Defense Industry Daily

Americas

• The Bell-Boeing Joint Project Office has been awarded a $58.8 million US Navy contract in order to develop and integrate the V-22 aerial refueling system (VARS) for the MV-22. Once installed, VARS will operate by using a portable refueling station that will roll up the Osprey’s back ramp and into its back cabin. Crews will use it to aerially refuel F-35s, F/A18 Hornets and other aircraft – including V-22s and CH-53 helicopters – by extending a hose and drogue out the open back ramp. NAVIR will supervise the contract execution, and the whole project is to be completed by June 2019.

• Aurora Flight Sciences tested the new capabilities of the Autonomous Aerial Cargo/Utility System (AACUS) last week, and if proven workable, could see the entire USMC rotary-wing fleet converted into autonomous flying machines starting from 2018. With the May 26 test seeing the system mounted on a Bell 206 helicopter, it’s believed that the AACUS will now be tested on a UH-1H roughly this time next year. The AACUS is an autonomy applique kit that enables operations of full-scale rotary-wing aircraft in and out of austere landing zones, tactically, with little human assistance.

Middle East North Africa

• Sales of cluster munitions to Saudi Arabia have been blocked by the Obama administration after reports of their use by the kingdom in the ongoing conflict in Yemen. An Amnesty International report revealed last week that British-made BL-755 munitions, sold to both Saudi Arabia and coalition partner UAE in the 1980s and 1990s, were discovered in a village in northern Yemen, spurring claims that war crimes were being conducted against civilians. Neither the US nor Saudi Arabia have signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions treaty, which bans the use of the munitions.

Europe

• General Dynamics European Land Systems and Airbus recently demonstrated the loading of the former’s Piranha 5 8×8 Armored Personnel Carrier (APC) into an Airbus A400M cargo lifter. Testing was carried out in San Pablo, Spain and no special requirement was needed in order to load and tie-down the armored vehicle inside the transport’s cargo hold. Spain is one of the key partner nations involved in the A400M program, and the Piranha 5 has been selected for the integration of Spanish technologies and subsystems under an R&D contract for the future Wheeled Combat Vehicle (VCR in Spanish) project.

• Russia has carried out its second successful test of a new anti-satellite missile dubbed Nudol. The weapon was launched from the Plesetsk test launch facility on May 25, and follows the first successful test which occurred on November 18 last year. It remains unknown if the missile was fired against a satellite or fired in a suborbital trajectory without hitting a target.

• It’s been reported that the British government is set to buy 50 AH-64E Apaches off-the-shelf from Boeing in a deal expected to be worth $2.9 billion. The announcement confirming the sale is expected to be made at the Royal International Air Tattoo or Farnborough air show in July. This will disappoint Leonardo-Finmeccanica who hoped to instead land the contract producing the helicopters at its Agusta-Westland plant in Yeovil, Somerset.

Asia Pacific

• South Korea is to pursue the development of their own submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) to be fitted on their next generation Chang Bogo-III submarine. This class of boat is planned to be equipped with vertical launch systems, with 10 indigenous Hyunmoo cruise missiles each. The cold launch technology for launching missiles underwater will be based on the S-400 air defense missile, gained from Russia as repayment for loans given to Moscow in 1991.

• This week’s Singapore Shangri-la Dialogue may see sideline discussions between France and India over the closing of a multi-billion sale of 36 Rafale fighters. The defense ministers from both nations will be in attendance, and it’s expected that issues like consensus on actions to be taken in case of a material breach, stringent liability clause, and guarantees by France are likely to be discussed.

Today’s Video

• V-22 Aerial Refueling Proof of Concept:

Monday, May 30th is Memorial Day in the USA. DID honors those who have given all of their tomorrows in American military service, and will not be publishing. Readers are reminded that in America, the National Moment of Remembrance takes place at 3:00 pm.

A survey commissioned by The National WWII Museum in Washington had only 20% say they were very familiar with the day’s purpose, which is to honor those who have fallen in America’s wars. It’s the same purpose as Remembrance Day/ Armistice Day (Nov. 11th) in the British Commonwealth and elsewhere – but in America, November 11th is Veteran’s Day, honoring all who have served in the US military.

Americas

• L-3 Communications Vertex Aerospace has been awarded a $302.2 million US navy contract for logistics services in support of the C-12 Huron utility lift aircraft. Work to be carried out includes post-production, full commercial-type aircraft maintenance, logistics support and materials for the Marine Corps Reserve C-12 and Navy TC-12B trainer aircraft with a completion date set for June 2021. The military version of Hawker Beechcraft’s King Air 200, the C-12 is a multi-mission aircraft that provides personnel and cargo transportation, range clearance, medical evacuation, courier flights, and humanitarian rescue or assistance.

• “Not a wild idea” is outgoing USAF’s chief of staff Gen. Mark Welsh’s thoughts on restarting the F-22 production line as industry officials and the air force have repeatedly dubbed the concept a nonstarter. In an era of declining military budgets and streamlining of services, Walsh’s comments will bolster lawmakers supporting the superiority fighter’s reintroduction, and may see an F-22 revival gaining traction, after the full House passed legislation that would, if approved by the Senate and signed into law, direct the service to study the possibility.

Middle East North Africa

• RADA has announced the sale of a number of its RPS-42 Tactical Air Surveillance Radar Systems to an unnamed Asian country. The $2 million contract will see the Israeli firm deliver the system this year, and will be installed by the purchaser on its own tactical vehicles. Once installed, the system will provide the customer with a mobile air surveillance solution for its armed forces.

• Turkish defense procurement officials revealed that the Turkish Navy is keen to induct a long-range maritime patrol aircraft to complement its CN-235 and ATR72 fleet, with Boeing’s P-8A a favored choice. Requirements from Ankara include being able to fly 1,000 to 1,200 nautical miles away from their main base in Turkey, and fly 12 to 15 hours as well as being able to fulfill anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare roles. While a request for information is expected to be released soon, the parameters set may make the competition a very small one.

Europe

• The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) could have a contractor chosen for its laser directed energy weapon demonstrator by next month. Andy Rhodes, a business development executive at Raytheon UK, dropped the date of June 3 as a possible MoD announcement date when talking to reporters during a tour of the company’s plant in Glenrothes, Scotland. The company is part of a Babcock-led consortium including Lockheed Martin, Thales UK, MBDA and Rheinmetall. The consortium’s offering involves a modified truck-mounted version of Raytheon’s Phalanx close in anti-missile with the gun removed to make way for the laser, which is being developed by Qinetiq. Lasers for three other contenders are believed to be supplied by the company.

• Russian manufacturer Aviacor has delivered another An-140 turboprop aircraft to the Russian Navy, bringing to three the number operated by the service. The aircraft’s configuration is primarily for passenger transport but can also be modified to carry cargo. As well as providing An-140s, Aviacor is conducting maintenance and overhauls of Tu-154 aircraft, modernization of Tu-95MSs and maintenance of An-74 aircraft.

Asia Pacific

• Just days after the lifting of the US arms embargo, Vietnam look like they may request F-16s and P-3 Orions from Pentagon’s excess defense articles (EDA) program. Hanoi may also look into purchasing US made UAVs alongside the aircraft to improve its air defense and maritime security capabilities in order to enhance its position in the South China Sea. It’s also likely that the government will look to achieve a similar P-3 deal given to Taiwan including torpedoes (banned under the embargo) and an F-16 EDA procurement given to Indonesia.

• General Electric is to provide its F414-GE-400 engines for South Korea’s KF-X fighter after beating a European consortium offering the Eurojet EJ2000. The deal is estimated to be worth up to $3.5 billion, and contracts are expected to be finalized and signed in June. Korea Aerospace Industries Ltd (KIA), who is developing the jet alongside Lockheed Martin, plans to develop and produce 170 twin-engined jets initially, with 50 destined for export to Indonesia.

Today’s Video

• RADA’s RPS-42 Tactical Air Surveillance Radar System:

Kilo Class cutaway
(click to view full)

In April 2009, reports surfaced that Vietnam had agreed in principle to a deal with Russia for 6 of its diesel-electric Kilo/ Project 636 Class fast attack submarines. By December 2009, it was an inflection-point deal for a capability that Vietnam has never had before. By November 2013, the new submarines had begun to arrive.

Nor is that the only change in Vietnam’s military capabilities these days, courtesy of their long-standing relationship with Russia. There have been some outside deals for items like maritime surveillance floatplanes, and a Dutch deal will provide high-end frigates. For the most part, however, Vietnam’s new combat power in the air, at sea, and on land is coming from Russia. China’s displays of naval might are only part of the mosaic influencing Vietnam’s decisions in these matters.

Vietnam’s New Military Buys: Considerations & Conclusions Southeast Asia
(click to view full)

China’s 2009 display of naval might certainly marks an increased shift toward “forward defense” farther from its borders, a policy that must eventually include China’s trade lifeline to Vietnam’s south, through the Straits of Malacca. It also underlined a growing gap between China’s increasingly advanced ships and high capacity hovercraft, and Vietnam’s fleet of older Soviet and even American ships.

Ownership of the Spratly Islands remains very much in dispute, and Vietnam and China share a centuries-long history of mutual distrust and occupation. Recent punctuations of that animosity include the 1979 3rd Indochina War; this was followed by a significant skirmish in 1981, and a naval skirmish over the Spratly Islands in 1988. Today, Vietnamese protests over a Chinese bauxite mine in Vietnam, and media disobedience over the Spratly Islands issue, serve as a reminder that the 1989 treaty has not changed the relationship’s underlying fundamentals.

Key Platforms Submarines Kilo Class for China
(click to view full)

China itself has adopted a strategy of building up a submarine force to counter a superior surface opponent (the US Navy). It’s entirely logical for Vietnam to adopt a similar approach vis-a-vis China, especially given that China’s lifeline of raw materials and exported goods from and to Africa, the Middle East, Europe, and parts of Asia passes right by Vietnam’s doorstep.

Aside from Thyssen Krupp Marine’s U209 family of submarines, the Russian Kilo Class are the world’s most widely exported subs. They’re known for a level of quietness that’s significantly better than other Russian designs, and have been produced in the Project 877EKM, and the Project 636M “Improved Kilo” / Varshavyanka Class variant that Vietnam is receiving. Countries operating or ordering these submarines include Russia, Algeria, China, India, Iran, Poland, and Romania.

There had been some speculation that Vietnam’s emphasis on shallow water operations, and proximity to the Straits of Malacca, might have made DCNS’ novel 885t, $200 million Andrasta Class of “pocket submarines” attractive. Instead, Vietnam appears to have opted for a longer-range, higher capacity 3,000t submarine from its tried and true Russia partner. They can be armed with 533mm heavy torpedoes, mines, and/or the 3M54 Klub-S family of missiles. The Improved Kilo Class boats will be named:

• HQ-182 Hanoi (delivered)
  
• HQ-183 Ho Chi Minh City (testing complete 2014-01)
  
• HQ-184 Hai Phong (launched 2013-08, arrival 2014)
  
• HQ-185 Khanh Hoa (arrival 2015)
  
• HQ-186 Da Nang (arrival 2015)
  
• HQ-187 Ba Ria-Vung Tau (arrival 2016)

Other Naval Dinh Tien Hoang
(click to view full)

The new submarines are the most important new Russian addition to Vietnam’s capabilities, but they are not alone. A mixed set of 6 stealthy Gepard 3.9/Dinh Tien Hoang Class light frigates will add surface warfare and patrol punch. The first pair optimized for surface attack are already delivered, plus orders for 2 model emphasizing anti-submarine warfare, and 2 upgraded ships with undetermined capabilities as yet.

Gepard 3.9 frigates. These ships are a combined diesel-turbine export version of Russia’s Project 11611 (Tartarstan) frigates, which serve in the Caspian fleet. The 102m/ 2,100t design sits in the grey area between small frigates and large corvettes, and despite their 5,000nm endurance, they’re best suited to local maritime patrol and interdiction. Their stealth-enhanced ship design and 8 sub-sonic Kh-35E anti-ship missiles make them potentially dangerous adversaries in littoral regions; other armament includes 1 AK-176 76mm main gun, 2x AK-630 family multi-barrel 30mm automated guns, and 12-20 mines. There’s space at the back of the ship for a Ka-27 helicopter, but no hangar.

Air defense is handled by a Palma turret derived from the land-based SA-19 Tunguska, carrying twin AO-18KD multi-barrel 30mm cannons and 8 SOSNA-R 9M337 hyper-velocity laser beam rider missiles. An optical turret in the Palma’s center handles fire control, and a command module includes the 3Ts-99/Positiv ME1 target detection 3D radar. It’s mounted in place of the 9K33M “OSA-M”/SS-N-4 Gecko twin-launcher missile system installed on Russia’s frigates, and provides a maximum air defense reach of 10 km and 19,500 feet altitude, with a 2nd kill zone out to 4 km for the 30mm guns.

The ASW ships can be expected to carry 533 mm torpedo tubes, depth charges, and an RBU-6000 12-barreled Anti-Submarine rocket launcher.

This size and weapons array may not be much to get excited about, relative to other international frigate designs, but it will make them Vietnam’s most capable combat ships until the Dutch Sigma Class frigates arrive. There has been talk about including Shtil-1 air defense missiles with a 50 km range on the last 2 ships, in place of the Palma turret. Adding those would quadruple the ships’ air defense radius, but the ship’s overall changes would need to extend beyond that mounting.

Molniya/ Project 12418 FAC. These missile-armed Fast Attack Crafts, derived from the Tarantul-class Soviet corvette design, will help modernize a fleet that’s mostly made up of aging Soviet FACs, and captured American ships from the Vietnam War. The new ships are small, at just 550t full load, but they pack a very dangerous set of 8 sub-sonic Kh-35E anti-ship missiles, or 4 Moskit/ SS-N-22 Sunburn supersonic anti-ship missiles. Up to 10 may be built under the 2010 contract.

An agreement to license-build the Russian Kh-35 anti-ship missile adds extra impetus to Vietnam’s maritime modernization.

Air Force: SU-30MKs, and…? SU-30MK2 weapons
(click to view full)

Vietnam’s air force is still reliant on the same core platform that formed their high end during the Vietnam war: the MiG-21. Swing-wing SU-22M4 strike and close air support fighters are only slightly newer. After that, there’s a sharp technological break to SU-27 air superiority fighters. Vietnam is slowly extending that modernized base with newer multi-role SU-30 planes from the same fighter family, strengthening air defenses and adding a long-range strike capability. They need that kind of firepower, given China’s own set of SU-30/J-11s, and the existence of flash-points like the Spratleys far from the mainland. The question is how they manage to balance that qualitative improvement with the need for fighter numbers, as the MiGs and SU-22s age out.

Note that even the most modern fighters will be limited without AWACS/ AEW support for wider awareness and coordination, and patrol ranges around key disputed territories like the Spratlys will be limited without mid-air refueling platforms. The bad news is that Vietnam doesn’t have a lot of budget to spare, and its ground forces are also in need of significant upgrades. The good news is that options like the Airbus/IAI C295 AEW, BAe 146 tanker conversions, and IAI Bedek’s K-767 tanker conversion of used commercial aircraft are creating new lower-cost options.

Contracts and Key Events

This section covers only Vietnamese contracts with Russia. As the “Additional Readings” section notes, Russia is not Vietnam’s exclusive arms provider – but it is the country’s most important defense relationship.

2014 – 2016

May 27/16: Just days after the lifting of the US arms embargo, Vietnam look like they may request F-16s and P-3 Orions from Pentagon’s excess defense articles (EDA) program. Hanoi may also look into purchasing US made UAVs alongside the aircraft to improve its air defense and maritime security capabilities in order to enhance its position in the South China Sea. It’s also likely that the government will look to achieve a similar P-3 deal given to Taiwan including torpedoes (banned under the embargo) and an F-16 EDA procurement given to Indonesia.

May 24/16: US President Barack Obama has announced the lifting of a decades long arms embargo on Vietnam. Speaking in Hanoi with Vietnamese President Tran Dai Quang and under a looming bust of Communist leader Ho Chi Minh, Obama said that the move will end a “lingering vestige of the Cold War” and pave the way for more-normal relations between the two countries. The move comes as Vietnam looks to recenter allies amid a growing spat with China over ownership of islands in the South China Sea, while also looking to lessen their reliance on Russian weapons manufacturers, factors that may make Hanoi one of Washington’s new best friends in the region.

January 5/16: Vietnam has received possession of two more Su-30MK2 fighters, bringing the current number now operated to to thirty two. Dubbed the King Cobra, the Vietnamese Air Force hopes to have this increased to thirty-six by the end of 2016. The latest order, for twelve jets, was signed in 2013 and worth $600 million. Flight training for the aircraft is being provided by the Indian Air Force, who also operate the Russian made aircraft in their own military. In the past, India has trained Vietnamese naval personnel in operating Russian Kilo-class submarines.

Dec 10/14: Submarines. HQ-184 Hai Phong is reportedly on its way to Vietnam, after technical acceptance was signed on Dec. 4. The rest of the project appears on track: sea trials for boat #4 started in June, while the keel of #6 was laid in May.

Source: Russia Beyond the Headlines: Admiralty Shipyards provide Vietnamese Navy with third Project 636.1 submarine, Vietnam media relaying Russian sources.

Testing “Lightning” ships

Dec 8/14: Fast Attack Crafts. HQ 377 and HQ 378, the first 2 of 6 Molniya fast attack, are handed over by Ba Son Corporation for induction by the Vietnamese navy. The ships had been tested in April and delivered in June. The government seems to support Ba Son’s request to build a new, more modern shipbuilding factory.

Sources: Nhan Dan: Ba Son Corporation urged to complete, hand over missile boats | Tuoi Tre News: Vietnam to boost defense development, improve military combat capacity | Vietnam Breaking News: Vietnam to build more Russian missile boats | Asitimes: Vietnam holds technical test for its first 2 domestically-made high-speed missile boats.

Aug 27/14: SU-30s. Russia & India Report says that negotiations are underway to deepen Vietnam’s training relationship with India, progressing beyond subs to include its 36 SU-30MK2 jets by 2015. Malaysia already trains with India, as their SU-30MKM jets have a lot in common with the IAF’s SU-30MKIs. Vietnam’s SU-30MKs lack canards and thrust vectoring, but India is a logical pairing:

“India and Vietnam are likely to sign a defence agreement, under which Vietnamese pilots will be trained to operate Russian-built Sukhoi fighters, sources in the Indian Defence Ministry told RIR. The agreement is likely to be signed when Indian President Pranab Mukherjee visits the Southeast Asian country in September. The details are being finalised during the on-going visit of Indian External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj to Vietnam, the sources said…. India will also consider the sale of the Indo-Russian BrahMos missiles to Vietnam [DID: q.v. Dec 3/13 entry], although a deal is not imminent, the sources added.”

Adding the air-launched, supersonic BrahMos to Vietnam’s arsenal would make Indian training the only sensible solution, while greatly increasing Vietnam’s strike reach and capabilities. Sources: Russia & India Report, “India to train Vietnamese pilots to fly Sukhoi fighters”.

April 23/14: Frigates. Russia’s Nudelman Precision Engineering Design Bureau confirms that the “People’s Army of Vietnam Navy” (Maoist heritage, much?) will equip its Project 11661 Gepard anti-submarine light frigates with the same Palma air defense and CIWS system that sits on the first 2 surface warfare frigates. The ships are scheduled for delivery in 2017, and given the space constraints involved in a 2,100t platform, it’s always interesting to see what can and can’t stay when they’re equipped for a new role. Sources: IHS Jane’s Navy International, “Vietnam to arm new Gepard-class frigates with Palma CIWS”.

April 1/14: Frigates. Vietnam’s 2nd batch of Gepard frigates are scheduled for delivery in 2017, according to Zelenodolsk Shipyard’s annual financial statements. That set is supposed to be optimized for anti-submarine duties. Sources: IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly, “Vietnam to receive two more Gepard frigates in 2017”.

Feb 27/14: Frigates. Vietnam has reportedly ordered 2 more Gepard Class/ Project 11661K frigates from Russia’s Gorky Shipyard, which will bring their fleet to 6.

None of the announcements discuss terms, or mention which variant Vietnam is buying this time. The small 2,100t frigates have space limitations, which forces some role-based equipment tradeoffs. Current orders involve 2 Gepards ordered in 2006 and optimized for surface strike with anti-ship missiles (q.v. March 5/11), plus 2 frigates ordered in 2011 and equipped as anti-submarine specialists (q.v. Dec 7/11). There have been unconfirmed reports that subsequent ships would add Russia’s SA-17 derived 3S90E Shtil-1 naval anti-aircraft missile system, providing much wider air defense out to 50 km. Sources: Vietnam.NET, “First of a New Class Patrol Ships Laid Down at Zelenodolsky Shipyard in Russia” | Defense Update, “First of a New Class Patrol Ships Laid Down at Zelenodolsky Shipyard in Russia” | Defense Studies, “Second Batch of Gepard Equipped with Sthil-1 Missile”.

2 more frigates

Jan 16/14: Submarines. Vietnam’s 2nd submarine, HQ-183 Ho Chi Minh City, completes operational tests in Russia and receives its checkout certificate. It will be loaded onto a barge, and is expected to arrive in Vietnam around May 3/14.

HQ-184 Hai Phong was launched on Aug 28/13, and is also expected to be delivered to Vietnam in 2014. HQ-186 Khanh Hoa is due in 2015, and HQ-185 Da Nang can be inferred as also arriving that year. HQ-187 Ba Ria Vung Tau is due in 2016. Sources: Bao Dat Viet, “Tau ngam HQ-185 Da Nang ha thuy ngay 28/3” | Thanh Nien News, “Vietnam’s second Russian submarine completes testing” | Vietnamnet, “Russia hands over the second submarine to Vietnam”.

T-90
(click to view full)

Jan 10/14: Tanks. Vietnam is reportedly investigating the possibility of upgrading at least some of their existing fleet of about 480 T-72 main battle tanks, and buying T-90s to begin replacing their force of almost 1,000 elderly T-55s. Due diligence has reportedly been done with India’s T-90s, which also face the ravages of hot climates.

The problem is cost. T-72 upgrades can be sourced from a number of countries besides Russia, but top of the line new tanks are costly. If new armored personnel carriers also have to be bought for Vietnam’s armored formations, the entire project gets very expensive very quickly. On the other hand, defeats on land are very, very expensive when you have a large and aggressive neighbor on your border, and a long history of animosity. Tanks may not be the whole answer, but Vietnam will have to spend money to upgrade its land forces in some way.

Vietnam’s armored forces include various models of Russian and Chinese equipment, which means their fleets are fragmented as well as old. Consolidation of any sort would be helpful, though their terrain means that light vehicles can be as important as heavy armor. Israel has been talking to Vietnam about military deals, and one wonders if they’ve discussed conversion of the T-55s into refurbished Achzarit heavy APCs. Sources: Tinnong, “Viet Nam xem xet mua xe tang T-90 cua Nga”.

Jan 3/13: Submarines. HQ-183 Hanoi is unloaded from the Dutch Rolldock Sea carrying vessel into Cam Ranh Bay, Vietnam. Sources: Vietnam.NET, “In pictures: Hanoi submarine arrives at Cam Ranh port” | Thanh Nien, “First Russian-made submarine arrives in Vietnam” (also several pictures) | Vietnam.NET, “Vietnam’s most modern submarine launched” | Taiwan’s Want China Times, “Vietnam receives its first Russian Kilo-class submarine”.

1st sub arrives

2012 – 2013

12 more SU-30MK2s; Kh-35 anti-ship missile partnership; Singapore partnership for submarine rescue; Vietnam will need help with training and maintenance. Kh-35E/ SS-N-25
(click to view full)

Dec 3/13: Weapons. Vietnam has reportedly placed an official request for a derivative of the Russian SS-N-26 Oniks missiles that already equip a couple of its shore batteries:

“Vietnam formally requested India to supply the Indo-Russian BrahMos cruise missiles at a meeting in New Delhi, informed sources told RIR. The request was made when Vietnam Communist party general secretary Nguyen Phu Trong visited the Indian capital, the sources said, adding that the Southeast Asian country was looking at enhancing security cooperation with India… During Phu Trong’s visits, requests were also made to India for submarine training and for conversion training for Vietnamese pilots to fly Sukhoi-30 aircrafts.”

The PJ-10 Brahmos is also a supersonic, radar-guided, medium-range anti-ship and strike missile. Vietnam’s current and planned ships aren’t good platforms for BrahMos, and Vietnam already has similar SS-N-26 shore batteries in place. A buy from India could deploy mobile shore batteries, but the most likely interest involves the developmental air-launched BrahMos, designed to be carried by SU-30 fighters. That would add about 300 km of strike range to Vietnam’s fighters, using a lethal threat to both enemy ships and shore installations. Deploying that combination would be almost as significant as Vietnam’s new submarines in shifting the South China Sea’s overall balance of power. Sources: Russia & India Report, “Vietnam looking to purchase BrahMos cruise missiles”.

Nov 7/13: Submarines. The Improved Kilo Class boat HQ-183 Hanoi is handed over to the Vietnam Navy in Russia, where its crew has been undergoing training. It will be loaded onto a barge on November 11/13, and prepared for shipment to Vietnam.

At the same time, representatives from Russia and Vietnam sign a document that will transfer a new submarine sailor training center in Cam Ranh Bay to the Vietnam Navy in January 2014, when the Hanoi and its cadre arrive at Cam Ranh Bay. By the end of 2014, Vietnam is expected to have 3 of its 6 ordered submarines. Sources: Vietnam Bridge, “Russia hands over Cam Ranh submarine sailor training center to Vietnam” | RIA Novosti, “Russia to Deliver 2 More ‘Black Hole’ Subs to Vietnam in ’14”.

Oct 25/13: Infrastructure. Vietnam officially inaugurates a maintenance line in Da Nang’s “Factory A32” for Su-27 and Su-30 fighters. Other countries have had real problems waiting for Russian support, so moving more of that support in-country will boost the fighter fleet’s availability. Sources: People’s Army Newspaper Online, “Maintenance line for Su-27 and Su-30 fighters unveiled”.

Sept 26/13: Infrastructure. Vietnam is committing to a ship repair facility in Cam Ranh Bay that can handle Russian ships by 2015. It’s a win for their ally, but Vietnam is also trying to turn Cam Ranh Bay into a broader maritime service center. US Military Sealift Command ships have received repairs and basic maintenance there over the last couple of years.

Strong naval maintenance capabilities for Russian designs is also a big asset to a force that operates Russian ships almost exclusively. Sources: RIA Novosti, “Vietnam Sets 2015 Deadline for Soviet, Russian Ship Repair Facility”.

Sept 24/13: Frigates. Russia’s Zelenodolsk shipyard has begun construction on Vietnam’s next Gepard Class 2,100t light frigates, which will be optimized for anti-submarine warfare instead of surface attack (q.v. Dec 7/11). Sources: RIA Novosti, “Russia Starts Building 2 Frigates for Vietnamese Navy”.

Sept 6/13: Submarines. Singapore and Vietnam sign a Memorandum of Agreement regarding submarine rescue. If there’s an accident involving a Vietnamese submarine, Singapore’s 85m, 4,300t submarine rescue and support ship MV Swift Rescue will steam over with its submersible rescue vessel, Deep Search and Rescue Six (DSAR 6).

Singapore operates its own set of ex-Swedish diesel-electric submarines: 4 old but modernized and “tropicalized” Challenger/ Sjoormen Class boats, and 2 modern Archer/ Vastergotland Class Air Independent Propulsion boats that received similar treatment. Sources: RSN – Assets – Ships | RSN – Assets – Submarines | Singapore MINDEF, “Republic of Singapore Navy and Vietnam People’s Navy Sign Submarine Rescue Memorandum of Agreement”.

Submarine rescue agreement

August 21/13: SU-30s. Interfax and RIA Novosti report, and Vietnam confirms, that a new contract signed earlier this month will lead to the delivery of another batch of 12 SU-30MK2s by 2015. When added to 2 earlier contracts, Vietnam’s SU-30MK2 fleet will rise to 32 fighters.

Sources differ in their reporting of this contract’s value, worth $450 million or $600 million depending on whom you ask. The higher value is similar to the previous batch of 12 planes, and is probably the fully-loaded cost with support and parts, but excluding weapons. This is about the level of detail you can publicly expect from such countries. Communist Party of Vietnam.

12 SU-30MK2s

July 5/13: Submarines. Russia’s Interfax says that Vietnam’s 2nd submarine, Ho Chi Minh City, has returned to Admiralty Shipyards of St. Petersburg after series of sea trials. The 1st sub, Hanoi, was launched in August 2012 (vid. Aug 28/12 entry), and both are scheduled for handover to the Vietnamese Navy later in 2013. Earlier reports had targeted the end of 2012 for Haoi’s handover.

Note that the photograph in the linked article is not a Kilo Class sub. Thanh Nien News.

May 21/13: SU-30s. A Tuoi Tre News article offers some revealing information, alongside the classic Stakhanovite paeans.

“Living in rented houses, many of the [SU-30 maintenance] staff have to work as part time teachers in local schools to earn extra income for their families. They even use their own money to buy devices to test tools of their own invention before submitting ideas to leaders.”

Needless to say, economic conflicts of interest among the maintenance staff for your nation’s premiere air asset offers all kinds of potential vulnerabilities.

May 17/13: SU-30s. A Tuoi Tre News article discussed the propensity of Vietnamese pilots to stay in the aircraft and try to land, even if the failure is very serious. Materiel worth more than people? That does seem to be part of the attitude, but if so, it’s a long-standing predisposition:

“For example, three-star colonel and pilot Dao Quoc Khang managed to save his Su-27 when its engines broke down just seconds after taking off…. in April last year, captain and chief of Air Strike Regiment 935 Nguyen Xuan Tuyen and flight head Nguyen Gia Nhan saved a Su-30MK2 while they were on a regular patrol over East Sea and its engines suddenly stopped working when it was 600km from the coast. “….We told ourselves in our minds that we are responsible for keeping the US$50 million asset of the State in one piece. It is made from the labor of citizens. And we must protect it at any price, even if that means our lives,” pilot Tuyen said.”

In fairness, ejecting 600 km from the coast is near-certain death, given Vietnam’s limited search and rescue resources. So the brave and selfless-sounding justification doesn’t actually change their decision, and is the sort of thing you’d expect in an article that quotes political commissars with a straight face. Or is the mentality in the pilot’s justification real? That’s the interesting question.

March 29/13: Submarines. Rubin design bureau general director Igor Vilnit pledges to deliver the 1st Project 636M Improved Kilo Class submarine to Vietnam “in 2013 as scheduled.” Odd. Earlier reports from RIA Novosti (vid. Aug 28/12) had the handover taking place at the end of 2012.

The first boat has been built by Admiralteiskie Verfi shipyard in St. Petersburg, Russia, and is undergoing sea trials. All 6 boats are due for delivery by 2016. What isn’t addressed in these reports is Vietnam’s recruiting, training, infrastructure, and maintenance preparations. As Vietnam’s Australian neighbors have discovered the hard way, neglect of any of these 4 “invisible” elements leads to an undeployable submarine force. Vietnam has the advantage of beginning with a proven, tested submarine design, but in all other areas, they’re building from a very low foundation. RIA Novosti.

Oct 26/12: SU-34s? Phun.vn cites a report from the mysterious site “Periscope 2,” wherein it’s suggested that Vietnam plans to replace its fleet of 50 or so aged SU-22 strike aircraft with SU-34s, and that export approval will be given immediately, once it’s requested. The report also suggests that Saab JAS-39 Gripens will replace the VPAF’s even older fleet of 150 or so MiG-21s, that L-159s may replace existing L-39 trainers alongside Vietnam’s reported Yak-130 options, and that Vietnam may be interested in C295-AEW planes.

All of the above are possible, and militarily reasonable choices. Even the L-159 could be reasonable, if bought second-hand as a dual role trainer and MiG-21 fill in, to give the VPAF a dual Russian & Western fleet with appropriate weapon options. The thing is, “reasonable” doesn’t mean “likely”, and DID could find no other reports along these lines. Any of the non-trainer deals would be quite expensive, and Vietnam’s economy is a bit shaky these days. In addition, all of the non-Russian equipment would require export approval for American military items.

We throw this item in for reader interest, with a strong caution concerning its reliability. Phun.vn [in Vietnamese].

Aug 28/12: Submarines. Russia’s RIA Novosti reports that the Admiralteiskie Verfi shipyard in St. Petersburg has launched Vietnam’s 1st Project 636 diesel-electric submarine. The boat is due for handover to Vietnam by the end of 2012.

July 27/12: Political. Vietnam says that Russia can set up a base in Cam Ranh Bay, but it would be a maintenance base, not a military base. Vietnam is trying to promote Cam Ranh as a ship maintenance center, and has even worked on ships from US Military Sealift Command. Sources: RIA Novosti, “Vietnam Ready to Host Russian Maritime Base”.

June 21/12: Fighters. Vietnam is conducting air patrols over the disputed Spratly Islands, using its long-range Su-27 fighters.

“Hong Lei, spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry, protested against the patrols by Vietnamese Su-27 fighters over the disputed Spratly islands in the South China Sea at a press conference in Beijing…. The flights by fighters from the Vietnam People’s Air Force over the Spratlys are routine and will continue, according to the Vietnamese military officials.”

State-owned China Radio International makes some valid points when it cites reasons not to be too concerned about Vietnam’s Su-27s: payload limitations, the lack of AWACS support for wider awareness and coordination, and the lack of mid-air refueling platforms. On the other hand, there’s no denying that the Su-27s and Su-30s offer Vietnam a leap forward in both air superiority and strike roles. With that foundation in place, it’s possible for Vietnam to begin closing some of the other gaps in coming years. Sources: Taiwan’s Want China Times, “Beijing downplays threat of Vietnam’s air force”.

March 29/12: Sub training from India? Singapore’s Asia Times:

“For full-scale underwater warfare training, it appears Vietnam will turn to India. The two countries have been engaged in high-level military talks with special emphasis on maritime cooperation. Since the Indian navy also employs Kilo-class submarines, New Delhi would be well suited to train Vietnamese crews. China responded warily to this bilateral warming trend in both words and deeds when a Chinese warship reportedly confronted an Indian navy vessel leaving a Vietnamese port in August… Moscow will reportedly build a submarine base for Vietnam at strategic Cam Ranh Bay, a one-time American and later Soviet naval base…”

Feb 15/12: Kh-35. RIA Novosti reports that Vietnam will begin joint production of a modified SS-N-25 Switchblade/ Kh-35 Uran subsonic anti-ship missile, whose base characteristics are similar to the American xGM-84 Harpoon. The project is described as similar to joint Russian-Indian production of the PJ-10 BrahMos missile, which was derived from the supersonic SS-N-26 Yakhont.

The Kh-35 can be launched from Ka-27 naval helicopters, ships, or shore batteries, but haven’t been integrated with Vietnam’s new SU-30MK model fighters, or its forthcoming Kilo Class submarines. Even so, this joint venture will give Vietnam assured low-cost production and support for an important element of naval deterrence in the South China Sea.

The Kh-35 looks set to become Vietnam’s mainstay anti-ship missile for its navy, and a joint project also gives them a base to make changes. India undertook to integrate Brahmos with its Su-30MKI fighters, for example, and Vietnam’s air force may have similar plans for their modified Kh-35 project. The urge to use locally-built weapons in new ships also seems to be deep-seated. Kilo Class submarines are already configured for 3M54 Klub family (SS-N-27) missiles, and only time will tell what the Vietnamese plan to do with this shared technology.

KH-35 missile partnership

2009 – 2011

Vietnam orders 6 Improved Kilo Class subs, 12 SU-30MK2 fighters, 2 Gepard Class ASW frigates; 2 Gepard/ Dinh Tien Hoang Class surface warfare frigates delivered; Vietnam begins building Molniya FACs locally; China’s underwater neighborhood getting crowded. Gepard 3.9, 2-view
(click to view full)

Dec 7/11: ASW Frigates. Rosoboronexport and the Zelenodolsk Gorky Plant have finished shipping Vietnam’s 1st 2 Gepard Class frigates, and have just signed a contract for 2 more. That isn’t a surprise, as reports from March 2010 were already discussing a set set. Unlike the first set, however, this next 2 will concentrate on anti-submarine warfare, rather than surface attack missions.

Vietnam’s example may also be creating ripples in the region. Gorky Plant Deputy Director Sergei Rudenko adds that Vietnam’s neighbor Cambodia has expressed its own interest in the Gepard Class. Interfax-AVN.

2 more Gepard Class frigates

Oct 25/11: FACs. Vietnam is beginning to get assembly kits and components for its Molniya/ Project 12418 missile-armed fast attack craft. They’re working under the technical supervision of the “Almaz” Central Maritime Design Bureau in St. Petersburg, and the OJSC Vympel shipbuilding plant. Russia has built 2 for Vietnam, and Vietnam is building its first 4 boats of class, with an option for 4 more. The ships are small, at just 550t full load, but they pack a very dangerous set of 4 Moskit/ SS-N-22 Sunburn supersonic anti-ship missiles, or 8 of the sub-sonic Kh-35E anti-ship missiles.

