attack capability, geo-location of detected electro-magnetic emitters, and initial integration with the GPS-guided GBU-39 Small-Diameter Bomb (SDB-I). That last change expands the F-22’s ground attack arsenal from 1 JDAM per bay to 4 SDB-Is, though a pilot will only be able to release 2 weapons at a time.

Timing Etc.: Testing shows that this upgrade has also improved the F-22’s Mean Time Between Critical Failure rates. Increment 3.1 is being fielded from 2011 – August 2017.

Changing upgrades
(click to view full)

Increment 3.2 was meant to be a software-focused upgrade, and was initially expected to begin delivering planes in 2010. The effort ran into funding delays, then ran into technical and cost problems. It has now split into a 3.2A and 3.2B phase, and a number of items have vanished from the plan.

Increment 3.2A will focus on Electronic Protection and Combat Identification, including Link-16 track fusion. Development began in November 2011, testing is expected to run from late 2012 – late 2013, and operational testing was expected to finish in early 2014.

Removed: Improved geo-location of detected emitters, Ground Moving Target Indication and Tracking Indicator (GMTI) radar mode to upgrade its ground-looking SAR from Increment 3.1, the MADL datalink, Anti-jam GPS SASSM retrofits, an Automatic Ground-Collision Avoidance System (AGCAS) to improve safety, and improved data recording.

Timing Etc.: Fielding of Increment 3.2A is planned to overlap Increment 3.1, and it will be fielded from FY 2014 – 2018.

Increment 3.2B has been structured as a new major defense acquisition program since December 2011. It will provide compatibility with new AIM-9X Sidewinder short range air-air missiles, and with the AIM-120D medium range air-air missile; the AIM-120D’s range, 2-way datalink, and AESA friendly features appear to be tailor-made for the F-22. Beyond that, 3.2B will finish Increment 3.1’s Electronic Protection Update, add the IFDL datalink, and improve geo-location of detected emitters (albeit to a lesser degree than initially planned).

Removed: All items removed from 3.2A are still gone, except geo-location which is added back to a degree.

The USAF also cut full SDB-I integration, which offered the ability to release all of the plane’s bombs at once against 8 separate targets. That can be very useful in some tactical situations, allowing just one screaming pass over defended and dispersed targets: airfields, air defense complexes, etc. On the other hand, FY 2013 USAF budget summary states that the GBU-53 tri-mode (MMW radar/IIR/laser) guidance SDB-II will also be integrated with the F-22A, and this has remained consistent. It’s possible that initial SDB-II integration will be done by the end of 3.2B. If added, it would give the Raptor the ability to hit moving targets, and to drop bombs using “buddy lasing” designation from other platforms.

Timing Etc.: Increment 3.2B estimated at $1.538 billion, of which $1.2 billion is R&D, and only $338.6 million is procurement. That isn’t unusual for a software-heavy upgrade.

Milestone B approval and system development was planned for Q1 2013, with fielding to take place between 2017 – 2020. Development began in February 2013, with a design review scheduled for July 2015 and a Milestone C decision in December 2015. Testing will begin in August 2016, with a “full rate production” (deployment) decision in October 2017, an expected initial operational capability in December 2018, and fielding running to 2020. The problem is that delays in completing the 3.1 and 3.2A increments are likely to push 3.2B back as well.

What Comes Next? There may be a hardware focus at the end of Increment 3.2, if a USAF effort to examine the full replacement of the F-22’s core electronics with a modern, open architecture software and hardware framework (vid. the F-35) bears fruit. If so, that would probably become Increment 3.2C, or an Increment 3.3 upgrade program. Previous wish lists have included items like side-mounted AESA radar arrays to improve radar field of view and simultaneous ground scans, multispectral/infrared search and track (IRST) systems for aerial and/or ground targets, and the JHMCS helmet-mounted sight. Improved jamming capabilities are another item that will always be in demand. At present, there are no plans to add powered weapons like HARM/AARGM anti-radar missiles, and fitting them into the weapon bays could be a challenge.

Milestones for F-22 modernization, and forecast dates for future milestones, are reproduced below:

Long-Term Maintenance Programs Ready?
(click to view full)

Operations and Maintenance is about 2/3s of the cost of any fighter over its lifetime, and the F-22 has been criticized for its performance. It promised better O&M costs than the F-15, but 2008 costs per flying hour were $19,750 for the F-22, vs. $17,465 for the F-15. All-in cost estimates of $49,808 vs. $30,818 are even more unfavorable. Those costs tend to rise as aircraft get older, and the F-22’s extensive use of uncommon materials like titanium and composites adds some new variables to the aging curve. An independent 2007 estimate by the Air Force Cost Analysis Agency projected a $49,549 all-in cost per F-22 flight hour at maturity in 2015 – more than double the $23,282 estimate made in 2005. It’s true that cuts in the number bought have raised fixed costs per plane, and also contributed to a shrinking industrial base that makes parts more expensive. The biggest impact, however, has come from the work required to maintain the F-22’s stealth coatings after flights and maintenance work.

The US military has a couple of programs aimed at tackling these challenges.

RAMMP. The F-22’s Reliability and Maintainability Maturation Program began in 2005, and will run as long as the aircraft serves. It aims to drive continuous improvement in F-22 reliability and maintainability, as measured by metrics like Availability, Maintenance Man Hours per Flight Hour [MMH], Mean Time Between Maintenance (MTBM), and cost-saving Return on Investment. RAMMP used to include production cut-in opportunities, but that stopped when production did. It still encompasses development work and retrofits that are seen as affordable up front and technically viable, with a good return on investment. According to program officials, as of January 2014 there were over 100 RAMMP projects of varying scope and cost under way, and over 200 projects had been completed.

In April 2011, the Pentagon changed the way they measured F-22 readiness to “material availability,” the percentage of the fleet available to perform assigned missions at any given time. The GAO says that this was just 55.5% in 2011, and the current goal for RAAMP is an availability rate of 70.6% by 2015. In May 2014, the US GAO flatly said that RAMMP wouldn’t achieve this.

The program had planned to spend about $258 million between 2005 and 2011, but a May 2012 GAO report pegged actual investments through 2011 at about $528 million. RAMMP is expected to need almost $1.3 billion through 2023, and is expected to run until the F-22 leaves service around 2033.

SRP I/II. The Structures Retrofit Plan/Program (SRP) is a 2-part program designed to correct warning signs discovered during the F-22’s 2005 Full Scale Fatigue Testing (FSFT), and make sure the planes reach their 8,000 flight hour service lives. All USAF planes have a routine structural integrity process designed to proactively detect and repair damage, and SRP is the Raptor’s. Phase I was designed to correct structural deficiencies with that were less than 2,000 flight hours from their limits, while SRP II is tackling less urgent deficiencies with life shortfalls between 2,000 – 8,000 flight hours. The SRP II program was scheduled to run from 2006 – 2015, but that has been stretched to 2019.

Basing

The F-22A Raptor is currently assigned to 7 bases across the US, 3-4 of which have operational aircraft:

• Langley AFB, VA: Operational F-22As of the 1st Fighter Wing’s 27th Fighter Squadron (FS) are assigned here. They have been certified to Full Operational Capability, and the Virginia Air National Guard’s (ANG’s) 192nd Fighter Wing is an associate squadron.

• Elemendorf AFB, AK: 3rd Fighter Wing’s 90th FS & 525th FS. Elmendorf AFB should have its full complement of 40 aircraft by December 2009. The US Pacific Air Force’s 477th Fighter Group (302nd FS, 477th Maintenance Sqn and 477th Aircraft Maintenance Sqn) will associate with the 3rd FW, becoming the first Air Force Reserve unit to maintain and fly the F-22A; its units have historic connections to the Tuskegee Airmen, the USAF’s highly-decorated black aviators of WW2. Source.

• Hickam AFB, Hawaii: Future base for 18-24 F-22A Block 30s; the Hawaii ANG’s 199th FS will contribute most of the personnel, and the 531st FS will be a USAF active force associate squadron to them. F-22As began arriving in July 2010, and the squadron flew its last F-15 mission in August 2010.

• Holloman AFB, NM: Was to become base #6 as its tenants transitioned from F-117 stealth aircraft to the F-22A. The base was converted to an F-16 training center instead, and the 8th Fighter Squadron was inactivated in May 2011. The 7th Fighter Squadron’s transfer was delayed for years because of a USAF freeze on structure changes, but te last set of F-22s left in April 2014.

• Tyndall AFB, FL: Pilot and maintenance teams training. Tyndall AFB has become the largest F-22 base, with over 50 planes. The Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard also have individuals here as instructors, and Tyndall boosted its numbers with F-22s from Holloman AFB.

Temporary deployments to Andersen AFB on Guam and Kadena AFB in Japan can be expected on a regular basis. F-22s can also be found at:

• Edwards AFB, CA: Flight testing, of course.
  
• Nellis AFB, NV: Tactics development, which becomes a new issue with full stealth aircraft.

F-22 Raptor: Key Events 2014

1st combat missions; GAO on F-22 maintenance program issues; F-22 training stats; Holloman AFB squadrons finally move; USAF reprisals against whistleblower pilot?; F-22s needed as F-35 air cover? Syria later!

May 14/15: The Air Force has test fired two AIM-9X Sidewinder missiles from a F-22 Raptor fighter. This test-firing is a step towards the F-22’s Increment 3.2B upgrade program, with Lockheed Martin awarded a contract last October to modify 220 F-22 Configurable Rail Launchers to accommodate the AIM-9X. Full operational fielding of the AIM-9X by the F-22 is not expected until 2017.

Sept 23/14: First combat strikes. The Pentagon touts how F-22s were used in their first combat role during strikes against ISIS in Syria. The aircraft dropped GPS-guided munitions and destroyed a building believed to be used for command and control purposes. Which makes the insurgents look like a regular military, but in some way that is how they have been fighting in past months. Given the relatively limited damage shown in the before/after pictures [PDF] released by DoD, as well as a video of one of the strikes, the bombs used were likely 250 pound GBU-39 SDB-Is optimized for penetration, rather than heavier 1,000 pound JDAMs.

The mission looks a bit out of character and underwhelming for what is primarily an air-to-air fighter, but the F-22 does have air-to-ground capabilities. Penetration against Syrian air defenses might have been an issue making the case for stealth, but then F-15s, F-16s and even UAVs were used in the same wave against northern Syria.

July 30/14: Reprisals? The Inspector General report covering allegations of reprisals against Capt. Wilson (q.v. April 20/14) is due – well, “soon” may be the wrong term to use:

“U.S. Sen. Mark Warner met Tuesday with officials of the Department of Defense inspector general and said he is pleased they’re promising to deliver their findings by Aug. 30 if not sooner…. Warner said he’s angered that the investigation has taken years instead of months, calling it a message to service members that those who sound an alarm will be punished…. “We’re now over 800 days since this process started. We’ve gone through three secretaries of defense. It’s time to get an answer.”

Acknowledgement of wrongdoing could carry a price tag for the US military. When the USAF removed him from his full time Air Combat Command job, they also removed most of his $100,000 per year salary. Sources: Virginia-Pilot, “Pentagon: F-22 whistleblower inquiry to finish in Aug.”

July 30/14: F-22 training stats. The USAF describes greater use of simulators and classroom instruction, as it moves to drastically cut the number of flight hours to qualify in an F-22. they’re hoping to pump up the volume:

“F-22 B-Course graduations increased from approximately 10 pilots per year on average to 23 pilots during fiscal year 2014. The program expects to graduate 30 pilots in fiscal year 2015. While increased numbers fall short of the 42 B-Course F-22 pilots the Air Staff said are required to meet the overall CAF fighter need, the trend is heading in the right direction… The F-22 basic qualification syllabus is one area that has seen sizable cuts and changes, primarily with the number of sorties B-Course students need to perform to graduate from the F-22 training course. Prior to the adjustments, a B-Course student required 43 sorties to graduate. The number is now down to 38 sorties. Track 1 course pilots, more experienced pilots retraining from other aircraft, also saw a reduction in the number of sorties needed to graduate, from 19 to 12 sorties.”

Meanwhile, the T-38s are taking up the aggressor role from F-22s. In 2013, T-38s flew 831 adversary air sorties in 9 months, and that number is expected to double in 2014.

At the same time, the USAF is touting improvements in the F-22’s availability rate, despite a negative recent report from the GAO (q.v. May 15/14). The 325th FW reportedly hit an 80.7% Mission Capable rate in March 2014, vs. an average rate from January – March 2013 of 49%. Software enhancements and beter availability of spare parts are cited as drivers, and the latter is helped by the 325th’s status as a training unit. Sources: USAF, “Tyndall AFB takes F-22 pilot training to next level”.

Training stats

F-22A readiness
(click to view full)

May 15/14: GAO Report. The US GAO looks at ongoing costs and estimates for the F-22’s SRP I/II and RAMMP programs, which aim to address the aircraft’s reliability and structural problems. The most recent combined cost estimate for these efforts from 2003 was approximately $11.3 billion, of which nearly 60% has already been invested. Of this total, $9.36 billion involves modernization, vs. $1.93 billion for maintenance efforts like RAMMP and SRP. Overall, GAO highlights 3 issues related to these efforts.

The 1st is the difficulty of tracking RAMMP, as the FY 2013 defense budget bill requested. The Pentagon says that reliability and maintainability programs can’t be baselined like regular new-item programs, because of unexpected life cycle issues that arise as the weapon system ages. GAO says that the current reporting system makes it impossible to consistently track cost and schedule progress. Both can be right.

The 2nd issue involves depot-level maintenance and turnaround time, whose lateness will now delay the fielding of key modernization increments like 3.1 (now August 2017, not FY 2016), 3.2A (now FY 2018, not FY 2016), and remediation programs like SRP (now 2019, not late 2017). The GAO cites management turnover at the contractor-run depot in Palmdale, CA, plus extra time needed for corrosion fixes, as the causes. One wonders whether the coming move to a government-operated facility in Ogden, UT will help, though they do have lower labor rates there, and have reportedly charged fewer labor-hours when performing modifications. A residual capability will be maintained at Palmdale, CA into 2015.

The 3rd issue cited is that the USAF has never been able to meet the F-22’s aircraft availability targets, and doesn’t expect to hit the required 70.6% figure by fiscal year 2018. Even that target figure isn’t all that high for a fighter, but the F-22 is handicapped by the fact that maintaining the F-22’s stealth with tapes, coatings, etc. accounts for almost 50% of off-line maintenance time. As such, “minor repairs or modifications that would take a few hours on a non-stealth aircraft can require days of maintenance on an F-22.” Sources: US GAO-14-425, “Cost and Schedule Transparency Is Improved, Further Visibility into Reliability Efforts Is Needed” | Defense-Aerospace, “F-22 Availability Lags Despite $11Bn Investment”.

April 20/14: Reprisals? F-22 pilot Capt. Joshua Wilson of the VA Air National Guard’s 149th Fighter Squadron was one of the pilots who talked publicly about the F-22’s oxygen problems on the CBS’ “60 Minutes” episode that aired in May 2012. In April 2012, the USAF stopped his planned promotion to major over his reluctance to fly the jets before various fixes were made; they’ve also forced him out of his full-time desk job with the Air Combat Command at Langley, and reportedly threatened to take away his wings.

“If you guys can prove I’m a bad officer, kick me out of the military,” he said. “If not, let me get back to my job. Let me get back to what I love to do, what I’m good at and what I trained my entire life to do.”

Wilson alerted the Department of Defense’s office of inspector general, which is investigating, and his own lawyers are calling the USAF’s actions a reprisal. U.S. Rep. Adam Kinzinger [R-IL-16] concurs, and Sen. Mark Warner [D-VA] has been critical.

It’s worth noting that Maj. Jeremy Gordon was also part of that 60 Minutes interview, and remains in the squadron, flying a T-38 after voluntarily stepping away from the Raptor in mid-2012. At the same time, the USAF hasn’t exactly explained themselves re: Wilson. Sources: Virginia-Pilot, “Pilot’s career stalls after criticizing oxygen system”.

April 8/14: Basing. The last 4 F-22A Raptors from Holloman AFB, NM’s 7th Fighter Squadron arrive at their new home in Tyndall AFB, FL (q.v. July 29/10, May 13/11, Oct 12/12, Jan 6/14), and become part of a new squadron. Col. David E. Graff, who commands the 325th Fighter Wing at Tyndall AFB, FL declares that the recently-reactivated 95th Fighter Squadron has reached Initial Operational Capability. Additional personnel and equipment still need to arrive from the F-22s’ former base at Holloman AFB, NM, and full operational capability is expected “this summer.”

The F-22s will also be flown by the 301st Fighter Squadron Air Force Reserve Command Associate unit. Including 95th FS, 43rd FS, and the F-22 training squadron, more than 50 Raptors are now based at Tyndall. Sources: Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine, “Last Raptor Leaves Holloman” and “Raptor Squadron Reaches IOC”.

F-22As over Fla.
(click to view full)

Feb 3/14: F-22s & F-35s. USAF Air Combat Command’s veteran leader, Gen. Michael Hostage, offers an interview answer that ignites much more controversy than he expected. After firmly stating that he intends to defend every single one of the 1,763 F-35As in the program, and adding that “adversaries are building fleets that will overmatch our legacy fleet, no matter what I do, by the middle of the next decade”, he’s asked about expensive upgrades to the F-22:

“A. The F-22, when it was produced, was flying with computers that were already so out of date you would not find them in a kid’s game console in somebody’s home gaming system. But I was forced to use that because that was the [specification] that was written by the acquisition process when I was going to buy the F-22.

Then, I have to go through the [service life extension plan] and [cost and assessment program evaluation] efforts with airplanes to try to get modern technology into my legacy fleet. That is why the current upgrade programs to the F-22 I put easily as critical as my F-35 fleet. If I do not keep that F-22 fleet viable, the F-35 fleet frankly will be irrelevant. The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform. It needs the F-22. Because I got such a pitifully tiny fleet, I’ve got to ensure I will have every single one of those F-22s as capable as it possibly can be.”

Gen. Hostage’s views are more complex than this, and his ideas concerning “the combat cloud” with F-35s as its backbone are especially interesting. His position is also operationally prudent. The problem is that Lockheed Martin and the USAF have been selling the F-35 as an air superiority aircraft. Meanwhile, outside commenters had looked at design tradeoffs and test data, while pointing to fighter design advances from Russia, China, et. al. and expressing skepticism re: air superiority claims. Now, the head of USAF ACC has just confirmed their skepticism. Can a very political military and industrial complex handle that? Sources: Defense News, “Interview: Gen. Michael Hostage, Commander, US Air Force’s Air Combat Command” | The Aviationist, “”If we don’t keep F-22 Raptor viable, the F-35 fleet will be irrelevant” Air Combat Command says” | Canada’s National Post, “Canada’s multi-billion dollar F-35s ‘irrelevant’ without U.S.-only F-22 as support, American general says” || Breaking Defense (2013), “Why Air Force Needs Lots Of F-35s: Gen. Hostage On The ‘Combat Cloud'”.

F-22s and F-35s kerfuffle

Jan 6/14: Basing. The first 5 Raptors arrive at Tyndall AFB, FL from Holloman AFB, NM. The 19 remaining fighters of the renamed 95th Fighter Squadron will arrive by the end of April 2014, making Tyndall the largest F-22 base with more than 50 Raptors. It will be the first time Tyndall has ever hosted a combat aviation unit.

The transfer has taken more than 3 years, thanks in part to an ongoing Congressional freeze on USAF structure changes (q.v. July 29/10, May 13/11, Oct 12/12). The F-22 move also frees up space for the transfer of 2 F-16 squadrons from Luke AFB, AZ in Arizona to Holloman AFB, which is becoming the USAF’s F-16 training center. Sources: Panama City News Herald, “‘Awesome’ new mission awaits Raptor pilots at Tyndall”.

2013

Last F119 engine; No HMD becoming a problem? AIM-9X test
(click to view full)

Nov 7/13: RaIL. Technicians at the Raptor Avionics Integration Laboratory (RaIL) at Hill AFB, UT complete the conversion from a contractor-run to an Air Force-run operation. The RaIL has been performing the critical avionics sustainment function for the F-22 Raptor at Hill since April 10/14. It’s a public/private partnership with Lockheed Martin, with 10 civil service employees part of an intensive 2 year training program. Sources: Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine, “RaIL Up And Running”.

Oct 10/13: Innovation. The usual method of deploying fighters is structured around large footprint packages to a select few operating bases. That wasn’t good enough for Lt. Col. Kevin Sutterfield, a reserve F-22 pilot assigned to the 477th Fighter Group at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska. He circulated a white paper around the concept of mobile stealth fighter groups that could refuel, rearm, and redeploy from a number of smaller bases, greatly complicating enemy planning.

Once that paper had senior attention, Sutterfield worked with other active duty and reserve experts to flesh out the details. The new approach uses a flexible combination of 4 F-22As, 1 C-17A, a tailored package of spares and equipment, and trained personnel on board as the “cell” quickly disperses to new bases to refuel, rearm, and fly operations. To test these theories, experienced pilots and maintainers from the 3rd Wing and 477th developed exercises in 2009, 2010, 2012, and in August 2013. The USAF considers the new approach to be ready for operational use. Sources: USAF, “Innovation advances F-22 as strategic force in Pacific”.

Aug 8/13: Crash report. USAF Air Combat Command’s Accident Investigation Board report says that the November 2012 crash at Tyndall AFB, FL (q.v. Nov 15/12) was caused by a chafed electrical wire. The positive generator-feeder wire arced out, burning through a nearby hydraulic line and forcing the generator offline. When the F-22A pilot attempted to restart the generator, the spark ignited misted hydraulic fluid. That fire took out key electrical and hydraulic systems, and c’est fini for Raptor 00-4013.

Fortunately, the pilot ejected safely, but the jet became a smoking hole in the ground. Total damage is estimated at $149.6 million. Sources: USAF, “F-22 accident report released”.

May 29/13: Infrastructure. The USAF is consolidating F-22A maintenance at Ogden Air Logistics Complex, Hill AFB, UT. A a 31-month incremental transition plan will shift away from the current arrangement, which is split between Ogden and Lockheed Martin’s Palmdale, CA facility. The USAF’s business case says they’ll save $16 million per year. As with all business cases, the proof is in the results. Sources: USAF, “Air Force to consolidate F-22 depot maintenance at Hill”.

April 8/13: Squadron stand-down. The USAF is standing down 17 combat-coded squadrons in response to budget cuts that reduced the flying hours budget by $591 million for the remainder of FY 2013. The grounding includes F-22As from the 1st Fighter Wing’s 94th Fighter Squadron at Joint Base Langley-Eustis, VA, who are returning from a high-profile exercise in South Korea. Gannett’s Military Times.

April 4/13: Some restrictions lifted. The F-22 Raptor fleet’s prohibition on venturing more than 30 minutes flight from suitable airfields is removed, after modifications to aircrew life-support equipment were completed across the fleet. F-22 crews have also resumed their aerospace control alert mission in Alaska after the Automatic Back-up Oxygen System (ABOS) was installed in the F-22s at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson.

Altitude restrictions still remain for some of the fleet. Altitude restrictions for training flights remain for non-ABOS aircraft; however, those restrictions will be removed as each aircraft is modified. Officials expect combat fleet completion by July 2014. USAF | KHON 2 Hawaii.

April 1/13: Korea. Pentagon Press Secretary George Little underscores the fact that 2 F-22As have deployed from Kadena AB, Japan to Osan AB in South Korea, arriving in the middle of the 2-month-long Foal Eagle exercise. Little says the move was pre-planned, and it happens to coincide with a sharp escalation in tensions with North Korea. Then again, escalations and acts of war have happened to every new South Korean administration, so it was predictable in advance. US DoD | CNN.

March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish. The F-22 itself is no longer a major program, but its Increment 3.2B upgrade has been approved as an MDAP all its own. It’s estimated at $1.538 billion, of which $1.2 billion is R&D, and only $338.6 million is procurement. That isn’t unusual for a software-heavy upgrade.

Development will begin in February 2013, with a design review scheduled for July 2015 and a Milestone C decision in December 2015. Testing will begin in August 2016, with a “full rate production” (deployment) decision in October 2017, and an expected initial operational capability in December 2018.

GAO is worried that the AIM-9X Block II air-to-air missile won’t be ready in time to support that 2016 testing, or 2018 fielding. It would have to be pretty late, though, because its IOC is scheduled for 2014. Other GAO concerns include the possibility of testing delays from more “pilot hypoxia” fleet groundings. F-22 flight software updates could create a concurrency risk for the developers, and if the Ogden Air Logistics Center’s software development lab isn’t accredited, it will add 75 more test flights and extend testing. Finally, the GAO cites “a lack of test resources to verify electronic protection and geo-location capabilities…” as a notable risk.

Feb 9/13: NASA on Hypoxia. The Hampton Roads Daily Press used Freedom of Information requests to review a redacted copy of NASA’s 120 page August 2012 report concerning F-22 “hypoxia” issues (q.v. also Sept 13/12 entry). The 14-member NASA team cites lack of information sharing at the outset, as different bases tried different approaches. Langley AFB, VA, for instance, found that hyperbaric treatments were helpful, but pilots in Alaska didn’t receive them. They also use the ominous term “normalization of deviance” to describe initial lack of reaction to pilot health problems.

NASA is also recommending reducing oxygen levels at lower altitudes as a way of avoiding “absorption atelectasis,” in which too much oxygen at low altitudes wash away necessary nitrogen within the lungs and cause lung tissue to collapse. The USAF says that many Navy pilots have flown without issue on 100% oxygen instead of 95%, and wants more data before making that change. NASA also wanted a central F-22 Medical Consult Service in place, as a resource for flight surgeons who treat pilots. The USAF says that Hyperbaric Division of the Aeromedical Consultation Service at the USAF School of Aerospace Medicine already serves in that role.

Feb 6/13: Pentagon IG Slams USAF. The Pentagon’s Inspector-General delivers a scathing assessment of the USAF Accident Investigation Board report that faulted the late Capt. Haney for the Nov 16/10 crash in Alaska. The crash led directly to fleet cockpit retrofits and changes in the flight vests, after the AIB’s own report described the absurdly difficult process for reactivating the pilot’s cut-off oxygen (q.v. Dec 14/11, March 20/12 entries). The IG’s report was sharply critical, and its main criticisms can be excerpted as follows:

“The AIB report cites three causal factors (channelized attention, breakdown of visual scan, and unrecognized spatial disorientation) as the cause of the F-22 mishap. However, these three factors are separate, distinct, and conflicting…. The AIB report’s determination that the mishap pilot’s mask was in the full up position throughout the mishap sequence was not adequately supported by the Summary of Facts or by the analysis cited in the TABs…. The AIB report’s Non-Contributory portion of the Human Factors section inadequately analyzes the human factors listed, such as hypoxia, gravity-induced loss of consciousness, and sudden incapacitation and does not contain any references and/or supporting documentation…. lacked detailed analysis of several areas, such as the Emergency Oxygen System activation as well as the physiological reactions to lack of oxygen…. Of the 109 references in the AIB report’s Summary of Facts, 60 of those references were either incorrect or did not direct the reader of the AIB report to the information cited in the paragraph.”

Reading the report in detail, the IG says there’s a lot of evidence that the pilot was “not actively flying the aircraft” for critical periods, citing inter alia 39 seconds of either unintentional or no flight control inputs just prior to the 7.4 g “recovery” maneuver and crash. Basically, the IG believes the pilot was probably unconscious.

The report is an interesting collision. Its conclusions vindicate the honor of the deceased pilot, which the Accident Board report had damaged, at the price of charging the USAF with incompetence (the alternative being dishonesty). The USAF disagrees, stating that the AIB report could have been clearer, but their conclusion was “supported by clear and convincing evidence and he exhausted all available investigative leads.” The IG responds that writing clarity was not the issue. They continue to lack confidence in both the quality of the evidence, and the thoroughness of the investigation, which means the AIB should be re-convened. The USAF is resisting that, and the IG wants more than a vague promise to “address deficiencies”. The tug-of-war continues. Pentagon Inspector General Report | ABC News | Flight International.

Inspector General slams USAF AIB’s 2010 accident report

Feb 6/13: Doc. The USAF does a feature on Lt. Col. (Dr.) Jay Flottmann, a former flight surgeon who is now a fully qualified F-22A pilot, and 325th Fighter Wing chief of flight safety at Tyndall AFB, FL. That role began in November 2010, so he has been very involved in many of the investigations and revised procedures. Including installation of a pulseoximeter in the F-22’s helmet.

Another part of his legacy is that Air Force Instruction 11-405 now allows qualified flight surgeons to apply to pilot training through normal channels.

Feb 5/13: RAF Eurofighters. British Eurofighter Typhoon fighters are training with F-22s at Langley AFB for the first time. German Typhoons reportedly found that they could deal with the Raptor in close during a recent exercise (q.v. July 30/12 entry), but exercises like these are more about teaching other air forces how to work together with the F-22’s different capabilities and protocols. Hampton Roads Daily Press.

Jan 31/13: Missile gap? Increment 3.2B upgrades are supposed to deliver AIM-9X Sidewinder missile capabilities to the F-22A fleet, but pilots are concerned that the short-range air combat missile will fall short of required performance without a Helmet Mounted Display, and leave the F-22A at a disadvantage in close-in fights. One Raptor pilot told Flight International that:

“We’ve been screaming for years that the F-22 needs to have the capability fielded, and fast… Once the jets transitions from BVR [beyond visual range] to WVR [within visual range] with only AIM-9M-9s it is hugely vulnerable…”

The pilots like the AIM-9X’s added range, which extends to beyond visual range levels when launched at supercruise speed, and its ability to lock-on after launch. The problem is that without an HMD like the JHMCS I/II on other USAF fighters, or the Thales (Gentex) Scorpion that equips A-10s and some Air National Guard F-16s, the pilots can’t take full advantage of the missile’s full targeting cone. It doesn’t help that AIM-9X Block II’s one cited deficiency is helmetless high off-boresight (HHOBS) performance, but a fix can be expected by 2017.

The Raptor may be able to out-turn anyone, but an opponent with 30 degrees more sighting cone to work with doesn’t have to maneuver as hard. As experiences with the Eurofighter show (q.v. June 30/12 entry), some 4+ generation aircraft do approach the F-22’s capabilities in close. Russian thrust-vectoring designs like the MiG-35, SU-30SM, and SU-35 may also fall into this category, and top-end SRAAMs can even create openings against the F-22’s infrared masking countermeasures.

Jan 17/13: Engine. Pratt & Whitney delivers the last of 507 production F119-PW-100 engines for the F-22 fleet. They’ll continue to produce parts and spares, but the plant removed 100 people in December 2012: 80 layoffs, and 20 early retirement buy-outs.

The last F-22A was delivered on May 2/12. WTNH, CT.

Last F119 engine

2012

The ‘Hypoxia’ issue; Why stealth maintenance is so expensive; F-22’s serious accident rate; 186 aircraft left; German Eurofighters claim good WVR record against F-22s. F-22A w. fuel tanks
(click to view full)

Dec 7/12: Fender bender. An F-22A stationed at Joint Base Preal Harbor – Hickam sustains $1.8 million in damage in a landing incident. The fighters scrapes both horizontal stabilizers on the runway, about 90 minutes after conducting a Missing Man Flyover during the 71st Anniversary Pearl Harbor Day Commemoration ceremony. The Aviationist | UK’s Daily Mail.

Nov 27/12: Stealth. The USAF discusses some aspects of stealth-related maintenance on its F-22s:

“Once a week, the LO shop conducts outer mold line inspections on the Raptor. All the information is placed into a database that rates its stealth capability, called a signature assessment system… Senior Master Sgt. Dave Strunk, 477th Maintenance Squadron fabrication flight chief… said that LO application falls into two areas – the removal of coatings to facilitate other maintenance and the removal and replacement to bring the SAS rating down… “We are working all day every day,” said Air Force Staff Sgt. Matthew Duque, 477th Maintenance Squadron LO technician. “We have 24/7 coverage to ensure a steady flow of progress from the start of a repair to finish.” “

All day, every day, in a highly specialized and technical job, using expensive materials, equals cost. This is normal for stealth aircraft, but it’s worthwhile to illustrate why they cost more to run.

Nov 20/12: The 325th Fighter Wing resumes flying. Tyndall AFB.

Nov 15/12: Crash. An F-22 crashes less than 500 yards from the drone runway at Tyndall AFB, FL. The pilot ejects safely. In response the 325th Fighter Wing stands down operations. Also in response, Flight International asks the intriguing question: how many F-22As does the USAF have left? The researcher’s tally is 184, and the head of USAF Air Combat Command agrees. But ACC’s press had this to say:

“This is what ACC sent me: “The F-22 inventory is 123 combat-coded, 27 training, 16 test, and 20 attrition reserve. The incident at Tyndall was a training aircraft which brought the number down from 28. There are currently 186 total.”

StrategyPage offers another useful calculation, finding that the Raptor has had just over 6 serious accidents per 100,000 flight hours. That’s about double the F-16 and F-15 fleets, and around the same level as India’s air force. In this case, a subsequent report finds that a chafed wire is to blame for the $145+ million accident (q.v. Aug 8/13). Sources: USAF | Tyndall AFB | Flight International | StrategyPage.

Crash

Oct 12/12: Delayed move. Holloman AFB, NM officials announce that the scheduled transfer of 7th Fighter Squadron F-22As to Tyndall AFB, FL will be delayed for another 18 months, due to an ongoing freeze on U.S. Air Force structure changes. The freeze will also postpone the transfer of 2 F-16 squadrons from Luke AFB, AZ in Arizona to Holloman.

Meanwhile, the 7th FS continues to perform its missions from Holloman, and they returned from a 9-month deployment to “Southwest Asia” in January. Las Cruces Sun-News, “F-22 Raptors move from Holloman AFB on hold for 18 months” | USAF, “Holloman loses F-22s to fleet consolidation, picks up F-16 schoolhouse”.

Sept 27/12: Hypoxia. Associated Press reconstructs some of the history behind the F-22’s oxygen related controversies. An informal working group of experts had flagged some of these problems a while ago:

“Internal documents and emails obtained by The Associated Press show [the Raptor Aeromedical Working Group, RAW-G] proposed a range of solutions by 2005, including adjustments to the flow of oxygen into pilot’s masks. But that key recommendation was rejected… “This initiative has not been funded,” read the minutes of their final meeting in 2007.”

RAW-G also forecast potential issues with the system providing too much oxygen at lower altitudes. Its founder, Tyndall AFB flight surgeon Wyman, is now a brigadier general, and USAF Air Combat Command surgeon general. Sources: AP, Air Force insiders foresaw F-22 woes.

Sept 13/12: Hypoxia Hearings. The House Armed Services Committee’s Subcommittee On Tactical Air And Land Forces meets to discuss the F-22’s pilot health issues. At this point, the USAF Scientific Advisory Board’s Oxygen Generation Study Group has been delivered, but not implemented. USAF Air Combat Command’s Life Support Systems Task Force still needs to complete its report and provide its final recommendations, and so does NASA’s Engineering and Safety Center, but NASA’s core conclusions are known (q.v. Feb 9/13). Senior leaders from all 3 efforts are invited to testify, and the subcommittee chair is a Congressman who did his Ph.D in flight physiology, and has been involved in military accident investigations.

The full testimony is very detailed, and covers a complex subject. There’s no substitute for reading it in full at the link below. With that said, here are some key points and take-aways:

• The estimated cost of fleet modifications is $82.5 million, including an Automatic Backup Oxygen System (A-BOS), Automatic Ground Collision and Avoidance System (AGCAS), Upper Pressure Garment Valve, Oxygen Hose Pass-Thru Panel, and Helmet Mounted Pulse Oximeter. Trying to mount an oximeter on pilots’ fingers kept giving incorrect readings, and it took the USAF a little while to catch on to that.

