TEWKSBURY, Mass., Sept. 23, 2013 /PRNewswire

Production milestone keeps next radar on schedule for 2014 delivery

Raytheon Company has completed the manufacturing of an Antenna Equipment Unit for the AN/TPY-2 ballistic missile defense radar. An integral part of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS), the AN/TPY-2 searches, discriminates between threats and non-threats, acquires and tracks threat ballistic missiles.

AN/TPY-2 is a mobile X-band radar that helps protect the U.S., warfighters, and America's allies and security partners from the more than 6,300 ballistic missiles the Missile Defense Agency estimates are not controlled by the U.S., NATO, China or Russia. The Antenna Equipment Unit is one of the four major components that comprise the AN/TPY-2 ballistic missile defense radar, and completing the AEU is critical to ensuring Raytheon delivers the ninth radar system to the Missile Defense Agency in early 2014.

"Because of the high demand from forces worldwide, Raytheon remains committed to maintaining its track record of delivering the AN/TPY-2 on cost and on schedule," said David Gulla, vice president of Global Integrated Sensors for Raytheon's Integrated Defense Systems business. "The AN/TPY-2 has a record of flawless test performance and demonstrated capability against many classes of ballistic missiles; so it's important we get the system to those who need it."

The AN/TPY-2 may be deployed globally in either terminal or forward-based mode. In terminal mode, the AN/TPY-2 serves as the search, detect, track, discrimination and fire-control radar for the THAAD weapon system, enabling the THAAD missile to intercept and destroy threats. In forward-based mode, the AN/TPY-2 cues the BMDS by detecting, discriminating and tracking enemy ballistic missiles in the ascent phase of flight.

About AN/TPY-2
AN/TPY-2 is a high resolution, mobile, rapidly deployable X-band radar capable of providing long-range acquisition, precision track, and discrimination of short-, medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles.

• AN/TPY-2 has performed flawlessly in both terminal and forward-based mode in all major tests.
• On Oct. 25, 2012, two AN/TPY-2 radars – one terminal and one forward-based – participated in FTI-01, the MDA's largest and most complex exercise. In a complex raid scenario involving multiple targets, both radars met or exceeded all test objectives.
• On April 15, 2011, a forward-based AN/TPY-2 extended the battlespace by enabling a Standard Missile-3 to launch on remote and intercept a separating intermediate-range ballistic missile.

About Raytheon
Raytheon Company, with 2012 sales of $24 billion and 68,000 employees worldwide, is a technology and innovation leader specializing in defense, security and civil markets throughout the world. With a history of innovation spanning 91 years, Raytheon provides state-of-the-art electronics, mission systems integration and other capabilities in the areas of sensing; effects; and command, control, communications and intelligence systems; as well as a broad range of mission support services. Raytheon is headquartered in Waltham, Mass. For more about Raytheon, visit us at www.raytheon.com and follow us on Twitter @Raytheon.

Note to Editors 
It takes Raytheon 30 months to build an AN/TPY-2 ballistic missile defense radar. The major components of the AN/TPY-2 are the Antenna Equipment Unit, Cooling Equipment Unit, Electronic Equipment Unit and Power Production Unit. 

Sep. 23, 2013 - By ANDREW TILGHMAN and MARCUS WEISGERBER – Defense News

September 23, 2013 defense-aerospace.com

(Source: Government Accountability Office; issued Sept. 20, 2013)

ICBM Modernization: Approaches to Basing Options and Interoperable Warhead Designs Need Better Planning and Synchronization

The Department of Defense (DOD) has identified capability requirements and potential basing options for the Minuteman III follow-on intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), and the Department of Energy (DOE) has begun a parallel study of options to extend the life of its warhead, but neither department plans to estimate the total system costs for the new missile and its warhead.

GAO’s work on cost estimating has found that a reliable cost estimate is critical to any program by providing the basis for informed decision making. The Nuclear Weapons Council—the joint activity of DOD and DOE for nuclear weapons programs—is responsible for coordinating budget matters related to nuclear weapons programs between the departments, and is engaging in an effort to broadly synchronize nuclear weapons life-extension programs with delivery-system modernization efforts, but has not asked either department to provide estimates of the total system cost. In the absence of such a request, neither department is developing total cost estimates.