Deliveries of parts to Vietnam, which began in 2010 under a $30 million contract, will continue through 2016. ITAR-TASS (Google Translate).

Vietnam begins assembling FAC boats

Oct 20/11: Patrol boats. Vietnam signs acceptance certificates for the last 2 of 4 Project 10412/ Svetlyak Export Class patrol boats at Almaz Shipbuilding Firm. The 390t class was originally developed for the KGB’s border guards, mounting an AK-176M 76.2mm cannon, an AK-630 30mm gatling gun, and a mount for very short range SA-16/SA-18 anti-aircraft missiles.

The first 2 ships were delivered to Vietnam in 2002, and the 2 follow-on order ships were laid down in June 2009. Unfortunately, repeated issues with key components, including the Arsenal AK-176M gun mounts, delayed construction. The ships will be moved to St. Petersburg, and embarked on a transport ship for shipping to Vietnam. RusNavy.

Aug 22/11: Frigates. The Gepard Class frigate Ly Thai To [HQ-012] arrives at Cam Ranh Bay. Sources: Defense News, “Vietnam Receives Second Russian-Made Frigate”.

March 5/11: Frigates. The Vietnamese Navy officially accepts the 1st Gepard class frigate from Russia, naming it the Dinh Tien Hoang, after the first Vietnamese emperor. Vietnam became the class’ 1st export order with a contract for 2 ships in December 2006, and the HQ-011 Dinh Tien Hoang was launched in August 2009. HQ-012 Ly Thai To, the 2nd frigate in the order, was launched in March 2010, and has been in sea trials since August 2010.

The Gepard 3.9 ships are a combined diesel-turbine export version of Russia’s Project 11611 (Tartarstan) frigates, which serve in the Caspian fleet. The 102m/ 2,100t design sits in the grey area between small frigates and large corvettes, and despite their 5,000nm endurance, they’re best suited to local maritime patrol and interdiction. Their stealth-enhanced ship design and sub-sonic Kh-35E anti-ship missiles make them potentially dangerous adversaries in littoral regions, and other armament includes 76mm and 30mm guns, 533mm torpedoes, depth charges, and a 9K33M “OSA-M”/SS-N-4 missile system for air defense. This size and weapons array may not be much to get excited about, relative to other international frigate designs, but it will make them Vietnam’s most capable combat ships. DatViet report [Google translate] | AvWeek Ares.

Gepard Class frigate accepted

March 27/10: RIA Novosti reports that Chinese admirals are beginning to grasp the implications of advanced diesel-electric attack submarines in the hands of several regional neighbors, located right near China’s shipping lifelines.

Vietnam’s Kilo Class, Malaysia’s Scorpene Class, and Singapore’s Vastergotland Class submarines are all on China’s Southeast Asian radar. In the background, Indonesia continues to express its intent to buy Kilo Class submarines of its own.

Postscript: Indonesia eventually ended up buying a modern South Korean variant of the German U209.

March 25/10: Submarines. It’s good to be a good customer. Russian defense minister Anatoly Serdyukov says that Russia will help Vietnam build the submarine base it needs to house its new Kilos, provide a loan to help buy rescue and auxiliary vessels and planes for Vietnam’s navy, and build a ship repair yard. That yard would benefit the Russians, too, as it could service visiting Russian navy ships.

Vietnam’s geographic position could make its service yard attractive to other navies as well, giving other countries even more reason to focus on relations with the Southeast Asian nation. A good service yard could wind up being as important to Vietnam’s geo-political position as the submarines themselves. Associated Press | China’s Xinhua.

March 23/10: Russia’s Voice covers growing ties between Russia and Vietnam, which is becoming one of Russia’s biggest arms customers:

“Vietnam backs multilateral cooperation with Russia especially in military defense, stated Vietnam’s president Nguyen Minh Triet during talks with Russia’s Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov in Hanoi. “Each of Russia’s victories is like our own, the president said, and we support Russia in the Georgian conflict.” The president said that the US decision not to deploy its ABMs in Eastern Europe is also a victory for Russia… Anatoly Serdyukov noted that Vietnam is Russia’s strategic partner and Russia is ready to train Vietnamese personnel at the Russian Defense Ministry’s academies.”

March 16/10: Frigates. Russia’s Zelenodolsk PKB shipyard launches Vietnam’s 2nd Project Gepard 3.9 light frigate into the River Volga. In May 2010, the warship will sail to St. Peterburg and then travel by sea to Vietnam for sea trials. The 1st ship in the order was launched in August 2009.

A separate report indicates that Vietnam could be preparing to order 2 more light frigates of this type. ITAR-TASS [in Russian] | ITAR-TASS Arms [in Russian].

Feb 10/10: SU-30s. Interfax reports the signing of a formal contract between Russia and Vietnam for 12 SU-30MKK fighters, for delivery in 2011-2012, plus associated weapons, service, and support. The deal is reportedly worth $1 billion, and is signed the day after a Russian contract to build Vietnam’s first nuclear plant.

The exact state of the contract is less than clear, so we’re sticking with Dec 15/09 as the date. Agence France Presse | AP | RT | Straits Times.

SU-30MK & SU-27SK
(click to view full)

Dec 15/09: Shortly after Vietnam makes its defense white paper public, reports indicate that it has ordered 6 Improved Kilo Class submarines and 12 SU-30MKK fighter jets from Russia, during a visit to Moscow by Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung.

Russia’s Interfax news agency quoted an unnamed Defense Ministry official on Dec 15/09, who said the submarines were improved “Project 636” types, and gave the deal’s value at of $2 billion, with delivery taking place at a rate of 1 submarine per year. The Sukhoi Su-30MK2 fighter jet deal was valued at $600 million, and would raise Vietnam’s SU-27/SU-30 family fleet to 20 fighters.

Vietnam also invited Russia to help build its 1st nuclear power plant, and hopes to begin construction in 2014 and put it on line by 2020. The country has been growing its manufacturing capacity in recent years, partly at China’s expense, and needs to improve its electric grid in tandem. Vietnam’s Thanh Nien News | RIA Novosti | Agence France Presse | Associated Press | BBC News | China’s Xinhua | Agence France Presse analysis.

12 SU-30s & 6 Improved Kilo submarines

Dec 4/09: Russia’s RIA Novosti reports:

“According to the Vedomosti business daily, Moscow and Hanoi are close to sign deals on the purchase of six Kilo class diesel-electric submarines and 12 Su-30MK2 Flanker-C multirole fighters. The submarine contract, worth an estimated $1.8 billion, includes the construction of on-shore infrastructure and training of submarine crews and will be the second largest submarine contract concluded by Russia since the Soviet era after the 2002 deal on the delivery of eight subs to China.”

April 27/09: Initial media reports. The submarine deal’s value is reported to be around $1.8 billion, and the SSKs would be built at Admiralty Shipyards in St. Petersburg. In addition to submarines, the Vietnamese Navy order is said to include new heavyweight torpedoes and missiles (most likely Klub family) to arm them.

This is a big step forward. There have been rumors that Vietnam owns 2 ex-Yugoslav mini-submarines for use in commando operations, but the Vietnamese People’s Navy doesn’t own any full size submarines that can take on enemy subs and ships.

Some of the Russian reports note that these 6 submarines were once planned for Venezuela, adding that Russia’s Rosoboronexport canceled the deal following Hugo Chavez’ meeting with US President Barack Obama. That must be judged an extraordinarily thin public rationale for canceling a $1.5+ billion purchase. A sinking global oil market, and Venezuela’s growing economic dependence on its declining oil production for revenue, are far more likely reasons for any delay and/or shift. See: RIA Novosti | MosNews | St. Petersburg Times | Singapore Straits Times | Defpro.

Additional Readings

• Haze Grey – World Navies Today: Vietnam

• Naval Technology – SSK Kilo Class (Type 636) Attack Submarine, Russia

• Rubin Design Bureau – Project 636. “Improved Kilo”/ Varshavyanka Class.

• Zelenodolsk Shipyard – Frigate of 11661 project “Gepard – 3.9”

• Air Force Technology – Su-30MK Multi-Role Two-Seater Fighter Aircraft, Russia

• Army Technology – T-72S Main Battle Tank, Russia

• The Armor Site – Russian T-90/T90S Main Battle Tank

• Military Today – Achzarit Heavy Armored Personnel Carrier. An option for converting the large fleet of T-55s?

News and Views

• Unbiased Jottings (April 1/13) – Maritime Contours: India – Vietnam & India-Japan Relationships. The site is by Indian Rear Admiral S Kulshrestha (ret.)

• Tuoi Tre News (May 21/13) – Caretakers of Sukhoi jet fighters in Vietnam

• Tuoi Tre News (May 17/13) – The ‘Air cobra’ of Vietnam’s air force

• The Diplomat (Nov 1/12) – Vietnam’s Underwater Anti-Access Fleet

• Reuters (Feb 10/12) – Vietnam seen courting Western arms deals. Israel is also in this mix, and can leverage experience with nearby clients in India, Thailand, and Singapore.

• DID (Oct 30/11) – More than the Sum of Its Parts: Dutch SIGMA Ships for Vietnam?

• DID (May 5/10) – Vietnamese Navy Orders DHC-6 Twin-Otter 400s. The durable float planes are a clever choice for short-range maritime surveillance.

• Reuters (Dec 14/09) – U.S. eyes Vietnam, Libya arms sales. The focus at this point is on “non-lethal” equipment, in Vietnam’s case, the focus is on maritime patrol aircraft, coastal radar systems, and English language training..

KODEF ’11 slide
(click to view full)

South Korea has been thinking seriously about designing its own fighter jet since 2008. The ROK defense sector has made impressive progress, and has become a notable exporter of aerospace, land, and naval equipment. The idea of a plane that helps advance their aerospace industry, while making it easy to add new Korean-designed weapons, is very appealing. On the flip side, a new jet fighter is a massive endeavor at the best of times, and wildly unrealistic technical expectations didn’t help the project. KF-X has progressed in fits and starts, and became a multinational program when Indonesia joined in June 2010. As of March 2013, however, South Korea has decided to put the KF-X program on hold for 18 months, while the government and Parliament decide whether it’s worth continuing.

Indonesia has reportedly contributed IDR 1.6 trillion since they joined in July 2010 – but that’s just $165 million of the DAPA’s estimated WON 6 billion (about $5.5 billion) development cost, and there’s good reason to believe that even this development budget is too low. This article discusses the KFX/IFX fighter’s proposed designs and features, and chronicles the project’s progress and setbacks since 2008…

Changing Stories: The “F-33/ Boramae” KF-X Fighter Unofficial KF-X vid
click for video

Unrealistic early visions of an F-35 class stealth aircraft developed on the cheap produced some attention-getting models, but they appear to have given way to the idea of a fighter with slightly better kinematic performance than an F-16C/D Block 50, along with more advanced electronics that include a made-in-Korea AESA radar, the ability to carry a range of new South Korean weapons under development, and a better radar signature. The Jakarta Globe adds that the plane is eventually slated to get the designation F-33.

The project goes ahead, the 1st step will involve picking a foreign development partner, and the next step will involve choosing between 1 of 2 competing designs. The C103 design’s conventional fighter layout would look somewhat like the F-35, while the C203 design follows the European approach and uses forward canards in a stealth-shaped airframe. It’s likely that the choice of their foreign development partner will determine the design choice pursued.

Either aircraft would be a twin-engine fighter weighing around 10.4 tonnes, with stealth shaping. In order to keep ambitions within the bounds of realism, KFX Bock 1 fighters would only have to meet the radar cross-section of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet or Eurofighter Typhoon. Sources have used figures of 0.1 – 1.0 square meters.

Note that even this specification amounts to developing a plane similar to or more advanced than the JAS-39E/F Gripen, from a lower technological base, with less international help on key components, all for less development money than a more experienced firm needed to spend. South Korea’s own KIDA takes a similar view, questioning the country’s technical readiness for something this complicated, and noting an overall cost per aircraft that’s twice as much as similar imported fighters.

KFX Block 2 would add internal weapon bays. Present plans call for Block 1 would be compatible with the bays, and hence upgradeable to Block 2 status, but Block 1 planes wouldn’t begin with internal bays. The fighter’s size and twin-engine design offer added space compared to a plan like the Gripen, but this feature will still be a notable design challenge. Additional tolerance and coating improvements are envisioned to reduce stealth to the level of an F-117: about 0.025 square meters.

KFX Block 3 would aim for further stealth improvements to the level of the B-2 bomber or F-35.

No timeline has been discussed for Block 2 and Block 3 improvements. At this stage of the program, any dates given would be wildly unreliable anyway.

KF-X: Program & Prospects T-50 line
(click to view full)

The KF-X project remains a “paper airplane,” without even a prototype under construction. The program was reportedly postponed until April 2011 due to financial and technological difficulties, and now a second postponement appears to extend to June 2014. If South Korea elects to proceed at all. The ROK Agency for Defense Development says that if full-scale development begins in October 2014, the 1st KF-X Block 1 prototype flight wouldn’t take place until September 2020. Based on the history of other programs, the new plane would be hard pressed to enter service before 2025.

Indonesia is currently the only KF-X foreign development partner, with 20% of the project. The project is sometimes referred to as “IFX” (Indonesia Fighter eXperimental) in that country, whose huge archipelago leads them to value range. That could create a problem if the KF-X design shrinks, in order to present a lower cost profile.

Turkey is a big defense customer for South Korea, and discussions have been held concerning KF-X, but Turkey wanted more control over the project than a 20% share, and no agreement has been forthcoming. The TuAF is already committed to buying about 100 F-35As to replace its F-4 Phantoms, and many of its F-16s as well. They’re also investigating the idea of designing their own fighter, and have enlisted Sweden’s Saab to assist (vid. March 20/13 entry).

In the interim, KAI’s FA-50 is emerging as a low-end fighter to replace existing ROKAF F-5s and F-4s, and South Korea is scheduled to have its F-X-3 competition decided before the KF-X resumes. That could leave them with a high-end fleet plan of 80-100 stealth-enhanced F-15SE Strike Eagles, split between new buys and upgrades. It’s fair to ask where an expensive KF-X program would fit in that mix, especially when even on-budget performance of WON 14 billion for development and production could buy and equip over 110 more F-15SEs, instead of 130-150 “F-33s”.

ROK Flag

Moreover, if KF-X was developed, how big would the 2025 – 2040 export market really be? The Teal Group’s Richard Aboulafia is right that “The world fighter market needs a modern, F-16-class mid-market fighter.” With that said, even in a hypothetical market where F-16, F/A-18 family, Eurofighter, and Rafale production lines had all shut down, that would still leave South Korea competing for mid-tier purchases against China’s J-10, J-11, and “J-31”, Russia’s SU-35 and possibly its MiG-35, and Sweden’s JAS-39E/F.

On the other hand, KAI needs development work after the FA-50 is done. As one 2009 article asked, how far can industrial nationalism go? The next 18 months will offer an answer to that question.

Contracts & Key Events 2014-2016

K-FX C-501: no.
(click to view full)

May 27/16: General Electric is to provide its F414-GE-400 engines for South Korea’s KF-X fighter after beating a European consortium offering the Eurojet EJ2000. The deal is estimated to be worth up to $3.5 billion, and contracts are expected to be finalized and signed in June. Korea Aerospace Industries Ltd (KIA), who is developing the jet alongside Lockheed Martin, plans to develop and produce 170 twin-engined jets initially, with 50 destined for export to Indonesia.

April 21/16: South Korea looks set to decide on which engine provider will be selected for its KAI KF-X fighter as early as the end of the month. Suppliers looking to win the contract are European firm Eurojet Turbo GmbH and the US’s General Electric. Seoul is seeking to locally produce 120 twin-engine combat jets under the KF-X program that is estimated to cost some $16 billion. Deployment of the new planes is hoped to start in mid-2020 to replace its aging fleet of F-4s and F-5s.

January 25/16: South Korea’s KF-X fighter program has kicked off as officials from KAI, the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), Lockheed Martin, the Indonesian Defense Ministry and PT Dirgantara Indonesia (PTDI) met in Sacheon, South Korea for the first time. Six prototypes of the fighter will be produced by 2021 with completion of the development due for 2026. 120 fighters will be produced by 2032 to replace the F-4 and F-5 jets in service. Collaboration in the program sees Lockheed Martin provide twenty-one key technologies used in the US F-35 fighter and the government of Indonesia is to provide $1.4 billion toward research and development in the project. Seoul will spend $7.1 billion in the project’s development.

December 28/15: South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) is set to sign a development contract with Korea Aerospace Industries for the continued production of the indigenous KF-X fighter. The news follows the granting by the US government for the transfer of 21 technologies used in Lockheed Martin’s F-35 which had been the subject of much wrangling over the last number of weeks. Washington had denied the transfer of four key technologies back in April citing security concerns. The contract will see the production of six prototypes by 2025 with an expected 120 jets produced by 2032.

December 7/15: South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) has been accompanied by high level diplomats to discuss the KF-X fighter program with Lockheed Martin. The trip to the US follows the visit by Lockheed staff to Seoul last month to discuss the transfer of 21 technologies from their F-35 fighter jet. The inclusion of diplomats shows that Korea is looking to bolster their bargaining power amid the refusal to allow the transfer of four key technologies by the US government. DAPA claimed that they are capable of developing these four key technologies, but failure to secure the remaining 21 would be of serious consequence to the development of Korea’s own indigenous fighter.

November 19/15: Lockheed Martin staff are visiting South Korea this week to further discuss the transfer of technologies in relation to the development of the $6.9 billion KF-X fighter program. The talks come following a recent refusal by the US to allow the transfer of the four core technologies necessary for the program which could put the future of its development in jeopardy. Despite this, both Lockheed and the South Korean government are confident that the transfer of another 21 technologies will go ahead as planned with possibly some minor alterations to the technologies initially listed. The State Department however did approve the sale of 19 UGM-84L Harpoon Block II All-Up-Round Missiles and 13 Block II upgrade kits totally $110 million.

October 30/15: A subcommittee in South Korea’s Parliament has passed a $58.8 million budget for the country’s indigenous KF-X fighter program, with the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) planning to press ahead with the development of critical technologies required for the jet, despite the US State Department preventing F-35 prime contractor Lockheed Martin from exporting four key technologies to the country. The country’s Ministry of National Defense will also stand-up a KF-X project team to manage the development of these four technologies.

October 26/15: South Korea’s defense acquisition agency is reportedly planning to press ahead with development of the four key technologies required for the country’s KF-X indigenous fighter program, refused by Washington in April. South Korea is thought to be capable of finding replacements for three of these technologies; however the acquisition of an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar system is a particularly difficult problem for Seoul. It was thought that the technology would be transferred as part of offset arrangements for the South Korean F-35 acquisition, with Saab reportedly offering to develop an AESA solution for South Korea, unveiling a new radar system earlier this month.

October 21/15: South Korea’s president has fired the country’s senior presidential secretary for foreign affairs Ju Chul-ki following failure to secure the transfer of four key technologies from the US required for the country’s KF-X indigenous fighter program. The blockage of the technologies in April – subsequently confirmed by the South Korean government in September – has also led to a criminal investigation into a senior security official in the country, as US SecDef Carter publicly reiterated the refusal to transfer the critical technologies last week.

October 7/15: South Korea and Indonesia look set to sign a set of agreements later this month to cement the two countries’ industrial commitments to the collaborative development of the South Korean KF-X indigenous fighter program. The two states signed an engineering and development agreement in October 2014, which split the development costs 80-20 to South Korea. The two countries reiterated their commitment to the program in May this year. Meanwhile, the South Korean Defense Acquisition Program Administration announced on Tuesday that a separate organization will be established specifically to manage the KF-X program.

September 28/15: South Korea’s $6.9 billion KF-X program has hit a major speed bump with refusal by the US government to approve the transfer of four core technologies from F-35 prime contractor Lockheed Martin to the country’s defense procurement agency, with the South Korean government now confirming that Washington refused the transfer back in April. The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) will now have to look elsewhere to acquire these technologies, which include an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, EO targeting pod, RF jammer and IR search and track system. Lockheed Martin promised to transfer 25 technologies to the country when it signed a Foreign Military Sales contract for 40 F-35s in September, with the homegrown fighter project seemingly now in jeopardy.

April 10/15: GE to push engines. General Electric is reportedly looking to supply jet engines for the South Korea KF-X program, submitting a proposal to Korea Aerospace Industries, following the company’s selection as preferred bidder at the end of last month. The F414 engines GE is proposing has previously equipped the US Navy’s Super Hornets and Growlers, the Saab Gripen NG and the Indian Mk II Tejas.

March 31/15: KAL eliminated. South Korean manufacturer Korean Aerospace Industries (KAI) was selected as preferred bidder today in the country’s indigenousKF-X fighter program, South Korean media reported today, beating a partnership of Airbus and Korean Airlines. KAI are expected to partner with Lockheed Martin for the $7.9 billion program, which will replace the existing Korean fleet of F-4 and F-5 fighters, as well as equip the Indonesian Air Force, which joined the project in 2010.

Feb 23/15: KAL partners with Airbus.
On February 22, Yonhap reported that KAL indeed signed an MOU with Airbus to present a join offer.

Jan 27/15: KAL prospects dim. After proposals were sought on December 23, one government official was quoted as saying that price may be a controlling factor. That probably presupposes that KAL’s international partners, like Boeing, were staying with them, as they can help make up for the leaner engineering department at KAL. But one report indicated that Boeing was pulling out. The consortium, also to have included Airbus, would have pushed a revised F-18 model.

Oct 15/14: F-35 & KF-16. Korean media report that a proposed $753 million price hike for BAE’s KF-16 upgrade deal could result in cancellation. Lockheed Martin waits in the wings, and is reportedly extending an offer that would include more technical help with the multinational KF-X fighter program if the ROKAF switches.

The US government is reportedly demanding another WON 500 billion (about $471 million) for unspecified added “risk management,” while BAE is reportedly requesting another WON 300 million ($282 million) to cover a 1-year program delay. The Koreans are becoming visibly frustrated and distrustful, and have said openly that the deal may be canceled.

Lockheed Martin’s angle is a spinoff from their recent F-35A deal, which will supply 40 aircraft to the ROKAF. Part of their industrial offsets involved 300 man-years of help designing the proposed KF-X. They were cautious about providing too much help, but they reportedly see enough benefit in badly wounding an F-16 upgrade competitor to offer another 400 man-years of support for KF-X (total: 700) if the ROKAF switches. Sources: Chosun Ilbo, “U.S. in Massive Price Hike for Fighter Jet Upgrade” | Defense News, “F-16 Upgrade: Problems With S. Korea-BAE Deal Could Open Door to Lockheed” | Korea Times, “Korea may nix BAE’s KF-16 upgrade deal”.

Sept 24/14: F-35A. DAPA agrees on a WON 7.3 trillion deal for 40 F-35A fighters. including technology transfer in 17 sectors for use in KF-X. Transfers will include flight control and fire suppression technologies, and this appears to have been the final part of the KF-X puzzle. DAPA is said to have finalized their WON 8.5 trillion KF-X development plan, but it still has to be approved.

Subsequent reports indicate that Lockheed Martin has limited its proposed help with KF-X to just 300 man-years, rather than the 800 desired. In exchange, they offered a very unusual offset: they would buy a military communications satellite for South Korea, and launch it by 2017. Lockheed Martin isn’t saying anything, but Thales is favored as the source, as they provided the payload for South Korea’s Kopmsat-5 radar observation satellite, and have played a major role in KT Sat’s Koreasat commercial telecommunications satellites.

Why wouldn’t Lockheed Martin, which makes these satellites itself, just built one? Because this way, it doesn’t have to deal with any American weapon export approval processes and restrictions, which would have delayed overall negotiations and might have endangered them. That’s a lot of effort and money, in order to avoid ITAR laws. Or added help for KF-X. Sources: Yonhap, “Seoul to buy 40 F-35A fighters from Lockheed Martin in 7.3 tln won deal” | Defense News, “F-16 Upgrade: Problems With S. Korea-BAE Deal Could Open Door to Lockheed” | Reuters, “Exclusive: Lockheed to buy European satellite for South Korea in F-35 deal”.

Aug 31/14: DAPA gave public notice of KF-X bids this month, with plans to pick the preferred bidder (likely KAI) in November 2014, and sign a system development contract in December 2014.

The estimated WON 20 trillion development and production cost for 120 fighters is giving South Korea pause, especially with the ROKAF’s coming fighter fleet shortage (q.v. March 26/14). Sources: Korea Herald, “Fighter procurement projects pick up speed”.

Aug 21/14: Engines. GE declares their interest in equipping the ROKAF’s KF-X. The firm already equips some ROKAF F-15Ks (F110), Korea’s own T/TA/FA-50 fighter family (F404), Surion helicopters (T700-701K), and many ROK naval ships (LM2500). The F404, LM2500, and T700 are all assembled locally in South Korea. GE is promising to expand aero engine technology cooperation, increase the component localization rate, and support KF-X exports via joint marketing, while ensuring that over half of KF-X’s engine components are locally assembled.

GE’s F404, F414, and F110 jet engines are all viable possibilities. The key questions will involve matching their engineering specifications to the new platform: space, weight and balance, fuel consumption vs. onboard fuel, and twin-engine thrust vs. expected weight.

GE competitor Pratt & Whitney’s F100 engine equips some ROKAF F-15Ks, and all of its F-16s. Sources: Yonhap, “GE eyes S. Korea’s fighter jet development project” | Joong An Daily, “GE wants in on new fighter jets”.

July 18/14: Twin-engines. South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff endorse the plan to develop KF-X as a twin-engine fighter by 2025. That seems to pick the C-103/ C-501 (q.v. Feb 6/14), a twin-engine design that’s similar to the F-35 in overall shape. This decision an important step, but it isn’t a contract, or even a budget.

The state-funded Korea Institute for Defense Analysis (KIDA) didn’t favor the twin-engine option, because they believed it would increase the fighter’s cost, and wouldn’t have a competitive edge. There actually is an edge for twin-engine fighters in a number of markets, because they’re less likely to crash due to engine failure. A country with large or remote areas to cover – Indonesia, for instance – will benefit from that choice. As for increases in cost, fighters like the Anglo-French Jaguar and Taiwan’s F-CK are smaller twin-engine planes that were successfully developed at reasonable cost. The key cost factor isn’t engines, it’s overall specifications.

With that said, this choice does rule out KF-X’s least-cost, least-risk C-501/ KFX-E design, which would have been derived from the single-engined FA-50 that’s currently in production at KAI. Sources: Defense News, “S. Korea Opts for Twin-Engine Fighter Development” | Reuters, “S.Korea military chiefs endorse $8.2 bln development plan for home-built fighters”.

JCS picks twin-engine C-103 design

March 26/14: Fill-ins. The ROKAF needs to retire its fleets of 136 or so F-5E/F Tiger light fighters, and about 30 F-4 Phantom fighter-bombers. Meanwhile, The F-16 fleet is about to begin a major upgrade program that will keep part of that fleet out of service. The F-X-3 buy of F-35As is expected to be both late, and 20 jets short of earlier plans. The KF-X mid-level fighter project will be even later – it isn’t likely to arrive until 2025, if it arrives at all. The ROKAF is buying 60 FA-50s to help offset some of the F-5 retirements, but the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses (KIDA) sees this combination of events leaving South Korea about 80 planes short.

FA-50 deliveries only began in August 2013, and foreign FA-50 orders from Iraq and the Philippines are beginning to take up additional slots on the production line. As such, the ROKAF may be leaning toward a quicker stopgap:

“The Air Force is considering leasing used combat jets as part of ways to provide the interim defense capability because replacement of aging F-4s and F-5s wouldn’t take place in a timely manner,” a senior Air Force official said, asking for anonymity. “As midlevel combat jets are mostly in shortage, the Air Force is considering renting 16 to 20 used F-16s from the U.S. Air Force…. “The U.S. Air Force stood down some F-16s in the wake of the defense spending cut affected by the sequestration,” another Air Force official said, asking not to be named. “Under current circumstances, we can rent F-16s or buy used ones.”

It will be interesting to see if the USAF will let the ROKAF lease, or just have them buy the jets at cut-rate prices. Sources: Yonhap, “S. Korea considers F-16 lease deal to replace aging jets”.

Jan 5/14: Budget. The Korea Times reports that the 2014 defense budget has appropriated KRW 20 billion (about $19 million) to finalize KF-X’s design. A subsequent report from Aviation Week describes conditions that might be difficult for KF-X to meet:

“The latest South Korean budget provides 20 billion won ($19 million) to continue KF-X studies in 2014, hedged by two major conditions—development cost must be capped at just under $8 billion and be complete by 2025, and the aircraft must be approved for export by the U.S. An international partner must be found and contribute a 15% investment.”

A decision between the available design options is possible by February, and would be followed by detail design work. With respect to US export approval, AW confirms that “Eurofighter is still trying to offer South Korea 40 Typhoons, along with support for KF-X.” Unlike Lockheed Martin’s expected assistance, the vast majority of Eurofighter GmbH technology would be beyond American export approvals. Unfortunately, the ROK military’s short-circuiting of DAPA’s fighter competition (q.v. Nov 22/13) will expand the scope of possible American KF-X export clearance interference. Korea Times, “Military to flesh own fighter jet plan” | Aviation Week, “Fast-Changing Trends In Asia Fighter Market”.

Feb 6/14: KAI’s official blog talks about the prospects for the K-FX. It clarifies that the design decision will be between the C-103, which is a twin-engine design similar to the F-35 in overall shape, and the FA-50 derived C-501/ KFX-E. Sources: KAI Blog.

2011 – 2013

Program halt lifted, as specs get clearer; Indonesia confirms, then faces a delayed program again; Turkey invited, but seem to be going their own way. KAI’s FA-50
(click to view full)

Nov 22/13: KF-X moved up. South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff add urgency to proposed development of the local KF-X fighter, moving it from a long-range project to an intermediate-term project for development by 2020. Past timelines have given 7 years from the beginning of development to the end, which is already pretty fast. Even if KF-X receives follow-on approval and budgets, 7 years means development doesn’t end until 2022 or so.

They also announce that there will be no competition for F-X Phase III – the F-35 is the only option. As a result, Lockheed Martin is expected to lend its expertise to KAI for KF-X, as part of an industrial offsets program that will also include a new military communications satellite and a cyber-warfare training center. ROK’s Yonhap, “(LEAD) S. Korea decides to buy 40 Lockheed F-35s from 2018” | Aviation Week, “South Korea To Order 40 F-35s, Maybe 20 More Later” | E&T, “South Korea confirms F-35 fighter jet deal” | NY Times, “In South Korea, Delays Drag a Project to Build Homegrown Fighter Jets” | China’s Xinhua, “S. Korea picks Lockheed Martin’s F-35 as main fighter jet”.

Nov 5/13: Sub-contractors. Rockwell Collins is expressing interest in KF-X. They’re already a significant avionics supplier for existing T-50 family jets and Surion helicopters. Honeywell’s senior director of APAC Customer Business Mark Burgess:

“We are in discussions with KAI and Samsung Techwin to explore how Honeywell can contribute to the KF-X program.”

Oct 28/13: KF-X shrunk? Aviation Week reports that KAI has responded to the KF-X’s program’s stall with a smaller, single-engine “KFX-E/ C501” design that uses the F-35-style C103 design as a base, and proposes to reuse some systems from the FA-50. Overall weight would drop from around 11 tonnes to 9.3t (an F-16 is 8.9t), removing advance provision for an internal weapon bay, and leaving 2 underbody stations unused if a centerline fuel tank is carried.

Engine choices would involve the same PW F100 or GE F110 choice available to F-16s, leaving KFX-E vulnerable to US export bans. Avionics would come from LIG Nex1, and a Korean AESA radar with about 1,000 T/R modules and a claimed performance similar to the F-16E/F’s AN/APG-80 would be fitted. Unlike the F-35, the targeting pod would have to be carried externally, and self-protection antennas will be part of a carried package, rather than conformal. South Korea believes they can develop the targeting pod themselves, and they’ve already developed an ALQ-200K ECM pod that could be adapted for internal carriage.

The problem with all of this is that the design math is adverse. KFX-E’s ceiling offers poorer acceleration and range versus the F-16, a design that doesn’t appear to be optimized for maneuverability, and a radar that’s likely to be technically behind the ROKAF’s upgraded KF-16 fighters, all without the benefits of stealth in its initial configuration. The product would due to enter service the mid-2020s, and costs are difficult to predict but are unlikely to be less than a current F-16. This would augur poorly for exports, and makes the case for internal ROKAF adoption more difficult. Worse, launch partner Indonesia in particular values range, which would endanger their continued participation. KFX-E seems to be a formula that minimizes one type of risk, while increasing others. Sources: Aviation Week, “KAI Proposes Smaller KF-X Design” | IHS Jane’s, “ADEX 2013: KAI unveils new version of KFX fighter” (incl. picture).

July 30/13: Turkey. Hurriyet quotes “a senior official familiar with the program” who says that $11 – $13 billion would be a realistic development cost for Turkey’s planned TF-X fighter. That actually is a reasonable estimate for a 4.5+ generation machine, but even this figure adds $50 million per plane to a large national order of 200 fighters. Keeping costs within the official’s $100 million per plane target will be challenging, which means a 200 jet program would cost Turkey $31 – $33 billion if everything goes well. Which won’t happen, especially if Turkey pushes for ambitious specifications.

That math offers daunting odds for a national jet program, and much of the same math can be expected to apply to KF-X. Will sticker shock cause Turkey to take another look at collaboration with Korea? Push them to abandon TF-X and buy something else? Or just be ignored by local politicians looking to make big promises? Hurriyet Daily News.

May 23/13: EADS. EADS Cassidian reportedly announces that they would invest $2 billion in the K-FX fighter development project, and help market the plane internationally, if the Eurofighter is chosen for F-X-3. Investments would include a maintenance repair and overhaul (MRO) facility that could extend to the KF-X, and an aerospace software center.

It isn’t a bad idea for EADS. Barring multiple orders from new sources, it’s very unlikely that the Eurofighter will still be in production by 2022. Upgrades and maintenance will continue for some time, but the C-203 KF-X design could offer EADS a new option to sell, with a fundamental design that can improve toward stealth fighter status. The question is whether South Korea wants to go forward. Yonhap News.

May 16/13: Indonesia. Indonesian Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro says that they remain committed to the KFX/IFX program. The Jakarta Post:

“We have told our South Korean counterparts that we will continue doing our part. Whatever their decision is, and whatever technology they focus on, we will follow their lead and our 20 percent of share will remain,” Purnomo said…. TB Hasanuddin of House Commission I on defense and foreign affairs, said that about Rp 1.6 trillion ($164.8 million) was already spent on the project.”

The question is whether South Korea chooses to pick up the project again, after the 18-month delay is over.

April 29/13: Details. Aviation Week recaps the ROK ADD’s KF-X plan (q.v. Feb 18/13 entry), and quotes “a former air force officer who has been involved in planning for KF-X” to say that radar cross-section for Block 1 will be between 0.1 – 1.0 square meters. It adds that the choice between the conventional layout C103 and C203 canard design probably comes down to the development partner Korea chooses: C103 if American, C203 if European.

Candidate engines for the twin-engine design are reportedly the GR F404 used in the FA-50, Eurojet’s EJ200 used in the Eurofighter, or GE’s F414 used in the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, JAS-39E/F Gripen NG, and India’s Tejas Mk.II. Snecma’s M88, used in Dassault’s Rafale, reportedly isn’t a candidate. Aviation Week.

April 5/13: South Korean media detail a proposal from EADS to produce 80% of F-X Phase 3’s 60 fighters at KAI, if DAPA picks their Eurofighter. The Yonhap report also discusses this potential industrial boost for KAI in the context of the KF-X program,:

“Many have been calling on the Park Geun-hye administration to promptly make a decision to either go ahead with the large-scale airplane development project or put on the brakes if it is deemed economically unsustainable.”

The rest of the Yonhap report may be switching contexts to the F-X-3 high-end fighter acquisition, as it describes a decision to be made by June 2013, as part of a renewed emphasis on major defense projects in light of North Korea’s actions. That doesn’t entirely track with previous reports that place resumption of KF-X at June 2014, if it happens at all. It does track with reports concerning the F-X-3 program, so the confusion could just be poor writing. What is true is that provocations from North Korea are very much a double-edged sword for KF-X. On the one hand, they boost the idea of defense spending generally. On the other hand, they raise needs like anti-submarine warfare, missile defense improvements, etc. that will be higher priorities than KF-X. Yonhap News Service | Hankoryeh.