• The USAF doesn’t have any plans to reduce “Raptor cough” (acceleration atelectasis) among pilots. Rep. Bartlett points out that oxygen feeds that rise way above 158 partial pressure leave too little nitrogen to keep the alveoli inflated in the lungs, especially under high Gs. If the systems adjust the partial pressure to stay close to that figure, he believes that many of the coughing-related problems & risks will go away. The USAF, on the other hand, says that super-oxygenating the bloodstream maximizes “time of useful consciousness” if the cockpit blows off and the pilot has to eject at altitude. Translation: get used to coughing.

• The Raptor is different because of the amount of time spent at high altitude. Gen. Lyon notes that the has over 3,000 hours in the F-16, but less than 10.0 above 40,000 feet. In contrast, F-22 pilots spend most of their time at 40,000 – 60,000 feet. The USAF is still learning about very high altitude flying’s effects on pilots, even after 50+ years of experience with U-2 spyplanes.

• The USAF doesn’t plan any changes for maintenance personnel either, who have also reported health issues. The USAF couldn’t find any significant toxicology traces in tests.

• Ground testing needs to include the full life-support system, and it must be realistic. It wasn’t until the USAF started putting F-22 pilots and their flying ensembles into altitude chambers and centrifuges that they really began to see repeatable failures.

• The USAF acknowledges that their flight medicine and aviation physiology research capabilities were cut back sharply during the 1990s. Some shifted to contractors, but it’s a high cost/ low payout field, aso much of the capability just went away. One of the recommendations is for the USAF to restore some of that capability.

• NASA notes, dryly, that “…the investigative process could have been more efficient. The F-22 task force was never given a directive that assigned the authority to conduct the investigation. They began with two narrow hypotheses, and did not communicate well to all parties.”

• Comprehensive testing has ruled out stealth coating by-products as an issue for maintainers or pilots.

• All F-22 pilots and associated ground crew have received baseline pulmonary tests and blood tests, which have been put into a registry that will track them through their Air Force career “and, if necessary, beyond.” Gen. Lyon acknowledged “…if something is discovered [in future] that would be tied to this aircraft or in servicing this aircraft, we have a moral imperative to take care of those Americans.”

• The F-35’s oxygen system is described as “designed with a bit more redundancy and robustness”, including a backup system.

Sources: HASC Subcommittee, “No. 112-154 F-22 Pilot Physiological Issues: full transcript” | WIRED, “Air Force to Stealth Fighter Pilots: Get Used to Coughing Fits” | Fort Worth Star-Telegram’s Sky Talk, “More on the F-22 Raptor’s oxygen problems.

Hypoxia hearings

Sept 20/12: Hypoxia. US Air Combat Command chief Gen. Mike Hostage says that the F-22’s oxygen problem is one of human physiology limits. It’s odd that Eurofighter pilots, who also fly above 50,000 feet at high gs, haven’t reported similar issues. Regardless:

“The service will “train our aviators that the issue is work of breathing,” Hostage told Air Force Times following the conference.” Gannett’s Air Force Times.

Sept 18/12: Hypoxia. USAF Gen. Gregory Martin (ret.), who headed the official investigation into the F-22’s hypoxia issues, explained the removal of the backup oxygen system to the HASC Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee:

“It was not a cost issue… the catalyst for this particular decision was… the ‘war on weight.’ In retrospect, that was not an appropriate decision.”

ABC News says that Martin’s comments seem to contradict Gen. Charles Lyon, who cited cost-driven cuts in August. On the other hand, it’s likely that Martin has the more complete briefing on the issue. ABC News.

Sept 19/12: 20 in Hawaii. The Hawaii National Air Guard’s 199th Fighter Squadron and the Active Duty Air Force’s 19th Fighter Squadron have received their last 4 F-22As. Their fleet is now complete, with 18 housed on Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, and 2 under depot maintenance on the Mainland. Hawaii News Now.

Sept 13/12: Hypoxia – NASA’s take. NASA’s Engineering Safety Center presents its own assessment of the F-22A’s problems to a House Armed Services Committee. They point to “absorption atelectasis,” in which too much oxygen at low altitudes wash away necessary nitrogen within the lungs and cause lung tissue to collapse. NASA also uses a term with strong echoes, when they say that acceptance of “Raptor cough” and difficulty breathing “could be seen as a ‘normalization of deviance.’ ” NASA has used that term with respect to the Space Shuttle Challenger, during their post-mortem of its explosion. Aviation Week. See also Feb 9/13 entry.

Aug 25/12: Long-term safety issue? The Fort Worth Star-Telegram has been looking into the F-22 issues, and notes a disturbing piece of news: some Raptor pilots and families are complaining about long-term health problems, which include a chronic cough, impaired motor skills, loss of concentration and an inability to recall words and facts, lethargy and “crushing headaches.” There’s even one suicide that has the family raising questions, involving Brig. Gen. Thomas Tinsley.

The USAF says that contamination has been ruled out, but the article also takes a deeper look at various possibilities like contaminants, or repeated acceleration atelectasis (collapsing alveoli in the lungs). The USAF hasn’t issued its full report, so it’s hard to evaluate why it has ruled out those possibilities. As for the symptoms, they could be from contamination, they could be something that isn’t physical, or they could involve some aspect of physiology at extreme conditions that isn’t well understood yet. If it was easy to tell, we’d have answers already. Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Aug 13-17/12: Lawsuit settled. Anna Haney has agreed to a settlement in her wrongful death case against Lockheed Martin (F-22), Boeing (life support system), Pratt & Whitney (bleed air system), and Honeywell (OBOGGS). Her husband, Captain Jeff Haney, was killed in the Nov 16/10 crash in Alaska. The terms of the settlement are confidential.

An ABC News report points out that part of the problem was known to the USAF for a decade. In March 2000, a combined USAF/ contractor test group said that during certain specific high-altitude maneuvers, the Environmental Control System (ECS) system would shut down. Worse, it was built so that if it failed, a cascade of events would cut off the pilot’s primary oxygen supply. Such a real-world failure was described as “unacceptable,” but instead of installing an automatic plenum tank within the system, the USAF’s solution involved the incredibly difficult to use manual ring-pull system that contributed to Captain Haney’s death.

A June 5/12 contract (q.v.) with Lockheed Martin will retrofit 40 jets in the fleet with an automatic system, designed to kick in whenever the plane’s instruments detect an interruption in the oxygen flow. ABC News | Alaska Dispatch | Flight International.

July 30/12: Red Flag. Combat Aircraft leaks some results from the 2012 Red Flag exercises. WIRED Danger Room:

“In mid-June… [8] Typhoons arrived at Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska for an American-led Red Flag exercise involving more than 100 aircraft from Germany, the U.S. Air Force and Army, NATO, Japan, Australia and Poland. Eight times during the two-week war game, individual German Typhoons flew against single F-22s… The results were a surprise to the Germans and presumably the Americans, too. “We were evenly matched,” Maj. Marc Gruene told Combat Aircraft’s Jamie Hunter. The key, Gruene said, is to get as close as possible to the F-22 … and stay there. “As soon as you get to the [close-in] merge … the Typhoon doesn’t necessarily have to fear the F-22,” Gruene said.”

The news has even more impact because the Eurofighters are still flying without helmet-mounted displays, which expand the engagement radius for short-range missiles. That’s a gap in the Raptor’s arsenal, too, but the Eurofighters are about to field an HMD. In contrast, JHMCS HMD integration was cut from the F-22 program during cost overruns, and an HMD isn’t in their current plans.

F-22As vs. Eurofighters

July 30/12: AIM-9X test. An F-22A performs the 1st supersonic launch of an AIM-9X short range air to air missile over the Sea Test Range at Point Mugu, CA. The first launch of an AIM-9X from the F-22 was carried out in May 2012.

Note that these are mechanical and aerodynamic tests, to ensure safe separation, ignition, etc. F-22As won’t be able to really use the AIM-9X in combat until the Increment 3.2B upgrade, which is expected to debut in 2017. Lockheed Martin @ Flickr.

July 30/12: To Japan. USAF F-22As arrive at Kadena AB in Japan. They’re expected to remain on Japan’s southern island of Okinawa for several months, but will be under flight restrictions during that time since pilots won’t be wearing the Combat Edge vests. CBS News.

July 24-30/12: Hypoxia solved? The USAF says they’ve found the root cause of the hypoxia problem. Part is said to be hose and valve connection hardware in the cockpit, and part is with pilots’ Combat Edge upper pressure system, and its breathing regulator/anti-g (BRAG) valve. The valve works fine for F-15 and F-16 pilots, but they don’t have the same performance envelope, and they have different life support systems. The USAF says that in the F-22A the BRAG valve stays open, keeping the vest inflated when it shouldn’t be. That leads to shallow breathing, and hyperventilation.

Kevin Divers, a former USAF rated-physiologist and F-22 flight test engineer, isn’t so sure, He says that the problem was known in 2000, but he had been assured that the issue had been tested thoroughly. There’s also the question of why maintainers on the ground are suffering from similar symptoms to the pilots. The USAF says that the issue is unrelated, but others aren’t so sure. They cite potential causal chains involving chemicals that become much more toxic when heated, can be introduced to the pilot in ways that go beyond the breathing system, and would also affect maintainers afterward.

Meanwhile, flight restrictions of 44,000 feet, maneuvering limitations, and a mandate to remain within 30 minutes of an airfield will remain until all of the USAF’s mechanical modifications reach flight crews. That isn’t expected to begin until September 2012. CBS News | Defense Tech | Flight International in-depth report | Flight International – USAF doubles down.

June 5/12: Oops. A “ground incident” at Tyndall AFB, FL puts an F-22 out of commission, but no-one is hurt. The former F-16 pilot at the controls was making his 2nd flight in an F-22, and the incident happened during a “touch and go”. Tyndall is where F-22 training happens, so that situation is normal.

This kind of thing usually means some repair expense (tail drag? wingtip runway strike? landing gear damage?), but shouldn’t scrap the plane. With a fleet size this low, however, even minor incidents like this one can become significant. Panama City News Herald.

May 15/12: Restricted flight. US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta issues a letter to Air Force Secretary Michael Donley, ordering that F-22 flights remain “within proximity of potential landing locations”. The specifics will be up to individual pilots and commanders, but you don’t want to be the commander if an F-22A accident occurs very far away from any landing options.

Panetta also asks the USAF to accelerate installations of an automatic backup oxygen system, and a contract for the first 50 is later announced in early June 2012. Finally, the US Navy and NASA are to be brought in, to help solve the ongoing oxygen problems that have hampered the fleet’s effectiveness for over a year now. Pentagon spokesman Capt. John Kirby, USN, tells reporters that in light of the recent deployment of several F-22s to the Persian Gulf, and because of pilots’ complaints, Panetta chose to “dive a little more deeply into the issue,” and then to issue the letter. Panetta letter, via scribd | Minneapolis Star-Tribune | Rep. Kinziger | Sen. Warner | WIRED Danger Room.

May 11/12: U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner [D-VA] and Rep. Adam Kinzinger [R-11-IL] send a joint letter to Air Force Secretary Michael B. Donley, asking for a comprehensive and confidential survey of F-22 pilots and USAF flight surgeons. Rep. Kinziger.

May 3/12: 60 Minutes. Raptor pilots Maj. Jeremy Gordon and Capt. Josh Wilson of the Virginia Air National Guard’s 192nd Fighter Wing come forward and talk to the news show 60 Minutes, explaining why they have told their command they do not wish to fly the jet.

Gordon and Wilson say the Air Force has threatened to fire F-22 pilots who express these objections, and have asked Rep. Adam Kinziger [R-11-IL, formerly USAF Maj. Kinziger] to help them gain protection under the federal whistleblower law. On May 8/12, testimony to the House indicates that the 2 pilots will not face sanctions from the USAF. CBS News 60 Minutes | Rep. Kinziger release.

May 2/12: Last F-22A delivered. Lockheed Martin formally delivers its 195th and last F-22 Raptor to the USAF, after a run of 187 F-22As and 8 test aircraft from 1997-2012. This final Raptor will join 3rd Wing at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska. Lockheed Martin.

Last delivery

May 2/12: GAO Modernization, Part 2. The US GAO issues report #GAO-12-447, “F-22A Modernization Program Faces Cost, Technical, and Sustainment Risks.” The summary is not positive:

“Total projected cost of the F-22A modernization program and related reliability and maintainability improvements more than doubled since the program started – from $5.4 billion to $11.7 billion – and the schedule for delivering full capabilities slipped 7 years, from 2010 to 2017. The content, scope, and phasing of planned capabilities also shifted over time with changes in requirements, priorities, and annual funding decisions. Visibility and oversight of the program’s cost and schedule is hampered by a management structure that does not track and account for the full cost of specific capability increments… Results to date have been satisfactory but development and operational testing of the largest and most challenging sets of capabilities have not yet begun. Going forward, major challenges will be developing, integrating, and testing new hardware and software to counter emerging future threats… While modernization is under way, the Air Force has undertaken parallel [RAAMP] efforts to improve F-22A reliability and maintainability to ensure life-cycle sustainment of the fleet is affordable and to justify future modernization investments. But the fleet has not been able to meet a key reliability requirement, now changed, and operating and support costs are much greater than earlier estimated.”

F-22A vs. “Teen series”
(click to view full)

April 26/12: GAO Modernization Report. The F-22A began as a single-step program, with no need for significant future modernization. Reality intervened, and the current total estimated cost of F-22A modernization is now $9.7 billion for Increments 2, 3.1, and 3.2B. GAO explains why this is more expensive than past “teen series” fighter designs:

“In 2003… We noted that while [advertising a single-step approach] may have allowed the F-22A program to compete for funding, it hamstrung the program with little knowledge about its true technology, funding, and schedule needs. In addition, the Air Force did not make early trade-offs between requirements and available resources… Ultimately F-22A development took more than 14 years, encountered significant cost increases and quantity reductions, and has not yet fully met established requirements, specifically those related to reliability and maintainability.

…F-22A production was terminated in 2009, before… (Increment 3.1) had finished development, so the remaining modernization increments will have to be retrofitted… Based on F-22A flight hour data provided by the program office our analysis indicates that a large number of aircraft are likely to have flown more than 1,500 hours, or nearly 20 percent of their 8,000-hour service lives, before the Increment 3.2B upgrades are fielded.11 …retrofitting upgrades onto stealth aircraft with fully integrated computer systems – referred to as fused or integrated avionics – like the F-22A is a riskier and more complex process than integrating new technologies into a conventional aircraft with separate and distinct computer systems and software for each subsystem – known as federated avionics – even if the technologies are mature.”

See: GAO | Washington Examiner.

March 23/12: Increment 3.1. Flight International reports that the 3rd Wing’s 525th fighter squadron at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska became the first Combat Air Forces squadron to receive the F-22A Increment 3.1, with greatly improved ground-attack capabilities.

Increment 3.1 fielded

March 20/12: Hypoxia. Gannett’s Air Force Times reports that Capt. Haney’s fatal Alaska crash (vid. Dec 14/11) has led to design changes and retrofits. The Air Force is replacing handles that engage the F-22A’s emergency oxygen system, at a fleet material cost of $8,400 for 200. Elemndorf’s F-22As have already been refitted, and refits to other units are ongoing.

March 12/12: Lawsuit. Capt. Haney’s widow, Anna Haney, files a wrongful death suit in Cook County Court, IL against Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Honeywell International and Pratt & Whitney. The core of the suit reportedly claims that the plane’s onboard oxygen delivery system is defective, and that the mechanism for activating the emergency backup oxygen system is essentially impossible to operate impossible in emergencies. As such, the plane “did not safely or properly provide breathable oxygen to the pilot operating the aircraft.”

Lockheed Martin’s spokeswoman was sympathetic, but added that the company does not agree with the allegations, and will contest them in court. Military.com.

Jan 17/12: 2011 DOT&E. The Pentagon releases the “FY2011 Annual Report for the Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation.” The F-22A is included, and results are mixed.

On the one hand, Increment 3.1 improvements involving ground radar modes and the new Small Diameter Bomb appear to be effective, and strongly improved Mean Time Between Critical Failure rates. The fleet grounding in 2011 delayed full testing, but in July 2011, the USAF authorized early fielding anyway.

A more mixed review came in the USAF’s 5-year Low Observables Stability Over Time (LOSOT) testing. The stealth system was found to be durable and stable over time, but stealth-related maintenance “continues to account for a significant proportion of the man hours per flight hour required to maintain the F-22A.” That has always been true for stealth aircraft, though the F-22 was supposed to feature new technologies that would avoid this outcome and keep costs in line. That does not appear to have happened. The USAF continues to try and improve things by fielding an LO(Low-observable, i.e. stealth) Repair Verification Radar tool, performing periodic maintenance audits of the LO system, and fielding more people (aka. “Martians”) for low-observable maintenance. The extra Martians should improve mission-readiness, in exchange for extra costs per flight hour.

2011

Last Raptor rolls out; Increment 3.2 upgrade gets split up; Fleet grounding; T-38s introduced to reduce aerial training costs; Cockpit design the real cause of a fatal crash. End of the day
(click to view full)

Dec 14/11: Crash cause? Terrible Man-Machine Interface. That’s certainly what a leaked USAF report appears to conclude, concerning the fatal November 2010 F-22A crash in Alaska. According to reports, onboard computers detected that bleed air was leaking out of the engine bay, which could cause a fire. They shut that system down, leaving the OBOGS with no air feed. To activate the Emergency Oxygen System (EOS) back-up, the pilot has to pull up on a small ring tucked into the side of his ejection seat. While trying to find it, Capt. Haney seems to have put his aircraft into a dive – a result repeated in ground simulations, as the pilot moves the stick and rudder while twisting in the cockpit.

It doesn’t help that to avoid hitting their canopy with protruding night vision goggles, while looking down and to the side, F-22 pilots have to brace themselves to shift their torso. A requirement that wouldn’t exist, except that the F-22 program cut JHMCS Helmet-Mounted Display integration. The accident investigation board still blames the accident on the pilot, for failing to activate the EOS. Flight International.

Dec 12/11: Last Raptor. The last F-22 rolls off the assembly line in Marietta, GA, as the US prepares to mothball the production line’s tooling, along with photos, video, and detailed instructions. Mothballing is a rare step, which would reduce the cost of re-starting production later.

About 5,600 Lockheed employees worked on the F-22 program at its peak in 2005, including 944 in Marietta. The current number is 1,650, with 930 in Marietta. More than 200 Marietta jobs have been cut in 2011, and more cuts could be coming. What’s known is that 600 Marietta, GA employees will handle F-22 technical support and modernizations. Some of the rest will be cut, while others will move to other programs. Atlanta Journal Constitution | UK’s Daily Mail | Reuters | TIME Magazine Battleland.

The Last Raptor

Oct 20-25/11: Stand-down. The commander of the 1st Fighter Wing at Langley AFB, VA issues a temporary stand-down order for the squadron’s F-22As, after another hypoxia-like incident. The F-22s at Elmendorf AFB, Alaska follow suit. All F-22s are flying again by Oct 25/11, but it’s clear that whatever problems the plane has aren’t going away. AP | Gannett’s Air Force Times | WAVY TV 10 | WIRED Danger Room.

Oct 15/11: Reservists with the 477th Fighter Group in Joint AB Elmendorf, AK resume F-22 flying operations. After the fleet’s 4-month grounding, active duty pilots had priority to begin flying the F-22s. US PACAF.

Oct 5/11: USMC Maj. Christopher Cannon writes a report advocating the F-22 as a ‘Plan B’ fallback replacement for the Marines’ F-35B if it’s canceled. The challenge is that the F-22 can’t be flown from ships, and current plans call for the USMC to buy a mix of F-35B STOVL and F-35C carrier aircraft. If the F-35B in canceled, therefore, the current Plan B is the F-35C. On the other hand, Canon argues that:

“The F-22 dwarfs the F-35 in stealth, speed, survivability, deployability and firepower… F-22s could be purchased now and would be cheaper initially and cost less to maintain than F-35s in the future. The current DoD (Department of Defense) plan is to buy 50 Marine Corps F-35B aircraft… [costing] $190 million per aircraft. In 2011, flyaway costs for the F-22 are a reported $150 million per aircraft… The U.S. Air Force estimates flying hour costs for the F-22 are $44,259 per hour. The 2008 GAO (Government Accountability Office) report estimated $33,000 per flying hour in a JSF aircraft… However, F-35B costs will likely be higher than A and C models. Additionally, the 2011 GAO update states that ‘current JSF life-cycle cost estimates are considerably higher than the legacy aircraft it will replace.’ “

Short takeaway: The report is very unlikely to become policy. Walton Sun.

Sept 26/11: Return to flight. The F-22 Raptor returns to the skies in a series of test and production flights at Lockheed’s Marietta, GA facility. Lockheed Martin.

Sept 19/11: Grounding. The USAF says that it will resume F-22 flights on Sept 21/11, even though it’s not sure what the problem is. While the wait for the fall report, the USAF will continue studying the problem, run regular physiological tests on the pilots, add training and unspecified protective gear, beef up aircraft inspections, and implement some short-term flight restrictions. The timing will, however, allow pilots grounded since May 3/11 to maintain their proficiency certifications. Aviation Week | Bloomberg | DoD Buzz | Gannett’s Air Force Times.

Aug 31/11: Grounding. Defense News reports that the USAF is looking to lift the F-22 fleet grounding, even though the cause of the hypoxia-like symptoms hasn’t been determined yet. A Sept 2/11 meeting will determine what flight restrictions need to remain: the USAF wants to restrict the planes below 40,000 feet, but the pilots are pushing for the full 60,000 foot ceiling, and want the physiologists dealing with this issue to have piloting experience. A Sept 7/11 Defense News article goes into more detail:

“Sources said the man they want to help with the investigation is a former Air Force flight test engineer and rated physiologist… Kevin Divers [of] Warrior Edge. Divers was a member of the F-22 Combined Test Force during the jet’s developmental testing and operational testing… Physiologists don’t fully comprehend the safety systems built into the modern aircraft, Divers said, but moreover, most don’t have the real-world experience in an aircraft. The consequence is that it has made it harder for the Air Force to get to the bottom of the problem… also created “an aircrew perception that the career field doesn’t understand its customer any more,” Divers said… “I know all of their flight equipment – the [onboard oxygen generating system] OBOGS, the entire plumbing of the aircraft to the OBOGS… My pilot training experience taught me to break down subsystems and know the aircraft to the level that the aircrew has to know it. Air Force physiologists aren’t trained that way coming into the Air Force.”

See also: Defense News Aug 31/11 | POGO.

August 16/11: Grounding. As of this date, F-22s have been grounded for 105 days. A mix of toxins has been found in pilots’ blood after the various incidents that led to the fleet’s grounding, but how the gasses make it into the plane’s air supply is still unclear. Carbon monoxide dissolves too quickly to have been found by the tests, but it could also explain hypoxia and may make it into cockpits during hangar startups used during Alaska’s winter.

The investigation led by the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) has been expanded to other planes: F-35 Lightning II, T-6A Texan II, F-16 Fighting Falcon and A-10 Thunderbolt II. It is planned to be completed by early fall.

Meanwhile, a larger readiness problem is growing. Simulators help maintain a pilot’s instrument approach, but do not replace the live experience, so this is disrupting training. After 210 days without flying, pilots may have to go through extensive re-qualification.

June 16/11: Grounding. The F-22 fleet remains grounded, except for any emergency and testing missions that might be ordered.

May 30/11: New Core? The USAF is considering scrapping or heavily supplementing the F-22’s hardware/ software core with a modern open architecture system that would make upgrades much more portable from platforms like the F-35, EA-18G, etc., and also allow the USAF to open upgrades to competition beyond Lockheed Martin and Boeing.

When the F-22 was in development, VAX hardware and the Ada programming language were the most advanced mature technologies available; UNIX had not fully evolved to a military grade choice, and the project needed to lower risk. A lot has changed on the technology front since then, and now the tightly-coupled nature of the F-22’s systems, and age of their legacy underpinnings, is making improvements difficult.

The F-22 System Program Office (SPO) at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH will be trying to scope out the cost and effort via a 2011 RFI for demonstration projects. Depending on what they find, the system might become part of “Increment 3.2C” installations in 2019-2020, and allow the USAF to bring the entire Raptor fleet up to Increment 3.2 standard. Defense News | Vector Software | WSJ Tech Europe.

May 19/11: 3.2 splits up. The Senate Armed Services Committee gets bad news from USAF procurement chief David Van Buren, as he tells them that:

“Increment 3.2 that we’re currently working on for the F-22 for our war-fighting customer is taking too long to implement… We are working with the company to try to speed that up and make it more affordable.”

Software development issues are the problem for this mostly-software upgrade, which has now been split into Increment 3.2A for 2014 fielding, and Increment 3.2B for 2017 fielding. As noted elsewhere in this article, the F-22 runs on VAX computers, programmed in Ada. During the F-22’s development phase, they were the stable, mature options available. Now, they’re almost extinct. Lockheed Martin says that they’re working on it, adding that they saved the USAF $20 million by moving some electronic protection software forward from Increment 3.2B (2017) to Increment 3.2A (2014). They’re reportedly looking at 100 additional cost-cutting items for Increment 3.2B. SASC Hearing (actually focused on F-35) | Defense News | Gannett’s Air Force Times.

May 13/11: Holloman out. The active-duty 8th Fighter Squadron at Holloman AFB is officially inactivated, marking only the second time in the squadron’s 61-year history that it has been inactive. 8th FS flew F-22s, and Holloman AFB, NM is being converted to an F-16 training base. Source.

May 5/11: Grounded. The F-22A fleet, which had been restricted to flying at a maximum of 25,000 feet since January 2011, gets a full grounding order from the USAF. A few pilots have been experiencing hypoxia-like symptoms on a few flights, and the USAF still doesn’t know why, so they’ve taken a cautious approach while a full investigation is conducted.

Suspicion naturally falls on the fighter’s on-board oxygen gas generation system (OBOGGS) system, and the USAF is also investigating the OBOGGS systems on a range of other planes: F-15s, F-16s, F-35s, and T-6 trainers. With that said, the F-22A uses a new system designed by Honeywell, as opposed to the older Cobham plc systems found on many other USAF aircraft. Those kinds of systems do not usually fail, and the F-22 fleet has operated for some time without this problem. It is possible that some component may be wearing out early, or not holding up well over time, but the USAF is careful to note that they have not confirmed the source of the problem – if they knew it was the OBOGGS, this would not be an investigation. Meanwhile, the F-35 program takes pains to point out that their OBOGGS system is a newer Honeywell design. Bloomberg | DefenceWeb | Defense News | Flight International | Stars and Stripes.

Fleet grounded

March 19/11: Libya from afar. Operation Odyssey Dawn begins multinational enforcement of a no-fly zone over Libya, and includes strikes on a wide range of defended Libyan targets. The F-22 is completely absent from these proceedings, though the EA-18G Growler electronic warfare fighter makes its combat debut. Given a clear air superiority and air defense suppression mission, which seems to play to all of the F-22’s strengths, and a March 17/11 statement by USAF Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz that he expected the F-22s to be employed in the early days of the conflict, many observers speculate about the F-22’s absence from the conflict.

Speculation includes political motives to force a coalition effort, lack of shared datalinks with most of the other planes participating, the fact that upgrade Increment 3.1’s ground-looking SAR mode for the AN/APG-77 radar hasn’t been delivered yet, or just an assessment that Libya wasn’t all that tough, and the F-22 wasn’t needed. A less credible reason was advanced by the USAF, who said it was because the F-22s aren’t based in Europe. All other reasons are possible contributors, but the May 2011 grounding adds an additional, and very persuasive, possibility: distrust of the plane’s oxygen system. Bloomberg | The DEW Line | DoD Buzz | Gannett’s Air Force Times.

Feb 14/11: FY 2012 budget. The Pentagon releases its FY 2012 budget request, which includes over $1 billion for the F-22 program. What will that fund? No new planes, but:

“Supports procurement of equipment associated with standing up operational locations and other support required to deliver new aircraft and funds shutdown activities, preserving assets for long-term F-22 fleet sustainment. Continues critical F-22 modernization through incremental capability upgrades and key reliability and maintainability efforts. Continues retrofit of Increment 3.1 into the combat-coded F-22 fleet. Increment 3.1 provides an initial ground attack kill chain capability via inclusion of emitter-based geo-location of threat systems, ground-looking synthetic aperture radar (SAR) modes, electronic attack capability, and initial integration of the Small Diameter Bomb (SDB-1), which expands the F-22’s ground attack arsenal from one Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) to four SDB-1s per payload. Continues development of Increment 3.2, providing AIM-120D and AIM-9X integration, radar electronic protection, enhanced speed and accuracy of target geo-location, Link-16 track fusion, Automatic Ground-Collision Avoidance System (AGCAS), and other enhancements to improve system safety and effectiveness.”

F-22A and T-38
(click to view full)

Jan 10/11: T-38 substitutes. One way to keep operations and maintenance costs down is to use cheaper fighters for air combat training. Lt. Col. Derek Wyler of the T-38 Adversary Air Program at JB Langley, VA explains:

“Right now at (JB Langley) … the F-22s are having to fly against themselves for their air-to-air training… By bringing the T-38s out, we’ll be able to train F-22 pilots by flying against the T-38s, which will give them a larger number of aircraft to fly against, and it will be a far more cost-effective way to train.”

It will, but T-38s are not a full substitute for training against fully-capable adversaries. NASA officials used an Aero Spacelines Super Guppy outsize cargo plane to deliver the first 2 of an eventual 15 T-38s that will be regenerated at Holloman AFB, NM, then flown to operating locations at Joint Base Langley-Eustis, VA, and Tyndall AFB, FL. Holloman AFB will receive 2 T-38s at a time, with the last slated for February 2011. The first 7 regenerated planes will go to JB Langley, VA. USAF.

2010

Corrosion. Wondering what’s next. Last few…
(click to view full)

Dec 16/10: Corrosion. A GAO study looks at corrosion lessons learned from the F-22 program, and provides some details. Unfortunately, the very same materials used to help ensure smooth and stealthy surfaces are responsible for corrosion problems:

“Efforts are under way to address corrosion problems with the F-22. Corrosion of the aluminum skin panels on the F-22 was first observed in spring 2005, less than 6 months after the Air Force first introduced the aircraft to a severe environment. By October 2007, a total of 534 instances of corrosion were documented, and corrosion in the substructure was becoming prevalent. For corrosion damage identified to date, the government is paying $228 million to make F-22 corrosion-related repairs and retrofits through 2016… Many of the F-22’s corrosion problems were linked to problems with gap filler materials and paint… [Also,] Environmental and occupational health concerns drove the initial use of a nonchromated primer[Footnote 6] on the F-22 that did not provide corrosion protection, and the program later switched to a chromated primer.”

According to the GAO, the F-35 program has learned from the F-22 in some areas, but is making similar mistakes in others. Other programs that could also learn from the F-22 experience include the US Marines’ EFV armored vehicle and CH-53K helicopter, the Navy’s JHSV fast transport/ support catamarans and RQ-4N BAMS naval surveillance UAVs, and the Hummer replacement JLTV.

Nov 16/10: Restart? The US Air Force Association’s airforce-magazine says that the USAF is beginning to discuss a restart of F-22A Raptor production:

“Extending F-22 production could be the dealmaker if F-35 foes carry the day and compel USAF to take mostly new-build F-16s instead. The Raptors would provide the extra stealth force required to make the non-stealthy F-16s acceptable. Also, if you’ve listened carefully, USAF has gone from saying it will retain a “portion” of F-22 production tooling to “most” and, most recently, to “all.” Gen. William Fraser, head of Air Combat Command, acknowledged last week that Lockheed Martin is filming all F-22 tooling processes as the earliest parts of production shut down, so that it can go back to production of parts… Also last week, Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.) said he might spearhead an effort to get more F-22s into the budget. But he acknowledged it could be a difficult task given pressures to rein in spending.”

Nov 8/10: Industrial. Flight International reports that Lockheed Martin has entered the final 12 months of F-22A production in Marietta, GA, with the final aircraft due out of building B-1 by November 2011. Production will then shift over to F-35 inner-wing shipsets, using 250,000 square feet of space that had used for C-5M tooling storage, even as the site also works to treble C-130J production to about 36 a year.

Nov 3/10: What’s next? The USAF issues its “Next Generation Tactical Aircraft (Next Gen TACAIR) Materiel and Technology Concepts Search” solicitation, as it begins to think about what might replace the F-22 Raptor:

“ASC/XRX is conducting market research analyses to examine applicable materiel concepts and related technology for a Next Gen TACAIR capability with an IOC(Initial Operational Capability) of approximately 2030. The envisioned system may possess enhanced capabilities in areas such as reach, persistence, survivability, net-centricity, situational awareness, human-system integration, and weapons effects. The primary mission in the future Next Gen TACAIR definition is Offensive and Defensive Counterair to include subset missions including Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD), Close Air Support (CAS) and Air Interdiction (AI). It may also fulfill airborne electronic attack and intelligence-surveillance-reconnaissance capabilities. This is not an all-inclusive list and the Next Gen TACAIR definition will mature and sharpen as the market research and Capabilities Based Assessment (CBA) unfold… The future system will have to counter adversaries equipped with next generation advanced electronic attack, sophisticated integrated air defense systems, passive detection, integrated self-protection, directed energy weapons, and cyber attack capabilities. It must be able to operate in the anti-access/area-denial environment that will exist in the 2030-2050 timeframe.

ASC is issuing this CRFI to support Air Combat Command (ACC) in their effort to establish potential weapon system concepts and future operating environment definition, establish a common understanding of future capability needs, and define key enabling technologies and their path to maturity. This CRFI will support requirements generation/refinement and provide decision-making products (including cost analyses) required to estimate operational benefits. The Government is issuing this CRFI to conduct market research in accordance with Part 10 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation.”

That list of requirements seems calculated to produce another bleeding edge research project; time will tell, as it gets whittled down to a set of firm requirements, and the USA’s budgetary situation becomes clearer over the next decade. See also Flight International | Reuters.

Oct 27/10: What’s next? An Aviation Week article discusses the future of fighter design in the face of widespread spending reviews, including possible plans for the F-22:

“Much of the thinking about future designs is being driven by the emergence of new threats, including the ability to deal with more sophisticated and longer-range air defenses and advanced fighters such as Russia’s PAK FA. Those developments also have U.S. Air Force officials mulling how to continue to evolve the Lockheed Martin F-22. Potential improvements in the 2020-plus timeframe include a multispectral infrared search-and-track system and introducing side radar arrays that were once part of the program but dropped in the 1990s to cut costs. Advanced data links and improved combat identification capability also could be in the cards.”

Multispectral IRST systems let fighters scan aerial targets in the non-radar spectra like infrared, allowing them to identify enemy aircraft by air friction and/or engine heat. Conventional radar stealth is not a defense, and a pilot with medium range infrared-guided air-to-air missiles can launch attacks from beyond visual range that do not rely on radar, and so do not trigger a target’s radar warning receivers.

Oct 20/10: Science! It’s good to know physics. Boeing’s F-22 manager Duane Innes does, so when he saw a truck sliding across lanes at around 40 miles an hour, he warned his passengers, slammed on the minivan’s gas, pulled ahead of the runaway vehicle, and let it rear-end him. As he explains “Basic physics: If I could get in front of him and let him hit me, the delta difference in speed would just be a few miles an hour, and we could slow down together.”