Further, DOD’s plan to study ICBM follow-on options does not include the council as a stakeholder to synchronize the missile and warhead efforts to help ensure that the study considers an enterprise-wide perspective. Without timely cost estimates and updates on the status of the ICBM follow-on study, the council may be unable to provide guidance and direction on the study, or consider its implications and potential effects on other nuclear weapons modernization efforts.

DOD and DOE have prepared a long-term plan that incorporates interoperable warheads into the stockpile, and although they have begun studying the feasibility of designing such a warhead, the Navy has had limited participation thus far. The 2010 Nuclear Posture Review recommended the Nuclear Weapons Council study the development of an interoperable warhead that could be deployed on both Air Force and Navy ballistic missiles, and the council has requested the Air Force, Navy, and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to commit resources to the study.

Although the Air Force and NNSA have been examining warhead concepts, the Navy has not fully engaged in the effort because (1) other, ongoing modernization programs are higher Navy priorities, and (2) it has concerns about changing the design of the warhead. The Navy’s further participation is uncertain because it has not identified the resources needed to continue with the program once the study is completed, if the interoperable warhead is adopted.

Consequently, the Navy will be poorly positioned to perform the more-detailed analyses needed to validate the approved design, potentially resulting in program delays. The Nuclear Weapons Council guidelines governing nuclear weapons refurbishments, and the corresponding DOD instruction, do not require the Air Force and Navy to align their programs and resources before beginning joint-service warhead studies. For example, DOD’s instruction states that the military departments are to develop procedures for certain joint DOD-DOE activities, but it is unclear about aligning their programs and resources with each other.

If the guidance and DOD instruction are not updated, the services may not be prepared to participate in future joint-service studies.

WHY GAO DID THIS STUDY

U.S. nuclear weapons—both the bombs and warheads and their delivery systems—are aging beyond their intended service lives. The 2010 Nuclear Posture Review recommended that the Nuclear Weapons Council study options for extending the life of ICBM warheads, including the potential for developing a warhead that is interoperable on both Air Force and Navy missiles. In 2013 DOD will initiate a study to identify a replacement for the Minuteman III missile.

This report addresses the extent to which (1) DOD has assessed the capability requirements, potential basing options, and costs for the follow-on to the Minuteman III ICBM; and (2) DOD and DOE have explored the feasibility of incorporating an interoperable warhead concept into the long-term nuclear weapons stockpile plan.

GAO analyzed DOD and NNSA policies, plans, guidance, and other documents; and interviewed officials responsible for planning the Minuteman III follow-on and the warhead life-extension program.


Click here for the full report (48 PDF pages) on the GAO website.

September 23, 2013: Strategy page

U.S. SOCOM (Special Operations Command) has equipped and deployed 14 MC-130W "Dragon Spear" gunships in the last three years. The first MC-130W arrived in Afghanistan in late 2010 and a month later it had fired one of its weapons (a Hellfire missile) for the first time (killing five Taliban). Getting 14 new gunships into action so quickly was only possible because SOCOM adopted an idea developed by the U.S. Marine Corps; the "instant gunship." Called "Harvest Hawk," the marine instant gunship system works using weapons and sensors that can be quickly rolled into a C-130 transport and hooked up. This takes a few hours, and turns the C-130 into a gunship (similar in capabilities existing AC-130 gunships). The sensor package consists of day/night vidcams with magnification capability. The weapons currently consist of ten Griffin missiles and four Hellfires. A 30mm autocannon is optional.

The 15.6 kg (34.5 pound) Griffin had earlier entered service in Afghanistan aboard UAVs. The older Hellfire II weighs 48.2 kg (106 pounds), carries a 9 kg (20 pound) warhead and has a range of 8,000 meters. The Griffin has a 5.9 kg (13 pound) warhead which is larger, in proportion to its size, than the one carried by the heavier Hellfire. Griffin has pop-out wings, allowing it to glide, and thus has a longer range (15 kilometers) than Hellfire. UAVs can carry more of the smaller missiles, typically two of them in place of one Hellfire.

This use of missiles instead of cannon has allowed for a major change in how gunships are used. As a result in 2011 SOCOM, for the first time since the Vietnam War, allowed its MC-130 gunships to operate in daytime. For the last four decades it was believed too dangerous for these low, slow flying, heavily aircraft to operate when the sun was up. The key to this change is the use of missiles by gunships. The new, small, missiles enable the slow, large, MC-130s to operate above the range of ground fire and still hit their targets.