March 20/13: Turkey. The Turks appear to be picking an independent course toward their future fighter aircraft, in line with rumors that they wanted more control than the KF-X program could give them. Their SSM signed an August 2011 deal with Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI) to carry out the conceptual design work, and recent reports add a preliminary agreement between TAI and Saab Group for technical assistance. Reports add that TAI is expected to acquire Saab’s aircraft design tools, which would make cooperation much easier.

These moves don’t completely rule out KF-X participation, but they do weight the odds the other way. Defense Industry Undersecretary Murad Bayar says that Turkey’s project began in 2012, adding that after some modeling trials, one of the designs has matured. After completing the design phase, the undersecretary will offer a program plan to Turkey’s Defense Industry Executive Committee.

Turkey faces some of the same dilemmas as South Korea. If 2023 is the first flight date for a 4.5 generation fighter, there’s a real risk that the design will be outmoded from the outset. On the other hand, designing and prototyping an indigenous jet from scratch takes time, and technical overreach versus current capabilities is incredibly risky. One “top official from a Western aircraft maker” told Hurriyet that Turkey may already be headed down that path: “…we had to step back when we understood that the technical requirements for the aircraft are far from being realistic.” Hurriyet | Hurriyet follow-on | AIN.

March 1/13: 2nd Delay. Indonesian Defense Ministry official Pos Hutabarat confirms that KF-X has been postponed by 18 months to June 2014, while President Park Geun-hye decides whether to continue the project, and secures Parliamentary approval for that choice. Indonesia signed a 2010 MoU to become part of the project. Reports indicate an investment to date of IDR 1.6 trillion (about $165 million), with 30 PT Dirgantara Indonesia engineers at KAI working on the project.

UPI says that the KFX/IFX fighter’s price has already risen to $50-$60 million per aircraft, and this is before a prototype even exists. That’s already comparable to a modern F/A-18E/F Super Hornet or JAS-39 Gripen, in return for hopes of similar performance many years from now. Jakarta Globe | UPI.

2nd program delay

Feb 18/13: Details. Aviation Week reports that the Korea Institute for Defense Analysis has given KF-X a sharp negative review, even though it’s a defense ministry think-tank. In brief: the ROK isn’t technologically ready, and the project’s KRW 10+ trillion cost will be about twice as much as similar imported fighters. The 2013 budget is just KRW 4.5 billion, to continue studies.

Those studies are coming to some conclusions. The ROK ADD would still have a pick a design if they go ahead: either the conventional C103 fighter layout, or the C203 design with forward canards. Either aircraft would be a twin-engine fighter weighing around 10.4 tonnes, with stealth shaping. Bock 1 would only have to meet the radar cross-section of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet or Eurofighter Typhoon. Block 2 would add internal weapon bays, which Block 1 would be compatible with but not have. Additional tolerance and coating improvements would reduce stealth to the level of an F-117. Block 3 would aim for further improvements to the level of the B-2 bomber or F-35.

The ROK Agency for Defense Development says that if full-scale development begins in October 2014, the 1st KF-X Block 1 prototype flight would take until September 2020. Based on the history of other programs, the new plane would be hard pressed to enter service before 2025. Aviation Week.

Oct 27/11: KF-X specs. Fight International:

“In 2013, South Korea and two national partners will start developing a medium-sized and probably twin-engined fighter. It will be more agile than a Lockheed Martin F-16, with an advanced sensor suite and fusion software on a par with the US company’s new-generation F-35. Aiming to enter operations in 2021, the new design will also carry a bespoke arsenal of indigenous missiles and precision-guided munitions. That is the vision for the KF-X programme, outlined on 21 October at the Seoul air show by South Korean government and academic officials.”

DAPA’s technical requirements reportedly include an AESA radar and onboard IRST (InfraRed Search and Track) sensors, standard fly-by-wire flight and HOTAS (hands on throttle and stick) pilot controls, an NVG-compatible helmet-mounted display, and sensor fusion to the large screen single display. That last bit is especially challenging, and DAPA acknowledged that foreign partners will be needed. They hope to begin flight tests in 2016-2017, with an 8-year system development phase and a 7-plane test fleet (up from 5 prototypes at the Indonesian MoU).

Under this vision, South Korea’s LiG Nex1 would also develop a compatible line of short and medium range air-to-air missiles, strike missiles, and precision weapons to complement DAPA’s 500 pound Korea GPS guided bomb (KGGB). That array will expand global weapon choices if DAPA follows through, but the challenge will be getting them integrated with other countries’ aircraft. Ask the French how that goes.

KF-X specs

July 14/11: Indonesia confirmed. About a year after the MoU, The secretary general of Indonesia’s defence ministry, Erris Heriyanto, confirms the MoU’s terms to Indonesia’s ­official Antara news agency. KAI EVP Enes Park had called Indonesia’s involvement unconfirmed at the November 2010 Indo Defence show, but the Antara report appears to confirm it.

Turkey unveiled indigenous fighter plans of its own in December 2010, with the aim of fielding a fighter by 2023, but they haven’t made any commitments to KF-X. Flight International.

April 2011: Postponement of the KF-X project is reportedly lifted, as South Korea gets a bit clearer about their requirements.

Resumed

2008 – 2010

Reality check scales back specs, before indecision suspends program; Indonesia signs MoU. T-129: Quid pro quo?
(click to view full)

Dec 27/10: Yo-yo. South Korea’s Yonhap News agency reports that South Korea’s military is trying to swing KF-X back to a stealth fighter program, in the wake of North Korea’s Nov. 23 shelling on Yeonpyeong Island.

Subsequent reports indicate that the uncertainty about KF-X requirements leads to a program halt, until things can get sorted out. Yonhap.

Aug 9/10: Turkey. DAPA aircraft programs director Maj. Gen. Choi Cha-kyu says that Turkey is actively considering the K-FX fighter program, and would bear the same 20% project share as Indonesia if they come on board.

There are reports that in return, Turkey wants the ROK to pick the T-129 ATAK helicopter under the AH-X heavy attack helicopter program. Turkey bought the A129 Mangusta design from AgustaWestland, as part of a September 2007 contract to build 51-92 helicopters for the Turkish Army. Korea Times | Hurriyet.

Now: TNI-AU F-16A
(click to view full)

July 15/10: Indonesia. Indonesia signs a Memorandum of Understanding to participate in KF-X. They’ll pay 20% of the estimated WON 5.1 trillion (about $4.1 billion) development effort, with 5 prototypes to be built before 2020, and commit to buying 50 of the fighters. South Korea has only committed to 60% of the development cost, which leaves 20% in limbo. DAPA’s KF-X program director Col. Lee Jong-hee says:

“There are two options on the table. One is to lure financial investments from other nations, such as Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. The other is to receive investments from Western aircraft makers wishing to participate in the KF-X.”

The Indonesian agreement follows a March 2009 Letter of Intent that was co-signed by South Korean President Lee Myung-bak. Indonesian MPs urged the government to conduct a feasibility test beforehand, but that wasn’t done. Key issues from Indonesia’s point of view include KF-X’s adequacy for the TNI-AU’s needs; technical and fiscal feasibility; technology and cost risk; the benefits to Indonesia’s aviation industry, given a break-even set by Aviation Week at 250-300 fighters for under $41 million each; and the role of 3rd country tech for engines. etc. which could still leave the fighters subject to foreign embargoes. Defense News | Jakarta Post.

Indonesia joins the program

Sept 12/09: KF-X drivers. Aviation Week offers their take on KFX’s positioning and industrial drivers:

“South Korea has decided that it can’t afford to build a cutting-edge stealth fighter…. it is considering building a gen-4.5 fighter, which might emerge as a jazzed up Typhoon or Super Hornet…. KFX would go into service in the early 2020s, perhaps a quarter of a century behind its technology level.

….Korea Aerospace will run out of fighter development work in a few years when the FA-50 is finished. It presumably does not have the technology to step straight from that to a combat drone. And it can’t spend next decade building up skills with an improved, single-seat FA-50, because the air force wants bigger aircraft…. the KFX would perhaps be an extreme example of sacrifices made in the name of self reliance or, perhaps, nationalism.”

July 23/09: KF-X. Defense News reports that “South Korea Drops 5th-Generation Fighter Plan,” but the title is misleading. The Weapon Systems Concept Development and Application Research Center of Konkuk University asked Boeing, Eurofighter, Lockheed Martin and Saab about their views on the per-plane cost estimate of $50 million, as well as budget-sharing ideas and technology transfer.

The problem is that South Korea’s specifications as described most closely mirror the ($150-180 million each, and $10+ billion development) F-22 Raptor, indicating that some reconciliation with reality is still necessary. The center will wrap up the feasibility study by October 2009, and DAPA is supposed to issue a decision on the KF-X initiative by year’s end. That will determine whether KF-X competes with/ supplants F-X-3, or proceeds as a separate program.

May 12/09: Changing gears. The Korea Times reports that the ROKAF’s Studies and Analyses Wing made an interim decision KF-X operational requirements in March 2009:

“Basic requirements call for a F-18E/F Super Hornet-class aircraft equipped with 4.5-generation semi-stealth functions, a domestically-built active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar [“based on accrued technologies from Israel”], a 32,000-pound of engine thrust and fully integrated weapons and sensors systems…. The KF-X aircraft would be either a single-engine fighter or a twin-engine one, [the source] added. It is the first time that KF-X operational requirements have been revealed.”

DAPA expects a final program decision around the end of 2009, and KF-X is expected to be part of the military’s 2010-14 force improvement package.

Jan 28/08: Reality check. The current program was scheduled to be followed by a KF-X program to develop and indigenous 5th generation/ stealth fighter to replace all F-5E Tiger IIs and F-4E Phantom IIs. After a feasibility study in 2008, the project would aim to produce the next-generation jets by 2020, with the goal of building 120 planes in a bid to secure proprietary technology and strengthen the country’s medium level fighter jet capacity. The goal is reportedly a single-seat, twin-engine plane with about 40,000 pounds of thrust from its engines, with more stealth than the Eurofighter Typhoon or Dassault Rafale, but less stealth than the F-35.

Now the Korea Development Institute has delivered a report concluding that the economic and industrial returns would be weak in proportion to its cost: about 3 trillion won/ $3 billion in returns, on a 10 trillion won investment. Papers quote foreign experts who estimate development costs of up to $12 billion. Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration said the KDI report was for reference only, and the project decision would include other factors such as export prospects and technological capacity.

$7 billion is not a sum to be thrown away casually, and the difference would be very noticeable within South Korea’s defense budgets. Options like partnering with EADS on a stealthier version of the Eurofighter, for instance, might lower development costs and offer an additional option. Nevertheless, with F-X-3 likely to select a stealthy platform, a merger with the K-FX program and negotiation of an industrial deal seems more likely. Especially given South Korea’s demographic crunch, which will begin to bite by 2020. Chosun Ilbo | Korea Times.

Additional Readings The KF-X Program

• Aviation Week – KFX Timeline. To 2013.

• Aviation Week (Feb 3/14) – Fast-Changing Trends In Asia Fighter Market

• Flight International (Oct 27/11) – IN FOCUS: South Korea outlines strategy for indigenous fighter.

• World Politics Review (Aug 13/10) – Global Insider: Indonesia-South Korea Joint Fighter Project (subscription). Says that KF-X will be based on KAI’s T-50, and aims to produce a fighter on par with the F-16C/D Block 50.

• Defense News (July 15/10) – Indonesia Joins South Korean Fighter Effort

• The Jakarta Post (July 12/10) – RI-S. Korea KFX cooperation: The second best option?

• Aviation Week (Sept 21/09) – A Generation 4.5 Fighter for the 2020s

Related Programs

• DID – Korea’s T-50 Family Spreads Its Wings. Some accounts have KF-X as an FA-50 derivative.

• DID – Korea’s F-X Multi-Role Fighter Buys: Phases 2 & 3. The ROKAF’s high-end fighter plans.

Americas

• It may have been coming for some time, but the Pentagon has finally admitted that the F-35 will not be cleared for full rate production until 2018. Frank Kendell, the program’s chief weapons tester, had been warning of delays for some time; however, it had been maintained by some that the jet’s initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) would occur as planned in August or September 2017. Now that reality has hit home, the extra six months will be spent retrofitting the 23 aircraft required for IOT&E with the full 3F software and hardware patches.

• USS John Paul Jones was used to validate the ability of the Aegis Baseline 9 to track Medium Range Ballistic Missile (MRBM) targets within the Earth’s atmosphere recently. Supported by the Navy, Missile Defense Agency, and Lockheed Martin the use of the missile destroyer marks the first demonstration of Aegis’s ability to conduct a complicated tracking exercise against an MRBM during its endo phase of flight. The development comes as targets and threats have become more advanced, with Aegis BMD evolving over the last 20 years from a tracking experiment to today’s capability in which it can detect, track and engage targets.

Middle East North Africa

• Leonardo-Finmeccanica has announced that Pakistan will purchase an undisclosed number of AW139 helicopters for Search & Rescue missions. This will add to 11 already in service, and delivery is to commence in 2017. The contract is part of a fleet renewal program spread over several batches, including a logistic support and training package.

Europe

• Ukraine’s Antonov has been tipped as the favorite candidate in Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd’s. (HAL) medium military transport aircraft program. The company emerged as the frontrunner out of five bids received by the company after meeting all the necessary requirements alongside a recent design with state-of-the-art aviation systems like fly-by-wire, high-efficiency engines and all-weather operations. Antonov or AN class of aircraft have been part of the Indian Air Force (IAF) for over five decades. The IAF has more than 100 AN-32 aircraft recently upgraded on its inventory.

• Sweden’s air force looks set to advance a competition to select its new jet trainer to replace the service’s Saab 105 by the end of the decade. After an initial request for information was issued late last year, the air force and the state’s procurement agency now need to refine their exact needs for the right replacement. Sweden had initially expressed interest in participating in a proposed multinational Eurotraining project however that failed to materialize.

Asia Pacific

• An op-ed piece published last week, suggesting the US should supply AGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missiles to Japan has received a rebuttal from Chinese researchers. Experts from the China Institute of International Studies stated that while the idea of supplying the missile to Tokyo was not new, it would pose a threat to other countries in East Asia. The warning most likely comes following efforts started last year by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to pursue changing the country’s post-WW2 constitution to allow it to re-arm and expand its forces.

• Israel’s Rafael Advanced Systems looks set to win the Indian Army’s short-range surface-to-air missile (SRSAM) contest with its Spyder system. According to the Economic Times, the Spyder seems poised to win after offerings from Sweden’s Saab and Russia’s Rosoboronexport failed to comply with the Army’s requirements during technical trials. The competition has been running for five years.

Today’s Video

• The “Hell Cannon“: Homemade artillery of Syria’s rebel armies:

SPYDER Mobile Firing Unit
(click to view full)

Israel’s SPYDER air defense system follows a recent trend of using advanced air-air missiles designed for fighter jets as ground-launched surface-to-air missiles (SAM). This truck-mounted system mixes radar and optical tracking with any combination of short to medium-range Derby 4 and ultra-agile short-range 5th generation Python 5 air to air missiles, in order to create a versatile system adapted for a wider range of threats. Hence its inclusion in in our AMRAAM FOCUS article’s “international competitors” section.

India has become the system’s inaugural export customer. SPYDER will reportedly replace India’s Russian-made OSA-AKM/SA-8 Gecko and ZRK-BD Strela-10M/ SA-13 Gopher SAM systems, and the purchase has decisively shelved the Indian DRDO’s failed Trishul project.

More success may be on the way. As India’s Air Force gears up, the Army is reportedly about to follow suit with an even bigger contract.

The SPYDER System SPYDER Systems
(click to view full)

Each SPYDER ADS-SR Mobile Firing Unit can slant-launch up to 4 missiles in either lock on after launch (LOAL) mode, or lock on before launch (LOBL). This short-range version offers 360 degree quick engagement capability and 60-target tracking via IAI’s Elta EL/M 2106 ATAR 3D surveillance radar and TOPLITE optical sensor, a kill range of over 15 km, and openly advertised effectiveness from 20 – 9,000 meters (65 – 30,000 feet).

A new SPYDER ADS-MR 6×6 truck version was unveiled at Eurosatory 2006. It’s restricted to LOAL but offers 8 vertical-launch missiles in any mix, adds a dedicated radar vehicle with a more powerful radar, and puts boosters on all missiles, in order to improve advertised range to 50 km/ 30 miles, and performance to 16 km/ 52,000 feet.

A typical SPYDER squadron consists of 1 Mobile Command and Control Unit, plus 4 Mobile Firing Units with their own built-in power supplies and missile sets of 4-8 missiles.

Contracts and Key Events SPYDER MR vs. SR
(click to view full)

May 26/16: Israel’s Rafael Advanced Systems looks set to win the Indian Army’s short-range surface-to-air missile (SRSAM) contest with its Spyder system. According to the Economic Times, the Spyder seems poised to win after offerings from Sweden’s Saab and Russia’s Rosoboronexport failed to comply with the Army’s requirements during technical trials. The competition has been running for five years.

October 26/15: Vietnam has purchased [Vietnamese] SPYDER air defense systems, manufactured by Israel’s Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd. The surface-to-air missile system is capable of launching the company’s advanced Derby beyond visual range and Python-5 missiles, with it unclear whether the Vietnamese military has purchased the Short Range (SPYDER-SR) or Medium Range (SPYDER-MR) version, with respective ranges of 20km and 50km.

Aug 18/09: Indian Army’s QR-SAM. The Times of India reports that India’s Ministry of Defence has finally given the go-ahead for the army’s INR 40 billion (about $820 million) Quick-Reaction SAM program. These mobile missiles would protect Indian maneuver elements like armored columns and troop concentrations, as well as important areas and installations. The Army seeks to equip 3 regiments with this contract, which is over twice the size of the IAF’s 18 squadron purchase. The Times of India:

“With the indigenous Akash and Trishul air defence projects not meeting its “user-requirements”… The Defence Acquisitions Council, chaired by defence minister A K Antony, discussed the entire matter on Monday. Though there was no official word, sources said the Israeli SpyDer QR-SAM systems had been selected for the project.

…The projects were in a limbo for quite some time now, with one of the main reasons being the naming of Israeli Aerospace Industries (IAI) and Rafael in the Rs 1,160-crore Barak-I deal kickbacks case by the CBI. The government, however, was reluctant to blacklist these Israeli armament firms because it held that it would prove “counter-productive” since there were several “crucial” defence projects underway with them.”

Jan 20/09: SR-SAM – Revenge of DRDO? India Defence reports that neither MBDA nor India’s state-run DRDO have given up on their “SR-SAM” short range air defense proposal. Rumors peg it as a combination of DRDO’s Trishul and MBDA’s VL-MICA system, though Trishul’s failure and VL-MICA’s techologies mean that claims regarding Trishul technology are likely to be about saving face as much as anything else.

The “Maitri” LLQRM proposal’s positioning would be directly competitive with RAFAEL’s SPYDER, and VL-MICA is deployable as a mobile system. That could affect SPYDER’s future expansion within the Indian military, and might even affect its prospects if program problems crop up. MICA’s capabilities mean that SR-SAM/Maitri would also be directly competitive with India’s indigenous Akash, and might even impinge on the proposed medium range MR-SAM deal involving a longer-range Barak missile.

Dec 11/08: The Indian Ministry of Defence confirms that it has signed the Spyder contract – and canceled Trishul. Defence Minister Shri AK Antony, in a written reply to Shri Tarini Kanta Roy in Rajya Sabha:

“Ministry of Defence has signed a contract with M/s Rafael, Israel to procure Spyder Low Level Quick Reaction Missile System (LLQRM) for the Indian Air Force.

The proposal for Trishul system was foreclosed due to its inability to meet certain critical operational requirements. However, it served as a technology demonstrator and the expertise acquired with the technologies developed during design and development phase of Trishul Missile System are being utilized for developing state-of-the-art Short Range Surface to Air Missile System.”

Costs were not disclosed, though some reports place the deal at $260 million; previous reports of R 18,000 crore would be about $362 million at current exchange rates. Nor was the future composition of India’s Spyder force; Spyder systems now come in the 8-pack, booster-enabled SPYDER ADS-MR, and the 4-pack SPYDER ADS-SR. Indian MoD | domain-b.

Oct 13/08: DNA India reports that a new order from the Union government downgraded both IAI and RAFAEL’s position as weapon suppliers to India, and may place the Spyder contract in jeopardy. The issue is not expected to sort itself out until after the 2009 Parliamentary elections. Read “India Downgrades Vendor Status of IAI and RAFAEL” for more.

Sept 1/08: The Spyder contract was delayed for almost 2 years by political accusations, but those have apparently been put to rest. Defense News reports that a $260 million contract has now been signed with Rafael. The Indian Air Force will receive 18 Spyder systems, with deliveries beginning in early 2011 and finishing by August 2012. Unusually, the contract will not include any mandatory industrial offsets.

March 19/07: Reports indicate that MBDA is working on a deal with the DRDO, whose Trishul short range anti-aorcraft missile project continues to flounder. DRDO’s Defence Research and Development Laboratory (DRDL) would team with MBDA to develop a “new-generation low-level, quick-reaction missile (LLQRM) system” known as ‘Maitri’, for the Indian Navy and Air Force. India Defence.

The project is said to be worth $500 million and is to be signed in May between the Hyderabad-based DRDL and MBDA. It is retry to revive the work done under the unsuccessful Trishul LLQRM project,

October 2006: India Defence quoted Air Chief SP Tyagi as saying India is close to wrapping up a deal to purchase quick reaction surface-to-air missiles from Israel as a mobile air defense system. Under the deal, India proposed to buy 18 SPYDER (Surface-to-air PYthon and DERby) missile systems and accompanying missiles in a deal worth more than Rs 1,800 crores (18 billion Indian rupees, or about $395.4 million at the time). RAFAEL would be the prime contractor, and Israel Aircraft Industries the major subcontractor.

Additional Readings

• RAFAEL – SPYDER ADS-MR

• RAFAEL – SPYDER ADS-SR

• RAFAEL – Python 5: Full Sphere IR Air-to-Air Missile

• RAFAEL – Derby: Beyond visual Range Air-to-Air Missile

• Israeli Weapons – SPYDER

• Army Technology – SPYDER Surface-to-Air Python 5 and Derby Air Defence Missile System, Israel

• DID – India’s IGMP Missile Programs. Including the canceled Trishul and the medium range Akash SAM.

• DID – India & Israel Introducing MR-SAM. Based on a longer-range version of the Barak missile.

Americas

• USAF commitments to maintain 1,900 aircraft beyond 2021 may be in trouble according to the Pentagon’s annual aviation, inventory, and funding plan for fiscal years 2017 through 2046. Budget constraints across the armed forces are requiring the Air Force to retire more aircraft than it procures; with the report predicting the fleet to reach its lowest in point 2031. The report notes that the service plans to sunset John McCain’s beloved A-10 between FY18 and FY22, but hints that those plans “are subject to change,” while Congress’s desire to restart the F-22 Raptor production line looks increasingly like a non-runner.

• Huntington Ingalls has been awarded a $152 million US Navy contact for advance planning for the construction of the aircraft carrier Enterprise (CVN 80). The third aircraft carrier in the Gerald R. Ford class was named in honor of the Navy’s first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, USS Enterprise (CVN 65). Work to be carried out includes engineering, design, planning, and procurement of long-lead-time material, and will be performed at the company’s Newport News Shipbuilding division through March 2018. Construction is to commence in 2018 and be delivered to the Navy in 2027.

• Weapons testers upgrading the Northrop Grumman RQ-4B Global Hawk have commenced laser-printing simulated ice for ice-shape testing on the UAV. Using a process known as “selective laser sintering,” it is possible to characterize ice buildup on the aircrafts wings and V-tail, a common problem found on most aircraft. The testing will now allow operators to know the airframe’s exact tolerance to buildup when carrying different fuel loads. In use since the late 1990s, the USAF is looking to extend the UAV’s lifetime through to 2034 instead of early retirement.

Middle East North Africa

• Saab has announced increased interest in its configuration of a Bombardier 6000 business jet with the company’s GlobalEye system for the UAE. The $1.27 billion deal will see the heavily adapted Global 6000 to be capable of conducting airborne early warning and control (AEW&C), maritime and land surveillance, and electronic intelligence duties. Included in the package is Saab’s improved Erieye ER active electronically scanned array radar, now capable of a 70% greater detection range than its previous sensor, and the ability to spot challenging targets, such as cruise missiles, small unmanned air vehicles and hovering helicopters. Combining its below-fuselage mounted maritime search radar and electro-optical/infrared sensor will enable operators to locate surface threats and submarine periscopes, while its primary sensor’s synthetic aperture radar and ground moving target indication modes will be used to locate land targets.

Europe

• The first two Dutch F-35As have successfully landed in the Netherlands, marking the Joint Strike Fighter’s first eastbound transatlantic journey. Dubbed AN-01 and AN-02, the fighters were welcomed by a crowd of 2,000 including Minister of Defence Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert. The aircraft will now spend the next few weeks conducting noise and environmental tests over the country, designed to determine the levels of noise disturbance the residents experience. The jets will perform flights over the North Sea range and then appear and fly at the Netherlands’ Open Days in June.

Africa

• After showcasing its Parabot super robot at this year’s SOFEX in Jordan, South Africa’s Paramount Group is setting its sights on increasing their defense collaboration with US firms. With partnerships already existing with Boeing, Airbus, and firms in Kazakhstan and Jordan, Paramount’s founder, Ivor Ichikowitz, believes the company has much to offer the US defense industry, not just in supplying technology, but in philosophy, as the US attempts to rethink how it acquires defense capabilities. Having known nothing but government budget restrictions since its foundation in early post-Apartheid South Africa, Ichikowitz said, “We’ve always had to come up with technologies that give our customers the most capabilities for the least amount of money.”

Asia Pacific

• The Indian Defence Research and Development Organisation’s (DRDO) successful test-firing of an indigenous Advanced Air Defense (AAD) missile interceptor on May 15 is being called into question following claims that the launch didn’t occur in the first place. Initially it was claimed that the missile successfully tracked, engaged and destroyed a naval version of the Prithvi missile, which was fired to simulate an enemy target. However “informed sources” talking to The Hindu newspaper claim that the test was a failure as the interceptor was never launched. Perhaps its back to the drawing board for the DRDO, again.

Today’s Video

• Recording of the F-35A’s arrival in the Netherlands:

Arabian/Persian Gulf
(click to view full)

In November 2009, Saab announced a 1.5 billion SEK (about $220 million) contract from the United Arab Emirates for 2 of its Saab 340 regional turboprops, equipped with Erieye active-array radars that can scan large airspace volumes, and with related command and control systems. The Saab 340 AEW contract also includes ground equipment, initial spares, and support services.

The UAE is just the latest buyer of Saab’s Erieye system.

The Erieye, and Its Competitors cutaway view
(click to view full)

The Erieye family of Airborne Early Warning & Control aircraft offer of small size, lower purchase price, dual air/sea scan capabilities, and comparatively cheap operating costs are making it one of the world’s most popular AEW systems. The antenna reportedly provides coverage out to 450km, with a detection range of 350km even inchallenging conditions. The Erieye Ground Interface Segment (EGIS) provides a 2-way exchange of data via an associated “Link-E” datalink sub-system, and the plane’s capabilities can can also reportedly be used to support border control or even rescue operations.

The UAE joins Sweden, Pakistan, and Thailand, who have all ordered systems based on Saab’s S340/S2000 regional passenger turboprops. Brazil, Mexico, and Greece all ordered R-99As/ EMB-145 AEW&Cs that pair Erieye with Embraer’s ERJ145 regional passenger jets.

Key global competitors for Erieye systems include Boeing’s developmental E-737 ordered by Australia, South Korea, and Turkey; Israel’s Phalcon system (active on 707, IL-76, and Gulfstream G550 jets), and Northrop Grumman’s carrier-capable E-2 Hawkeye. That may become relevant, as some reports depict the Saab 340 Erieye as an interim system for the UAE, on the way to a final purchase of additional AWACS platforms.

The UAE’s aircraft order also fits into a regional trend, as the Emirates move to establish a leadership position within the Gulf Cooperation Council’s accelerating command-and-control efforts. Over time, the GCC’s ability to fuse the UAE’s efforts with local infrastructure like long range radars, Saudi Arabian 707-based E-3 AWACS/TASS planes, and other assets, may begin to produce cooperative situational awareness on a regional level.

Contracts & Key Events Thai S340 Erieye
(click to view full)

May 25/16: Saab has announced increased interest in its configuration of a Bombardier 6000 business jet with the company’s GlobalEye system for the UAE. The $1.27 billion deal will see the heavily adapted Global 6000 to be capable of conducting airborne early warning and control (AEW&C), maritime and land surveillance, and electronic intelligence duties. Included in the package is Saab’s improved Erieye ER active electronically scanned array radar, now capable of a 70% greater detection range than its previous sensor, and the ability to spot challenging targets, such as cruise missiles, small unmanned air vehicles and hovering helicopters. Combining its below-fuselage mounted maritime search radar and electro-optical/infrared sensor will enable operators to locate surface threats and submarine periscopes, while its primary sensor’s synthetic aperture radar and ground moving target indication modes will be used to locate land targets.

February 18/16: Following a custom $1.27 billion two-aircraft deal to provide an early warning and control (AEW&C) system to the UAE, Saab has officially launched the new early warning aircraft to the wider market. The GlobalEye combines the Erieye ER active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar with Bombardier’s Global 6000 business jet. The Erieye had been previously offered on the Embraer 145, Saab 2000 and Saab 340, but its incorporation on the Global 6000 will allow it much greater altitude and endurance capabilities, flying at 11,000 ft for 11 hours. The business jet will likely be armed with Saab’s RBS-15 anti-ship missile and a lightweight torpedo; possibly a EuroTorp weapon. Saab’s announcement comes as they look to provide maritime, land, and air surveillance capabilities to countries increasingly involved in anti-terrorism, anti-piracy, or territorial monitoring operations.

November 10/15: Saab has received an order for two additional Airborne Early Warning aircraft from the United Arab Emirates in a deal valuing $1.27 billion. The Swing Role Surveillance System (SRSR) will incorporate the company’s Erieye radar and other sensors aboard two Bombardier Global 600 business jet platforms. The UAE already operates two Saab Erieye-equipped AEW turboprop aircraft, ordered in November 2009 through a $220 million contract.

March 16/11: The Khaleej Times reports that Sweden’s Saab Group will deliver the 2nd S340 Erieye to the UAE slightly late, in April 2011. It quotes Swedish Ambassador Magnus Scholdtz as saying that “We’ve offered to the UAE to sell 4 more such aircraft… it is up to the UAE to decide.”

Nov 17/09: 1.5 billion SEK (about $220 million) contract for 2 of Saab’s S340 Erieyes announced. An official statement hinted at more orders to come, saying that:

“The UAE Air Force & Air Defence is currently evaluating several options to purchase permanent solution Command and Early Warning aircraft to meet the UAE Armed Forces operational requirements.”

Local defense media picked up on this theme amd noted the order’s interim status, pending a wider buy that could involve more Erieyes, Boeing’s 737 AEW&C, or Northrop Grumman’s new E-2D Advanced Hawkeye. Deliveries of the 2 Erieye planes are scheduled for Q3 2010, and Q1 2011. Saab [PDF] | Arabian Aerospace | Dubai Airshow 09 | Khaleej Times | UAE’s The National.

Additional Readings

• Saab Group – Erieye AEW&C Airborne Border Surveillance

• DID – UAE Looking to Become a Regional C2 Leader. They bought the required back-end ground systems for national command and control first, so they could make full use of AEW&C systems when they finally bought some. Smart.

• DID (Oct 11/10) – Saab’s Mysterious S-2000 AEW&C Customer? Saudi Arabia. Essentially the same plane & system as the UAE is buying.

• Aviation Week (Feb 13/08) – Low-Cost and Effective AEW Systems Find Buyers

• C4ISR Journal (Jan 4/08) – AEW&C contenders confident as UAE decision nears

Americas

• Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $331.7 million foreign military sales contract by the US Army. The sale will see the company provide the defense departments of Israel, Singapore, Finland and Jordan with the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) which includes 290 alternative warhead rocket pods, 34 unitary rocket pods and 529 reduced range practice rocket pods. Work and delivery of the system is expected to be completed by March 31, 2018.

• Sikorsky’s HH-60W Combat Rescue Helicopter is to move into the detailed design phase after successfully passing an air vehicle preliminary design review by the US government. The UH-60 Black Hawk variant will now enter a 75-month engineering and development phase which will see nine aircraft produced, including five “system demonstration test articles” to support operational testing. The design includes air force and mission-specific avionics, equipment and defensive countermeasures, plus a larger internal fuel capability and cabin area when compared to its UH-60 cousin and is unique enough to warrant its own development phase and even a separate assembly line.

Middle East North Africa

• British-made cluster bombs have been discovered in a village in northern Yemen, all but confirming that the banned munition is being used by the Saudi-led coalition in the region. The BL-755 cluster bombs, originally manufactured in the 1970s, were purchased by the air forces of Saudi Arabia and UAE to be used on the British made Tornado fighters. Locals described the ordinance as “hanging off trees”and are believed to have been there since air strikes in July and August.

• An advanced missile approach warning system has been integrated on Israeli CH-53 transport carriers, giving the helicopters an extended service life until 2025. Dubbed Dragon Block 3, the system provides 360 degree coverage alongside a more effective warning of missile attack and fast activation of countermeasures equipment. The troop transports have had their fair share of trouble from rocket attacks having seen extensive use in conflicts in south Lebanon and the Palestinian territory of Gaza.

Europe

• Russia’s Defence Ministry looks set to become the first customer of the Mil Mi-38 multi-role helicopter. The helicopter’s manufacturer Russian Helicopters made the announcement in a press release last week, and it is expected to pass a series of flight tests according to the ministry’s requirements. Designed to take part in a variety of missions, the Mi-38 is capable of carrying either troops or cargo as well as participating in search & rescue and offshore operations.

• Italy is to release $179.5 million toward the development of the Centauro II wheeled tank program by the consortium of Italy’s Iveco and Leonardo-Finmeccanica. An update of the older Centauro wheeled tank, it will include a new hull, better armor and upgunning to a 120mm gun compared to the 105mm found on the original. However the cash injection will be lacking in other programs with the planned arming of Italy’s UAVs to be postponed and only $23.5 million made available for procurement of the light-weight Freccia armored vehicles.

Africa

• Prosecutors in South Africa are to appeal a court ruling that they should reconsider corruption charges against President Jacob Zuma. 783 charges against the controversial president were dropped just weeks before the 2009 election in which he was elected. The allegations stem from a $5 billion arms deal in 1999 which involved companies from Germany, Italy, Sweden, the UK, France and South Africa. In 2005, Schabir Shaik, Zuma’s former financial advisor was jailed in connection with the deal after being found guilty of soliciting a bribe on behalf of the president.

Asia Pacific

• US President Barack Obama has announced the lifting of a decades long arms embargo on Vietnam. Speaking in Hanoi with Vietnamese President Tran Dai Quang and under a looming bust of Communist leader Ho Chi Minh, Obama said that the move will end a “lingering vestige of the Cold War” and pave the way for more-normal relations between the two countries. The move comes as Vietnam looks to recenter allies amid a growing spat with China over ownership of islands in the South China Sea, while also looking to lessen their reliance on Russian weapons manufacturers, factors that may make Hanoi one of Washington’s new best friends in the region.

Today’s Video

• Boeing’s latest commercial for the Advanced F-15:

Americas

• Textron is currently testing their upgraded RQ-7 Shadow M2 unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), which they believe will allow the system to undertake increased mission capabilities currently reserved for larger UAVs such as the MQ-1 Predator. At present, Shadow V2s are used by the US Army in conjunction with AH-64 Apaches to fill the armed reconnaissance mission, following the retirement of the OH-58 Kiowa Warrior helicopter. The Shadow M2 will add longer endurance, more capable payloads, and more power than the M2 version, and also gain a satellite uplink that allows it to communicate beyond-line-of-sight.

• USAF’s fleet of more than 500 F-15s are to get a wheel and brake upgrade after successful flight testing. Once completed, F-15C/D/E fighters will be capable of undertaking 1,400 landings before having to swap out their brakes. The USAF stands to save over $194 million in F-15 maintenance costs once all of the aircraft are fitted with the upgrade, and this will be the first brake testing to be carried out on the jet since the 1980s.

• A USMC MV-22 Osprey has given a successful ground refueling of a Marine F-35B Joint Strike Fighter. The one-hour test consisted of hooking up fuel transfer lines between the two aircraft with the MV-22 fueling the F-35B with an aerial refueling to follow. Both aircraft will be used to allow the Marine Corps to employ assets in austere environments on short notice without having to rely on long-term planning and fixed facilities.

• The Missile Defense Agency has awarded a $235.3 million contract to Millennium Engineering & Integration to provide advisory and assistance services for test, exercise, and wargames in support of technical, engineering, advisory and management support. This contract provides support for the development, implementation, sustainment, and assessment of test processes, procedures, plans, and policies to support the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) through the test life cycle. Completion of the contract is expected for June 2020.