They did. The driver had suffered a heart attack and passed out at the wheel – but USAF veteran Bill Pace survived, thanks to the same combination of courage and physics that builds and then commands every F-22 in service. Well done, Mr. Innes. Seattle Times.

Hero

Sept 15/10: Industrial. Lockheed Martin announces that it has reached 86 consecutive F-22As aircraft delivered on or ahead of schedule. To date, the company has delivered 166 production F-22s, including 13 in 2010.

Aug 25/10: Hawaii. Pilots from the Hawaii Air National Guard 199th Fighter Squadron complete their last training mission with the F-15 Eagle from Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam. The 3 remaining F-15s will depart JB Hickam Sept 1/10, with 2 joining the 56th Aggressors Squadron at Nellis AFB, NV, and 1 moving to the 120th Fighter Wing of the Montana Air National Guard. The 199th FS will use the next year to transition to the F-22, and they will fly and help maintain the 20 F-22A Raptors that will deploy there. USAF.

Aug 6/10: UAE exercise. The 2010 ATLC (Advanced Tactical Leadership Course) at Al Dhafra is an annual exercise in the United Arab Emirates that bring American, British, French, and regional aircraft together. The main 2010 exercise featured the UAE’s own F-16 E/F Block 60s and Mirage 2000v9s, along with 6 Royal Jordanian Air Force F-16s, 6 Pakistani F-7PGs (Chinese MiG-21 copy), 6 French Rafales, 6 RAF Eurofighter Typhoons, and 6 USAF F-16CJ Block 52 “Wild Weasel” aircraft, which are optimized for killing ground-based air defenses.

A 6 aircraft deployment of F-22As from the 1st Fighter Wing’s 27th FS participated in bilateral training opportunities during this period, but did not participate in the main exercise. They flew 86 exercise sorties during the deployment, including 36 DACT (Dissimilar Air Combat Training) sorties and 4 sorties at the Dubai air show. Arabian Aerospace:

“This marked the first deployment of the F-22A Raptor to… the Central Command AOR… The F-22As fought Armée de l’Air Rafales on six occasions… [in 2010. In 2009] The USAF refused to comment directly about the French claims [re: the Rafale and Raptor]… Lt Col Lansing Pilch, commander of the 27th, and of the F-22 deployment [said in 2010 that] “In every test we did, the Raptors just blew the competition out of the water.” He did praise the Rafale, however… The deployment… was undertaken to test the expeditionary capabilities of the F-22A, and particularly… operations in a harsh desert environment… Pilch was keen to stress that the purpose… “We were not there to beat up on anybody [it’s about] showing them what we can do, and learning about what they can do, and thus how best we can operate alongside them in coalition operations.” …F-22As flew only within visual range 1 vs 1 BFM (Basic Fighter Manoeuvring) sorties, and [without using] the F-22’s AN/APG-77 radar and highly advanced AN/ALR-94 passive receiver system. The Raptor pilots flew against a variety of opponents, with only the RAF turning down the offer of training against the F-22A, to the evident disappointment of Pilch and Rogers… [Using a generic support package] the F-22A operated at a higher tempo and with a smaller logistics footprint than would be required by the F-15 or F-16…”

See also Flight International. In a separate article, Arabian Aerospace adds an overview of the ATLC itself.

July 30/10: Industrial. Flight International reports that even after the F-22 production line shuts down, tooling with “near-term needs” for fleet maintenance will be retained on site. Others will be stored in large, bar-coded steel ISO containers, instead of using conventional warehousing. all of this will be funded by shutdown contracts.

Retaining the line’s tooling will allow the USAF to repair and modernise the service’s aircraft more easily – or re-start the line again to manufacture new Raptors. The latter course would not be cheap or fast, however, taking an estimated 2 years and costing about $4 billion by the time skills are retrained, new suppliers for some components are found, engineering modifications to incorporate the new components are finished and testing is done, etc. Flight International | Conservative Weekly Standard magazine.

July 29/10: Holloman out. Well, that was fast. The F-22s will be leaving Holloman AFB under a new re-basing plan, and the base will turn into an F-16 training center by adding 2 training squadrons.

The existing Holloman half-squadron (8th Fighter Squadron) will be deactivated and redistributed to Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK (6), Langley AFB, VA (6), and Nellis AFB, NV (2). The other F-22 squadron (7th Squadron) will relocate as a unit to Tyndall AFB, FL. USAF Tyndall AFB | Alamogordo Daily News.

June 2/10: Holloman in. The first 2 F-22A Raptors arrive at Holloman AFB, NM, and taxi into Hangar 301. USAF.

May 26/10: Corrosion. Rust never sleeps. DoD Buzz reports a quote from the US House Armed Services Committee, in its FY 2011 budget proposal:

“The Committee notes that it has yet to receive the congressionally directed report from the Director of Corrosion Policy and Oversight assessing the corrosion control lessons learned from the F-22 Raptor fleet – which was grounded in February 2010 for corrosion on ejection seat rods due to poorly designed drainage in the cockpit – as they apply to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program.”

As DoD Buzz notes:

“Regardless of how lowly rust might seem at first glance, it is a huge problem for the military, costing about $20 billion each year. According to the House Armed Services Committee, roughly $7 billion of that rust is preventable. So, the committee… wants to substantially increase the budget of a little known Pentagon entity, the Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight… to… $10.8 million, up from a tiny request of $3.6 million.”

April 14/10: More work for F-15s. Aviation Week reports that USAF F-15Cs with new APG-82 AESA radars will now shoulder 50% of the “air dominance” burden, to compensate for the F-22A’s production shutdown.

The USAF’s F-15 A-D fleet has faced structural concerns in recent years, following catastrophic accidents that led to fleet-wide groundings.

Sukhoi’s PAK-FA
(click to view larger)

Jan 29/10: PAK-FA competitor flies. Russia’s first prototype PAK-FA 5th generation stealth fighter lifts off from KNAAPO’s Komsomolsk-on-Amur facility for a 47 minute flight, piloted by Sukhoi test-pilot Sergey Bogdan.

Sukhoi says that the plane met all expectations. Sukhoi JSC release | NPO Saturn release [in Russian] | Russia 1 TV video | Pravda | RIA Novosti | Times of India | Aviation Week | Defense News | Agence France Presse | BBC | Canadian Press | Washington Post | China’s Xinhua | Aviation Week’s Bill Sweetman: Preliminary Analysis. See also APA: “Assessing the Sukhoi PAK-FA.”

Competitor

2009

Program terminated. Japan has to look elsewhere. F-22, inverted
(click to view full)

Dec 21/09: To CENTCOM. A set of 6 F-22As from Langley AFB, VA complete a deployment to the Middle East, including participation in training sorties alongside pilots engaged in a multinational training exercise. The F-22s did not fly missions during that exercise, which included pilots and planes from Britain, France, Jordan, Pakistan, and the USA. USAF | UPI.

As a separate matter, F-22As have also deployed to several international air shows, including a demonstration at the Dubai Air Show in November 2009. These deployments are the first time the F-22A has been sent to the Middle East.

Nov 23/09: Japan. In the wake of the FY 2010 American defense budget that ended F-22 production, while maintaining the ban on exporting the aircraft, Japan has been forced to look at other options. Kyodo news agency reports that Japan is considering buying 40 F-35s, and that the Japanese defence ministry is seeking fiscal allocation in the 2011 budget. According to media reports, other contenders include the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, F-15 Eagle variants, and EADS’ Eurofighter. The acquisition plan is likely to be incorporated in new defense policy guidelines and a medium-term defense plan to be adopted in December 2010. Japan Today | Agence France Presse | domain-b | Times of India.

Oct 20/09: Industrial. Second Line of Defense offers “Michael Wynne on: The Industrial Impact of the Decision to Terminate the F-22 Program,” by former Secretary of the USAF Michael Wynne. His article discusses the entire sweep of the F-22 program and its key decisions. Among them are the detrimental role of the DoD’s insistence on ADA programming, which has made updating the plane’s electronics so difficult. With respect to the decision to close the F-22 production line and deny exports, Wynne cites fallout effects that include the potential for F135 engine cost increases, and other industrial impacts:

“Nationally; we have one fifth generation fighter facility left, and that ultimately will be the Fort Worth Facility. Yes, the Navy continues to buy the F-18 from the St. Louis Boeing facility, but the follow on program is the F-35, and the clock is now ticking loudly. Large Aircraft is Long Beach, and without the C-17, that facility will be history. Bomber programs – we have none, and the planned future one seems at risk. C-130 program will suffer further price increases, and the C-130J program barely made it to production as did the C-17.

While you cannot pile the entirety of two decades or more of industrial base decisions and program decisions on this F-22 decision, it is clearly correlated; it is a decision taken in a context and has strategic consequences. And it is stunning to see the money being given to industries such as the automotive industry and little or no concern being expressed about the fate and future of the aerospace and defense industries.”

July 31/09: The US House passes its “H.R. 3326: Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010” by a 400-30 vote. The bill contains a number of provisions that challenge official Pentagon decisions re: the C-17, VH-71, and F136 engine, but before it was passed, H.Amdt. 392 by H.R. 3326 sponsor John Murtha [D-PA] stripped the additional $369 million for F-22 long-lead production items out of the House Bill. It passed by a 269-165 vote.

That vote was not straight party line, but it was heavily influenced. While 26 Republicans voted in favor, 165 were opposed. While 13 Democrats were opposed, 243 voted in favor. As House members prepare for negotiations with the Senate on a single, final bill to send to the President, the amendment vote, and subsequent passage of HR 3326, effectively marks the end of the F-22 program. F-22 production will continue through remaining funded orders, and cease in 2011.

Both the House and Senate versions of the 2010 defense authorization bill require a report to study the potential for F-22A exports. The House version listed only Japan, while the Senate bill did not restrict the countries involved. Development work would be required before production, however, and is almost certain to require an expensive restart of the F-22 production line when it’s complete. While it is theoretically possible to bridge that time gap by resurrecting the American program in future defense bills, the aircraft’s supply chain will stop producing certain parts, and begin losing the people associated with them, long before the final delivery in 2011. See also: Aero News.

Raptor Program shot down

July 21/09: Politics. The US Senate votes 58-40 in favor of S.Amdt 1469, the Levin-McCain amendment to strip $1.75 billion for 7 F-22As out of the Senate’s FY 2010 defense budget. The additional funds had been inserted in committee, just as the recently-passed FY 2010 House defense budget proposal contains $369 million in initial funding for 12 more F-22s.

The vote was heavily determined by state lines, with 40/50 states voting coherently. Both Republicans voted “yea” to F-22 funding removal in AZ, SC and WY. Both Democrats voted against the amendment in CA, CT, HI, NM, and WA. John Kerry [D-MA], who often reiterated his support for the F-22 in the run-up to the vote, would have added to that trend – but he voted to remove funding, and F-22 supporter Sen. Kennedy [D-MA] was absent for medical reasons. Democrat senators split in WVA (Sen. Byrd nay) while Republicans split in AL (Sen. Shelby yea), and OK (Sen. Coburn yea). In the 7 remaining cases, the split was party-based, with the state’s Democratic Party senator supporting the amendment to remove funding, and the Republican Party Senator opposing: FL, IA, LA, NE, NH, NC, and SD.

S.Amdt 1469’s passage does not entirely end the mater, since the House and Senate bills must now be reconciled in committee before they are submitted to the President. But the 17-12-1 vote among Senate Armed Services committee members to remove F-22 funding does raise the aircraft’s obstacles, absent pressure in the interim that causes Senators to shift their positions. Bloomberg News | Washington Post | POGO re: Senate Armed Services Committee member votes | Senate Roll Call.

July 15/09: Politics. S.Amdt 1469, the Levin-McCain amendment to strip $1.75 billion for 7 F-22As out of the Senate’s FY 2010 defense budget, is withdrawn from consideration. That generally means that a measure does not yet have enough reliable votes. The Project On Government Oversight (POGO) offers its own assessment of where the votes stand, then wusses out and removes its tally.

July 15/09: Politics. The Air Force Association reports that:

“It now turns out that a recent “study” touted by Pentagon leadership as the justification for terminating the F-22 fighter isn’t really a study at all, but a series of briefings by DOD’s Program Analysis and Evaluation shop and the Air Force. That word comes from the Pentagon’s top spokesman, Geoff Morrell… Defense Secretary Robert Gates has been claiming a rigorous analytical basis for stopping the F-22 since early this year. Congress has been pressing the Pentagon for a vetted analysis of F-22 requirements since 2007, when then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England was directed to provide, within a year, a comprehensive tacair plan that would specifically explain how the number of F-22s had been determined. According to various members of Congress, he never complied with this directive.”

July 13/09: Politics. President Obama threatens to veto the defense budget if F-22 funding is included. That same day, S.Amdt 1469, the Levin-McCain amendment to strip $1.75 billion for 7 F-22As out of the Senate’s FY 2010 defense budget, is introduced.

July 13/09: Politics. The right-wing Heritage Foundation discusses past and ongoing rationales for F-22 force structures, in “U.S. Air Force Fifth-Generation Fighter: The F-22A Raptor Requirements Retreat” and “Congress Should Support the Development of an Allied Variant of the F-22A.”

July 9/09: F-22 effectiveness argued. The Washington Post runs “Premier U.S. Fighter Jet Has Major Shortcomings,” an article that’s highly critical of the F-22. It alleges failure to meet key performance parameters, spiraling maintenance and operations costs, and failures of the plane’s stealth coatings in conditions like rain. The USAF offers official replies, which states that the paper got most of its cost and performance claims wrong, and furnishes figures. USAF replies, via Sen. Orrin Hatch [R-UT] | Air Force Association: “A Bagel and a Smear“.

June 29/09: Lawsuit. Stephen Trimble reports that sued former Lockheed Martin engineer Darrol Olsen has filed suit, claiming that the company knowingly supplied defective stealth coatings for the F-22. A copy of the suit is reproduced via scribd.com.

A July 2009 response [PDF] by Lockheed Martin states that:

“We believe the allegations are without merit. While we are aware of the Olsen lawsuit, the Corporation has not yet been served in this matter. We deny Mr. Olsen’s allegations and will vigorously defend this matter if and when it is served.”

June 25/09: Politics. H.R. 2647, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, passes the House by a margin of 389 Ayes, 22 Nays, and 22 Present/Not voting. It includes $369 million in funding for long-lead materials to build 12 more F-22s.

In addition, Sec. 132 requires the Secretary of the Air Force to “develop a plan for the preservation and storage of unique tooling related to the production of hardware and end items for F-22 fighter aircraft.” Sec. 1237 requires “a report on potential foreign military sales of the F-22A fighter aircraft to the Government of Japan.”

June 18/09: Politics. House Armed Services Committee disagree with SecDef Gates’ F-22 decision, and prepare to go their own way with respect to F-22 funding. Christian Science Monitor | Aviation Week.

April 22/09: Collision. CF-18 kills! An F-22 Raptor collides with a Canadian CF-18 while taxiing on the runway at Tyndall AFB, FL. This is the 5th F-22 Class A accident in the last 6 years, and it’s a Class A accident because damage is over $1 million. That’s easy on a $150 million F-22A, even if wing damage is minor as it reportedly was in this case.

A higher accident rate per 100,000 flying hours is normal for new aircraft, and the F-22’s rate is reportedly around 7. Older F-16s and F-15s have rates around 3-4, while the venerable B-52 sits at just 1.5 per 100,000 hours. By comparison, unmanned MQ-1 Predator UAVs have a rate of close to 30 per 100,000 hours. Gannett Air Force Times | StrategyPage.

F-22 Accidents

F-22 and F-16s
(click to view full)

April 6/09: Politics. US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announces his recommendation to terminate F-22 orders at the end of FY 2009, leaving the USA with a fleet of 187 aircraft. Let the political fight begin.

The Hill magazine describes the production implications. The Christian Science Monitor’s “You can’t kill F-22, Georgians tell Gates” looks at the local impact of that announcement, the likely 2011-2014 production line hiring gap between the F-22 and F-35, and the role of the unions in any lobbying effort.

March 30/09: GAO Report. The US government’s GAO audit office issues its 7th annual “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs. This includes the F-22A modernization and improvement program, which began in 2003. It aimed to add better air-to-ground capabilities, leverage the plane’s electronics to offer information warfare, reconnaissance, and other capabilities, and improve the aircraft’s reliability.

The plan was to field these capabilities in 3 increments, to be completed in 2010. Funding decreases, schedule slips, and changes in requirements have pushed the development date back to 2013. The USAF now plans to integrate additional capabilities beyond the three increments in a separate major defense acquisition program, and some planned enhancements have been deferred. GAO:

“One of the F-22A modernization program’s three critical technologies-processing memory-is mature. The two remaining technologies-stores management system and cryptography-are approaching maturity, and have been tested in a relevant environment… According to the F-22 program office, implementation of the modernization program’s three increments has been delayed by 3 years because of numerous budget decreases and program restructurings. Since fiscal year 2002, the F-22A’s modernization budget has been decreased by over $450 million.”

March 29/08: Israel. The Jerusalem Post reports that:

“The [Israeli] Defense Ministry will closely follow discussions in Congress next month over the United States’ 2010 fiscal defense budget amid growing speculation that a ban on foreign sales of the stealth F-22 fighter jet may be lifted to keep the threatened production line alive… “If this happens we will definitely want to review the possibility of purchasing the F-22,” explained a top military source. “In order to have strong deterrence and to win a conflict we need to have the best aircraft that exists.”

Speculation is that Israel would seek to order F-22As immediately, then wait until later in the F-35’s production cycle, when the plane will be cheaper to buy, fully tested, and more technically mature.

March 25/09: An F-22A crashes during a test mission at around 10am, about 35 miles northeast of Edwards Air Force Base, CA. The pilot is killed. For decades, Edwards has been the USAF’s Flight Test Center, where pilots push the envelope in existing and experimental aircraft. Edwards AFB was also the scene of the last F-22 crash, in December 2004.

The 49 year old Lockheed Martin test pilot, David Cooley, was a 21-year USAF veteran. He worked at the F-22 Combined Test Force, a joint team of Lockheed Martin and USAF pilots. Pentagon, initial release | USAF statement | Lockheed Martin statement | Wall St. Journal. A July 2009 Washington Post article says that the pilot was performing a high speed run with weapon bay doors open when the plane crashed.

Crash

Feb 24/09: Australia. Australian Liberal Party MP Dr. Dennis Jensen used to be a defense research scientist. He pens “US Allies Sold Short on New Fighters” as a DID guest article, decrying America’s refusal to export the F-22 to loyal allies like Australia as insulting and strategically short-sighted.

It’s significant that Jensen is a Liberal Party MP, since the previous Liberal Party government had consistently promoted the F-35A over the F-22A as Australia’s future fighter. While in opposition, current Labor Party Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon also expressed a preference for the F-22, and a desire to remove US export controls on the aircraft.

Feb 8/09: Specs. Aviation Week reports that a number of the F-22’s performance parameters are above specifications. Desired radar signature from certain critical angles is -40 dBsm, it can supercruise at Mach 1.78 rather than Mach 1.5, has better acceleration, can operate from about 65,000 feet using afterburner, and its APG-77 AESA radar has 5% better range than originally specified.

See also John Young’s Nov 20/08 transcript, below, for some contrasting but less specific comments.

Above spec.

Jan 20/09: Politics. President-elect Barack Obama receives letters from 200 members of Congress, urging him to continue building F-22s. The letters from the Senate (44: 25 Republican, 19 Democrat) and House (194, led by Phil Gingrey [R-GA], David Scott [D-GA], Kay Granger [R-TX], and Norman Dicks [D-WA]) also claims that his “certification” is needed by March 1/09. Otherwise, a progressive set of shut-downs in the manufacturing supply chain may begin, as final long lead-time item orders for various aircraft components are filled.

The letter cites military arguments involving advanced jet fighter projects underway abroad, and the global proliferation of advanced SA-10/20 anti-aircraft missiles, but its main focus is economic. The figure given is more than 25,000 Americans working for more than 1,000 companies in high-tech and manufacturing jobs. Stated economic multiplier effects deliver $12 billion annually once all monies paid are spent several times throughout that economy; statistically, models predict that another 70,000 local jobs would be indirectly dependent on the F-22 program. House letter text | AOL Political Machine, incl. Senate letter | Defense News.

Jan 19/09: To PACOM. A flight of 14 F-22As deployed from their home base at Elmendorf AFB, Alaska arrive at Andersen AFB in Guam for a 3-month forward deployment. A second set of 12 F-22As arrives in Kadena, Japan from Langley AFB in Virginia.

One of the things the USAF will be paying attention to is the effect that the change from Alaska’s winter to Guam’s tropical climate will have on the aircraft. This difference seems trivial, but it has a variety of implications. The Raptor’s stealth characteristics, for instance, are partly dependent on very smooth fits of its component parts. USAF re: Guam arrival | USAF re: deployment in general | Gannet’s Air Force Times | The Virginian-Pilot.

2008

Readiness data. BACN. Exports? F-15E and F-22A
(click to view full)

Dec 16/08: The USAF announces that in January 2009, 12 Raptors will deploy to Kadena Air Base, Japan, from Langley Air Force Base, VA, and another 12 will deploy to Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, from Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK. The deployments will last for approximately 3 months.

Dec 9/08: Multi-year order? Adm. Mike Mullen, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, says that he has talked to USAF chief of staff, Gen. Norton Schwartz about buying “60 or so” more F-22As beyond the 183 now on order, which would bring the total to 243. He adds that “I am concerned that it is such an expensive system,” but added that systems like the F-35 often run into delays, and “it’s very important we have capability to bridge to that system with respect to the broad range of capabilities for the country.” Reuters.

Based on existing patterns, 60 F-22As would represent another 3-year, multi-year contract, stretching from 2010-2012. Some analysts believe this will be combined with an F-22EX push to address pressure from Australia, Israel, and Japan, and lift F-22 production numbers in order to bring down the price.

The F-35A’s initial operational date in USAF service is scheduled to be 2013, but the JSF testing program was recently pushed back 6 months, and reports indicate that the phase may be headed for financial shortfalls. With the structural viability of its F-15 Eagle fleet also a question mark, the option of keeping the F-22 production line open has support. One wild card is continuing Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, whose look ahead for the Pentagon sees the USA de-emphasizing fighters as a class, in favor of longer-range options like the “2018 bomber.”

Nov 20/08: Readiness & Upgrades. John Young, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for acquisition technology and logistics, speaks to the Defense Writer’s Group. Full DWG Transcript [PDF] | Partial transcript at The DEW Line. Key excerpts:

“The recent mission capable data for FY2008 on F-22s had a mission capable rate somewhere in the 62 percent range. I think that’s troubling. Follow-on operation tests in 2007 raised operational suitability issues and noted that the airplane still does not meet most of its KPPs. It meets some, but not all… The trend in those operational tests… is actually negative.

The maintenance man hours per flying hour have increased through those tests. The last one was a substantial increase… the Air Force had planned and expected to have kind of a two-tiered structure where some of the earlier jets were not fully capable jets, not to the block 35 or increment 3.2 configuration which provides important capabilities… But the cost of that is $6.3 billion of R&D. This is in a platform we’ve already developed. We’re going to spend six billion more of R&D to engineer the 3.2 upgrade for the software and the changes in the jet, and then about $2 billion to modify on the jets. That’s $8 billion more, and $8 billion I think needs to be spent in order to make sure the 183 airplanes we have will be highly capable fighters. Those discussions need to be had before I think you talk about buying more jets.”

Nov 19/08: Politics. The House Armed Services Air/Land subcommittee is not satisfied with the Pentagon’s response re: unfreezing F-22 funds, and holds hearings on the matter. The bottom line? The Pentagon is able to do whatever it wants, because the bill used the term “not more than,” instead of simply mandating that the full amount be spent on long-lead parts. While that was the bill’s clear intent, the normal GAO process that could force the Defense Department to obey Congress would take too long, given the coming end of the current term of government. Since the officials in question are also likely to see their terms end with the incoming administration, a damaged relationship with Congress doesn’t really mean anything to them at this point. Gannett’s Air Force Times | Aviation Week.

See also Nov 26/08 contracts.

Nov 10-18/08: Politics. Congress appropriated at least $140 million to the Pentagon to buy long-lead items for 20 F-22s, a move that would extend the production line’s life. Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England is believed to angry at the USAF’s success in getting that funding approved, despite Pentagon plans to end production. Whatever the motive, the funds were not being spent.

In an early November 2008 letter, 4 key House members pressed Gates to obligate the entire $140 million that Congress appropriated. Bipartisan signatories included House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton [D-MO] and ranking member Duncan Hunter [R-CA], Armed Services Air and Land Forces subcommittee Chairman Neil Abercrombie [D-HI] and ranking minority member Jim Saxton [R-NJ].

In response, the Office of the Secretary of Defense put out a release that unfroze funds, but allocated only $50 million for 4 fighters, adding that they would request additional money to buy the 4 fighters in the FY 2009 war-supplemental request. In January 2009, said Mr. Young, the next administration can decide to release additional advanced procurement funds, up to the Congressional $140 million ceiling. Office of the Secretary of Defense release via Washington Post | USAF | Aviation Week | Fort Worth Star-Telegram | Gannett Air Force Times | The Hill | TMC.net | Washington Post | Fort Worth Star-Telegram op-ed.

Nov 10/08: Israel. Flight International reports that sticker shock over the proposed $200 million per plane price of F-35As, and a need for rapid delivery, may push Israel to renew its F-22EX request with the new Obama administration.

“This aircraft can be delivered in two years if the deal is approved [DID: 2011, vs. 2012-14 for F-35s], and that is very important for the security of Israel,” comments one Israeli source.”

Read “Israel Requesting F-22EX Fighters” for more.

Oct 27/08: Pilot retention issue. StrategyPage reports:

“Despite signing bonuses of up to $125,000, the U.S. Air Force was unable to get many pilots to sign on for another five years (after they hit their eighth year of service, usually the mandatory service for someone to become a pilot). The bonus program did enable the air force to get 68 percent of pilots to extend their service, but the percentage that did so varied according to aircraft type. At the low end, only 43 percent of F-22 pilots stayed in. At the high end, it was 81 percent for rescue helicopter and F-15E pilots. The other signup percentages were, transport 71 percent, F-15C 68 percent, A-10 53 percent and F-16 51 percent… the air force is still trying to figure out why so few F-22 pilots, and so many F-15E and rescue helicopter pilots, want to stay.”

One possible explanation involves promotion. The USAF is now headed by a career rotary wing/special operations transport pilot, rather than the fighter pilots that had come to dominate top positions. If F-22 pilots believe they will not receive “before the zone” promotions just for being F-22 pilots, the criteria shift toward combat time and service. Which F-22 pilots will not receive, either. F-22s are optimized for precision strikes on difficult strategic targets, and wars with peer-class competitors. To date, the Secretary of Defense has elected not to deploy F-22s to counterinsurgency theaters like Iraq or Afghanistan, and that’s not likely to change.

Oct 10/08: Japan. Flight International’s “Eurofighter gets serious about Japan’s F-X contest” discusses political developments in Japan, where the Eurofighter Typhoon appears to be gaining ground as a possibility.

Flight International’s sources indicate that Japan will make one more push in 2009, after the American elections. If that fails, it is likely to abandon efforts to secure the F-22, and move to buy other options. See DID’s “F-22 Raptors to Japan” for more.

Sept 4/08: Alternative fuel. An F-22 based at Edwards AFB performs an aerial refueling using a synthetic 50/50 mix of JP-8 jet fuel and a natural gas-based fuel. The test was the culmination of Edwards test points in certifying the F-22’s use of the fuel.

It is the first time an Air Force aircraft has refueled in mid-air using an alternative jet engine fuel. USAF.

May 20/08: Hawaii. DTI’s Ares reports on the Hawaiian Air National Guard’s transformation to become the first Air National Guard commanded F-22 unit. The first F-22 simulator is scheduled to arrive in 2008, the first pilots start training in 2009, and they get their first F-22A Block 30 aircraft and a repair facility that can handle stealth fighters in 2010. Hawaii’s 15 F-15Cs will go to Nellis AFB, where they will serve as the aggressor unit for Nellis’ F-22As.

Despite the relative cost of the F-22s, the Pacific’s importance to the USAF is illustrated by the fact that Hawaii was slated to receive from 18-24 F-22s as replacements, all of which will have full ground attack capabilities. Personnel will also increase from 1.2 pilots per aircraft (18) to as much as 1.75 pilots per aircraft (up to 42), with a mix of about 25% active duty USAF pilots and 75% US ANG.

May 13/08: Make mine BACN! If you’re a stealth fighter, opening radio communication can be a bad idea – see our Aug 4/06 entry for details and coverage. At the same time, the F-22A’s tremendous information gathering capabilities have a lot to offer other American fighters.

The US military’s Joint Expeditionary Force Experiment 2008 (JEFX-08) just finished testing one option: the Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) Intra-Flight Data Link subsystem (BIS). In JEFX-08, BACN-BIS received and translated selected F-22 sensor data into the standard tactical data link format and distributed the data to F-15s, F-16s and to ground-based operations centers at Nellis Air Force Base, NV and Langley Air Force Base, VA. BIS did not require modifications to either hardware or software in the F-22 aircraft, and did not compromise any of the F-22’s stealth characteristics. NGC release | DID: Bringing Home the BACN to Front-Line Forces.

May 7/08: Politics. Reuters reports that the US House Armed Services Committee’s Air & Land Forces subcommittee has recommended an additional $523 million as a down payment on long-lead items required for 20 more F-22A fighters in FY 2010. See “C-17A, F-22A May Get Reprieves from Congress.”

April 9/08: Seagulls 1, Raptors 0. F-22 airfields are being bombed, and planes are being damaged. The attackers? Gulls dropping clams onto the runways to break them, whereupon the shells get sucked into the Raptor’s $10.2 million jet engines. Langley AFB in Virginia is trying to defend them. USAF story.

Feb 18/08: Australia. Australia’s new Labor Party government formally announces a major Air Combat Capability Review. The case for and against buying F-22 Raptors, based on regional air power trends until 2045, is one of the explicit items in the ACCR’s terms of reference. See “Australia Unveils Comprehensive Airpower Review” for full details.

Feb 14/08: Radar SAR test. Northrop Grumman announces that tests aboard a company BAC 1-11 test aircraft have successfully demonstrated the AN/APG-77v1 radar’s ability to generate high-resolution, in-flight synthetic aperture radar (SAR) ground maps and moving target tracking. The test flights are the first phase of a planned multi-year contract with Boeing to add SAR capability to the existing fleet of F-22As, and incorporate them into new production aircraft. “F-22As to Add SAR/GTMI Capabilities” explains why this matters to the Raptor’s offensive and defensive capabilities.

February 2008: F-15 age-out. The US Air Force Association’s Washington Watch reports that the recent grounding of the USA’s entire F-15A-D Eagle fleet is sparking questions in Congress re: the viability of the Eagle force. The ripples are being felt by the F-22 program:

“On Dec. 12, 28 Senators and 68 members of the House of Representatives wrote to Pentagon chief Robert M. Gates, urging him to keep buying F-22s, at least through the end of the 2009 Quadrennial Defense Review. They said that, in light of the F-15 groundings and reports indicating that “significantly more than 220″ Raptors are needed to fulfill national strategy, ending F-22 production now would be, at best, “ill advised.”… In late December, Pentagon Comptroller Tina W. Jonas directed USAF to shift $497 million marked for F-22 shutdown costs to fix up the old F-15s instead. The move effectively set the stage for continued F-22 production.

…Replacing [the F-15A-D Eagles] with F-22s – above and beyond the 183 Raptors now planned – would require buying at least 20 a year to be minimally efficient. At that rate, it would take nine extra years of production to replace the F-15 fleet fully. Raise the rate, and replacement time would decrease. At 30 per year, the F-15s could be wholly replaced in six years. However, USAF is also struggling to fund the F-35 fighter. It needs to build 110 per year to replace the F-16 in a timely manner, but can only afford 48 per year in its budget…”

Jan 20-27/08: F-22, Pro and Con. The Fort Worth Star-Telegram publishes pro and con articles re: the F-22 program. On the anti F-22 side are F-16 designer Pierre Spey, John Stevenson, and Winslow Wheeler of the left-wing Center for Defense Information: “The F-22: expensive, irrelevant and counterproductive.” The Star-Telegram story appears to be incomplete, so here’s a similar op-ed from the trio on Defense Tech. Their 3 key points regarding the F-22 program deal with force structure, pilot training, and actual unit costs, which they believe to be $180 – $215 million.

On the pro F-22 side, deputy editorial page director J.R. Labbe writes “F-22 is still what the U.S. needs.” See also Oct 30/07 entry re: USAF studies, and February 2008 entry re: the US F-15 fleet, for backward and forward extensions of this ongoing debate.

2007

Lots 7 to 9. Flying costs. FOT&E. Full Operational Capability. Ice Braker
(click to view full)

Dec 12/07: F-22 FOC.. The USAF’s 1st Fighter Wing’s 27th Fighter Sqn at Langley AFB, VA, have been training since their F-22s were certified for Initial Operational Capability on Dec 15/05. IOC made them capable of emergency combat operations and limited operations like exercises and homeland defense. Now Gen. John D.W. Corley, the commander of Air Combat Command, has officially certified that the F-22 Raptors at Langley AFB have reached Full Operational Capability. This makes them available for combat deployments of any kind, around the world. USAF release.

Full Operational Capability

Nov 29/07: Ice, ice baby. A lot goes into fully fielding an aircraft. November 2007 tests at Eiselson AFB, Alaska focused on the F-22’s braking and anti-skid system, which is unique to the aircraft. In addition to looking at wheel slip like a car’s anti-lock brakes, the F-22’s system also accounts for deceleration through its pinpoint GPS/INS navigation system, in order to improve control on any surface.

Operating – and stopping – on snow, ice fog, and similar surfaces is mandatory for any USAF jet. The tests started with basic ground maneuvering on an icy surface before progressed to high-speed braking tests and eventually, both real and aborted take-off and landings under “low runway condition reading” conditions. Fortunately, the Alaska weather obliged and the team was able to finish all mandatory test points within the first 5 days of the 3-week test period. They went on to gather more data and updated the F-22’s landing charts, flight manuals, and cold-weather maintenance procedures. USAF story.

Oct 30/07: Politics. The Lexington Institute releases “Policymakers Suppress Expert Findings on Future Fighter.” The key excerpt:

“The world’s pre-eminent repository of air power expertise [DID: he means the USAF] says it needs 381. Is there some other authoritative source of insight into the right number? It turns out there are three such sources, because three separate studies on the subject were commissioned during the quadrennial review — including one requested by Mr. England himself from the same outfit that provided an earlier plan for streamlining naval aviation. So what do the studies say? The Pentagon won’t tell us… And here’s why… each study concluded that 183 F-22s isn’t enough. They all found a requirement for more, with the analysis requested by Mr. England recommending a number somewhere in the 250-aircraft range…”

Oct 29/07: Active in Alaska. The 3rd Wing at Elmendorf Air Force Base activates the 525th Fighter Squadron during a ceremony at Elmendorf AFB, Alaska. The second active-duty F-22 Raptor squadron had been based in Bitburg, Germany, and was formally activated nearly 3 months after the new F-22s officially landed on base. Lt. Col. Chuck Corcoran assumed command of the squadron with its initial cadre of 5 pilots and 4 support staff. USAF release.

Sept 28/07: Testing – GBU-39 SDB. The USAF announces that the F-22 Raptor Combined Test Force staff has conducted the first airborne separation of a small diameter bomb from the internal weapons bay of an F-22, to ensure the SDB would have a clean separation when released. Testing confirmed expectations. The tests are part of the F-22A’s Increment 3.1 upgrade.