Dragon Spear is based on the earlier Harvest Hawk system which enabled marine KC-130J tankers to be transformed into a gunship with the addition of the portable weapons and sensors. The marines had long noted the success of the U.S. Air Force AC-130 gunships that SOCOM (Special Operations Command) uses. But they couldn't afford them, as an AC-130 costs more than three times as much as a marine KC-130J aerial refueling aircraft. But the marines developed a solution. This is something the marines often do.

The KC-130J is the latest, and largest, USMC version of the C-130 transport used for aerial refueling. The KC-130J can also carry cargo, and weapons (bombs and missiles) hung from the wings. Thus the Harvest Hawk version of the KC-130J adds a targeting pod, with the data going to a special cargo container containing control equipment (computers, commo and displays) enabling operators use of the day/night sensors of the targeting pod, to fire missiles hung from the wings. The SOCOM version is the MC-130W.

The original plan was to have a 30mm Bushmaster cannon fired out the door, so that there would be gunfire support as well. But this was made optional, as the 14 missiles seemed to provide sufficient firepower. It also means less for Harvest Hawk to carry. The Mk44 30mm Bushmaster cannon weighs 157 kg (344 pounds) and fires at 200 or 400 rounds per minute (up to 7 per second). The cannon has 160 rounds available, before needing a reload. That means the gunner has 25-50 seconds worth of ammo, depending on rate of fire used. Each 30mm round weighs about 714 g (25 ounces, depending on type.) Explosive anti-personnel rounds are fired when used in gunships. The fire control system, and night vision sensors, enable the 30mm gunners to accurately hit targets with high explosive shells. Existing SOCOM AC-130 gunships are armed with a 105mm howitzer, a 25mm and 40mm automatic cannon. But the two smaller caliber guns are being phased out of military service. The air force is considering equipping its gunships just with smart bombs and missiles.

The big thing with gunships is their sensors, not their weapons. Operating at night, the gunships can see what is going on below, in great detail. Using onboard weapons, gunships can immediately engage targets. But with the appearance of smart bombs (GPS and laser guided), aerial weapons are more available to hit any target that is found. So Harvest Hawk would be able to hit targets that were "time sensitive" (had to be hit before they got away), but could also call on smart bombs or laser guided missiles for targets that weren't going anywhere right away. Most of what Harvest Hawk does in Afghanistan is look for roadside bombs, or the guys who plant them. These the marines want to track back to their base, and then take out an entire roadside bomb operation.

Ultimately, the air force and SOCOM see the potential for the Harvest Hawk/Dragon Spear approach replacing custom built AC-130 gunships. There would still be a need for specially trained gunship crews. But they, and the several cargo containers of Harvest Hawk gear, could be held ready to go wherever they are most needed. SOCOM used their version of Harvest Hawk (the Precision Strike Package) in their MC-130 transports (which are already equipped for all-weather operations.) Meanwhile, SOCOM is expanding its existing AC-130 gunship fleet to 33, with the acquisition of 16 new AC-130J models. But the big change for gunships is the switch from automatic cannon (20mm, 30mm and 40mm) to missiles. The cannon require the gunships to fly low, within range of heavy machine-guns and portable anti-aircraft missiles. Missiles can be fired from much higher and new sensors still enable the gunship crew to get an up-close view of what is down there.

The Sikorsky S-97 Raider fuselage prior to departure from Aurora Flight Sciences in West Virginia last week. (Sikorsky)

Sep. 23, 2013 - By AARON MEHTA – Defense News

WASHINGTON — Sikorsky will begin final assembly of its S-97 Raider helicopter prototype this week, according to company officials.

That puts the helicopter manufacturer — which is competing for the US Army’s Armed Aerial Scout program — on track for a first flight at the end of 2014.

“It’s just a really exciting foundational milestone for us, and it’s great to be leaving the design phase of Raider and getting into the build phase,” Chris Van Buiten, Sikorsky Innovations vice president, said.

The Raider is based on the X-2 technology developed by Sikorsky in the late 2000s, but grows the size and weight significantly. Where the X-2 demonstrator was a one-person, 5,000-pound platform, the Raider will be roughly 11,000 pounds with room for six troops in its combat assault mode. In reconnaissance mode, that space could be used for extra equipment or ammunition.