Europe

• The first prototype of the Ka-62 twin-engine helicopter successfully completed its maiden flight. Items tested on the multi-purpose rotorcraft included the main power supply systems and avionics during a ten minute hover flight at Progress Aircraft-Manufacturing Enterprise’s site in eastern Russia. Capable of undertaking a wide variety of missions, the Ka-62 has been designed for transportation, search and rescue, and for work in Russia’s oil and gas industry.

Asia Pacific

• Pakistan’s hope to procure subsidized F-16 fighters from the US has been scuppered by US Congress. State Department officials reported that if Islamabad wishes to purchase eight of the aircraft, it will cost up to $480 million, two and a half times the original cost. US foreign military financing of the deal had been criticized by many lawmakers who believed that Pakistan wasn’t doing enough to tackle Islamic militants operating in the country, and who would more likely use the F-16s against neighboring India than combating terrorism.

• Longbow LLC, a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, has been awarded a contract by the Indian government to provide fire control radar (FCR) systems with advanced air and ground targeting capabilities. The $57.1 million contract will see Longbow install 12 systems on India’s AH-64E Apache attack helicopters, and could be worth up to $116.7 million. The FCR’s air over-watch mode provides aircrews with 360-degree situational awareness, improving survivability and mission success.

• Japan and the Philippines will conclude talks this week to lease five Beechcraft TC-90 Kind Airs from the Maritime Self-Defense Force to Manila. Japan’s Defense Minister Gen. Nakatani will call his Filipino counterpart Gazmin today, May 2nd to finalize the deal. The aircraft will help boost the Philippine’s maritime security efforts, particularly patrolling territory in the West Philippine Sea.

Today’s Video

• Turkey’s indigenous Bayraktar TB2 UAV successfully dropped a Roketsan MAM-L laser-guided glide bomb on April 29:

RQ-7 Shadow
(click to view full)

By 2007, US Army RQ-7 Shadow battalion-level UAVs had seen their flight hours increase to up 8,000 per month in Iraq, a total that compared well to the famous MQ-1 Predator. Those trends have gained strength, as workarounds for the airspace management issues that hindered early deployments become more routine. Some RQ-7s are even being used to extend high-bandwidth communications on the front lines.

The difference between the Army’s RQ-7 Shadow UAVs and their brethren like the USAF’s MQ-1A Predator, or the Army’s new MQ-1C Sky Warriors, is that the Shadow has been too small and light to be armed. With ultra-small missiles still in development, and missions in Afghanistan occurring beyond artillery support range, arming the Army’s Shadow UAVs has become an even more important objective. It would take some new technology, but that seems to be on the way for the US Marine Corps RQ-7B Shadow UAV fleet.

Pieces of the Puzzle RQ-7 launch, Mosul
(click to view full)

SecDef Robert Gates’ has consistently offered strong support for more attention to the needs of the counterinsurgency fight. Surveillance is part of that, but it needs to be backed by action. Pending and emerging approaches tie UAVs, manned propeller planes, artillery, and helicopters into a cohesive, fast, and flexible solution for finding, identifying, and capturing or killing opponents.

Larger RQ-5 Hunters have been tested with Viper Strike mini-bombs, and MQ-1C Sky Warriors can carry up to 4 Hellfires – but both UAV types are far outnumbered by the Army’s smaller RQ-7 Shadows. Precision weapons can also be dropped by fighters or bombers, but the planes’ $10,000 – $25,000 cost per flight hour is prohibitive, they require extensive planning processes to use, and declining aircraft numbers affect their potential coverage and response times.

M270 firing M30 GMLRS
(click to view full)

Small UAVs can still pack a punch without weapons by providing GPS targeting data to M30 GPS-guided MLRS rockets, long-range ATACMS MLRS missiles, or 155mm Excalibur artillery shells – as long as those weapons are (a) appropriate and (b) within range.

Using an ATACMS missile to take out an enemy machine gun position seems a bit silly, but that’s exactly the sort of help that could really make a difference to troops on the ground – and has been used in urban fights, against building strongholds. With that said, maximum effectiveness comes when battalion-level “Tactical UAVs” like the RQ-7B Shadow can perform the full spectrum of missions: surveillance, laser or GPS target designation, or close support for infantry fights.

The U.S. Army’s Armament Research Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) at Picatinny Arsenal, NJ has funded some R&D in order to provide “Tactical Class Unmanned Aircraft Systems (TCUAS)” with a low-cost weapon, US NAVAIR is busy developing a 5-pound missile called Spike, and global trends are pushing companies like Raytheon and Thales to invent designs of their own. The US Army ended up dragging its feet on arming its small tactical UAVs, but they are fielding GBU-44 Viper Strike weapons on MQ-5B Hunter UAVs, and have a small but growing fleet of Hellfire-armed, Cessna-sized MQ-1C Gray Eagle UAVs. The US Marines have no such option, and decided that arming their own growing fleet of RQ-7Bs was the way forward.

Step 1 requires a lightweight laser designator that would add the ability to actively mark targets for common helicopter and UAV weapons like Hellfire missiles, laser-guided 70mm rockets, or Paveway bombs. That way, the small and relatively cheap RQ-7s could mark targets for any component of Task Force ODIN, or its equivalent. That effort is already underway, across the board.

Step 2 involves arming even RQ-7 size UAVs, but their payload weight limits make that a very challenging task. Small missiles like the US Navy’s Spike are in development, in cooperation with Finmeccanica’s DRS, but parallel private developments

ATK: Hatchet. This 7-pound weapon is extremely small, and half its weight is warhead. GPS and GPS/laser guidance variants are both said to be possible.

GD: RCFC. General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems makes the US Army’s mortar rounds, and had an interesting idea. What if their 81mm mortars could receive a small add-on GPS guidance kit, similar to the JDAM kits used on larger air force bombs? The Army’s 81mm mortars weigh just 9-10 pounds each, and GD-OTS’ clip-on Roll Controlled Fixed Canard (RCFC) is an integrated fuze and guidance-and-flight control kit that uses GPS/INS navigation, replacing current fuze hardware in existing mortars. A standard M821 81mm Mortar with fuze weighs 9.1 pounds, and the same mortar with an RCFC Guidance system and fuze weighs just 10.8 pounds. US Army ARDEC funded their development testing.

The nose-mounted RCFC guidance has now been successfully demonstrated on multiple mortar calibers, in both air-drop and tube-launch applications. The tube-launched application has been successfully demonstrated at Yuma Proving Grounds, AZ in a tactical 120mm guided mortar configuration known as the Roll Controlled Guided Mortar (RCGM), which uses the existing 120mm warhead and the M934A1 fuze.

Lockheed Martin: Shadow Hawk. In 2012, Lockheed began discussing its “11 pound class”, semi-active laser-guided Shadow Hawk bomb.

Raytheon: Pyros. STM. Raytheon has a privately-developed effort called Pyros, a 22-inch, 13.5-pound bomb that uses dual GPS/INS and semi-active laser guidance. It also has also 3 warhead options: height-of-burst, point-of-impact or fuze-delay detonation.

Thales/ Textron: FF-LMM/Fury. Thales’ beam-riding Lightweight Modular Missile with its tri-mode (burst height, impact, delayed) warhead will equip Britain’s AW159 Wildcat helicopters, and single launchers are small enough to fit on tactical UAVs like Schiebel’s S1000 Camcopter. Removing the propulsion system lightens the missile even further as the Free-Fall LMM, which adds a dual-mode GPS-laser guidance system up front. A partnership with Textron is aimed at the US market, where the weapon is known as the Fury. It was tested from an RQ-7B in 2014.

These and other systems will offer the US Marines the options they need. In the end, however, they key change isn’t the individual weapons – it’s the concept. That concept’s influence will extend past small UAVs, in 2 ways.

MC-130W: next
(click to view full)

One is the growing trend away from sole USAF control of air support, and toward a much more responsive era of “federated airpower” that includes high-end aircraft and UAVs operated by the US Air Force, and lower-tier propeller planes and small UAVs operated by the US Army and Marines. Those lower-tier options use lower-cost platforms that are far more affordable to operate, which means they can be bought and operated in numbers that provide far wider battlefield coverage for small-unit engagements.

The USAF’s long-running and pervasive deprecation of relevant counter-insurgency capabilities, and strong institutional preference for high-end, expensive platforms, has left them vulnerable to lower-cost disruptive technologies that meet current battlefield needs. While the service still has a key role in maintaining American power, strategic control of the air, and high-end capabilities, the new reality involves a mix of high and low-end aerial capabilities, with a lot more aerial control nested closer to battlefield decision-making.

The other change is reaching beyond UAVs, and into USAF and USMC aircraft, which can carry larger weapons. Related tube-launched small precision weapons, which already include Raytheon’s Griffin missile, are finding their way to USMC KC-130J and Special Operations MC-130W Hercules, which are receiving roll-on/ roll-off weapon kits that can turn them into multi-role gunship support/ aerial tanker aircraft. Similar weapons, like Textron’s G-CLAW and many of the weapons discussed here for UAVs, will make it easier to equip more planes with more on-board weapons. As Airbus and Alenia both begin fielding smaller gunship aircraft of their own, and more countries begin arming other kinds of counterinsurgency aircraft, the market is expected to grow.

Contracts and Key Events Pyros strike
click for video

May 2/16: Textron is currently testing their upgraded RQ-7 Shadow M2 unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), which they believe will allow the system to undertake increased mission capabilities currently reserved for larger UAVs such as the MQ-1 Predator. At present, Shadow V2s are used by the US Army in conjunction with AH-64 Apaches to fill the armed reconnaissance mission, following the retirement of the OH-58 Kiowa Warrior helicopter. The Shadow M2 will add longer endurance, more capable payloads, and more power than the M2 version, and also gain a satellite uplink that allows it to communicate beyond-line-of-sight.

Sept 23/14: FF-LMM. Textron Systems touts a pair of successful live-fire demonstrations from an RQ-7 Shadow 200 UAV at Yuma Proving Ground, AZ, using its new GPS/laser guided Fury (FF-LMM) collaboration with Thales. Textron’s AAI subsidiary makes the Shadow, and the demonstration to TRL 7 levels (prototype tested in representative environment) took 15 months of planning and work with Thales.

As noted above, Fury is derived from Thales’ beam-riding Lightweight Modular Missile, but it uses a different guidance system and removes the rocket motor. It’s properly a glide bomb, which is true for the vast majority of entrants in this market niche. Sources: Textron Systems, “Textron Systems Fury™ Lightweight Precision Weapon Engages Target During Live-Fire Demonstrations”

July 13/14: FF-LMM. Thales unveils an unpowered version of LMM at Farnborough 2014, as a smaller and lighter option for use on tactical UAVs, as well as larger platforms. It’s 70cm / 2’4? long and 6 kg / 13 pounds in weight, with a combined GPS and laser guidance system. The initial model won’t have an airburst fuze, though. Sources: IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly, “Farnborough 2014: Thales unveils new LMM variant” | Aviation Week, “Thales Reveals 6-Kg Glide Bomb For UAVs”.

Aug 7/12: STM-II Pyros. Raytheon announces a successful test for their 13.5 pound “Small Tactical Munition,” now redesigned and named “Pyros.” The end-to-end test from a Shadow-sized Cobra UAV validated the weapon’s dual laser/GPS guidance, its height-of-burst sensor, electronic safe and arm device, and multi-effects warhead.

May 2/12: Shadow Hawk test. Lockheed Martin announces successful tests of its privately-developed Shadow Hawk bomb from an RQ-7B. The “11 pound class,” 2.5 inch diameter weapon is laser-guided, and hit within 8 inches of the target at at Dugway Proving Grounds in Utah after being dropped from 5,100 feet.

April 4/12: Army update. The US Army discusses its plans for the RQ-7 Shadow. The army’s product manager, ground maneuver, UAS is Lt. Col. Scott Anderson. He says the Army is observing USMC efforts to add weapons to the Shadow, but is more interested in giving the UAV a new engine to improve reliability. That multi-phase competition got 14 responses, and could indirectly help weaponization efforts, especially if the new engine also provides more power.

Jan 12/12: Armed to Afghanistan? Flight International reports that the USMC plans to send 8 armed RQ-7Bs to Afghanistan as a combat demonstration program, after 94 “high-value targets” escaped during a recent Marine unit’s deployment, even though they were spotted by RQ-7s circling overhead. There isn’t always someone else on hand to fire.

The goal is to arm the Shadows with guided bombs weighing under 25 pounds, which was cleared for treaty compliance (?!?) by the US State Department in July 2011, and reportedly followed by a $10 million December 2011 contract. Installation and certification is expected to take a year, followed by a $7 million follow-on contract for deployment. The magazine reports that the weapon isn’t Raytheon’s STM, MBDA’s SABER, or ATK’s Hatchet, but is “another guided weapon that already has been developed and fielded in secrecy.”

Dec 30/11: Laser designators. Textron subsidiary AAI Corp. in Hunt Valley, MD receives a $54.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to supply RQ-7B laser designator retrofit kits.

Work will be performed in Hunt Valley, MD, with an estimated completion date of March 31/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-08-C-0023).

FY 2011

STM-P2 on Cobra UAV
(click to view full)

Sept 16/11: STM-II test. Over at Yuma Proving Ground, AZ, Raytheon’s 12-pound, 22″/ 56cm Small Tactical Munition Phase II finishes captive carry tests on the company’s smaller Cobra test UAV, paving the way for full weapon tests.

STM Phase II is more than 2 inches shorter than the Phase I design, and has foldable fins and wings that allow it to be used from the U.S. military’s common launch tube. It uses both GPS and semi-active laser guidance. Raytheon is taking the production-ready mandate seriously, as well; STM Phase II is also easier to assemble than the Phase I design. Raytheon Nov 30/11 release.

Aug 17/11: Cleared to arm. Flight International, quotes US NAVAIR’s Small Tactical UAS program manager, Col. Jim Rector, who says that the Marines have received clearance from policymakers to arm the RQ-7 Shadow. The USMC made its intent to do so clear late last year (vid. Jan 18/11 entry). Field trials are to be performed on with unnamed munition selected by AAI, within the Marines’ request that it be a production-ready item. This evaluation process is scheduled to last 18 – 24 months.

Aug 15/11: Collision. When an RQ-7 flies into a C-130 Hercules, at least the latter gets to land in one piece. This time.

The incident underscores the role that “deconfliction” needs to play, when armed UAVs are used over the battlefield without “sense and avoid” technologies on board. Experiments are underway to give Shadow-sized UAVs those capabilities, but without that, expect sharp flight restrictions that emphasize long advance notice of flight plans, and narrow altitude bands. Those restrictions will reduce an armed “MQ-7C” Shadow’s potential value, which means the full impact of small tactical armed UAVs won’t be felt until that technical hurdle is cleared.

June 21/11: First test flight at Webster Field, MD of a RQ-7B Shadow UAS under the direction of NAWC Aircraft Division’s UAS Test Directorate. Col. Jim Rector, program manager for Navy and Marine Corps Small Tactical UAS program office (PMA-263), said:

“Having a RQ-7B at the UAS Test Directorate allows for the test and evaluation of system enhancements and ultimately provides the ability to quickly get new technologies into the hands of Marines”.

Rector was appointed in April after last serving in the V-22 program office (PMA-274).

May /11: Competition: T-20. Arcturus in Rohnert Park, CA has built the T-20 tactical UAV drone, whose wings can carry MBDA’s 10-pound Saber mini-missile.

The USMC has a few in testing now, and this wing-mounting capability may give Arcturus an opening to supplement, or even replace, AAI’s RQ-7 Shadow as the USMC’s armed tactical UAV.

Jan 18/11: USMC in. Flight Global reports that the US Marines have decided to arm Shadow UAVs as their own initiative, since the Army is dragging its feet, and the Marines don’t have a larger armed UAV like the Army’s MQ-1C Gray Eagle:

“Although the Army Aviaton [sic] and Missile Command issued a request for information in April seeking data on precision-guided weapons weighing 11.3kg (25lb) or less… and said as recently as October that it would take the lead on development of Shadow weaponisation with the USMC, the programme is no longer on the table for the army… says Col Robert Sova, capability manager for UAVs at the Army Training and Doctrine Command.”

The Marines reportedly want a solution fielded within 12-18 months. Beyond options like RCFC, NAVAIR’s Spike, etc., Raytheon has been pressing ahead with its 13 pound Small Tactical Munition (STM), with its dual-mode, laser/GPS guidance system.

Dec 3/10: R&D projects. Aviation Week reports that the US Navy is working on weapons that could give even the ScanEagle UAV hunter-killer capability – and implicitly, the Marines’ Shadow 200s as well.

The 2 pound next-generation weapon management system (WMS GEN2) is designed for use on small UAVs like the Shadow. It has been tested in the lab, and the development team is now looking at using the WMS GEN2 with the 5 pound NAWCAD Spike mini-missile, the Scan Eagle Guided Munition (SEGM), and a GPS-Guided Munition (G2M).

Oct 26/10: STM tests. Flight International reports that Raytheon has conducted tests of its 13 pound, unpowered Small Tactical Munition (STM) at the Yuma Proving Ground, AZ. The 2 successful tests used Raytheon’s Cobra UAV, which was picked because it’s close to the RQ-7 Shadow’s size. Raytheon estimates needing 12 to 18 months to get STM production lines running at quantity, and is readying the project in response to interest from the USMC and, they expect, from Special Forces.

FY 2008 – 2010

81mm RCFC test
(click to view full)

April 19/10: Army RFI. Looks like the US Army is getting more serious about fielding armed Shadow UAVs. US FedBizOpps solicitation #W31P4Q-10-R-0142 says that “Responses to this RFI will be used for information and planning purposes only and do not constitute a solicitation…,” but its issue does show a higher level of seriousness, and could well be a prelude to a real solicitation if an acceptable candidate emerges:

“The US Army Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM) Program Executive Office (PEO) Missiles and Space (M&S), Program Management (PM) Joint Attack Munition Systems (JAMS), on behalf of the war fighter, seeks information from industry on weapons systems ready for production and suitable for integration on the RQ-7B with POP 300D laser designator payload Shadow Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UASs). Potential weapons systems must be ready to field within 12 months from the date of a potential contract award. The primary interest is in weapon systems approximately 25 lbs or less total system weight (to include munition, launcher, wiring, fire control interface, etc). The weapons system should be able to engage stationary and moving targets such as light vehicles and dismounted combatants in day and night conditions with low collateral damage when launched from a Shadow UAS flying at speeds of 60-70 knots and between 5,000 and 12,000 feet Above Ground Level (AGL). Terminal accuracy must be on the order of that demonstrated by currently fielded Semi Active Laser / Imaging Infrared / Millimeter Wave (SAL/IIR/MMW) weapons…”

That level of terminal accuracy may be an issue for RCFC mortars, depending on how the Army interprets it. SAL/IIR/MMW weapons are generally considered to be more accurate that GPS guidance, but if “on the order” means “approximately,” then a GPS guidance kit would qualify. It is intended that this RFI will be open for 21 calendar days from date of publication (to May 10/10).

April 1/10: RCFC test. General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems announces successful 81mm Air-Dropped Mortar guide-to-target flight demonstrations at Ft. Sill, OK. The RCFC weapon was released from a TUAV (Shadow) using the GD-OTS’ newly developed “Smart Rack” carriage and release system.

Feb 12/09: Laser designators. Textron subsidiary Army Armaments Incorporated (AAI) in Hunt Valley, MD receives a $9.3 million cost plus fixed fee contract modification, exercising options for additional engineering hours related to these Shadow UAV modifications. These services are related to low-rate initial production of Laser Designators, Tactical Common Data Link (TCDL) interoperability, and integration with the Army’s Universal Ground Control Station and Universal Ground Data Terminal.

Work will be performed in Hunt Valley, MD, with an estimated completion date of April 30/09. One bid was solicited and one bid received by the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-08-C-0033).

Jan 21/09: Laser designators. Textron subsidiary AAI Corp. in Hunt Valley, MD receives a $12.2 million firm-fixed-price finalization of Letter Contract Modification P00012. It will purchase 25 Laser Designator Retrofit Kits for its RQ-7 Shadow Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS).

Work will be performed at Hunt Valley, MD, with an estimated completion date of Aug 31/09. One bid was solicited and one bid received by the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-08-C-0023).

Dec 16/08: RCFC test. General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems announces that it has successfully demonstrated the ability to maneuver and guide 81mm air-dropped mortars to a stationary ground target after release from an aircraft. These test results in Kingman, AZ build on previous pre-programmed maneuver flight tests successfully conducted by General Dynamics in 2007, and use the company’s patented Roll Controlled Fixed Canard (RCFC) flight control and guidance system.

Additional Readings

• DID thanks subscriber Trent Telenko for his research assistance with this article.

The Trends

• P.W. Singer – Wired for War. Singer works at the Brookings Institution, one of Washington’s principal think-tanks. See also his DID article, “In the Loop? Armed Robots and the Future of War.”

• US Army (March 4/11) – Shadow defies gravity with success. Looks behind the scenes at how the RQ-7 became the Army’s workhorse UAV, and some of the mechanical and procedural changes used to give it a wider temperature range and lower the accident rate.

• Aviation Week (Feb 4/11) – Shadow Punches Above its Weight

• National Defense Magazine (April 2010) – Army on a Fast Track to Build its Own High-Tech Air Force

• National Defense Magazine (February 2010) – Army’s Shadow Unmanned Aircraft Receiving Upgrades For Longer Missions. The extended wings will also improve carrying capacity.

• DID (Jan 21/09) – Laser Designators for RQ-7 Shadow UAVs. That didn’t take long.

• StrategyPage (Jan 8/09) – Laser Precision In All Its Forms. The US military is also testing a laser designator that’s small enough for its RQ-7s. The UAVs can already use a laser rangefinder to geo-locate targets for GPS systems like Excalibur shells, GMLRS rockets, and JDAM/WCMD bombs. A lightweight laser designator would add the ability to actively mark targets for laser-guided weapons like Hellfire missiles, or Paveway bombs. As geolocation and laser designation continue to shrink and devolve to even smaller UAVs than the Shadow, it will change the way units can fight.

• WIRED Danger Zone (Oct 10/08) – New Killer Drones Could be Piloted by Teenagers. Includes trends re: adding weapons to Shadows.

• US Army Fires Bulletin (May-June 2008) – Fires for the 2007 Surge in Iraq: Lethal and Nonlethal [PDF]. See esp. the points re: the changing targeting chain.

• US Army Fires Bulletin (March-April 2008) – Revolutionary to Conventional – Evolution of GMLRS. Shadow drones can currently supply GMLRS GPS targeting via their laser rangefinders. Note, again, the changes in the Army kill-chain, and flattening of the surveillance – fire – approval structure using Army-owned air assets plus artillery. Arming those assets themselves is simply the next logical step.

The Weapons

Listed in alphabetical order of manufacturer.

• Flight International (April 20/11) – PHOTOS: Bits and bobs around Quad-A. Covers ATK’s Hatchet, reportedly funded by the US Air Force Research Laboratory.

• DID (Nov 16/09) – Boeing Team Gets USAF Contract for UAV Miniature Weapon Development.

• Designation Systems – NAWC/DRS Spike. Very short range (around 2 miles) powered missile with a 1 kg warhead, weighs only 5 pounds.

• Lockheed Martin (May 1/12) – Lockheed Martin’s Shadow Hawk Munition Launched from Shadow UAS for the First Time.

• DID – GBU-44 Viper Strike: Death From Above. Now owned by MBDA, and called Viper-E. GPS or dual GPS-laser guidance options, used from MQ-5B Hunter UAVs and slated for integration into the MC-27J Praetorian gunship. At 42 pounds, however, it’s a bit outside the Shadow’s class.

MBDA – SABER. Their Small Air Bomb Extended Range (SABER), whose unpowered version is about 10 pounds. The powered version of this GPS/laser guided weapon is 30 pounds.

• Defense Update (July 21/10) – MBDA Unveils Small Guided Bomb at Farnborough. SABER.

• Raytheon – Pyros: Small Tactical Munition.

• DID – Raytheon’s AGM-176 Griffin Mini-Missiles.

• Textron – Fury. A much smaller weapon that their 50-70 pound G-CLAW, which is dropped by aircraft. Collaboration with Thales (FF-LMM).

• DID – Direct Sting: Thales’ Small LMM / FASGW-L Missiles. FF-LMM/Fury is derived from it.

F-15C over DC
(click to view full)

“Array of Aging American Aircraft Attracting Attention” discusses the issues that accompany an air force whose fighters have an average age of over 23.5 years – vs. an average of 8.5 years in 1967. One of the most obvious consequences is the potential for fleet groundings due to unforseen structural issues caused by time and fatigue. That very fear is responsible for the #1 priority placed on bringing new KC-X aerial tankers into the fleet to complement the USA’s 1960s-era KC-135 Stratotankers.

It can also affect the fighter fleet more directly.

Following the crash of a Missouri Air National Guard F-15C aircraft Nov 2/07 (see crash simulation), the US Air Force suspended non-mission critical F-15 flight operations on Nov 3/07. While the cause of that accident is still under investigation, preliminary findings indicate that a structural failure during flight may have been responsible. In response, Japan suspended its own F-15 flights, which left them in a bit of a bind – even as Israel’s F-15s joined them on the tarmac. As the effects continue to spread and the USAF and others continue to comment on this situation, DID continues to expand its coverage of this bellwether event. A conditional restoration of the American F-15A-D fleet to flight status was soon overturned by the re-grounding of that fleet as a result of the report’s conclusions – a status that remains only been partially lifted. Meanwhile, the accident report has been released (compete with video dramatization) and the status of the remaining aircraft will have significant implications for the USAF’s future F-15 fleet size. Not to mention its other procurement programs.

Then, too, this is America. Now there’s a lawsuit.

F-15E, Afghanistan
(click to view full)

The F-15A reached initial operational capability for the US Air Force in September 1975, and approximately 670 F-15s remain in the USAF’s inventory. Current F-15 flying locations include bases in the continental United States, Alaska, England, Hawaii, Japan and the Middle East, and the aircraft are active on the Iraqi and Afghan fronts. The Missouri Air National Guard F-15C that crashed was built in 1980.

Lt. Gen. Gary L. North, US CENTCOM Combined Forces Air Component commander, is maintaining the newer F-15E Strike Eagles on ground alert, to be used if required. Otherwise, he says he will accomplish all assigned missions using a variety of fighter, attack and bomber aircraft, and unmanned aerial vehicles. Lt. Gen. North added that:

“I worry about the health of our aging fleet and how sometimes it is not well understood by those our Airmen protect… The investigation will get to the cause of the accident.”

USAF Chief of Staff Michael Moseley was even more specific in an Oct 30/07 interview with GovExec.com:

“The F-15s and F-16s were designed and built in the late ’60s and ’70s. Some of them were produced up until the early ’80s. But they’ve led a pretty hard life of 17 years of combat. So you have to replace them with something, because we were continuing to restrict the airplanes. In the F-15 case, we’ve got the airplane restricted to 1.5 Mach. It was designed to be a 2.5 Mach airplane. We’ve got it limited on maneuvering restrictions because we’ve had tail cracks, fuselage cracks, cracks in the wings. The problem with that is – and Mike Wynne uses this analogy – it’s almost like going to the Indy 500 race practicing all the way up until Memorial Day at 60 miles an hour, and then on game day, accelerating the car out to 200 miles an hour. It’s not the time to be doing that on game day.

So in our training models and in our scenarios, we’re limiting these airplanes because they’re restricted and getting old. So there’s two parts to the recapitalization of the fighter inventory. The first part is the existing stuff is old and it’s getting broke, and it’s getting harder to get it out of depot on time. And our availability rates and our in-commission rates are going down. The ability to generate the sorties on those old airplanes is in the wrong direction.”

And Flight International:

“A USAF F-15 crashed in the Gulf of Mexico in 2002 when it broke up after the leading edge of its left vertical stabiliser detached in a high-speed dive to Mach 1.97. The pilot was killed.

The USAF says it began replacing the leading edge and upper aft portion of the vertical stabilisers during depot overhaul and has so far completed 463 of its 664 aircraft. The F-15 involved in the Missouri accident had its vertical stabilisers repaired in August 2003, the service says.”

Further investigation focused on the plane’s longerons, which connect the aircraft’s metal ‘skin’ to the frame, and run along the length and side of the aircraft. Both the Accident Investigation Board and Boeing simulations have indicated them as a possible source of catastrophic failure; indeed, DID had wondered why structural failure was suspected immediately, and it with that revelation it began to make sense. As DID explained at the time, if one or more of those longerons had failed, the stresses on the airframe could have folded or broken the plane in half – a very unusual form of accident. Eventually, the publication of the formal report confirmed that hypothesis:

“The one longeron, already not up to design specifications, cracked apart under the stress of a 7G turn, the colonel said. This led to the other longerons failing as well, which then caused the cockpit to separate from the rest of the fuselage. The pilot was able to eject, but suffered a broken arm when the canopy snapped off.”

F-4EJ “Kai(zen)”
(click to view full)

Nor is this problem confined to the USA – or even to the here and now.

The Chinese government’s Xinhua agency reports that Japan has also grounded its F-15 fleet. Japan’s F-15Js were built locally under license, on a more recent production schedule, but their oldest planes do date back to 1980. This is a precautionary measure until more is known.

Since Japan’s F-16-derived F-2 fighters are also grounded in the wake of a recent crash at Nagoya, this leaves 1960s era F-4EJ ‘Kai’ Phantom IIs as Japan’s interceptor and fighter patrol fleet for the time being.

Israel confirmed to Flight International that it had also grounded its 70 F-15A-D air superiority aircraft, which are undergoing multi-role conversions, and its F-15I Strike Eagles. The Strike Eagles were later removed from the USA’s concern list, but its F-15 A-D fleet is an important component of Israeli air defenses alongside its larger F-16 fleet.

Gen. John D.W. Corley, the commander of US Air Combat Command, was not encouraged by the results of the report, and of the in-depth fleet inspections that led to 40% of the Eagle fleet remaining on the ground over 3 months after the investigation:

“The difficulty is that issues have been found with F-15s built between 1978 and 1985, across A through D models at several bases, so no one source of the problem can be isolated… This isn’t just about one pilot in one aircraft with one bad part… I have a fleet that is 100 percent fatigued, and 40 percent of that has bad parts. The long-term future of the F-15 is in question… We don’t have a full and healthy fleet, so we’ve gotten behind on training missions, instructor certifications, classes and exercises…

We’re going over each and every aircraft to make a determination. We will take some F-15s out of the inventory. It just doesn’t make sense to spend the time and money if it won’t be worth it for some aircraft.”

Updates F-15E, P-51, F-22A
(click to view full)

May 2/16: USAF’s fleet of more than 500 F-15s are to get a wheel and brake upgrade after successful flight testing. Once completed, F-15C/D/E fighters will be capable of undertaking 1,400 landings before having to swap out their brakes. The USAF stands to save over $194 million in F-15 maintenance costs once all of the aircraft are fitted with the upgrade, and this will be the first brake testing to be carried out on the jet since the 1980s.

May 26/09: Aviation Week reports that the USAF is looking into the possibility of a Service Life Extension Program for its F-15A-D fleet, designed to increase their service lives from 8,000 flight hours to 12,000.

The move is driven, in part, by the impending collapse of Air National Guard wings that can be used in domestic air sovereignty patrols, as older fighters retire and are not replaced. The USAF is accelerating the retirement of 250 F-16 and F-15 fighters in FY 2010, and current plans calls for 2 ANG air sovereignty mission units to get F-22s, 4 to get receive upgraded F-15A-Ds, and the remaining 12 are yet to be determined.

March 22/08: Maj. Stephen Stilwell, a pilot for Southwest Airlines whose Missouri Air National Guard F-15C’s mid-air crackup began the fleet groundings, has filed suit in U.S. District Court against claiming Boeing Corp. His injuries left him with a 10-inch metal plate in the injured arm and shoulder, and he reports that he has suffered from chronic pain since the accident.

Stilwell’s suit, filed by attorney Morry S. Cole, says that Boeing knew or should have know that the F-15 as manufactured allowed and permitted for catastrophic flight break-up, and adds that Boeing failed to notify the Air Force and Missouri Air National Guard of “the likelihood of excess stress concentrations, fatigue cracking, structural failure and in-flight aircraft break up as a result of the structural deficiencies.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

February 2008: The largest effects of the F-15 fleet’s grounding may yet play out on the procurement front. If many of the USAF’s F-15s, which were supposed to serve until 2025 or so, must be retired, how should they be replaced? Read “Aging F-15s: Ripples Hitting the F-22, F-35 Programs.”

Jan 21/08: This week’s edition of the “Today’s Air Force” show highlights how the Air Force carried on its mission while more than 700 of its F-15 Eagles were grounded. See “The Eagle flies once again!” on the Pentagon Channel, American Forces Radio and Television Service stations around the world, and video podcast [30 minutes].

Jan 14/08: Officials begin flight operations again as 39 of the 18th Wing F-15C/Ds at Kadena Air Base, Japan are cleared to fly again after remaining on the ground for more than 2 months as a result of a fleet-wide stand-down. See USAF story.

Jan 10/08: According to the Air Combat Command Accident Investigation Board report released on this day. Their conclusion? The plane was simply too old:

“…a technical analysis of the recovered F-15C wreckage determined that the longeron didn’t meet blueprint specifications. This defect led to a series of fatigue cracks in the right upper longeron. These cracks expanded under life cycle stress, causing the longeron to fail, which initiated a catastrophic failure of the remaining support structures and led to the aircraft breaking apart in flight… the pilot’s actions during the mishap sequence were focused, precise and appropriate. The pilot’s actions did not contribute to the mishap, said Colonel Wignall. In addition, a thorough review of local maintenance procedures revealed no problems or adverse trends which could have contributed to the accident.”

Col. William Wignall, the head of the accident investigation added that:

“We’ve had great involvement from Boeing during the investigation. In fact, they’re the ones who determined the longeron was the problem. This was then confirmed by the Air Force Research Laboratory.”

See the USAF’s “F-15 Eagle accident report released,” and the accompanying video dramatization, as well as “Air Force leaders discuss F-15 accident, future.”

Jan 9/08: Air Combat Command officials clear 60% of the F-15A-D fleet for flying status, and recommends a limited return to flight for those planes that have cleared all inspections. The decision follows detailed information briefed on Jan 4/08 to Air Combat Command from the Air Force’s F-15 systems program manager, senior engineers from Boeing and the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center; as well as a briefing received on Jan 9/08 from the Accident Investigation Board president.

The USAF report describes inspections as “more than 90% complete,” with remaining inspections focusing primarily on the forward longerons. Thus far, 9 other F-15s have been found with longeron fatigue-cracks, and almost 40% of inspected aircraft have at least 1 longeron that is thinner than blueprint specifications. ACC believes each affected F-15 will have to be analyzed to determine if there is sufficient strength in the non-specification longeron, and this analysis will take place at the Warner-Robbins Air Logistics Center over the next 4 weeks. A number of F-15s are scheduled to be retired in 2009, and calculating the cost of fixes and airframe life of fixed aircraft could have a substantial bearing on the size of the USAF’s future F-15 fleet.

Meanwhile, the 2-month grounding, which has been the longest of any USAF jet fighter, is a gift that keeps on giving. Fully 75% of US Air Force and Air National Guard F-15A-D pilots have lost their currency status for solo flight, and another week would have made it 100%. Instructor pilots have retained their currency and will begin flying F-15B/Ds with the other pilots, so the pilots can land the plane and regain their status. This will be followed by further pilot training, which is required to regain operational proficiency status. USAF report | Flight International.

F-15C CAP(Combat Air Patrol)
(click to view full)

Dec 27/07: The Associated Press details some of the ripple effects created by the F-15 A-D grounding. With the F-15s in Massachusetts out of commission, the Vermont Air National Guard (ANG) is covering the whole Northeast. The Oregon ANG’s fighters are grounded, so the California Air National Guard is standing watch for the entire West Coast plus slices of Arizona and Nevada. To meet that need, the Fresno, CA based 144th Fighter Wing has had to borrow F-16s from bases in Indiana and Arizona and trim back training.

The Minnesota ANG is manning sites in Hawaii, while the Illinois ANG covers Louisiana. In Alaska, the new F-22 Raptors are stepping in – and so are Canadian CF-18s, which have intercepted several Russian bombers near Alaska in recent weeks.

Dec 10/07: The F-15 A-Ds remain grounded. A USAF update informs us that throughout the Air Force, maintainers have found cracks in the upper longerons of 8 F-15s so far: 4 from Air National Guard 173rd Fighter Wing, Kingsley Field, OR; 2 from USAF 18th Wing, Kadena Air Base, Japan; 1 from 325th Fighter Wing, Tyndall AFB, FL; and 1 from ANG 131st Fighter Wing, St. Louis, MO.