Sept 26/07: Lockheed Martin announces that the US Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center (AFOTEC) has designated the F-22A as “effective, suitable and mission capable,” following a second increment of Follow-on Operational Test and Evaluation (FOT&E II). capabilities evaluated during the operational test included the areas of mission generation, mission support, and enhancements to air-to-air and air-to-ground employment capabilities. AFOTEC Commander Maj. Gen. Steve Sargeant:

“This second FOT&E was a significant milestone in terms of validating the F-22A’s combat capability to conduct Offensive Counter Air-Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses (OCA-DEAD) We are confident we have provided Air Combat Command and senior Air Force leaders with an accurate and complete picture of the Raptor’s impressive operational capabilities. AFOTEC also highlighted where additional resources can be focused to further mature and sustain this fifth generation fighter.”

“Effective and Suitable”

Aug 29/07: Air Force officials receive the 100th F-22 Raptor from Lockheed Martin. The milestone aircraft (USAF serial number 05-0100) will be assigned to the 90th Fighter Squadron at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska. USAF release.

#100

Aug 13-17/07: F-117 to F-22. More than 70 49th Fighter Wing operators and maintainers gathered at the 1st Fighter Wing in at Langley Air Force Base, VA to hand off 25 years of stealth knowledge, as well as stealth integration tactics. This training is the third and final combined training between the F-117 and the F-22. Previous combined events were held at Tyndall AFB, Fla., and Nellis AFB, Nev., each with a different focus. Holloman AFB, NM will be receiving the F-22, and transitioning from the F-1117 Nighthawk. Lt. Col. Todd Flesch, the 8th Fighter Squadron commander, said that:

“This is the first time we will really be able to talk full capabilities of both jets at an operational level … The F-117 mission is going away. It’s being handed off and we need to make sure what we’ve learned is passed on correctly. In the Air Force, when one plane takes over another, we tend to reinvent the wheel. This time, it’s a total hand-over of knowledge.”

USAF: “Holloman Airmen hand stealth knowledge to F-22 community”

Aug 8/07: PACOM. Ceremonies are held at Elmendorf AFB, Alaska to mark the formal beginning of operations for the F-22 Raptor in the Pacific region, where the 90th Fighter Squadron is deployed. The Pacific Alaska Range Complex’s 67,000 square miles of space to train in played a role in this basing decision. USAF report | Lockheed Martin release. NOTE: Lockheed Martin changed its web back end and URLs recently, but did not include a redirect feature, thus breaking all previous links to its site.

Raptors first visited Alaska in June 2006 when the 27th Fighter Squadron at Langley AFB, VA deployed to participate in Northern Edge, a large-scale, force-on-force exercise. Lockheed Martin states that Raptor pilots flew 97% of their scheduled missions, and achieved an 80-to-1 kill ratio against their Red Air opponents. See June 9-16/06 entry for more.

AMRAAMs on AVEL

July 2/07: Multi-Year buy OK. Air Force officials announce authorization from Congress to pursue multi-year agreements for Lots 7, 8 and 9. The multi-year contract approach has been controversial, with competing claims as to whether it will save money or not. Contracts with Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney are expected to follow later this summer [DID: and did, see July 31/07 contract entries]. USAF: “Materiel Command on track to deliver more F-22s.”

May 18/07: Air shows. The USAF is beginning to exhibit the F-22A at air shows. An Air Force Association Magazine article “Raptor Puts on the Ritz” describes some of the maneuvers, including the “tail slide” that is also executed by SU-30s as a way of breaking doppler radar locks.

May 10/07: PACOM. The 27th Fighter Squadron leaves Japan and begins their return to Langley Air Force Base, VA. In addition to sharpening their understanding of foreign deployment requirements, the unit also flew over 600 sorties against pilots from various US services, and the Japanese Air Self Defense Force (which is interested in buying an export version). The squadron also “conducted almost 30 tours and briefings for visiting dignitaries” during their 3 month deployment. USAF report.

April 27/07: South Korea. South Korea’s Yonhap news agency: “Seoul eyes advanced jets beyond F-15K” contends that the issue of F-22 exports to Japan will be under discussion during the imminent summit between U.S. President George W. Bush and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe this week. The decision will be watched closely by South Korea, which also wants 5th generation fighter jets for its 3rd phase F-X purchase. An excerpt:

“China is modernizing its air force at a rapid pace,” said Dennis Wilder, senior director for East Asian Affairs at the White House National Security Council. “And so we are very positively disposed to talking to the Japanese about future-generation fighter aircraft.”

DID’s coverage of South Korea’s F-X program looks at some of the obstacles in the way of granting South Korea similar treatment. See esp. its April 27/07 update.

April 20/07: Israel. Flight International reports that Israel has approached the USA about acquiring Lockheed Martin F-22s, as concern mounts about new threats to the IAF’s regional air superiority from proposed sales of advanced US weapons to the Gulf states, and Israeli assessments of a growing threat from Iran. Sources say that the issue was raised during a recent one-day trip by US defense secretary Robert Gates to Israel.

April 2/07: GAO Report – fatigue issues. The US Government Accountability Office releases #GAO-07-415 – ‘Tactical Aircraft: DOD Needs a Joint and Integrated Investment Strategy’, which describes the Pentagon’s current fighter modernization plans as “unexecutable.” The F-22 is discussed in many places, but this excerpt has immediate relevance:

“The Air Force is working with the contractor to fix structural deficiencies on the F-22A. Fatigue testing identified cracks in the aircraft near the horizontal section tail of the aircraft. The Air Force is planning modifications to strengthen the structure to get the 8,000-hour service life. The Air Force estimates the costs to modify 72 F-22As will be approximately $124 million. These modifications will not be fully implemented until 2010.”

March 26/07: APG-77v1 certified. Northrop Grumman Corporation announces radar flight-test certification for the next-generation variant of the F-22’s active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, the AN/APG-77v1. It will be installed beginning with Lot 5 production that will finish by the end of March 2007. It supposedly improves search and targeting modes, though exact details were not discussed. The flight tests were conducted as part of an overall flight-test certification of the Raptor by the Combined Test Force team at Edwards Air Force Base from Jan. 18 – March 7, 2007; it included AIM-9 and AIM-120 missile launches, and JDAM bomb drops. The flight-test certification is one of the prerequisites for the aircraft to begin the Operational Utility Evaluation (OUE) phase, after which Raptors with the new radar are considered available for combat.

March 20/07: Air shows. Pratt & Whitney announces that the USAF has selected the F-22 Raptor for their East Coast Demonstration Team beginning in April 2007 at Langley Air Force Base, VA. This marks the end of more than 20 years of showmanship by the F100-PW-100 powered F-15 Eagle East Demonstration Team, which performed for more than a million spectators annually at air shows and demonstrations.

The East Coast Demonstration air show season runs from April through mid-November 2007. The F119-powered F-22 Raptor will perform multiple flyby passes that will include a series of high and low speed climbing and turning maneuvers during its first season.

March 13/07: UID. Secretary of the Air Force Michael W. Wynne toured Pratt & Whitney’s East Hartford and Middletown operations to recognize their implementation of the U.S. Department of Defense’s (DoD) Unique Identification (UID) marking initiative. Pratt & Whitney began the UID marking program in January 2005, with data tracking on nearly 200 F119 engine parts, and is working toward UID marking on all of its military engine products. Steve Finger, Pratt & Whitney president, is quoted as saying that “We have experienced numerous measurable benefits as a result of implementing UID technology…”

See “UPC Body Publishes New Supply Chain Standards” for more information concerning the DoD-wide UID initiative. Government defense suppliers must deliver UID-compliant hardware by 2010.

March 7/07: Flying cost. In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee Air & Land Forces Subcommittee, Congressional Research Service defense specialist Christopher Bolkcom says, inter alia [PDF]:

“The military services generally would prefer to invest in new aircraft rather than modernize older aircraft. They often argue that new aircraft will be cheaper to operate and maintain than the aircraft they will replace. Frequently, this has not proven to be the case. Newer aircraft are often more complex than those they replace, and cost more to operate. The estimated flying hour cost of the F-22, for example, is $22,284.00. The estimated flying hour cost of the F-15C/D it will replace is $14,139/$13,524.”

The F-22 had been sold as being cheaper to maintain than its F-15 predecessor, just as the F-15 was sold relative to the F-4. Neither of those claims turned out to be true. This consistent trend is an important explanation for shrinking fleet numbers, even as budgets rise.

Flying costs

February 2007: Testing – SDB-I. The 411th Flight Test Squadron at Edwards AFB begins formal integration testing of the F-22A Raptor and the GBU-39/B Small-Diameter Bomb. See USAF Link article.

Feb 20/07: Australia. Controversy continues in Australia regarding the F-35, and has spread to include the 24 F-18 E/F Super Hornets the government is moving to buy as a stopgap until the F-35A arrives.

Feb 17-18/07: PACOM. Kadena Air Force Base (AFB), Japan received 10 F-22A Raptors in the aircraft’s first overseas deployment. The F-22As are assigned to the 27th Fighter Squadron at Langley AFB, VA, and are under the command of Lt. Col. Wade Tolliver. The aircraft started their deployment with a stop at Hickam AFB, Hawaii, but a software issue affecting the aircraft’s navigation system was discovered on February 11th, causing the aircraft to return to Hickam. The issue was corrected and the aircraft continued on to Kadena.

The 27th FS deployed more than 250 Airmen to Kadena for the 90-120 day deployment, which is part of a regularly-scheduled U.S. Pacific Command rotational assignment of aircraft to the Pacific. See USAF release.

Feb 11/07: Glitched out. The F-22A’s first foreign deployment to Kadena Air Force Base (AFB), Japan runs into a serious problem. The aircraft started their deployment with a stop at Hickam AFB, Hawaii, but a software issue affecting the aircraft’s navigation system was discovered on February 11th, forcing the aircraft to return to Hickam without navigation or communications.

The planes were very fortunate that KC-10 aerial tankers were flying with them.

Software shootdown

Jan 17/07: Multi-Year deal. Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne tells Inside the Air Force that “We promised the Congress a savings of about $225 million,” in the FY 2007-2009 multi-year procurement (MYP) of 60 aircraft, and “we think that is very achievable and we continue to think that is very achievable… Every program has its ups and downs, but I do believe that the $225 million is achievable, and I think we can demonstrate it.”

The multi-year buy was resurrected by Sen. Saxby Chambliss [R-GA] as an amendment despite opposition from fellow Republicans Warner [R-AK] and McCain [R-AZ], but the case for it was based largely on a business case analysis conducted by the Institute for Defense Analyses in Alexandria, VA. Their now-departed CEO’s shareholdings in F-22 subcontractor EDO have cast a shadow over those findings, however, and the final FY 2007 defense bill required a new business case analysis as a condition of the MYP’s continuation.

Jan 12/07: Collier Trophy. 2006 Collier Trophy Win for F-22 Raptor aircraft team. The National Aeronautic Association (NAA) is the oldest national aviation organization in the United States, and is dedicated to the advancement of the art, sport and science of aviation in the U.S. The Collier Trophy was established in 1911, and is granted each year “for the greatest achievement in aeronautics or astronautics in America… during the preceding year.” Lockheed release.

F-22A: Colonial Flag
(click to view full)

Jan 16/07: F-22 at Red Flag. “Colonial Flag” the first of three Red Flags this year, and the F-22 Raptor is participating for the first time. The USAF says that more than 200 aircraft and about 5,200 military members from the United States, United Kingdom and Australia are taking part over a pair of 2-week periods.

Other combat aircraft platforms at colonial Flag included B-2 Spirit stealth bombers, F-117 Nighthawk stealth fighters, B-1 Lancer heavy bombers, F-16 Falcons, F-15E Strike Eagles, Royal Air Force GR-4 Tornado strike aircraft, Australian F-111 Aardvark strike aircraft, and the AH-64 Apache Army helicopter. The F-22’s role was primarily air-to-air fighter escort, but it also demonstrated air-to-ground capabilities since Red Flag exercises include ground-based air-defense systems. See the USAF’s “F-22 Raptors make mark at Red Flag” for details. Fence Check Magazine adds that:

“February’s Red Flag 2007-2 at Nellis Air Force Base may prove to be the only true “Stealth Flag” involving all three US stealth aircraft… In a tour de force Red Flag debut, the 1st Fighter Wing’s 94th FS cleared the skies of “Red Force” fighters with only one purported loss during the entire two-week exercise. The Langley AFB, Virginia based squadron’s exceptional success surprised even the most experience Raptor pilots.”

Jan 10/07: PACOM. Air Force officials are scheduled to deploy a squadron of F-22 Raptors to Kadena Air Base, Japan, as part of U.S. Pacific Command’s Theater Security Package in the Western Pacific in early 2007. See USAF article.

2006

Multi-year buy. Unit cost. Side-bay door open
(click to view full)

Nov 13/06: Politics. Aviation Week’s Aerospace Daily & Defense Report publishes “Rumsfeld’s Ouster, Dems’ Arrival Could Bring TACAIR Changes.” There are a number of predictions that the changes will involve more F-22As, followed by fewer F-35s and more F/A-18 Super Hornets.

Nov 1/06: Australia. AVM Criss: Does Groupthink Power Australia’s JSF? Follow-on to DID’s updated Oct 2/06 article. Retired Australian Air Vice Marshal Peter Criss pens a guest article, and discusses both the JSF decision and what he contends is a larger problem of groupthink within Australia’s DoD.

Oct 20/06: Maintenance pros & cons. Aviation Week has a report covering the F-22’s maintenance history to date. The short version: Integrating all the systems through the avionics supercomputer brain offers plusses in self-diagnostics, preventative maintenance, fewer spare parts required, and fewer repair roles.

On the other hand, avionics is 70% of the maintenance workload, and even false alarm failures can affect several systems. Some systems like the F119 engines have been better than expected, while other systems like pumps have been problematic. Read the full article.

Oct 19/06: New radar tricks. DID’s article “Elec Tricks II: $9.7M for Further Research” is a follow-on to our December 2005 piece that cites the potential to use the F-22A’s AN/APG-77 AESA radar as a secure, high-bandwidth communications relay. It seems the concept is being taken seriously, and given additional funding.

Oct 2/06: Australia. Recently-retired Australian Air Vice Marshal Peter Criss has publicly broken ranks with Australia’s DoD, and advocates buying the F-22A Raptor for Australia instead of the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter. DID has the coverage – including a very in-depth submission to a Parliamentary Committee that supports Criss’ view and explains some of the thinking behind it, and submissions from the Australian government and Parliament.

Note that Australia’s planned buy of early-production F-35A aircraft could result in costs of over $100 million each, considerably narrowing the gap with the F-22 whose recently quoted price per aircraft could be as low as $130 million.

Sept 27/06: Multi-year buy. House and Senate defense appropriators have tentatively approved multi-year procurement of the F-22A, “realigning” $210 million in additional funds from the base budget line to the advance procurement line and bringing the total budget for advance procurement to $687.4 billion. The move would fund 20 fighters each year through FY 2006, 2007, and 2008; but it must remain in the final FY 2007 budget in order to become official. A move to consider foreign sales of the F-22, however, was rejected. See full Aviation Week article.

Aug 8/06: Industrial. Boeing Starts Production of Aft Fuselage for 100th F-22 Raptor. A corporate release that normally wouldn’t draw DID’s interest – but they describe a couple of the manufacturing improvements implemented during the program.

Aug 4/06: Training for stealth. Learning to handle a new and stealthy aircraft like the F-22 to its full potential isn’t just a job for its pilots. Tyndall AFB in Florida is the first base to develop integration tactics for ground and air command and F-22s, and is using the new capabilities to train all new F-22 pilot and air battle manager students.

One change is a greater emphasis on stealth-friendly mission protocols: the goal is for an F-22 pilot to leave his home base, locate, cue in on and destroy all targets, receive the locations of all possible threats, receive landing instructions and come home safely without being seen or heard, on radar or via more obvious radio intercepts. This USAF Link article covers some of the efforts along those lines, including the use of Link 16 and other relatively ‘silent’ encrypted data channels for text messaging, situation updates, etc.

July 26/06: Multi-year buy. In testimony to the Senate, Secretary of the Air Force Michael W. Wynne said the USAF has met 5/6 legislative requirements for proceeding with multi-year funding on the F-22 aircraft – the last being full funding authorization from Congress, which he intends to meet in the FY 2008 program objective memorandum. The 6 requirements under Title 10 U.S. Code, Section 2306B are: (1) promotes national security, (2) the number of aircraft required is stable, (3) the aircraft design is stable, (4) the contract will result in substantial savings, (5) the cost estimates for the contract and cost avoidance are realistic, and (6) able to provide stable funding throughout the contract period.

July 25/06: Multi-year buy. The July 25, 2006 Congressional Budget Office testimony to the Senate regarding the proposed multi-year buy of F-22s is lukewarm at best. The short version? The percentage is small relative other aircraft programs, funding for the 60 aircraft involved is not set, any cancellation costs aren’t covered, and savings are uncertain.

June 23/06: Multi-year buy & retrofits. An Air Force Link article notes that the USAF and manufacturers are finalizing F-22 design issues. Those issues include changes to the canopy actuator, the air recharge system, the nose gear retraction system, the forward boom heat treatment, and several structural retrofits. The total cost to make these repairs to the existing fleet of Raptors comes to about $105 million, and these issues will be corrected in the production line for lots 6 to 9 (each lot = 20-25 aircraft).

The USAF is also lobbying for a multi-year procurement buy for the 60 aircraft in Lots 7, 8 and 9 of the F-22A. The last jet in that series would be delivered around 2011, and the USAF estimates that bulk buys would allow savings of up to $225 million. See USAF Link article. The Project On Government Oversight disputes the savings, and the US Congress is reportedly very lukewarm on the idea so far.

June 23/06: The same USAF Link article cited above contains a quote from Maj. Gen. Richard B.H. Lewis, US Air Force executive officer for the F-22 program, which gives some precise program figures:

“By the time all 183 jets have been purchased, around $28 billion will have been spent on research and development. An additional $34 billion will have been spent on actually procuring the aircraft. That’s about $62 billion for the total program cost. Divided out, that’s comes to about $338 million per aircraft.

But the reality is, if the Air Force wanted to buy just one more jet, it would cost the taxpayer less than half that amount. The current cost for a single copy of an F-22 stands at about $137 million. And that number has dropped by 23 percent since Lot 3 procurement, General Lewis said.

“The cost of the airplane is going down,” he said. “And the next 100 aircraft, if I am allowed to buy another 100 aircraft … the average fly-away cost would be $116 million per airplane.””

Cost per jet

June 9-16/06: Exercise Northern Edge. Exercise Northern Edge in Alaska, which includes Army troops, Navy ships, and Marines in addition to the Air Force. Participating fighters on the “Red” side included front-line F-15s, F-16s, and Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornets. In one Northern Edge engagement, USAF and its sister services put more than 40 fighters in the air at once, as well as E-2C Hawkeye and E-3 AWACS aircraft. Red Air units were allowed to regenerate and return to the fight after being killed, but lost forces on the F-22’s “Blue” side could not. In the largest single engagement, F-22-led forces claimed 83 enemies to one loss, after facing down an opposing force that had generated or regenerated 103 adversary fighters.

The final air-to-air tally for the F-22’s “Blue” team was a favorable 241-2 kill ratio – and the 2 lost aircraft were F-15Cs. “They [the Red Air adversaries] couldn’t see us,” said Lt. Col. Wade Tolliver. This was reportedly true even when the opponents were assisted by AWACS. Close-in, where radar-guided missiles are just one option among many, the Raptor was equally formidable. Col. Thomas Bergeson, the 1st Operations Group commander said that he and a captain engaged 6 F-16s at close range, but it was “no problem.” Even when all of their missiles were gone, the Raptors remained in the fight, flying as stealthy forward air controllers and guiding their colleagues to enemies hiding in their AWACS’ blind spots, behind mountains and such.” When the AIM-120D AMRAAM missile enters wider service, F-22s will also have the option of actively guiding missiles fired by other aircraft.

The F-22s also dropped 26 inert 1,000-pound Joint Direct Attack Munitions, responding to close air support requests from ground troops, with 26 hits. Col. Tolliver had a sensible take: “We’re not an A-10; we’re not an F-16. We don’t do close support like that, but we do carry two 1,000-pound JDAMs, and we can support that ground troop, and that’s … what we proved.” USAF release | AFA article.

June 12/06: Testing – JDAM. The F-22 Combined Test Force team of The Boeing Company, Lockheed Martin, and the US Air Force successfully tested the F-22’s precision strike capabilities at White Sands Missile Range, NM. The F-22 flew at a speed of Mach 1.5 at 50,000 feet, released a 1,000 pound GPS-guided JDAM from a range of 24 nautical miles to destroy a ground target. The drop tested the Raptor’s Launch Acceptability Region (LAR) supersonic algorithm, developed by a Boeing collaboration of F-22, Phantom Works and JDAM engineers. It defines the area in the sky from which the pilot can release a weapon to successfully attack the desired target, factoring in in navigation, weather, target and weapon information. See Boeing release.

May 10/06: Titanium. Titanium prices have been cited as potential future cost issues for the F-35 and F-22 fighter programs, but a 1973 US law called the Berry Amendment has the effect of restricting supply and raising prices. On May 10, the Aerospace Industry Association reported that they’ve reached agreement in principle with senior leaders of the Defense Department on changes to the Berry Amendment.

April 29/06: Politics. Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee chair Rep. Curt Weldon [R-PA] criticized the USAF’s new F-22A buying strategy, and his subcommittee proposes a different funding approach for the F-22A. Read the full Inside Defense article for all the maneuvering involved, which surely rivals most dogfights for intricacy.

Feb 20/06: F-22 Raptors to Japan? Inside The Air Force (ITAF) reports that momentum is building within the Air Force to sell the ultra-advanced F-22A Raptor abroad to trusted U.S. allies, as a way of plussing up numbers and production. The Japanese are lobbying, and some military personnel think it’s a good idea (updated May 2007).

January 10/05: Force shift? US Plans to Retire B-52s, C-21s, F-117 & U-2 for more F-22s. The move was designed to add $1 billion to the F-22A Raptor program in order to keep the production line running. As long as it is running, then future contingencies and needs leave the USAF with the option of ordering more.

The F-117 was retired, but the U-2s turned out to have no effective replacement. As of 2012, the full fleet is still serving the USAF.

2005 (Partial)

F-22A over Ft. Monroe
(click to view full)

Dec 15/05: Elec Tricks: Turning AESA Radars Into Broadband Comlinks. The F-22’s large AESA radar may have an important capability that it’s builders hadn’t suspected. If so, the Raptor’s ability to securely share information with other AESA-equipped planes like the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, and some F-15s could rise by several orders of magnitude.

Nov 15/05: In its annual Selected Acquisition Reports (SARs) submitted to the Congress for FY 2005 (ended Sept. 30, 2005), the US Defense Department had no slippages or cost increases to report for the F/A-22, just normal milestone reporting. Its SAR was submitted to rebaseline because it progressed from a Development to a Production Estimate, following the April 2005 approval of Full Rate Production (Milestone III) for the F-22A.

SAR

Oct 24/05: Supersonic SIGINT: Will F-35, F-22 Also Play EW Role? The F-22’s abilities in this area had been kept under wraps, but it’s coming out as a result of budget lobbying. The F-22 may have electronic warfare capabilities out of the box that rival dedicated aircraft like the EA-6B Prowler, and eavesdropping and scanning capabilities that rival 707 airliner-based aircraft like the RC-135 Rivet Joint.

Oct 6/05: Titanium. Boeing is trying to get out ahead of the titanium supply issue. This issue matters to the F-22, which uses a lot of titanium.

October 2005: Air Force Magazine Online (October 2005) – England Launches New Fighter Review. Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England’s upcoming new air power review, which may provide further cuts in the F/A-22 and F-35 programs after all is said and done (in the end, the numbers remained stable).

F-22 Raptor: Contracts & Production F-22 Cutaway

The F-22A Raptor was built at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics facilities in Palmdale, CA; Meridian, MS; Marietta, GA; and Fort Worth, TX, as well as Boeing’s plant in Seattle, WA. The Raptor program also included 1,000 nationwide suppliers and subcontractors in 42 states. Final assembly and initial flight testing of the Raptor took place at Lockheed’s Marietta, GA plant facilities.

Unless otherwise specified, the Headquarters Aeronautical Systems Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH issues all contracts listed here, and Lockheed Martin Corp. in Fort Worth, TX (near Dallas) is the recipient.

FY 2015

AIM-9X integration work. Combat debut

Oct 27/14: Support. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $486.5 million contract modification, exercising a 3rd option year for F-22 sustainment. $1 million in FY 2014 USAF RDT&E budgets are committed immediately.

Work will be performed at Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/15. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center at Hill AFB, UT manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2897 PO 0566).

Oct 24/14: 3.2B: AIM-9X. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX receives a maximum $33.4 million unfinalized contract for AIM-9X Configurable Rail Launcher (CRL) modification to the F-22. They’ll provide upgrade to 220 AIM-9 CRLs with AIM-9X capability. $5.8 million is committed immediately, using FY 2014 USAF aircraft budgets.

The ability to fire AIM-9X missiles is part of Increment 3.2B upgrades, and limited testing has begin (q.v. Events, July 30/12) but a fielded capability isn’t expected until at least 2017. The lack of a corresponding helmet-mounted display is a concern for Raptor pilots (q.v. Events, Jan 31/13).

Work will be performed at Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to be completed by Feb 28/17. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center at Hill AFB, UT manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0559).

FY 2014

Talon HATE and 5-to-4 for comms. F-22 Simulator
(click to view full)

Sept 16/14: Talon HATE. Boeing Advanced Network & Space Systems, Phantom Works has completed the final design review for the USAF’s Talon HATE pod program, which is designed to enable existing fighters to share information with F-22s over stealth-friendly secure datalinks. The core of this effort integrates the same IFDL datalink used on F-22As with MIDS-JTRS, a Link-16 box whose new software-defined electronics allow it to use different waveforms concurrently. Fighters equipped with the Talon HATE pod can bridge the gap between the F-22A and everyone else, serving as a distribution node over more universal modes like Link-16. As a bonus, pod-equipped fighters also get IRST long-range infrared to find targets – a method that bypasses radar stealth. This is especially useful against low-flying cruise missiles.

Note that unarmed platforms like the BACN UAVs and business jets can already handle datalink bridging, but you wouldn’t take them into enemy airspace. Hence the fighter pod approach. Tactically, Talon HATE allows the F-22 to act as a “bird dog” forward observer of sorts, transmitting the position of enemy aircraft and key ground systems to pod-equipped legacy fighters, who share the data with the rest of the force. To the extent that legacy fighters employ new missiles with full 2-way datalinks and compatibility with F-22 retargeting, the F-22s could even serve as terminal guidance. The idea isn’t entirely new, and was demonstrated during the Northern Edge 2006 exercise when F-22s were used to find opponents whose positioning behind obstacles made them invisible to standard AWACS (q.v. Key Events, June 9-16/06). What’s new is the ability to do this without giving away the F-22’s position: Talon HATE is an initial effort, and may be followed by a “5-to-4″ program.

F-15C air superiority fighters are Talon HATE’s initial platform, but MIDS-JTRS is being deployed on the US Navy’s multi-role F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, as is expected to spread to other fighters as a standard. Boeing is scheduled to deliver several Talon HATE systems to operational F-15C squadrons in 2015. Sources: Boeing, “Boeing Completes Design Review for U.S. Air Force’s Talon HATE Program”.

Sept 16/14: Engines. United Technologies subsidiary Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford, CT receives a $7 million contract modification for a rotable F119 PW-100 engine parts pool. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 USAF O&M budgets.

Work will be performed at East Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/14. USAF Life Cycle Management Center in Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2896, PO 0125).

Sept 12/14: Engines. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford, CT has received a $7,627,698 contract modification for F-22 sustainment, including the purchase of an additional 112 Rotor 5s for the F119 engines. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 USAF O&M budgets.

Work will be performed at East Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete by Dec 17/17. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2896 P00127)

June 18/14: 5-to-4. The USAF is planning an RFP by March 2015, for a “5th to 4th” system that would allow F-22s to communicate with F-35s and other fighters, in ways that they hope won’t give away their position. What they still don’t have, are specifications. Boeing, Northrop Grumman (Jetpack Link-16 translator) and Lockheed/L-3 (Chameleon waveform/ Missouri project) are expected to bid.

“Underscoring the need for a quick program is the fact that communications are a limiting factor to using F-22s operationally. They were considered for use in the Libya campaign in 2011, but planners were stymied by an inability to deliver data collected by the F-22s back to other forces, according to one industry source.”

They’re reportedly considering a Multi-Domain Adaptable Processing System (MAPS) that will fit on older “teen series” fighters, similar to the “Talon HATE” IRST + MIDS/IFDL datalink pods slated for trials on F-15Cs by the middle of 2015. The catch is that this approach depends on having non-stealthy translator aircraft within range of the stealth jets, in an era when advanced air defense systems have ranges of 100 miles or more, and enemies are developing advanced stealth fighters. Sounds risky for the translators. Sources: Aviation Week, “5th-To-4th Gen Fighter Comms Competition Eyed In Fiscal 2015″.

Dec 23/13: Support. A $108.2 million cost-plus-fixed-price contract modification for F-22 calendar year 2014 depot throughput and touch-labor sustainment. $36.3 million in FY 2014 O&M funding budgets are committed immediately.

Work will be performed at Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/14. USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WWUKH at Hill AFB, UT, is the contracting activity (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0501).

Dec 20/13: FASTeR. A maximum $562 million, unfinalized contract modification will incorporate 9 months of FASTeR support in 2014. $157.3 million in FY 2014 RDT&E, Air National Guard, and O&M funding is committed immediately.

Under FASTeR, Lockheed Martin provides all sustaining engineering, field service, modifications, heavy maintenance, supply chain management, technical data maintenance, and reliability and maintainability upgrades for the F-22 Raptor. Work will be performed at Fort Worth, TX, and is expected to be complete by Sept 30/14. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WWUK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0212, contract change proposal 0362).

Dec 20/13: Engines. UTC subsidiary Pratt and Whitney in East Hartford, CT receives an maximum $231.5 million unfinalized contract modification for calendar year sustainment of their F119-PW-100 thrust-vectoring turbofans. $106.9 million in FY 2014 O&M funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed at East Hartford, CT; Edwards AFB, CA; Elmendorf AFB, Alaska; Hickam AFB, Hawaii; Hill AFB, UT; Holloman AFB, N.M.; Langley AFB, VA; Nellis AFB, NV, Sheppard AFB, TX; Tinker AFB, OK; and Tyndall AFB, FL, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/14. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center/WWUK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2896, PO 0116).

Nov 7/13: Training. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $19.8 million option to retrofit fielded mission training centers with “out the window visual systems upgrade” (i.e. the surrounding screens in the simulator) and night vision goggles capability. This will include F-22 training systems at Sheppard Air Force Base (AFB), TX; Tyndall AFB, FL; Langley AFB, VA; Hickam AFB, Hawaii, and Elmendorf AFB, AK. All funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed at St. Louis, MO, with an expected completion date of Dec 31/16. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0050).

FY 2013

Major upgrade contract; 5to4 aims to improve fighter communication; Sustainment; structural retrofit. F-22 air show
(click to view full)

Sept 3/13: Engines. United Technologies’ Pratt & Whitney division in East Hartford, CT receives an $18.4 million contract modification for 5,434 more F119-PW-100 low pressure turbine blades. The total cumulative face value of this contract is now $1.848 billion, but engine production has stopped (q.v. Jan 17/13, in Events). All funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed at East Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/14. The USAF’s Life Cycle Management Center/WWUK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2896, PO 0110).

Feb 20/13: FREDI An maximum $6.9 billion indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for F-22 modernization. Lockheed Martin has confirmed that this is the Follow-on Raptor Enhancement, Development and Integration (FREDI) contract. Program officials later tell the GAO that about $6.2 billion will continue work on defined modernization efforts, with $700 million available for unexpected costs or undefined needs. An updated cost estimate that reflects all modernization costs through the life of the aircraft won’t be done until late in 2014.

The previous REDI contract reached a $7.4 billion maximum (vid. Nov 18-22/11 entry). It fully funded Increment 3.2A modernization, and has funded all of Increment 3.2B to date, which includes all of the design portion and unique hardware development requirements.

FREDI will complete software development for Increment 3.2B upgrades, and then complete systems integration, developmental testing and operational testing needs until 2023. Note that $6.9 billion is far less than FREDI’s $16 billion maximum (vid. Jan 26/11 entry).

Work will be performed in El Segundo, CA; Scottsdale, AZ; San Diego, CA; Nashua, NH; and Wayne, NJ. Work is expected to be complete by Feb 20/23. This award is a result of a sole source acquisition by AFLCMC/WWUK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (FA8611-13-D-2850). See also GAO-14-425, “Cost and Schedule Transparency Is Improved, Further Visibility into Reliability Efforts Is Needed”.

FREDI Modernization

Feb 13/13: 5 to 4. FBO.gov:

“AFLCMC located at Hanscom, AFB, MA, requests information from industry to identify qualified, experienced, and interested sources for procurement of communications gateway products that will digitally connect and exchange data between 5th Generation Fighters (e.g., F-22 and F-35) and 4th Generation Fighters (e.g., F-15, F-16, F-18) with the potential to connect to additional platforms (e.g., Command and Control (C2) units; Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) units; bomber aircraft; and national assets).”

The BACN E-11A jet and EQ-4B UAV already do this, but there are places you wouldn’t send them. 5to4 aims to field a TRL 6+ system that allows the fighters themselves to digitally connect, connecting existing Link 16 platforms with F-22s via the Intra-Flight Data Link (IFDL), and eventually to F-35s via the Multifunctional Advanced Data Link (MADL).

Dec 18/12: FASTeR. A $613.3 million contract modification for the continued sustainment support of the F-22 part of the follow-on agile sustainment to the Raptor (FASTeR) program. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, TX until the end of the fiscal year, on Sept. 30, 2013 (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0165).

Dec 18/12: Support. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford, CT received an $85.3 million contract modification for F119 Engine Sustainment at East Hartford, CT; Edwards Air Force Base, CA; Elmendorf AFB, Alaska; Hickam AFB, Hawaii; Hill AFB, UT; Holloman AFB, NM; Langley AFB, VA; Nellis AFB, NV; Sheppard AFB, TX; Tinker AFB, OK and Tyndall AFB, FL. Work will run until Dec 31/13 (FA8611-08-C-2896, PO 0100).

Oct 23/12: SRP-II, etc. A $133.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for F-22 modifications and heavy maintenance sustainment, depot throughput and installations, signature analysis system reduction, contractor field teams, structural retrofit plan (SRP-II) and modernization and common configuration work.

Work will be performed at Hill Air Force Base, UT, and Palmdale, CA until Dec 31/13 (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0153).

Oct 16/12: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $22.4 million cost plus fixed fee contract for F-22 modifications and heavy maintenance sustainment, depot throughput and installations, signature analysis system reduction, contractor field teams, structural retrofit plan and modernization and common configuration work.

Work will be performed at Hill AFB, UT and Palmdale, CA, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/13 (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0153).

FY 2012

REDI contract raised by $1.4 billion; Oxygen issues getting backup fix; Reliability and Maintainability Maturation Program. F-22A and KC-135
(click to view full)

Sept 26/12: FASTeR. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $10.4 million contract modification to support the F-22 program until Dec 31/12.