Despite that growth, Sikorsky executives are confident the design will bring a mix of speed and maneuverability that helicopters have not yet achieved.

“This thing has to fly faster than 220 knots” at cruising speed, Van Buiten said when asked about key performance targets. “It has got to do more than a 3G turn at speed. It has to demonstrate hover at 10,000 feet and 95 degrees. Those are the non-negotiables.”

The fuselage, assembled by Aurora Flight Sciences in a West Virginia facility, arrived at Sikorsky’s West Palm Beach, Fla., facility Sept. 20. A composite airframe, the fuselage has been tested to tolerate bird strikes at 230 knots and has shown very low drag, according to the company.

The Armed Aerial Scout program aims to replace the Army’s fleet of OH-58 Kiowa Warriors, in use since the late 1960s. The winner of the program is expected to last well past 2050, meaning the competition would be a long-term windfall for the winner.

Army officials visited with competitors AgustaWestland, Boeing, EADS and Bell Helicopter during the summer of 2012, but the top acquisition adviser to the secretary of the Army told a congressional hearing in May that “we didn’t find a single aircraft that was out there that could meet the Army’s requirements.”

Sikorsky is confident is can fill that role — assuming the replacement program can get funding.

As with all programs in the Pentagon, the Armed Aerial Scout is facing budget challenges. Speaking Sept. 19 on the Hill, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno indicated the program is at risk if sequestration continues.

“In the event sequestration-level discretionary caps continue into FY14, we will assume significant risk in our combat vehicle development,” Odierno said. “In our aviation program, we cannot afford to procure a new Armed Aerial Scout program and we will be forced to reduce the production and modernization of 25 helicopters.”

Despite such warnings, Sikorsky remains confident the Army will find the money to fund the program, according to Steve Engebretson, the company’s Advanced Military Programs director.

“It’s a tough financial environment, but the fact Odierno highlighted this program reflects the level of importance the Army has in that mission,” he said. “To me, it’s at least a sign that if there is a way the Army can get that program going, they will find a way to do that.”

“We understand the climate we’re operating in,” added Van Buiten. “We’re committed to demonstrating this technology, but we understand the customer has a lot of priorities to balance. Our job is to open up the aperture of what’s possible with them.”

Both men can be sanguine, in part, because the development of the Raider has been entirely funded by Sikorsky and its industry partners. While the S-97 is being designed with Armed Aerial Scout in mind, it will also serve as a test bed for further X-2 technologies, which could then go onto future Sikorsky products. Additionally, the company sees the Raider as a demonstrator for a larger machine that would fit the Army’s Joint Multi-Role helicopter replacement program for the service’s Blackhawk fleet.

In other words, the company sees ways to recoup its investment in the prototype even if the program never comes through. That company investment is a point of pride for Van Buiten, whose team was responsible for the design and creation of the Raider.

“We’ve created this innovations group, and one of our charters is to demonstrate differentiating technology that creates competitive advantages for us or all new capability for our customers,” he said. “We don’t have the luxury of using traditional timelines and budgets to do it.”

If the project continues on target, the Raider prototype’s first flight will take place roughly 48 months after its clean-sheet design, a much faster pace than the defense industry normally sees. While costs are not set, the company has estimated it could produce the platform in production quantities for as little as $15 million a copy, including mission system packages.

There is also a potential international market for the technology through the Foreign Military Sales program. The company has been in contact with “several very close allies of the US” about the technology, Engebretson said.

While declining to name which countries might be interested, he said the “international interest roughly equals the quantities the US government is thinking about, in the hundreds.”

September 23rd, 2013 By Northrop Grumman - defencetalk.com

Northrop Grumman Scalable Agile Beam Radar (SABR) will help extend the viability of the U.S. Air Force’s F-16 fighter aircraft beyond 2025 and help ensure the F-16 remains a vital component of the nation’s fighter force structure.

Skip Wagner, director of International Business Development and Strategy for Northrop Grumman’s ISR and Targeting Systems Division, provided details on the radar upgrades to reporters in a briefing today at the Air Force Association’s Air and Space Conference and Technology Exposition 2013.

Northrop Grumman was chosen by prime contractor Lockheed Martin as the radar provider for the F-16 Combat Avionics Programmed Extension Suite (CAPES), which is an avionics modernization program designed to keep the F-16 viable in future threat environments and improve system reliability and maintainability.