Inspections are underway using previous methods, until the Warner Robins ALC develops new ones for the fleet. After the area’s paint is stripped and bare metal is exposed, Airmen apply chemicals that reveal cracks under a black light. “Other inspections in hard-to-see areas are done with a boar scope [sic… maybe they mean “borescope”?] – a tool that uses a tiny camera and fits in tight areas.” Inspection time per aircraft is 12.5 to over 20 hours, and the 2-seat B and D models are more time consuming because the rear seat must be removed to access the upper longerons. USAF story.

UPDATE from USAF: “Yes, other readers pointed that out as well (although yours was the funniest). The story was corrected…”

Dec 3/07: It’s now official. Gen. John D.W. Corley, the commander of Air Combat Command orders the stand-down of all ACC F-15 A-Ds until further notice, and recommends the same for all other branches of the USAF. The stand-down does not affect the F-15E Strike Eagle and its variants abroad.

Technical experts with the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center at Robins Air Force Base, GA are developing a specific inspection technique for the suspect area, based on the recent findings. However, unlike previous inspections, the inspected aircraft will not be returned to flight until the F-15 A-D model findings and data have been analyzed, required inspections have been accomplished, and the necessary repair or mitigation actions have been completed. To date, longeron cracks have been discovered in an additional 4 aircraft. USAF release.

F-15E: Mission executed.
(click to view full)

Nov 28/07: The accident investigation board (AIB) report leads to the recommended re-grounding of the USAF F-15 A-D fleet, and almost certainly those of other countries as well. The new AIB findings have drawn attention to the F-15’s upper longerons near the canopy of the aircraft, which appear to have cracked and failed. Longerons connect the aircraft’s metal ‘skin’ to the frame, and run along the length and side of the aircraft. In addition to the AIB’s conclusions, manufacturer simulations have indicated that a catastrophic failure could result from such cracks, which were also discovered along the same longeron area during 2 recent inspections of F-15C aircraft.

The commander of Air Combat Command has recommended the stand-down of all F-15 A-D model aircraft across the US military, and ordered a renewed fleet-wide inspection of all ACC F-15 A-D model aircraft using a very specific inspection technique for the suspect area. The multi-role 2-seat F-15E Strike Eagles, which were manufactured later and had several design changes made, remain exempt from these cautions and exceptions. USAF article.

Nov 21/07: All USAF’s F-15s are being returned to flight status, despite acknowledgment that the service is accepting a degree of risk in doing so. Gen. John D.W. Corley, commander, Air Combat Command:

“The cause of the mishap remains under investigation… At the same time, structural engineers have conducted in-depth technical reviews of data from multiple sources… First, we focused on the F-15Es. They are… structurally different than the A-D models. Problems identified during years of A-D model usage were designed “out” of the E-model… Next, we concentrated on the remainder of the grounded fleet. The AIB(Accident Investigation Board) is now focused on the area just aft of the cockpit and slightly forward of the inlets. Warner Robins ALC mandated a thorough inspection and repair of all structural components in this area. I have directed each F-15 aircraft be inspected and cleared before returning to operational status. Today, ACC issued (a flight crew information file) and Warner Robins ALC issued an Operational Supplemental Tech Order to further direct and guide your pre-flight and post-flight actions.”

There are 666 F-15s in the Air Force inventory. As of this day, 219 of the 224 E-models and 294 of the 442 A-D models in the USAF’s inventory have been inspected and re-cleared for flight.

Nov 19/07: Shortly after becoming the first deployed F-15E unit in the Air Force to return to full operational capability following the Air Force’s fleet-wide grounding of the aircraft, the 455th Expeditionary Maintenance Squadron at Bagram AFB, Afghanistan, began the move from 5-7 day phase inspections every 200 flight hours, to a phase inspection every 400 flight hours. This change isn’t slated for implementation until 2008, but it’s being implemented early at Bagram AFB to keep more F-15Es in the air and meet mission demands.

The USAF says that its engineers at the Warner-Robins Air Force Base Air Logistics Center, GA looked carefully at all the data after years of F-15E analysis and testing, before approving the change. USAF release.

Nov 15/07: A USAF release says that an order issued by Air Combat Command’s Commander Gen. John Corley on Nov 11/07 mandates a 13-hour Time-Compliance Technical Order (TCTO) on location for each of the USAF’s F-15E Strike Eagles, to inspect hydraulic system lines, the fuselage structure, and structure-related panels. Aircraft that pass this inspection may return to flight status, and similar procedures are likely to be underway for Israel’s F-15Is. ACC Combat Aircraft Division chief Col. Frederick Jones said that this was possible because:

“We were able to determine, based on initial reports from an engineering analysis, that the F-15E is not susceptible to the same potential cause of the Missouri mishap.”

The TCTO inspection is designed to confirm the engineering analysis, and aircraft deployed the CENTCOM has apparently completed inspections and returned to flying status. This still leaves 2/3 of the USAF’s F-15 fleet grounded, however, as the F-15A-D models remain under suspicion. The F-15Es are about 15 years old on average, but the F-15A-D models were introduced earlier. Maj. Gen. David Gillett, ACC director of Logistics said that:

“What we’ve got here is an example in the C model of what happens when you have an airplane that’s about 25 years old… What you find is that it becomes more and more expensive to modify [the F-15 airframe] over time… Our costs have gone up 87 percent in the last five years and continue to rise rapidly. Even when you invest in an old airframe – you still have an old airframe.”

Additional Readings & Sources

• Gannett’s Military Times – F-15’s midair breakup. Hosts the Pentagon’s Crash Simulation.

• DID Spotlight article – Aging Array of American Aircraft Attracting Attention. The problem is not at all unique to America.

• Reuters (Oct 15/08) – US Air Force eyes fighter cuts to boost modernization. The force cuts would reduce the reserve fleets by about 137 F-15s, but it would also cut 177 F-16 fighters and 9 A-10s. The goal is to save $3.4 billion, to be applied to F-35 purchases.

• Investors Business Daily (Dec 7/07) – The Eagles are Grounded. Quotes ACC chief Maj. Gen. Ronald Keys re: the slippage of fighter fleet average age from 1967 to the present.

• Flight International (Nov 6/07) – VIDEO: Israel and Japan join US in grounding F-15s

• USAF (Nov 6/07) – Mission continues during grounding of F-15s.

• US DoD DefenseLINK (Nov 6/07) – Air Force Grounds F-15 Fleet Following Crash

• Xinhua, via Military.com – Now Japan Grounds F-15 Fighters

• USAF (Nov 4/07) – Air Force suspends some F-15 operations

Americas

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

• With its fourth test aircraft up and running, Boeing has reported a $243 million pre-tax charge for cost overruns on the USAF’s KC-46A Pegasus tanker program. It is believed that the company has incurred out of pocket expenses for the tanker totalling around $1.5 billion since being awarded the the $4.4 billion fixed-priced KC-X development contract in 2011. In total, $6.4 billion has been spent on the tanker, and Boeing is anxious for more funds to be released under the low-rate initial production (LRIP) contract expected later this year.

• The USAF awarded an $82.7 million contract to Space Explorations Tech. (SpaceX) to launch a GPS III satellite in May 2018. The move represents a shift away from the decade-long monopoly held by giants Boeing and Lockheed Martin on military space launches. Work to be carried out under the contract includes production of a Falcon 9 rocket, spacecraft integration, launch operations, and space flight certification.

Middle East North Africa

• UAE has seemingly donated a number of Armored Personnel Carriers (APC) and military pick-up trucks to the UN backed Libyan government based in the city of Torbuk. The amount of vehicles sent by the Gulf emirate is unknown, but a picture posted by the Libyan National Army (LNA) shows dozens of what appear to be new Panthera T-6 light APCs and Toyota Landcruiser pick-up trucks. Together with Egypt and Jordan, the UAE has allegedly defied the UN arms embargo on Libya to become one of the most consistent supporters of the LNA since 2012.

Europe

• Airbus has reported further delays to the development of the A400M with the latest issue involving the engine gearbox of the military transport plane. In a statement following the the first-quarter financial results by chief financial officer Harald Wilhelm, he warned of “serious challenges for production and customer deliveries” of the A400M this year. Negotiations on a new delivery schedule are being held through OCCAR, the European procurement agency.

• Polish company WB Electronics has announced that it has sold a number of its Warmate micro combat unmanned air vehicles to two undisclosed export customers. The system operates as a scaled-down expendable loitering munition, aimed at detecting and countering targets including light tanks and armored vehicles. The Warmate can be operated as an autonomous system transported by the army or special forces, and can also be installed on board military vehicles and controlled through the vehicle’s electronics.

Asia Pacific

• Defense experts in Seoul have reported that North Korea carried out two test-firings of their intermediate range missiles on Thursday with both failing. The seemingly hurried tests involved a Musudan missile with a range of more than 3,000 km, followed later by a similar intermediate range missile, both of which crashed soon after take-off. North Korean missile testing in the face of the UN ban have been escalating as of late in the run up to the ruling Workers’ Party congress to be held on May 6.

• Efforts by India to increase their domestic weaponry and equipment output has hit a stumbling block as domestic and private companies are divided over a new not-yet-implemented Ministry of Defense procurement policy. When brought into force, the policy would identify a select few private sector defense companies to be named Strategic Partners (SP), who could then be nominated to big ticket defense projects. Opposition to the policy mainly comes from over 6,000 small and medium companies who fear that the use of SPs would leave very little for them to be involved in.

Today’s Video

• Iraqi army aviation helicopter strikes against ISIS targets west of Baiji (Salah Ad-Din province):

Falcon 9 Engines

DID has covered SpaceX’s role in DARPA’s Responsive Small Spacelift Launch Vehicles program with its Falcon I design, and noted the Low-Earth Orbit launch contracts it had secured for various customers. RSSLV is designed to create a less expensive, quick launch capability. Yet SpaceX is developing a whole family of launch rockets, and recently announced a much larger Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) class rocket called the Falcon 9.

It’s a long way from the venture’s beginnings, when PayPal founder (and SpaceX CEO) Elon Musk noted that “The computer and Internet revolutions have given a great deal of capital to the ‘Star Wars’ fans.” SpaceX stuck to its original plan – giving private firms and government agencies that want to launch satellites a $6 million alternative to the cheapest existing rockets, which now cost $30 million per flight. Now, it’s branching out.

The Falcon 9

SpaceX initially intended to follow its first vehicle development, Falcon 1, with the intermediate class Falcon 5 launch vehicle. However, in response to customer requirements for low cost enhanced launch capability, SpaceX accelerated development of an EELV-class vehicle, upgrading Falcon 5 to Falcon 9. SpaceX has sold a Falcon 9 launch to a US government customer, and still plans to make Falcon 5 available in late 2007. Their efforts are worth watching, and could affect the military satellite launch market.

With up to a 17 ft (5.2 m) diameter fairing, Falcon 9 is capable of launching approximately 21,000 lbs (9,500 kg) to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) in its medium configuration and 55,000 lbs (25,000 kg) to LEO in its heavy configuration, a lift capacity greater than any other launch vehicle. In the medium configuration, Falcon 9 is priced at $27 million per flight with a 12 ft (3.6 m) fairing and $35 million with a 17 ft fairing. Prices include all launch range and third party insurance costs, and SpaceX claims that this makes Falcon 9 the most cost efficient vehicle in its class worldwide.

Nine SpaceX Merlin engines power the Falcon 9 first stage with 85,000 lbs of sea level thrust per engine, for a total thrust on liftoff of 765,000 pounds. After engine start, Falcon is held down until all vehicle systems are verified to be functioning normally before release for liftoff.

Although in-flight failures are very rarely explosive, a Kevlar shield protects each engine from debris in the event of its neighbor failing. The second stage tank of Falcon 9 is simply a shorter version of the first stage tank and uses most of the same tooling, material and manufacturing techniques. This results in significant cost savings in vehicle production. A single Merlin engine powers the Falcon 9 upper stage, with dual redundant hypergolic igniters (TEA-TEB) with four injection ports for added reliability of restart.

Falcon Family
(click to view full)

SpaceX: Rocket Science With A Difference

SpaceX’s approach to vehicle design is interesting, and may make them a strong lower-budget alternative to Boeing and Lockheed – and a potentially strong competitor to Ariane or Russian launch options.

An overview of SpaceX’s Falcon family of rockets and launch schedules can be found here. Their designs incorporate a number of well thought-out approaches to balancing low cost and reliability.

SpaceX’s analysis noted that the vast majority of launch vehicle failures in the past two decades can be attributed to three causes: engine, stage separation and, to a much lesser degree, avionics failures. An analysis of launch failure history between 1980 and 1999 by Aerospace Corporation showed that 91% of known failures can be attributed to those subsystems.

Falcon 1

In response, they designed Falcon 1 to have only one engine per stage and only one stage separation event – the minimum pragmatically possible number. Falcon 9 uses similar engines, electronics, guidance & control and separation systems to Falcon 1, but is built on a different scale and uses multiple engines.

In the case of Falcon 5 and Falcon 9, the multiple engines are set up so that the vehicles will be capable of sustaining an engine failure at any point in flight and successfully completing their mission. These architectures are improved versions of those employed by the Saturn V and Saturn I rockets of the Apollo Program, which had flawless flight records despite losing engines on a number of missions.

SpaceX hold-before-release system is required by commercial airplanes, but rarely seen on launch vehicles. After first stage engine start, the Falcon is held down and not released for flight until all propulsion and vehicle systems are confirmed to be operating normally. An automatic safe shut-down and unloading of propellant occurs if any off nominal conditions are detected. It is, after all, cheaper to reset a launch than to replace a cargo that is often worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

Keeping the design to only one stage separation event, and adding triple redundant flight computers and inertial navigation, with a GPS overlay for additional orbit insertion accuracy, take advantage of design and lowering costs for electronics to address the remaining reliability issues while keeping the cost of launch economical.

Falcon 5 and Falcon 9 will also be the world’s first launch vehicles where all stages are designed for reuse.

Reuse is not currently factored into their launch prices, but SpaceX has publicly stated that it will make further reductions in launch prices when the economics of stage recovery and checkout are fully understood.

SpaceX: The Future

SpaceX founder Elon Musk has stated that eventually, he wants to pave the way for safe and reliable airplane-like trips to space. “If anyone can do it,” says Mike Griffin, a former NASA exec (at the time – he’s now NASA Administrator) and president of the venture-capital firm In-Q-Tel, “Elon can. He has an incredible track record.”

• So, Mike Griffin used to be a former executive of NASA and a current head honcho at In-Q-Tel. Now he’s a former In-Q-Tel executive and a current head honcho at NASA. Thanks to the readers who wrote in to point this out. Does this make him a “re-former” NASA executive? I guess we’ll see.

Updates

April 29/16: The USAF awarded an $82.7 million contract to Space Explorations Tech. (SpaceX) to launch a GPS III satellite in May 2018. The move represents a shift away from the decade-long monopoly held by giants Boeing and Lockheed Martin on military space launches. Work to be carried out under the contract includes production of a Falcon 9 rocket, spacecraft integration, launch operations, and space flight certification.

April 12/16: Last Friday saw SpaceX successfully land a first-stage Falcon 9 rocket on a barge in the Atlantic Ocean. This is the second time SpaceX has successfully landed a rocket back on earth after putting a payload in space, but the first such landing on an ocean-going barge. An earlier attempt at a similar landing failed last December when the first stage rocket tipped over and exploded. Friday’s flight saw the Falcon 9 deliver cargo to the International Space Station.

October 12/15: The Pentagon has denied United Launch Alliance a waiver that would have allowed the company to continue using Russian RD-180 rockets. SpaceX was unhappy that the company’s competitor for defense and intelligence satellite launch services requested the waiver, with ULA previously threatening to withdraw from future competition with SpaceX if the waiver was denied. SpaceX was cleared for national security launches in May, with Congress passing the 2015 defense authorization law in December 2014 to curtail the use of the RD-180 by ULA, resulting in protests from some within the Pentagon earlier this year.

May 28/15: SpaceX has been cleared by the Air Force for national security-related launches, injecting competition into a previous United Launch Alliance monopoly on private DoD launches. This is part of Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain’s efforts to end US reliance on the Russia-manufactured RD-180 rocket for space launches. However, the Pentagon has previously urged Congress to allow ULA to continue using the Russian rockets in order to “ensure access to space”.

Americas

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

• Northrop Grumman has been awarded an $83.4 million modification contract by the US Army to provide logistics support for the Hunter Unmanned Aircraft System. Work will continue until October 30, 2016. Based on the Hunter UAV by Israel’s IAI, the RQ-5 Hunter has been used by the US Army as a short wave system, and has been operated extensively on missions in Afghanistan. While retirement of the Hunter was scheduled for 2013, the Army has issued a number of logistic and support contracts to Northrop since then, giving the RQ-5 a license to keep hunting for the time being.

• Efforts to prevent Canada’s $11 billion deal to sell light armored vehicles to Saudi Arabia have gone one step further after the filing of a legal challenge in the Federal Court of Canada by former MP and law professor Daniel Turp. According to Turp, the sale violates Canadian law, which prevents the export of military goods to a nation that abuses human rights or is engaged in an active conflict. However, the case may be over before it begins, as Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion quietly issued export permits for the bulk of the shipments earlier this month, and the deal has received its blessing from Canada’s media darling, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Saudi Arabia, accused of committing war crimes during its ongoing campaign in Yemen with western made weaponry, has purchased 1,400 LAVs from General Dynamics Land Systems with a variety of weapon systems, ranging from 25mm cannons to 90mm guns over the last 20 years.

Middle East North Africa

• Israel’s eagerness to customize its orders of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters has already seen its first app created for the next generation jet. Utilizing the open-architecture software design found in the Lockheed Martin designed fighter, Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has developed its own command, control, communications, and computing (C4) system which will be equipped on the aircraft in December. The software is an upgrade of an existing C4 system the Israeli air force flies on its F-15 and F-16 fighters.

Europe

• After some guessing and speculation, the UK’s Protector unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) platform will be the Certifiable Predator B (CPB) UAV. The MoD had announced its plans to go ahead with its 10-strong MQ-9 Reaper Block 1 fleet replacement back in October 2015, but only now has its successor been revealed. The $606 million purchase from manufacturer General Atomic Aeronautical Systems will be facilitated through the usual government to government Foreign Military Sales with the US. Compared to the MQ-9, the CPB has 40% more endurance and four extra external store stations.

Asia Pacific

• After numerous delays in its maiden flight which occurred last week amid much excitement from manufacturer Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), the X-2 stealth demonstrator will have a year long test campaign involving around 50 flights. With the maiden flight described as “ordinary” by Hirofumi Doi, manager of Japan’s Future Fighter Program at the defence ministry’s Acquisition, Technology & Logistics Agency (ATLA), future testing will help ATLA gather data on advanced fighter technologies such as stealth, thrust vectoring, data links, and other areas. Depending on this data, flight testing of the X-2 could easily be extended, leading the way for a potentially busy period for the demonstrator.

• Delivery of the S-300 air defense system to Iran is ahead of schedule after deliveries began earlier this month. The $900 million contract was initially signed back in 2007, but suspended when UN Security Council sanctions blocked the deal in 2010. A thawing in relations between the US and Iran over the latter’s dropping of its nuclear program has allowed Tehran to pursue additional military hardware, much to the chagrin of the US’s Gulf allies. Potential future arms contracts between Russia and Iran may involve weaponry that is not on the UN ban list, including air defense systems, small arms, and electronic warfare systems.

• France’s DCNS has been announced as the winner of the $38.7 billion Australian Future Submarine contract. The hotly contested tender for the 12 new subs also saw offers from Germany’s Thyssen-Krupp Marine Systems and the Government of Japan to carry out the build. The new design will be based on DCNS’s Shortfin Barracuda A1 submarine design, a conventionally-powered derivative of the nuclear-powered Suffren-class submarine now under construction for the French Navy. US made combat systems integrator and weapons systems will be installed by either Lockheed Martin or Raytheon in contracts expected to be announced shortly.

Today’s Video

• Live fire testing of a Russian Iskander-M Tactical Missile Launcher Cruise Missile:

Bridge to the future?
(click to view full)

In its 2009 White Paper, Australia’s Department of Defence and Labor Party government looked at the progress being made in ship killing surveillance-strike complexes, and at their need to defend large sea lanes, as key drivers shaping future navies. These premises are well accepted, but the White Paper’s conclusion was a surprise. It recommended a doubling of Australia’s submarine fleet to 12 boats by 2030-2040, all of which would be a new successor design that would replace the RAN’s Collins Class submarines.

The surprise, and controversy, stem from Australia’s recent experiences. The Collins Class was designed with the strong cooperation of ThyssenKrupp’s Swedish Kockums subsidiary, and built in Australia by state-owned ASC. The class has had a checkered career, including significant difficulties with its combat systems, issues with acoustic signature and propulsion, major cost growth to A$ 5+ billion, and schedule slippage. Worse still, reports indicated that the RAN can only staff 2 of its 6 submarines. High-level attention led to a report and recommendations to improve the force, but whether they will work remains to be seen. Meanwhile, the nature of Australia’s SEA 1000 future submarine project – and its eventual cost – remain unclear, with estimated costs in the A$ 36-44 billion range. This FOCUS article covers Australia’s options, decisions, and plans, as their future submarine program slowly gets underway.

Australia’s SEA 1000 Future Submarine Program Structure & Timeline

There is widespread skepticism that the Australian can handle this proposed project, especially after the failure of the Collins Class. Worse, a number of expert reports have pointed out that the next generation of submarines needs to be in the water before the Collins Class wears out. Many believe that the Collins’ original 2024 – 2031 range for safe and effective service is too generous (vid April 21/12 entry, below), which left very little time as of 2009.

Australia’s Labor government didn’t approach the problem with that level of urgency. The breadth and severity of problems with the Collins Class led to a number of reports covering failures in current submarine operations, and lessons learned. The good news is that this has given Australia a better foundation for its decisions, and improved the government’s understanding of its real needs and responsibilities. The bad news is that this approach delayed action on the May 2009 White Paper for almost 3 years. It’s likely to be 2017 before there’s a serious contract to build the new boats, and the schedule announced in May 2012 has already slipped slightly:

CIS re: ‘$40B mistake’

2012: The Government will make a decision on design and test facilities, including the Land Based Test Site, and will receive the Future Submarine Industry Skills Plan. Actual: That skills plan wasn’t publicly unveiled until May 2013.

2013: The Government will receive the results of the design, technical, and capability studies, and will make a decision on the combat systems, torpedoes, sensors and other weapons systems. Actual: The studies were received, and the combat system was decided on in May 2013, but not the other elements.

2013/2014: First Pass approval was scheduled for late 2013/early 2014. This would presumably involve a picked design. That hasn’t happened yet, and the new Liberal Party government is rethinking the entire short list.

2017: Second Pass approval is scheduled for around 2017, with construction expected to begin afterward.

These delays and replacement realities have forced to government to state that the Collins Class can operate safely and effectively to 2031 – 2038. Whether that’s true remains to be seen.

Submarine Choices S-80 cutaway, labeled
(click to view full)

Australia’s Labor government delayed making its decision, as it considered 4 broad options for the future diesel-electric fast attack submarines. By May 2013, however, it had decided to go with the riskiest 2 options for a purchase that’s supposed to be the RAN’s future centerpiece. If they get this wrong to the same degree that they botched the Collins Class, they will have crippled Australia’s future naval posture for a generation.

RAN needs

Off-the-Shelf. An existing design available off-the-shelf, modified only to meet Australia’s regulatory requirements. Australia looked at the AM-2000 Scorpene, U214/U216, S-80, and Soryu Class – see Appendix A for details. This option was eliminated in May 2013.

Picking this option would have ensured rapid delivery for the RAN’s strategic centerpiece. It also would cut the risk of technical failure by deploying proven systems, and offered greater cost certainty and savings. The price of this approach is that the submarine chosen might not fit Australia’s exact vision. Which leads to the question of how much that vision is worth, when the extra cost is judged by what else it could buy Australia. If the answer is “their entire future fleet of 72 F-35A stealth fighters,” decision-makers are going to stop and think carefully.

Modified. One way to get most off-the-shelf benefits is to buy existing design and make minor changes to incorporate Australia’s specific requirements, especially the RAN’s chosen combat systems and weapons. Accepting off-the-shelf choices for a new submarine class would force Australia to stock and maintain new types of torpedoes, anti-ship missiles, electronics, etc. Which could be done, but is expensive. Hence the potential attraction of a modified buy. This option was eliminated in May 2013, but it’s resurfacing under the new Liberal government.

Either Japan’s Soryu Class or TKMS’ U218SG would require some modifications along these lines. The Soryus would need to modify their combat system to be compatible with Australia’s chosen AN/BY-1G combat system and with its Mk-48 heavy torpedoes. The U218SG is less defined, but Singapore uses Finmeccanica WASS Black Shark torpedoes in its Archer Class, so unless Singapore plans to switch to torpedoes and use the American AN/BYG-1 combat system, switching the U218SG’s combat system and weapons will take similar design work.

Note that the ultra-cramped nature of a submarine’s internals means that modifying a submarine’s internal electronics is a bit more than a minor design swap-out, and carries expenses and risks of its own. The German/Singaporean U218SG and Sweden’s potential A26 would add the risks inherent to a new design. Hence Australia’s growing focus on Japan’s Soryus. There is talk that the entire set of 10 subs may now be built abroad; a weaker option would use the common approach of having 2-3 boats built in the foreign shipyard with Australian workers on site, and the rest built in Australia following that hands-on skills transfer period.

HMAS Rankin
(click to view full)

Evolved. An evolved design that enhances the capabilities of existing off-the-shelf designs, or of the current Collins Class design. Groups like ASPI suggest that Australia is moving toward an Evolved Collins Class design, but first, they had to remove a key roadblock noted in RAND’s December 2011 report (q.v. Dec 13/11 entry):

“One problem that hindered the Collins program was the lack of the intellectual property (IP) rights to the design of the basic platform and much of the fitted equipment. Not having the rights to Collins IP on future designs may constrain the design effort for the new submarine class that will replace the Collins. Although Kockums and the DoD reached a settlement in 2004 that provided ASC and its subcontractors access to Kockums’ IP, it still protected Kockums’ proprietary information to the point that no intellectual property from the Collins can be used in a new Australian submarine design [implied: absent negotiations & licensing].”

A May 2013 agreement with Sweden’s FMV procurement agency has settled that issue, but an Evolved Design option remains inherently risky, precisely because it’s so easy to pretend that the structural and electronic modifications to an existing class won’t really create much risk. Experiences in a range of Australian and Canadian programs show that this simply isn’t true. Both technical and cost risks can become serious problems, as demonstrated by the fact that the Collins Class was itself begun under those same auspices. Worse, ASC’s performance regarding Collins construction, and metrics far below global norms while building Australia’s new Hobart Class air defense destroyers, may be raising the risk profile so high that it destroys the Evolved option. Nevertheless, an evolved variant of the Collins Class remains on the table as a possibility.

SMX Ocean

One possible way to sidestep the Evolved Option’s issues is to choose DCNS’ SMX Ocean Class, a 4,000t+ design that’s evolved from France’s Barracuda Class nuclear submarines. That takes care of a big chunk of the R&D costs and risk, and offloads most of the rest to the vendor. On the other hand, Australia would still be the initial and only customer for a new design – one that will require replacement of its combat system, its standard weapons, and other key technologies.

New. An entirely new developmental submarine, designed in Australia.

The “New Developmental Submarine” option is, of course, the riskiest option of all. It’s also by far the most expensive, as a large amount of R&D must be financed. Since export sales from Australia are deeply unlikely, any R&D expenses are simply money down the drain.

With that said, the Swedish government may have a very interesting offer to make. They have broken off talks with Germany’s TKMS following accusations of bad faith in TKMS’ management of Kockums, which designed the Collins Class. In response, they’re working to revive a Swedish submarine industry at Saab. One possible solution is to continue taking those steps toward a Swedish submarine industry, but buy Australia’s ASC as well, and design their planned A26 successor submarine as a co-development project with Australia (q.v. April 12/14 entry).

Contracts and Key Events 2015 – 2016

April 28/16: France’s DCNS has been announced as the winner of the $38.7 billion Australian Future Submarine contract. The hotly contested tender for the 12 new subs also saw offers from Germany’s Thyssen-Krupp Marine Systems and the Government of Japan to carry out the build. The new design will be based on DCNS’s Shortfin Barracuda A1 submarine design, a conventionally-powered derivative of the nuclear-powered Suffren-class submarine now under construction for the French Navy. US made combat systems integrator and weapons systems will be installed by either Lockheed Martin or Raytheon in contracts expected to be announced shortly.

January 26/16: Japan and France are the front runners in providing Australia with its next submarine fleet. Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems had also been considered, however recent worries over technical concerns may have them out of the running for the $34.55 billion contract. Japan has offered a variant of its 4,000-ton Soryu boats made by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Heavy Industries, where as France’s state-controlled naval contractor DCNS has proposed a diesel-electric version of its 5,000-ton Barracuda nuclear-powered submarine. The final decision will be made within the next six months ahead of Australian elections, with a slowing economy to be the main issue among voters. All competitors have agreed to build the new fleet in South Australian shipyards.

Feb 12/15: Bids to be competitive, just not too competitive. Japan is expected to be disappointed that Australia will have a competitive process for choosing submarine vendors. But it won’t be too competitive. Russia and North Korea have been excluded.

2014

New center-right gov’t and its supporters rethinking the program; Interest in Japan’s Soryu Class accelerates; Swedish sub turmoil could be Australia’s big opportunity; France steps in with SSN derivative; ASC may be losing its grip on sub construction. A26 concept

Dec 02/14: Love Me Tender. Treasurer Joe Hockey brushed aside the idea of running an open tender for new submarines as “a speculation process” that Australia no longer had time for. The opposition in return stuck to its support of local construction. This comes a week after Defense Minister David Johnston said that he wouldn’t trust ASC “to build a canoe”, a statement that he and his boss David Abbott only softly backpedaled later. In other words the government is clearly not softening the substance of its position, which is widely interpreted as favoring Japan as the closest thing to an off-the-shelf option.

Sources: The Australian: Joe Hockey rules out open tender for new submarines | Sydney Morning Herald: Defence Minister David Johnston ‘regrets’ his shipbuilder ‘canoe’ comments.

Nov 19/14: France. The CEO of France’s DCNS opens a DCNS Australia subsidiary during an official visit to Australia by French president Francois Hollande. DCNS can tout its FREMM frigates for Australia’s ASW program, but recent decisions pointing to the Hobart Class hull as a base give them few options. On the other hand, they are specifically touting their submarine:

“Xavier Mesnet (Submarines Marketing Director at DCNS) told Navy Recognition: “SMX OCEAN is more than a concept ship, it is a concept ship near to be realized”.”

The design’s touted 14,000 mile range would help Australia meet the recent promise of a sub with “longer range and endurance than any diesel/electric submarine currently available off the shelf” (q.v. Nov 12/14), and its SSN heritage removes some of the risks associated with a new boat. On the other hand, Australia is insisting on an American combat system and weapons, which would require design modifications. Then, too, several key technologies, like the propulsion system and fuel cells, come with all of the standard risks accompanying new technologies. Sources: Naval Recognition, “DCNS opens a subsidiary in Australia to better market its SMX OCEAN SSK for the RAN”.

Nov 18/14: Politics. The South Australian Economic Development Board commissions an analysis from the independent National Institute of Economic and Industry Research, to assess the economic ramifications of purchasing 12 submarines overseas versus building them in South Australia. The report finds no cost difference from building in South Australia, and a lot of negative economic impacts from building outside it. What a shock.

ASPI runs an article that attacks the study’s core assumptions. Past projects’ cost blowouts show that skill differences in Australia’s industry have predictable effects, and an unrealistic economic impact model assumes the highly-skilled people involved have no other job options. The Chair of the South Australian government’s Advanced Manufacturing Council replies, defending their costing model and shifting the argument about the input-output model to a discussion about spillovers from new knowledge – with a reference to Sweden’s JAS-39 Gripen fighter program. Sources: Government of South Australia, “New expert economic report supports an Australian submarine build” [PDF] | ASPI, “On economics and submarines” | ASPI, “Submarines: reader response.”

Nov 17/14: Politics. A Labor Party dominated Senate committee says that there aren’t any off-the-shelf submarine options for Australia, and pressures the government to adopt a competitive global tender.

The reasons behind the Liberal Party’s distrust of this option have been discussed (q.v. Sept 11/14), but their own defense minister may have given away their case this week by agreeing that no off-the-shelf option is possible. He’s narrowly correct, in that even Japan’s Soryu would need combat system and weapon swap-outs. On the other hand, there’s a difference between a contention like that, and a belief that the Australian design would be wildly different. The government hasn’t managed its message in a way that makes this clear. Sources: Melbourne Herald-Sun, “Give up on Japanese sub plan: committee”.

Nov 16/14: Germany & Japan. Australian media report that the TKMS proposal to biuld 1 submarine in Germany, and 11 more at ASC in Adelaide, is gaining traction within the Australian government.

If Australia can’t buy the Soryus, or Japan blocks the transfer of key technologies, the government is reportedly looking at having Japan build an evolcved version of the Soryu Class, then have it refitted in Adelaide. Sources: The Advertiser, “New German hope for multibillion-dollar submarine build at Adelaide’s ASC shipyards”.

Nov 12/14: Politics. The Minister for Defence speaks to the Submarine Institute of Australia Biennial conference. Sen. Johnston highlights the view that 2009 should have seen full approval for the next-generation submarine, and highlights the urgency of Australia’s shrunken replacement schedule:

“I am advised that by 2030, half of the world’s submarines will be in Australia’s broader strategic region…. the Government’s priorities are sustaining Collins, followed by the Future Submarine capability, schedule and cost. And I highlight the issue of schedule as being the most challenging constraint as I can not solve for time I don’t have…. Australia’s next submarine will have longer range and endurance than any diesel/electric submarine currently available off the shelf.”

That last quoted line is seized upon by the media, because it shifts the playing field against any off-the-shelf buy. That, in turn, makes anything other than a competitive procurement hard to justify. Which cuts the throat of efforts to keep the replacement schedule on an urgent track, or to build the boats much more quickly abroad. Sen. Johnston does make arguments about the industrial end, but they aren’t widely reported:

“There has been almost $1 billion worth of Defence procurement and sustainment work being undertaken in South Australia this year, and over the next four years, there will be up to $4.2 billion in Defence spending for building and sustaining defence materiel in South Australia…. It is well over 20 years since a submarine was designed for Australia and already over a decade since the last Collins class submarine was launched.”

The government also mentions that they are committed to the processes laid out in the Kinnaird Review, with 1st and 2nd pass approvals, but explicitly avoids committing to any kind of competition. The question is whether the minister has fatally undermined the sole-source option, even so. Sources: Australia DoD, “Minister for Defence – Opening address to the Submarine Institute of Australia Biennial conference, Fremantle WA” | The Australian, “Subs boost for SA — Defence Minister David Johnston rules out ‘off the shelf’ submarine purchase”.

Nov 8/14: Saab bids. Saab CEO Hakan Bushke will be unveiling Saab’s offer to Australia at the Submarine Institute of Australia’s centenary conference, but Australia’s government confirms that it has already received the unsolicited bid. At this point, all the report will say is that:

“It includes a lower price than its competitors and a smooth flow of Japanese submarine [propulsion] technology from the Soryu Class boat, because Sweden is a partner in the Japanese project. There will also be substantial technology transfer and industrial offsets for Australia, including jobs in Adelaide during the build phase.”

The question is whether there will be an open competition. Australia’s government has been handed a program that’s already badly behind, and an existing Collins Class fleet whose cost-effective and performance-effective lifecycle is being questioned. Japan’s Soryu Class is already designed, built, and in service, unlike its German and Swedish competitors. Meanwhile, state-owned ASC has lost this government’s confidence as a shipbuilder, and delays in awarding a contract make it harder to reduce ASC’s role. Sources: News Corp., “Australian jobs promise as Sweden’s Saab Group bids for Navy’s $20 billion plus submarine project”.

Sub advances

Oct 28/14: Enter France? DCNS unveils its 4,750t SMX Ocean concept design at EuroNaval 2014. This diesel-electric attack submarine design is much closer to reality than past SMX concepts, because it’s based on the basic SSN Barracuda nuclear fast attack submarine’s layout, masts, and combat system. Meanwhile, shifts in the global market toward the Pacific and Indian oceans are tilting requirements in favor of larger conventional submarines, with more range and endurance.

Switching out the nuclear reactor does create a bit more space, even with 2nd generation fuel cell technology added to give the submarine a submerged endurance of 3 weeks. A cable-and-collar “saddle” system can be added for deployment and retrieval of UUVs from a mid-body chamber, and a detachable mobile pod aft of the sail can carry a special forces swimmer delivery vehicle. Behind the UUV bay, a 6-shooter for vertically-launched cruise missiles like MBDA’s MdCN/ Scalp Naval is complemented by internal frontal space for 28 weapons in any combination of heavyweight torpedoes, Exocet anti-ship missiles, A3SM anti-aircraft missiles, or mine packages. Items like the Vipere tethered communications and surveillance buoy round out the package.