Work will take place in Marietta, GA; Fort Worth, TX; Seattle, WA; Edwards AFB, CA Elmendorf AFB, AK; , Hickam AFB, Hawaii, Holloman AFB, NM, Langley AFB, VA; Nellis AFB, NV; Sheppard AFB, TX; Tinker AFB, OK; and Tyndall AFB, FL. The AFLCMC/WWUK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH ,manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 00158).

Aug 28/12: RAMMP. A $12 million contract modification for additional development work and feasibility assessments under the F-22’s RAMMP (Reliability and Maintainability Maturation Program). Work will be performed in Marietta, GA, and will be complete by Dec 3/12 (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0150)

June 5/12: Oxygen backup. Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, TX received a $19.2 million (face value) cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for automatic backup oxygen supply in the F-22’s Life Support System. The contract includes 40 retrofit kits, plus non-recurring engineering, and 10 spares. Work will be performed in Marietta, GA, and is scheduled to be complete by April 30/13. The ASC/WWUK at Wright Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0145).

This won’t solve the F-22’s ongoing “hypoxia” problem, but it will provide an automatic safety backup if the F-22’s Environmental Control System (ECS) system shuts down under certain maneuvers, turning the main oxygen supply off. This is a known defect (vid. Aug 13-17/12 events entry), and the USAF’s “solution” of using a manual system that many pilots couldn’t even activate while sitting motionless ended up killing at least 1 pilot in a 2010 Alaska crash.

In May 2012 (vid. May 15/12 events entry), US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta halted long-distance F-22A combat air patrols in Alaska until Elmendorf AFB’s Raptors had this automatic backup oxygen system installed. Retrofitting the fleet will start in December 2012, and finish in 2014. See also ABC News | AP.

July 17/12: Infrastructure. Cutting Edge Concrete Services Inc. in Oro Grande, CA receives an $11.7 million firm-fixed-price contract to build a 15,000-square-yard parking apron for the F-22 at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii, with an estimated completion date of July 31/13. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 5 bids received by the US Army Corps of Engineers in Fort Shafter, HI (W9128A-12-C-0007).

June 18/12: Infrastructure. Creative Times, Inc. in Ogden, UT received a $9.6 million firm-fixed-price contract to build a 2-story F-22 system support facility at Hill AFB, UT, with an estimated completion date of Dec 3/13. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 13 bids received by the US Army Corps of Engineering in Sacramento, CA (W91238-12-C-0014).

March 29/12: Fleet support. A $664.4 million cost-plus-incentive-fee and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, paying for CY 2012’s Raptor fleet support services. Work will be performed in Marietta, GA; Fort Worth, TX; Palmdale, CA; and Seattle, WA, and will run until Dec 31/12 (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0119).

Adding 2012 aircraft and engine support together totals $886.4 million for 185 operational planes, or about $4.8 million per year per fighter.

Jan 20/12: O2 Know… Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, TX receives a $7 million firm-fixed-price contract for installation of a commercial sensor and associated hardware to measure the oxygen concentration and pressure within the oxygen system. The contract is the F-22’s contract, and the result will be a real time logging and display of O2 concentration, and a warning if oxygen partial pressure drops below a threshold value. Data is always good, of course, and this may help shed light on the F-22’s operational problems – but what this says is that the USAF still isn’t exactly sure what’s going on.

Work will be performed in Marietta, GA, and is expected to be complete by Aug 31/12. The ASC/WWUK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2897 PO 0109).

Dec 22/11: Support. United Technologies subsidiary Pratt and Whitney in East Hartford, CT received a $202 million cost-plus-incentive fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price contract for CY 2012 sustainment of the Raptor fleet’s F119-PW-100 engines.

Work will be performed in East Hartford, CT, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/12. The F-22 Program Office at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2896, PO 0075).

Nov 18-22/11: REDI. Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, TX receives a multi-year, maximum “$7.4 billion” indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for F-22A upgrades. Work will include upgrades to existing systems, and new systems to improve performance and widen the plane’s capabilities. It’s actually just a move to raise the 2002 Raptor Enhancement Development and Integration (REDI) contract’s ceiling value by $1.4 billion to this new number, as the contract moves toward expiry at the end of 2012. Flight International reports that the USAF is preparing a $16 billion REDI II contract. Meanwhile:

“The [$1.4 billion in] extra money was necessary to pay Lockheed to change the F-22’s advanced tactical data link, accelerate the production line shutdown by four years, launch two structural upgrade programmes and fund unexpected costs of upgrading F-22s with reliability and maintainability improvements.”

One firm was solicited, and one firm submitted a proposal to the HQ Aeronautical Systems Center’s Fighter Bomber Directorate at Wright Patterson AFB, OH (F33657-02-D-0009). See also Dayton Business Journal | Reuters.

More REDI upgrades

Oct 19/11: Smarter. AFRL’s clever cost-saver. The US Air Force Research Lab’s Propulsion Directorate has developed a $35 vibration damper to prevent cracks in the F119 engine’s inlet case – a spoked, ring-like device that helps control the air going into the engine. Their fix is expected to save the USAF about $40 million, by preventing cracks. Those cracks force repair attempts, which sometimes break the $362,000 inlet case.

AFRL’s dollar-coin sized orange snubber looks like an exotic pencil eraser, and 7 of them fit in the gap opposite where the J-seal is welded to the inlet case. Each F-22 has 2 engines, so outfitting a plane costs $490. They were designed to last for half the life of the engine, but because they’re so cheap, they’ll be ordered in bulk, and new ones will be installed whenever the engine is pulled out. USAF.

Oct 17/11: SMART. A $7.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for the F-22 SMART (Structural Maintenance and Repair Team) program. See March 2/10 entry for more context (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0093).

FY 2011

Array of maintenance contracts; Mission Planning Environment improvements. Pacific flight
(click to view full)

Sept 26/11: Support. A $24.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for engineering and depot partnering associated with F-22 non-destructive inspections, hypoxia root cause analysis, titanium crack growth, site activation, slider seals, and radar cross-section turntable (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0098).

Sept 21/11: Support. A $7.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for F-22 software maintenance based on root cause analysis. This may well refer to hypoxia-like pilot issues. Work will be performed at Marietta, GA (FA-8611-08-C-2897, PO 0099).

Sept 13/11: MPE. Boeing announces an F-22 mission planning systems contract worth up to $24 million, if all options are exercised. It was awarded under the USAF’s June 2010 Mission Planning Enterprise Contract-II. Boeing will continue development and integration of the existing F-22 Mission Planning Environment (MPE), which gives F-22 crews a full range of mission information, from preflight data reports to postflight debriefing materials.

Aug 31/11: United Technologies subsidiary Pratt and Whitney in East Hartford, CT receives an $11.1 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to finalize the buy at 39 F-119-PW-100 priority initial spare engines. That’s up from earlier plans: vid. Nov 11/10, Sept 29/10 entries. Based on published announcements, the final total would be $424.6 million.

The ASC/WWUK at Wright Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8611-08-C-2896, PO 0060).

July 6/11: IMIS. Sources sought for the Raptor’s Integrated Maintenance Information System (IMIS) Oracle/Solaris platform and associated hardware. Expected contract award in July 2013. This function has so far fulfilled under the current F-22 sustainment contract (FA8611-08-C-2897) but a path to cost savings is sought. FBO (FA8211-11-R-2000).

June 20/11: Infrastructure. Leebcor Services, LLC in Williamsburg, VA wins a $6.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for the design and construction of a paint spray hangar bay addition to an existing low observable/composite repair hangar.

Work will be performed at Langley Air Force Base, VA, with an estimated completion date of Dec 15/12. The contract didn’t explicitly make the connection, but F-22s fly from Langley, and the F-22A’s stealth is a combination of shape, tapings made of special materials to cover key seams, and special paints that interfere with full radar reflection. Bids were solicited through the Internet, with 12 bids received by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Norfolk, VA (W91236-11-C-0040).

May 17/11: RAMMP. A $49.5 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for retrofit installations, including retrofits associated with the Reliability and Maintainability Maturation Program (RAMMP), and Structural Retrofit Program Phase II (q.v. March 2/10 entry), for aircraft scheduled to be inducted during the Q2-Q3 of CY 2011 at the Palmdale Depot facility, as well as contractor support for depot throughput at both the Ogden and Palmdale depot facilities.

Work will be performed at Marietta, GA; Fort Worth, TX; and Seattle, WA. $9.8 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0071).

Feb 10/11: FASTeR. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $726.6 million contract modification for calendar year 2011 sustainment of the F-22 fleet. At this time, $388 million has been obligated by the ASC/WWUK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH.

Follow-On Agile Sustainment for the Raptor (FASTeR) is a Performance-Based Logistics contract providing sustaining the F-22A fleet at all operational bases, including training systems, customer support, integrated support planning, supply chain management, aircraft modifications and heavy maintenance, sustained engineering, support products and systems engineering. Based on earlier releases (vid. Aug 20/10), the value of this contract set has just jumped to around $1.4 billion for 2008-2011 (FA8611-08-C-2897; P00061). See also Lockheed Martin release.

Jan 26/11: Do the FREDI. Sources sought on FBO.gov for F-22 Follow-on Raptor Enhancement, Development and Integration (FREDI) indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (ID/IQ) contract, with an estimated maximum amount of $16 billion.

Jan 11/11: Sub-contractors. Matrix Composites in Rockledge, FL ships its last critical F-22A structure. Matrix was one of only 4 companies qualified worldwide to produce specific components related to the aircraft’s fuselage and critical airframe components, and had been manufacturing Raptor components since 2005, with a notable pickup at the end of October 2006.

More than 20 trained aerospace technicians were employed on the project, specializing in the use of close-tolerance resin transfer molding (RTM). Despite the end of F-22A work, Matrix anticipates significant growth over the next 3 years, including some F-35 opportunities they’re pursuing.

Nov 11/10: Engines. Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford, CT received a $100.7 million contract modification for 8 F119 engines. It increases an unfinalized contract for priority initial spare F119 engines to 33 total (q.v. Sept 29/10).

All funds have been committed by the ASC/WWUK at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8611-08-C-2896; P00044).

Oct 25/10: RAMMP. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $15.2 million contract modification covering installation of the F-22 reliability and maintainability maturation program’s engineering change proposals on fielded fighters. At this time, all funds have been committed by the ASC/WWUK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (FA8611-08-C-2897; P00060).

See also entries for Sept 23/10, March 2/10.

FY 2010

Last 4 ordered; RAMPP; FASTeR; SRP II. F-22A on Ice
(click to view full)

Sept 29/10: Engines. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt and Whitney in East Hartford, CT receives a not-to-exceed $33.1 million contract modification to buy 3 priority initial spare F-119-PW-100 engines, bringing the totals to $312.8 million for 25 engines. At this time, all funds have been committed by the ASC/WWUK at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8611-08-C-2896; P00041).

Sept 24/10: Engines. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt and Whitney in East Hartford, CT receives a not-to-exceed $279.7 million contract modification to buy 22 priority initial spare F-119-PW-100 engines. At this time, all funds have been committed by the ASC/WWUK at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8611-08-C-2896; P00040).

Sept 23/10: RAMMP. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $12 million contract modification for development of the F-22 reliability and maintainability maturation program. This change will increase the ceiling cost for “over and above work” beyond regular efforts, and buy wet weather repairs for actuator interface module components. At this time, all funds have been committed (FA8611-08-C-2897; P00057).

Sept 1/10: Spares. A $15.6 million contract modification for 20 spare integrated F-22A forebodies. All funds have been committed (FA8611-06-C-2899; P00102).

Aug 31/10: Support. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt and Whitney in East Hartford, CT receives a $9.1 million contract modification finalizing calendar year 2010 sustainment, combined test force operations, and support for the F-22A’s F119-PW-100 engines. “At this time, $90,157,719 has been obligated.” (FA8611-08-C-2896; PO0030).

Aug 20/10: FASTeR. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Fort Worth, TX receives a $111.4 million contract modification to provide “sustainment” (spares and support) for the F-22 program in calendar year 2010. “At this time, $241,645,563 has been obligated” by the ASC/WWUK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages this contract (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0049).

Actually, Lockheed Martin’s release places the total value of the Follow-On Agile Sustainment for the Raptor (FASTeR) contract at $709 million, including the initial 2008 contract and 2009 extension.

FASTeR is a Performance-Based Logistics contract providing sustaining the F-22A fleet at all 7 operational bases for the 2010 calendar year, including training systems, customer support, integrated support planning, supply chain management, aircraft modifications and heavy maintenance, sustained engineering, support products and systems engineering.

July 6/10: Support. A not-to-exceed $23 million contract modification for continued funding of F-22 sustainment services and activities, including items over-and-above the base contract. At this time, $17.4 million has been committed by the 478th AESG/SYK at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (FA8611-08-C-2897, P00050).

March 2/10: RAMMP/ SRP-II. Lockheed Martin Corp. in Fort Worth, TX received a $568.5 million contract, incrementally funding an unfinalized Dec 15/09 contract for the F-22’s Structural Retrofit Program II and Reliability and Maintainability Maturation Program during calendar year 2010. At this time, $411.2 million has been committed by the 478 AESG/SYK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (FA8611-08-C-2897, P00040).

Mr. Glenn Miller, F-22 Program Office advisor for the 478th Aeronautical Systems Group, later offered these explanations:

“The structures Retrofit Program (SRP) II is phase II of a 2-part structural retrofit program designed to correct structural concerns discovered during the F-22 Full Scale Fatigue Test (FSFT) conducted in 2005. The process… is a routine structural integrity process performed on all modern Air Force platforms to proactively detect and repair damage… SRP I was designed to correct structural deficiencies with life short falls less than 2000 flight hours while SRP II was designed to correct structural deficiencies with life short falls between 2000 and 8000 flight hours. The SRP II program is scheduled to complete in 2015.

The Reliability and Maintainability Maturation Program (RAMMP) [aims] to drive continuous improvement in weapon system reliability and maintainability… metrics [include]… Availability… Maintenance Man Hours per Flight Hour [MMH]… Mean Time Between Maintenance (MTBM)… Return on Investment. The scope of RAMMP includes: development, retrofit, and the earliest possible production cut-in of the change. In summary, RAMMP projects must be affordable, technically viable, and provide a high return on investment.”

Feb 25/10: Infrastructure. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Albuquerque, NM issues solicitation #W912PP-10-B-0032, an Invitation for Bid (IFB) open only to Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses. The project is a 1,347 square meter munitions maintenance facility for the F-22 weapons systems at the Munitions Storage Area on Holloman AFB, NM. This project will provide 6 munitions maintenance bays to support the F-22 Raptor, and a small administrative area for meetings, office, break, locker, toilet, training and support areas. This building is being constructed as a permanent facility with a life expectancy exceeding 25 years.

NAICS code is 236210/SIC 1541, with a size standard of $33.5 million, and a magnitude of construction estimate between $1-5 million. Bonding will be required for this acquisition, and bidders must be registered with Central Contractor Registration in order to receive a contract. Plans will be issued on or about March 15/10 with bids due on or about April 15/10.

Dec 24/09: Engines. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford, CT received a $95.4 million modified contract for 8 F119-PW-100 installed engines under Lot 10 production. They will equip the last 4 F-22As ordered. At this time, $25 million has been committed (FA8611-09-C-2901).

Dec 11/09: Support. A $550.4 million contract “which will provide for the F-22 weapons system during the CY2010.” This appears to be a fleet sustainment contract. At this time, $312.1 million has been committed (FA8611-08-C-2897, PO 0036).

Dec 11/09: Support. United Technologies Corp. in East Hartford, CT receives a $148 million contract which will provide “CY20 sustainment of the F119-PW-100 engines.” Presumably, the Pentagon means “CY 2010.” At this time, $59.9 million has been committed (FA8611-08-C-2896, P00020).

Nov 26/09: Flares. Kilgore Flares Co. in Toone, TN, a subsidiary of UK-based Chemring Group, received an indefinite delivery/ indefinite quantity contract, with a potential value of $54 million, to supply MJU-39 and MJU-40 infrared (IR) decoy flares for the F-22 aircraft. The flares are designed to defeat air-to-air IR guided missiles. The contract extends over a 4-year period; the 1st delivery order of $24 million, for delivery in 2010 and 2011, has been placed by the US Air Force. The 784 CBSG/PK at Hill Air Force Base, UT manages the contract (FA8213-10-D-0012).

Oct 29/09: Last 4. Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, TX receives a $474.2 million contract for full production of 4 Lot X F-22A aircraft, alternate mission equipment, production engineering support and work in process through Aug 11/09 for 16 shipsets of raw material aircraft fuselage titanium. The 478 AESG/PK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH manages the contract (FA8611-09-C-2900, P00007).

FY 2009

Lot 10 lead-in. Production line

2009 orders are being conducted under a multi-year buy. See July 31/07 for key entries.

Sept 29/09: Support. Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, TX receives an $11 million contract to provide F-22 field team support at various bases. At this time the entire amount has been committed by the 573th AESS/SYK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (FA8611-08-C-2897, P00033).

Sept 14/09: Engines. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt & Whitney of East Hartford, CT received a $6 million contract to provide nozzle modules for F119 Combined Test Force Engines. At this time the entire amount has been committed by the 478th AESG/PK at Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (FA8611-08-C-2896,P00010).

Sept 9/09: Training. Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, TX received a $77.7 million contract modification for procurement of multi-year F-22 pilot training devices in 4 simulated cockpit configurations (FA8611-06-C-2899).

April 2/09: The Watterson/Davis JV in Anchorage, Alaska received a $38.6 million firm-fixed-price contract to design and build the U.S. Air Force and Air Force Reserve F-22 squadron operations/aircraft maintenance unit’s 6-bay hangar facility, (PROJ: ELM297/292) at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska. The estimated completion date is March 24/11.

The U.S. Army Engineer District, Alaska at Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK solicited 8 bids, received 4, and will manage this contract (W911KB-07-D-0013).

Dec 16/08: Support. The USAF exercising a $784.1 million option with Lockheed Martin Aeronautics in Fort Worth, TX, for pre-priced calendar year 2009 F-22 Weapon System Sustainment. Work will be performed in Marietta, GA.

Dec 16/08: SPaRE. The USAF is exercising a $285 million option for 2009 sustainment of the Raptor’s F119-PW-100 Engines with United Technologies subsidiary Pratt and Whitney Aircraft Group in East Hartford, CT. The Support Program for the Raptor Engine (SPaRE) includes spare parts, labor support, fleet management and technical support. Pratt & Whitney.

Dec 4/08: Infrastructure. A $29.1 million modification to a cost plus award fee contract, to incorporate CCP 0184 re: F-22 Depot Activation Equipment for fiscal years 2007 and 2008. At this time, the entire amount has been obligated (FA8611-08-C-2897, #P00006).

Nov 26/08: Lot 10 lead-in. An estimated $180 million not-to-exceed contract, providing for long-lead time materials and assemblies to cover 4 Lot X F-22A aircraft, with an option for an advance buy on behalf of 16 additional Lot X F-22As. At this time, $49 million has been committed (FA8611-09-C-2900).

Nov 26/08: Engines. A $7 million not-to-exceed, firm-fixed price contract to United Technologies subsidiary Pratt and Whitney in East Hartford, CT. The contract will buy long-lead time materials for 8 Lot X F119-PW-100 engines, which would equip 4 F-22A fighters. At this time, $1 million has been committed (FA8611-09-C-2901).

See Nov 10-19/08 entries in the “Events: 2008″ section for further background regarding this partial-compliance move by the Pentagon.

FY 2008

Contractor infrastructure. Fill ‘er up!
(click to view full)

2008 orders are being conducted under a multi-year buy. See July 31/07 for key entries.

July 31/08: Sub-contractors. EDO Corp. Defense Systems, of North Amityville, NY received a firm-fixed-price contract not to exceed $18.2 million for 139 of their BRU-46 and 220 of their BRU-47 Bomb Release Units.

Both designs are fielded as bomb racks for the F-15E Strike Eagle. The F-22A’s standard ground attack weapons will be up to 8 of the derivative GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb, a 250 pound, GPS-guided glide bomb weapon designed to penetrate hardened structures. On the F-22, the BRU-47 is reportedly used to carry external fuel tanks.

At this time $9.1 million has been obligated. 542nd Combat Sustainment Wing, Contracting Division, 782nd CBSG/GBKAA, Robins Air Force Base, Ga., is the contracting activity (FA8520-08-C-0013).

April 25/08: Testing. Lockheed Martin Corp. of Orlando, FL received a modified contract for $5.5 million, in exchange for 20 Common Organizational Level Testers (COLT) and accessory kits under F/A-22 Option 5. At this time, all funds have been committed (FA8626-04-C-2060 P00029).

April 23/08: Sub-contractors. Northrop Grumman announces multiple contracts for the F-22A’s communications, navigation and identification (CNI) systems. Lockheed Martin has awarded them contracts worth $252 million since Jan 1/08, covering F-22 Production Lots 7-9, spares, and CNI modernization efforts.

Northrop Grumman’s integrated CNI system uses software-defined radios and provides 14 critical functions, including advanced multichannel/multiband voice and data links, flight navigation and friend-or-foe identification to F-22 pilots. Northrop Grumman’s F-22 CNI production, integration and test and modernization activities take place at Northrop Grumman facilities in San Diego, CA, and are supported by approximately 70 suppliers in 22 states. NGC release.

April 22/08: Engines. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt and Whitney Aircraft Group of East Hartford, CT received a modified contract for $6.9 million. The firm will refurbish 3 F-22 Raptor F119 Test Engines (FA8611-05-C-2851).

April 15/08: Infrastructure. Bristol Environmental & Engineering Services Corp. in Anchorage, AK won a $5 million firm-fixed price contract to design and build Elmendorf Air Force Base’s F-22 infrastructure Phase II, and F-22 taxiway, taxi lanes, and arm/de-arm sites. Work is expected by be complete on Oct 30/09. Web bids were solicited on Nov 8/07, and 3 bids were received by the U.S. Army Engineer District, Alaska (W911KB-08-C-0007).

April 14/08: Infrastructure. Native-owned business Chugach Government Services, Inc. in Anchorage, AK won a $14.1 million firm-fixed price contract for construction of the F-22 jet inspection and maintenance facility at Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK. Work is expected to be completed on Sept 28/09. Web bids were solicited on Nov 17/07, and 3 bids were received by the U.S. Army Engineer District, Alaska (W911KB-08-C-0009).

Feb 20/08: Support. A contract modification for $182.6 million for “sustainment of the F-22 Weapon System during Calendar Year’s 2008 and 2009. At this time $258,763,747 has been obligated” (FA8611-08-C-2897).

Feb 20/08: Support. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt and Whitney of East Hartford, CT received an undefinitized contract modification for $101.2 million to provide CY 2008 support for the F-22 Raptor’s F119 Engines. Each aircraft carries 2 F119 engines with thrust-vectoring capabilities. “At this time $129,834,373 has been obligated” (FA8611-08-C-2896).

Dec 13/07: Support. An undefinitized contract for $512.1 million, to provide sustainment & support of the F-22 fleet during the calendar year 2008. “At this time [$384.1] million has been obligated” (FA8611-05-C-2850 P00076).

Dec 13/07: Support. A firm fixed price contract for $9.1 million; at this time $5 million has been obligated. The US Defense Department adds, helpfully: “This effort supports F-22 aircraft.” One would hope so (FA8611-06-C-2899 – P00023).

Dec 13/07: SPaRE. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt and Whitney Aircraft Group of East Hartford, CT received an undefinitized contract of $114.7 million for F119-PW-117-PW-100 engines, and calendar year 2008 sustainment (the part that isn’t finalized yet). At this time $86 million has been obligated (FA8611-05-C-2851).

This support program for the Raptor engine (SPaRE) involves activation of Holloman Air Force Base (AFB) in Alamogordo, New Mexico, and sustainment for fielded engines in 2008, with an option to support activation of Hickam AFB in Honolulu, Hawaii, and sustainment services in 2009. Sustainment activities include spare parts and labor support, fleet management and technical support of the F119 engine.

Dec 12/07: Infrastructure. BAE Systems opens a new 30,000-square-foot facility in its South Nashua, New Hampshire campus for production work on the F-22A Raptor and F-35 Lightning II electronic warfare suites, which provide threat warning and jamming. About 60 suppliers from New Hampshire provide products and services to support the programs, and the site will support more than 1,400 of BAE Systems’ 4,500 New Hampshire employees who contribute to the F-22 and F-35 programs.

In BAE’s release, Nashua VP Operations Mike Dow says that the new facility is “capable of assembling and testing complex microwave products and performing assembly, integration, and acceptance testing at significantly reduced cost and cycle times.”

Oct 16/07: Training. Boeing announces a $46 million contract from Lockheed Martin to integrate the F-22A the U.S. Air Force Distributed Mission Operations (DMO) training network, which will enable Raptor pilots to train with other aircrews flying different simulated aircraft at locations throughout the world. Once the contract is complete, Raptor pilots on the East Coast would be able to train with AWACS crews in the Midwest and F-15 pilots in Europe, as part of a joint synthetic battlespace made up of a combination of live, virtual, and programmed-in elements.

The contract allows for the design and test of new software and systems for the F-22 Full Mission Trainer (FMT), and the Boeing team will incorporate the enhanced FMTs into an F-22 Mission Training Center (MTC) that is scheduled to begin operations in 2009. The Boeing release adds that Lockheed Martin’s Marietta, GA facility recently delivered Raptor no. 103 to the Air Force. See “F-22s to Become Part of Joint Simulated Training.”

FY 2007

Contract for 24 aircraft. F-22, bays open
(click to view full)

July 31/07: A firm-fixed-price, firm-fixed-price w/economic price adjustment and cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification for $5.05 billion for the F-22 multi-year aircraft advance buy. This is an Economic Ordering Quantity and Full Rate Production contract for 60 aircraft: Lots 7, 8 and 9. At this time, $332.5 million has been obligated. Work will be complete June 2012. (FA8611-06-C-2899/no modification number at this time).

Lockheed Martin’s release states that this order is on top of $2.3 billion used to buy long lead- time parts and maintain continuous manufacturing flow, bringing the total cost to $7.35 billion. The release says that the multi-year contract is estimated to save approximately $400 million compared to a corresponding annual procurement program, which equates to a savings of $6.85 million per aircraft. To date, 105 Raptors have completed final assembly at the Lockheed Martin facility in Marietta, GA, and 99 have been delivered to the USAF.

July 31/07: United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt & Whitney received a $1.28 billion fixed-price with economic price adjustment and firm-fixed-price contract modification from the United States Air Force to deliver F119 engines for the F-22 Raptor in a multi-year contract spanning 2008, 2009 and 2010. The number of engines was not specified, but the USAF plans to order 60 aircraft during this time, which means at least 120 engines plus spares.

At this time, $367.6 million has been obligated. Solicitations began April 2006, negotiations were completed in July 2007, and work will be complete February 2011 (FA8811-06-C-2900/No modification number at this time). P&W release – which came out a day before the DefenseLINK announcement. A contract of this magnitude also attracts dignitaries.

Multi-year buy: 60 more

April 10/07: An $11 million firm-fixed-price contract modification. “This contract action will definitize Lot 8 Advanced Buy through 12 October 2007, in support of the F-22 program.” At this time, all funds have been obligated and work will be complete December 2011 (FA8611-06-C-2899, PO 0015).

April 10/07: Sub-contractors. GKN Aerospace announces 2 new contracts, with a combined value of just under $15 million, raising the value of GKN’s work per aircraft to over $5 million. Overall, GKN supplies high performance metallic and composite assemblies for the aircraft wing, body and engine, plus the complete advanced cockpit canopy system.

The first contract covers the Inlet Lip Assembly that surrounds the engine intake. It is made up of multiple hand lay-up and resin transfer molded composite details which are assembled into extremely tight tolerance requirements. GKN Aerospace will manufacture and assemble this part for 50% of the aircraft in lots 5 – 9, with deliveries from 2007-2009.

The second contract covers the chine edge, the co-cured composite structural cover over the area where the cockpit and fuselage transition into the wing. That contract covers aircraft Lots 6-9 on a sole-source basis, with deliveries commencing by the end of 2007 and continuing to 2009.

Work on both contracts will take place alongside the F-22A stabilator manufacture and assembly (see Nov 22/06), at GKN Aerospace’s St Louis, MO plant.

April 2/07: Engines. United Technologies Corp. in East Hartford, CT received a $107.6 million fixed-price with economic price adjustment contract for “12 install and 1 spare F-119-PW-117-PW-100 engines.” Hard to say what that means, as the designation seems to be off and may also be referring to engines that power other aircraft. At this time, $96.8 million have been obligated. Work will be complete July 2008 (FA8626-07-C-2076).

March 30/07: Support. United Technologies Corp. in East Hartford, CT received an $116.2 million cost-plus-fixed fee, firm-fixed-price, and cost-plus-award fee contract modification to provide F-119 engine Lot 6 for CY 2007 sustainment. At this time, $80.7 million have been obligated. Negotiations were complete March 2007, and work will be complete December 2007 (FA8611-05-C-2851, PO 0015).

March 9/07: PALS. A $248.4 million cost-plus-award fee & cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification finalizes Performance-Based Agile Logistics Support (PALS) contract line items 0207, 0216, and 0217. Work will be complete December 2009 (FA8611-05-C-2850, PO 0030)

March 9/07: Engines. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford, CT received a $27.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, finalizing the purchase of F119 engine Lot 7 long lead items. At this time, $13.6 million has been obligated, and work will be complete September 2007 (FA8611-06-C-2900, PO 0002).

Feb 27/07: Support. A $107.3 million cost-plus-award fee and cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification, extending the contractor’s current authorization to provide F-22 sustainment from Jan 31, 2007 – Feb. 28, 2007 to April 30, 2007. At this time, $80.4 million have been obligated. Work will be complete December 2009 (FA8611-05-C-2850, PO 0041).

Feb 27/07: Support. United Technologies subsidiary Pratt and Whitney Aircraft Group in East Hartford, CT received a $49.6 million cost-plus fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price and cost-plus award-fee contract for F119-PW-119 Engine Lot 6, calendar year 2007 sustainment. At this time, $24.8 million has been obligated, and work will be complete June 2007 (FA8611-05-C-2851).

Feb 26/07: Engines. United Technologies subsidiary Pratt and Whitney Aircraft Group in East Hartford, CT received a $45 million firm-fixed-price contract modification. It covers “F-119 Engine Multi-Year Economic Order Quantity Effort, Undefinitized Contract Action (UCA)” – in other words, they’re ordering key parts and materials in advance, in order to bulk up the order and drive prices for each item down. The F-22A’s current multi-year contract framework lets them do more of this, instead of just ordering year by year. All funds are already obligated, and work will be complete January 2010 (FA8611-06-C-2900, PO 004).

Feb 5/07: Engines. United Technologies subsidiary Pratt and Whitney Aircraft Group in East Hartford, CT received a $18.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 2 Lot 6 F119-PW-100 engines for F-22 replacement test aircraft. This work will be complete January 2008. (F33657-05-C-2851, PO 0014)

Jan 8/07: Multi-Year lead-in. A $255 million firm fixed price contract modification “for an F-22 multiyear economic order quantity procurement.” To date all funds have been obligated, and work will be complete December 2011 (FA8611-06-C-2899/No Modification number at this time).

Dec 29/06: Engines. United Technologies subsidiary Pratt and Whitney Aircraft Group in East Hartford, CT received a $27.2 million firm fixed price contract modification. This provides for long lead undefinitized buys in preparation for F119-PW-100 Engine Lot 7. To date, $13.6 million has been obligated. Work will be complete September 2007 (FA8611-06-C-2900)

Dec 27/06: PALS. A $204.8 million cost-plus-award fee and cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification, authorizing Lockheed to provide F-22 Performance Based Agile Logistics Support (PALS), from January 1, 2007 through February 28, 2007. At this time $153.6 million have been obligated. Work will be complete December 2009 (FA8611-05-C-2850, PO 0042)

Dec 27/06: Support. United Technologies Corp. in East Hartford, CT received a $12.1 million cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification for F119-PW-100 Engines Support to Combined Test Force (CTF) Infrastructure at Edwards Air Force Base, CA. At this time $4.2 million have been obligated. Work will be complete July 2007 (F33657-05-C-2851, PO 0012).

Dec 21/06: Titanium. A $379.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for the remaining Lot 8 Advanced Buy Requirements and for Lot 9 Advanced Procurement for Titanium in support of the F-22A Lot 9 aircraft. This is one of the major advance purchases as part of the ongoing multi-year buy – see Sept 27/06 entry in “Program and Events” for more. Work will be complete December 2011 (FA8611-06-C-2899, PO 0009).

Dec 21/06: Engines. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford, CT received a $50 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification. This action provides for Lot 6 F119-PW-100 Engines (46) for the F-22, and associated Field Support and Training (FS & T) for calendar year 2006. Work will be complete January 2008 (FA8611-05-C-2851/PZ0008).

Dec 5/06: Landing gear. A $9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for the upgrade of the F-22 engineering, manufacturing, and development landing gear trainer to an “aircraft 4041 configuration” (the designation for the first operational F-22A Raptor), to be consistent with other training devices delivered to Sheppard Air Force Base. At this time, total funds have been obligated. Solicitations began August 2005, negotiations were complete September 2006, and work will be complete by October 2008 (FA8611-04-C-2851, PO 0060).

Nov 22/06: Sub-contractors. GKN Aerospace announces a $50 million contract to be the sole source provider of the complete horizontal stabilator for the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor. This brings the total value of GKN Aerospace work on the F-22 to $4.9 million per ship set.

This contract covers lots 7-9 of the aircraft program. and requires fabrication of advanced composite assemblies, machining of complex titanium parts, and full assembly of the complete stabilator for delivery to Lockheed Martin in Marietta, GA. Work will take place at the GKN Aerospace plant in St Louis, MO, with deliveries commencing in the fourth quarter of 2007 and continuing until the end of 2010.

Nov 21/06: A $1.05 billion firm-fixed-price contract modification for 24 F-22A aircraft: 23 service aircraft and 1 replacement test aircraft (TL 24). This action supports the F-22 Lot 6 Full Production contract, and the Pentagon oddly notes that “$1,466,447,970 have been obligated.”

Work will be complete February 2010 (FA8611-05-C-2850). Note that this doesn’t represent the aircrafts’ full cost, just the parts that haven’t been covered by long-lead procurement, and by the separate buys of “government furnished equipment” like engines, etc.

Lot VI: 24 more

Nov 20/06: Sub-contractors. GKN Aerospace has won a $50 million contract from Lockheed Martin to be the sole source provider of complete horizontal stabilators (i.e. fully-moving horizontal tail fins) for Lot 7-9 F-22A Raptors, with delivery from Q4 2007-2010. This brings the total value of GKN Aerospace work on the F-22 to $4.9 million per aircraft. This contract is the culmination point of several capabilities and processes, all placed under one roof – see full DID coverage.

Nov 15/06: Flares. Kilgore Flares Co. LLC in Toone, TN received an $18.5 million firm-fixed-price contract to procure replenishment spares for the F-22 aircraft. The products purchased are flares, specifically MJU-39, MJU-40 and BBU-59 designed to defeat air-to-air guided missiles. At this time, total funds have been obligated. Solicitations began February 2006, negotiations were complete October 2006, and work will be complete June 2008. The Headquarters Ogden Air Logistics Center at Hill Air Force Base, UT issued the contract (FA8213-0-C-undefined).

Nov 1/06: Lot 7 lead-in. A $1.23 billion firm-fixed-price contract modification supporting the F-22 Lot 7 Long Lead Procurement. This is technically a “funding modification to the ongoing undefinitized contract action,” but it’s part of the multi-year 2007-2009 production contract for 60 F-22As that was recently agreed upon. At this time, $403.2 million have been obligated, and work will be complete October 2009 (FA8611-06-C-2899, PO 0007).