CAPES program objectives are to mitigate critical future capability gaps, provide advanced electronic protection, enhance situational awareness and survivability, and provide options to meet force structure requirements with modernized F-16s. SABR contributes substantially to CAPES program objectives.

“We are proud that SABR is the centerpiece of the F-16 CAPES program,” said Wagner. “The radar system adds robust electronic protection, including modes ported directly from the F-35′s AN/APG-81 radar to counter current and future threats. As a matter of fact, SABR has 95 percent re-use of fifth generation AESA modes adding to commonality and affordability.”

SABR includes Big Synthetic Aperture Radar (Big SAR) mapping, which allows for broader all-environment precision mapping. Auto Target Cueing and Auto Target Recognition improves situational awareness and combat identification. Air-to-air and air-to-surface detection, tracking, and weapons employment ranges have all been increased. Mode interleaving also improves situational awareness and survivability.

“With the capabilities that SABR brings, reliability and availability will be three to five times greater than with the mechanically scanned F-16 radars fielded just two decades ago,” added Wagner. “That adds up to higher readiness rates and lower support costs. SABR brings great value.”

SABR’s design incorporates proven hardware and advanced operating modes from Northrop Grumman’s F-35 and F-22 AESAs. The high degree of commonality among the various AESA radars, coupled with shared manufacturing processes and infrastructure, enables efficiencies and affordability across all of Northrop Grumman’s AESA programs.

As part of the contractual agreement with Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman will also be upgrading the radars for the Taiwan Air Force’s F-16 fleet. Radar development and production activities for the U.S. and Taiwan F-16 upgrade programs will run in parallel and demonstrate the benefits of international cooperation, interoperability and equipment commonality for U.S and allied forces.

Other AESA radars developed by the company are currently flying on the F-16 Block 60, F-22 and F-35 Lightning II.

Sep. 23, 2013 - By ZACHARY FRYER-BIGGS – Defense News

WASHINGTON — A small provision in the Dodd-Frank Act meant to create transparency surrounding the use of conflict minerals by publicly traded companies is causing concern in the defense industry, as the magnitude of checking the totality of the supply chain comes into focus ahead of a May 2014 deadline.

The provision does not prevent companies from using minerals mined in countries undergoing conflict, but instead requires that they disclose the use of such minerals to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). For the defense industry, where individual components can have a dozen independent contractors, verifying the source of minerals for all of those contractors is an intimidating undertaking.

Initially, several business groups fought the requirement, including the Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers. But an injunction wasn’t granted, and a successful appeal doesn’t look likely, said Christian Marrone, vice president of the Aerospace Industry Association’s (AIA) national security and acquisition policy group.

“If this were the stages of grief, we’re at acceptance,” he said.

Marrone said the association isn’t focused on fighting the provision, which was the basis for an SEC rule, but rather helping members understand how the rule will work and sorting out its mechanics. To that end, AIA plans to send questions to the SEC to try to clarify how the system will work.

The rule, specifically designed to address concerns about minerals mined in the Democratic Republic of the Congo that have fueled years of conflict, applies only to publicly traded companies, which means many contractors in the defense industry won’t be required to file a report on the origin of the minerals they use. That creates something of a problem for prime contractors in particular, because they must get information from privately held subcontractors in order to verify the origin of all the minerals in the systems they acquire.

“When they ask those questions, a lot of the supply chain is private, so how do you compel those individuals to supply that information when they’re not required to?” asked Micah Edmond, assistant vice president for industrial base policy at AIA.

Edmond said that while the May deadline is fast approaching, companies do have a means to give themselves more time. If they file and say that they essentially don’t know the origin of all of the minerals in the supply chain, they can get an extension that will last another year or two, he said.

Exact numbers on how much compliance will cost and how many companies will be affected are difficult to calculate given uncertainty surrounding implementation of the rule. Some estimates put the cost in the billions for the defense industry alone, and the number of companies affected in the hundreds of thousands.

Despite those costs, the rule serves an important purpose, according to Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., one of the men behind the clause in the House version of the Dodd-Frank Act.