The key caveat is that this isn’t a prototype, or even a detail design that’s ready for manufacturing. If DCNS wants to compete at this level of capability in markets like Australia or India, they have an advance investment decision ahead of them. Their competitor TKMS already has a contract for the large U218SG, and Australia has also been discussing Japan’s 4,000t Soryu Class. Sources: DCNS, “DCNS unveils SMX-Ocean, a new blue-water SSK with expanded capabilities”.

Sept 15/14: Japan risks. As it becomes clear that Japan is the odds-on favorite, discussion of that choice’s particular risks is coming up. If Australia picks the Soryus, the risks it will accept include some level of opacity with respect to key technologies, like special steels for hull strength. Time will tell, but Japan is also said to be reluctant to transfer all of the boat’s key technologies to Australia. Noise reduction designs in particular transfer naturally, as part of giving Australia full local maintenance capability, but are highly sensitive.

These issues, and the complex nature of these technologies, have industrial implications. The ability to actually build the submarines at ASC would leave no middle ground regarding technology transfer. Worse, experts like Kazuhisa Ogawa and ex-submariner Toshihide Yamauchi estimate that an ASC build could double the cost to the full planned A$ 40 million. This compares rather unfavorably with TKMS’ reported bid submission, but that design promises serious performance and timeliness risks, along with the potential for unexpected costs. Pick your poisons.

Other risks are geopolitical. Hugh White is not a fan of local construction, but his questions go to the heart of the strategic risks:

“How sure can we be that within that time [of the submarines’ delivery and entire service life] Japan will… be a US ally? That it will not have restored its long-standing ban on defence exports? That it will not have become a compliant neighbour of a predominant China, or on the other hand have become China’s bitter enemy? What would happen to our new submarine capability in any of these contingencies?”

Fair questions. Does Australian participation in a project of this magnitude make some of these outcomes less likely? How much less likely, and what role will other macro trends play? Someone needs to be doing this kind of analysis, and Australia’s DoD hasn’t shown great proficiency in the past. Sources: Australia’s ABC, “Soryu submarine deal: Japanese insiders warn sub program will cost more, hurt Australian jobs” | Canberra Times, “Japanese submarine option odds-on favourite”.

Sept 11/14: Germany & Sweden. The Australia Financial Review says that they’ve “confirmed that German submarine builder ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) has submitted a bid for a joint venture with Adelaide-based ASC that comes in at under $20 billion.” What they don’t say are which model of submarine the proposal used, and how cost risk for going beyond that budget would be handled. For instance, an A$ 20 billion bid with 100% escalation risk to the government is effectively an open-ended contract for any amount; vs. an A$ 20 billion contract with a 50/50 sharing arrangement for cost escalation and a $30 billion government cap, which is an A$ 20-30 billion contract. Or a straight A$ 20 billion purchase and delivery contract, which remains at A$ 20 billion unless the government changes the design or decides to negotiate for other reasons. The details matter.

Australian Labor Party leader Bill Shorten has been invoking World War II a lot in his opposition to a built in Japan deal, which makes a collaborative offer from the other former Axis power a mite awkward. Meanwhile, Sweden is committed to making a strong bid, if there is an open competition. Saab CEO Haakan Bushke says that they’re willing to design a 4,000t submarine for Australia, and take ASC and Royal Australian Navy engineers and technicians to work on its new A26 design. He adds:

“As of July 2, Saab completed a full takeover of Kockums which is now Saab Kockums and the Swedish Kingdom now controls the intellectual property for… [Australia’s currently-serving] Collins class submarines…. If there is an open competition, Saab Kockums will be in it.”

The publicity and lobbying builds pressure toward an open tender, which would create 2 distinct policy problems for the Abbott government. One is a policy angle. The Soryu Class is a proven and built design, while TKMS and Saab’s offerings aren’t. This creates a real risk that the new submarines will be delayed (q.v. Sept 8/14), amid questions concerning the Collins Class’ costs and effective lifespan. The 2nd problem is political. Opening competition delays the contract, allowing ASC, unions and the Labor Party to spend a lot of time and effort lobbying. That raises the odds of having the contract outcome and costs dictated by political forces outside the government. Against those negatives, one must weigh the potential for really great competitive offers, which could avoid a complete breach of the Liberal Party’s pre-election commitment to building the boats at ASC. Sources: Australia Financial Review, “Germans undercut Japan on Australia’s submarines” | Australia Financial Review, “Swedes launch desperate bid for Oz submarine project” | Business Insider Australia, “Germany Joins The Race To Build Australia’s New Submarine Fleet” | Business Insider Australia, “Australia Could Get A Great Deal On Its New Submarine Fleet If Tony Abbott Wants It” | Manufacturers’ Monthly, “German company wants to build Australia’s submarines”.

Sept 8/14: Japan. News Corp. reports that the government is fast-tracking their pursuit of Soryu Class submarines, because of growing concerns about the $2+ billion cost of maintaining the Collins boats beyond 2026; some estimates put that cost at more than $2 billion. The government also seems focused on a proven solution; TKMS’ U218SG isn’t, and neither is Saab’s A26. DCNS’ Scorpene, meanwhile, lacks the size and range Australia wants. Hence Soryu, especially given Australia’s urgency:

“The Government cannot afford a submarine capability gap and every day past 2026/27 when Collins class is due to begin decommissioning, adds days of risk,” a senior defence source said.”

Controversy. A second consequence of the government’s risk and cost aversion is that ASC Pty’s performance on the Air Warfare Destroyer project may have relegated them to a service role for the future submarines. In other words, construction in Japan. ASC and the Labor Party are understandably unhappy, arguing that the industry is strategic and that the Collins Class’ reported 21,300 km range is 88% better than even the Soryus. Australia would also need to either modify the Soryus to use American torpedoes, or switch as a fleet to the class’ natural weapon set of American UGM-84 Harpoon missiles and Japanese Type 89 torpedoes.

Cost. A Japanese build would be a big, big geopolitical deal, but the headline’s A$ 20 billion figure is unreliable because it’s based on a statement by Germany’s TKMS, regarding a different submarine. Another report costs a program for 10 Soryu Class boats at A$ 25 billion. Note that even A$ 25 billion is just 69% of the original A$ 36 billion projection for ASC. For perspective, this inherently optimistic build cost means that switching to Soryus leaves about enough money to cover current official costs for Australia’s 2 Canberra Class LHDs and 3 Hobart Class Air Warfare Destroyers. If build-out cost in Australia were to hit A$ 40 billion, which is very possible, savings from a Japanese build would pay the estimated A$ 15 billion cost of Australia’s F-35A stealth fighter program.

Politics. Does that level of cost savings negate the political blowback from cutting out ASC? It might, but there are risks. Australia is a Parliamentary system, but Abbot’s government relies on a coalition of 4 parties in the House. If the Liberal Party’s partners don’t bolt the coalition over the issue, and the plan goes forward, the question becomes whether Parliamentary maneuvering can force an issue vote in the Senate. There, the government would need 6 of 8 non-Labor and non-Green votes outside of its own coalition.

Basing. To make things even more interesting, there are also reports that Australia is considering a basing shift to HMAS Coonawarra, up near Darwin in the north. That would drastically improve deployment into theater, as the sailing difference between HMAS Coonawarra and the current submarine base in Australia’s southwest at HMAS Stirling is almost 5,000 km / 2,700 nmi. Unfortunately, HMAS Coonawara is currently just a patrol boat base, and creating a full submarine and support base would be expensive. Especially if the natural harbor isn’t super-deep. The other problem is that basing the RAN’s most strategic assets near Darwin makes it much easier to reach them with weapons like cruise missiles. A forward base near Darwin is possible for refueling and minor service, and it would basically cancel the range difference between the Collins and Soryu classes, but a full basing switch is unlikely.

Sources: News Corp., “New Japanese submarines to cost Abbott Government $20 billion” | Australia’s ABC, “Submarine policy: [Independent Sen.] Nick Xenophon urges PM to ‘end the uncertainty’ over SA project” | The Australian, “Submarine plan a threat to national security: Labor” | 7News, “Darwin submarine base ‘won’t happen’, Australian Defence Association chief Neil James says”.

Japan buy: key issues

July 8/14: Japan. Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe sign the “Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of Japan Concerning the Transfer of Defence Equipment and Technology” at a ceremony in Canberra.

It isn’t the full security cooperation policy mooted in previous reports (q.v. May 28/14), but it’s an immediate step. As expected (q.v. April 6/14), they’re leading off with a joint Marine Hydrodynamics Project between Australia’s Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO) and Japan’s Technical Research and Development Institute (TRDI). In English, they’ll analyze propulsion and water resistance around submarine hulls – and, implicitly, torpedoes. Sources: Australian DoD, “Minister for Defence – Defence Minister David Johnston hails defence science and technology accord with Japan”.

May 28/14: Japan. Reuters reports that Japan is warming to the idea of selling submarines to Australia, but what they want in return is something Australia will need to think about:

“Japan is considering selling submarine technology to Australia – perhaps even a fleet of fully engineered, stealthy vessels, according to Japanese officials. Sources on both sides say the discussions so far have encouraged a willingness to speed up talks…. Japanese military officials and lawmakers with an interest in defense policy have signaled a willingness to consider supplying a full version of the highly regarded Soryu to Australia if certain conditions can be met. These would include concluding a framework agreement on security policy with Canberra that would lock future Australian governments into an alliance with Japan, the [Australian] officials said.”

China’s likely reaction would create diplomatic complications, and limit Australia’s future political options. On the other hand, the Japanese have the one proven design that meets Australia’s needs. Just don’t expect rapid decisions. That isn’t usually the way things are done in Japan. Sources: Reuters, “Japan & Australia consider submarine deal that could rattle China”.

April 12/14: Swedish option? The Collins Class was built around a Swedish design, News Corp Australia says that Saab and the Swedish Government have been engaged in secret talks around a joint submarine effort. That proposed approach may have the potential to cut through many of the dilemmas faced by Australia’s government, and Sweden’s as well. Here’s Australia’s problem, as explained in the SMH:

“This week the Australian Strategic Policy Institute hosted a conference billed as the “Submarine Choice” – but the arguments simply shot past each other. Nothing connected. The Navy stressed its strategic need for submarines without reference to the budget; industry obsessed about the business case without worrying about how such massive expenditure would severely unbalance the forces; while politicians agonised over the need to save jobs and save money, despite the fact these objectives stand in direct contradiction to one another. In the meantime, the bandwagon rolls remorselessly onwards.”

The reported Swedish solution would buy ASC, and embark on a fully cooperative joint design for Sweden and Australia’s next submarines. Australia would receive a design that’s explicitly built for Australia’s needs – a necessary compromise for Sweden, whose needs are different. It’s also worth noting that the Japanese Soryu Class propulsion system that has attracted so much interest from Australia’s Navy is part Swedish. From industry’s point of view, making ASC part of Saab removes any conflict of interests with a foreign firm that acts as the project lead, and creates both development jobs/skills and production work. From the politicians’ point of view, a program that includes Sweden and Australia offers the added security of shared risk, and shared acquisitions. As a starting point, Saab soon buys Kockums from TKMS, after hiring away many of its engineers. Read Saab Story: Sweden’s New Submarines for full coverage.

April 8/14: Minister for Defence Sen. David Johnston gives the speech, but says that the government is still evaluating options and has made no decisions. Since his party had campaigned on building 12 submarines in Australia, he also needs to qualify his way out by invoking his statement that “…if anything the Minister has said is based on fantasy, we’ll tell you and we’ll revisit this.” He does put industry on notice that the priority is performance rather than jobs, and adds that the priority isn’t X number of submarines, but a stable submarine capability that matches what Australia can afford and operate.

Taken as simple logical propositions, both points are extremely sensible. The government can expect to face strong lobbying from the shipyard and its associated unions, and that’s already starting, but the sheer size of the price tag involved means that the unions’ traditional allies on the left aren’t going to fight very hard alongside them. Observers are speculating that that the minister’s framework means 6-9 submarines, but no-one knows at this point. Sources: Australia DoD, “Minister for Defence – Speech – Address for the ASPI conference” | Australia DoD, “Minister for Defence – [Q&A] Transcript – ASPI Conference” | ASPI, “The Submarine Choice: ASPI’s International Conference, Canberra” | State-owned ABC, “Submarines off-the-shelf would breach promises to South Australia, says Penny Wong” | The Age, “Why do we need more submarines?” | The Australian, “Cheaper submarines ‘risk the lives of sailors’”.

April 7/14: Rethink? Looks like the stirrings of discontent earlier this year (q.v. Jan 29/14, Dec 17/13) are about to become more real. Minister for Defence Sen. David Johnston is scheduled to make a speech at ASPI on April 9/14, and there’s considerable speculation that he will change the submarine program in 3 important ways. One, he may choose to cut the program from 12 boats to 9, on both cost and operational capacity grounds. Two, he will force ASC to make a case to win the work, saying that the Navy’s strategic centerpiece “is not a job-creation program”. Third, there’s the clear implication that if the ASC case isn’t good enough, some or all of the submarines may be built abroad. As a final wrinkle, talks continue with Japan regarding their large Soryu Class boats, shortly after Japan relaxes their restrictions on exporting weapon technologies:

“When asked yesterday what aspects of the Japanese boats might be included in an Australian design, a senior government source replied: “Everything.”…pressed on whether that included buying the boats off-the-shelf from the Japanese the answer was an emphatic “yes”.”

The usual approach is to build the first few boats aboard, with some local workers sent to participate, and then begin production locally. That would create an industrial timing problem for ASC, but if the government replaces 3 submarines with a 4th Hobart Class air defense destroyer, it could enhance Australia’s naval and missile defense options while covering the industrial gap. Sources: News Australia, “Australia in talks to buy Japanese submarines to upgrade fleet” | Sydney Morning Herald, “Coalition casts doubt on plan to replace Collins Class submarines”.

April 6/14: Japan. Jane’s reports that Australia and Japan have agreed to start talks on creating a framework for defense technology co-operation, with an initial project involving joint research into marine hydrodynamics.

“An official at the Japanese Ministry of Defence (MoD) told IHS Jane’s said this would include the analysis of propulsion and water resistance around submarine hulls.”

The message to Jane’s also suggested that the propulsion technology that so interests in Australians was deemed too sensitive. Instead, Japan’s Technical Research and Development Institute and Australia’s DSTO would begin collaboration here. Japanese decision making processes are slow, especially in an area so likely to create tensions with China. Will they be too slow for the decisions Australia needs to begin making? Sources: IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly, “Japan, Australia agree to joint research on submarines, hydrodynamics”.

March 6/14: Evolved Collins. It isn’t new to say that Australian politicians seem to be leaning toward an evolved Collins Class submarine, given the riskiness of designing a new boat. The political dynamics at work are more interesting:

“An evolved Collins-class has emerged as the favoured option for Australia’s next generation of submarines amid signs the much maligned existing boats will remain in service beyond 2030…. Few sources close to defence believe it will opt for a new design given the risk of having an orphan boat class. Treasurer Joe Hockey is said to be uneasy with the mooted pricetag of $36 billion. Defence Minister David Johnston has also cast doubt on whether Australia will double its fleet to 12, saying the number first mooted in the former prime minister’s 2009 white paper has never been justified.”

The report also says that decision makers are more comfortable leaving the Collins Class in service until 2030 – ironically, because they’ve been defective so often and spent so much time out of water. Sources: Australian Financial Review, “Evolved Collins favourite but timing unclear”.

Jan 20/14: Political pushback. The A$ 30-40 billion size of the future submarine project guarantees political scrutiny, but that won’t really begin until it’s a near-term project rather than just funded studies. The Sydney Morning Herald decides to start as the new center-right Liberal Party government prepares its 1st budget, and it’s coming from a right-wing source:

“Whatever one may think of [new Board member] Mirabella [q.v. Dec 17/13], she is an economic dry and does not shirk the dirty work of confronting spendthrift bureaucrats, military brass and trade unions, all of whom have treated the Australian Submarine Corporation and the Defence Materiel Organisation as a giant honey pot.

Both organisations are impervious to competence…. The idea that Australia should produce a dozen submarines in South Australia, at a projected cost of about $3 billion a vessel, is madness…. The new submarines will have a unit cost that dwarfs the Collins-class subs if built here, or roughly three times the cost of acquiring the submarines from foreign shipyards. The navy disputes this disparity but history does not.”

As many observers have noted before: please tell us how you really feel, Paul Sheehan. More seriously, this is an early sign that Abbott’s traditional allies may not be solidly behind the program as currently conceived. Meanwhile, the Labor Party is no longer in power, and hence no longer really bound to defend a program that will demand many more dollars for national defense. Sources: Sydney Morning Herald, “Future Submarine project a farce that has missed a mention”.

2013

Combat system picked. Potential work with Japan? click to read

Dec 17/13: ASC Board. Former Liberal Party MP Sophie Mirabella, a 12-year incumbent who was the only party incumbent to lose her seat in the recent election, is appointed to ASC’s Board of Directors by Prime Minister Tony Abbott, alongside new members Peter Iancov and Paul Rizzo.

Ms. Mirabella does have qualifications as the Coalition’s Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science while they were in opposition, and is known as a strong opponent of public sector waste. It’s arguable that ASC could use both, given the scale and importance of the projects they’re handling, and will soon begin to execute. Prime Minister Abbott could certainly use a critically-minded loyalist on the inside, to avert problems or at least give him advance warning of any nasty surprises. Now he has one. Sources: Minister for Finance, “Appointment of Three New Board Members to ASC Pty Ltd” | Sydney Morning Herald, “Coalition appoints Sophie Mirabella to board of government-owned shipbuilding firm”.

May 16/13: IP deal. Australia’s government signs a deal with Sweden’s FMV procurement agency, Intellectual Property rights for submarine design and technology. As RAND’s 2011 report had noted (q.v. Dec 13/11), this was a major stumbling block for any sort of Evolved Collins design.

The agreement covers use of Collins Class submarine technology for the Future Submarine Program. It also creates a framework and principles for the negotiation of Intellectual Property rights, if Australia wants to be able to use and disclose other Swedish submarine technology for an Evolved Collins solution. Disclosure is included because there are sub-contractors et. al. who require some level of disclosure in order to work on the project. Defense Ministers Joint Communique | Australia DoD.

Swedish Intellectual Property Agreement

May 2/13: White Paper. The Labor government’s 2013 defense white paper rejects the safer and quicker options of buying or modifying an existing class from abroad. Instead, they’ll focus on options #3 & 4: an evolved design of the Collins Class, or a completely new Australian design. As part of that decision, they’re going to continue with the American AN/BYG-1 combat system as their standard. It equips every class of American nuclear submarines thanks to a combination of initial installs and systems modernizations, and a BYG-1(V)8 variant was inserted into the current Collins Class as Project SEA 1439 Phase 4A.

This is a decision that exacerbates both the performance risks so amply illustrated by the Collins Class to date, and the risks of delayed in-service date for new boats. Which is why it shouldn’t surprise anyone that the government has extended their estimates of how long the Collins Class can serve. Unless they want a gap where Australia loses its submarines entirely, or operates with a much-reduced force, delays and decisions to date mean that the government can’t say anything else. Whether their study’s carefully-couched conclusion is true in an operational sense is a different question.

On the topic of performance risks, even with the new Submarine Propulsion Energy Support and Integration Facility, the submarine skills plan, and government plans to improve productivity in Australian shipbuilding, the new submarine decision expands almost every possible risk facing the Australian Navy’s future strategic centerpiece. It may be that a new propulsion system can fix some of the Collins Class’ problems, but the boats’ problems over the years have stemmed from a wide variety of defects and failures, across multiple systems. There are conflicting reports regarding the extent and success of the fixes tried to date, and one can be forgiven some skepticism that the same organizations responsible for the present situation can create or insert new designs that solve all of their previous mistakes. Since the systems will be new, or at the very least not proven in operations with the boat they’re inserted into, it’s also more than possible that “unforeseen” delays will make it hard to get new boats into service before the existing fleet becomes unfit for purpose.

In exchange, of course, the government gets to promise more spending with a state-owned firm (ASC) and its sub-contractors, on behalf of a Labor Party whose political standing is shaky, a few months before an election. Future Submarine Industry Skills Plan | Australia DoD release | ASC | ASPI | ASPI Shipbuilding timeline.

2013 White Paper, Combat System picked

Feb 13/13: Japan. The New Pacific Institute reports that Japanese media are now openly discussing a Soryu Class deal with Australia, and chronicles the process so far. Bottom line: If a deal is consummated, it’s going to be a delicate process of mutual trade-offs, not a straightforward transaction:

“The article did not offer much additional detail about how the process from here is likely to unfold, although it did frame the technology transfer as part of a supposedly mutual desire to balance against Chinese naval activities. It nevertheless suggests that defense officials are still considering the plan and that the chances are good that something will come out of the process notwithstanding any domestic or international backlash. The main issue for the Japanese side likely revolves what level of information and access to provide to the Royal Australian Navy.”

The relaxation of Japan’s export laws was meant to support joint development projects like the SM-3 Block IIA, rather than a 1-way transfer of technology to a foreign shipbuilder. Japan sees submarines as a strategic technology for its own preservation, and must weigh the risk of dissemination against the potential benefits. NPI doesn’t believe that complicating China’s life is enough of an inducement all by itself. Meanwhile, Australia knows that it wants a large diesel-electric sub, and believes that Japan has a reliable propulsion system design. Cooperation that stops short of full-scale licensed submarine construction might be an option for both parties.

2012

Initial studies budget; Is the project about pork-barrel politics, at the expense of defending Australia? Japan’s Soryu Class enters the mix; Kokoda’s shoddy study. JS Soryu
(click to view full)

Nov 15/12: Requirements. David Feeney, Parliamentary Secretary of Defence, speaks to the Submarine Institute of Australia Biennial Conference. He describes regional trends that could see A$ 44 billion spent by 2021 and up to 150 diesel-electric submarines operational, offers a naval “sea control” doctrine formulation straight from Sir Julian Corbett, and adds more clarity to his government’s expectations for the future submarine:

“Denial retains a place, but sea control operations ensure that Australian response options are not constrained and our freedom of action is not threatened. It is inconceivable that Australia can achieve sea control – a requirement for successful maritime power projection – without submarines.

Government is resolved that the Future Submarine will have greater range, longer endurance on patrol, and expanded capabilities (i.e. communications) as compared to the current Collins Class submarine. The Future Submarine must be able to carry different mission payloads such as uninhabited underwater vehicles (UUVs)… conduct strike operations against military targets, including an adversary’s operating bases, staging areas and critical military infrastructure.

Relative to other nations that operate diesel-electric submarines, the Future Submarine must operate across exceptionally vast distances… Asia-Pacific possesses numerous critical maritime nodes – notably the Malacca Strait, Sunda Strait, and Lombok Strait- all of which are critical to the global economy. These nodes are 2,000 or even 3,000 nm from [naval base] HMAS Stirling.”

The problem is that those requirements amount to a unique requirements set that will add massive costs to the project, along with risk that the next batch will fail like the Collins Class. Industry infrastructure is acknowledged to be shaky. Could the same money be used to buy an existing design, along with the sub tenders needed to give it all of that range and more? Or a set of submarines plus other critical sea control forces (like maritime aircraft)? Very likely. But the “made in Australia” rhetoric is all about jobs and perceived government largesse first, and defense second. Australia DoD Transcript.

Nov 14/12: Jobs justification. Jason Claire, Minister for Defence Materiel, speaks to the Submarine Institute of Australia’s 6th Biennial Conference. He begins by justifying the need for large submarines, on the grounds that they need to operate at long ranges. There are other approaches which could address this issue, but it makes for a useful uniqueness justification when he gets to the speech’s point – justifying his decision to build all of the submarines in Australia.

That approach significantly raises the risks of program failure, and of failure to replace existing boats in time. If the submarines really were a strategic priority, an approach that had the first 2-3 subs built abroad with Australian engineers on site, and the rest built locally as expertise grows, would be the obvious plan. Note, too, Claire’s use of the word “design,” indicating that despite government assurances, use of an existing submarine design isn’t getting serious consideration from this government:

“…will create thousands of jobs and work for hundreds of Australian companies. More than this it will create a new Australian industry… It will take decades to build 12 submarines, and by the time the last is built the first will need to be replaced. It’s not a short project. It will go on and on. It will create an industry that could last for a century or more. That industry should be here. That industry also has flow on benefits. It will build skills useful for other industries and technology… also build the capabilities and skills of our universities and our technical colleges… it is important we have an indigenous capability that can design, develop, build and maintain submarines.

That is not something we can or should do on our own… But we also can’t, and shouldn’t, outsource the whole task… Acquiring nuclear powered submarines… [means] outsourcing the construction, maintenance and sustainment of the submarines… built overseas, they would have to be fuelled, docked, defueled and disposed of overseas. That means tens of billions of dollars for acquisition and sustainment over decades that could be invested in Australia, spent overseas.

We have got a valley of death between the last AWD and the start of construction of the first future submarine. It’s a valley where jobs are lost and the skills we need will disappear… We need to fix this. This is the job of the Future Submarines Industry Skills Plan that I will receive next month.”

Sept 6/12: Infrastructure. Australia’s government announces that the Future Submarine Systems Centre will be based in Adelaide, South Australia. There had been some concern that the work might migrate elsewhere, but this is where Australia’s naval shipbuilding infrastructure is located.

The Systems Centre is set to formally open in 2013 as the home of the Future Submarine program, much as the AWD Centre in Adelaide has been the home of the A$ 8 billion Air Warfare Destroyer program. There are already staff working on the project, but they are based at state-owned shipbuilder ASC. Once they move, the center will be used to conduct evaluation of options, design work, program management, engineering, logistics and production planning. Over the next few years, it will grow to include hundreds of Defence personnel from Navy, the Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO), the Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO), and defense contractors.

There has also been a steady drumbeat of criticism over Australia’s slow decision-making, and the government’s readiness to choose an industrial structure that will roughly double the program’s cost to A$ 36 billion or more, and introduce significant risk. Even as the RAN has extreme difficulties sustaining and manning its existing fleet of 6 Collins Class subs. The government is sticking to the 2009 plan of 12 new submarines to be assembled in South Australia, with the same 4 options under study, etc. The minister adds that this commitment will be reinforced as part of the 2013 Defence White Paper.

Aug 28/12: Where’s Coles Review 2? Liberal Party opposition defense critic Sen. Johnston releases a statement:

“Part 2 of the Coles Review of the Sustainment of Australia’s Collins Class Submarines was expected to be handed to the Minister in April, but in spite of the Minister declaring Collins Class sustainment was at the top of the Government’s Project of Concern List, it is still nowhere to be seen… I can see why the Defence Minister isn’t exactly pushing down Mr Coles’ door as Part 1 of his report was a damning indictment… Senator Johnston said this year alone taxpayers will spend close to $1 billion on maintenance and sustainment of the Collins Class with only one, sometimes two out of six submarines operationally ready at any one time.”

The review doesn’t arrive until mid-December 2012.

July 25 – Aug 3/12: Breakdowns & delays. After reporting a successful torpedo firing and sinking exercise during RIMPAC 2012, Australia’s DoD reveals that a leak is forcing HMAS Farncomb to return to port immediately. The Liberal Party’s shadow defence minister, David Johnston, reminds Sydney Morning Herald readers that these kinds of breakdowns are all too common, while highlighting the timing problem that could leave Australia without a viable fleet. The time for a decision, he says, is now:

“The ASPI report described the gap between when all the Collins Class have been retired and the time it would take to build a replacement as “nothing short of catastrophic”… three years “of no submarines at all”… After some prodding the Minister also declared [in May 2012, 3 years after the White Paper] a final decision on the replacement would not be made until late 2013 or 2014 – in other words, not until after the next election… all against the backdrop of our submarines being so operationally fragile that competing in exercises with allies becomes a case of going in with fingers crossed… We also have our submariners reluctantly leaving the Navy because they simply don’t get time at sea doing what they signed up to do.”

July 9/12: Japan’s Soryu? RAN Future Submarine Program head Rear-Admiral Rowan Moffitt, and DMO Chief Defence Scientist Dr. Alexander Zelinsky are traveling to Japan to look at the country’s new 4,200t Soryu (“Blue Dragon”) Class/ 16SS submarines.

Japan relaxed its ban on weapon exports somewhat in December 2011, which opens up the possibility of an Australian-built submarine derivative. On the flip side, the previous ban means that Japanese firms lack the same kind of technology transfer and off-site quality control experience that has been earned over the years by Germany’s HDW (Greece, India, South Korea, Turkey), and France’s DCNS (Brazil, India).

The Soryus have a Stirling Air Independent Propulsion system, and began service just 3 years ago. They’re also much larger than competitors like France’s 2,060t MESMA AIP equipped AM-2000 Scorpene. That makes the Soryus attractive to Australia, and some think they might have the range and capacity Australia needs. It’s worth noting that smaller submarines like Germany’s 1,830t U212As have traveled thousands of miles while submerged, and technically have a longer range than the Soryus. Still, bigger is better to some. The Japanese subs do offer a lot more space for weapons, and a similar submarine design might offer interesting opportunities for Australian-Japanese operational cooperation. Adelaide Now | Sydney Morning Herald.

May 3/12: Initial budget & plans. Australia’s Labor Party government announces a budget of another A$ 214 million for the next stage of the Future Submarine Project, and appoints Mr. David Gould as the DoD’s General Manager of Submarines, working within the DMO and reporting directly to its CEO. The initial budget will pay for detailed studies and analysis to inform the design choice, the cost/ capability tradeoffs, and the workforce skills requirements to build them in Australia. Those funds are on top of the government’s December 2011 RFI, and the contract with Babcock for a land-based propulsion testing site.

Overall, the Government announces that they’re considering 4 broad options for diesel-electric fast attack submarines, as outlined above. with respect to the studies and work conducted:

Scientific and technological studies will be conducted primarily by the Australian DoD’s Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO).

The off-the-shelf studies will be undertaken with same trio of firms who were sent the December 2011 RFI: DCNS (Scorpene), TKMS HDW (U212A/214), and Navantia (S-80). TKMS Kockums will perform the evolved design studies for the Collins Class, as they were its original designers.

An interesting 2nd look will happen within the AUSMIN framework agreed in November 2010. US technical cooperation will involve capability modeling for both off-the-shelf and evolved Collins options. Systems Performance and Analysis, and GD Electric Boat, will do that work under a US Foreign Military Sales case.

The workforce skills plan will be developed by a team be led by the DoD’s Defence Materiel Organisation CEO, Mr. Warren King, and supported by an Expert Industry Panel headed by Mr. David Mortimer, AO. The Expert Industry Panel will include representatives of the Navy; DMO; the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education; Skills Australia; unions; the CEOs of ASC, Austal, BAE Systems and Forgacs Engineering; and the Australian CEOs for local subsidiaries of Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, Thales, Saab Systems and BAE Systems. Australia DoD.

Budget & Studies

April 23/12: An interview with Minister for Defence Stephen Smith touches on the Collins Class’ ongoing problems, and the decisions to be taken regarding Australia’s future submarines. An excerpt:

“So there are capability issues [with the operating ranges required for Australian submarines] but no decisions have been made other than the Government ruling out a nuclear [propulsion] option… Australia does not have a nuclear industry, and if we acquired nuclear submarines that would effectively see the outsourcing to another country of our maintenance and sustainment… We remain committed to 12 submarines assembled in Australia.

“…Whether there is a gap in capability will in the end depend upon the decision that we make about the new submarine, firstly; secondly, the length of life or the life of type of the Collins Class Submarine. That is currently not known… one of the studies we have currently under way is a study trying to better define the life of type of the Collins Class Submarine… it would have been in my view wrong – indeed, irresponsible – to have leapt into a Future Submarine Project without trying to address the long-standing endemic, systemic difficulties that we’ve had with the Collins Class Submarine.”

April 21/12: Captain’s Critique. Commander James Harrap, a 20-year navy veteran, resigns from the RAN after commanding both HMAS Waller and HMAS Collins. While the boats and their crews had “serviced the navy well and achieved much,” the media obtain a copy of his overall assessment. It is stark and scathing: scrap the class.

“I don’t believe the Collins-class are sustainable in the long term and many of the expensive upgrade plans which have been proposed would be throwing good money after bad… Over the last two years, I believe these problems have become worse… Throughout my command of both Collins and Waller, full capability was never available and frequently over 50 per cent of the identified defects were awaiting stores… Collins has consistently been let down by some fundamental design flaws, leading to poor reliability and inconsistent performance. The constant stream of defects and operation control limitations makes getting to sea difficult, staying at sea harder and fighting the enemy a luxury only available once the first two have been overcome.”

The submarines’ diesel engines come in for special criticism, but they are far from his only target. His final conclusion has special relevance to Australia’s next-generation program: “I do not believe we have the capability to independently design and build our own submarines.” The Australian.

Jan 19/12: Kokoda criticized. The Kokoda Foundation releases its study “Sub Judice: Australia’s Future Submarine,” written by former ASC employee Brice Pacey. It concludes that no off-the-shelf conventional submarine can meet Australia’s requirements, and that a nuclear submarine program is unaffordable and unmanageable. Instead, it recommends “an evolution of the Collins design,” and claim that “the cost of building the submarine will be markedly less than some published estimates… there is no cost penalty for an Australian build.” These statements are from the foundation’s release; the full document itself is a for-fee publication.

While there is widespread agreement that nuclear-powered SSN fast attack boats are not a realistic option for Australia, the foundation’s other 3 conclusions draw fire. First, submarine-builder ASC’s sponsorship of the paper has led several observers to question the study’s seriousness and objectivity. The critics add that requirements themselves are arbitrary, unless the gaps involving current state-of-the-art submarines create serious mission problems, and the cost to field a 100% solution is acceptable. Given the demonstrated capabilities of submarines like the U214, they see the capability gap as too small, and the price gap as too large.

On which topic, reports indicate Kokoda estimates of just A$ 18 billion for the 12 boats, which is, indeed, significantly less than other published estimates. The history of the Collins Class, with respect to both build costs and performance, is not overly encouraging, and the credibility of this estimate has been deeply doubted. ASPI analyst Andrew Davies summed up this view with a Carl Sagan quote: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” Kokoda Foundation release [PDF] | Canberra Times | Lowy Institute for International Policy.

2011

German “Type 216”?; Learning from other submarine programs – including Australia’s. U214 cutaway
(click to view full)

Dec 28/11: Type 216? HDW has released details of a 4,000t “Type 216” concept design, which appears to be targeted at Australia’s SEA 1000 future submarine program.

Australian sources have expressed concerns that the U214, and other boats investigated in the RFI, may not have the size and range to meet Australia’s specification. This may or may not be accurate, but a larger design could conceivably appeal to customers like Australia, India, and possibly Canada one day.

With doubts growing that an Australian-designed successor to the Collins class boat cannot be ready by the 2025 deadline, HDW might find some traction with a large submarine that offered 10,400 nm/ 19.240 km notional range, Air-Independent Propulsion for long underwater patrols; and the ability to launch cruise missiles, a special forces swimmer delivery vehicle, or UUVs. The flip side is that first-of-class boats can be problematic, even if the class is designed by a very experienced and skilled firm. The Greek experience with the 1st of class Papanikolis (U214) is instructive here. Canberra Times | Navy Recognition (incl. drawings).

click to read

Dec 13/11: Studies & Contenders. The Phase 1 Coles Review into the Collins Class’ difficulties is released, and goes as far as calling Australia’s approach to managing submarines “unfit for purpose.” The same day, Australia’s DoD releases RAND’s requested report of lessons learned from US, UK, and Australian submarine programs, and discusses the class options they’re investigating:

“Options for the Future Submarine range from a proven fully Military off the Shelf design through to a completely new submarine. All options are being considered, other than nuclear propulsion which the Government has ruled out… The Government has approved the release of Requests for Information to three overseas submarine designers… [to] provide a better understanding of the capabilities of off-the-shelf options.”

The list deals a blow to recent reports, as it’s made up of France’s DCNS (Scorpene), Germany’s TKMS HDW (Type 214), and Australia’s biggest shipbuilding partner, Spain’s Navantia (S-80). TKMS’ Swedish Kockums subsidiary, who worked with Australia to design the Collins Class, didn’t see its developmental A26 Class make the list.

The government isn’t stopping there. Australia’s DoD has signed a contract with Babcock Australia to study a land-based propulsion systems test facility, and the Defence Materiel Organisation has been ordered to develop a Future Submarine Industry Skills Plan, in consultation with Australia’s defense industry. Meanwhile, the Government refers to the discussions and agreement with the USA at AUSMIN 2010, regarding Australian-United States cooperation on submarine systems, which “will extend into future submarine acquisition program.” That could add one more advantage to Navantia, whose S-80 uses a number of American technologies. Australia DoD | RAND Report | Coles Review, Phase 1 [PDF].