FY 2006

Lot 6, 7. F-22A Raptor, ready
(click to view full)

Sept 29/06: Support. United Technologies Corp. in East Hartford, CT received a $6 million cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification for the Lot 4 F119 engines Life Cycle Reduction Program. Work will be complete August 2009 (F33657-03-C-2011). See the presentation “Cost Reduction Task Force Key to Raptor Affordability” [PDF, 8.6 MB] for more context.

Sept 27/06: Lot 6 lead-in. A $98.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification. This undefinitized contract action increase is not-to-exceed, F-22A Lot 6 long-lead procurement and funding through Oct. 31, 2006. At this time, $74.1 million has been obligated. Work will be complete February 2010 (FA8611-05-C-2850, PO 003).

Sept 27/06: A $17.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification provides for production support systems in support of F-22A Lot 6 production; all funds have already been obligated. Work will be complete February 2010 (FA8611-05-C-2850, PO 0029)

Sept 21/06: Engines. United Technologies Corp. in Hartford, CT received a $455.1 million firm-fixed-price & cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification covering Lot 6 production of 48 F119 engines, plus calendar year 2006 field support and training. Solicitations began July 2005, negotiations were complete September 2006, and work will be complete December 2006. The Headquarters Aeronautical Systems Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH issued the contract (FA8611-05-C-2851/ P00010).

Sept 5/06: Sub-contractors. Defense Systems in North Amityville, NY received a $10 million firm-fixed-price contract for “bomb rack units in support of F-22 aircraft.” Half of the funds have already been committed, and work will be complete in January 2009. The Headquarters 542d Combat Sustainment Wing at Robins Air Force Base, GA issued the contract (FA8520-06-C-0015).

Aug 16/06: PALS. A $119.9 million firm-fixed price and cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification. This undefinitized contract action increases the current undefinitized contract action amount in order to extend the period of performance for Performance Based Agile Logistics Support (PALS). PALS for F-22A Lot 6 Contract Line Item Numbers will extend until September 30, 2006. At this time, $89.9 million has been committed (FA8611-05-C-2850)

Aug 8/06: Titanium. A $19.6 million firm-fixed-price undefinitzed action contract for advance procurement of titanium in support of F-22A Lot 8 aircraft, with full funds committed. Work will be complete in October 2009, which is when Lot 8 production is scheduled (FA8611-06-C-2899).

As noted above, the F-22 makes heavy use of titanium in order to give it the lightness, strength, and temperature resistance required. Someone obviously thinks the price is about to rise – and given increased global demand, they’re hardly alone.

July 12/06: Engines. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt and Whitney in East Hartford, CT received a $16.5 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification. This undefinitized contract action for Lot 6 production F119 engines covers long lead items and field support, and a training period of performance extension. Solicitations began July 2005, negotiations were complete in July 2006, and work will be complete by December 2006 (FA8611-05-C-2851, PO 0007).

July 5/06: We’re just going to quote this one. It’s a firm-fixed-price contract modification to Lockheed Martin, for $552.7 million. Negotiations were complete in June 2006, and work will be complete February 2010:

“This undefinitized contract action extension period of performance is through Sept. 30, 2006, for F-22A lot 6, long-lead activities and increase not-to exceed.” …The public affairs point of contact is Capt. Everdeen, (937) 255-1256… (FA8611-05-C-2850).

We’ve been inquiring with Capt. Everdeen for a translation of exactly what’s going on here for over a week now, and have received no response from the F-22 Program Office. Even they probably can’t understand language like this.

July 5/06: Support. A $99 million firm-fixed-price contract modification. This undefinitized contract action is for F-22 lot 6 program support/annual sustaining period I through Sept. 30, 2006. Negotiations were complete in June 2006, and work will be complete by September 2006 (F33657-97-C-0031).

June 15/06: Lot 7 lead-in. A $187.1 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to provide for an extension to the advance buy period of performance from June 2006 through September 2006, and increases the outlay amount. This action supports F-22A Lot 7 production. Work will be performed at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Marietta, GA (33%) and Fort Worth, TX (35%); and Boeing Information and Space Defense Systems, Aircraft and Missile Systems group in Seattle, WA (32%). Work will be complete in October 2009 (FA8611-06-C-2899, PO 0005)

May 19/06: Engines. United Technologies Corp. in East Hartford, CT received a $5 million firm-fixed-price contract to cover advance procurement items for 40 Pratt & Whitney F119 engines. This work will be complete December 2006 (FA8611-06-C-2900).

May 15/06: PALS. A $62 million firm-fixed-price & cost-plus fixed-fee contract modification that increases the current undefinitized contract for Lot 6, F-22 aircraft performance based agile logistics support (PALS) activities. Specifically, this modification funds PALS 3010 activities through June 2006, plus authorized work to begin on 3600 funded support equipment development activities. Additionally, this modification increases the obligation amount for the Lot 6 PALS effort to 75% – $137.3 million has been obligated at this time. Work will be complete December 2006 (FA8611-05-C-2850, PO 0015).

May 3/05: 1 more. A $143.1 million firm-fixed price contract modification, which is an undefinitized contract action for F-22 Lot 6 replacement test aircraft. This work will be complete February 2010 (FA8611-05-C-2850, PO 0014).

April 24/06: Support. A $103 million firm-fixed price & cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification to increase fund production long lead diminished manufacturing sources activities and performance-based agile logistics support of 3400 funded activities through June 30/06. The location of performance is Lockheed Martin Corp., in Marietta, GA(33%), Fort Worth, TX (34%); and Boeing in Seattle, WA (33%). Work will be complete December 2006 (FA8611-05-C-2850, PO 0012)

March 13/06: Support. A $383.5 million modification to increase Lot 6 F-22 production long lead activities, (including target price curve and diminishing manufacturing sources); and long-lead performance-based agile logistics support activities; and the aircraft structural integrity program. Work will be complete December 2006 (FA8611-05-C-2850, PO 0009).

PW F119 engine:
vectored thrust
(click to view full)

Feb 28/06: Support. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt and Whitney Aircraft Group in East Hartford, CT received a $153.5 modification that will support the F119 Engine’s Lot 6, Long Lead Items and Field Support and Training period of performance extension. Solicitations began July 2005, negotiations are expected to be complete May 2006, and work will be complete December 2006 (FA8611-05-C-2851).

Feb 15/06: PALS. A $144.3 million cost-plus fixed-fee contract modification. This undefinitized contract action provides for F-22A Lot 6 Weapon System Support as a Capability Performance-Based Agile Logistics Support (PALS). Negotiations were complete in January 2006, and work will be complete by May 2006 (FA8611-05-C-2850, PO 0010).

Jan 25/06: Support. United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt and Whitney Aircraft Group in East Hartford, CT received a $56.7 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus fixed-fee contract modification. This undefinitized contractual action will “support the F119 Engine Lot 6,” and work will be complete by March 2006. Hard to say if they’re buying components, or help (FA8611-05-C-2851, PO 0003).

Jan 11/06: PALS. A $191.1 million not-to-exceed firm-fixed-price contract modification. This action provides long lead activities and Performance Based Agile Logistics Support (PALS) for F-22 Lot 6 aircraft and associated equipment. Negotiations were completed in December 2005, and work will be complete in February 2006 (FA8611-05-C-2850, PO 0008). As one might guess from the dates, a large chunk of the work had been done already, which is why $95.4 million was already obligated.

Jan 11/06: Support. A $116.5 million firm-fixed-price fee contract modification provides for F-22 Lot 6 Program Support/ Annual Sustaining (PSAS) for period I, i.e. through June 2006. Negotiations were completed in December 2005 (F33657-97-C-0031, PO 0070). As a point of reference, the FY 2005 Lot 5 PSAS contract mentioned in DID’s November 17, 2005 article was a $160 million firm-fixed-price/ cost-plus fixed-fee contract modification that definitized FY 2005 production support/ annual sustainment associated with the F-22 Lot 5 batch.

Dec 23/05: long-lead buy. An $18 million, undefinitized, firm-fixed-price contract modification. It covers Long Lead Effort for Replacement Test Aircraft (RTA) for the F-22A program, and work will be complete by February 2006 (FA8611-05-C-2850).

Nov 10/05: Lot 6 lead-ins. A $39.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to support F/A-22 Lot 6 production. This action provides for advanced procurement for 24 Lot 6 aircraft and associated equipment. Work will be performed ar Lockheed Martin Corp. in Marietta, GA and Fort Worth, TX, and Boeing in Seattle, WA. At this time, the full amount has been obligated, and work will be complete November 2005. Negotiations were complete October 2005 (FA8611-05-C-2850/ P00006)

Nov 9/05: A $2.99 billion firm fixed price contract modification to definitize the F/A-22 Lot 5 production acquisition for 24 aircraft. The location of performance is Lockheed Martin Corporation, Marietta, GA. At this time, $1.98 billion has been obligated.

This work will be complete November 2007. Solicitations began July 2004 and negotiations were complete November 2005. The Headquarters Aeronautical Systems Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH issued the contract. (FA8611-04-C-2851). Note that this doesn’t represent the aircrafts’ full cost, just the parts that haven’t been covered by long-lead procurement, and by the separate buys of “government furnished equipment” like engines, etc.

Lot V: 24 more

Nov 9/05: Support. A $160 million firm-fixed-price/ cost-plus fixed-fee contract modification to definitize the undefinitized action for calendar year 2005 production support and annual sustainment activity. This effort supports the F/A-22 Lot 5 production aircraft. The location of performance is Lockheed Martin Corporation, Marietta, Ga. Solicitations began July 2004, negotiations were complete November 2005, and work will be complete by December 2005 (F33657-97-C-0031). Both November 9 awards were covered in this DID article, as was this engine-related award…

Nov 7/05: Support. United Technologies Corp. in East Hartford, CT received a $17.3 million firm-fixe-price and cost plus fixed fee contract modification to provide for contractual action for F119 engine, FY 2006-2007 to support the combined test force infrastructure at Edwards Air Force Base, CA. Solicitations began December 2003, negotiations were complete June 2005, and work will be complete December 2006 (FA8611-04-C-2852).

FY 2005 and Earlier (Incomplete) F/A-22 Raptor landing
(click to view full)

Sept 30/05: Support. A $17.7 firm-fixed price contract modification to support the F/A-22 Lot 5 Support System. The location of performance is Lockheed Martin in Marietta, GA. Total funds have been obligated, and work will be complete by November 2007. Negotiations were complete October 2005 (FA8611-04-C-2851/ P00026)

Before this, the most significant contract is…

March 12/03: Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth, TX received a $6 billion indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract modification to provide for development of system upgrades to existing requirements, incorporate new requirements, add capability and enhance performance in the F/A-22 Weapon System. Funds will be obligated as individual delivery orders are issued. The Air Force can issue delivery orders totaling up to the maximum amount indicated above, though actual requirements may necessitate less than this amount.

Locations of performance are: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Fort Worth, TX; Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems in Marietta, GA; and Boeing ISS Aircraft and Missile Systems in Seattle, WA. Solicitation began in March 2002, negotiations were complete in March 2003, and work will be complete by June 2013. The Aeronautical Systems Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH (F33657-02-D-0009).

F-22 upgrade contract

Additional Readings & Sources Background: The F-22

• DID – F-22 Raptor: Capabilities and Controversies. In-depth coverage looks at both sides.

• USAF Fact Sheets – F-22 Raptor.

• Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor.

• Air Force Technology – F-22A Raptor Advanced Tactical Fighter Aircraft, USA

• US Air Force Link – F-22A mini-site. Includes articles, photos, background information. Good idea, but ended in 2008.

• UTC Pratt & Whitney – F119 Engine. Vectored-thrust jet engine.

• Global Security – F-22 Avionics

• DID (Feb 7/06) – EDO’s AVEL Missile Ejection System: Extending the Raptor’s Claws. Covers the development of an important F-22 sub-system, which was a success by any project measure. Despite AVEL’s performance, Pierre Sprey et. al. make a plausible argument that the split-second nature of air combat may make even the seconds of opening and launch time created by the stealth-enhancing weapons bays a problem.

• DID (Dec 15/05) – Elec Tricks: Turning AESA Radars Into Broadband Comlinks. The F-22’s large AESA radar may have an important capability that it’s builders hadn’t suspected. If so, the Raptor’s ability to securely share information with other AESA-equipped planes like the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, and some F-15s could rise by several orders of magnitude.

Background: Official Reports

• US GAO (May 15/14, #GAO-14-425) – F-22 Modernization: Cost and Schedule Transparency Is Improved, Further Visibility into Reliability Efforts Is Needed.

• US Government Accountability Office (May 2/12, #GAO-12-447) – F-22A Modernization Program Faces Cost, Technical, and Sustainment Risks.

• US Government Accountability Office (Dec 16/10, #GAO-11-171R) – Defense Management: DOD Needs to Monitor and Assess Corrective Actions Resulting from Its Corrosion Study of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. It’s actually about the F-22’s corrosion problems, for the most part.

• US Congressional Research Service (July 16/09) – Air Force F-22 Fighter Program: Background and Issues for Congress. Includes discussion of foreign sales, upgrade plans.

• RAND Pacific View 2008 briefing – Air Combat: Past, Present & Future. This analysis uses a hypothetical “F-22s over Taiwan” scenario and historical data to look at the core assumptions underlying the USA’s fighter doctrine of “stealth + beyond visual range engagement” as the keys to victory. It concluded that numbers still mattered, and that the “Lanchester Square” principle still applied. It is reported that one of its key analysts was fired in retaliation for its conclusions, once they became public.

• US Government Accountability Office releases (April 2/07, #GAO-07-415) – ‘Tactical Aircraft: DOD Needs a Joint and Integrated Investment Strategy’. Includes a number of details re: the F-22A program, including the issue of cracking near the tail.

• RAND Project Air Force (2005) – The Challenges of Developing New Weapon Systems: Lessons Learned from the F/A-22 and F/A-18E/F

• United States Government Accountability Office (March 3/05, #GAO-05-390T) – Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives: Status of the F/A-22 and JSF Acquisition Programs and Implications for Tactical Aircraft Modernization. “Significant changes in the F/A-22 program have severely weakened its original business case…”

Background: F-22 Program

• DID Spotlight – F-22 Raptors to Japan? The Japanese, Australia, Israel, and South Korea all lobbied at one time or another for an “F-22EX”. Exports were prohibited right to the end of the program, and Japan ended up buying F-35As.

• USAF Maxwell AFB Air & Space Power Journal (Nov-Dec 2012) – The F-22 Acquisition Program: Consequences for the US Air Force’s Fighter Fleet. By Lt. Col. Christopher J. Niemi, USA. “First, given the clear need to recapitalize its fleet, why did the Air Force acquire just 25 percent of the F-22s originally planned? Second, could it have realized a better result by making alternative decisions during F-22 development?”

• DID Spotlight (to 2010) – The Australian Debate: Abandon F-35, Buy F-22s?. The opposition Labor party favored a request for F-22s over the previous government’s purchase of 24 F/A-18F Block II Super Hornets, and question the proposed timing and numbers for the proposed F-35. In the end, the USA refused to sell F-22s to anyone, and Australia bought the F-35A. DID compiles the various arguments and briefings over time, pro and con, from the politicians, DoD, civilian defense experts, the media, et. al.

• Aviation Week (Feb 8/09) – F-22 Design Shows More Than Expected [dead link]. Summary: Desired radar signature from certain critical angles is -40 dBsm., supercruise at Mach 1.78 rather than Mach 1.5, better acceleration, operation from about 65,000 feet using afterburner, 5% greater range from its APG-77 AESA radar.

• DID (Oct 24/06) – Supersonic SIGINT: Will F-35, F-22 Also Play EW Role? The F-22’s abilities in this area had been kept under wraps, but emerged as a result of budget lobbying. The F-22 may have latent electronic warfare capabilities out of the box that rival dedicated aircraft like the EA-6B Prowler, and strong eavesdropping and scanning capabilities.

• Aviation Week (Oct 20/06) – F-22 Maintainers Focus More On Avionics, Less On Engines [dead link]. Good history to date of F-22 maintenance benefits and issues, notes avionics as 70% of the non-stealth maintenance workload.

• DID (Dec 6/05) – $96.7M for Theory of Constraints & 6-Sigma Support in US Naval Aviation. What is Theory of Constraints, and why is it so powerful? DID explains, and notes the method’s use as part of the F-22 Raptor program, via Critical Chain project management.

• DID (Oct 18/05) – RAND PAF: Lessons Learned from the F/A-22 and F/A-18 Super Hornet Programs.

• MIT Lean Aerospace Initiative (March 23/05) – Cost Reduction Task Force Key to Raptor Affordability [HTML Google cache | PDF format, 8.6 MB]

• US Air War College, Maxwell AFB (June 2003, Paper #30) – The Air Superiority Fighter and Defense Transformation: Why DOD Requirements Demand the F/A-22 Raptor

• Air University School Of Advanced Airpower Studies, Maxwell AFB (June 2000) – U.S. Military Aircraft For Sale: Crafting an F-22 Export Policy [PDF format]. Excellent discussion of the F-22’s capabilities, as well as potential export issues and the considerations that will influence US policymakers.

• Crosstalk Journal of Defense Software Engineering, via WayBack (May 2000) – F-22 Software Risk Reduction. The plane’s software is fundamentally based on the VAX system; the article explains why, and notes the modernization challenge ahead.

• Northrop-Grumman Analysis Center (April 2000) – Analogues of Stealth [PDF]. This paper briefly explores antisubmarine warfare, examines the development and fielding of low-observable “stealth” aircraft and emerging countermeasures, and suggests analogues between past experience with stealthy platforms and countermeasures in the sea and the future of stealthy platforms in the air.

• Australian Aviation (1999) – Deedle, Deedle, Deedle, BANG! The Paradigm Shift in Air Superiority. Discusses the evolution of missiles, how this has affected aircraft design, and the significance of the F-22’s capabilities against aerial and ground targets.

• Lockheed Martin Code One Magazine (April 1998) – F-22 Design Evolution. This wasn’t even the end of that evolution, merely the end of the first stage that eliminated the Northrop / General Dynamics’ F-23 Black Widow. The YF-23 was faster and stealthier than the YF-22, but less maneuverable. The Navy reportedly thought it was also less amenable to modification for carrier use, though the NATF program was canceled shortly thereafter in 1991.

• YouTube – Northrop YF-23 Black Widow II. Very good documentary about the competing YF-23.

News & Views

• DID – Aging F-15s: Ripples Hitting the F-22, F-35 Programs. The unexpected, months-long grounding of the USA’s F-15 A-D Eagle fleet triggered some rethinks, and delayed the planned end of F-22 production.

• Air Power Australia (Feb 15/10) – Assessing the Sukhoi PAK-FA. Russia’s 5th-generation plane. “While the failure to account for the imminent arrival of this design in United States TACAIR force structure planning qualifies the PAK-FA as a “known capability surprise”, the important advances in PAK-FA aerodynamic, kinematic and low observables design also qualify it as a “surprising capability surprise”.

• Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, via WayBack (July 31/09) – What Happened to the F-22? “…successful defense programs require three pillars: “the service that wants and will advocate for the program, a contractor for whom the program is major business, and members of Congress”…”

• The Moderate Voice, via WayBack (Sept 26/09) – The Demise of the F-22 Raptor: The Story Behind the Story. Includes an excerpt from Fred Kaplan’s Sept 19/09 Newsweek article, as well as a number of other relevant links.

• Heritage Foundation, via WayBack (July 13/09) – Congress Should Support the Development of an Allied Variant of the F-22A

• Heritage Foundation, via WayBack (July 13/09) – US Air Force Fifth-Generation Fighter: The F-22A Raptor Requirements Retreat

• Air Force Association (July 13/09) – The F-22, A Bagel and a Smear“.

• Sen Orrin Hatch [R-UT] (July 9/09) – Issues & Legislation: F-22 Raptor. Includes F-22 Assertions and Facts [PDF], and a formal Air Force Rebuttal [PDF] to the Washington Post’s article.

• Washingtion Post (July 7/09) – Premier U.S. Fighter Jet Has Major Shortcomings. It alleges failure to meet key performance parameters, spiraling maintenance and operations costs, and failures of the plane’s stealth coatings in conditions like rain.

http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=IssuePositions.View&IssuePosition_id=989152b7-5f5f-45c4-9c04-caf70407a581

• Defense Review, via WayBack (May 29/09) – F-22 Raptor Program Cancellation: Will we learn from it? Can the USA re-learn how to field new aircraft designs in 5 years, from concept to combat?

• The Atlantic, via WayBack (March 2009) – Mark Bowden’s The Last Ace.

• Air Force Association Magazine, via WayBack (January 2009) – The John Young View. Discusses the F-22 in particular, and other programs as well. Also relates to the Nov 20/08 DWG transcript.

• US DoD (Nov 26/08) – John Young DWG transcript: EPX, CSAR-X, F-22. John Young, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for acquisition technology and logistics, speaks to the Defense Writer’s Group. Full DWG Transcript [PDF] | Partial transcript at The DEW Line.

• Fort Worth Star-Telegram (Jan 27/08) – The F-22: expensive, irrelevant and counterproductive [dead link]. Here’s a similar op-ed from the trio on Defense Tech: Fighter Mafia Alumns on the Defense Budget.

• Fort Worth Star-Telegram op/ed (Jan 27/08) – F-22 is still what the U.S. needs [dead link].

• Lexington Institute (Oct 30/07) – Policymakers Suppress Expert Findings on Future Fighter. The think-tank charges that this is so because all 3 studies found a need for more than 183 F-22s.

• February 2007 Exercise Red (Colonial) Flag results (Feb 21/07) – USAF: Raptors wield ‘unfair’ advantage at Red Flag

• US AFA, Air Force Magazine, via WayBack (February 2007) – The Raptor in the Real World. Talks about Exercise Northern Edge, among other topics.

• DID (Aug 21/06) – David Axe’s F-22 Series: Raptor, or Turkey? He talks to a number of people involved with the program during this 4-part series, while looking at the associated controversies involving the aircraft.

• DID (Aug 7/06) – GKN Buys Stellex to Position Itself in Titanium. The article explains titanium’s importance to new civil and military aircraft. Titanium prices are a major component of the F-22’s costs.

• USAF (Aug 4/06) – Tyndall spearheads F-22 fighter tactics integration. It’s a bit different when you fly a stealth fighter; the rest of the force has to work with you in ways that don’t blow your cover.

• USAF (June 23/06) – F-22 excels at establishing air dominance. Includes Northern Edge 2006 exercise takeaways, and the $134 million flyaway cost figure for additional F-22s.

• The Virginian-Pilot, via WayBack (June 13/06) – Air Force jet funding on the line with Senate vote. Looks at the F-22’s funding profile, and also offers a god back-and-forth between the performance points made in Pierre Sprey & James Stevenson’s CDI briefing (see Apr 19/05 entry) and F-22A pilot Lt. Col. Wade Tolliver.

• USAF (June 16/06) Exercise highlights Raptor synergy, joint capabilities. Exercise Northern Edge 2006.

• DID (Jan 12/06) – US Plans to Retire B-52s, C-21s, F-117 & U-2 for more F-22s.

• Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University (April 19/05) – The F-22 Raptor is said to be invisible…until it isn’t. Covers the CDI event that featured Pierre Sprey’s and Jim Stevenson’s presentations re: the F-22. The file sizes of their Power Point presentations precludes making them available via DID, unless their size can be reduced or they are hosted at CDI (which they presently are not). See also their accompanying F-22 fact sheet.

Boeing Delta IV Heavy
(click to view full)

The EELV program was designed to reduce the cost of government space launches through greater contractor competition, and modifiable rocket families whose system requirements emphasized simplicity, commonality, standardization, new applications of existing technology, streamlined manufacturing capabilities, and more efficient launch-site processing. Result: the Delta IV (Boeing) and Atlas V (Lockheed Martin) heavy rockets.

Paradoxically, that very program may have forced the October 2006 merger of Boeing & Lockheed Martin’s rocket divisions. Crosslink Magazine’s Winter 2004 article “EELV: The Next Stage of Space Launch” offers an excellent briefing that covers EELV’s program innovations and results, while a detailed National Taxpayer’s Union letter to Congress takes a much less positive view. This DID Spotlight article looks at the Delta IV and Atlas V rockets, emerging challengers like SpaceX and the new competition framework, and the US government contracts placed since the merger that formed the United Launch Alliance.

The EELV System

When comparing launch vehicles, note that Geostationary Transfer Orbit (GTO) between 1,240 – 22,240 miles above the Earth’s surface is preferred for high-end satellites. It’s much easier to lift objects into Low Earth-orbit (LEO), up to 1,240 miles above the Earth’s surface. On the other hand, your payload’s coverage will suffer, and its lifespan might as well.

A quick primer on reading EELV configurations is in order. “AF” is the US Air Force, while “NRO” is the USA’s National Reconnaissance Office. The numbers after the rocket type represent its payload cover (fairing) diameter, and the number of boosters attached to the core rocket.

For example, in the Atlas models, 501 means a 5m diameter fairing, 0 boosters, and everything always ends with a 1. If we strapped on 4 boosters, it would become an Atlas V 541.

For Boeing’s Delta rockets, the attributes are broken out more clearly: (4,2) means a 4m diameter fairing and 2 boosters. If we switched to a 5m fairing instead, it would become a Delta IV 5,2.

Delta IV Delta rocket family
(click to view full)

The Delta IV’s history dates back to the late 1950s when the US government, responding to the Soviet Union’s launch of Sputnik in 1957, contracted for development of the Delta rocket. The first successful Delta launch was NASA’s Echo 1A satellite on Aug 12/60.

Over the years the Delta family of rockets has become larger, more advanced, and capable of carrying heavier satellites into orbit. Design changes included larger first-stage tanks, addition of strap-on solid rocket boosters, increased propellant capacity, an improved main engine, adoption of advanced electronics and guidance systems, and development of upper stage and satellite payload systems.

Following a 1989 contract from the US Air Force for 20 launch vehicles, the newer, more powerful Delta II version emerged. Then, in response to market needs for a larger rocket to launch commercial satellites, Delta III began development in 1995. Its first launch occurred in 1998 and its final launch in 2000, paving the way for the Delta IV.

The Delta IV offers customization options by adding booster rockets, including a Delta IV Heavy that uses 2 additional Common Booster Cores. The Delta IV Heavy has the highest payload rating to Geostationary Transfer Orbit of any American rocket, and also beats the Ariane 5 ECA. It’s expected to stay on top even after SpaceX launches its Falcon Heavy, though the Falcon Heavy will offer greater capacity to Low Earth Orbits.

Delta IV medium-to-heavy launch vehicles became operational in 2002. The first Delta IV launch, of Eutelsat’s W5 commercial satellite, took place on Nov 20/02. The first payload delivered for the EELV program was the DSCS A3 satellite, on March 10/03.

Atlas V Atlas family
(click to view full)

Developed in the late 1950s as the USA’s first operational intercontinental ballistic missile, the Atlas launch vehicle went on to become the first commercial ride to space.

The 1990s opened a new chapter in Atlas history with the first commercial satellite launch. The growing demand for satellite entertainment presented new opportunities in the launch business. The Atlas I was developed to serve these needs and to continue the evolution of the Atlas vehicle.

Launched on Dec 7/91 with a Eutelsat satellite on-board, the first Atlas II ushered in a family of Atlas vehicles that would go on to launch many commercial payloads. The Atlas II family of launch vehicles was retired in 2004.

Developed as an evolutionary bridge, the Atlas III launch vehicle, like the I and II before it, debuted by delivering a commercial payload to orbit. First launched on May 24/00, the Atlas III family was retired in 2005. There was no Atlas IV.

The Atlas V launch vehicle comes in 400 and 500 series variants, and made its debut on Aug 21/02. It uses the Russian RD-180 rocket engine, which has become a problem as tensions between the USA and Russia have reignited. Like the Delta IV, each rocket can be customized by adding boosters, in order to launch heavier payloads. Atlas V can also rise from 1 to 2 Centaur second-stage engines, in the XX2 configuration.

The Atlas V has been used to launch several NASA missions, and a July 2011 agreement with NASA began the process of certifying the design for manned missions as well. ULA partnered with Blue Origin, Boeing, and Sierra Nevada Corp. for NASA’s Commercial Crew program, and Boeing was 1 of the 2 final winners, which helps to ensure additional orders down the road.

Military Satellite Payloads AEHF concept
(click to view full)

A rocket’s key specifications involve how much it can lift to various orbits, and the US military pushed for the EELV program in part to expand that range. There’s controversy over the military’s success in meeting other goals, but lift and range have clearly improved.

EELV rockets are currently being used to launch satellites for a number of the major military satellite programs, including:

• Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) communication satellites that will support twice as many tactical networks, while providing 10-12 times the capacity and 6 times higher data rate transfer than that of the current Milstar II satellites.

• Wideband Global SATCOM satellites that will support the USA’s warfighting bandwidth requirements, supporting tactical C4ISR, battle management, and combat support needs.

• Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS)-High satellites that will provide a key component of the USA’s future missile alert system, designed to give maximum warning and monitoring of ballistic missile launches anywhere in the world.

• GPS IIF navigation satellites that are an upgrade of the original GPS, which is a worldwide timing and navigation system that utilizes a constellation of satellites positioned in orbit approximately 12,000 miles above the Earth’s surface. GPS-III will also launch using EELV rockets, instead of the Delta IIs.

EELV Budgets & Structure Competition Again? The New “Open” Launch Framework SpaceX Falcon
(click to view full)

Emerging competition from privately developed solutions like SpaceX’s Falcon-9 will give NASA and the US military additional options for all kinds of medium-heavy launch projects. EELV itself may even provide competition for NASA. The Delta IV has been considered as an alternative for a manned return to the moon, and a NASA-sponsored report concluded that using a modified Delta IV capable of human spaceflight could save billions of dollars, in place of NASA’s developmental Ares rocket. It would also provide a quickly-fielded solution to the expected gap in US space lift capabilities, now that the Space Shuttle program has ended.

As of July 2012, NASA and the Pentagon intend to pursue separate rocket buys, within a common framework. That framework is a huge departure from past practice, with big long-term implications for EELV.

In October 2011, NASA, the US National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) and the US Air Force announced a game-changing development: “certification of commercial providers of launch vehicles used for national security space and civil space missions.” In English: the market for national security launches just opened up beyond EELV, which will have to compete in some segments. That simple change incorporates 4 payload types (A-D), and 3 risk categories (1-3), where 3 is lowest risk. It’s both more, and less, than it seems.

For high-value “Class A, failure is not an option” long-lived national security satellites, whose added presence has a high marginal value to the existing constellation, EELV’s “Category 3″ low-risk certified rockets will remain the only option. Barring a huge national emergency and Presidential orders, A1 or A2 combinations are impossible. At the other extreme, “Class D” payloads could fly on anything, even “Category 1″ launch vehicles classified as high risk or unproven.

Once a new entrant demonstrates a successful launch of an EELV class medium-heavy launch system, the Air Force awards integration studies, and they can begin working toward EELV certification of specified systems and configurations. If no competitor has a certification rating that matches a competed launch, ULA gets a sole-source contract as a pre-priced option.

This framework will help NASA most, but each category now has a specific number of successful launches needed for eligibility, as well as a known set of technical, safety and test data needed to verify that record. Technically, competition exists now. In reality, it will take a while.

On the other hand, the new framework’s flexibility means that every successful launch by a non-EELV platform brings it closer to a new category, which will grant access to a forecastable set of new opportunities. That makes the investment payoff clear, and should spur a long-term sea change toward a number of qualified providers for many of the US government’s launch contracts. The big and obvious potential winner here in SpaceX (vid. May 23/11), whose Falcon 9 is poised to compete in the EELV’s segments once the certification paperwork is done on its 3 qualifying launches. Orbital’s Minotaur family may also benefit at some point.

Going Forward: Block Buys in a Broader EELV Program Delta IV, waiting
(click to view full)

The US military made an EELV multi-year block buy of some kind part of its procurement strategy in November 2011, as an attempt to improve a shaky industrial base and drive costs down. Boeing and Lockheed Martin saw this as their opportunity to push a multi-year deal for 40 ULA rockets and launches from FY 2013 – 2017 inclusive. That would make it much more difficult for other private firms to secure launch orders, regardless of the certification framework, while EELV annual orders nearly doubled to over $2 billion per year.

Their lobbying ended up securing a 35-core block buy from FY 2013 – 2017, but their prices kept rising, and the contract’s exact terms are murky. Note, however, that cores =/= launches. The Pentagon’s FY14 plan involved 29 total launches from FY 2013 – 2017, vs. 45 booster cores. EELV launch services are usually ordered at least 24 months before a planned mission launch, so this multi-year buy actually covers US government missions into FY 2019.

FY 2015 – 2017 was supposed to see the beginnings of competition, with 14 “cores” (about 28%) supposedly open to competition, but there are reports of restrictions in the block buy agreement that essentially remove competition before 2018. Those allegations are now the foundation of a court case involving SpaceX and the USAF.

As of March 2014, SpaceX has completed the required number of successful Falcon 9 certification missions to begin competing for some national security launches. What they don’t have yet is certification, as government employees go over every aspect of their business. The USAF is working hard on this, but SpaceX’s Silicon Valley propensity to keep innovating adds to the challenge of certifying their configurations, even as it helps improve their costs and performance. Their entire approach is a major culture clash with the standard model for space access, explaining SpaceX’s 66%+ cost advantage and better pace of innovation, as well as their solid-but-not bulletproof reliability record. The long-term bet in this race is obvious. In the short-term, it’s a tougher call.

A March 2014 GAO report explained the USAF’s options, which became even more complex after Russia invaded Crimea, and the Atlas V’s dependence on Russian RD-180 engines became a glaring problem:

Contracts & Key Events AEHF-2 launch
(click for video)

Military satellite launches will be covered in their respective satellite type’s articles. This section will generally be reserved for contracts, but significant military-related launches that are not covered elsewhere on DID may receive a pointer here. We’ll also cover EELV rocket-related issues that delay launches, but not external delays stemming from weather issues, ground equipment, etc.

FY 2014 – 2015

FY 2014 base and production contracts to ULA; GAO repport looks at USAF options; SAR report shows program costs down, but still $67.6 Bn; USAF reduces the number of competed launches; SpaceX meets cert. requirements, claims 75% savings are possible, launches lawsuit to force competition; Europe scrambles to compete with SpaceX; ULA also begins to move, hooking up with Bezos’ Blue Origin; Friction with Russia makes access to Atlas V’s RD-180 engines an issue. Launch, Deliver… Compete?

May 14/15: DefSec Carter and DNI Clapper have urged Congress to allow United Launch Alliance, a Lockheed Martin/Boeing joint venture, to use Russian RD-180 engines for “assured access to space.” If the current law were to change from the current 2015 defense authorization law banning the use of Russian engines in US launches, ULA would be capable of competing for 18 out of 34 competitive launches between 2015 and 2022, versus the current 5 as the law stands, with the Air Force pushing for more launches by the private sector.

Feb 26/15: The Air Force is looking nervously at its capacity to meet the congressionally-mandated deadline of 2019 to stop relying on Russian rocket engines. Air Force Secretary Deborah James told senators on Wednesday that to try to meet the deadline by 2019 would mean exchanging one monopoly franchise for another. Except, of course, it wouldn’t be controlled by Russia, a quality that of late has started to have more and more charm. It was an interesting remark given that the new monopoly in question might be that of SpaceX, the firm that has shown unprecedented speed to development. James indicated a decade was more realistic, which sounds more like the preferred timeframe of the Air Force’s long-time partner United Launch Alliance, which has a good record, but not one for sprightliness.