“None of the authors wanted to create undue burden on business, but any discussion of costs would be remiss without including the high human cost of inaction,” he said in a statement provided by his office. “More than 5 million people have been killed in the Democratic Republic of Congo’s civil war. The mining and trade of these minerals has driven the war for over a decade. Manufacturers understand the supply chain and asking them to obtain a certificate is not an undue burden, especially if it will help cut off the funding for rebel groups and put an end to the millions of deaths, untold number of rapes, and slavery of mine workers.”

McDermott pointed to the need to give purchasers visibility on mineral sourcing.

“The law we passed creates the transparency that consumers and investors deserve and will hopefully move the minerals industry to cleaner sources and curb some of the devastation the conflict has left in its wake,” he said.

How a product is built and sourced does seem to have an impact on the consumer market, as seen in the backlash surrounding certain issues with Apple’s supply chain in the last couple of years. Whether those sourcing issues would cause market problems for companies that build products specifically designed to cause death is another question.

Marrone said industry agrees with the intent of the law, but that it forces companies to swallow what may be a large cost in the middle of a budget-cutting environment already causing fiscal pressures.

“I don’t think you’ll find anyone who disagrees with the idea, but it has unintended consequences,” he said. “If you’d done a cost-benefit analysis you probably wouldn’t have done this.”

Two M1A2 Abrams tanks of the Saudi Arabian Army

23 September 2013 army-technology.com

General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) has received a contract for conversion of additional M1A1 and M1A2 Abrams main battle tanks (MBTs) to the Saudi M1A2 (M1A2S) configuration for Saudi Arabia.

Awarded by the US Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) Lifecycle Management Command (LCMC) on behalf of the Royal Saudi Land Forces (RSLF), the $187.5m contract covers conversion of additional 44 M1A1 and 40 M1A2 Abrams tanks.

The latest foreign military sales (FMS) contract also continues the work initiated by the company in 2008 to update M1A1 and M1A2 tanks to the M1A2S configuration, which improves its efficiency and operational capability.

An upgraded version of the US Army and Marine Corps' M1A1 MBT, the M1A2 Abrams is designed to engage and attack enemy forces using enhanced firepower, manoeuvrability and shock effect in the battlefield.

Integrated with manually loaded 120mm M256 smoothbore cannon, the tank can fire a multitude of different rounds, such as M865 TPCSDS-T and M831 TP-T training ammunition against enemy armoured vehicles, soldiers and low-flying aircraft.

Offering enhanced protection to a crew of four, the tank features a gunner primary sight, new Block I second generation forward-looking infrared (FLIR) technology, an eye-safe laser range finder and a blue force tracking (BFT) system for improved effectiveness in the battlefield.

Upgrade work under the contract is scheduled to be carried out at the company's Joint Systems Manufacturing Center in Lima, Ohio, with an estimated completion in March 2015.

General Dynamics spokesman Rob Doolittle was quoted by Reuters as saying that the contract is one of several foreign and domestic awards the company was hoping to secure to ensure continued work at the Lima facility.

GDLS also secured $132.7m and $40m FMS contracts in January and April 2013, for supply of additional M1A2S tanks to the Saudi Arabian Army.

Sep 20, 2013 ASDNews Source : The Boeing Company

    Exhibit includes Phantom Badger high-performance tactical vehicle, Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb

Boeing is highlighting a diverse warfighting equipment portfolio – including an advanced high-performance tactical vehicle – during this year’s Modern Day Marine exposition.

The Marine Corps League event takes place Sept. 24-26 at U.S. Marine Corps Base Quantico. Boeing will display the Phantom Badger, a combat support vehicle that is small enough to fit in a MV-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft for transport.

Read More

Sep. 23, 2013 by Dave Majumdar – FG

Washington DC - Concerns are being raised within industry about the new direction mandated by the Pentagon for the US Navy’s Unmanned Carrier Launched Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) aircraft programme.

The reason for the concern is because the Pentagon’s Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) has fundamentally altered the requirements for the UCLASS from a long-range penetrating strike platform to something akin to a modestly stealthy carrier-based Predator. “Where it leaves us is developing an alternative that meets the requirements that the navy has outlined,” says one industry source – which means spending even more company money after funding nearly three years of internal research and development designing an aircraft without any guidance from the USN.

“This looks like a giant runaway for General Atomics and Predator, I would not be surprised if the other companies ‘no-bid,’” says Dan Goure, an analyst at the Lexington Institute. Companies such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman have spent a large sum of their own money on UCLASS and may not want to dump even more money into what amounts to a stacked deck, he says.

“It does damage to an industrial base that is already fragile,” Goure adds.

Congress is also concerned about the direction of the USN acquisition strategy, which has been described as “atypical”. In a letter to navy secretary Ray Mabus, congressmen Randy Forbes and Mike McIntyre – chairman and ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee’s sea power subcommittee respectively – question the service’s plan to field four carrier air wings worth of UCLASS aircraft before the completion of operational testing or even a formal “Milestone B” decision to enter engineering and manufacturing development.

This is a concern shared by some in industry. “I have had similar concerns regarding the navy trying to procure one to four carriers worth of UCLASS aircraft for early operational capability as part of a technology demonstration phase that is pre-Milestone B,” says another industry source. “The only type of technology development programme which results in ‘residual operational assets or capabilities’ used to be called a JCTD [Joint Capabilities Technology Demonstration] – which the UCLASS programme is not.”

However, more fundamentally for the industry, both industry sources concur that the USN has deviated significantly from the normal process for developing a new aircraft. Typically, the industry would have been developing solutions over the past two years based on an initial set of navy-issued requirements. Those specifications would have been refined and updated as needed, based on various industry-informed trade studies, both sources say. That procedure would likely have yielded more relevant industry investment, more affordable requirements and a better overall competition.

The USN, however, did not issue any aircraft performance specifications or draft requirements until the spring of 2013. That means that for nearly three years, industry teams have been developing potential UCLASS candidates using their own money and based on their own assumptions about the navy’s requirements, both sources agree. That means each competitor is now trying to “force-fit” their aircraft into the UCLASS preliminary design review phase – which is now requiring even more investment, one industry source says.

The lack of industry feedback has had some unforeseen consequences. Superficially, the shift to an aircraft designed for long-duration orbits over permissive airspace would appear to favour General Atomics, which builds the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper. However, the current requirements are not as simple as they look, says one industry source. “They want to span the deck-cycle, the means the endurance has to be greater than 12h,” he says. “From a carrier that’s pretty significant because you have limitations on wing-span just because of the carrier environment.”

Fundamentally from an engineering standpoint, to achieve better endurance, the aircraft must have a higher aspect ratio wing – which means a longer wing-span. However, on board a carrier, the wing-span is limited to about the same length as a Northrop X-47B. The absolute maximum is probably 70ft (21m), which means – by necessity – weight reduction is the key to meeting the USN’s new requirements.

“If you were allowed to refuel in the air then you might actually have a much broader performance spectrum,” the source says. “With that gone, you’re into designing as light a weight structure as can survive the carrier environment and hold as much fuel as you can.

Although the navy says that the UCLASS is going to be designed to operate in “permissive and low-end contested environments”, one industry source says that the low-observable requirement was not completely removed. “I don’t think the survivability requirements are trivial,” he says. However, he concedes that “the overwhelming design driver now is endurance without refueling”.

An aircraft carrier would be expected to deploy enough UCLASS aircraft to maintain two orbits about 600nm (1,110km) distance from the ship, or maintain a single orbit at a range of 1,200nm. If the UCLASS were called on to conduct a light strike mission, it could attack lightly defended targets at a distance of 2,000nm. As currently envisioned, the UCLASS will have a total payload of 1,360kg (3,000lb), of which only 454kg would consist of air-to-ground weapons.

Either a flying-wing or wing-body tail configuration could meet the requirements, the industry source says. However, the endurance requirement is strenuous enough that the source says that he is not sure that a turbofan engine is a “viable option”.

Boeing and General Atomics appear to have selected a wing-body tail design, while Lockheed Martin has disclosed its RQ-170-derived flying-wing concept. Presumably, the Northrop design will resemble its X-47B demonstrator.

September 23rd, 2013 By US Defense Security Cooperation Agency - defencetalk.com

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress on September 18 of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Tunisia of F-5 avionics upgrades and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of $60 million.

The Government of Tunisia has requested a possible sale of Block 1 Avionics Upgrades on Tunisia’s fleet of 12 F-5 aircraft. The upgrade includes 12 LN-260 Standard Positioning System Embedded Global Positioning System/Inertial Navigation Systems (GPS/INS), Control Display Unit, Electrical Power, and Environmental Control System, repairs, Material Condition Inspection, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistical and program support. The estimated cost is $60 million.

This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a friendly country in North Africa.

The proposed sale will improve Tunisia’s capability to deter regional threats and strengthen its homeland defense, as well as support counter-terrorism operations. These systems will bolster Tunisia’s ability to continue supporting its air and ground forces in counter-terrorism and border security operations. Tunisia, which already has F-5 aircraft in its inventory, will have no difficulty absorbing this service and support into its armed forces.

The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.

The principal contractor will be Northrop Grumman of St. Augustine, Florida. There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.

Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of up to 23 U.S. contractor representatives to Tunisia for approximately two years.

There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.

This notice of a potential sale is required by law and does not mean the sale has been concluded.

Vol d`un avion prototype du F-15SE effectué en juillet 2010 aux Etats-Unis (Boeing)

2013/09/23 yonhapnews.co.kr

SEOUL, 23 sept. (Yonhap) -- Dans le cadre du plan d’acquisition du nouvel avion de combat (F-X) qui remplacera les F-4 et F-5 de l’armée de l’air, l’Administration du programme d’acquisition de défense (DAPA) va soumettre son dossier d’examen final, avec comme seul candidat le F-15 Silent Eagle de Boeing, lors de la réunion de la Commission du projet de défense qui aura lieu demain et qui révèlera le nom définitif du retenu.

Parmi les trois candidats de cet appel d’offres d’un budget de 8.300 milliards de wons (7,2 milliards de dollars), à savoir le F-15SE de Boeing, le F-35 de Lockheed Martin et l’Eurofighter d’EADS, seul celui du Boeing a répondu à la limite budgétaire fixée par le gouvernement et la DAPA a rapporté ce résultat au palais présidentiel le 13 septembre dernier et va soumettre demain le dossier du F-15SE à la commission qui va conclure la procédure de sélection.

La commission sera dirigée par le ministre de la Défense, Kim Kwan-jin, et ses membres évalueront la pertinence du candidat final dans ce projet d’acquisition de 60 avions de chasse de Boeing entre 2017 et 2021. La Corée du Sud a acheté le même nombre de F-15K en 2002. Un responsable de la DAPA a confirmé le 17 septembre dernier qu’«il reste la dernière étape de ce projet d’acquisition du nouvel avion de chasse, nous allons rapporter à la commission le sujet de la sélection de l’avion et le résultat des examens».

Il a par ailleurs confirmé qu’«il n’est pas possible de faire demi-tour pour relancer le projet de son point de départ afin de ne pas avoir de trou dans la ligne de défense aérienne». Ces propos sont liés aux critiques concernant la présence d’un seul candidat au sein de l’opinion publique et parmi notamment 15 anciens chefs d’état-major de l’armée de l’air qui ont demandé le 12 septembre dernier le choix d’un avion furtif au lieu de sélectionner le F-15SE.

WASHINGTON, 22 sept 2013 marine-oceans.com  (AFP)

Un hélicoptère MH-60, qui avait décollé d'un destroyer d'escorte du porte-avions USS Nimitz déployé en mer Rouge en prévision d'éventuelles frappes contre la Syrie, s'est abîmé dimanche en mer, a annoncé la Marine américaine.

Trois des cinq membres d'équipage ont été récupérés et étaient dans un état stable tandis que les recherches se poursuivaient pour les deux autres, a précisé le commandement de la Ve flotte américaine basé à Bahreïn.

Cinq navires, des hélicoptères et des avions du groupe aéronaval du Nimitz participaient aux recherches, ainsi que des embarcations légères.

Les circonstances de l'accident n'ont pas été précisées, l'US Navy assurant toutefois qu'il n'était "pas dû à une quelconque activité hostile".

Le MH-60 Knighthawk, version marine du célèbre Blackhawk, avait décollé du destroyer William-Lawrence, l'un quatre navires d'escorte du porte-avions Nimitz.

Le Nimitz, qui emporte près de 80 avions et hélicoptères, et son escorte venaient de terminer un déploiement de plusieurs mois dans la région du Golfe et amorçaient leur retour vers la côte ouest américaine quand il ont été redéployés fin août en mer Rouge en raison de la crise syrienne.

Les trois destroyers et le croiseur d'escorte du Nimitz emportent chacun des dizaines de missiles de croisière Tomahawk, susceptibles d'être utilisés en cas de frappes contre le régime de Bachar al-Assad.