Coles Review & RAND Report

Oct 15/11: The Labor Party government’s leader in the Senate, Chris Evans, indicates that components and possibly modules of Australia’s future submarines are expected to be built beyond South Australia, and even overseas. This is not a surprising plan, given the history of the Collins Class, but it creates political sparks. ASC, of course, is lobbying to keep everything it can in-house. The Australian | Adelaide Now.

Oct 15/11: Australian media report on the Collins Class’ annual costs, and future sub competition:

“Figures obtained by the Herald Sun, show the six Collins subs cost about $630 million a year – or $105 million each – to maintain, making them the most expensive submarines ever to put to sea… A US Navy Ohio Class nuclear attack submarine – more than three times the size of a Collins boat – costs about $50 million a year to operate.

The cost figures are revealed as Defence officials say at least two possible contenders for the navy’s new submarine fleet – the Spanish S-80 and French-Spanish Scorpene class boat – have been ruled out of the future submarine project.”

If true, one wonders what’s left. Sweden is just beginning to design a new A26 Class, and Germany’s HDW has its U214. Russian designs aren’t a realistic option. The other possibility is that Australia might seek, once again, to design its own submarine. Herald Sun | Courier Mail, incl. infographic | Australia’s Daily Telegraph.

July 25/11: The Australian reports that Australia’s DoD:

“…will seek US help with Australia’s plan to build 12 big conventional submarines to replace the navy’s six troubled Collins-class boats… After initial problems with the Collins fleet a decade ago, the US provided a state-of-the-art combat system and the latest technology to improve the subs’ propulsion systems and make them less noisy.”

July 19/11: Coles Review begins. Labor Party Defence Minister Stephen Smith admits that there are “long-term difficulties” with the Collins Class submarine fleet, and announces a full independent review led by British private sector expert John Coles. The Minister cites too many stretches where only 1-2 submarines have been available, and there are reportedly doubts that the subs’ diesel engines are robust enough to last until 2025 as planned:

“These problems are significant and highly technically complex. At times we have seen as few as one Collins Class submarine available for operations. This situation is unacceptable but will not be addressed simply by continuation of the status quo… As a consequence, the Government will conduct a review into the optimal commercial framework for the conduct of Collins Class Submarine sustainment… My ambition is that the Coles Review will do for the Collins Class Submarine what the Rizzo Report has done for our amphibious fleet capability: a clear sighted path to improve the sustainment and availability of the Collins Class Submarines… Without having confidence in our capacity to sustain our current fleet of submarines, it is very difficult to fully commence, other than through initial planning, the acquisition program for our Future Submarine. This is consistent with the absolute necessity to work very hard in the early days to get projects right and thereby avoid, reduce, and minimise project difficulties down the track.”

The Coles Review has been asked to provide an interim report by December 2011, and a final version by March 2012. The key questions are how long this will delay Australia’s future submarine program, and whether the review will include political-structural weaknesses in the program, or confine itself to procedures. Minister for Defence ASPI transcript | ASC release | Adelaide Now | Australian Broadcasting Corp. and ABC AM radio | Canberra Times | Queensland’s Courier-Mail | Sydney Morning Herald | The Australian.

May 15/11: Australia’s Kokoda Foundation releases “Under the Sea Air Gap: Australia’s Anti-Submarine Warfare Challenge. The study “attempts to identify issues surrounding Australia’s Anti Submarine Warfare capabilities that will require greater scrutiny in the period leading up to the 2014 Defence White Paper.”

Author Brice Pacey is concerned that the design for Australia’s next-generation submarines might not be complete until 2019, and the first boat might not be ready until 2030. With the Collins Class scheduled to begin retiring in the mid-2020s, that would present a problem. Australia would need to either extend the lives of a class that has not performed well or reliably, or accept a vestigial submarine fleet even as it neighbors build up their capabilities. See also Adelaide Now.

April 14/11: Australia’s ASPI think-tank releases “The once and future submarine – raising and sustaining Australia’s underwater capability.” Based on past acquisitions, beginning the future submarine program immediately would only deliver the 1st boat in 2025; further delays would create timing issues with the Collins Class’ retirement. On which subject:

“…the boats have spent so little time in the water due to maintenance and crewing problems that the hulls have not been pressure cycled anywhere near to the extent anticipated. However, a life-of-type extension for the Collins is not an especially appealing prospect for a number of reasons. To start with, the drive train in the Collins has been problematic since day one, and attempts to keep the fleet going into the late 2020s would almost certainly require work to replace the highly problematic diesel engines (which are already ‘orphans’ in the world of maritime diesels). That alone is an undertaking requiring major engineering work, not to mention a lot of money. It is a simple fact of geometry that the engines can only be removed by cutting the pressure hull. Given that less complex mid-cycle dockings are taking 100 weeks to complete (against an anticipated 52 weeks), this exercise would result in considerable downtime. It could be that every five years of additional life would come at the cost of one or two extra years out of the water and/or conducting sea trials for each boat being upgraded. This would further exacerbate the already disappointingly low availability of the fleet.”

2009 – 2010

Australia’s White Paper sets an ambitious target. Collins Class
(click to view full)

Jan 27/10: Australian DoD:

“There have been inaccurate reports today that the Rudd Government was reconsidering its decision to build our future submarines in Adelaide[, Australia]. These reports are false. The Rudd Government is fully committed to building our new future submarines in Adelaide.”

Jan 25/10: The Collins Class submarine HMAS Farncomb encounters a generator failure, which reduces Australia’s operational Collins Class submarine fleet to 1 boat in 6. The cost of repairs is not yet predictable, and the mechanical issue could extend beyond HMAS Farncomb.

Continuing issues with the class also lead to questions concerning the feasibility of, and proposed strategy for, Australia’s next-generation submarine program. Read “Australia’s Submarine Program in the Dock” for full coverage.

Nov 5/09: Acting Minister for Defence Greg Combet highlights the major challenges facing Australia’s next generation submarine project in a speech to the Sydney Institute. Excerpts of “From Collins to Force 2030: The Challenge of the Future Submarine“:

“…the White Paper recognises that the aim of establishing sea and air control in our primary operating environment does not entail a purely defensive or reactive approach. Rather, we must be able to conduct proactive combat operations at a distance from our shores. This demands a mix of intelligence, defensive and strike assets to ensure both deterrence and, if that were to fail, an ability to impose unacceptably high costs… Put simply, we need to be able to take warfare to an adversary’s front door. Submarines are able to stop an adversary from deploying its’ fleet by maintaining sea denial. By imposing disproportionate costs on an adversary, submarines represent an asymmetric threat well suited to Australia’s defence.

…In planning for the future submarine, we need to consider a range of engineering and production solutions, ranging from the acquisition of a Military Off The Shelf (MOTS) design, options consistent with the Kinnaird/Mortimer reforms, to a developmental solution designed indigenously… Electric Boat have a rule known as the ‘law of 1:3:8’, that is, a task that takes an hour in module construction takes 3 hours when the hull has been assembled and 8 hours when the submarine is in the water. In other words, make sure the design is mature before you start cutting steel.

…Studies have shown that 90 per cent of the discretionary decisions that affect the outcome of a project are made in the first 7 to 12 per cent of the project’s life. There are three things that we must get right… adequately define the operating concepts and requirements for the future submarine… develop a sophisticated acquisition strategy [which may include rolling production or batch buys]… understand the interaction between capability and the acquisition strategy. It is often the interaction between these two processes that leads to trouble.

One of the matters that we will need to tackle early in the project is the need to invest in and develop a sustainable industrial base that is capable of designing, constructing and maintaining 12 large submarines [which will include cooperation with US Navy facilities].”

Nov 3/09: RAND study commissioned. The Sydney Morning Herald quotes Acting Defence Minister Greg Combet, who says that the USA’s RAND Corporation will be conducting a study related to the submarine project, due in February 2010:

“(Defence) is undertaking a number of studies to identify and explore all the options to ensure we have the appropriate design capability to support our submarines throughout their life.”

See also SpaceWar article.

Oct 29/09: The Australian Strategic Policy Institute releases “Strategic Insights 48 – How to buy a submarine: Defining and building Australia’s future fleet.” ASPI projects an $A 36 billion (currently about $32.6 billion) cost to field 12 built-in-Australia diesel-electric submarines – a sum comparable to buying 12 of the USA’s most advanced SSN-774 Virginia class nuclear fast attack submarines. OIt adds:

“As described, the resultant boats are likely to be the largest, most complex and, at $3 billion each, the most expensive conventional submarines ever built. The industrial capacity and capability to produce these vessels does not exist in Australia at the moment. By the time construction commences, it will be over fifteen years since the last Collins-class submarine was launched. Hard-earned lessons from that process will need to be re-learned in many cases and the required engineering and construction skills will have to be built up to the required level… This paper, authored by Sean Costello and Andrew Davies, surveys the complexities that have to be negotiated and suggests a way ahead that makes best use of the resources available to government.”

See also Full report [PDF].

May 2/09: Australia’s 2009 Defence White Paper is released. One of its goals is a fleet of 12 non-nuclear diesel-electric submarines with Air-Independent Propulsion, capable of launching land attack cruise missiles, to be assembled in South Australia. Design to be determined. ASC is not guaranteed the contract, however, something Fitzgibbon had pledged during the election.

The subs could be upgraded versions of the existing Collins class, or a foreign partnership around a sub like Spain’s S-80, which will already be designed to launch Tomahawk missiles.

The Collins class will also receive sonar and other upgrades during their lifetime.

White Paper

Appendix A: Foreign Contenders CM-2000 Scorpene
(click to view full)

Once Australia decided to field new submarines, the next question was “which submarines”? Off-the-shelf designs, or a modified variant that kept the structure but used Australian combat systems and weapons, were 2 of the 4 options under consideration until May 2013.

The 4 contenders that evaluated as potential off-the-shelf or modified design buys were:

• DCNS’ Scorpene, which has been bought by Brazil, Chile, India, and Malaysia. It includes an option to add the MESMA AIP(Air-Independent Propulsion) section, for longer underwater running time.

• Navantia’s S-80. So far, only Spain has bought it, but it’s designed for size, range, and compatibility with American systems & weapons. Navantia is also the RAN’s biggest shipbuilding partner, with very deep experience and partnerships thanks to the Air Warfare Destroyer and LHD projects.

• TKMS HDW’s U212A/U214, which has been sold to Germany, Greece, Italy, South Korea, and Turkey. South Korea’s world-leading shipbuilding firms can even build the design under license, which may create interesting collaboration opportunities in Australia. The class comes with AIP built-in, and has undertaken some long trips in German service. A larger 4,000t U218 design has also been discussed by TKMS, and sold to Singapore.

• Japan’s new 4,200t Soryu Class, which is far larger than any of the European submarines. It’s also an AIP submarine, using a Stirling system from TKMS in Sweden. Japan changed some of its laws in December 2011, allowing it to export some items to vetted allies.

Additional Readings

• Australia DoD – Defence Capability Plan 2009 Public Version: SEA 1000.

• DID – Australia’s Submarine Program In the Dock. Covers issues with the Collins Class.

• The Submarine Institute of Australia. Wide-ranging work in this general area, and on this program specifically. See their May 5/11 “FAQ for the Future Submarine,” among others.

• Project Gutenberg – Some Principles of Maritime Strategy by Sir Julian Stafford Corbett. His theories of naval power are similar to Australia’s goals and vision for their submarine force.

Official Reports

• Australia DoD (May 2013) – Government releases 2013 Defence White Paper.

• Australia DoD (May 2013) – Future Submarine Industry Skills Plan.

• Australia DoD (July 2012 – Dec 2012) – Coles Review: The Study Into the Business of Sustaining Australia’s Strategic Collins Class Submarine Capability.

• DID – Australia’s 2009 Defense White Paper.

Other News & Reports

• The National Interest (Sept 18/14) – U.S. Submarines: Run Silent, Run Deep…On Diesel Engines? Suggests buying a squadron of Soryus for the USN. Tremendous obstacles, but the author is a US Naval War College professor, and co-author of a defining work analyzing the Chinese naval buildup: “Red Star Over the Pacific”.

• Naval Technology (Feb 19/14) – Sink or swim: Sweden’s new A-26 next-gen submarine in doubt.

• Wall St. Journal (March 23/14) – Dispute Threatens ThyssenKrupp’s Submarine Business.

• SvD Naringsliv (March 18/14) – Sverige tar tillbaka ubåtarna. Mentions Australia and Poland as potential collaborators on a Swedish submarine design.

• Defense News (March 2/14) – Saab Maneuvers To Buy Swedish Submarine Maker. Following a late February decision by Sweden’s FMV to give Saab a $3.87 million contract. The point? To study Saab’s ability to produce Sweden’s next-generation submarine, instead of Kockums.

• Sverige Radio (Feb 27/14) – Osäker framtid för Kockum. “Uncertain future for Kockum”.

• The Local – Germany (Nov 29/13) – Poland gives thumbs down to German subs. “…but sources have told The Local that on the back of a landmark naval deal between the two countries, Poland is likely to lease two subs anyway.” Over the longer term, could Poland become a partner?

• Polish MON (Nov 15/13) – Okrety podwodne – rozmawiajmy o faktach. Excerpt Trans.: “The Polish Navy, according to the approved Technical Modernisation Programme 2013-2022, is expected to receive three new submarines. Two will go to its facilities by 2022 – a third by 2030.”

• Sydney Morning Herald (Aug 3/12) – Time for talking on new submarine is over. Explains the program’s timing issues, and also ongoing problems with the Collins Class.

• Kokoda Foundation (January 2012) – Sub Judice: Australia’s Future Submarine [PDF, Release]. A number of observers weren’t impressed, questioning its seriousness, objectivity, and conclusions – see Jan 19/12 entry.

• RAND 2011 – Learning from Experience: Lessons from the Submarine Programs of the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia. Covers SSBN/SSGN Ohio, SSN-21 Seawolf, and SSN-774 Virginia programs in the USA, Britain’s Astute SSNs, and Australia’s Collins Class SSKs (Volume IV).

• Australian DoD (Dec 13/11) – Collins Class Sustainment Review Phase 1 Report [PDF]. Also known as the “Coles Review”. Delivered to government Nov 4/11.

• Kokoda Foundation (May 25/11) – Under the Sea Air Gap: Australia’s Anti-Submarine Warfare Challenge. “This study attempts to identify issues surrounding Australia’s Anti Submarine Warfare capabilities that will require greater scrutiny in the period leading up to the 2014 Defence White Paper.”

• ASPI (April 14/11) – “The once and future submarine – raising and sustaining Australia’s underwater capability.

• Australian Defence magazine (April 1/10) – Size Matters, by Rex Patrick. A wide-ranging and educational look at trends in submarine warfare.

• The Australian (Feb 9/11) – Nuclear or not, we’ll need prefab subs. Amidst calls for SSN nuclear-powered fast attack subs, the article looks at the shortcomings of existing diesel-electric SSKs – and of Australian submarine experiences to date.

• ASPI in Brisbane Courier (Feb 1/10) – Royal Australian Navy lumbered with sub-par hardware.

• ASPI (Oct 29/09) – Strategic Insights 48 – How to buy a submarine: Defining and building Australia’s future fleet.

• DID (May 25/09) – ADF: An “Aren’t Deployable” Force?.

• ELP Defens(c)e Blog – Defence White Paper Fantasy. About the most critical coverage of the 2009 White Paper that we found.

• Australia DoD (July 1/99) – Mcintosh-Prescott report. Covering the shortcomings and issues with Australia’s Collins Class submarine program.

• Naval Technology – Collins class submarines.

Potential Contenders

• DID – Saab Story: Sweden’s New Submarines. Began as the A26; how will it end up?

• Spanish Navy – Submarine S-80.

• DID/DII – S-80: A Sub, for Spain, to Sail Out on the Main. Technical issues remove it as an export option until they’re fixed.

• Naval Technology – SSK Scorpene. India and Malaysia will operate this in the neighborhood.

• Naval Technology – SS Soryu Class Submarines, Japan.

• Naval Technology – U212/ U214 Type Submarines.

• TKMS – Type 216. About 4,000t, much larger than all but Japan’s Soryu. A customized version will become Singapore’s U218SG.

• Defense Update (Dec 5/13) – Singapore’s Type-218SG – Forerunner of a new Submarine Class? Says the U216 is designed to be scaled up or down.

Regional Developments

• DID/DII – India’s Multi-billion Dollar Scorpene Sub Contract. Includes a snapshot of Chinese developments.

• DID – Scorpene’s Sting: Liberation Publishes Expose re: Malaysia’s Bribery & Murder Scandal.

• DID – KSS-II: South Korea Orders 6 More U-214 AIP Submarines. They can build/assemble them, and may be about to begin exporting them.

& DID – Submarines for Indonesia. South Korean built, reportedly modified Chang Bogo Class U209s.

• DID – Thailand’s New Second-Hand Submarines. Reportedly 6 of the 500t U206As – but Thailand ended up backing out.

• SLD (Jan 9/14) – From Dynamic Defense to a “Comprehensive Defense Architecture”: Japan Re-Shapes Its National Security Strategy. The changes affect Australia’s plans, and expand the windows for cooperation.

• Senang Diri (Dec 4/13) – Republic of Singapore Navy Type 218SG submarine buy caps 18-year journey in underwater warfare.

• Singapore MINDEF (Dec 2/13) – MINDEF Signs Contract to Acquire Two Submarines. The U218SGs.

• TKMS (Dec 2/13) – ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems receives major submarine order from Singapore. For its U218SG. Switches them away from traditional provider Kockums, after TKMS blocked attempts by their subsidiary to sell new submarines to Singapore.

• The Diplomat (July 16/13) – The Submarine Race in the Malaccan Strait.

Americas

• The US Navy has delivered the first fixed-wing aircraft variant of the Advanced Precision Kill Weapons System (APKWS), to be attached to AV-8B Harriers and operated by the Marine Attack Squadron (VMA). Initially integrated onto MH-60S, MH-60R, and AH-1Z helicopters, the new design just took seven months to be incorporated onto the Harrier. The new capability will quickly provide the AV-8B with a low-cost, low-collateral damage, high-precision weapon in support of combat operations.

• Sales of the Yak-130 jet trainer are expected to make their way to a number of Latin American countries according to Anatoly Punchuk, the deputy director of the Russian Federal Service of Military-Technical Cooperation. It is hoped that the combat training aircraft is selected as a number of air forces plan to renew their current fleets of flight equipment. Punchuk’s comments were made as he participated in the FIDAE-2016 arms exhibition in Chile, where foreign experts were allowed to test the aircraft for themselves.

• Embraer has announced that their KC-390 cargo aircraft is now back on schedule, after delays last year ran the risk of affecting potential customers. A direct challenge to Lockheed Martin’s Hercules, the KC-390 promises capabilities to fly higher, fuller, and faster, at a lower price than its competitor. Customers for the Brazillian airlifter include 28 contracts to deliver the KC-390 to Brazil, and 32 “letters of intention” with other countries, including South American neighbors Chile, Argentina and Portugal.

Middle East North Africa

• A request has been made by Algeria to test the Su-35 as a number of countries have expressed interest in the fighter. This adds a new dimension to the negotiations surrounding the purchase of Su-32 bombers which started last November, expected to cost between $500-600 million. After the Algerian Air Force’s testing of the Su-35, it’s expected they would purchase at least ten of the fighters, which would come with a price tag of around $900 million.

Europe

• The Bulgarian government has approved the purchase of up to 19 fighter aircraft for its air force. $1.4 billion has been allocated in an investment plan to go toward keeping its current MiG-29 planes operating while investing in new warplanes and naval patrol ships. The aircraft procurement will come in two stages with eight planes acquired between 2018-2021 with a further eight coming between 2022-2023. Meanwhile, its naval procurement plan will see the Navy acquire two multi-purpose patrol ships with a modular design to be implemented over the next five years.

• The Royal Air Force (RAF) has tested the BriteCloud decoy during a Tornado GR4 jet strike. Successful trials of the new radar-jamming anti-missile countermeasure may see the RAF become the first buyer of the system with negotiations under way between the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the British arm of manufacturer Finmeccanica. BriteCloud is a self-contained unit with a battery-powered digital radio frequency memory (DRFM) jammer, that can be ejected from fighter aircraft, in a straight swap for the existing 55mm flare, to counter the threat from the latest air-to-air and surface-to-air radio frequency guided missiles.

Asia Pacific

• Contracts have been signed between India and the US Department of Defense for the purchase of Raytheon’s FIM-29 Stinger missiles. 245 of the air-to-air munitions will be fitted on the 22 AH-64 Apache helicopters currently on order by the Indian government. The Apache purchase was part of a $2.5 billion deal which included not only Apaches, but also 15 CH-47F Chinook helicopters.

• Guidance systems initially used for air-to-air missiles may soon find themselves adapted for civilian uses according to the Mitsubishi Electric Corp. The manufacturer of the Japanese military’s missile needs have been working to use components such as millimeter-wave radars, sonars, sensors and cameras for automated cars and vehicles due to hit the road in 2020. Their experience in military guidance systems has allowed the company to catch up with competitors Continental AG, Denso Corp. and Hitachi Automotive Systems Ltd. in providing assistance technologies with components for lane-keeping and automatic braking systems due for manufacture next year.

Today’s Video

• A look at the Russia’s new T-14 main battle tank:

KC-390 refuels AMXs
(click to view full)

Global competition in the 20-ton air transport segment continues to intensify, with Brazil’s launch of its KC-390 program. Embraer figures reportedly place the global C-130 replacement market at around 700 aircraft. In response, it will develop a jet-powered rival to compete with Lockheed Martin’s C-130J, the larger Airbus A400M, Russia’s AN-12 and its Chinese copy the Yun-8/9, and the bi-national Irkut/HAL MRTA project. Smaller aircraft like the EADS-CASA C-295M, and Alenia’s C-27J, represent indirect competition.

Embraer is extending its efforts and markets by crafting a jet-powered medium transport with a cargo capacity of around 23 tons, that can be refueled in the air, and can provide refueling services to other aircraft by adding dedicated pods. The KC-390 has now become a multinational program, and may be shaping up as the C-130’s most formidable future competitor. A tie-up with Boeing underscores the seriousness of Embraer’s effort, which is now a production program…

The KC-390: Program KC-390 schedule, 2010
(click to view full)

Brazil’s aerospace industry has made impressive global gains in the civilian business and regional jet segments, and in the military market for primary trainer and counterinsurgency aircraft. Slumping civilian demand recently led to layoffs, but rising Brazilian defense budgets give the government a lever to inject funds into the company, while completing a strategic project that has been under consideration for a couple of years.

Overall, Embraer reportedly bases its business case on a break-even point of 120 orders, or about 1/7th of the tactical transport market outside of China, Russia, Ukraine and the USA.

The initial Brazilian contract covered R&D, and called for 3 development aircraft, with a 28 plane production order to follow. Brazil has held to that, which will allow the KC-390 to restore an existing FAB shortfall and replace the Brazilian Air Force’s 21 C-130E/H and 2 KC-130H Hercules planes. The FAB flew 10 aged DHC-5 Buffalo tactical transports for many years, but had to replace them recently with C295s from Airbus Military. The C295s are very useful for smaller cargo loads, but they have limits as tactical airlifters, so the added KC-390s will fully restore the FAB’s status quo ante.

To date, possible orders stand at 60, including Brazil’s confirmed 28, plus possible orders from Argentina (6), Chile (6), Colombia (12), the Czech Republic (2), and Portugal (6). South Africa’s cancellation of its A400M order may create another opportunity, and Brazil’s F-X-2 fighter competition may lead to even more European orders. Sweden promised to consider the KC-390 to replace its recently-upgraded C-130s with the KC-390 if the JAS-39 Gripen won, and so it will probably become Sweden’s next airlifter at some point.

Embarer’s boast that it has 32 Letters of Intent from various countries indicate that this customer list could grow quickly. Note, however, that there aren’t any formal contracts yet for these export orders. Until prospective orders turn into firm contracts, relying on any numerical commitments is premature.

Meanwhile, development continues on an aggressive schedule. The first prototypes are expected to fly by the end of 2014, with acceptance by Brazil’s air force beginning in 2016.

The aircraft design itself will belong to the Brazilian government, with Embraer as the lead technical and industrial partner. All talks to join the program will be conducted at a government-to-government level, and the process of adding “risk sharing” partners will be a top-down process that results in directives handed down to Embraer.

Note that this kind of arrangement can create program risks, and obstacles to an aggressive schedule, if the partners selected by the Brazilian government fail to perform on an industrial level. Joint Definition Phase partnerships & commitments to date include:

The KC-390: Aircraft Initial dimensions
(click to view full)

The C-390 was originally supposed to be a militarized ERJ-190 jet that competed in a unique niche between EADS-CASA’s C-295M and Lockheed Martin’s C-130 Hercules, with Brazil’s postal service as its launch customer. The more the engineers worked, the more it diverged from that idea, until it assumed it present T-tailed, high-winged, hump-backed form as a full military aircraft and C-130 competitor.

Compared to a stretched C-130J-30, the renamed KC-390’s cargo compartment is now 17.75m long (vs. 16.9m) and 3.45m wide (vs 3.12m); 2.9m high forward of the wing (vs 2.74m) and 3.2m aft of the wing. The KC-390’s wings were lengthened to 35.03m during the configuration phase, in order to allow helicopter refueling at speeds around 120 kt. With the right engines, the Force Aerea Braziliera (FAB) has confirmed that each aircraft will carry up to 80 troops, or a 23.0 tonne/ 25+ ton total cargo load. That surpasses initial expectations of 19t, and places it slightly above competitors like Lockheed Martin’s C-130J (21.8t).

The airplane will incorporate a modern, night-vision compatible Pro Line Fusion avionics system, including 2 Head-Up Displays (HUD), and will use fly-by-wire technologies instead of all-mechanical control systems.

KC-390 range
(click to view full)

The most unusual feature in current mockups may be a movable pressure bulkhead that retracts into the roof and descends to seal the cargo cabin. While it shortens the cabin from 17.75m to to 12.78m when deployed, it could allow high altitude airdrops from the space behind, without depressurizing the entire cabin. In order to improve airdrop accuracy, the KC-390 will use Computed Air Release Point (CARP) technology integrated with the fly-by-wire system.

As the aircraft grew, its thrust requirement grew beyond the 27,000 pound class. Embraer eventually picked the International Aero Engines joint venture’s V2500-E5, which can supply up to 31,330 pounds of thrust. It beat GE/Safran’s CFM56-5B, which competes with IAE to power many Airbus narrowbody passenger jets.

A complete self-protection system will also be fitted, and Elbit’s AEL has been announced as the key supplier. Other firms may also become involved in supplying warning elements and decoys, to integrate with AEL’s SPS controller and DIRCM.

Contracts and Key Events 2014 – 2016

Core production contract from Brazil and significant funds released; KC-390 Rollout; 32 Letters of Intent?; Argentina finally ready to produce parts. Embraer re: KC-390

April 1/16: Embraer has announced that their KC-390 cargo aircraft is now back on schedule, after delays last year ran the risk of affecting potential customers. A direct challenge to Lockheed Martin’s Hercules, the KC-390 promises capabilities to fly higher, fuller, and faster, at a lower price than its competitor. Customers for the Brazillian airlifter include 28 contracts to deliver the KC-390 to Brazil, and 32 “letters of intention” with other countries, including South American neighbors Chile, Argentina and Portugal.

October 29/15: Embraer’s KC-390 transport aircraft has resumed flight testing following an eight-month break, forced on the program by a falling Brazilian Real and slow payments to the company by the Brazilian Defense Ministry. The aircraft’s schedule has been pushed back, with the company signing an agreement in late July to extend the KC-390’s entry into service from late 2016 to 2018.

Aug 3/15: Brazilian flagship firm Embraer has been hit heavily by a falling real and defense sector cuts, downsizing its 2015 revenue forecast by $300 million. The delivery of first KC-390 transport aircraft to the Brazilian Air Force (FAB) has been pushed back by eighteen months, to the first half of 2018. Certification is now scheduled for the latter half of 2017, with the tactical transport/tanker registering its first test flight in February.

Oct 21/14: Rollout. Embraer rolls out the 1st of 2 KC-390 testing prototypes during a ceremony at its Gaviao Peixoto plant. The event was attended by the Brazilian Minister of Defense, the Commander of the Brazilian Air Force,, and delegations and representatives from more than 30 countries. Looks like the statements about widespread Letters of Intent (q.v. May 21/14) were on the money, though even this turnout is just 30 of the claimed 32.

Next steps: initial systems evaluations before the 1st engine run, then ground vibration tests and the other planned ground tests en route to 1st flight. Sources: Embraer, “Embraer rolls out KC-390 military airlift”.

Rollout

Oct 1/14: Brazil’s COPAC has approved $1.926 billion for Embraer to buy materials and begin production of 28 KC-390s (q.v. May 21/14, part of a BRL 7.2B / $3.26B deal), with funds released according to the physical and financial schedule of the contract, effective until 2026. COPAC chair Air Brigadier Jose Augusto Crepaldi Affonso says there will be enough resources over time to produce the batch of 28 aircraft plus ground support equipment, initial logistics and pilot and mechanic training. On the other hand, he also says that some potential shortfalls are being worked out:

“Quanto aos valores que estavam contingenciados (cerca de R$ 500 milhoes segundo o Valor apurou), o brigadeiro da Copac disse que todo o orcamento previsto para 2014 foi liberado, mas que ainda ha carencias de recursos. Ele ressaltou, no entanto, que o projeto continua com andamento normal, buscando as solucoes necessarias em coordenacao com os orgaos do governo.”

Sources: Brazilian Government, “Extrato De Inexigibilidade De Licitacao Nº 1/2014 Nº Processo: 67701.003019/2014-95.” | defesanet, “KC-390 – Recebera U$ 1,9 Bi”.

Oct 4/14: Argentina. It took a lot of work and investment, but Fabrica Argentina de Aviones, which was forcibly nationalized in 2009, has finally made good on the 2011 MoU and opened a production line for KC-390 parts. They’ll make wing spoilers, flap fairings, nose landing gear doors, a tail cone, and the ramp door. Their journey shows why partner readiness cannot just be assumed in extended supply chains.

The former Lockheed Martin facility had a lot of work to do after 2011, but the 10-year agreement led the state to allocate over $35 million dollars to upgrade the Cordoba factory, which has added 180 direct jobs. It has tripled its capacity in composite materials, added advanced machining centers, and brought in equipment for forming, processing and heat treating primary aluminum parts. That was accompanied by about 80,000 hours of training and AS9100 certification, which triggered improvements to production processes and non-destructive testing. Sources: defesanet, “KC-390 – FAdeA Inaugura Linha de Producao de Componentes”.

Aug 18/14: Embraer personnel from the KC-390’s interior outfitting, test, and training groups have been participating in Brazilian operations, from the recent Campo Grande exercise to C-130 operations in Antarctica. Some design changes have dropped out of the Antarctic operations in particular, which the Swedes will certainly appreciate once they become customers. The FAB release also implied that interior placement of wiring and outlets had changed, in order to accommodate medical equipment.

Continued refinement is commendable, but shouldn’t these efforts and changes take place before design finalization (q.v. March 11-22/13)? Sources: Brazil FAB, “Embraer participa de exercicio da FAB para aperfeicoar nova aeronave”.

May 21/14: Brazil. Embraer signs the core BRL 7.2 billion ($3.263 billion) KC-390 series production contract for 28 planes, plus spare parts and maintenance. They also hold the opening ceremony for the 30 million square meter KC-390 production line, with President Dilma Rousseff in attendance.

The KC-390 program directly employs about 1,500 workers, which will expand with more orders. Embraer Defense & Security President Jackson Schneider adds that they have 32 Letters of Intent signed with other countries, which goes far beyond announced candidates. The challenge now involves converting some of them into orders, and the opening of the production line starts that clock running in earnest.

Embraer will formally enter Brazil’s contract on its books within 90 days, when the complementary documentation goes into effect. Deliveries are expected to begin in 2016. Sources: Ministerio da Defensa, “Com presenca da presidenta da Republica, FAB assina contrato de compra do aviao brasileiro KC-390” | Embraer, “Embraer opens final assembly hangar for the KC-390, in Gaviao Peixoto, SP, Brazil” | Brazil Poder Aero, “Com Dilma, Embraer inaugura ‘linha de montagem’ do KC-390”.

Brazil orders 28

May 20/14: Engines. International Aero Engines AG announces that they’ve shipped all 6 prototype V2500-E5 powerplants for Embraer’s new KC-390, which are rated for 31,330 pounds of thrust. They’ll be used in KC-390 flight tests, set to begin in 2014, and civil certification for the E5 engine is expected in Q3 2014.

The engines are assembled at UTC Pratt & Whitney’s Engine Center in Middletown, CT, then shipped to UTC Aerospace Systems – Aerostructures in Foley, AL to install the nacelles, thrust reversers and engine build-up equipment. The first 3 were delivered to Embraer ahead of schedule earlier in 2014, and the remaining 3 instrumented powerplants were shipped earlier in May 2014. Sources: IAE, “V2500-E5 Engines Shipped to Embraer”.

2013

Agreement with Boeing; CDR; Embraer & forecasters on the addressable market; Opportunity in Sweden, just not immediately; KC-390 officially ready for sale. KC-390 concept
(click to view full)

Nov 19/13: Sub-contractors. BAE Systems announces that they’ve finalized an industrial cooperation contract with the Brazilian Air Force, as part of an agreement to provide the flight control system and active side sticks for Embraer’s KC-390. BAE General Manager of Commercial Aircraft Solutions and Dr. Ehtisham Siddiqui says that it involves “…software development training and maintenance, repair, and overhaul services for the KC-390 flight control system that will be performed in Brazil. BAE Systems has also proposed performing some final assembly work for its KC-390 products in the country.” Sources: BAE, “Brazilian Air Force Receives More Than Just Flight Controls for KC-390”.

Dec 18/13: Sweden. A somewhat unexpected announcement by the Ministerio da Defesa confirms that Brazil has picked Saab’s Gripen-NG as their preferred bidder, and expects to buy 36 planes for $4.5 billion. That’s currently just an estimate, as negotiations need to sort themselves out, including financing and industrial offset arrangements. A final contract and financial arrangements are expected in December 2014, and deliveries are expected to begin 4 years later.

Sweden is now almost certain to fly the KC-390 after its 8-plane C-130H2 Hercules fleet retires (q.v. Oct 4/09), but in-depth upgrades performed from 2006 – 2009 mean that they won’t be needing new transports any time within the next few years. One obvious alternative involves replacing existing Swedish Saab 105/ SK60 trainers with the Super Tucano. That needs to happen around 2017, and Saab’s recent tie-up with Boeing to produce a supersonic jet trainer for the USAF’s T-X doesn’t change that. The SK60 jet is used in a basic-intermediate trainer role, and the Flygvapnet’s 18 serving JAS-39D Gripens won’t be upgraded to Gripen NG status. That would give them the option to use Gripen-Ds for use as lead-in fighter trainers to the JAS-39E, while still needing to replace the SK60s.

The coming year of Gripen NG negotiations will involve the Swedish government, and the agreement’s provisions could tip the scales on Swedish acquisition plans as well. Read “F-X2: Brazil Picks Saab’s JAS-39 Gripen-NG over Rafale, Super Hornet” for full coverage.

Aug 22/13: Turkey. Turkey and Brazil are forming a number of working groups on defense cooperation. Their release specifically mentions that the aeronautics working group will be studying the assembly of Turkish helicopters in Brazil. The T129 is the only candidate that fits. Note that Brazil already fields a handful of Russian Mi-35M attack helicopters, with a limited secondary capability as transports. On the other hand, they could definitely use more armed helicopters, and local production appeals to them.

The flip side is that Turkey would be studying the assembly of Brazilian aircraft in Turkey. Embraer offers the Super Tucano, a number of military aircraft based on their ERJ 145 regional jetliner, and the KC-390 medium transport. Turkey is committed to buy 10 A400M medium transports, but they have 32 C160 and C-130 medium transports to replace, so a future KC-390 buy is possible. Other possibilities are more restricted, as Turkey already has projects or orders in those categories: KAI’s KT-1 for training, Boeing’s E-737 AWACS for aerial surveillance, and Airbus ATR-72s and CN-235s for maritime patrol. Sources: Brazil MdD [in Portuguese].

June 18/13: Boeing agreement. Embraer and Boeing sign an agreement to market the KC-390 in limited international venues, building on the June 26/12 MoU. Boeing will be the lead for KC-390 sales, sustainment and training opportunities in the USA, UK and “select Middle East markets.”