Feb 3/15: In addition to a new GPS III satellite procurement, the new Air Force budget would pay for five launches, two of which would be “set aside” for competition. This follows the very public recent settlement of a SpaceX protest that the Air Force had deliberately prevented competition when it awarded United Launch Alliance a bevy of launches over many years not long before SpaceX was expected to gain certification to compete. ULA uses Russian engines to loft satellites into orbit, and the new Air Force budget also has a line item to reduce reliance on Russian hardware, although the mechanism for doing so isn’t yet clear.

Jan 26/15: SpaceX has said it will call off the legal dogs on the Air Force. SpaceX sued after the Air Force bundled up a great number of future space launches and pre-contracted for the services without letting SpaceX bid. In an odd sort of settlement, SpaceX will drop its suit, and in return, the Air Force will add more launches that will not necessarily go to the Boeing-Lockheed-led United Launch Alliance consortium. When asked directly this morning an Air Force representative said that there was not a specific number of launches attached to that settlement. The Air Force has also agreed to work toward getting SpaceX certified for launches, although it is unclear if that last aspect is actually part of the settlement, as it is something that wouldn’t be properly withheld. When asked, the Air Force referred back to the single-paragraph statement. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk previously accused an Air Force official of seeking employment from the bidders during the process, an offer SpaceX had refused. That accusation made news at the time (May 2014) partly because of the significance of the contract size, but primarily because it is fairly rare for a contractor to speak of such alleged behavior publicly.

Sept 29/14: United Launch Services LLC in Littleton, CO receives a $127 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for 1 Air Force Atlas V 531 (5m fairing, 3 boosters), and the exercise of an option for backlog transportation. It’s a FY 2014 launch vehicle configuration, will all funds committed immediately using FY 2013 and 201 USAF missile budgets.

Work will be performed at Centennial, CO, and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL, and is expected to be complete by Aug 15/15. USAF Space and Missile Systems, Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA manages the contract (FA8811-13-C-0003, PO 0055).

Extra Atlas V ordered

Sept 7/14: ULA & Blue Origin. United Launch Alliance partners with Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin to jointly complete development of Blue Origin’s 550,000 pound thrust BE-4 LNG/LOx rocket engine, a fuel choice that helps reduce costs and complexity. The announcement hints at coming consolidation of ULA’s rocket lines.

The BE-4 has been under development at Blue Origin for the last 3 years, and the new joint agreement expects another 4 years of development, with full-scale testing in 2016 and a 1st flight in 2019. They won’t discuss the new engine’s costs, except to say that they expect it will cut costs for customers when 2 BE-4s are used to power ULA’s next-generation rocket. What the new engine won’t do, is fix the Atlas V’s reliance on a Russian engine. ULA’s FAQ says:

“The BE-4 is not a direct replacement for the RD-180 that powers ULA’s Atlas V rocket, however two BE-4s are expected to provide the engine thrust for the next generation ULA vehicles. The details related to ULA’s next generation vehicles – which will maintain the key heritage components of ULA’s Atlas and Delta rockets that provide world class mission assurance and reliability – will be announced at a later date.”

The BE-4 will be available to other customers beyond ULA, beginning with Blue Origin itself. If the new CEO (Aug 12/14) was looking to inject a bit of Silicon Valley’s DNA into ULA, in order to compete with SpaceX and lower costs, this is a good start. Sources: Blue Origin, “United Launch Alliance and Blue Origin Announce Partnership to Develop New American Rocket Engine” | ULA, “United Launch Alliance and Blue Origin Announce Partnership to Develop New American Rocket Engine” and FAQ | BE-4 Fact Sheet [PDF].

Sept 16/14: NASA CCiCap. NASA issues its main Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCap) contracts: up to $4.2 billion to Boeing, which will use the CST-100 on top of the Atlas V, and up to $2.6 billion to SpaceX, which will use its Dragon v2 on top of its own Falcon 9.

SpaceX isn’t certified yet, but by the time flights begin taking place, it will be. Which means that each NASA CCiCap mission will improve production volume, and hence likely prices. Read “NASA’s CCiCap: Can Space Taxis Help the Pentagon?” for full coverage.

NASA CCiCap

Sept 16/14: FY 2015 ELC. Sept 16/14: United Launch Services LLC in Littleton, CO receives a $938.4 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification for FY 2015 EELV Delta IV and Atlas V launch capability. This contract covers mission assurance, program management, systems engineering, integration of the space vehicle with the launch vehicle, launch site and range operations, and launch infrastructure maintenance and sustainment. As one might guess, actual rockets and launches are separate. $231.8 million in FY 2015 USAF missile budgets is committed immediately.

Work will be performed at Littleton, CO; Vandenberg AFB, CA; and Cape Canaveral Air Station, FL, with an expected completion date of Sept 30/15. The USAF Launch Systems Directorate’s Space and Missile Systems Center at Los Angeles AFB, CA manages the contract (FA8811-13-C-0003, PO 0048).

FY 2015 base (ELC) award

Aug 12/14: ULA Leadership. ULA names Lockheed Martin’s VP and GM of Strategic and Missile Defense Systems, Tory Bruno, as its next President and CEO, effective immediately. He will replace Michael Gass, who has held these roles since ULA’s founding in 2006. Former Boeing executive Daniel Collins will remain COO.

In a separate statement, Gass said he had planned to retire “in the near term” but with “the changing industry landscape over the next several years, the Board of Directors and I have agreed that the immediate appointment of my successor to begin the leadership transition is in the best interest of the company.” Lockheed Martin Space Systems EVP and ULA Board member Rick Ambrose praised Gass’ launch record, and stated that:

“Tory is an ideal leader to take the reins at ULA. He’ll bring the same unwavering commitment to mission success that has been ULA’s hallmark, and will apply his proven track record of driving customer focus, innovation and affordability to shape ULA’s future.”

It would seem that ULA is beginning to take the prospect of competition with SpaceX et. al. seriously. Sources: ULA, “United Launch Alliance Names Tory Bruno President and Chief Executive Officer” | Space News, ” United Launch Alliance Taps a Lockheed Executive To Replace CEO Gass”.

Aug 4/14: SpaceX Infrastructure. SpaceX picks a site in Brownsville, TX as its private launch site, beating a location in Shiloh, FL just north of Cape Canaveral. They plan to stage up to 12 commercial launches a year from there, but the need to steer clear of populated areas forces them into a “keyhole” area between Florida and Cuba that restricts missions to equatorial orbits. “Dogleg” maneuvers could expand the range of orbit allowed, but there’s a performance cost. The good news for SpaceX, who wanted a range clear of NASA or USAF restrictions, is that 3 of 4 SpaceX launches from Cape Canaveral since December 2013 would fit Brownsville’s launch profile.

SpaceX plans to invest $85 million in the site, with another $15.3 million coming from the Texas state government: $2.3 million from the Texas Enterprise Fund (TEF), plus $13 million from the Spaceport Trust Fund to the Cameron County Spaceport Development Corp. FAA certification will be part of that development, and the Texas government has already made moves to support that. These Texas investments aren’t coming from out of the blue. SpaceX has operated a Rocket Development Facility in McGregor, TX since 2003. It now has over 250 employees, and a TexasOne visit to California in 2011 launched Texas’ bid for this project.

Government missions under contracts like EELV will still be launched from Cape Canaveral, as will some commercial missions. Sources: Governor of Texas, “Gov. Perry Announces State Incentives Bringing SpaceX Commercial Launch Facility, 300 Jobs to the Brownsville Area” | Florida Today, “Despite SpaceX plans, Nelson pushes for Brevard launches” | Space Politics, “As Texas celebrates winning SpaceX spaceport, Florida regroups”.

July 17/14: Political. The Senate Appropriations Committee approves a $489.6 billion base FY 2015 budget, plus $59.7 billion in supplemental funding. The issue of launch infrastructure, which is currently an almost $1 billion per year award to ULA, gets a small but interesting twist:

“The Committee believes additional competition can be achieved by creating new opportunities within the United States launch infrastructure, including commercial and State-owned launch facilities. Increasing the capability and number of launch facilities helps to ensure our Nation’s ability to launch priority space assets. Therefore, to promote competition at launch facilities, $7,000,000 is provided to spaceports or launch and range complexes that are commercially licensed by the Federal Aviation Administration and receive funding from the local or State government. These funds shall be used to develop the capacity to provide mid-to-low inclination orbits or polar-to-high inclination orbits in support of the national security space program.”

At the same time, however, the SAC directs the USAF to dispose of DSP-20, rather than storing a $500 million satellite for $425 million until its planned 2020 launch. It also votes to add $125 million for a competed EELV launch order in FY 2015, which could help the USAF kill 2 problems with one launch (q.v. July 10-15/14). Note that the FY 2015 budget still has to be voted on in the whole Senate, then reconciled in committee with the House of Representatives’ defense budget, then signed into law by the President. There is no guarantee that this provision will survive. Sources: US Senate Committee on Appropriations, “Committee Approves FY 2015 Department of Defense Appropriations Bill – Report: Department of Defense”.

July 16/14: Disclosure. The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and the Senate Committee on Armed Services’ Subcommittee on Strategic Forces hold a joint hearing titled, “Options for Assuring Domestic Space Access.” There’s a lot of back-and-forth on a number of issues, including requests from representatives in ULA strongholds of Alabama and Colorado:

“In the interest of full disclosure and accountability to the American taxpayer, we request that NASA publicly release all anomalies and mishap information, un-redacted, so that Congress can gain a better understanding of what has occurred and ensure full transparency”…. They also ask for information “on the various aspects of risk and reliability with these programs” and the agency’s “understanding of the specific technical issues, failures and resulting consequences for ISS.”

That’s trickier than it seems. Export control restriction may prevent unredacted reports, Elon Musk says that no government funding was used to develop Falcon 9, and the SpaceX contracts were carefully set out for cargo services rather than launch vehicles. See also: Space Politics, “House members press NASA for information on “epidemic of anomalies” with SpaceX missions” and “Senators debate RD-180 replacement, EELV competition”.

July 10-15/14: DSP-20 to compete. The USAF got some pushback about the ULA block buy at the House Armed Services Committee hearings on July 10th. USAF Secretary Deborah Lee James is telling reporters that they’re looking to reprogram $100 million, and move the DMSP-20 weather satellite launch into FY 2015 as a competed contract. That would raise the number of purchased FY 2015 launches to 6, but the amount committed strongly suggests that SpaceX would win the deal. Sources: DID, “FY15 US Defense Budget Finally Complete with War Funding” | DoD Buzz, “Air Force Seeks $100 Million for Rocket Rivalry” | Space Politics, “DOD official defends EELV block buy, endorses launch competition”.

July 15/14: SpaceX. USAF Space Command’s Space and Missile Systems Center has declared that SpaceX’s Dec 3/13 and Jan 6/14 flights qualify toward EELV certification, completing the Falcon 9 v1.1’s 3-flight requirement. The rocket must still pass a number of technical reviews, audits and independent verification and validation of the launch vehicle, ground systems, and manufacturing processes before EELV certification is complete. Sources: USAF, “SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 Flights Deemed Successful”.

July 10/14: Competition. The ripples of competition are extending beyond the USA. Europe, at least, is taking the competition extremely seriously:

“In June, it became obvious that Europe has made a major collective error, underestimating SpaceX’s capability to successfully market commercial launches at a fraction of Ariane’s costs. Today everyone is trying hard to maximize the impact of an Airbus Group-Safran initiative to form a joint venture and take control of the Ariane program. Jointly, the two groups own two-thirds of the heavy-lift booster and this is most probably just the beginning of a far-reaching consolidation strategy…. In other words, Ariane, despite an excellent reliability record, suddenly appears too complex and far too expensive…. In June, Genevieve Fioraso, the French minister in charge of space, candidly admitted the looming U.S. competition had been underestimated…. Now will come technical disagreements, such as solid propulsion versus liquid fuel…. the upgraded 5ME derivative and the envisioned next-generation Ariane 6. Divergent views on technicalities are expected to make discussions difficult…. The wake-up call is salutary, but devastating.”

They probably underestimated the threat because they focused on the American competitor most like themselves, believing that there wasn’t really any other way to perform this role. There’s a lesson for the whole industry there. Sources: Aviation Week, “Opinion: Arianespace Facing Shake-Up To Compete With SpaceX”.

July 4/14: ULA. ULA is the top aerospace company in Denver, so the locals are understandably concerned about the firm’s viability in light of competition from SpaceX, and a potential squeeze from Russian rocket engines. So, how is ULA reacting? By focusing on their reliability record, and ability at the top-end geosynchronous delivery missions:

“Michael Gass, CEO of ULA [says]…. ULA’s best strategy to keep winning business is to remain the most advanced and reliable rocket-launch company in the world…. “If a new entrant only wants to do a few of the missions and only has capability to cherry-pick a few, that’s not fair and level competition,” Gass said.”

USAF Space Command head Gen. William Shelton has his own take:

“Generally, the person you want to do business with you don’t sue…. Show me an interplanetary mission from NASA that’s contracted with SpaceX – that’s not what they’ve contracted,” he said. “Basically they’ve contracted commercial resupply with SpaceX. It is not putting my most precious assets on top of that rocket and launching it.”

Valid points. The downside of this approach for ULA is that a disruptive innovator who eventually hits a similar effectiveness level will destroy a “business as usual” incumbent. If Falcon Heavy succeeds, ULA will have a serious problem. Sources: Upstart Business Journal (Denver), “Rocket war involving SpaceX upends the space-launch business”.

June 3-5/14: New engine? Aviation Week quotes Gencorp President & CEO Scott Seymour, who says that their Aerojet Rocketdyne subsidiary has spent roughly $300 million working on technologies that will feed into a new AR-1 liquid oxygen/ kerosene booster engine with 500,000+ pounds of thrust, to replace Russia’s RD-180. Hoped-for costs would be about $25 million per pair. He also estimated that finishing development would take about 4 years and cost $800 million – $1 billion.

Gencorp hopes to recoup their investment by getting government funding for the remaining development work, and by fostering AR-1 use on multiple platforms. Their targets include the ULA’s Atlas V, Orbital’s Antares, “and, possibly, Space Exploration Technology’s Falcon 9 v1.1.” SpaceX uses a vertical integration philosophy, so they’d be a very tough sell. On the other hand, the Merlin engines used by SpaceX aren’t seen as an ideal solution for boosts to geosynchronous transfer orbit, and they don’t provide a high-energy upper stage. SpaceX has managed GTO launches, and they will need to prove the doubters wrong re: capacity at higher orbits with the forthcoming Falcon Heavy, which requires 27 of their Merlin 1D engines.

Meanwhile, if the government wants a new engine, why not compete the development phase? Sources: Aviation Week, “Aerojet Rocketdyne Targets $25 Million Per Pair For AR-1 Engines” | Lexington Institute, “Aerojet Rocketdyne Lays Down Challenge To Russian Rocket Engine Monopoly”.

June 2/14: ULA’s argument. The Lexington Institute, which counts Boeing and Lockheed Martin as funders, makes the case for the ULA block buy. Loren Thompson elides the issue of the latest block-buy agreement removing announced competition, which is a huge hole in his argument, but it isn’t one he can address without inside information. Beyond that, he does make some valid points:

“The Air Force says it has dedicated $60 million and 100 personnel to getting all the steps accomplished expeditiously…. [EELV hasn’t] had an unsuccessful mission in 70 attempts, whereas SpaceX has seen several failures in less than a dozen launches. During the Obama Administration, the launch alliance has met its schedule objectives for when launches occur 87% of the time, while the corresponding figure for SpaceX is 29%…. the Falcon 9 rockets that SpaceX currently uses as its main launch vehicle are severely limited in terms of what kinds of payloads they can loft into which orbits….[and are] also hobbled by the lack of a high-energy upper stage…. According to [HASC Chair Mike] Rogers, various SpaceX missions have delivered a satellite into a suboptimal orbit, experienced multiple spacecraft thruster failures, or failed to successfully achieve a planned second-stage relight…. SpaceX has sought to correct all of the glitches it encountered….. [but] when a company keeps altering the configuration of its launch vehicles… it becomes unclear as to precisely what is being certified.”

Sources: Forbes Magazine, “SpaceX Versus The Air Force: The Other Side Of The Story”.

May 23/14: New engine? The Senate Armed Services Committee inserts an initial $100 million in funding into the FY 2015 defense bill, in order to begin developing an American rocket engine that can replace the oxygen-rich, staged combustion performance of the Russian RD-180. Sources: Gizmodo, “A Senate Panel Just Set Aside $100 Million To Build a Putin-Free Rocket” | Phys Org, “US Senate panel budgets $100 mn for non-Russian rocket”.

May 22/14: Twitter Accusation. Elon Musk’s Twitter account fires a shot at former USAF PEO Space launch Scott Correll, who negotiated ULA’s block contract and is now at Aerojet-Rocketdyne as VP Government Acquisition and Policy:

“Air Force official awards $10B+ contract uncompeted & then takes lucrative job w funds recipient [DID: link]”

“V likely AF official Correll was told by ULA/Rocketdyne that a rich VP job was his if he gave them a sole source contract”

“Reason I believe this is likely is that Correll first tried to work at SpaceX, but we turned him down. Our competitor, it seems, did not.”

“Either way, this case certainly deserves close examination by the DoD Inspector General per @SenJohnMcCain’s request [DID: link]”

SpaceX had made the point in a less directly accusatory way as item 106 in its original legal brief, but retreated even further to an arm’s length statement in their amended legal filing of May 19th (q.v. May 19/14), citing the same National Legal and Policy Center NGO article noted in Musk’s Tweet. Musk’s Twitter volley more then negates any defensive legal benefits of that soft-pedaling. It’s an extremely serious accusation – people have gone to jail for this, which is why Correll’s hiring about a year after the contract’s signing was cleared through the USAF General Counsel.

It’s also logically obvious that trying to work at SpaceX after awarding the block-buy would destroy the idea that the ULA contract was a quid pro quo. Legally, SpaceX had better have some proof that Correll solicited a job with them before he left the USAF, or there’s probably a defamation suit in Musk’s future. One wonders if triggering a defamation suit is the point here, given the additional opportunities it would give SpaceX for legal discovery procedures. Sources: elonmusk@Twitter, Tweet 1 | Tweet 2 | Tweet 3 | Tweet 4 || | Business Insider, “SpaceX’s Dispute With The Air Force Just Got Even Uglier” and “Elon Musk Isn’t Backing Off Some Of His Most Serious Accusations Against The Air Force” | Spaceflight Insider, “Elon Musk suggests former USAF officer got Aerojet Rocketdyne position for sole source contract with ULA.”

May 21/14: Mitchell Report. SpaceNews obtains a summary of the Aerospace Corp. report authored by USAF Maj. Gen. Mitch Mitchell (ret.), and describes scenarios ranging from 9 missions/ 2 years avg. delay/ $2.5 billion cost to 31 missions/ 3.5 years avg./ $5 billion:

“…a bleak outlook for the American launch landscape without the RD-180 engine…. losing the RD-180… would delay as many as 31 missions, costing the United States as much as $5 billion…. The report says 38 Atlas 5 missions are on the manifest, but United Launch Alliance and RD-Amross have only 16 RD-180 engines on hand. That number is expected to shrink to 15 on May 22 with the launch of a National Reconnaissance mission.”

Sources: Space News, “Losing Access to RD-180 Engine Would Prove Costly, Pentagon Panel Warns”.

May 19/14: SpaceX suit. SpaceX amends its original suit in Federal District Court. The overall suit sets out their core rationale. SpaceX claims that the USAF changed the rules for eligibility mid-stride, bent its own rules to remove planned competitive launches, locked in a contract with secret terms that further restrict competition, and will cost the USA more than $6 billion over just 3 years. Read “Sued from Orbit: SpaceX and the EELV Contract” for full coverage.

May 13/14: Russian block? Russian Deputy PM Dmitry Rogozin unleases his Twitter diplomatic notes of Doom (SM) once more:

“Russia is ready to continue deliveries of RD-180 engines to the US only under the guarantee that they won’t be used in the interests of the Pentagon.”

That choice of words rules out fears that Russia would stop delivering US astronauts to the International Space Station, but a subsequent tweet says that will also end after the agreement expires in 2020. A release from ULA says this is all SpaceX’s fault, adding that a 2-year inventory of RD-180 engines (see also May 21/14 entry) should help cushion the blow:

“United Launch Alliance (ULA) and our NPO Energomash supplier in Russia are not aware of any restrictions…. We are hopeful that our two nations will engage in productive conversations over the coming months that will resolve the matter quickly…. [but we] have always prepared contingency plans in the event of a supply disruption…. We also maintain a two-year inventory of engines to enable a smooth transition to our other rocket, Delta, which has all U.S.-produced rocket engines.”

Sources: Twitter @DRogozin, re: RD-180s and re: ISS | ULA, “ULA Statement Regarding Reports of Russian Engine Restrictions” | Washington Post, “Feud between SpaceX and ULA over space contract grows more intense”.

April 25-29/14: SpaceX sues. SpaceX files a formal legal challenge to the USAF’s long-term, sole-source, 36-core EELV contract with ULA (q.v. Dec 16/13). Their release says that EELV is 58.4% above initially estimated costs on each launch, and estimate cost savings of 75% from each SpaceX launch. More to the point, however, they allege that the block-buy deal, which has not been made public, contained clauses that negated the government’s promise of open competition before 2018.

The SpaceX releases also cite The Atlas V’s Russian RD-180 engine, produced by state-owned NPO Energomash, which is overseen by Deputy Prime Minister of Russia in charge of defense industry Dmitry Rogozin. Rogozin is best known to the world as the guy who mocks other world leaders on Twitter when they criticize his government, and he had personal sanctions placed on him by the US government in March 2014. Read “Sued from Orbit: SpaceX and the EELV Contract” for full coverage.

SpaceX sues for competition

April 25/14: Politics. Concurrent with the lawsuit filed by SpaceX, Sen. McCain [R-AZ] is taking actions of his own:

“The first letter is to Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James requesting additional information about her recent testimony regarding the EELV program before the Senate Armed Services Committee on April 10, 2014, and conveying concern about the apparently incomplete and incorrect nature [DID: emphasis ours] of some of that testimony. The second letter is to the Department of Defense Inspector General Jon T. Rymer requesting that his office investigate recent developments regarding the EELV program.”

Sources: Sen. McCain’s office, “Senator Mccain Seeks Information On Air Force’s Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (Eelv) Program”.

April 17/14: SAR. The Pentagon finally releases its Dec 31/13 Selected Acquisitions Report [PDF]. The EELV is mentioned, due to significant cost changes:

“Program costs decreased $3,062.7 million (-4.3%) from $70,685.1 million to $67,622.4 million, due primarily to savings realized in the negotiation and award of the new 2013-2017 Phase 1 contract (-$3,770.7 million), revised cost assumptions based on the negotiated contract (-$1,511.5 million), and net decreases from a change in launch vehicle configuration requirements (-$411.3 million). These decreases were partially offset by a quantity increase of 11 launch services from 151 to 162 (+$2,505.0 million).

With that said, it’s worth asking just how much can be saved by opening the process fully to competition (q.v. March 5/14). SpaceX hasn’t been formally certified yet, and it will be interesting to see what changes once that happens.

Cost Reduction

March 12/14: GAO Report. GAO releases GAO-14-382T, “Acquisition Management Continues to Improve but Challenges Persist for Current and Future Programs.” Regarding EELV:

“In December 2013, DOD signed a contract modification with ULA to purchase 35 launch vehicle booster cores over a 5-year period, 2013- 2017, and the associated capability to launch them. According to the Air Force, this contracting strategy saved $4.4 billion over the predicted program cost in the fiscal year 2012 budget [DID: but see March 5/14 entry].

….DOD expects to issue a draft request for proposal for the first of the competitive missions, where the method for evaluating and comparing proposals will be explained, in the spring of 2014…. The planned competition for launch services may have helped DOD negotiate the lower prices it achieved in its December 2013 contract modification, and DOD could see further savings if a robust domestic launch market materializes. DOD noted in its 2014 President’s Budget submission for EELV that after the current contract with ULA has ended, it plans to have a full and open competition for national security space launches. Cost savings on launches, as long as they do not come with a reduction in mission successes, would greatly benefit DOD, and allow the department to put funding previously needed for launches into programs in the development phases to ensure they are adequately resourced.”

March 4-11/14: FY15 Budget. The US military slowly files its budget documents, detailing planned spending from FY 2014 – 2019. In the EELV’s detailed budget briefings, which are split between ELC launch capability and ELV launch vehicles, the USAF has this to say about ongoing competition:

“The number of competitive launch opportunities from FY15-17 changed from 14 to 7 due to launch manifest changes. If competition is not viable at the time of need, missions will be awarded to the incumbent. The Air Force plans to compete all launch service procurements beginning in FY18, if there is more than one certified provider.”

EELV Hearings

March 5/14: Politics. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is one of several individuals giving testimony to the Senate Committee on Appropriations’ Defense Subcommittee. It’s a wide-ranging hearing, covering the realities of planning and running national security launches, the ELS infrastructure contract’s rationale as national security emergency launch insurance, the prospect of creating segmented monopolies, etc. Musk’s basic message is that once competition is possible, every launch should be competed on a firm fixed-price basis, and ULA’s $1 billion per year subsidy should be removed. His firm isn’t certified for national security launches yet, but he hopes that a very involved and intrusive process involving over 300 government officials will be done by year-end. Key excerpts:

“I commend the United Launch Alliance (ULA) on its launch successes to date. However, year after year, ULA has increased its prices…. In FY13 the Air Force paid on average in excess of $380 million for each national security launch, while subsidizing ULA’s fixed costs to the tune of more than $1 billion per year…. By contrast, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 price for an EELV mission is well under $100M… and SpaceX seeks no subsidies…. had SpaceX been awarded the missions ULA received under its recent non-competed 36 core block buy, we would have saved the taxpayer $11.6 billion…. now we have serious concerns that it may not be the case that 5 missions [planned outside the block buy] will be openly competed [in FY15]…. To be clear, every mission capable of being launched by qualified new entrants should be competed this year and every year moving forward…. Consistent with federal procurement regulations and DOD acquisition directives, when a competitive environment exists, the Government should utilize firm, fixed-price, FAR Part 12 contracts that properly incent contractors to deliver on-time and on-budget. That also means eliminating $1 billion subsidies to the incumbent, as those subsidies create an extremely unequal playing field.”

Air Force data that wasn’t public until the GAO’s report yesterday (q.v. March 4/14) show $2.247 billion in FY13 funding for 11 launches from all EELV customers, which works out to $204 million per launch. The comparison may not be exact – either way, ULA’s problem is that they’re unlikely to be able to compete with SpaceX on a level playing field, now that SpaceX has refined rockets whose significantly lower costs are a product of hardware research & design. The GAO has explained (q.v. March 4/14) why pure fixed-price competition is best for SpaceX, but the implications go farther. ULA’s problem isn’t just competitive, it’s existential. Firm-fixed price competition for every launch, under a structure that eliminated byzantine cost-reporting systems, could turn ULA into a sharply-downsized bit player very quickly.

To survive, ULA has 3 options: (1) Hope that lobbying funds can deliver them contracts by skewing competitive structures, and limiting competition, regardless of costs to the government, even as military budgets shrink; (2) Deliver new designs with different cost points, soon, thanks to major, fast-moving and wide-ranging internal design efforts that are already underway; (3) Hope that future accidents force SpaceX into a lesser launch status, and force Falcon redesigns with higher costs. Just to make things really interesting, and highlight the need for #2, Musk’s testimony makes a pointed reference to the Atlas V’s Russian engine. If supplies depend on President Putin’s permission, the Atlas V cannot possibly be described as providing “assured access to space.”

Competition options
(click to view full)

March 4/14: GAO Report. The GAO releases GAO-14-377R, “The Air Force’s Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Competitive Procurement”. The period from 2002 – 2013 has seen a total of $18.974 billion spent on 55 military and government launches, and the GAO places the total for EELV-type space launches to 2030 at an astonishing $70 billion. They also look at potential competition structures, which is a critical question. There are outside indications that the federal government could save up to half of its costs, as well as risks that the wrong acquisition policy could entrench existing or new monopolies. What’s the right thing to do? The GAO’s competition structure chart is reproduced here.

The GAO also covers significant changes in the EELV contract structure. Projected escalations in EELV costs were so high that they forced a new acquisition strategy in 2011, and the Pentagon & NRO’s homework included both intrusive and detailed pricing data for ULA rocket components, and scrutiny of the government’s own launch processes. A June 2013 contract for 35 cores was finalized in December 2013, leveraging insights gained to improve government bargaining, combining the 2 previous launch & infrastructure contracts into 1 framework (but 2 budget lines), and creating a touted $4.4 billion in relative savings, according to the USAF. Even so, nailing down exact costs per launch remains tricky, because about 75% of cost-reimbursement items still aren’t broken out per launch. Other key excerpts:

“…DOD officials say the administrative burden of renegotiating every year will be substantially lessened due to the new contract’s simplified structure…. ULA periodically sells launch services to customers outside of the EELV program, such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and to commercial customers. Because DOD pays for ULA’s fixed costs, DOD receives compensation… on a per-launch basis for launches ULA sells to non-DOD customers. Prior to the December 2013 contract modification, compensation amounts were loosely based on an average of 30 days of launch pad use… DOD was reimbursed through price reductions on ULA invoices submitted to DOD at the end of the fiscal year. Under the new contract, compensation is based on some actual costs, including factory support and direct labor hours, and is approximately three times the dollar amount per-launch of reimbursements under previous contracts.”

As for the new competition regime, which is expected to start in FY15, it’s worth noting that some of the questions involve the byzantine reporting systems demanded by cost-reimbursement approaches. ULA had to install them, raising their costs and lowering corporate flexibility. SpaceX hasn’t, and a firm-fixed price per launch cost wouldn’t force them to. The US government may move to systems that would force such systems on SpaceX, despite firm-fixed costs half as much as ULA’s. Cost alone won’t be the decider, either:

“DOD officials told us they intend to use a best value approach in evaluating proposals from all competitors… may also consider mission risk, taking past performance into account, and satellite vehicle integration risks…. DOD is currently developing its methodology for comparing launch proposals, including establishing how proposals are to be structured, and what the specific evaluation criteria will be…. “

Jan 6/14: SpaceX. SpaceX launches the THAICOM 6 satellite from Cape Canaveral’s Space Launch Complex 40. It’s a successful launch that reaches a targeted 295 x 90,000 km geosynchronous transfer orbit at 22.5 degrees inclination.

More to the point, it’s the 3rd of 3 required certification flights for EELV qualification. Looks like there’s going to be a new competitor in town. Until then, the company says that “SpaceX has nearly 50 launches on manifest, of which over 60% are for commercial customers.” In case anyone was still wondering, ULA and Airbus Defence & Space have a serious competitor on their hands. Sources: SpaceX, “SpaceX Successfully Launches Thaicom 6 Satellite To Geostationary Transfer Orbit”.

Dec 16/13: FY14 Production. United Launch Services LLC in Littleton, CO receives a $530.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, which finalizes the multi-year FY 2014 – 2017 contract, and sets the FY 2014 buy (q.v. June 16/13, Oct 18/13: TL $2.558 billion). Which may explain why $679 million in FY 2014 funds can be committed immediately.

Recall that the FY 2014 budget (q.v. April 10/13) begins a split between EELV Launch Capability (ELC) and Launch Services (ELS). This is the ELC award. ULA will produce the following configurations: Air Force Atlas V 501, Air Force Atlas V 511, Air Force Delta IV 4,2, Air Force Delta IV 5,4, and a National Reconnaissance Organization Delta IV Heavy. Orders for FY 2015 – 2017 will have to be exercised separately.

Work will be performed at Centennial, CO; Vandenberg AFB, CA; and Cape Canaveral Air Station, FL, and is expected to be complete by Q2 2018. The USAF’s Launch Systems Directorate at the Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), Los Angeles AFB, CA manages the contract (FA8811-13-C-0003, PZ0001).

ULA Rockets bought, Block buy finalized

Dec 3/13: SpaceX. SpaceX successfully launches a civil SES satellite into geostationary transfer orbit. SES-8 is the Falcon 9’s 1st GTO launch, the 1st commercial flight from Cape Canaveral in over 4 years… and the 2nd of 3 certification flights needed to certify the Falcon 9 to fly EELV national security missions. Sources: SpaceX, “SpaceX Successfully Completes First Mission to Geostationary Transfer Orbit”.

SpaceX SES-8 to GTO

Oct 18/13: FY 2014 ELC. United Launch Services LLC in Littleton, CO receives a $939.1 million sole-source contract modification covering FY 2014 support work, including integration of the space vehicle with the launch vehicle mission assurance, program management, systems engineering, launch site and range operations, and maintaining the launch infrastructure. The contract’s structure is cost-plus-incentive-fee, with cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price contract line items.

$294.3 million is committed immediately. Recall that the FY 2014 budget (q.v. April 10/13) begins a split between EELV Launch Capability (ELC) and Launch Services (ELS).

Work will be performed at Littleton, CO, Vandenberg AFB, CA, and Cape Canaveral Air Station, FL and will run until fiscal year end on Sept 30/14. The USAF Launch Systems Directorate at the Space and Missile Systems Center in Los Angeles AFB, CA manages the contract (FA8811-13-C-0003, PO 0002).

FY 2014 ULA base (ELC) award

FY 2013

Major program changes: Multi-year block buy is a huge windfall to ULA, but opens 28% of EELV to competitors; SpaceX begins Falcon 9 certification process. Falcon Heavy
click for video

June 26/13: United Launch Services LLC in Littleton, CO receives a maximum $1.088 billion sole-source letter contract for “production services in support of” 7 launch rockets: AF Atlas V 401; AF Atlas V 501; AF Delta IV 4,2; AF Delta IV 5,4; NRO Atlas 401; NRO Atlas 541; and a NRO Delta IV 5,2. $525 million in FY13 funds is committed immediately.

A quick primer on reading these configurations is in order. “AF” is the US Air Force, while “NRO” is the USA’s National Reconnaissance Office. The numbers after the rocket type represent its payload cover (fairing) diameter, and the number of boosters attached to the core rocket. In the Atlas models, 501 means a 5m fairing, 0 boosters, and everything ends with a 1. If we strapped on 4 boosters, it would become an Atlas V 541. For Boeing’s Delta rockets, the attributes are broken out more clearly: (4,2) means a 4m fairing and 2 boosters. When we use a 5m fairing instead, it becomes a Delta IV 5,2.

Work will be performed at Centennial, CO, and is expected to be complete by 2015. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center’s Launch Systems Directorate at Los Angeles AFB, CA manages the contract (FA8811-13-C-0003).

ULA Rockets bought

June 11/13: SpaceX. The USAF’s Space and Missile Systems Center signs a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with SpaceX, to begin certifying Falcon 9 v1.1 for National Security Space (NSS) missions according to the New Entrant Certification Guide (NECG).

The NECG process will monitor at least 3 certification flights, after looking at the Falcon 9 v1.1’s flight history, vehicle design, reliability, process maturity, safety systems, manufacturing and operations, systems engineering, risk management and launch facilities. The CRADA will be in effect until all certification activities are complete, and the USAF has made a decision. USAF SMC.

May 24/13: SAR. The Pentagon finally releases its Dec 31/12 Selected Acquisitions Report [PDF] describes and costs out the major shifts underway (vid. April 10/13):

“Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) – Program costs increased $35,717.0 million (+102.1%) from $34,968.1 million to $70,685.1 million, due primarily to a quantity increase of 60 launch services from 91 to 151 launch services (+$16,040.5 million) resulting from an extension of the launch manifest from FY 2018 to FY 2028 and the program life extension from FY 2020 to FY 2030 that was directed in Space Command’s Strategic Master Plan (+$20,987.5 million). These increases incorporate cost saving methodologies implemented in the revised contracting strategy, to include incentivizing the contractor, enabling the government to implement cost cutting initiatives during technical evaluations and contract negotiations, improving insight into the contractors’ costs, and enforcing better cost management. These increases were partially offset by cost savings realized in the FY 2014 President’s Budget Future Years Defense Program due to a revised acquisition strategy and other initiatives (-$1,671.6 million).”

SAR – big program changes

April 10/13: FY14 Budget. The President releases a proposed budget at last, the latest in modern memory. The Senate and House were already working on budgets in his absence, but the Pentagon’s submission is actually important to proceedings going forward. See ongoing DID coverage.

This budget describes major changes in the EELV program, whose components have been moving into place for a couple of years now. These changes include the use of the Open Launch Framework to compete almost 30% of planned launched through FY 2017, as described above. In addition, beginning with the FY 2015 budget submission, EELV Launch Services (ELS) and EELV Launch Capability (ELC) support will become separate budget lines.

Major shifts for EELV

Dec 5/12: SpaceX. SpaceX announces that USAF Space and Missile Systems Center has awarded them 2 “EELV-class” missions. DSCOVR (Deep Space Climate Observatory) is slated for launch by a Falcon 9 in late 2014, while STP-2 (Space Test Program 2) would be launched aboard a Falcon Heavy in mid-2015. The Falcon Heavy launch is significant, as the rocket hasn’t flown yet, but SpaceX also says that “the awards mark the first EELV-class missions awarded to the company to date.”

Both missions fall under Orbital/Suborbital Program-3 (OSP-3), and aren’t directly part of EELV. OSP-3 is its own contract for small and medium-class military payloads. Orbital Science’s Minotaur rockets had been the staples for those missions, but they’re going to have more competition now. OSP-3 is also partly designed to provide new entrants an opportunity to demonstrate their vehicle capabilities, as part of the path to EELV certification. These 2 SpaceX missions are expected to launch from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL. Sources: SpaceX, “SpaceX Awarded Two EELV-Class Missions From The United States Air Force” | Aerospace Blog, “SpaceX Bests Orbital Sciences In First OSP-3 Duels”.

FY 2012

Certification framework opens EELV to competition; Launch contracts; Boeing sues for pre-ULA costs; NASA’s CCiCap a boost to ULA and competitors. Dream Chaser & Atlas V
(click to view full)

Sept 28/12: FY 2013. United Launch Services in Littleton, CO receives a $1.168 billion cost plus incentive fee and cost plus fixed fee contract for 4 Delta IV and Atlas V launches.

Work will be performed in Littleton, CO, and the contract will run through FY 2013 to Sept 30/13. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8811-13-C-0001).

Aug 3/12: NASA CCiCap. NASA issues about $1 billion in contracts under its Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCap) program. These “space taxis” will rely on heavy-lift rockets to make it into space, and 2 of the 3 winning entries have picked Lockheed Martin’s Atlas V, which was the subject of a ULA-NASA agreement in July 2011. That’s good news for the Atlas industrial base, and for the Pentagon. Seven firms entered, and the 3 winners are:

Boeing in Houston, TX – $460 million for their CST-1000 capsule, which will launch using Lockheed Martin’s Atlas V.

Sierra Nevada Corporation in Louisville, CO – $212.5 million for their Dream Chaser space plane, an evolution of a NASA’s former HL-20 test vehicle that’s boosted into orbit on an Atlas V.

SpaceX in Hawthorne, CA – $440 million for a manned version of the Dragon capsule that recently docked at the International Space Station. They will continue to use their own Falcon 9 booster. Read “NASA’s CCiCap: Can Space Taxis Help the Pentagon?” for full coverage.

NASA CCiCap

July 26/12: GAO report & EELV plans. The US GAO releases “Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle: DOD Is Addressing Knowledge Gaps in Its New Acquisition Strategy.” The Pentagon plans to spend about $19 billion on launch services from FY 2013-2017, and $35 billion through 2030.

The question is how that will be divided up, and the Pentagon hasn’t made a decision about the length or amount of any block buy. They’re trying to get a very clear picture of EELV costs, down to the sub-component level, and won’t decide until they have that. Meanwhile, they plan a FY 2013 EELV bridge buy. The ULA will present its certified block buy pricing proposal later this summer, with price proposals for its Atlas V and Delta IV booster cores to cover different launch quantities across several contract lengths. The Defense Contract Audit Agency will be involved in reviewing contractor and subcontractor proposals and cost or pricing data.

The idea of joint NASA/Pentagon EELV buys is out the window, as DOD and NASA plan to continue to acquire launch vehicles on separate contracts. The GAO thinks the US government isn’t getting as much benefit or leverage as it could, and launch technology R&D is also a concern. Existing R&D programs are receiving minimal funding. Less than $8 million of the roughly $1.7 billion in the FY 2013 EELV budget is R&D, for instance, with no R&D funding budgeted after 2014. This naturally leads to the question of other launch providers, who are working with NASA already and developing new technologies. This excerpt makes it seem like an afterthought, rather than an avidly pursued solution, but time will tell:

“Another assessment that will take place prior to EELV contract award is an evaluation of the potential production capability and technology development status of a new launch provider, and potential competitor of ULA. DOD has authorized an assessment of a launch vehicle provider who may in the future be certified by the Air Force to compete with ULA for EELV-class missions. The assessment is being conducted by retired Air Force personnel with launch expertise. The results of this assessment are expected to be finalized by the end of the fiscal year.”

July 20/12: Atlas V & NASA. The United Launch Alliance has completed a review of its Atlas V rocket to assess its suitability for NASA human spaceflight, under the Commercial Crew Development Round 2 (CCDev2) agreement with NASA’s Commercial Crew Program (CCP). NASA provided technical consultation during the ULA’s System Requirements/Design (SRR/ SDR) reviews. This is a follow-on to the July 2011 co-operation agreement between ULA and NASA.

Atlas V was picked because it had already launched numerous satellites and robotic missions into space for NASA, including the Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity rover and the Juno probe to Jupiter. That gives it a strong baseline that it doesn’t need to test, but human spaceflight is a step beyond that. ULA has partnered to launch Boeing’s CST-100 capsule, Sierra Nevada’s Dream Chaser spaceplane, and Blue Origin’s Space Vehicle on missions to low Earth orbit and the International Space Station. NASA | ULA.

July 20/12: We Sue. Boeing is suing the USAF for $385 million, to recover “legitimate, allowable costs of the Delta IV program that Boeing incurred prior to the creation of ULA in 2006.” Boeing and the ULA filed the joint complaint on June 14/12 “to preserve their rights to recover these costs,” since ULA is the legal “successor-in-interest” to the relevant contracts and agreements.

This isn’t a surprise to the USAF. Boeing reportedly made the recovery of those costs a condition of accepting the EELV restructuring and joining ULA, back in 2006. Reuters.

May 14/12: United Launch Services, LLC in Littleton, CO receives a $398 million firm-fixed-price contract for an Atlas V EELV launch carrying the narrowband MUOS-4 communications satellite, and a Delta IV EELV launch carrying a GPS satellite.

Work will be performed in Decatur, AL, and the contract runs until Nov 30/14. The USAF’s SMC/LRK in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8811-11-C-0001 PO 0018).

March 26/12: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics redesignates the EELV Program as an Acquisition Category ID (ACAT ID) Major Defense Acquisition Program, and removes it from the “sustainment phase” designation. Source: USN budget documents.

Program shift

Jan 10/12: Launches. United Launch Services, LLC in Littleton, CO receives a $1.516 billion firm-fixed-price contract for Atlas V EELV launch services in support of Defense Meteorological Satellites Program satellite DMSP-19, the narrowband UHF Mobile User Objective System satellite MUOS-3, and 3 National Reconnaissance Office missions. It also buys Delta IV EELV launch services in support of Air Force Space Command-4, 2 GPS satellites, and the DMSP-20 weather satellite.

Work will be performed in Decatur, AL, and the contract runs until June 30/14. The USAF’s SMC/LRK in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8811-11-C-001 PO 0012).

December 2011: Industrial. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics USD (AT&L), Manufacturing and Industrial Base Policy office, completes a study of the liquid rocket engine industrial base. It’s part of their efforts to estimate independent cost estimates for 2 EELV engines.

The bad news is that the Space Shuttle had been stabilizing this industrial base, and now it’s gone. Unless military missions get an alternative launch vehicle, these engines are necessary for national security – but all of the liquid rocket engines currently supporting these requirements are associated with EELV. The report provides evidence of instability in the supplier base, and adds that the current lack of design opportunities make it difficult for industry to sustain a skilled workforce for future liquid rocket engine development programs.

The study is used to highlight the need for an EELV block buy, in order to provide certainty for these companies. It could also highlight the need for private alternatives, in order to remove dependence. US GAO.

Nov 28/11: Launch. United Launch Services, LLC in Littleton, CO receives a $150 million unfinalized firm-fixed-price contract, for launch services in support of Wideband Global Satcom satellite F5. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8811-11-C-0001).

Oct 14/11: Competition – and Politics. NASA, the US National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) and the US Air Force announce an agreement this week to establish clear criteria for “certification of commercial providers of launch vehicles used for national security space and civil space missions.” In English: the market for national security launches just opened up beyond EELV, which will have to compete in some segments.

For high-value “Class A, failure is not an option” long-lived national security satellites, whose addition has a high marginal value to the existing constellation, EELV’s “Category 3″ low risk certified rockets will remain the only option. There are no A1 or A2 launches, barring a huge national emergency and Presidential orders. At the other extreme, “Class D” payloads could fly on anything, even “Category 1″ launch vehicles classified as high risk or unproven (to keep symmetry, shouldn’t that have been the Cat 3?). This will help NASA most, but each category now has a specific number of successful launches needed for eligibility, as well as a known set of technical, safety and test data needed to verify that record.

The new framework’s flexibility means that every successful launch by non-EELV platforms brings it closer to a new category, which will grant access to a forecastable set of new opportunities. The big and obvious potential winner here in SpaceX (vid. May 23/11), whose Falcon 9 is poised to compete in the EELV’s segments. Orbital’s Minotaur family may also benefit.

In response, Boeing and Lockheed Martin are seeking to close the opened door by pushing a multi-year deal to buy 40 ULA rockets and launches from FY 2013 – 2017 inclusive. This would make it much more difficult for other private firms to secure orders, regardless of the certification framework. The stakes are high. Some estimates see the deal as being worth more than $12 billion, and the ULA’s 2016 budget could grow to around $2.0-2.2 billion, from its current 2011 figure of $1.2 billion. ULA claims that their deal would still leave 20% of the US government launch market up for grabs. SpaceX doubts those projections, and says that it could deliver saving far above the ULA’s advertised 15% – possibly up to $1 billion per year. In response, Congress has asked the GAO to report on this issue. NASA | USAF | Aviation Week | TMC’s Satellite Spotlight | Space News | The Space Review | Washington Post.

Competition?

FY 2011

Launch contracts; Atlas V for manned spaceflight?; EELV R&D plan to improve engine and replace obsolete parts; Contract type shifting; Hearings showcase SpaceX’s cost advantage over NASA. Lynx XR-5K18 nozzle test
(click to view full)

July 28/11: ULA R&D. United Launch Services in Littleton, CO receives a $34.4 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification to complete the development of the RL10C-1 engine. The RL-10 is the EELV’s upper stage rocket engine, made by Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne. The RL10A-4-2 powers the Atlas V’s upper stage, and the RL10B-2 powers the Delta IV’s upper stage.

The USAF’s Space and Missile Systems Center, Launch and Range Systems Directorate in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8811-11-C-0001).

July 18/11: Atlas V & NASA. The ULA and NASA sign an unfunded Space Act Agreement that will begin certifying the Atlas V for manned spaceflight. Success could make NASA a larger customer, which would make the Pentagon happy too.

NASA gave ULA some minor contracts in 2010, designed to help them develop monitoring systems for the rocket that could feed information to astronauts. Under this next step, ULA will provide Atlas V data to NASA, which is already a customer for Atlas V launches. In turn, NASA will share its human spaceflight experience with ULA, and tell them what it wants in terms of crew transportation system capabilities, and draft certification requirements for the accompanying booster. ULA will provide NASA feedback about those requirements, including providing input on the technical feasibility and cost effectiveness of NASA’s proposed certification approach. Eventually, they’ll agree on a certification path, and work toward checking off those requirements. NASA.

June 2011: R&D plan. The EELV program provides a sustainment plan to Congress, identifying required technology and investments to maintain the program’s current capability. From a GAO report:

“The investments identified in the plan include $80 million for the RL10C engine conversion activities, $500 million in non-recurring costs over 5 years to develop a new or evolved upper stage engine, and $100 million each year to sustain and replace avionics, ordnance, ground command, control, and communications, and launch infrastructure. The plan states that due to the limited demand for some types of materials and components for propulsion, avionics, and ordnance systems, which can include complex materials, electronics, and computers, special emphasis must be placed on designing and qualifying new designs to mitigate obsolescence issues. Many of the parts across the systems either have designs that have become obsolete or are no longer produced.”

R&D plan

June 30/11: ULA FY12. United Launch Services in Littleton, CO receives a $1.13 billion cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to cover EELV launch capability, engineering support, program management, launch and range site activities, mission integration, and mission specific design and qualification from July 1/11 through Sept 30/12, the end of the 2012 fiscal year.

This is a change from previous contracts, which were cost-plus award fee- frameworks. The contract includes a mission performance incentive plan, and the change in contract type is intended to encourage the ULA to deliver mission success at a lower cost.

Work will be performed at Littleton, CO, and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL. $300.4 million has been committed, which includes $187,500 that will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11. The SMC/LRK at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA manages the contract (FA8811-11-C-0002).

Contract type shifting

May 23/11: Private competition. Congressional hearings shine a light on an emerging EELV competitor, from the American private sector. Aviation Week says that “SpaceX Might Be Able To Teach NASA A Lesson, after it spends under $400 million to do what experts estimate would have taken NASA around $4 billion. A May 4/11 update from SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk lays out their competitive position:

“I recognize that our prices shatter the historical cost models of government-led developments, but these prices are not arbitrary, premised on capturing a dominant share of the market, or “teaser” rates meant to lure in an eager market only to be increased later. These prices are based on known costs and a demonstrated track record… The price of a standard flight on a Falcon 9 rocket is $54 million… The average price of a full-up NASA Dragon cargo mission to the International Space Station is $133 million including inflation, or roughly $115m in today’s dollars, and we have a firm, fixed price contract with NASA for 12 missions. This price includes the costs of the Falcon 9 launch, the Dragon spacecraft, all operations, maintenance and overhead, and all of the work required to integrate with the Space Station. If there are cost overruns, SpaceX will cover the difference…

“The total company expenditures since being founded in 2002 through the 2010 fiscal year were less than $800 million… The Falcon 9 launch vehicle was developed from a blank sheet to first launch in four and half years for just over $300 million. The Falcon 9 is an EELV class vehicle that generates roughly one million pounds of thrust (four times the maximum thrust of a Boeing 747) and carries more payload to orbit than a Delta IV Medium… The Dragon spacecraft was developed from a blank sheet to the first demonstration flight in just over four years for about $300 million… The Falcon 9/Dragon system, with the addition of a launch escape system, seats and upgraded life support, can carry seven astronauts to orbit, more than double the capacity of the Russian Soyuz, but at less than a third of the price per seat. SpaceX has been profitable every year since 2007, despite dramatic employee growth and major infrastructure and operations investments. We have over 40 flights on manifest representing over $3 billion in revenues.”

SpaceX’s Falcon 9 Heavy, aims to challenge EELV heavy lift platforms, offering higher payloads and lower costs.

May 6/11: Launches. United Launch Services, LLC in Littleton, CO receives a not-to-exceed $575 million firm-fixed-price contract to provide EELV launch services in support of the following missions: Mobile User Objective Services 2; Wideband Global Satellite Communications 6; and National Reconnaissance Office Launch 65. At this point, $245.25 million has been committed.

Work will be performed in Littleton, CO. The contract is managed by the Space and Missile Systems Center/Launch and Range Systems Directorate, at Los Angeles AFB, CA (FA8811-11-C-0001).

March 31/11: Extension. ULA in Littleton, CO receives a $293 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification, to extend the EELV contract by 3 months. Work will be performed at Littleton, CO. The USAF’s Space & Missile Systems Center in El Segundo, CA manages the contract (FA8816-06-C-0002, P00275).

March 17/11: R&D. ULA and XCOR Aerospace announce successful hot-fire demonstrations of a lighter-weight, lower-cost vacuum nozzle design for liquid-fueled rocket-engines. They used aluminum alloys and innovative manufacturing techniques to create a cheaper nozzle that’s hundreds of pounds lighter, and tested it on a modified Lynx XR-5K18 LOx/Kerosene engine. The nozzle was developed under a 2010 joint risk-reduction program, and aims to create lower cost space launches for ULA, and ULA has now launched a follow-on program with XCOR to develop a liquid oxygen (LOX)/LH2 engine in the 25,000 – 30,000 pound thrust class.

The companies structured their LOX/LH2 engine development program with multiple “go / no-go” decision points and performance milestones, while leaning on XCOR’s small-company environment to achieve fast turnaround and performance. ULA | XCOR.

March 11/11: NROL-37. A Delta IV rocket lifts off from the Cape Canaveral Space Launch Complex-37 launch pad at 6:38 p.m. EST, with a National Reconnaissance Office NROL-27 national defense satellite. This is the 4th NRO satellite launch by United Launch Alliance in 6 months: NROL-41 aboard an Atlas V from Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB) on Sept 20/10; NROL-32 aboard a Delta IV from Cape Canaveral on Nov 21/10 (see entry); and an NROL-49 aboard a Delta IV from VAFB on Jan 20/11. United Launch Alliance release.

Feb 11/11: Budget spikes. WSJ reports that the Obama administration is increasing by 25% the budget projection for the Delta IV and Atlas V heavy lift rockets, reaching $1.8 billion for FY 2012. Over 5 years, that budget line would climb to a total of about $10 billion, a roughly 50% jump from earlier projections.

Dec 20/10: A $101 million contract modification to provide launch services for the NROL-36 mission. At this time, all funds have been committed by the SMC/LRK in El Segundo, CA (FA8816-06-C-0004; P00019).

Dec 2/10: R&D. United Launch Services in Littleton, CO receives a $21.2 million contract modification, adding the “fleet standardization program core effort” to the EELV launch capability contract. At this time, $1.3 million has been committed by the SMC/LRK in El Segundo, CA (FA8816-06-C-0002; P00219).

Dec 1/10: ULA 4th Anniversary. The ULA celebrates its 4th anniversary, which includes 45 launches in its 48 months of operation. 2020 saw the launch of 4 Atlas-V, 1 Delta-II and 3 Delta-IV rockets.

Anniversary

Nov 21/10: NRO satellite. A United Launch Alliance Delta IV rocket lifted off from the Cape Canaveral Space Launch Complex-37 launch pad at 5:58 p.m. EST, with a National Reconnaissance Office satellite, which is reported to be the largest spy satellite ever launched. This was the 4th Delta IV launch and the 351st launch overall in the Delta program history. United Launch Alliance release

FY 2010

Extensions, launches, R&D. Atlas V w. AEHF-1
(click to view full)

Sept 24/10: Extension. United Launch Service in Centennial, CO receives a contract modification for up to $461.6 million, exercising an option to extend the EELV contract by 6 months. At this time, $58.5 million has been committed by the SMC LRSW/PK in El Segundo, CA (FA8816-06-C-0002; PO0237).

June 2/10: United Launch Services, LLC in Centennial, CO received a $90.2 million contract which will “provide launch services for a medium-plus lift launch vehicle,” on the National Reconnaissance Office’s Launch 38 mission. Other documents establish that the rocket will be an Atlas V. At this time, the entire amount has been committed by the LRSW/PK in El Segundo, CA (FA8816-06-C-0004). See also FedBizOpps solicitation.

March 4/10: GOES launch. A United Launch Alliance Delta IV rocket lifted off from its Cape Canaveral Space Launch Complex-37 launch pad at 6:57 p.m. EST, with the 3rd and final GOES weather satellite in the GOES-N series on board. Following a nominal 4 hour, 21-minute flight, the Delta IV successfully deployed the GOES-P spacecraft. GOES-P was scheduled to be placed in its final orbit on March 13 and renamed GOES-15. The multi-mission GOES series of satellites provides NOAA and NASA with data to support weather, solar and space operations, and enables future science improvements in weather prediction and remote sensing. The next-generation GOES satellite program, called GOES-R, is expected to launch its 1st satellite in 2015. United Launch Alliance release | NASA release

Feb 10/10: R&D. Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, a United Technologies company, announces that it completed the initial step in certifying the RS-68A rocket engine by hot-fire testing the 1st certification engine. The RS-68A is an upgrade of the RS-68, a liquid-hydrogen/ liquid-oxygen booster engine for the Delta IV family of launch vehicles. Each RS-68A engine will provide 702,000 pounds of thrust, or 39,000 more pounds of thrust than the RS-68 engine.

During the hot-fire test at John C. Stennis Space Center in Mississippi, the 1st RS-68A certification engine burned for 190 seconds, with operating time split between 102% and 55% power levels. The company will hot-fire test the 1st RS-68A certification engine a minimum of 12 times through February and follow that with a similar series of hot-fire tests on its 2nd certification engine in March and April. Engine design certification review and acceptance of flight readiness are currently planned for July 2010.

Oct 2/09: United Launch Services, a Littleton, CO-based subsidiary of United Launch Alliance, received a $927.7 million contract to provide the FY 2010 EELV launch capability effort for the Delta IV and Atlas V rockets. United Launch Alliance is a joint venture of Boeing and Lockheed Martin. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center’s Space Launch and Range Systems Material Wing at Los Angeles Air Force Base, in El Segundo, CA, manages these contracts (FA8816-06-C-0001, FA8816-06-C-0002, P00149).

FY 2008 – 2009

Program formally extended to 2030; WGS-2 launch scrubbed; Contracts. Delta IV w. WGS-3
(click to view full)

March 17/09: Leak. WGS-2’s launch is scrubbed, when an anomalous leak rate was detected in the Centaur upper stage oxidizer valve. A follow-on review of the time needed to inspect the Atlas V rocket, fix the identified problem and prepare for a rescheduled attempt revealed it could not take place prior to the Delta II launch date on March 24/09, so the schedule will be moved back beyond that. That date was later set for March 31st, but the satellite ended up launching on April 3/09.

Nov 4/08: Lockheed Martin Space Systems received a maximum $27.5 million contract modification, to provide launch services and hardware coverage for the AFSPC-2 mission and to protect the current launch schedule under the Evolved Expendable Launch Capabilities (ELC) contract. This contract modification covers the Atlas V geo-synchronous orbit and the ELC portions of the AFSPC-2 mission. The contract has a required minimum lead time of 24 months to build and deliver a launch vehicle. Delay of this action will adversely impact the launch manifest for a critical national security AFSPC mission and the contractor’s ability to meet its lead time requirements. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center’s Space Launch and Range Systems Material Wing at Los Angeles Air Force Base, in El Segundo, CA, manages this contract (FA8816-06-C-0002, Modification P00121).

Oct 17/09: Industrial. Lockheed Martin Space Systems received $19.9 million contract modification to perform supply chain management and technological improvement task to minimize the risk of launch failure by establishing subcontracts with common suppliers and addressing new capabilities to support the upcoming government EELV launches. These projects include lithium ion battery development for flight safety and development of a replacement resin for solid rocket boosters. Any delay in these projects will have detrimental effects to mission capability and schedule. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center’s Space Launch and Range Systems Material Wing at Los Angeles Air Force Base, in El Segundo, CA, manages this contract (FA8816-06-C-0002, P00095).

Sept 18/09: R&D. Lockheed Martin Space Systems received a not to exceed $30.7 million contract modification to provide a program for the development and implementation of a Global Position System metric tracking to include a detailed program acquisition/execution plan and Integration Master Schedule supporting a September 2011 initial operational capacity (Atlas configurations) and 2012 (Delta configuration) availability. Identified milestones will be evaluated at the time the individual statements of work are resubmitted. This is an initial study that will lay the foundation for the actual development of the launch requirements. The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center’s Space Launch and Range Systems Material Wing at Los Angeles Air Force Base, in El Segundo, CA, manages this contract (FA8816-06-C-0002, P00097).

Aug 8/08: Extension. On Feb 12/08, Boeing’s not-to-exceed amount to support the USA’s Delta IV rocket program was raised to $582.3 million, as its contract was extended. The goal was and is to “maintain critical engineering and integration skills and the infrastructure necessary to support the Delta IV Program and our nation’s space assets.” The Delta-IV Heavy rocket, developed under the EELV program, made its first flight on Dec 21/04.

Now the USAF is modifying that cost-plus award fee contract, adding up to $516.1 million to extend the contract to Sept 30/09 (end of FY 2009) and raising the contract’s maximum value to $1.656 billion. In addition, the contract has a $557.1 million option; if exercised, it would extend the contract through FY 2010.

The USAF Space and Missile Systems Center’s Space Launch and Range Systems Material Wing (LR) at Los Angeles Air Force Base, in El Segundo, CA, manages this contract (FA8816-06-C-0001, P00024).

June 27/08: Extension. The USAF is modifying a cost plus award fee contract with Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. of Littleton, CO for $1.384 billion. The Evolved Expendable Launch Capability (ELC) contract is being modified to cover a number of things. Part of the modification involves continued support for the last 2 months of FY 2008, which are August and September. This procurement will also extend the contract’s period of performance through FY 2009, and incorporate a one year priced option for FY 2010.

Lockheed Martin will provide standard and mission unique integration and development, systems engineering, program management, transportation, and launch and range operations for Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and Vandenberg Air Force Base, as required to launch American space assets. At this time $144.7 million has been obligated. The Space and Missile Systems Center’s Space Launch and Range Systems Material Wing in El Segundo, CA manages this contract (FA8816-06-C-0002, P00076).

March 31/08: MUOS-1. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. of Littleton, CO receives a modified firm fixed price contract for $124.1 million to purchase EELV launch services and Atlas medium-plus rocket (Atlas 5510) to launch the Mobile Users Objective System (MUOS)-1 Satellite. At this time all funds have been committed (FA8816-06-C-0004, Modification Number P00002).

See also Lockheed Martin’s March 27/08 release “Lockheed Martin Team Achieves Major Milestone On U.S. Navy’s Mobile User Objective System.” With all options exercised, the contract for up to 5 MUOS satellites delivering 3G voice/data transmission has a total potential value of $3.26 billion. The first MUOS satellite along with the associated ground system are scheduled for on-orbit hand over to the US Navy in 2010.

Feb 12/08: Extension. Boeing Launch Services of Huntington Beach, CA received a contract modification that changes the scope of contract #FA8816-06-C-0001/P00011 by adding an additional 4 months to the time period, and $288 million to the not-to-exceed (NTE) amount. This change brings the NTE amount to $582.3 million, and is considered “necessary to maintain uninterrupted support of the Delta IV Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Capability contract.” At this time, $216 of the additional $288 million has been committed by SMC/LRK at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA (FA8816-06-C-0001, P00017).

Feb 12/08: Extension. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company of Littleton, CO received a contract modification that changes the scope of contract #FA8816-06-C-0002 by adding an additional 4 months to the time period and $210.4 million to the not-to-exceed (NTE) amount. This change brings the NTE amount to $459.3 million, and is considered “necessary to maintain uninterrupted support of the Atlas-V Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Capability contract.” At this time, $157.8 million of the additional $210.4 million has been committed by SMC/LRK at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA (FA8816-06-C-0002, P00075).

Jan 23/08: Boeing Co. of Huntington Beach, CA received a contract for $505.3 million. This contract covers launch services using Delta IV heavy and medium launch vehicles under the EELV program; the rockets will launch the US National Reconnaissance Office’s missions #27, 32, and 49. At this time $252.7 million has already been obligated by the Space and Missile Systems Center in Los Angeles CA (FA8811-08-C-0005).

Oct 31/07: The AFSPC’s Routine Spacelift Enabling Concept Document formally extends the EELV Program an additional 10 years, from 2020 through 2030. Source: USN budget documents.

Extension

FY 2006 – 2007

Contracts; 1st ULA Atlas V rocket launch. Atlas V
Orbital Express Launch
(click to view full)

March 15/07: Pratt and Whitney Rocketdyne in West Palm Beach, FL received a $10 million undefinitized firm-fixed-price contract against the McDonnell Douglas Corporation’s other transaction agreement, for the RL-10 assured access to space projects. “At this time, a total of $896.7 million has been obligated.” Solicitations began November 2006, negotiations were complete March 2007, and work will be complete December 2007. The Headquarters Launch and Range Systems Wing at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA issued the contract (F04701-98-9-0005-0080).

In English: Boeing subsidiary McDonnell Douglas and subcontractor Pratt and Whitney Rocketdyne will increase the producibility and reliability of the RL-10 upper stage engine, thus enhancing mission assurance for the Delta IV and Atlas V rockets on the EELV Program. As PW Rocketdyne notes, the RL10B-2 powers the upper stage of Boeing’s Delta IV, and the RL10A-4-2 powers the upper stage of Lockheed Martin’s Atlas V.

March 8/07: United Launch Alliance Successfully Launches First USAF Atlas V. This was their 9th successful Atlas V launch and 1st ULA Atlas launch, as well as the 1st EELV Atlas launch for the US Air Force. The mission used the new ESPA (EELV Secondary Payload Adapter) which is designed to integrate multiple smaller satellites; the 6 satellites on this mission (DARPA’s Orbital Express x2, MidSTAR-1-1, STPSat-1, Cibola Flight Experience, and FalconSAT-3) were delivered into two distinctly different orbits.

EELV launches Atlas V

Feb 28/07: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Littleton, CO receives a $108 million firm-fixed-price contract to launch the first AEHF military communications satellite using an Atlas V Launch Vehicle under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program. At this time, total funds have been obligated and work will be complete February 2009. The Headquarters Space and Missile Systems Center at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA issued the contract (FA8816-06-C0004).

Jan 10/07: Boeing subsidiary McDonnell Douglas Corp. in Huntington Beach, CA receives a $20 million firm fixed price contract modification is for pre/post mission engineering and critical components under the Assured Access to Space program. McDonnell Douglas will perform supply chain management and technological improvement tasks to minimize the risk of launch failure for the Delta IV Rocket on the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Program (EELV) under the Launch and Range System Wing.

At this time, total funds have been obligated. Work will be complete December 2007. The Headquarters Launch and Range Systems Wing at Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA (F04701-98-9-0005-0079).

Nov 17/06: Boeing Co. of Huntington Beach, CA, receives a $674.1 million cost-plus-award fee contract for Delta IV Launch Capability for the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) rocket program. This effort includes a number of components: launch and Range Operations for Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA, and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL.; Mission Integration; Mission Unique Development and Integration; System Engineering and program management; subcontractor support; factory support engineering; and special studies. Solicitations began April 2005, negotiations were complete June 2006, and work will be complete September 2007. At this time, $405.2 million have been obligated. The Headquarters Space and Missile Systems Center in Los Angeles Air Force Base, CA issued the contract (FA8816-06-C-0001).

Additional Readings Firms & Platforms

• USAF, Los Angeles AFB – Fact Sheets: Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle.

• United Launch Alliance site.

• Lockheed Martin – Atlas Launch Vehicles.

• Boeing – Delta IV overview.

• GlobalSecurity.org – EELV Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle.

• SpaceX – Falcon 9. Approaching EELV certification.

• SpaceX – Falcon Heavy. Claims a payload to low earth orbit roughly equal to a loaded 737 jet. Tremendous competitive margin at LEO erased at higher GTO altitudes.

• Orbital Sciences – Minotaur Space Launch Vehicles. Comes in Minotaur I, IV, V, and VI.

Some Key USAF Payloads

• DID – Next-Stage C4ISR Bandwidth: The AEHF Satellite Program.

• DID – The USA’s GPS-III Satellites.

• DID – Despite Problems, SBIRS-High Moves Ahead (updated).

• DID – The Wideband Global SATCOM Program.

Launch Tracking

• SpaceflightNow.com – Worldwide Launch Schedule.

• Wikipedia – United Launch Alliance. Includes an updated table tracking past and planned ULA launches.

Official Reports & Legal

• DID – Sued from Orbit: SpaceX and the EELV Contract.

• US Court of Federal Claims (Amended May 19/14) – Civil Action No. 14-354C, SPACE EXPLORATION TECHNOLOGIES CORP. v. THE UNITED STATES and UNITED LAUNCH SERVICES, LLC. This is the legal suit as filed.

• US GAO (March 12/14, #GAO-14-382T) – Space Acquistions: Acquisition Management Continues to Improve but Challenges Persist for Current and Future Programs.

• US GAO (March 4/14, #GAO-14-377R) – The Air Force’s Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Competitive Procurement.

• US GAO (July 26/12, #GAO-12-822) – Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle: DOD Is Addressing Knowledge Gaps in Its New Acquisition Strategy.

• US GAO (Oct 17/11, #GAO-11-641) – Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle: DOD Needs to Ensure New Acquisition Strategy is Based on Sufficient Information.

• US GAO (Sept 28/08, #GAO-08-1039) – Space Acquisitions: Uncertainties in the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Program Pose Management and Oversight Challenges.

News & Views

• Slate (Aug 12/14) – Three Congressmen Are Using Red Tape to Bind SpaceX to Earth. Wait – a left-wing magazine is defending private contractors against attempts at government scrutiny, while that company contests federal decisions? Well, the Congressmen are all Republicans. Then again, so are Sens. Cruz [R-TX] and McCain [R-AZ], who are unhappy with the ULA block buy.

• Space News (May 21/14) – Losing Access to RD-180 Engine Would Prove Costly, Pentagon Panel Warns.

• SpaceX (March 5/14) – Elon Musk’s Statement to US Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. Says that the block-buy didn’t save $4.4 billion, it cost about $7.2 billion extra. Says it’s time to end ULA’s $1 billion subsidy per year, and includes a sharp reminder that since Atlas V depends on a Russian main engine, it can no longer be considered low-risk at the strategic level.

• Florida Today (Aug 12/09) – Dumping NASA’s New Ares I Rocket Would Cost Billions.

• Flightglobal.com (July 13/09) – Return to the Moon.

• AviationWeek (June 15/09) – Study Finds Human-rated Delta IV Cheaper. Than Ares I.

• NASASpaceflight.com (April 20/09) – Study finds EELV capable of Orion role – Griffin claims alternatives are fiction.

• DID (Oct 5/06) – The US FTC Clears Boeing-Lockheed Space Launch Merger.

• National Taxpayer’s Union (Dec 19/05) – “3 … 2 … 1 … Rip-Off!” Taxpayer Group Blasts Boeing/Lockheed Launch Vehicle Plan.

• DID (May 4/05) – Boeing & Lockheed Merge Rocket Divisions. Discusses some of the EELV program’s issues, and consequences.

• UPI op-ed (May 19/05) – US Space: A Shrinking, Timid Industry.

• Washington Post (May 3/05) Boeing, Lockheed Join Rocket Divisions.

• Crosslink magazine (Winter 2004) – EELV: The Next Stage of Space Launch.

• Manufacturing & Technology News (July 7/04) – News Analysis: Redesigning The Space Industrial Base: Reflections On The Aldrige Commission Report.

• WIRED Magazine (December 2001) – From Russia, With 1 Million Pounds of Thrust: Why the workhorse RD-180 may be the future of US rocketry.