The UK has committed its defense airlift budgets to a combination of C-130Js, A400Ms, and C-17s, so their inclusion doesn’t mean much. The USA is also an unlikely customer, as Lockheed Martin has a hard lock on the medium tactical airlifter segment. Absent some angle on civil sales, US SOCOM is about the only (remote) possibility. The Middle East offers a more promising market, with interest already expressed by Boeing’s C-17 customer in the UAE, but it will depend on which countries are within the agreement’s scope.

The biggest effect will probably be felt elsewhere, as one more positive factor in Boeing’s competition to supply its F/A-18E/F Super Hornets as Brazil’s new F-X-2 fighter. Boeing | Embraer.

May 29/13: Sub-contractors. Curtiss-Wright Controls, Inc. announces a new 5-year agreement from Embraer to harmonize flight test data-gathering equipment and database structures across the firm. The KC-390 is the 1st platform, using an Acra KAM-500 system with 46 chassis and 14 network switches.

This initial contract is $4 million, within an overall agreement whose lifetime value could rise to $30 million. Shipments of data acquisition units began in Q4 2012, and will continue in line with Embraer’s flight test programs.

April 9-13/13: For Sale. Embraer Defense & Security uses the LAAD 2013 expo to officially announce that the KC-390 is finalized and available for sale on the global market, with a 23-ton capacity and a maximum cruising speed of 465 knots (860 km/h). Engineering drawings are being released to suppliers, and Embraer maintains its promise to hold its 1st flight by the end of 2014.

Hopes of landing the plane’s 1st sale at LAAD were dashed. Embraer | Flight International.

April 3/13: KC-390’s origins. Defense News interviews Embraer CEO Luis Aguilar, which provides an interesting insight into the plane’s origins:

“When we thought about this airplane, it was the first time we looked at the international market also, not just the Brazilian requirements…. We looked at the market and then came back to the Brazilian Air Force to talk with them about what they think about their cargo airplanes for the future. They said they were probably going to replace with more C-130s, and we started talking and showed them we were able to develop something in a very feasible way. It took two years working together to launch and sign the contract. It was a much more sophisticated process. We are on schedule, and I think we have a great chance to sell abroad.”

April 2/13: Forecasts. Flight International takes a closer look at Embraer’s evolution, from its 2012 dependence on major aviation projects for 75% of its defense revenue, to a projected figure of just 58% by 2020. Domestic security and surveillance offerings are expected to grow in relative importance over that time, thanks to experience and products developed under Brazil’s $400 million SISFRON project, its 50/10/40 Haripa UAV partnership with Avibras and Elbit Systems, etc.

There are rumors that the LAAD 2013 expo will see Brazil announce the initial production order for 28 planes, but the larger question is how many orders Embraer can expect over the longer term. Rebecca Edwards of Forecast International says Embraer hopes to convert all of their MoUs into 60 firm orders by the end of 2013, and sees potential for production of 98 KC-390s by 2021, and up to 234 by 2027. The Teal Goup, on the other hand, sees most of the KC-390’s target market locked up in the USA, and only 25 planes built by 2021. Given a break-even production run of 120, Embraer has to hope that FI’s prediction is closer to their 2021 reality. For Teal, the key to the KC-390’s success is a price point in the $50 million range, but that won’t be easy:

“One factor which could drive up prices is that the Brazilian government has mandated the use of as many local suppliers as possible, depriving programme managers of the ability to choose the best components at the lowest possible cost, [Teal’s] Aboulafia says. Local subsystems tend to cost more than their international counterparts because of economies of scale and development costs. “It’s not a killer, it’s just something that hobbles designers, especially when they’re trying to keep costs down,” he says.”

Teal sees the KC-390 as more of a straight cargo plane than the C-130, with higher load capacity, modern features like fly-by-wire, and a faster cruising speed. The C-130’s use of turboprops is better for avoiding foreign object damage from unimproved landing strips and for low altitude operation, which makes them better suited to roles like special forces support. Flight International.

March 11-22/13: CDR. The Brazilian Air Force (FAB) and Embraer Defense & Security successfully conduct the KC-390’s Critical Design Review (CDR) at Embraer’s facilities in Sao Jose dos Campos.

The aerodynamic and structural configurations are now set, along with the architecture and systems installations. The next step is to begin building the prototypes. Embraer.

CDR

Feb 1/03: Forecasts. Aviation Week talks to Embraer about its schedule and forecasts. The firm forecasts a total market for 700 medium tactical transport aircraft over 10 years, worth more than $50 billion. The grounds for this number is that there are currently more than 2,000 older airlifters, mainly Lockheed Martin C-130s and Russian Antonovs, that will need replacing within 10 years. Which is true, but many are in countries like the USA. The KC-390 is competing well elsewhere, however, and it seems that summer 2013 will begin the big push for contracts:

“The [Critical Design Review] is to be completed by this quarter. “[By June] we will be ready to go to market with terms and conditions and a final configuration,” says [Embraer DS CEO] Luiz Carlos Aguilar…. following the April 2012 signing of a memorandum of understanding with Boeing…. “We will partner with them in some specific countries,” he says. “We are still discussing that, and will announce a commercial agreement in a few months.” Meanwhile, a “sharing process” is under way with Boeing engineers visiting Embraer, and vice versa.”

2012

Limited Boeing partnership; Sub-contractors picked; Possibilities in Canada & Indonesia? KC-390 concept
(click to view full)

Nov 15/12: Canada? The Ottawa Citizen’s David Pugliese writes:

“The recent industry day on the Canadian Forces fixed wing search and rescue (FWSAR) project brought a new player into the mix. Brazilian aircraft manufacturer Embaer was invited to attend.”

The KC-390’s faster cruising speed would give it advantages in a SAR/special forces role, and Embraer might be tempted to offer Canada a deal, in order to secure a high-end market endorsement. The bad news for Embraer is that they’re seen as a major competitor by Canadian aerospace firms, and especially by Bombardier. FWSAR’s rear ramp requirement caused Bombardier to bow out of the recent Industry Day. The political optics of shutting out Quebec’s flagship firm Bombardier, while giving the contract to their biggest competitor, make a KC-390 victory almost impossible to imagine.

Sept 26/12: Sub-contractors. Embraer picks 2 Brazilian companies to provide KC-390 components. Aerotron in Itajuba, Minas Gerais, will provide ballistics protection for the entire aircraft. LH Colus, from Sao Jose dos Campos, Sao Paulo, will provide seats and stretchers. Embraer.

Aug 13/12: Indonesia. Aviation Week reports that Indonesia is considering the KC-390. They’re already a customer for Embraer’s armed EMB-314 Super Tucano turboprop, but at the same time, earlier C-130 Hercules versions already serve with Indonesia’s TNU-AI. With respect to Indonesia’s choices:

“Asked if the Brazilians have been pitching the KC-390 to Indonesia, [Air Marshal Eris Herryanto] replied: “Yes. Prior to meeting you, we were shown a mockup today [Aug. 7] of the KC-390.” He says Indonesia needs a lot of military transports and wants to strengthen its capability to carry out disaster-relief operations.”

The other option for Indonesia, given its vast spaces, is to solve its issues with a larger number of smaller transports, like the Airbus Military CN-235s and C295s that IAe already manufactures. Indeed, industrial considerations are likely to play a significant role in any Indonesian buy, for reasons that go beyond the country’s procurement culture of corruption and bribes. A bill is being introduced to standardize required defense industrial offsets for equipment bought abroad, and it’s likely to raise the bar when it passes. Indonesia didn’t get its desired co-production deal from Embraer for the EMB-314 turboprops, but the KC-390 is also a different opportunity case. Within the Southeast Asia region, Australia (C-130J), India (C-130J, Irkut MTA), and (Malaysia A400M) are already committed to other medium transports. Bangladesh can’t afford much more than modernization of its aged C-130Es, and Myanmar doesn’t offer much potential. That leaves Vietnam, whose Russian and Indian relationships make a future MTA buy more likely, or C-130 customer Pakistan. This constellation means that some sort of regional sales arrangement for the KC-390 would be much more of a low-risk, good payoff venture for Embraer, as opposed to the medium risk, low to negative payoff option represented by Embraer/IAe co-production and marketing.

June 26/12: Boeing steps in. Boeing and Embraer announce an agreement to share some specific technical knowledge regarding the KC-390, and to evaluate markets where they may join their sales efforts for medium-lift military transports. It’s part of a broader agreement signed in April 2012, and its immediate significance is limited. On the other hand, it has the potential to turn Boeing into a medium transport rival to C-130 maker Lockheed Martin, while extending Embraer’s marketing reach to match Lockheed Martin and Airbus. Embraer Defense & Security CEO Luiz Carlos Aguiar:

“Boeing has extensive experience in military transport and air refueling aircraft, as well as deep knowledge of potential markets for the KC-390, especially those which were not considered in our original marketing plan.”

That’s the sort of thing that could change the KC-390’s global prospects, but it’s still too early to tell. Boeing | Embraer.

May 8/12: Sub-contractors. Thales announces a contract by Embraer Defence and Security to provide their civil-certified High Performance Inertial Reference System (HPIRS) as the KC-390’s Inertial Navigation System/ GPS navigation system.

May 7/12: Sub-contractors. United Technologies’ Goodrich Corp. is picked to provide more KC-390 components. Their SmartProbe air data system eliminates pneumatic lines, ice detectors, and they’ll also be supplying windshield ice protection controllers, and fuel gauges that include built-in-test capabilities. Initial hardware deliveries from Goodrich’s Sensors and Integrated Systems teams in Minnesota and Vermont are expected to begin in 2013. Goodrich.

April 18/12: Sub-contractors. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. announces that Embraer is continuing their decades-long partnership by equipping the KC-390 with Goodyear military aviation tires.

Jan 19/12: Sub-contractors. Embraer adds the KC-390’s Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) to Hamilton Sundstrand’s responsibilities.

APUs are small gas turbine engines that provide electric power, instead of propulsion. They’re used most often on the ground, providing electricity, compressed air, and/or shaft power for main engine start, air conditioning, electric power and other aircraft systems. They can also provide backup electric power during in-flight operation. The KC-390’s APU is derived from a commercial unit, adapted to military specifications. Hamilton Sundstrand.

Jan 18/12: Sub-contractors. Embraer picks Safran Group subsidiary Sagem DS to supply the KC-390’s Horizontal Stabilizer Trim System. It uses electric actuators, instead of hydraulic systems. Development work will be carried out at Sagem’s R&D center in Massy, near Paris. Sagem DS.

2011

Sub-contractors picked; Civil C-390 confirmed; Portuguese subsidies; Design changes. KC-390 concept
(click to view full)

Dec 14/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer picks United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Hamilton Sundstrand in Windsor Locks, CT to supply the KC-390’s Electric Power Generating System. The system will be based on the firm’s 90 kVA integrated drive generator, which is currently used in a variety of military and commercial applications. Hamilton Sundstrand.

Dec 14/11: Sub-contractors. Portugal takes another step. Embraer Defense and Security signs a partnership contract with OGMA Industria Aeronautica de Portugal and Empresa de Engenharia Aeronautica, for the KC-390 program. Reports indicate that EEA and the Centre for Excellence and Innovation in the Automotive Industry (CEIIA) will do engineering work for 3 unspecified segments of the jet. The segments designed and tested in Portugal will then be manufactured by OGMA, along with a central fuselage section.

The industrial contract follows Portugal’s Sept 10/10 Declaration of Intent to replace its 6 C-130H/C-130H-30 transports with 6 KC-390s. That purchase contract is the next step. Note that state-owned OGMA was privatized in 2003, and its ownership structure is now 45.5% Embraer, 19.5% EADS, and 35% government. Embraer | Macau Hub | Portugal Daily View | See also Flight International follow-up | Flight International on 2003’s A400M backout.

Nov 10/11: Portugal. Diario da Republica announces that Embraer is expected to receive up to EUR 87 million from Portugal’s National Strategic Benchmark Framework (QREN), or other public funding sources, in order to establish the necessary industrial infrastructure for KC-390 work. Macau Hub.

Oct 25/11: Sub-contractors. Elbit Systems wins an initial order worth $25 million. They’ll supply the KC-390’s pilot Head-Up Display, the Self-protection suite to coordinate warning systems and decoy/jammer defenses, and the DIRCM jammer for use against infrared guided missiles. All equipment will be provided through their Brazilian subsidiary, AEL, which also supplies the KC-390’s mission computer. Elbit Systems | Embraer.

Oct 19/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer and the Brazilian Air Force hold a workshop, to encourage more Brazilian companies to bid as suppliers of KC-390 parts, components, systems and services. The Nationalization Index of the aircraft, as calculated according to the criteria of the Brazilian Economic and Social Development Bank (BNDES), is currently estimated at 60%.

Embraer notes that the NI can’t realistically rise above 70%, since there is no Brazilian manufacturer for the engines. It’s also realistic to expect downward pressure on that Brazilian “nationalization” from foreign workshare, which will be required as part of export efforts. At the same time, the KC-390 is part of an industrial strategy for Brazil, whose government will want to see a wider group of Brazilian firms involved. Around 80 Brazilian companies participated in the workshop. Embraer.

Sept 29/11: Sub-contractors. Safran Group’s Hispano-Suiza gets the award to supply the KC-390’s Emergency Electric Power Generator System (EEPGS). The EEPGS deploys in dire emergency situations, and uses the guaranteed existence of airflow to create power and keep key on-board systems running. It includes a Ram Air Turbine (RAT), RAT electric generator and generator control unit, and a deployment/ restow mechanism.

Sept 8/11: Sub-contractors. Cobham is picked to put the ‘K’ in “KC-390,” and supply its wing-mounted Aerial Refuelling Pods. That’s followed by an order with an initial contract value over of US$60 million. Cobham is a leading global supplier of such systems, which equip Airbus’ A330 MRTT, as well as the new Boeing KC-46A. Embraer | Cobham plc [PDF]

Sept 8/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer Defense and Security picks Italy’s SELEX Galileo to supply their T-20 Gabbiano Tactical Radar.

The T-20’s solid state amplifier technology is designed for better Mean Time Between Failures, reduced energy consumption, and smaller size relative to previous generation technologies. What’s even more important to Brazil is the fact that it’s usually carried on UAVs and surveillance aircraft, and can perform basic land and sea surveillance, in addition to navigation functions. Embraer | SELEX Galileo [PDF] | Gabbiano Family product sheet [PDF].

Sept 8/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer picks Elbit’s Brazilian subsidiary AEL Sietemas to supply the KC-390’s mission computer. AEL has worked with Embraer to supply mission computers and full avionics systems for most Brazilian combat aircraft, and losing the KC-390’s avionics suite competition to Rockwell Collins was a disappointment. This award gets them back into the program. AEL [in Portuguese]

July 26/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer Defense and Security chooses BAE Systems to provide some flight control electronics hardware, embedded software, system design and integration support. BAE has a history of producing fly-by-wire systems, and the firm will supply flight control computers and actuator control electronics for the KC-390. The system will be developed in Rochester, United Kingdom; and Johnson City, New York, USA. Embraer.

July 26/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer chooses Goodrich Corp. to provide the electro-hydrostatic actuators (EHA), electro-backup hydrostatic actuators (EBHA), actuator electronics, and electrical controls for the KC-390’s primary flight control system. Goodrich will develop and deliver the system through the joint efforts of its businesses Actuation Systems and Engine Control & Electrical Power Systems, as well as the Goodrich Electronic Systems Center. Embraer.

July 25/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer chooses International Aero Engines AG’s V2500-5 engine for the KC-390. Engineering work on this military variant of their V2500 engine has already started at IAE’s shareholder companies, and 1st deliveries of powerplants for prototype aircraft are scheduled to begin in 2013, with flight tests to start in 2014. Production engines are anticipated for 2015, with entry into service projected for later that year. Deliveries are anticipated to last at least through 2030. Embraer | IAE.

June 22/11: Civil C-390. Embraer confirms plans to launch a stretched C-390 for the civil cargo market, adding a section ahead of the wing for a cargo door, and a section behind for balance and space. If launched, it will compete with offerings like civil Hercules aircraft, cargo conversions of passenger narrowbody planes like the 737, a possible commercial version of Kawasaki’s similar C-2, etc.

This is not an unexpected move, vid. the Feb 18/09 entry, and also the need for 120 orders to break even (q.v. April 5/11 entry). On the other hand, crossovers in this area are less common than you’d think, because the key traits of military and civil cargo planes don’t quite line up. Civil operators want low-cost operation, and generally transport predictable palletized loads. Military operators want performance for operations like fast ingress/egress, short runways, and loads that place a lot of weight on smaller sections of the plane. That often leads to higher-cost tradeoffs like more powerful engines that consume more fuel, highly strengthened floors that add more weight, and airframes optimized for lift rather than super-efficient cruise. The steady progression of the KC-390 design away from a standard Embraer ERJ 190 airframe is a classic example of those tradeoffs at work.

Embraer officials are nonetheless predicting 200-250 C-390 orders, from the plane’s projected launch in 2018 to 2030 or so. If they can sell even half that number, the military program will become more competitive as costs and prices drop, and Embraer will do extremely well financially. They do have a slight advantage in that their original intended C-390 customer, Brazil’s postal service, is almost certain to be their launch customer. Beyond that, their target market is likely to be with operators serving sectors like resource industries, who can use them to haul medium loads into remote locations. See Flight International.

Note that by the mid-2020s, their most significant competitor may not be an airplane at all.

June 21/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer Defense and Security announces that Esterline Control Systems in Sylmar, CA, USA will supply the KC-390’s autothrottle system. Modern aircraft have a significant computer control element. The autothrottle system’s 2 throttles and integrated controls calculate and transmit thrust demands from aircrew controls or autopilot functions, to the Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) electronics running the engines. Embraer.

June 16/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer Defense and Security announces that Liebherr-Aerospace Toulouse SAS in Toulouse, France will provide the KC-390’s environmental and cabin pressure control systems. The firm has a long-standing civil relationship with Embraer in this area, and the KC-390’s system will feature an integrated control architecture along with the pneumatic and mechanical components. Embraer.

May 5/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer picks Rockwell Collins’ Pro Line Fusion avionics system for the KC-390 cockpit, which will feed into 5 high-resolution 15″ LCD displays. It will include:

– An Integrated Flight Information Systems (IFIS) with electronic charts and enhanced maps;
– Advanced Flight Management Systems (FMS) with Wide Area Augmentation System that supports Localizer Performance with Vertical guidance approaches; (WAAS/LPV) and Required Navigation Performance (RNP) capabilities
– Advanced graphical flight planning capability; and
– An Information Management System (IMS) to manage databases and facilitate wireless interaction with ground systems.

Rockwell’s system already complies with the most recent CNS/ATM requirements for flight in international civilian airspace, and the Pro Line fusion cockpit will give KC-390s commonality with the systems on some of Embraer’s Legacy business jets. Because it’s a commercial system, it also sidesteps any American ITAR legal restrictions on future aircraft sales. The loser is IAI/EAE, whose proposal (vid. Jan 5/11 entry) failed to win. Embraer | Rockwell Collins | Flight International.

April 13/11: Sub-contractors. At the LAAD Defense and Security conference in Rio de Janeiro, Embraer Defense and Security signs contracts with the Czech Republic’s Aero Vodochody and Fabrica Argentina de Aviones to join the KC-390’s Joint Definition Phase, and produce parts for the program. Their acceptance is another step toward the commitments each government has made to buy the production aircraft.

Aero Vodochody will supply the rear fuselage II section, crew and parachutist doors, emergency door and hatches, cargo ramp and fixed leading edge for the prototypes, and for the future serial production aircraft. Embraer.

FAdeA will manufacture the spoilers (plates on the top surface of a wing for controlling wing lift), doors for the nose landing gear, ramp door, flap fairings, tail cone, and electronic cabinet. Embraer.

Embraer adds that “The program is running on schedule. Production of the first prototype is expected to start in 2013, followed by the first flight in 2014.”

April 6/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer publicly designates its subsidiary ELEB Equipamentos Ltda. of in São José dos Campo, Brazil to develop and produce the KC-390’s landing gear.

April 5/11: Break-even = 120. A Flight International report places the KC-390’s break-even point at 120 aircraft sold, about double the current commitments if all parties follow through.

That’s about 17.1% of the expected available tactical airlifter market, which Embraer reportedly places at of 700 or so replacement aircraft outside of China, Russia, and the USA. On its face, that seems a somewhat challenging but achievable total, given that other key buyers like India (MRTA with Russia) are also no-go markets. Contemplation of how many customers that entails at various purchase numbers, however, makes one wonder if their 700 aircraft figure has become too optimistic. A long future of austerity budgets due to the welfare state’s fiscal explosions may restrict remaining sales opportunities in “advanced” markets, to the point that even an expected uptick in rising regions like Asia and parts of Africa can’t compensate. Even a smaller overall market wouldn’t make Embraer’s success impossible, but it would change the relative ratio of required wins against powerful competitors.

Break-Even = 120

March 22/11: Sub-contractors. Finmeccanica subsidiary DRS Training & Control Systems in Fort Walton Beach, FL gets an undisclosed contract from Embraer S.A. to design, develop, test, produce, and support the KC-390 Cargo Handling and Aerial Delivery System (CHS/ADS).

The KC-390 CHS/ADS is one of the 5 major aircraft subsystems, used for loading both palletized cargo and rolling stock onboard, and for rolling out cargo on paradrops. CHS/ADS includes an electrical pallet locking system, an electronic load master control subsystem with DO178 level A software certification, retractable guide-rails, invertible cargo rollers, tie-down devices, and other floor panel components. DRS Technologies.

Feb 25/11: Sub-contractors. Embraer has frozen the configuration of its KC-390 tanker/transport, and plans to begin the joint definition phase in May 2011, once final decisions are made on major sub-contractors. Aviation Week describes a full scale mockup at Embraer’s plant in Sao Jose do Campos.

Recent KC-390 changes include longer wings (now 35.06 m), to enable slower 120 kt flight for helicopter refueling with the hose-and-drogue pods. Some customers are reportedly interested in a refueling boom as well, and Embraer is looking into this but doesn’t have a design it likes yet. The most unusual feature may be a movable pressure bulkhead that retracts into the roof and descends to seal the cargo cabin. While it shortens the cabin to 12.78m, it would allow high altitude airdrops from the space behind, without depressurizing the entire cabin.

Jan 5/11: Flight International reports that IAI and Synergy’s EAE joint venture is offering cockpit avionics and aircraft self-protection systems for the KC-390, under a 2009 cooperation pact.

IAI already has a presence in Brazil, supplying radars and maintenance services, and rumors of electronic intelligence or airborne early warning system KC-390 variants would play to IAI strengths. It’s worth remembering, however that both Embraer (ERJ-145 based R-99A) and IAI (Gulfstream G550 based CAEW) already have established AWACS offerings based on efficient, long endurance business jets. This makes the business case for an E-390 AWACS offering problematic for both parties.

2010

Letters of Intent from Argentina, Chile, Colombia, and Portugal; UAE may be interested; Infrastructure in Portugal. Looking beyond.

Nov 23/10: Portugal. Embraer begins the 1st phase of its new EUR 48 million, 330,000-square-foot (30,660-square-meter) facility in Evora, Portugal, dedicated to manufacturing complex airframe structures and components in composite materials. Construction is expected to be complete by the end of 2011, though production phase wouldn’t start until 2013. A 2nd phase will focus on metallic airframe structures.

Evora lies in the Alentejo region, 130 km east of Lisbon. Recently, the city developed an aerospace sector by creating a 9.4 million-square-foot (873,290-square-meter) aerospace industrial park, located near the municipal airfield. Embraer was the first investor. Ramos Catarino S.A. in Febres, Portugal is handling the excavation work, foundations and infrastructures. Construction was spurred by a wider strategy, but If Portugal goes ahead with a KC-390 buy, these facilities will already be in place for industrial offset work, and their construction costs may also count. Embraer.

Oct 29/10: Argentina intent. Embraer announces that:

“As a result of the conversations held between the Brazilian and the Argentine Defense Ministries, the ministers Nelson Jobim and Nilda Garre signed, this week, a Declaration of Intent regarding the South American neighbor’s participation in the development program of the KC-390 military transport jet. The agreement marks the beginning of negotiations for the involvement of Fábrica Argentina de Aviões “Brig. San Martín” S.A. – FAdeA in the manufacture of the new airplane, as well as the future acquisition of six KC-390 aircraft by the Argentine government.”

FAdeA was Lockheed Martin Aircraft Argentina during its privatized period, but is now state-owned again. The firm has collaborated with Embraer on a twin-prop regional airliner (the canceled CBA 123) and refurbished C-130s, but it also has a long history of aircraft development. Its best-known product is probably the IA-58 Pucara counter-insurgency aircraft, and they are currently developing an IA-73 basic jet trainer to go with their IA-63 Pampa advanced jet trainer. Flight International.

Argentina intent: 6

Sept 21/10: UAE. Reports indicate that Brazil and the UAE are negotiating an an umbrella agreement for military cooperation, with sales of Super Tucano trainer/light attack turboprops and KC-390 transports as key building blocks. Brazilian defense minister Nelson Jobim told reporters that Brazil would present the UAE with a draft agreement within 2 weeks, and hopes the deal could be signed within 2 months of a mutual draft.

The UAE would be a very significant customer. It has modernized its transport capabilities with a major C-17 buy, but negotiations to complement its 6 C-17As with 12 C-130J-30 Super Hercules planes have been bogged down for 18 months. A switch to the KC-390, and participation in its development, would attract considerable notice in global military circles, and offer a bridge to further middle eastern sales. Abu Dhabi’s The National.

Sept 13/10: Sub-contractors. The Brazilian and Czech Ministries of Defence sign an agreement for Aero Vodochody a.s. to cooperate with Embraer in developing and building the KC-390. The firm has considerable experience in aerostructure manufacturing, and the Czech defense ministry believes they could end up manufacturing the KC-390’s rear fuselage, doors, and wing leading edges

Specific terms are expected to be signed by the end of 2010, and the Czech Republic is reportedly looking to buy up to 2 KC-390s as a complement to their C-295M fleet. Aero Vodochody | Aviation Week | Flight International.

Czechs join – up to 2?

Sept 10/10: Portugal intent. Portuguese defense minister Augusto Santos Silva, signs a Declaration of Intent to join the KC-390 development program, and begin negotiations to finalize the terms and buy up to 6 planes.

The 6 KC-390s would replace the current fleet of 6 PoAF C-130H/C-130H-30 Hercules turboprops. Embraer | Reuters | In Portuguese: Portugal’s MDP | EFE | O Globo.

Portugal intent: up to 6

Sept 1/10: Colombia intent. Colombian defense minister Rodrigo Rivera announces that the country is negotiating to join the KC-390 partnership, and have signed a Declaration of Intent. They are reportedly interested in buying up to 12 planes to replace their existing fleet of 7 C-130B/H Hercules aircraft, and possibly other models in the FAC’s inventory. In return, they would join as industrial partners, via Colombian Aeronautics Industry Corp. The FAC is familiar with Brazilian aircraft, flying EMB 312 Tucanos, EMB 314 Super Tucanos, and a pair of EMB 110 Banderiante twin-turboprop light passenger/ transport planes.

The DoI was signed along with a broader set of agreements between Colombia and Brazil, covering economics, technology, environment and security. Marco Aurelio Garcia, a special adviser on Brazil’s international affairs, reportedly reaffirmed that the conflict with FARC’s narco-guerillas was solely Colombia’s internal issue, and Brazil would become involved only if Colombia requested it. That declaration is an obstacle to efforts by FARC and its backers in countries like Venezuela, who wish to pressure Colombia by internationalizing the conflict. Aviation Week | Defense News | defpro | Flight International | China’s Xinhua || In Spanish: La Republica | Terra Colombia | Vanguardia Liberal || DID: Colombia’s Defense Modernization

Colombia intent: up to 12

.

Aug 24/10: Chile intent. Embraer publicly announces an signed Declaration of Intention from Chile to join the KC-390 program. That allows Chile’s Empresa Nacional de Aeronautica (ENAER) to join discussions about participating in its development, and acting as a supplier to the KC-390 and other programs. Embraer’s Phenom 100/300 and Legacy 450/500 business jets have been mentioned in that context. The DoI also begins negotiations with Chile’s FACh to buy up to 6 planes.

Chile has been discussing the purchase of 3 Airbus A400Ms for over 5 years now, but had not come to any agreement. It seems likely that any KC-390 purchase would supplant that buy. ENAER has been supplying structures for Embraer’s 50-seat ERJ 145 regional jet since the 1990s, and Chile’s FACh already flies 12 of Embraer’s EMB-314 Super Tucanos. Embraer | Defense News | Mercopress. In Spanish: Diario Financiero | EFE. In Portuguese: O Globo | ANSA Latina | DCI.

Chile intent: up to 6

July 21/10: Brazil to buy 28. At the Farnborough 2010 show, Embraer and the Brazilian Air Force (FAB) announced the FAB’s intent to buy 28 KC-390s, and reveals additional details about the design.

The preliminary studies phase is done now, including wind tunnel tests, and aerodynamic, structural, and systems designs are all frozen. First flight is expected in 2014 and entry into service expected at the end of 2015. Embraer.

Brazil intent: 28

May 31/10: Brazil’s FAB offers an update, in the wake of their initial Workshop on KC-390 Offsets, held with 16 foreign firms at the Technology Park of Sao Jose dos Campos (SP), on May 25-26/10. Brazil’s Department of Aerospace Science and Technology (DCTA) organized and promoted the workshop.

Some of the KC-390’s equipment, from engines to instrumentation, will come from outside Brazil. Those firms will be required to offer industrial offsets to Brazilian firms, as the price of their participation in the project. Offsets could include production contracts for the KC-390 or other sales, or a range of activities from staff training, technology transfer, joint development of systems and supply of machine tools, etc.

The FAB adds that according to studies made by Embraer, there is a potential market of 700 aircraft in this class over the next 10 years. That may be so. Embraer will have to beat plenty of competitors, in order to secure its share of those orders. Brazil’s FAB [in Portuguese].

2007 – 2009

Development contract; Program will be international; Links to Brazil’s potential fighter buy. KC-390 sign-on
(click to view full)

Oct 4/09: F-X2 & KC-390 linked? Brazil’s FAB confirms that revised bids are in from all 3 short-listed fighter contenders, and Saab’s offer clearly has significant support from the Swedish government.

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

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

Sept 5/09: France. Brazil’s Ministerio Da Defesa announces that Brazil has secured French cooperation to develop Embraer’s KC-390 medium transport. Other reports indicate that France is set to buy 10-12 of the aircraft when they’re introduced. This would give the Armee de l’Air a small fleet that would offset the risks of late A400M delivery, provide a second source of immediate relief for the ancient C-160 Transall fleet, and offer a lower-capacity option that could either be used as a transport supplement, or converted to specialty roles.

The KC-390 announcement is part of an incipient deal for France’s Rafale fighters, and French technology transfer across a broad range of projects was reportedly the critical factor in the deal. President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva described the Rafale buy as “definitively consolidating a strategic partnership we started in 2005.” Brazil will now produce helicopters (EC725), submarines (nuclear-powered and diesel-electric), transport aircraft (KC-390) and possibly fighters (Rafale) in cooperation with France, under a broad strategic partnership in the defense arena. MDD announcement [Portuguese] | Agence France Presse | France24 | CS Monitor | Reuters.

June 15/09: International. Aviation Week reports that Brazil is in talks with other countries to make the KC-390 an international program. Embraer’s EVP for defense and government programs, Orlando Jose Ferreira Neto, expects that foreign partners could be added as early as the end of 2009. He adds that it will be a top-down government process, with accompanying directives handed down to Embraer.

The article adds that Embraer’s choice of its 27,000 pound thrust class engine will also be made in the next 24 months. Safran has reportedly said they will bid one of their GE partnership’s CFM engines. Pratt & Whitney and Rolls Royce are also obvious contenders.

May 1/09: South Africa. South Africa’s Engineering News reports interest among South African industry, but the country is already committed to buying 8-14 of Airbus’ larger A400M transport. Some of the skills involved in that order would definitely transfer, but a South African KC-390 order would be fiscally difficult. Excerpt:

“In February, Denel Saab Aerostructures (DSA) CEO Lana Kinley told Engineering News Online that “we are very interested in having Embraer as a customer, and in being a risk-sharing partner on the C-390″. DSA sister company Denel Dynamics is already involved in a partnership with the FAB to develop the A-Darter air-to-air missile.”

April 14/09: Development contract. At the 7th Latin America Aero and Defence (LAAD) trade fair in Rio de Janeiro, Embraer announces a contract from the Brazilian government to develop the KC-390. Figures are not disclosed, but the project’s scope is reported in other venues as around $1.4 – 1.5 billion over 7 years, with the aim of manufacturing 23 planes for Brazil, and inducting the first operational aircraft in 2015.

Embraer Defence VP Orlando Ferreira Neto tells Aviation Week that the program will help Embraer toward the goal of increasing its defense business to 20% of revenues, from 8% in 2008. As noted below, Colombia has expressed interest in a partnership. South Africa’s Engineering News reports that South Africa’s Denel Saab Aerostructures may also be interested in part

Americas

• The Pentagon’s joint program office (JPO) is expecting a slimmed down Gen-3 helmet by November for rollout in 2017. The announcement makes the Rockwell Collins design’s introduction sooner than initially expected. Earlier versions of the helmet were revised due to a potential for causing neck injury. Problems with the F-35’s ejector system had resulted in potential injuries for lightweight pilots, however fixes have been made including a switch on the Martin Baker US16E (MK16) ejection seat that delays the parachute’s opening “by milliseconds” when occupied by a lightweight pilot, plus a head support panel sewn between the parachute risers. However, a weight reduction for the third-generation helmet from 2.3kg (5.1lb) to 2.1kg (4.6lb) has also been required.

• Negotiations between Venezuela and Russia over a deal for 12 Su-30 have come to conclusion. Moscow has sent an offer for the sale, and an answer is expected shortly according to Anatoly Punchuk, deputy head of the Russian Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation. Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro had announced his intention to purchase the aircraft last November. The fighters will fill a multitude of roles, including anti-drug trafficking missions, particularly against those coming from neighboring Colombia.

Middle East North Africa

• A $7.5 billion deal between Qatar and France has concluded, with Qatar to purchase 24 Rafale fighters alongside MBDA missiles, and training for 36 pilots and some 100 mechanics.The deal had been initially estimated to be $6.9 billion, but extra cruise missile orders pushed up the price. The contracts were signed by French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian and his Qatari counterpart, Sheikh Khalid Al-Attiah, on the opening day of the Doha International Maritime Defence Exhibition and Conference. Despite this, the UK’s defence minister stated that a deal with Qatar to sell them Eurofighter Typhoon warplanes was “definitely still on the table” when speaking in Doha on Tuesday.

Europe

• Russian military action in Syria seems to have been a good advertisement for the Su-34, as a number of Middle East countries have expressed interest in acquiring the fighter. The news was broken by Rosoboronexport official Sergey Goreslavsk on Tuesday at the Defexpo India-2016. As well as countries from the Middle East, potential negotiations have started with a number of countries from Latin America and Africa, although he refused to name any of the buyers. While Goreslavsk is keeping mum on who is interested, the next few weeks may bring out some of the usual suspects of regular buyers of Russian weaponry.

Africa

• A weakening Rand, and a 10% defense budget cut may see the South African Air Force retire some of its current Gripen or Hawk jet aircraft. The defense cut coupled with the decrease in currency value has come as a double blow; affecting replacement parts for military jets as they are paid in either dollars, or in the case of the British built Hawks, in pound sterling. SAAF efforts to cut down on costs have seen five Hawk jets scrapped for parts, three of which were grounded after accidents. Furthermore, of the 24 Hawks initially acquired, there are only seven qualified pilots, while of the 26 Gripens in use (half of which are in storage), there are only five qualified pilots to operate the aircraft.

Asia Pacific

• This week, it’s been all about India! Thales and BEL-Thales Systems Limited (BTSL), the joint venture between Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) and Thales, have signed a partnership agreement for the joint development of the PHAROS fire control radar. The deal was finalized at this year’s Defexpo India. PHAROS is a tracking radar for gun and missile control which provides defense against small, fast moving and highly maneuverable air and surface targets.

• Vladimir Drozhzhov, deputy director of Russia’s Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation (FSMTC) has told reporters flocking to Defexpo that they are awaiting a response from India on their potential purchase of the S-400 air-defense system. The contract could potentially cost $6 billion, according to local media sources, after New Delhi initially approved the purchase at the end of 2015.

• Saab and India’s Tata Power SED have

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/2016/03/29/saab-partner-tata-power-manufacture-leds-india/82379922/">joined forces to manufacture the Land Electronic Defense System (LEDS). The agreement marks the first time that the system will be produced in India, but more significantly, the first time it has been produced outside of South Africa. Before now, the system was produced by Saab’s South African subsidiary, Saab Grintek Defence, but now will have the Indian LEDS 50 units initially manufactured at Tata Power SED’s eleven-acre manufacturing facility in Bangalore.

Today’s Video

• Russian Army training in the Arctic: