India’s submarine fleet currently consists of 16 boats: 10 Russian SSK Kilo (Sindhugosh) Class, 4 locally built SSK U209 (Shishumar) Class, a leased nuclear-powered Improved Akula Class SSN from Russia (INS Chakra), and its own INS Arihant SSBN. Most of the Kilos have been modernized, but readiness rates for India’s existing submarine fleet sits below 40%, and the U209s will have trouble lasting much beyond 2015. With Pakistan acquiring modern submarines, and Chinese submarine building exploding, expanding India’s submarine fleet became an obvious national priority.

In 2005, India confirmed that it would buy 6 Franco-Spanish Scorpene diesel submarines, with an option for 6 more and extensive technology transfer agreements. Unfortunately, 7 years after that deal was signed, “Project 75″ has yet to field a single submarine. A poor Indian procurement approach, and state-run inefficiency, are pushing the country’s overall submarine force toward an aging crisis. This DID FOCUS article covers the Scorpene deal and its structure, adds key contracts and new developments, and offers insights into the larger naval picture beyond India.

The Scorpene Class

Scorpene
click for video

The SSK Scorpene Class diesel-electric fast attack submarine was jointly developed by DCN of France and Navantia of Spain, and incorporates advancements that stem from being developed about 10 years later than DCN’s Agosta 90 Class. Many of the Scorpene’s internal systems and weapons, however, are shared with Pakistan’s Improved Agosta 90B.

Displacing 1,565 metric tonnes, the standard CM-2000 Scorpene Class is 71.7m (219 feet) long with a submerged speed of over 20 knots, and submerged range at 100% battery usage and 4 knots speed of 134 hours or 536 miles. This new submarine class incorporates a high level of system redundancy to achieve an average 240 days at sea per year per submarine, and the endurance to undertake a 50 day patrol before being resupplied. In addition, its maximum diving depth is 300 meters (about 1,000 feet), giving the commander good tactical freedom for a conventional submarine.

SUBTICS CCS

The Scorpene’s SUBTICS combat management system, with up to 6 multifunction common consoles and a centrally situated tactical table, is co-located with the platform-control facilities. The vessel’s sonar suite includes a long-range passive cylindrical array, an intercept sonar, active sonar, distributed array, flank array, a high-resolution sonar for mine and obstacle avoidance and a towed array. Each Scorpene submarine features 6 bow-mounted 533mm torpedo tubes, and stores 18 weapons divided between torpedoes, missiles, and mines (stacked, up to 30).

India was leaning toward Finmeccanica’s Black Shark, the same heavyweight torpedo used in Chile’s Scorpene subs, but that decision has been put on hold by corruption allegations. Fortunately, a contract for the MBDA SM-39 Exocet was signed along with the original submarine contract. The Exocet SM 39 variant is launched from a submarine’s torpedo tubes using a VSM (Vehicule Sous Marin), a self-propelled and guided container that will maneuver before surfacing so as not to reveal the position of the submarine. Once it surfaces, the Exocet missile leaves the VSM and proceeds to the target like a normal surface variant of the missile.

In addition to these regular weapons, the Scorpene platform also offers advanced capabilities for mine warfare, intelligence gathering and special operations.

Scorpene subs can hold a total company of 31-36 men, with a standard watch team of 9. The control room and the living quarters are mounted on an elastically supported and acoustically isolated floating platform, really a ship within the ship.

The India order brought the number of committed Scorpene submarine sales on the international market to 10. Scorpene orders worldwide now sit at 14, and include Chile (2 O’Higgins class CM-2000 with split Navantia/DCN production, both delivered); Malaysia (2 with split Navantia/DCN production); and now India (6 from DCN-Armaris and local manufacture, 3 each CM-2000 and AM-2000 AIP, delivery expected 2015-2020). Brazil would later undertake its own project, which will build 4 SSK Scorpenes and 1 nuclear-powered SSN fast attack submarine.

India’s Submarine Programs

Current Project 75 figures:

• Submarines: 6 CM-2000 Scorpene Class, #5-6 may have AIP, but that’s unlikely.
  
• Contract signed: 2005
  
• Schedule: Delivery from 2015-2018. Likely to go later.
  
• Cost: INR 235.62 billion

Project 75 has an pre-priced option for 6 more Scorpenes. A follow-on “Project 75i” is a separate program, which intends to field another 6 submarines with a very different design. The sections below provide more details.

Schedule, Cost & Plans

Final construction
(click to view full)

The Scorpene deal had simmered on the back-burner for several years, and media reports touted a deal as “close” in 2004, but nothing was finalized until late 2005. The cost had been subject to varying estimates over the life of those multi-year negotiations, and continued to change after the contract was awarded, but the final figure for the first 6 boats is now generally accepted as being about $4.5 billion.

India’s long-term objective is full made-in-India design, development and construction of submarines. Construction is the first step, and “Project 75″ Scorpene submarines will all be built in India at state-owned Magazon Docks Ltd. (MDL).

That insistence on local production, rather than having the first couple built at their home shipyard with Indian workers present on exchange, has cost India. There have been issues involving technology transfer and negotiations, but it’s also true that MDL simply wasn’t ready. Expected delivery dates for the first 6 were set at 2012-2017, until everyone had to bow to the obvious and begin promising 2015-2018. Given the record to date, and the difference between schedule slippage of 1st vs. final deliveries, it’s reasonable to expect deliveries stretching beyond 2018. Recent reports are even suggesting that deliveries may not begin before 2017.

Costs are slipping, too.

Planned costs for the Project 75 deal had a range of reported figures, until a contract was signed. In the end, the reported figure was Rs 15,400 crore, or $3.5 billion converted equivalent at the time. Subsequent auditor reports indicated that the program would actually cost about Rs 18,798 crore (about $4 billion), and escalations to Rs 20,798 crore/ $4.38 billion and then Rs 23,562 crore/ $4.56 billion have followed. That makes for about a 25.4% cost increase from the auditors’ baseline.

Tracking actual contracts is more difficult. Contracts signed as of August 2009 totaled INR 207.98 billion/ Rs 20,798 crore. The contracts were signed at different times, and will be paid over different periods, so a true currency conversion is difficult. A weakening American dollar and Euro have cushioned the increases somewhat, but most of the project’s cost involves local currency purchases. Contracts reportedly include:

• Rs 6,315 crore contract with DCNS’ predecessor for transfer of technology, combat systems and construction design.
  
• Rs 1,062 crore contract with MBDA for sea-skimming Exocet missiles and related systems
  
• Rs 5,888 crore contract with MDL for local submarine construction
  
• Rs 3,553 crore set aside for taxes
  
• Rs 2,160 crore for other project requirements
  
• Rs 2,000 crore added in March 2010 to cover added finalized costs of the “MDL procured material (MPM) packages”
  
• Rs 2,764 crore unaccounted for yet in public releases, but envisaged in final INR 235-237 billion program costs.

Timeline & Industrial Arrangements

Project 75 & 75i Timelines

A March 8/06 release from the Indian Ministry of Defence gives the long history of this contract’s genesis. After numerous delays, final negotiations were held with vendors in 2005. This reportedly cut INR 3.13 billion from the 2002 negotiated position, and involved other concessions. Even so, India’s program budget had to rise in order to accommodate the final contract.

As is often true in India, some of this was self-inflicted. In 2009, India’s Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) reported that the government’s delays in finalizing a deal had probably raised the project’s cost by 2,838 crore, or about 15% of the project’s total cost – and that was before the additional Rs 2,000 crore contract to DCNS was finalized in 2010.

Industrial

Scorpene
click for video

On the industrial front, the Scorpene deal will enable India to reopen its submarine building assembly lines. The initial plan was for all 6 boats to be built entirely in India by Mumbai-based Mazagon Dock Ltd. (MDL), whose submarine lines had been shut down since the finished the licensed manufacture of German HDW Type 209 diesel subs in 1994. That plan has remained fixed, despite delays created by MDL’s work.

The French firm DCNS (Thomson CSF became Thales, which became the Armaris naval JV, then DCNS) was set as the overall industrial prime contractor for this program. DCNS is also in charge of the technology transfer and delivery of all services and equipment, and DCNS subsidiary UDS International will supply the combat systems with help from Thales. An ancillary contract signed between DCNS’ predecessor Armaris and MDL provides for a team of French technical advisers during the construction of the first 2 submarines.

Tracking contract value for foreign firms is challenging.

The key foreign contractors for the Project 75 Scorpene buy are DCNS and Thales, who will provide the “MDL procured material (MPM) packages” of propulsion, sensors, weapons systems etc. that fit into the hull. When the initial contract was signed in 2006, Thales revealed that India’s Scorpene contract was worth nearly EUR 600 million (USD $736 million) to their company, in return for key subsystems for the submarines’ 6 UDS International SUBTICS integrated combat systems, underwater sensors, communications and optronics, and electronic warfare equipment. A corresponding DCN news release put the total value to all members of the DCN Group at EUR 900 million, but did not address possible overlaps with Thales.

Finalized supplier contracts changed overall totals, which increased by EUR 300 million to about EUR 1.8 billion total. The allocations also changed, since Thales sold part of its naval business to DCN in 2007, creating DCNS. Some of the Thales products destined for the Scorpene became part of the DCNS Group when the merger took place.

A variety of Indian subcontractors, such as SEC, Flash Forge, Walchandnagar Industries, et. al. are involved in the submarines’ construction, manufacturing and delivering specific parts for incorporation into the vessels.

By late 2010, delays at MDL led to reports that Scorpene construction might be altered to include other Indian shipyards, and even DCNS in France. That shift to other shipyards hasn’t happened for Project 75, but it is planned for the follow-on Project 75i. Whether that plan can survive rent-seeking lobbying by India’s state-owned industries remains to be seen.

The AIP Option

MESMA AIP section

Like many modern diesel-electric submarines, the Scorpene class is exceptionally quiet. It can also be equipped with an additional MESMA brand AIP (air-independent propulsion). A CM-2000 Scorpene can operate underwater for 4-6 days without surfacing or snorkeling to get oxygen to recharge its batteries. An AM-2000 Scorpene AIP, in contrast, will be able to operate underwater for up to 18 days depending on variables like speed, etc.

Each AIP system costs around $50-60 million, as they require adding a new 8.3 meter (27 foot), 305 tonne hull section to the submarine. The resulting AM-2000 Scorpene AIP is 70m long, and displaces 1,870t.

Naval Chief Admiral Arun Prakash has said that the agreement gives India the option of incorporating AIP technology after delivery of the 3rd submarines. India’s Navy appeared to be opting for this choice for Scorpenes 4-6, but decided in typical Indian fashion to try to develop their own AIP “hull plug” for the Scorpene. They’re now talking about fielding only submarines 5 & 6 as AIP boats, if the technology is ready. India’s past history suggests that it won’t be, even as Pakistan fields all 3 of its Agosta 90B boats with mature French MESMA AIP technology inside.

India’s Submarine Plans

U209 Shishumar class
(click to view full)

Most of the Project 75 delays, and many of the cost increases, are attributable to India’s slow decision making and lack of readiness. Meanwhile, India’s existing fleet continues to age, and the size of India’s submarine fleet will become a serious concern by 2016 or so.

“Project 75″ had options for another 6 submarines, but that option has been replaced by a 6-boat “Project 75i” competition. Introducing another competition sloows India to add improved technology, including an Air-Independent Propulsion module and the ability to carry supersonic BrahMos cruise missiles. On the other hand, it also adds industrial disruption from a new design.

India’s deeply flawed procurement process adds even more risks. The risk of delay has already materialized. Despite initial solicitations in 2008, the 75i RFP still pending in 2013, and India is unlikely to field any Project 75i submarines before 2023. The second risk is that a new competition will become bogged down in allegations and/or protests like so many other Indian projects, and fail to deliver anything.

If India can overcome its government’s own obstacles to fielding an effective submarine force, reports by Indian media describe a long-term desire to manufacture up to 24 submarines in a phased manner. Admiral Prakash confirmed that target, and used the objective of “24 subs in 30 years.”

DID reminds our readers that long term plans for major capital acquisitions have a way of shrinking over time as budgetary tradeoffs are made – 32 DD (X) destroyers for the USA became 12, and then 3. Nevertheless, options and/or future schedule delays could easily keep submarine production for India going to 2030 or beyond, and the buildup of China’s forces in particular is likely to keep submarines high on India’s defense priority list.

Time will tell if actual budgets and shipbuilding performance can match the Navy’s appetites.

India’s Scorpene Project: Contracts & Key Events

BrahMos
click for video

May 14/13: The Hindustan Times illustrates the dire situation facing India’s navy, due to mismanagement of India’s submarine programs:

“As reported first by HT on April 9, a confidential defence ministry report had warned that India had never before been poised in such a vulnerable situation and its undersea force levels were “at a highly precarious state.” …China operates close to 45 submarines, including two ballistic missile submarines. It also plans to construct 15 additional Yuan-class attack submarines, based on German diesel engine purchases.

The size of India’s submarine fleet will roughly be the same as that of the Pakistani Navy in two years…. merely six to seven submarines, including India’s first and only nuclear-armed ballistic missile submarine INS Arihant.”

That may be a bit pessimistic. The 4 U209s will need to begin retiring, leaving 10 Sindhugosh (Kilo) Class submarines that began entering service in 1986. At least 8 of those have been refitted under Project 08773, and can be expected to serve for several more years. That makes 9 submarines, but at Indian operational levels, that leaves just 3-4 boats available for missions. On the other hand, China’s fleet is venturing into the Indian Ocean more often, and bases like Hambantota in Sri Lanka and Gwadar in Pakistan will make that easier and easier. Keeping up with Pakistan won’t be enough, and the article is correct to point out that India is barely clearing even that low bar. Hindustan Times.

April 15/13: More delays and costs coming. The Times of India reports that bureaucratic delays by the Ministry of Defence may force Scorpene submarine deliveries to start in 2016, even as costs are set to rise again:

“According to sources, Mazagon Dock Limited (MDL) has informed the Navy that the project would be delayed by another 18 months…. Consultants from Navantia, the Spanish shipbuilding company, left the project in the last few days. The technical assistance pact for Navantia and DCNS, the French partner in the consortium, expired on March 31, sources said. With MDL failing to get the defence ministry’s approval in time, about 10 Spanish consultants working on the submarine project left India…. DCNS leadership is expected to meet with MDL top brass this week in Mumbai and present their own demand for additional technical assistance fee.”

Every problem listed here was preventable, and so is the crisis coming to India’s submarine force. A contract that built the first 2 boats abroad, with Indian engineers and specialists working at the foreign shipyard before transferring home to build the last 4 at MDL, would have cut technical assistance requirements, while delivering working submarines to the navy on time. India’s Navy has learned that lesson, and is lobbying hard for an analogous arrangement under Project 75i. Based on reports to date, the ministry hasn’t learned anything, and is resisting. Its political leaders would rather have the vote bank of state run jobs, and their associated financial arrangements up and down the supply chain. Even if that costs more, and leaves India strategically vulnerable. Somehow, that isn’t corruption.

March 20/13: BrahMos underwater. India successfully tests its supersonic PJ-10 Brahmos Mach 2+ cruise missile from a submarine. BrahMos joint venture CEO A Sivathanu Pillai describes it as the 1st underwater firing of a supersonic cruise missile anywhere in the world, and the missile successfully hit its target 290 km / 156 nm away.

Here’s the catch: none of India’s current submarines can fire the new submarine-launched missile. It’s too big to launch from a torpedo tube, and will need to use a vertical launch tube with the correct diameter. India’s Project 75i submarines are nearly certain to add this modification, but they won’t be ready until 2023 at the earliest, a decade after a submarine-launch Brahmos conducted its 1st test firing.

New Indian Express editorial director Prabhu Chawla attributes this disconnect to poor planning in the MoD. The truth is that there has been no shortage of planning, or lead time. Solicitations for the follow-on Project 75i reportedly began in 2008, and there is still no RFP. Likewise AIr-Independent Propulsion was discussed in 2006, but the ball has been dropped and it’s unlikely to appear in any of the 6 ordered Scorpene submarines. What has been in short supply is timely execution, thanks to a combination of delays stemming from MoD practices, industrial failures, and hindrances put in place by politicians. No amount of planning can trump that. Times of India | Chawla op-ed.

March 18/13: Legal. India PIB:

“A complaint was received alleging financial irregularities against the then Director in-charge of Scorpene Submarine project ina Defence Shipyard. The complaint is under enquiry.”

March 11/13: Torpedoes. Defense minister Antony offers a written Parliamentary reply to say that India still hasn’t finalized a contract for torpedoes. A Special Technical Oversight Committee (STOC) was convened to review the complaints about the proposed Black Shark buy, and approved it as fair and to procedure. The high-level political Defence Acquisition Committee accepted the report in September 2012 (6 months ago), and has done… nothing. The purchase has now been delayed for over 3 years.

Welcome to India. Part of the reason involves allegations that WASS’ parent firm Finmeccanica paid bribes to secure a contract for 12 AW101 VVIP helicopters. In Italy, its CEO is facing bribery charges, and has been deposed. That sort of thing could get the parent firm blacklisted, which would also scuttle the torpedo buy, and could make it difficult for India to build its Vikrant Class indigenous aircraft carriers. As of March 11/13, Finmeccanica subsidiary AgustaWestland has been given a ‘show cause’ notice regarding cancellation of the AW101s, but had not had the contract cancelled, or been blacklisted. See also Jan 12/10, Jan 31/11, Oct 28/12. India PIB.

March 8/13: China. An analysis piece in The Hindu by Vladimir Radyuhin points out that China continues to build a modern submarine fleet – including the most advanced conventional subs from Russia. The problem may be a pervasive one, stemming from poor Russian delivery and support on one hand, and India’s red-tape slowness and inability to make decisions on the other:

“At the end of last year, Russia concluded a framework agreement with China for the sale of four Amur-1650 diesel submarines…. It will also mark the first time that Russia has supplied China with more powerful weapon platforms compared with Russian-built systems India has in its arsenals. In the past, the opposite was the rule…. India risks being eclipsed by China on the Russian radar screens. As Russia’s top business daily Kommersant noted recently, even today, Russian officials from top to bottom tend to look at India with “drowsy apathy,” while Mr. Putin’s visit to India last year was long on “meaningless protocol” and short on time and substance.”

Jan 4/13: Investigation. India’s Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) has launched an inquiry against Commodore (ret.) Gopal Bharti, who heads up Project 75. The inquiry is in response to an unnamed internal whistleblower. the financial irregularities which include train fare reimbursement and taking his son abroad at public expense, aren’t earth-shattering. On the other hand, the CVC is investigating allegations that Bharti deliberately refused to place orders for 170 critical items, and are curious about the disappearance of 15 high pressure specialized underwater valves from his department.

Innocent until proven guilty, but the range of allegations are pretty broad. Times of India.

Pakistan’s A90Bs
click for video

Dec 4/12: AIP. StratPost offers an AIP system update from Indian Navy chief, Admiral D.K. Joshi

“AIP plugs for the fifth and sixth of (Project) 75 are under consideration. [DRDO's Naval Materials Research Laboratory (NMRL)] has been tasked to develop that. It is doing so. What is to be seen is whether the… timeline Matches the delayed production timelines of (Project) 75. In case this comes online in conformity with the fifth and sixth ones they will be put into place, but if for some reason they are not ready at that point in time we would not delay the production timelines…. This would [also] become an option for any of the subsequent indigenous options [Project 75i]…. The next line will have an AIP plug.”

Meanwhile, all 3 of Pakistan’s comparable Agosta 90B submarines will include DCNS’ mature MESMA AIP technology.

Dec 5/12: Project 75i. India’s cabinet Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) has accorded Acceptance of Necessity (AON) for buying “Project 75i”, India’s next 6 submarines. A global RFP is reportedly due “very soon,” and the Indian government has reportedly decided to spend up to $10 billion/ Rs 55,000 crore on India’s future submarine force.

Project 75i diesel-electric SSK subs will have air-independent propulsion, and India is also looking to equip them with conventional land attack missiles. DCNS could offer the AIM-2000 Scorpene with the MESMA AIP, and might be able to offer integration of MBDA’s developmental MdCN cruise missile. The MdCN is already slated for DCNS’ SSN Barracuda Class nuclear fast attack submarines, and the right electronic commonalities could give any French proposal a notable advantage over German and Spanish competitors.

If India prefers its own BrahMos missile, on the other hand, 2 things will happen. One is that the playing field will be level. The other is that any submarine chosen would have to be a modified design, with vertical launch tubes sized for BrahMos. Indian government | Zee News.

Oct 28/12: Torpedoes. More headaches for India’s Black Shark torpedo buy. As if their direct competitor’s complaint wasn’t enough, a probe is now underway into India’s EUR 560 million purchase of 12 AW101 VIP helicopters. AgustaWestland is also a Finmeccanica company, and there are several cases of India’s blacklist laws being invoked against firms on the basis of mere corruption allegations, with no available proof.

The Rs 1,700 crore buy of 98 torpedoes for the Scorpene fleet was expected to be followed by a similar buy for Project 75i’s 6 submarines, and possibly a 3rd buy to plus up stocks and equip the new SSBN Arihant Class of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines. That could mean a total of up to Rs 5,100 crore, or about EUR 733 million / $947 million at risk given current conversions.

As for Atlas Elektronik’s claims that the torpedo bid was rigged (vid. Jan 31/11 entry), the Indian MoD’s Acquisitions Wing, Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), and Minister of State for Defence MM Pallam Raju have all rejected the claims, despite strong circumstantial evidence. India MoD | India’s Business Standard.

July 17/12: Sub-contractors. SEC Industries and DCNS today officially inaugurate new 1,500 m2 of workshop facilities at SEC’s Hyderabad facilities, and formally deliver cofferdam door coamings after successful Factory Acceptance Tests. The work was done under a September 2011 sub-contract between SEC DCNS India Pvt Ltd., and a second sub-contract for additional work was signed in 2012 (vid. March 23/12 entry). DCNS.

June 23/12: Kilo Class. Russia completes its set of 7 mid-life refits and modernizations of India’s Kilo Class submarine fleet, which were delivered from 1986 – 2000. Russia handled repairs and modernization for 7 boats, while Indian shipyards have delivered 1 and are working on another 2.

This last boat, INS Sindhurakshak ended her mid-life refit in Zvezdochka about 15 years after she was built. A submarine’s expected safe lifetime is usually about 30 years, but India may be forced to contemplate a 2nd refit series. Ortherwise, they may not be able to keep their overall submarine fleet at acceptable levels, while they wait for Scorpenes and Project 75i boats arrive. Additional refit efforts generally cost more for each additional year of safe service delivered. The Hindu.

June 11/12: Industrial. DCNS signs a strategic partnership for bringing DCNS technologies, methods and skills into India’s private Pipavav Defence & Offshore Engineering Company Limited. Pipavav is a shipbuilder, repair & dry-docking firm, and were recently chosen by MDL to form a Joint Venture to build warships for the Indian Navy. DCNS.

March 23/12: Sub-contractors. DCNS India announces a Scorpene sub-contract and transfer of technology with SEC Industries Pvt Ltd of Hyderabad, India. The deal for hull hatches, cofferdam doors, knuckle hoses, ballast vent valves, High Pressure air cylinders, weapon handling and storage system is worth about Rs 310 crore/ EUR 50 million. To make this work, DCNS will provide SEC with full plans for the components, training for over 40 SEC personnel at DCNS facilities during 2012-2013, plus 5 years of on-the-job training and support for manufacturing and quality control at SEC in Hyderabad.

SEC is known in Indian defense circles as a manufacturer of missile airframes and components, and signed a deal with Israel’s IAI back in 2008. The company’s previous experience had been with heavy pump set and road-roller equipment. DCNS.

March 19/12: Delays. The 1st Indian Scorpene sub is now confirmed as scheduled for delivery in June 2015, barring further delays, and program cost is now confirmed at Rs 23,562 crore (currently about $4.56 billion).

The original schedule was for delivery by December 2012, with submarines arriving each year until December 2017. The new official schedule has deliveries beginning 2.5 years later in June 2015, with submarines arriving every 9 months until September 2018. Costs are up about 25.4% from the original CAG-audited cost of Rs 18,798 crore after the deal was signed, or 87% over the program’s initial 2002 figure. Indian MoD | New Kerala | PTI

Sept 13/11: Industrial. Private shipbuilder Pipavav Defence & Offshore Engineering Company (PDOL) and state-owned Mazagon Dock (MDL) agree to form India’s first public-private partnership venture to build warships and submarines for the Indian Navy.

Mazagon Dock Pipavav Ltd will be held 50/50, and it will help MDL fulfill existing orders while competing for future defence contracts in India. Pipavav chairman Nikhil P Gandhi is quoted as saying that it’s “primarily to fast-forward the process of warships and submarine contracts held currently by the MDL.” India’s Financial Express | Indian Express.

July 29/11: Rear Admiral MT Moraes takes over as the Assistant Chief of Naval Staff (Submarines) at Delhi, to look after the planning and acquisition of submarines.

Rear Admiral Srikant is also slated to take over as Flag Officer Submarines (FOSM) based at Visakhapatnam, this is the indian Navy’s class authority on submarines, responsible for defining standards, policies and procedures for their operations and maintenance. Rear Admiral G Ashok Kumar will take over as Flag Officer Sea Training (FOST) at Kochi. India MoD.

June 8/11: Sub-contractor. DCNS India Pvt. Ltd. signs an undisclosed contract with Flash Forge India Pvt. Ltd., an ISO 9001:2008 certified manufacturer of customized special material forgings based in Visakhapatnam.

This first contract with Flash Forge for the manufacturing of mechanical equipment is the conclusion of a long process for DCNS, which involved identification of potential partners, audits of the manufacturing and quality processes, qualification, and then a competitive Request For Proposal (RFP). With a lot of the advance work out of the way, DCNS expects to announce other local contracts in the near future. DCNS.

June 6/11: IANS relays a report in the May 2011 issue of India Strategic, quoting DCNS India Managing Director Bernard Buisson to say that 2 Scorpene combat systems have been delivered to Mazagon Docks Ltd. (MDL). They’re in the process of integrating the first one.

Buisson reportedly said that there are about 20 – 25 French engineers assisting in technology transfer, and added that DCNS has had technical discussions with the Indian Navy on installing MESMA air independent propulsion (AIP) systems on board the last 2 submarines. That move would raise the subs’ cost, and DCNS said they are (still) awaiting the Navy’s response. IANS | India Strategic.

May 18/11: Delays. The Times of India reports that 2 Indian naval crews will be going to France “after some months” to train for operating the SSK Scorpene fast attack submarines. The article notes that by 2020, India’s fleet will comprise just 5 Kilo Class and 4 U209 Shishumar class boats available, and quotes an unnamed official:

“We now hope to get the first Scorpene by August 2015. Each submarine will have just a 36-member crew since automation levels in them are very high,”… “The first Scorpene will be ‘launched’ into water in 2013, and will be ready for commissioning by August 2015 after extensive harbour and sea trials,” said a top DCNS official. “The target is to deliver the sixth submarine by 2018, one every nine months after the first one in 2015. The third and fourth submarines are already under construction at MDL…”

April 6/11: Stretch the Shishumars? The Scorpene project’s lateness, and uncertainties around Project 75I award and delivery dates, have led India’s Navy to talk with Germany’s HDW about upgrading the capabilities, and extending the lifespans, of its existing U209 Shishumar Class boats, inducted from 1989-1994. Zee News.

Feb 16/11: P75i. Indian media quote Indian navy chief Admiral Nirmal Verma, who reiterates that the follow-on program to the Scorpene deal is already cleared by India’s government. The result could add 6 more Scorpenes to the order books, or it could result in a parallel program to build another model. With 7 of India’s 14 active submarines due for retirement by 2015, and the Scorpene program 3 years late because of self-inflicted delays, the Indian government’s unwise choice to avoid building any Project 75 Scorpene submarines in France has created a looming crisis for the Navy.

Verma says that the Navy is going through responses to the September 2009 RFI, and hopes to be able to issue a tender in 2011. Responses have reportedly included DCNS (Scorpene AIP), Germany’s HDW (U214) and its Swedish Kockums subsidiary (several options, incl. the forthcoming A26 design), Navantia (S-80), and Russia’s Rosoboronexport (Amur 1650), He adds that Project 75i is looking for an improved combat management system, better sensors and detection range, and the certain inclusion of Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) technology. Reports place the order total at $11 billion, but that seems high even if it includes both the current $4.38 billion for Project 75′s 6 subs, and a Project 75i program for another 6 diesel-electric boats. Time will tell.

The current plan is for India to order 2 submarines built at the winning foreign shipyard, and build 3 at Mazagon Docks Limited (MDL) in Mumbai, and 1 at Hindustan Shipyard in Visakaphatnam. That’s similar to the Project 75 plan pushed by India’s Navy, who wanted 2 boats built abroad because they feared that delays and performance issues might create problems for the Scorpene. Political favoritism overruled that request, and the feared scenario has come to pass. This time, the government is showing slightly more flexibility, by approving the plan to have 2 submarines built abroad in order to avoid a complete crash in fleet numbers. On the other hand, the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) refused to accept the recommendation the Project 75i avoid MDL, due to that shipyard’s existing workload. Instead, the government assumes that it would be able to build 3 more submarines, which may even be of a different type, on an accelerated production schedule, while still delivering all 6 Project 75 Scorpene boats to the revised schedule. Yeah, right. IANS | Times of India.

Jan 31/11: Torpedo trouble? India’s Central Vigilance Commissioner has opened an inquiry into Project 75′s planned buy of 98 heavyweight torpedoes, after Atlas Elektronik GmbH executive director Kai Pelzer reportedly lodged a direct complaint. The complaint refers reportedly refers to irregularities in the conduct of the procurement process, including specific charges of corruption. The CVC inquiry was ordered in December 2010.

Atlas Electroniks’ complaint is straightforward: the competition was rigged. The RFP makes the torpedo vendor responsible for seamless integration and/or interface of the torpedo with the SUBTICS combat system. The Finmeccanica/DCNS Blackshark is the Scorpene’s default torpedo, but Atlas had to have their plan approved by the MoD’s Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC). That approval was given, but Atlas’ integration proposal was failed in the user trials. India’s DPP, Para 13, doesn’t allow requirements that “prejudice the technical choices by being narrow and tailor made.” The TEC’s approval escaped that trap, but Para 70a allows only one remaining vendor after trials. Atlas says this was the Navy’s intent all along.

The inquiry suspends India’s planned buy of Black Shark heavyweight torpedoes from Finmeccanica subsidiary Whitehead Alenia Sistemi Subacquel (WASS), until this can be sorted out. Atlas Elektronik Gmbh was offering their DM2A4 Seahake. Both torpedoes feature advanced seeker heads, and can be controlled by a trailing fiber optic cable. Defense World | Economic Times of India | Subsequent Business Standard coverage.

Jan 18/11: Industrial. India’s Economic Times sums up the latest revisions to India’s Defence Procurement Policy, amid hopes that the stranglehold of state-run firms on major Indian defense contracts might be loosened:

“…(DPP) 2011 has made it clear that the state-owned companies will get preference while awarding major defence contracts. Private sector will get certain concessions, but the situation has not gone down well with the players… According to DPP 2011, foreign defence vendors can now discharge their offset obligations in the civil aviation, internal security and training sectors, compared to the earlier mandate of discharging the same in the defence industrial sector only… The minister also brushed away concerns that the new policy guidelines related to the capital intensive shipbuilding industry favoured the defence PSUs, in spite of the demonstrated ability of private sector companies, such as Larsen and Toubro (L&T) and Pipavav Shipyard in recent years… L&T, which has invested millions on its state-of-the-art shipbuilding facility at Hazira, was promised a critical role in developing and manufacturing India’s second submarine line, Project 75I, along with the state-owned PSU Mazagon Dock, but was later sidelined… The new policy – which has divided procurement into two different sections – mandates that the DPSU shipyards will be given contracts on a nominated (non-competitive) basis, while the private shipyards will have to participate through a competitive bidding process. Further, it remains the government’s call to decide which contract should be open to competitive bids in the first place, raising questions of whether the government is queering the pitch further.”

December 2010: Torpedoes, etc. WASS (Whitehead Alenia Sistemi Subacquei) has launched its first subsidiary in India: Win Blue Water Services (WBWS)/ It will focus on naval equipment, market research and analysis, supporting offset and supply chain management, and creating a service hub for the Middle East and Asia.

WASS has operated in India since 1975. Their A244/S light torpedo recently received an Indian contract to upgrade their stocks to Mod 3, and their Bharat Dynamics Ltd (BDL) partnership is producing the C303 anti-torpedo countermeasures system, which is already 50% indigenized. The firm sees opportunities in artificial underwater targets, underwater surveillance systems for strategic areas and offshore energy production, etc. The more work it does, the more value it can count toward Indian requirements for industrial offsets, and the more it can compete with “indigenous” products for the Indian Navy. WBWS is planning to start joint ventures for its different domains, and is in the process of discussions with Indian companies including Larsen & Toubro. India Strategic.

Dec 2/10: Delays. The headline reads “After delays, Scorpene submarine now on track: Navy chief.” Unfortunately, the IANS article doesn’t offer many specifics to support that contention, so it’s hard to evaluate.

Nov 30/10: P75i. India’s PTI reports that Russia’s Rosoboronexport will offer the latest Amur-1650 class submarines to India for Project 75i, the follow-on tender for 6 new submarines that will either extend or complement the current Scorpene contract.

The Amur is known as the Lada class in Russia, and renaming it the “Amur” for export is probably a good idea, in case anyone still remembers those infamous Lada automobiles. The new class was developed by the Rubin Central Design Bureau of Naval Technology as an improvement to the Project 636 Advanced Kilo-class diesel-electric fast attack submarines, and is said to be even quieter. The 1,765t Amur 1650 variant is larger than the Amur 950 model, and has an option for air independent propulsion. It lacks the 950′s 10 vertical launch tubes, relying instead on 6 reloadable torpedo tubes.

Sept 29/10: Industrial. An Asia Times article, “Leaks in India’s submarine strategy,” says that the submarine construction program has changed:

“India is in the process of getting six Scorpene subs… to be built at the Mazagon facility in Mumbai… but this procurement is experiencing a slowdown. Mazagon Docks in Mumbai will construct three of the six, Hindustan Shipyard Ltd in Visakhapatnam will construct one, and the other two may be procured from foreign sources or built by another private shipyard in India.

“The delivery of the first of the French Scorpenes, which was supposed to enter service in December 2012, has been delayed. Antony addressed this situation in parliament only a few weeks back. This will clearly impact upon India’s undersea force levels,” said [Observer Research Foundation senior fellow Dr. Rajeswar] Rajagopalan. “India has about 35 private shipyards, of which L&T [Larsen & Toubro Ltd] and Pipavav are believed to be competing to build the two submarines, of the six planned.”

The report adds that shrinkage of India’s operational submarine fleet may even force 2 submarines to DCNS shipyards, so they can be delivered and become operational in time. As of March 2012, however, India has done none of these things – just added more overhead and reports, and pushed delivery back.

April 26/10: Delays. Sify News quotes a Parliamentary response by defence minister Antony regarding the Scorpenes:

“A programme of construction of six Scorpene submarines is currently underway at Mazagon Docks Limited (MDL) under transfer of technology from a French company. As per the contract, the first submarine was scheduled to be delivered in December 2012 and thereafter one each every year till December 2017… There has been a delay due to initial teething problems, absorption of technology and augmentation of MDL purchased material. The first submarine is now expected to be delivered in the second half of 2015… The delay in scheduled delivery of submarines is likely to have an impact on the envisaged [submarine] force level… However, the gap in submarine capacity has been addressed by modernisation with the state-of-the-art weapon and sensor fit on the existing submarines…”

See: Sify News | Indian MoD – less detailed.

March 30/10: WIL partnership. An Indian PR Wire release by Walchandnagar Industries quotes DCNS Chairman Patrick Boissier, who was speaking after the unveiling of the “Vinod Doshi Technology Center”:

“Said that the company which was Europe’s leading company in , ship building , off shore patrol vessels and Submarine manufacturing and valued at Euros 2.5 billion had signed an MOU with WIL last year manufacturing of critical technical parts for Scorpene” submarines for the Indian Navy… Walchandnagar Industries was identified for the project after we scouted for strategic partners and we were convinced that they would provide us the with High level technology for critical manufacturing components, he added “Talking about our future plans is premature, but it is possible in the long term to work with Walchandnagar Industry for world markets after our project in India is completed as we have a 30 % market share in Submarine manufacturing.”

While the release adds a piece to the industrial puzzle, careful reading of Mr. Boissier’s statement shows no commitment made.

Dec 2/09: Delays. The Indian government confirms earlier reports, via a written reply to a Parliamentary question:

“As per contract signed with Mazagaon Docks Limited (MDL), first Scorpene submarine is scheduled to be delivered in December 2012 and thereafter, one each every year till December 2017. On account of some teething problems, time taken in absorption of technology and delays in augmentation of industrial infrastructure and procurement of MDL purchased materials (MPM), slippage in the delivery schedule is expected. Delay in scheduled delivery of submarines is likely to have an impact on the envisaged submarine force levels [for the Navy as a whole]. Loss on account of the delayed delivery is difficult to quantify at this stage.

This information was given by Defence Minister Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri Prabhat Jha and Shri Prakash Javadekar in Rajya Sabha today.”

Aug 29/09: Costs. The Times of India reports that the Defence Acquisitions Council has decided to approach the Cabinet Committee on Security to approve a EUR 300 million (about Rs 2,000 crore) cost spike for the French ‘MDL procured material (MPM) packages,’ from a EUR 400 in 2005 to EUR 700 million now. The MPM packages go inside the hulls being produced by Magazon Docks Ltd., and reportedly include virtually all major systems connected with sensors, propulsion, and other systems.

Contracts signed to date include the October 2005 Rs 6,315 crore contract with DCNS’ predecessor for transfer of technology, combat systems and construction design; the October 2005 Rs 1,062 crore contract with MBDA for sea-skimming Exocet missiles and related systems; a Rs 5,888 crore contract with MDL for local submarine construction; Rs 3,553 crore set aside for taxes; and Rs 2,160 crore for other project requirements. Total: Rs 18,798 crore. India Comptroller and Auditor General reports that the government’s 9-year delay in finalizing the deal has probably raised the project’s cost by 2,838 crore, or about 15% of the project’s total cost before this price rise.

Jan 13/09: Sub-standard force. A CNN-IBN TV program highlights the case of the Kilo Class submarine INS Sindhukirti, whose repair schedule reportedly ran for 10 years, and which “has been in dry dock at Vizag for a refit programme for close to five years now.”

A confidential Indian CAG report is said to have found that only 7 of India’s 16 submarines are available for combat at any time. That’s not an unusual percentage for a submarine force, but if 10 of the 16 are due for phase-out by 2012, the impact on force levels is obvious. To maintain current numbers, one submarine would need to be inducted every 2 years, but there have been no additions since 2001. Source.

May 28/08: Delays. The Hindustan Times reports India’s navy may not be able to induct the first Scorpene submarine by the 2012 deadline, as the French have yet to part with crucial details including design and drawing documentation. “A senior navy official confirmed to HT on Tuesday that the project had been delayed by a year.”

The Scorpene project is not the only Indian naval project with delivery issues, and these situatons have begun to create combat power issues for India’s navy. The article states that by 2015, India’s fleet will have shrunk from 16 submarines to 10 Kilo Class plus the Scorpenes. See also subsequent Financial Express report.

March 22/06: Costs. India’s MoD responds to Scorpene-related financial and security breach allegations:

“No contract or contracts were signed with French firms for Rs. 16,000 crore for the Scorpene project. The total cost of the two contracts signed with the two French firms, M/s ARMARIS and MBDA, for the project is Rs. 7,197 crores.

The Government did not pay an extra amount of Rs. 4,500 crore than what was negotiated earlier. On the contrary, after the present Government came to power, it re-examined the project even though all negotiations had been completed in 2002 and the Ministry of Finance had accorded approval to the project in 2003. The present Government held negotiations and was able to achieve a reduction of Rs. 313 crore in the contracts with the two French firms from the negotiated position in 2002… As a result of the negotiations, the Government was also able to achieve several long-term concessions. These included the revision of the escalation formulae to the advantage of the Indian side by adjusting the fixed element in the ARMARIS contract and placing a cap on escalation in the MBDA contract. A cap was also placed on the Exchange Rate Variation (ERV) for calculation of profit for the Public Sector Undertaking, Mazagon Docks Limited (MDL).

Besides the contract with the two French firms, the only other contract that was signed was with the Defence Public Sector undertaking, Mazagon Docks Limited (MDL), for Rs. 5,888 crores for the indigenous construction of the submarines. Therefore, even taking into account the value of contract signed with MDL, the total value of all contracts signed for the Scorpene project is Rs. 13,085 crores out of the sanction accorded for Rs. 18,798 crores towards the project. Out of the balance amount of Rs. 5,713 crores, Rs. 3,553 crores is for payments towards taxes and Rs. 2,160 crores towards other items to be acquired during the project period for which only preliminary steps have been taken. No contract or contracts have been signed for the items under this head. A Technical Agreement was also signed between India and France to ensure the continued support of the French Government to the “project.

The Integrity Pacts signed to ensure transparency of the project, contain, severe penalties in case of breach of any of its provisions. The safeguards include cancellation of the contract, recovery of all advances with interest at a rate of 2% higher than the European Inter Bank Offered Rate or EURIBOR, non-payment by the buyer of any dues on any other contract to make such recoveries, imposition of Liquidated Damages and the recovery of all sums paid to any middleman or agent… The French company that has been accused of committing to pay commission to the alleged middleman has denied all the allegations and has stated that all the e-mails published in the articles in a journal that carried this story are fake and fabricated… The French company has since been reported to have filed a case in the Delhi High Court on 24th February 2006 against the journal which first made the allegations.

…Some press reports also sought to establish a link between the Scorpene project and the breach of security that had occurred in the Directorate of Naval Operations in the Naval Head Quarters… However, the leaked information did not pertain to the Scorpene project.”

March 1/06: AIP? “India Looks to Modify Scorpene Subs With MESMA AIP Propulsion.” Submarines 4-6 will include the MESMA system, according to reports. Those reports are contradicted by later reports, which make it clear that no AIP submarines are contracted yet.

The article also includes information about competing AIP systems.

Appendix A: India’s Current Submarine Force, and Rival Navies

Chinese SSK Project 636
(click to view full)

India’s two most prominent competitors are Pakistan and China.

Pakistan currently owns 5 submarines. Their 4 French Daphne submarines (Hangor Class) were retired in 2006. A pair of French Agosta 70 submarines (Hashmat Class) acquired from the French Navy were modified to fire Harpoon anti-ship missiles in 1985, but they won’t last much longer. Three updated Agosta 90Bs (Khalid Class) are also in service, commissioned in 1999, 2003, and 2008, respectively. PNS Hamza has a MESMA Air-Independent Propulsion system that lets the submarine stay underwater for much longer periods of time, and the other two Agosta 90B boats are getting MESMA retrofits. On balance, this will make them slightly more advanced than India’s new Scorpenes.

Pakistan had an opportunity to add to its diesel-electric fleet, but they’re reportedly pursuing nuclear submarine technology, while shelving a plan to more than double their advanced SSK fleet. On balance, that’s good news for India.

As of 2008, China owned about 66 submarines; 18 of them were Type 035/33s, which are Chinese derivatives of the 1960s-era Romeo Class. The Romeos were based on 1944 U-Boat designs, and even the 17 Type 35s aren’t expected to last much longer, or retain much of a role beyond training. If one leaves out all SSBN/SSGN nuclear missile submarines, all 5 of China’s problem-plagued Type 091 Han Class SSN nuclear powered attack subs, and all of the Romeo derivatives, China’s attack sub force alone still stood at 36 boats in 2008: 4 Type 093 Shang Class SSNs, 12 Kilo (Project 636) & Advanced Kilo Class (Project 877) SSKs, 13 Type 039 Song Class SSKs, and 7 Type 041 Yuan Class improvements of the diesel-electric Song Class.

China continues to build Shang Class SSNs and Yuan Class SSKs, which means that overall fast attack fleet numbers can be expected to grow.

As noted above, India currently operates 16 submarines, but only 12-14 can be said to be in service, and the fleet could face a noticeable decline beginning in 2015 or so:

Shishumar Class: 4 German Type 209 SSK submarines, built locally and delivered between 1984 – 1994. The vessels are expected to reach their end of service life between 2016-2024. The United News of India (UNI) reported on Sept 6/04 that Siemens of Germany has offered the Indian Navy an upgrade for the Shishumar Class submarines, which will involve the installation of their Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system. As of 2012, India hasn’t done anything about it.

Sindhugosh Class: 10 Russian Kilo Class/ Project 877 SSKs, built (1986-1991, 1997, 2000) under a contract between Rosvooruzhenie and the Indian Defense Ministry. They’re very quiet submarines, but there are reports that the Indian Navy considers them underpowered. Most of these subs have received mid-life refits in Russia, but the quality of those refits has been a subject of dispute. Key components of these mid-life refits and upgrades have include tube-launched Klub-S cruise missiles, plus a hydro-acoustic “USHUS” complex, a CCS-MK radio-communication system, and Porpoise Electronic Support Measures to locate radar emissions. A couple of these submarines are still undergoing work in India.

Scorpene Class: 0 built or in service. Earliest expected in-service date is now 2015 for the 1st boat, and that date could slip again. The entire fleet of 6 may not be operational until after 2020.

INS Chakra: 1 Improved Akula Class nuclear-powered fast attack submarine, owned under a 10-year lease from Russia. Its primary purpose is to train nuclear submarine crews for the Arihant Class, but INS Chakra is fully capable, and could be pressed into operational service. The former K-152 Nerpa was handed over in January 2012, but as of January 2013, the boat had issues with readiness.

Arihant Class SSBN. 1 boat in trials, with 3 others under construction. Designed and built in India, this nuclear-powered submarine has a limited ability to launch nuclear-armed ballistic missiles. Arihant was launched in July 2009, and conducted her 1st K-15 missile firing in March 2012, but hasn’t been commissioned yet. The Indian Navy hopes to do so in 2013. See “India’s Nuclear Submarine Projects” for further details.

Additional Readings & Sources

Submarines and Platforms

• Naval-Technology.com – Scorpene Class SSK

• Deagel.com – Scorpene Basic, or CM-2000 | Scorpene-AIP , or AM-2000 | Scorpene Compact-AIP

• Rediff.com (Sept. 12/05) – What is the Scorpene?

• GlobalSecurity.org – Project 75/Scorpene

• Bharat-Rakshak – Shishumar {Type 209} Class

• Bharat-Rakshak – Sindhugosh {Kilo} Class

• Bharat-Rakshak – Foxtrot Class

• Wikipedia – Exocet missile

• DID FOCUS – India’s ATV SSN Submarine Project

• GlobalSecurity.org – Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV)

• DCN – MESMA AIP

• Undersea Warfare Magazine (Fall 2001) – Air Independent Propulsion:
  

• Navy League of the United States, Seapower Magazine (December 1999) – The AIP Alternative

Additional Readings: News and Events

• Rediff News – Scorpene project archive

• India Strategic (June 2012) – Indian Navy to select Wake Homing Torpedo

• India Strategic (May 2011) – Indian Navy’s second Submarine Line will witness strong competition. Discusses the decline of India’s subamrine force, and Project 75i.

• Asia Times (Sept 29/10) – Leaks in India’s submarine strategy

• BBC (Oct 23/09) – Crucial Indian defence deals delayed. These include the Navy’s submarine and aircraft carrier projects, advanced trainers for the air force, and coastal surveillance plans. “For its part, the government has been slow in responding to criticism – even from its auditing organisation. When it comes to defence issues in India, speed does not seem to be of paramount importance.”

• CNN-IBN (Jan 13/09) – Are We Battle Ready: Submarine repair that takes forever. Describes an overhaul of INS Sindhukirti, one of the Navy’s Kilo Class subs. It has been drydocked for 5 years, and the reapirs at Hindustan shipyards, which has no experience in this area, are expected to take a total of 10 years instead of the 1-2 years that would be expected elsewhere.

• IBN Live (Oct 25/08) – Indian Navy’s submarine fleet in poor health: CAG. “The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG)… states that no more than 48 per cent of India’s submarine fleet is available for waging war, should India be attacked… “The Indian Navy currently hold just 67 per cent of the force level envisaged in its 1985 plan,” the report says.”

• India Defence (Oct 19/08) – Indian Navy Project-75A: RFIs Issued for Six Advanced Submarines; Rosoboronexport, Armaris, HDW in the Fray. These would be a follow-on to the original Scorpene purchase. AIPs and land-atack capability are both requirements.

• Rediff News/PTI (Oct 7/05) – India signs Scorpene submarine deal

• The Indian Express (Oct 7/05) – Scorpene Deal Inked in Delhi

• Times of India (Sept 13/05) – Scorpene Ahoy! Also contains a paragraph concerning India’s intention of building a nuclear submarine.

• DCN Release re: India (Sept 13/05) – New Success for Scorpene

• Rediff.com (Sept 12/05) – India to Buy 6 Scorpene Submarines

• Times of India (Sept 12/05) – Scorpene: India’s Latest Weapon

• Thales Release (Sept 12/05) – Success for Thales in India on Scorpene Submarine Programme

• DCN Release re: Chilean Navy (Sept 12/05) – DCN Delivers First New-Generation Submarine to Chilean Navy

• The Tribune of Chandrigarh (Aug 11/05) – Admiral Arun Prakash: Scorpene Deal Awaits Cabinet Nod. Good set of additional naval updates in this article. Note that the Scorpene deal discussed here of 2 buy, 4 build is different than the deal being reported now.

• DID (Dec 14/04) – India Close to Deal on Scorpene Sub Technology. Maybe depending on what the meaning of “close” is…

Additional Readings: Rival Navies

• Naval-Technology.com – Agosta 90B SSK

• Official Pakistani Navy Site – Submarines (Hashmat Class, ex French Agosta 70)

• GlobalSecurity.org – Hangor Class (Fr. Daphne)

• Pakistani Post Office – A History of Submarine Construction in Pakistan

• GlobalSecurity.org – China/ Ships

In August 2005, “Team Warrior” leader General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. in San Diego, CA won a $214.4 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) of the Extended Range/ Multi Purpose Unmanned Aerial Vehicle System (ER/MP UAS). That was just the first step along the US Army’s $5 billion road to fielding a true Medium Altitude, Long Endurance, armed UAV, modified from the USAF’s famous MQ-1 Predator.

The ER/MP program was part of the US Army’s reinvestment of dollars from the canceled RAH-66 Comanche helicopter program, and directly supports the Army’s Aviation Modernization Plan. Its position got a boost when a 2007 program restructuring cut the Future Combat Systems Class III UAV competition, in favor of ER/MP. Next, the US Air Force saw this Predator derivative as a threat and tried to destroy it, but the program survived the first big “Key West” battle of the 21st century. Now the MQ-1C “Gray Eagle” is moving into full production, as the US Army’s high-end UAV. This FOCUS article offers a program history, key statistics and budget figures, and ongoing coverage of the program’s contracts and milestones.

The MQ-1C Gray Eagle, and its Band of Brothers

Predator landing -
1 Hellfire fired?
(click to view full)

The Army wanted its ER/MP UAV to fill both surveillance and attack roles. General Atomics’ Sky Warrior, derived from their famous MQ-1 Predator, beat the Hunter II system offered by Northrop Grumman, Aurora Flight Systems, and IAI. With General Atomics Predators, Sky Warriors, and MQ-9 Reaper UAVs all headed for the skies above the conflict zone, our readers have asked us to help them tell the difference.

The MQ-1 Predator is 27 feet long, with a 55 foot wingspan. Its maximum gross takeoff weight is 2,300 pounds, and it can carry 625 pounds of fuel, 450 pounds of internal payload (sensors), and another 300 pounds on its wings for up to 2 AGM-114 Hellfire anti-armor missiles or equivalent loads. Its service ceiling is 25,000 feet, which can keep it well above the 10,000-15,000 ft ceiling above which most guns are ineffective. The piston engine is a Rotax 914 turbo that runs on aviation fuel, and pushes the Predator at a slow speed of 120 KTAS. It’s controlled by UHF/VHF radio signals, and is designed to be flown by a pilot – without automated takeoff and landing.

The USAF also had an MQ-1B Block X/ YMQ-1C project underway, to develop a Predator system that would run on heavy fuel and carry up to 4 Hellfires. That project, and questions of cross-service compatibility, died when the USAF stopped buying MQ-1 Predators, and shifted its focus to the larger MQ-9 Reaper instead.

MQ-9 w. Paveways
(click to view larger)

The MQ-9 Reaper, once called “Predator B,” is somewhat similar to the Predator. Until you look at the tail. Or its size. Or its weapons. It’s called “Reaper” for a reason – while it packs the same surveillance gear, it is much more of a hunter-killer design than its counterparts. The Reaper is 36 feet long, with a 66 foot wingspan. Its maximum gross takeoff weight is a whopping 10,500 pounds, carrying up to 4,000 pounds of fuel, 850 pounds of internal/ sensor payload, and another 3,000 pounds on its wings. The MQ-9 has 6 pylons, which can carry GPS-guided JDAM family bombs and other MIL STD 1760 compatible weapons, Paveway laser-guided bombs, Sidewinder missiles for air-air self defense, and AIM-114P Hellfire missiles or laser-guided Hydra rockets. With that arsenal the Reaper becomes the equivalent of a close air support fighter with less situational awareness, less speed and less survivability if seen – but much, much longer on-station time.

MQ-1 vs. MQ-9
(click to view full)

The Reaper’s service ceiling is 50,000 feet unless it’s fully loaded, which can make a lurking MQ-9 very difficult to find from the ground. That wouldn’t have been as useful to the other aircraft due to the Hellfire missile’s short range, but the ability to drop GPS and laser-guided bombs makes precision combat strikes from 50,000 feet perfectly plausible. The engine is a Honeywell TPE 331-10T, which pushes it along at a rather speedier clip of 240 KTAS. Not exactly an F-16, or even an A-10, but the extra speed does get it to the problem area more quickly when a call comes in from the troops.

Several MQ-9 variants exist. US Special Operations Command (SOCOM) also flies the MQ-9 Reaper, and has its own MQ-1 Predator program, too. Both UAVs are referred to as Medium Altitude Long Endurance Tactical (MALET) platforms. If SOCOM has to bring the MALET to hammer a target down, or soften it up, they fly in enhanced variants with improved video transmission, infrared modifications, signals intelligence payloads, and “delivery of low collateral damage weapons.” The latter presumably includes precision mini-missile options like Raytheon’s Griffin, and precision glide bombs like Northrop Grumman’s GBU-44 Viper Strike and Lockheed Martin’s Scorpion, all of which allow a single Hellfire rail or weapon station to carry multiple weapons.

General Atomics’ Mariner maritime surveillance UAV and FAA-certified high-altitude Altair research UAV are both derived from the MQ-9 Reaper. So, too, is NASA’s Ikhana.

The Army’s MQ-1C Gray Eagle

The MQ-1C Sky Warrior/ Gray Eagle looks a lot like the Predator, but it’s a little bit bigger, can carry more weapons, and has a Thielert Centurion 135hp engine that can run on the same “heavy fuel” that fills up the Army’s land vehicles. Maximum operating altitude is 29,000 feet, at a speed of up to 135 knots. The sensor turret payload was initially Raytheon’s AN/DAS-2, but has shifted to the final “Army Common Sensor Payload” AN/AAS-53 variant. The Army also added a communications relay, and has been working to give the UAV “sense and avoid” capabilities, in order to operate safely in crowded airspace.

There is some confusion over the exact name, with at least one notable Army spokespeople spelling it out as “Grey Eagle,” and other Army sources and General Atomics using “Gray Eagle.” DID will be using “Gray Eagle” throughout.

Sensors and Add-Ons

ZPY-1 STARLite
click for video

Beyond its standard equipment, the US Army is also developing and qualifying new payloads for the MQ-1C fleet, thanks to efforts by Product Manager RUS (Robotic and Unmanned Sensors) and PM-ARES (Airborne Reconnaissance and Exploitation Systems).

AN/AAS-53 CSP+. Raytheon’s base Common Sensor Payload (CSP) is being upgraded, and CSP High Definition (HD) is planned for production cut-in in FY 2013. It adds high-definition Full Motion Video (FMV) in both the Electro-optical and Mid-wave IR spectrums. A retrofit plan will begin in FY 2014 to convert all MQ-1Cs to CSP HD. The Army sees CSP Target Location Accuracy (TLA) as the final upgrade, upgrading targeting accuracy to allow timely use of GPs-guided bombs and missiles. All Gray Eagles will eventually be equipped with CSP TLA.

AN/ZPY-1 STARLite-ER. Northrop Grumman’s Small Tactical Radar – Lightweight (STARLite) Synthetic Aperture Radar/ Ground Moving Target Indicator (SAR/GMTI) is a lightweight, high performance, all weather radar that can track small moving ground targets, down to small car size, even in bad weather. It cross-cues with the UAV’s cameras, and enhancements have been approved to extend its range, and detect man-sized targets. STARLite ER (Extended Range) has been cut into production since FY 2011, and will begin fielding and retrofitting in FY 2012. The Army plans to buy 1 STARLite ER system per UAV.

Sense and Avoid. Ground Based Sense and Avoid (GBSAA) is a system designed to be aware of other aircraft, especially in civil airspace, and help avoid collisions with the MQ-1C. The Phase 2, Block 0 system will provide the operator with an air traffic display, color-coded to reflect the highest-priority potential conflicts. The Block 1 system will add recommended maneuvers to avoid crashing into others. That isn’t the full sense-and-avoid you’d see on a commercial jet, but by 2015 it will let the Army fly the UAVs from Fort Hood, TX; Fort Riley, KS; Fort Stewart, GA; Fort Campbell, KY; and Fort Bragg, NC, through Class D military airspace, to nearby test ranges without a manned chase plane. As the acronym suggests, making this work requires certain equipment in place on the ground at those locations.

Traveler Pod. BAE’s pods are designed to find and eavesdrop on electronic emitters, identify them (enemy radio communications? radar? etc.), then offer aerial precision geolocation (APG) and copying. SIGINT/ELINT pods and equipment can already be installed in larger UAVs like the USAF’s RQ-4 Global Hawks, and aboard light surveillance planes like the Beechcraft King Air MC-12Ws. The challenge is to shrink them and their supporting systems within the MQ-1C’s weight and size limits.

NERO pod. Provides electronic jamming that can prevent remote detonation of land mines, giving the UAV a very useful convoy overwatch role. It can also disrupt enemy communications. Raytheon’s NERO is adapted from the CAESAR pod that equips manned C-12 (Beechcraft King Air) turboprops. Initial deliveries took place in 2013.

The Army’s ER/MP Program

Prep for flight
(click to view full)

A few years after the ER/MP program began, General Atomics-ASI’s Steve May was already saying that “The Army is now as large a customer for us as the Air Force.” At the time, the firm saw a potential market for as many as 540 “Sky Warrior” UAVs – 45 sets of 12 UAVs each for each brigade, plus accompanying ground stations and crews. The production program grew five-fold, but it hasn’t approached that level.

The Systems Development and Demonstration (SDD) phase of GA-ASI’s multi-year ER/MP contract called for 17 MQ-1C UAVs, and 7 One System Ground Control Stations (OSGCS). Those pre-production Block 0 and Block 1 Gray Eagles have begun flying on the front lines, in Quick Reaction Component (QRC-1, 1R, and 2) deployments which began in December 2009, and continue to the present day. As noted above, QRC drones are unarmed, and lack other key capabilities. Even so, the Army has been very enthusiastic about their performance.

In 2010, the Army officially changed the planned number of MQ-1C Gray Eagle Block I+ production systems from 13 company-sized units of 12 aircraft, to 31 independent “UAS Platoons” with 4 UAVs each, plus the MQ-1C’s Standard Equipment Package (SEP), and Ground Equipment. The main production program will also buy 21 UAVs to replace those lost, and 7 training UAVs, for a total of 152.

Excel
download

As the MQ-1C transitioned into production, Pentagon documents began breaking the program out from its USAF counterparts. The total program, including both the initial development contract and follow-on production, looks like it will be worth almost $5 billion. Budgets from 2004-2017 include:

There’s also a manpower equation for the Army, which affects ongoing operating costs. Those aren’t found in these budgets, but they make up well over half of a program’s actual lifetime cost. Fully automated take-off and landing (ATLS) systems are becoming more common among UAVs, and the MQ-1C’s ATLS an important difference from the USAF’s MQ-1 Predators, which have all flight operations handled by pilots. While the initial batch of Gray Eagle UAVs will be flown by Army aviators, the Army plans to assign future MQ-1Cs to non-pilot warrant officers with UAV training. That’s a less expensive proposition, in terms of both salary and training costs. It’s also less expensive in terms of lost UAVs, as ATLS seems to lead to fewer crashes.

Key MQ-1C industrial partners include:

ER/MP UAS – Enter the Warrior: Contracts & Key Events

MQ-1C, Afghanistan
(click to view full)

May 14/14: NERO EW pod. Raytheon announces that they’ve delivered the first 2 Networked Electronic Warfare, Remotely Operated (NERO) pods, as part of a contract awarded by US NAVSEA-Crane in 2012 for use on the US Army’s MQ-1C Gray Eagle.

NERO is an airborne electronic attack system capable of jamming enemy communications systems, including remote detonators for land mines. It’s derived from the Army’s Communications Electronic Attack with Surveillance and Reconnaissance (CEASAR) program, which is mounted on MC-12W King Air manned turboprops. Moving to the Gray Eagle doubles or triples flight time, at a similar or lower operating cost. Raytheon.

May 7/13: Support. GA-ASI in Poway, CA receives a $110.3 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification for MQ-1C support and fleet sustainment, driving the contract’s total cumulative face value to $354.7 million.

Work will be performed in Afghanistan, using FY 2013 Operations and Maintenance funds, and other Procurement fund. The US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL manages the contract (W58RGZ-12-C-0075, PO 0032).

April 10/13: FY 2014 Budget. The President releases a proposed budget at last, the latest in modern memory. The Senate and House were already working on budgets in his absence, but the Pentagon’s submission is actually important to proceedings going forward. See ongoing DID coverage. For the Gray Eagle, the budget requests $627.1 million, of which just $10.9 million is RDT&E. That’s a cut of about $151.8 million from previous plans, and when combined with 2015 plans it cuts the program by $337.8 million. They’re still ordering the same number of UAVs, though.

The FY 2014 request covers continued development of the Universal Ground Control Station, a Ground Based Sense-and-Avoid system for flights at several US based locations (vid Aug 10/12 entry), 15 UAVs, 8 AN/ZPY-1 STARLite ER radars, 8 AN/AAS-53 Common Sensor Payload surveillance & targeting turrets, 16 Tactical SIGINT (TSP for signals interceptions) payloads, and 3 modular platoon sets of equipment.

April 2/13: What now? Defense News aptly summarizes the key question facing the USA’s large drones:

“On the one hand, the work in Mali shows that the signature weapon of the U.S. war in Afghanistan is outlasting that conflict. On the other, the detachment is a tiny fraction of the Predator/Reaper fleet – and just where are the rest of them going to go?”

With flights below 60,000 feet heavily restricted within the USA, there aren’t that many options stateside, and most of the MQ-9 fleet’s $8,000 per flight hour operations are funded by wartime OCO appropriations. AFRICOM may have the best combination of circumstances abroad, thanks to growing trouble in the Gulf of Guinea to the West, as well as the Indian Oceantp the East. Even a massive increase in surveillance can’t absorb all of the UAVs, and the $6,000 per flight hour manned MC-12s are a natural competitor.

Gray Eagle in Iraq
(click to view full)

Unless otherwise specified, the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL issues the contracts to General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) in Poway, CA.

Oct 2/12: Support. A $102.6 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for services to support the Gray Eagle UAS.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of May 7/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-12-C-0075).

Oct 2/12: Engine retrofits. A $10.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification to retrofit MQ-1C Block 0 UAVs with an alternate heavy fuel engine.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA with an estimated completion date of Sept 26/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-12-C-0001).

Aug 27/12: A $25.9 million fixed-price-incentive contract modification will add “a platoon set of ground equipment.” Note that for these UAVs, a “platoon” is 12 MQ-1Cs.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA with an estimated completion date of June 30/15. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-12-C-0057).

Aug 27/12: An $11 million fixed-price-incentive contract modification, to buy more universal ground data terminals. Work will be performed in Poway, CA with an estimated completion date of April 30/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-11-C-0099).

Aug 10/12: Civil airspace. The U.S. Army has validated the design and functionality of a Phase 2 ground-based sense and avoid (GBSAA, see above) radar system that will support training flights of MQ-1C Gray Eagle UAVs in unrestricted airspace, beginning in 2014.

The baseline GBSAA system was demonstrated in June 2012 at Dugway Proving Ground’s unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) testbed, and the Army’s UAS Rapid Integration and Acceptance Center. The 2-week demonstration covered several “vignettes” involving live RQ-7 Shadow and RQ-5 Hunter UAVs as well as simulated UAVs and intruder aircraft. The testing also replicated the airspace over other military installations and used live and recorded air traffic data from Salt Lake City, UT and Boston’s Logan airports. AIN Online.

July 18/12: A $19 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for MQ-1C contractor logistics support. Work will be performed in Poway, CA with an estimated completion date of July 15/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-11-C-0001).

July 11/12: A $411 million fixed-price-incentive contract for Gray Eagle systems, initial spares, and additional hardware. Work will be performed in Poway, CA with an estimated completion date of March 31/15. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with one bid received (W58RGZ-12-C-0057).

Looks like they got that authorization to continue Low-Rate initial Production.

June 27/12: Reliability & report. The US Army has some good news, and some bad news.

The bad news is that Gray Eagles are flying at about 80% availability rates after 24,000 combat flight hours, instead of their target 90%. The problems are mostly traceable to software issues that arise when new sensors are added.

The good news? The program is under budget. The UAVs have added weapons, ground-looking radars, and communication relays to their payload. The Army likes them a lot, and thinks they’re making a big difference, so they’ve decided to focus on expanding Gray Eagle capabilities for now, rather than trying to reach 90% availability rates. Right now, there are a pair of platoon-size 4-UAV QRC units in Afghanistan, and the “Fox 227″ full-size company of 12.

May 29/12: IOT&E funds. An $8.5 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification supplies incremental funding to support MQ-1C operational test and evaluation. The program’s IOT&E was moved back from October 2011, and is now expected in August 2012.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

May 10/12: A $141.8 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract, for services in support of the MQ-1C Gray Eagle. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of May 7/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-12-C-0075).

April 4/12: Plans. The US Army discusses its plans for the MQ-1C, which includes the addition of a new Synthetic Aperture Radar with Ground Moving Target Indicator, and the development of a Universal Ground Control Station, or UGS that can show video feeds from Gray Eagle, Shadow and Hunter UAS on a single system.

A full company of 12 Gray Eagle UAS have now deployed as part of a full-spectrum Combat Aviation Brigade, and a Pentagon Defense Acquisition Board meeting is planned for mid-May 2012, to approve another Low Rate Initial Production buy. Initial Operational Test & Evaluation is scheduled for summer 2012.

March 30/12: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” for 2012. With respect to the MQ-1C, it mentions that the Army will be modifying the UAV’s tail rudder and elevator, and the GAO is now satisfied with the automatic take-off and landing system’s technical maturity:

“However, the tactical common data link is still not fully mature… its air data relay capability has been deferred until fiscal year 2012. The March 2011 accident involving an MQ-1C in testing has delayed several key program events… The Army now plans to start [IOT&E] operational testing in August 2012 [instead of October 2011, and a]… full-rate production decision was postponed from August 2012 to March 2013. The Army has already awarded two low-rate production contracts in 2010 and 2011 for 55 aircraft. To avoid a break in production, the Army is planning to seek approval to award a third low-rate contract for 29 aircraft in May 2012. Based on the current program schedule, the Army will procure more than half of the total planned aircraft before the system’s operational effectiveness and suitability is fully tested…”

Jan 26/12: Preliminary FY 2013 budget materials discuss coming shifts in Pentagon priorities, as the defense department moves to make future cuts. The USAF will get fewer MQ-9 Reapers, but the Army’s MQ-1C is protected:

“Unmanned Air Systems – fund enough trained personnel, infrastructure, and platforms to sustain 65 USAF MQ-1/9 combat air patrols (CAPs) with a surge capacity of 85; the Predator aircraft was retained longer than previously planned, allowing us to slow the buy of the Reaper aircraft and gain some savings; we also protected funding for the Army’s unmanned air system, Gray Eagle.”

See: Pentagon release | “Defense Budget Priorities and Choices” [PDF]

Jan 17/12: A $30.3 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification to support the MQ-1C Gray Eagle Quick Reaction Capability drones in theater. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of May 7/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0153).

Jan 5/12: SIGINT Pods. BAE Systems in Nashua, NH receives a $12.3 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for T-Pod SIGINT Systems. on the MQ-1C Unmanned Aircraft System. A December 2011 expression of interest stated that the US Army was looking for up to 5 tested and calibrated Traveler Pods within 4 months for integration work on the MQ-1C, and within 6 months for deployment. The pods are designed to find and eavesdrop on electronic emitters, identify them (enemy radio communications? radar? etc.), then offer aerial precision geolocation (APG) and copying. Pods and equipment can already be installed in larger UAVs like the USAF’s RQ-4 Global Hawks, and aboard light surveillance planes like the Beechcraft King Air MC-12Ws. The challenge is to shrink them and their supporting systems so that it falls within the MQ-1C’s weight and size limits.

Work will be performed in Nashua, NH, with an estimated completion date of Dec 27/12. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by US Army Contracting Command at Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD (W15P7T-12-C-C009). See also FBO.gov.

Jan 5/12: A $20.5 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification to pay for operational test and evaluation. It does not specify further, but the contract is the MQ-1C’s.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

Dec 30/11: A $12 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for Warrior A/Block 0 support services. These are the Quick Reaction Capability drones. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, until Dec 17/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-12-C-0001).

Dec 23/11: An $18 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract. “The award will provide for the modification of an existing contract to allow for incremental funding of previous change order”; it does not specify further, but the contract is the MQ-1C’s. Work will be performed in Poway, CA; Hunt Valley, MD; Salt Lake City, UT; and Lake Forest, CA, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/11. One bid was solicited, with 1 received (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

Nov 10/11: A $15.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee and cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification, to support the MQ-1C QRC contingents. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Jan 7/12. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0153).

Nov 9/11: An AH-64D Apache Block III attack helicopter fitted with the Unmanned Aerial Systems Tactical Common Data Link Assembly (UTA) atop its mast has controlled the payload and flight of an MQ-1C Grey Eagle UAV, while both are in flight. This marks the 1st time an unmanned vehicle has been controlled from the cockpit of an Apache helicopter.

Lockheed Martin says that the test program proved the UTA’s design, adding that: “All goals of this phase of UTA testing were completed with 100 percent success.”

Oct 17/11: A $30.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for additional MQ-1C engineering services. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Aug 30/12. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0136).

Oct 7/11: WIRED Danger Room reports that a “keylogger” virus has infected the USAF’s MQ-1A/B Predator and MQ-9 Reaper fleets:

“The virus, first detected nearly two weeks ago by the military’s Host-Based Security System, has not prevented pilots at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada from flying their missions overseas. Nor have there been any confirmed incidents of classified information being lost or sent to an outside source. But the virus has resisted multiple efforts to remove it from Creech’s computers, network security specialists say… “We keep wiping it off, and it keeps coming back,” says a source familiar with the network infection, one of three that told Danger Room about the virus. “We think it’s benign. But we just don’t know.”

Unlike the USAF, the Army’s philosophy is to operate its MQ-1C Gray Eagles in-theater. The virus doesn’t compromise Army UAVs, therefore, but it may indicate a similar vulnerability point in the Army’s network.

Oct 5/11: An $8.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract will fund RESET efforts for the Warrior A/Warrior Block 0 Unmanned Aircraft Systems. RESET is a program for worn vehicles and aircraft, involving tear-down and comprehensive inspections, followed by replacement of any worn parts, and restoration to “like new” condition. The question is whether these initially-fielded “Quick Reaction Capability” UAVs will be upgraded to full operational MQ-1C Block 1 status, complete with weapons.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of June 30/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-11-C-0001).

QRC-1 sunrise, Taji
(click to view full)

May 20/11: An $8.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-plus-incentive-fee contract, that buys additional spare hardware under the MQ-1C Gray Eagle’s logistics support contract. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Jan 18/12. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0153).

April 25/11: An $8.3 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract, providing incremental funding to cover an extension of the ER/MP system development and design contract. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/11. One bid was solicited with 1 bid received by U.S. Army AMCOM Contracting Center in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

April 12/11: +26. $173.5 million of a $354 million fixed-price-incentive-fee contract, for MQ-1C Gray Eagle low rate initial production. Queries to GA-ASI indicate that the contract covers 2 Gray Eagle systems: 26 UAVs (12 aircraft per system, plus 2 spares for losses), 15 of AAI’s OneSystem Ground Control Systems, L-3 Communications’ Satellite Communications equipment, and other peripheral equipment to support the systems.

GA-ASI says that part of this contract is for FY 2010 buys, and part is FY 2011. Work will be performed at Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of April 30/14. One bid was solicited and one received (W58RGZ-11-C-0099).

March 7/11: A $64.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification for MQ-1C Gray Eagle product support, logistical support and sustainment operations.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA; Adelanto, CA; Palmdale, CA; Salt Lake City, UT; and Hunt Valley, MD, with an estimated completion date of Nov 7/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0153).

March 2/11: +30. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. in Poway, CA receives an announced $335.5 million fixed-price-incentive-fee contract for MQ-1C Gray Eagle systems. In-depth discussions with General Atomics place the order in its full context, which is somewhat complex.

In February 2010, General Atomics says the US Army placed a not-to-exceed $399 million contract, but did not appropriate any money. Their first step was the $195.5 million 49% funding contract in the May 19/10 entry. According to the firm, this award funds the remaining contract with another $115.1 million, to make a total of $310.6 million. This will include the LRIP Lot 1 order for 2 systems (24 UAVs + 2 attrition), plus the FY 2009 supplemental funding of 8 UAVs, and a sizable quantity of plus-up air, ground and communication equipment.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56RGZ-10-C-0068).

Feb 14/11: Budget request. The Pentagon releases its FY 2012 budget request, which includes breakout information concerning the MQ-1C Gray Eagle program. The FY 2012 request is $805.8 million for 36 systems, which includes $137 million in RDT&E(Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation) funds.

Jan 18/11: Program ramp-up. A US Army release quotes Tim Owings, deputy project manager for Army Unmanned Aircraft Systems:

“We’re going to accelerate Gray Eagle yet again. We’re accelerating from two systems per year to three systems per year, which will result in seventeen systems being procured by FY 2014… Defense Acquisition Board in February of this year is expected to confirm the addition of two more Low Rate Initial Production Gray Eagle systems – each consisting of 12 air vehicles, five ground control stations and five additional attrition vehicles… The Army has already deployed two Gray Eagle “Quick Reaction Capabilities.” One QRC is now flying with Army Soldiers in Iraq and another is with U.S. Special Operations Forces in Afghanistan”

Nov 28/10: Iraq T&P work. A posting from the 1st Infantry Division discusses [Pentagon DVIDS | US Army] some of the work that goes into the Gray Eagle’s Quick Reaction Capability 1-Replacement 1 (QRC-1/R1) deployment in Iraq, which is working to pioneer Gray Eagle tactics, techniques and procedures before the UAVs are deployed throughout the Army. Some excerpts:

“The QRC1-R1 operators are working with aviators from the brigade’s Apache battalion to integrate their mission… The unit has flown nearly 7,000 accident free hours, more than 350 combat missions, produced over 16,000 surveillance-type images, and maintained a systems operational readiness rate of about 93 percent [in its first 6 months].

“…One of the biggest things we try to do is educate other units about our capabilities,” said [unit commander Capt. Michael] Goodwin. “A lot of units have the ability to use our assets, but they don’t know what we can do.” One of the most useful tools the unit offers ground troops is education on a portable system known as the OSRVT, or One Station Remote Viewing Terminal. “We’re finding that a lot of units have the OSRVT, but don’t know what it does for them,” said Goodwin. “Our company helps train the ground guys on the system, on how to access our feeds and use our aircraft to support them.” …The unit is working to prepare the aircraft to carry hellfire missiles, and is scheduled to conduct a live test of the missiles in Iraq this January.

Sgt. Brent Randal, a Gray Eagle operator deployed with QRC1-R1 and a native of Las Vegas, Nev., said that one of the aircraft’s best features is its new Synthetic Aperture Radar, or SAR. Mounted underneath the Gray Eagle’s nose, the SAR can compare high resolution images of a location taken at different times to determine whether objects have been removed from or placed at a scene… The Gray Eagle can also help ground troops communicate with their headquarters over long distances. The success of [Predator drones he flew for Task Force ODIN] helped pave the way for the Army’s acquisition of the Gray Eagle, said [former scout Staff Sgt. Raymond] Ballance.”

Nov 19/10: General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. in Poway, CA receives a $31.9 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract, providing incremental funding to cover an extension of the ER/MP system development and design contract. Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/10. One bid was solicited with one bid received by U.S. Army AMCOM Contracting Center in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

Announced System Development & Demonstration contracts covered here, not including any UAV buys or any support contracts, now stand at $253.4 million.

Nov 8/10: STARLite radar. Northrop Grumman announces a contract for 40 more AN/ZPY-1 STARLite synthetic aperture ground-looking radars, bringing announced orders to 73. These lightweight radars include Ground Moving Target Indicator (GMTI) capabilities, and will equip the Army’s MQ-1C Gray Eagle UAVs,. Under the terms of the contract option, deliveries to the Army’s Product Manager Robotic & Unmanned Sensors Program Management Office will begin in March, 2011 and conclude in March, 2012.

Pat Newby, vice president of Weapons and Sensors for Northrop Grumman’s Land and Self Protection Systems Division. “STARLite completed all first article and government testing requirements, which led to this award. These systems are ready now for immediate deployment.” See Feb 11/10, Apr 28/08 entries for more.

Oct 27/10: TRACER radar. Lockheed Martin’s tree-penetrating Tactical Reconnaissance and Counter-Concealment-Enabled Radar (TRACER) flies for the 1st time aboard NASA’s Ikhana MQ-9, because the Army Gray Eagle MQ-1C fleet that will eventually host the external unpressurized TRACER pods are all busy on operations.

TRACER is a dual-band synthetic-aperture radar (SAR), designed to detect vehicles, buildings and other man-made objects that are buried, camouflaged or concealed under trees and other foliage. The flight tests on Ikhana focused on the radar’s performance in the harsh environment of the unpressurized pod, as the TRACER system will eventually be installed on a variety of manned and unmanned aircraft. Lockheed Martin.

Oct 4/10: General Atomics Aeronautical Systems in Poway, CA received a Sept 28/10 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for $5.8 million, covering ER/MP sub-engineering services for engineering and integration support, integrated logistics support, and program management.

Work will be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0136, P00018).

MQ-1C test flight
(click to view full)

Sept 10/10: A $7.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for ER/MP Quick Reaction Capability contractor logistics support replenishment sustainment spares. Work is to be performed in Poway, CA with an estimated completion date of June 6/12. One bid was solicited with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0153).

May 24/10: A $38.5 million cost-plus-incentive-fee/cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification that pays for new contractor logistics support; a transition to performance-based logistics for the Quick Reaction Capability 1 (see December 2009 entry), QRC-1R, and QRC-2 UAVs; and a UAS training base in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.

Work is to be performed in Adelanto, CA (34%); Hunt Valley, MD (24%); Poway, CA (18%); Palmdale, CA (17%); and Salt Lake City, UT (7%). The estimated completion date is May 19/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0153, #P00011).

May 19/10: +26. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. in Poway, CA received a $195.5 million fixed-price-incentive-fee contract for MQ-1C supplemental hardware and low-rate initial production. Work is to be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/12. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W58RGZ-10-C-0068).

General Atomics tells us that this is for the first half (49%) of the LRIP Lot 1 contract, and covers 2 full Sky Warrior systems (24 UAVs) and FY 2009 supplemental hardware (2 attrition UAVs). The rest of the funding is expected in a few months, and could drive this contract set to about $399 million for 34 Sky Warrior aircraft, 16 of AAI’s One System Ground Control Stations, L-3 Communications West’s airborne and ground Tactical Control Data Link (TCDL) equipment, and various other items to include automatic landing systems, spares, and ground support equipment. Beginning in December 2011, the company is scheduled to deliver over 2 MQ-1C aircraft a month through the end of 2012.

This award comes at the same time that the U.S. Army is celebrating the achievement of 1,000,000 flight hours for its entire unmanned aircraft systems fleet, of which GA-ASI Sky Warrior Alpha and Sky Warrior UAS have logged 145,000 flight hours. See also July 8/10 release.

May 7/10: Lynx radar. General Atomics announces that its Lynx Block 30 Synthetic Aperture Radar with Ground Moving Target Indicator (SAR/GMTI) has achieved over 1,000 collective mission hours on their 4 Sky Warrior Block 1 UAVs in Iraq. The radar has a broad area GMTI scanning mode for detecting moving vehicles in front and to either side, can cue the camera payload to things it “sees” by using the CLAW payload control software, and features very fast Coherent Change Detection (CCD) algorithms.

The US Army’s Quick Reaction Capability-1 (QRC-1) deployment began in December 2009. A second group of 4 Lynx Block 30 radars is scheduled to begin Limited User Testing with the Army later in May 2010, in support of this summer’s planned QRC-2 deployment. In addition to supporting QRC-1 operations with the Lynx radar, GA-ASI is providing full Contractor Logistics Support (CLS), including radar operation, image analysis, and maintenance support.

May 7/10: A $5.8 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for continued performance of the ER/MP’s SDD phase. Work is to be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/10. One bid was solicited with one bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command, AMCOM Constructing Center at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

May 6/10: A $15.2 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract, exercising an option in support of the ER/MP production readiness test asset. Work is to be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of April 09/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received by U.S. Army Contracting Command, AMCOM Constructing Center at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-09-C-0151). Asked about this contract, General Atomics spokespeople said that:

“…this is not the other half of the [April 22/10] PRTA contract, this is an additional amount for spares and ground support equipment.”

On other topics, they add that the ER/MP’s name change from General Atomics’ Sky Warrior designation to the US Army’s Gray Eagle designation is not official – yet.

April 29/10: 1,000,000 UAV hours. The US Army announces that April 2010 saw the 1,000,000th flight hour for its UAV fleets. That’s a dramatic change from the handful of Army RQ-7 Shadow and RQ-5 Hunter systems in 2001, to roughly 1,000 UAVs by 2010 that are logging up to 25,000 of UAV flight hours per month. It has taken 13 years to put together the first 100,000 hours, followed by 8.5 years to add the next 900,000. About 88% of these flight hours are from time in combat.

The Army now operates 6 MQ-5 Hunter systems that have recently been armed, 87 RQ-7 Shadow UAS systems that are likely to become armed MQ-7 variants son, 9 MQ-1C ER/MP variants, 1,300 Raven mini-UAV systems and 16 RQ-18 gMAV systems. Each system includes several UAVs, plus launch platforms if needed and associated ground control station and communications equipment. Tim Owings, deputy program manager, Army UAS:

“Ninety-five percent of what the Army has in its inventory today did not even exist at the beginning of the war… A lot of people liken Vietnam to a helicopter war – I liken these two wars as the unmanned systems wars because these are the wars where these systems hit the central axis of the way we fight and became part and parcel to the way the Army prosecutes wars… It has been absolutely amazing, no matter how many we have built there has always been a need for more.”??

A Quick Reaction Capability (QRC) of 4 unarmed MQ-1C Block 0s were deployed to Iraq in 2009 – and another ERMP QRC is slated for Afghanistan later in 2010, armed with Hellfire missiles. The idea of the QRC is to field technologies in service of the ongoing war effort as they are available while simultaneously developing a system as a program of record.

April 22/10: +4. A $17 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to finalize a contract for ER/MP production readiness test assets. Work is to be performed in Poway, CA, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/11. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0151). In response to a query, General Atomics tells DID that the contract includes:

“…4 Sky Warrior ER/MP aircraft, 2 ER/MP One System GCS, TCDL/GDT, SGDT, TALS, etc.). The [equipment is] to be used for the Initial Operational Test & Evaluation (IOT&E) phase that follows SDD.”

The other $23.4 million part of this contract, plus the May 6/10 contract, leaves the final price at $55.6 million for systems and support.

MQ-1C Sky Warrior
(click to view full)

March 30/10: GAO report. The US GAO audit office delivers its 8th annual “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs report. With respect to the ER/MP:

“…a Secretary of Defense memorandum to field the capability as soon as possible… affected the program in several ways. According to program officials, it extended system development and demonstration by about 2 years and delayed the award of the low-rate initial production contract by over 1 year. In accordance with the Secretary’s direction, the Army fielded one “Quick Reaction Capability” system in 2009 and plans to field another in 2010. These systems lack the full capabilities planned.”

“…All four critical technologies are now mature and have been demonstrated on the final version of the unmanned air system… The ER/MP is expected to enter low-rate initial production in early 2010 with all its manufacturing processes demonstrated in a production representative environment… the program was approved in February 2010 for low-rate initial production, and they now anticipate changes in cost, quantity, and schedule. However, official, detailed information was not available in time for inclusion in this report… the Air Force has determined it will no longer acquire the MQ-1C Predator. The Army now anticipates a DOD acquisition memorandum closing the [DoD's earlier] direction to combine the programs.”

Feb 19/10: General Atomics Aeronautical System in Poway, CA receives a $36.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, covering in-theater support for ERMP Alpha and Block 0 UAVs for the Iraqi and Afghan theaters of war. The contract will run until Nov 15/11. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-10-C-0044).

Feb 18/10: Tests, and Milestone C. The US Army announces that the ER/MP has successfully completed a series of tests with the HELLFIRE II UAS missile variant, whose 360-degree targeting ability, allowing UAVs that lack a helicopter’s instant maneuverability to put missiles on target faster. Testing began on Nov 22/09, and took place at Naval Air Weapons Station, China Lake, CA, following cooperation from General Atomics-Aeronautical Systems, Inc.’s Software Integration Laboratory, the company’s El Mirage Flight Test Facility in El Mirage, CA, and Edwards Air Force Base, CA..

The tests began with dry runs and an inert test missile, followed by a successful “cold” pass using a live missile to verify lock-on, followed by “hot pass” firing. November and December involved testing in various conditions, from varying altitudes, against stationary or moving targets. Tests recorded 9 successful shots, which helped pave the way for the UAV’s February 2010 Milestone C approval.

Feb 13/10: The US military issues a FedBizOpps notice as it conducts market research seeking sources to provide in-theatre logistical support, to include field service representatives and maintainers to support sustainment of the AN/DAS-2 payload and the AN/AAS-53 sensor and target designation turrets. The usual winner in these cases is the contractor, especially when, as in this case, “The government does not own the technical data package for these payloads.”

The AN/DAS-2 equipped initial SkyWarriors. The day/night sensing and targeting turret contains a continuous zoom day camera, a thermal imager, a visible imager, a laser designator, and an eye-safe laser rangefinder, all packaged within a stabilized gimbal. The AN/AAS-53 “is planned to replace the AN/DAS-2 beginning in fourth quarter 2009.” FBO solicitation.

Feb 11/10: STARLite, express. Northrop Grumman announces the recent delivery of the first 2 production AN/ZPY-1 STARLite radars for the US Army’s ER/MP, under a compressed 18-month schedule. The STARLite radar [PDF] is a 65 pound synthetic aperture radar (SAR) with ground moving target indicator (GMTI) capabilities. In SAR mode, the radar provides images along the aircraft’s flight path or along a path independent of the flight path. It can also provide a high-resolution image of a specific area on the ground. In the GMTI mode, the radar provides moving target locations overlaid on a digital map. It can see through battlefield obscurants at all times of day, and in all weather. It also has software that connects with the Army One Common Ground Station.

Northrop Grumman is working under a $78.5 million contract with the Army’s Robotics and Unmanned Sensors Product Office at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD, to provide a total of 33 STARLite radar systems by April 2011.

Feb 1/10: The Pentagon releases its FY 2011 budget requests. For the ER/MP program, Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation would jump 45% to $123.2 million. Purchases would jump about 5% to $506.3 million for 29 UAVs, including 3 UAVs under OCO/war funding purchases.

Dec 11/09: Arming begins. Aviation Week reports that the Army is beginning to arm its MQ-1Cs as its pushes toward a “Milestone C” production decision. Tests at China Lake, CA began with 2 Hellfire shots in late November, and will continue until Dec 18/09.

“The soon to be re-designated Gray Eagle UAV, currently called the extended range/multi-purpose (ERMP) unmanned aircraft system by the Army, is being rushed into service with newly-formed quick reaction capability (QRC) units in Iraq and Afghanistan… the initial QRC-1 unit is now deployed in Iraq with four unarmed aircraft… The current weapons tests… form part of preparations to arm QRC-2 aircraft which will be deployed to Afghanistan in July [2010].”

Army UAS project manager Col. Gregory Gonzalez confirmed to Aviation Week that QRC-2 will have the first real weaponized MQ-1C system.

Oct 27/09: The DEW Line highlights a Raytheon Program Manager job ad that discusses possible improvements to the MQ-1C fleet:

“[Raytheon] has proposed a significant upgrade program to the baseline CSP configuration to include High Definition (HD) EO/IR capability and Target Location Accuracy (TLA) enhancements. This position is the program manager (PM) of the CSP TLA/HD (approx $30M) development program. The selected individual will be responsible for managing all aspects of the development program including start up, gate reviews, customer reviews, customer daily interface, supplier management, build of 6 integration and test systems, quality testing and flight testing. It is anticipated the CSP TLA/HD development program will result in retrofit of up to 100 baseline CSP systems and this position would manage the follow-on retrofit business. The TLA/HD upgrade program will be run in parallel with the CSP IDIQ base program and will require integration and leveraging with the on-going CSP production program.”

MQ-1C, Block 0
(click to view full)

August 2009: QRC-1 deploys. Deployment of Sky Warrior Block 1 (ER/MP program version), as the Quick Reaction Capability-1 (QRC-1). Feedback from the field will be incorporated into the QRC-2 deployment as software and hardware upgrades, and tactical changes. Source.

March 2/09: +8. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. in San Diego, CA received a $35 million cost plus incentive fee, definitization of a letter contract to acquire 8 ERMP Quick Reaction Capability UAVs, and associated support equipment. This acquisition is directed by the Joint Chief of Staff to accommodate a surge of UAVs in theater.

Work is to be performed at San Diego, CA (46%); Adelanto, CA (14%); Palmdale, CA (8%); Salt Lake City, UT (18%); and Hunt Valley, MD (14%), with an estimated completion date of Jan 15/10. One bid was solicited and one bid received (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

Feb 5/09: No SAR. Jane’s Defence Weekly [site] reports that:

“The US Army is suspending a synthetic aperture radar (SAR) requirement for Warrior unmanned aerial systems (UASs) in order to… speed the Warrior’s deployment to theatre, where intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) assets are in great demand.”

USAF MQ-1A/Bs currently carry the AN/APY-8 Lynx ground-looking synthetic aperture radar, which gives them the ability to notice certain kinds of objects more prominently, and to see through some obscurants like low clouds, smoke, etc. On Feb 5/09, General Atomics tested a Lynx II dual-beam variant, with a Space Time Adaptive Processing (STAP) upgrade developed in cooperation with BAE Systems. The modifications cancel the main beam’s GMTI (ground moving target indicator) clutter, which helps the radar detect slow-moving objects more accurately and at longer ranges.

Sept 18/08: General Atomics Aeronautical System in San Diego, CA received a $37.2 million cost plus incentive fee price contract for incremental funding for systems development and demonstration (including integration of the Hellfire Missile) for the ER/MP. Work will be performed in San Diego, CA, Adelanto, CA, Palmdale, CA, Salt Lake City, UT, Hunt Valley, MD, and Huntsville, AL, with an estimated completion date of Aug 31/09. One hundred and twenty bids were solicited and 3 bids were received (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

Aug 19/08: General Atomics Aeronautical Systems in San Diego, CA received a $7.9 million cost plus fixed fee contract to acquire 3 ERMP Block 0 Unmanned Aircraft in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Work will be performed in San Diego, CA with an estimated completion date of March 31/10. One bid was solicited and one bid received (W58RGZ-06-C-0208).

Aug 8/08: GA-ASI issues. A US GAO decision denies Lockheed Martin’s bid protest over the BAMS maritime surveillance UAV contract – and cites ongoing performance issues with its key partner General Atomics as the reason. The GAO summary for Bid Protest B-400135 states that:

“Agency reasonably determined, in procurement for unmanned maritime surveillance aircraft, that awardee [DID: Northrop Grumman] had significant advantage over protester [DID: Lockheed Martin] with respect to past performance where: protester’s subcontractor [DID: General Atomics], responsible for approximately 50 percent of contract effort, had recent past performance history of being unable to resolve staffing and resource issues, resulting in adverse cost and schedule performance on very relevant contracts for unmanned aircraft; record did not demonstrate that protester’s subcontractor had implemented systemic improvement that resulted in improved performance; [in contrast] operating division of the awardee also had performance problems on very relevant contracts for unmanned aircraft, many had been addressed through systemic improvement; and overall performance of awardee’s team on most evaluated contract efforts was rated better than satisfactory, while the overall performance of protester’s team on 11 of 26 contract efforts was only marginal.”

The BAMS bid in question has been based on General Atomics’ Mariner, a variant of its larger MQ-9 UAV. The GAO decision then goes on to discuss these issues in more detail, including this passage:

“In contrast, however, GA-ASI’s contract performance was a matter of great concern to the agency. Specifically, while recognizing that GA-ASI had demonstrated a willingness and ability to respond on short notice to evolving Global War on Terror (GWOT) warfighter requirements, the SSEB found that GA-ASI’s performance demonstrated: inadequate staffing, resulting in performance problems on SDD contracts for the MQ-9 Reaper (a second-generation, Predator B model) and the MQ-1C Extended Range/Multipurpose (ER/MP) UAS (a second-generation Predator model); unfavorable schedule performance on four of seven relevant GA-ASI contracts, including very relevant contracts for the MQ-9 Reaper, UAS ground control stations, MQ-1C ER/MP, I-GNAT Extended Range UAS (a version of the Predator with some differences for the Army), and MQ-1 baseline Predator; poor performance in meeting technical quality requirements on three of seven GA-ASI contracts, including contracts for the MQ-9 Reaper, MQ-1C ER/MP, and I-GNAT Extended Range UAS; and workload exceeded the firm’s capacity on five of seven GA-ASI contracts, including contracts for the MQ-9 Reaper, UAS ground control stations, MQ-1C ER/MP, I-GNAT Extended Range UAS, and MQ?1/MQ-9 maintenance support. In summary, the SSEB found the overall performance of GA-ASI on its very relevant contracts for the MQ-9 Reaper (most delivery orders), UAS ground control stations, MQ-1C ER/MP, and I-GNAT Extended Range UAS to be marginal.”

May 17/08: Theilert scandal. Thielert Engines insolvency administrator Dr. Bruno M. Kubler discusses the current situation in a release, including some revelations with implications for customers like General Atomics. The statement notes that attempts are being made to keep Thelert as a an operating concern, with some flexibility shown by creditors and Frank Thielert may not be CEO, but he remains the personal holder of key permits and therefore remains involved. Meanwhile:

• German insolvency law does not permit the assumption of warranties or guarantees free of charge for products and services supplied prior to the declaration of insolvency. Parts supplied after insolvency can be warrantied, but the firm is in no position to do so. Dr. Kubler hopes that aircraft manufacturers will step in.

• Higher prices will be charged for engines and spares.

• Payment in advance is now required, but assurances are made re: delivery once payment is made.

• The firm’s #1 customer, Diamond Aircraft, has pushed for concessions and preferential deals with Thielert, using both private negotiations and public tactics. Relations are deteriorating, but the firms are still negotiating.

April 28/08: STARLite radar. Northrop Grumman announces that its STARLite has been selected by the U.S. Army Communication-Electronics Life Cycle Management Command to equip ER/MP UAVs. The initial $42 million contract will finalize development, and deliver 10 radars.

The ground looking SAR/GMTI (Sythetic Aperture Radar with Ground Moving Target Indicator) fills the niche that General Atomics’ own AN/APY-8 Lynx radar occupies on USAF MQ-1A/B Predators.

April 16/08: +8. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems in San Diego, CA receives $38.5 million cost-plus incentive fee contract for the acquisition of 8 ER/MP quick reaction capability unmanned aircraft vehicles and assorted support equipment.

Work will be performed primarily in San Diego, CA and is expected to be complete on May 15/09. One bid was solicited on March 17/08 (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

April 10/08: Theilert insolvency. SkyWarrior engine maker Thielert issues a release concerning their “urgent liquidity crisis.” The act is not an isolated incident, but rather a culmination of trends that include formal charges of accounting fraud and falsification of documents.

It is followed by a declaration of insolvency in May 2008.

March 31/08: General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. flies the first Sky Warrior Block 1 UAV from the company’s El Mirage Flight Operations Facility in Adelanto, CA. GA-ASI release.

March 3/08: General Atomics Aeronautical Systems in San Diego, CA received an $18.7 million cost-plus incentive fee contract that provides incremental funding for system development and demonstration of the ER/MP UAV. Work will be performed in San Diego, CA; Adelanto, CA; Palmdale, CA; Salt Lake City, UT; Hunt Valley, MD; and Huntsville, AL; and is expected to be complete by Aug 31/09. There were 120 bids solicited on Sept 1/04, and 3 bids were received (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

Feb 14/08: Raytheon announces 2 U.S. Army orders totaling $17.2 million for 18 common sensor payloads, as system design and development continues. The article does not give details that would confirm the Nov 7/07 entry as one of those contracts, but it is possible. The firm states that they’ve delivered 10 AN/DAS-2 sensors so far.

Nov 7/07: Raytheon Co. in McKinney, TX received a delivery order amount of $11 million as part of an $800 million firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for common sensors for the ARH-70A helicopter and the MQ-1C Sky Warrior ER/MP UAV. Work will be performed in McKinney, TX and is expected to be complete by Oct. 31, 2016. Bids were solicited via the World Wide Web on April 24, 2007, and 5 bids were received by the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command in Fort Monmouth, NJ (W15P7T-08-D-S602).

Raytheon’s release adds that the program calls for design and development, testing and air vehicle integration of a variant of Raytheon’s Multi-spectral Targeting System, in a project could be worth up to $1.2 billion for 875 units, if all options are exercised. See also Raytheon Feature | Common Sensor Platform product page. Raytheon’s CSP completes its Predator family trifecta; it also supplies the AN/DAS-1 system that equips MQ-1 Predator UAVs, and the AN/AAS-52 on MQ-9 Reapers. With respect to deliveries to the Sky Warrior program thus far:

“The company has delivered 10 AN/DAS-2 electro-optical/ infrared/ laser designator sensors under a system design and development contract let in May 2005. At the beginning of this year, the Army ordered seven more systems under a low rate production option.”

Oct 19/07: General Atomics Aeronautical System in San Diego, CA received a $20.8 million increment as part of a $231.2 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for system development and demonstration for the ER/MP UAV Vehicle, including integration of the Hellfire Missile.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (43%), Adelanto, CA (14%), Palmdale, CA (8%), Salt Lake City, UT (18%), Hunt Valley, MD (14%), and Huntsville, AL (3%), and is expected to be complete by Aug 31/09. There were 120 bids solicited on Sept. 1, 2004, and 3 bids were received (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

Oct 1-17/07: UAV Wars. DID talks to the US Army about the SkyWarrior program. Going forward, the USAF will manage the program according to jointly agreed requirements, but each service will maintain its own budget for the UAVs it wants.

A common version will be selected and approved by late 2008, but no decision has been reached re: which version will predominate: the MQ-1B Block X/MQ-1C with 4 missile pylons and a heavy fuel engine that can burn diesel, or the existing MQ-1 that burns aviation fuel and has 2 missile pylons.

Oct 1/07: General Atomics Aeronautical Systems in San Diego, CA received a $27.5 million modification to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for contractor logistics support for the Sky Warrior Block 0 Unmanned Aircraft System.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (80%); Hunt Valley, MD (10%); and Salt Lake City, UT (10%); and is expected to be complete by Sept. 27, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Sept. 14, 2007 (DAAH01-03-C-0124).

MQ-1C Sky Warrior
(click to view full)

Sept 28/07: UAV Wars. In its Daily Report for this date, the Air Force Association’s Air Force Magazine Online discusses the UAV executive agency issue:

“Defending the recent Pentagon decision not to give the Air Force executive agency over medium- to high-altitude unmanned aerial vehicles, Army Secretary Pete Geren told defense reporters Thursday that the Army’s modernization goals don’t fit with an executive agent approach. “The need for control with UAVs fits close to the individual soldier,” Geren said. Part of the Army’s Future Combat Systems program is to empower soldiers and give them greater control over assets such as UAVs. He noted that Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Moseley have met on the issue recently to work out disagreements. “Some of the disagreements have arisen because these issues have not been tackled at a high enough level,” Geren said. While sympathetic to the Air Force’s perspective, he noted that an executive agent approach that’s advocated by some would make sense if we were fighting a conventional war. “It’s a different debate when you’re talking about the kind of fight we are in today,” Geren declared.”

See also Military.com’s article re: the decision fallout.

Sept 13/07: UAV Wars. Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England rejects Air Force efforts to become the executive agent for all medium- and high-altitude unmanned aerial vehicles, over objections from the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps. In his memo, England directed the Pentagon’s acquisition office to create a task force on UAV issues to “enhance operations, enable interdependencies, and streamline acquisition” of the drones. He also directed Pentagon officials to take other steps to foster cross-service collaboration on the UAV programs.

The Predator and SkyWarrior programs, however, have been merged. The exact meaning of that move remains to be seen – either to standardize the Predator on a similar SkyWarrior/MQ-1C version, or eliminate the Warrior variant and use existing MQ-1As. Aviation Week | GovExec | The Hill.

Aug 22/07: A $5.15 million increment as part of a $215.4 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for system development and demonstration for the ER/MP UAV. Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (43%), Adelanto, CA (14%), Palmdale, CA (8%), Salt Lake City, UT (18%), Hunt Valley, MD (14%), and Huntsville, AL (3%), and is expected to be complete by Aug. 31, 2009. There were 120 bids solicited on Sept. 1, 2004, and 3 bids were received (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

According to DID’s calculations based on DefenseLINK public announcements, about $167 million of the $215.4 million ER/MP program’s contracts have been issued as of this increment.

Aug 6/07: +2 YMQ-1C. General Atomics in San Diego, CA received a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for $7.3 million to provide 2 Pre-Production YMQ-1C Block X aircraft. General Atomics has confirmed to DID that these are USAF versions of the Army Sky Warrior. See the May 7/07 entry and Appendix A for details; this award should be seen in the context of the USAF’s effort to take over UAV authority.

At this time, total funds have been obligated. Solicitations began in April 2006, negotiations were completed in July 2007, and work will be complete in January 2009 (FA8620-05-G-3028-0018).

July 5/07: General Atomics Aeronautical Systems in San Diego, CA received a $14.7 million increment as part of a $215.4 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for system development and demonstration for the ER/MP Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (43%), Adelanto, CA (14%), Palmdale, CA (8%), Salt Lake City, UT (18%), Hunt Valley, MD (14%), and Huntsville, AL (3%), and is expected to be complete by Aug. 31, 2009. There were 120 bids solicited on Sept. 1, 2004, and 3 bids were received (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

June 27/07: UAV Wars. Air Force Times report: With the question of whether there should be an executive agency in charge of medium- and high-altitude UAVs still hanging in the air, U.S. deputy defense secretary Gordon England wrote in a letter earlier in June to Army and Air Force leaders asking the services to collaborate on procuring and operating the Predator and Warrior UAVs. Army and Air Force officials were asked to submit briefings to England by the end of June 2007.

May 17/07: UAV Wars. The Congressional Government Accountability Office releases report #GAO-07-578, “Greater Synergies Possible for DOD’s Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Systems,” which explicitly discusses the possible merger of Warrior & Predator programs. It mentions that “The Air Force and the Army are currently working to identify program synergies in a three-phased approach:

• First, the Air Force will acquire and test two of the more modern Warrior airframes.

• Second, the two services will compare their requirements for ground control stations and automated takeoff and landing.

• Finally, the Army and Air Force plan to compare concepts of operation and training requirements for additional synergies.”

May 10/07: The JROC directs the USAF to flesh out its executive agency plan. No firm deadline is set, and no firm decision is taken.

May 7/07: “Predator Block X”. General Atomics in San Diego, CA received a $10.1 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract from the USAF’s Headquarters Aeronautical Systems Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH. This contract action will provide a series of required tasks to design, fabricate, integrate, and test the Predator MQ-1B Block X aircraft which will utilize a Heavy Full Engine (HFE), will support a 3,200 lbs gross take-off weight, and will carry 4 Hellfire missiles (2 on each wing). The Predator MQ-1B Block X shall leverage off technology from the existing Predator B (MQ-9) program, the Army’s ER/MP program, and on-going GA-ASI internal research and development efforts. At this time, total funds have been obligated. Solicitations began June 2006 and negotiations were complete April 2007 (FA8620-05-G-3028-0016).

It should come as no surprise to anyone that the ability to operate the engine on “heavy” fuels like diesel, and to carry 4 Hellfire missiles instead of 2, constitute the two biggest differences between the USAF’s MQ-1 Predator and the Army’s Warrior UAV. This award should be seen in the context of the USAF’s effort to take over UAV authority, vid. Appendix A.

May 7/07: UAV Wars. Officials with the DoD’s Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) meet with Army and Air Force officials to discuss proposals to put all such UAVs under a single executive agency. See Appendix A for more background.

April 6/07: General Atomics Aeronautical System in San Diego, CA received a $5.3 million modification to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for ERMP Block 0 UAVs. Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (65%), Adelanto, CA (5%), Palmdale, CA (5%), and Salt Lake City, UT (25%), and is expected to be complete by Aug. 31, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on June 21, 2006 (W58RGZ-06-C-0208).

March 5/07: UAV Wars. US Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley’s circulates a memo, proposing to name his service as the Pentagon executive agent for UAVs. See Appendix A for more background.

Feb 14/07: 4 more. General Atomics Aeronautical System in San Diego, CA received an $11.7 million modification to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for acquisition of 4 ERMP Block 0 UAVs, associated support equipment, and initial spares. This appears to be the initial installment on the test aircraft.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (65%), Adelanto, CA (5%), Palmdale, CA (5%), and Salt Lake City, UT (25%), and is expected to be complete by Dec. 18, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on June 21, 2006 (W58RGZ-06-C-0208).

Jan 9/07: FCS changes. The US Army restructures its $160+ billion Future Combat Systems program, and “delays”/ eliminates its Class II and Class III UAVs. The Warrior ERMP is expected to be one of the existing systems filling the Class III brigade-level gap.

Dec 22/06: General Atomics Aeronautical System, San Diego, CA was received a $63.1 million increment as part of “a $215.4 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for System Development and Demonstration for the Extended Range / Multi-Purpose Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.”

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (43%), Adelanto, CA (14%), Palmdale, CA (8%), Salt Lake City, UT (18%), Hunt Valley, MD (14%), and Huntsville, AL (3%), and is expected to be complete by Aug. 31, 2009. There were 120 bids solicited on Sept. 1, 2004, and 3 bids were received by the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

March 13/06: DID – Warrior UAV Program Underway. $67 million increment received for the Warrior program, as part of a “$214.3 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for System Development and Demonstration for the Extended Range / Multi-Purpose Unmanned Aerial Vehicle” (W58RGZ-05-C-0069).

Oct 6/05: DID – AAI Takes Another UAV Ground Control Project. A $30 million subcontract for the Warrior UAV’s ground control.

Appendix A: US Army et. al. vs. USAF Over UAVs

US Army Air Corps

Faced with an aerial tanker fleet that’s 50+ years old, front line fighters under flight restrictions due to age and fatigue, and heavy strain on transport aircraft resources, the USAF has been making strenuous efforts to take over the UAV domain. At the moment, UAVs are bought by individual services: Army, Navy, USAF, Marines. The Army in particular has been using UAVs for reconnaissance and persistent fire support, as in-house assets that involve less organizational friction to deploy, and can be prioritized for purchase according to the needs of soldiers on the ground.

The USAF had asked for authority over all American UAVs before, but this was refused. The Pentagon’s JROC(Joint Requirements Oversight Committee) determined that an executive agent was not necessary. Instead, they created the Joint Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Center of Excellence at Creech Air Force Base, NV to share operational tips; and the Joint Unmanned Aerial Systems Materiel Review Board in order to work out best practices for materiel. There is also a US Army UAV Center of Excellence at Fort Rucker, AL.

The end of the argument? No, because of the organizational and budgetary threat that non-USAF UAVs represent.

Viper Strike
(click to view larger)

One measure of the potential threat can be inferred from usage figures. As of September 2007, MQ-1 Predator UAVs had reached 300,000 flight hours since inception around 2001, of which 80% were combat flight. Fully 1/3 of those flight hours were accumulated in the previous 12 months, and total fleet flying hours had risen to 10,000 hours/month. On Nov 9/07, Jane’s International Defense Review reported that by the end of the second quarter of Fiscal Year 2007, US Army UAVs had flown a total of 295,181 hours in Iraq, nearly 18% of the total hours flown by the army aviation fleet.

Well below a Predator’s size threshold, US Army RQ-7 Shadow battalion-level UAVs are racking up 8,000 flight hours per month in Iraq (almost equal to the Predators’ recent totals), accompanied by US Army RQ-5 Hunter aircraft that sit somewhere between a Predator and Shadow in size and are accumulating their own flight time. Smaller UAVs like the popular RQ-11 Raven, meanwhile, are racking up their own significant totals, with shorter flight times offset by much larger numbers in the field to produce 300,000 flight hours in 2007 alone. The Army reached 1 million UAV flight hours for its fleet of RQ-5 Hunter, RQ-7 Shadow, RQ-11 Raven, RQ-18 gMAV, and MQ-1C ER/MP UAVs in April 2010, and is adding to that at 25,000 hours per month.

The RQ-5 Hunters have been tested with Viper Strike mini-bombs, and the Shadows may be eligible as well if the Army wishes. Shadows will certainly be eligible for NAVAIR’s 5-6 pound Spike missile project (scheduled for an autumn 2007 UAV test), and all UAVs can provide targeting for M30 GPS-guided MLRS rockets, long-range ATACMS MLRS missiles, or the 155mm Excalibur artillery shells entering service in Q3 2007. Larger UAVs like the Sky Warrior add Hellfire II missiles, the 250 lb. Small Diameter Bombs, and 250 – 500 lb. GPS-guided JDAMs or laser-guided Paveway bombs to the mix.

With these fire support assets on the airframe or on call, most close air support functions encountered in counterinsurgency missions can be covered.

Manned fighters offer their own advantages: anti-air capabilities, a payload capacity several times a UAV’s, greatly improved panoramic visibility, no need for potentially vulnerable or limited-bandwidth long-range communications in order to fly, better intimidation presence via fast flyovers, and better survivability/ fewer crashes. In counterinsurgency scenarios, however, air threats are minimal to nonexistent, fighters are usually loaded with just a couple of weapons; and except for the A-10 or dedicated COIN (COunter-INsurgency) turboprops, the planes are moving so quickly that they must rely on targeting pods with the same narrow field of view as a UAV pilot’s. That still leaves intimidation and survivability advantages, but your average jet fighter is extremely expensive to buy, has a 7,000 – 10,000 hour airframe life, costs many multiples of dollars per flight hour to operate, and offers an on-station time that is usually less than half that of a Predator class MALE UAV.

Specialty close-support aircraft like the USA’s A-10, gunships like the AC-130s, and even COIN turboprops offer combinations of affordability and/or compelling advantages that keep them competitive in counterinsurgency scenarios. Can the same be said for the USAF’s F-16s, F-15… or its future F-35 Lightning II and F-22A Raptor fighters? In their January 2007 article “UAVs With Bite,” Air Force Magazine notes that:

“The Air Force now has provisional plans to buy some 170 Predator MQ-1s by 2010 and acquire 50 to 70 MQ-9s by around 2012, for a total of 220 or more of the combat-capable drones. At present, the service plans on retiring a comparable number of F-16s over the same period.”

MQ-1 Predator:
circling to kill?
(click to view full)

This calculus is why some observers saw the UAV fight as the “Key West Agreement” fight for the 21st century, with the outcome determining the future organizational backbone and role of the USAF – and other services besides.

Hence the USAF’s persistence. The USAF’s return foray in March 2007 involved a move to take over acquisition authority for all UAVs designed to operate at “medium or high altitudes.” Battalion-level UAVs like the RQ-7 Shadow 200 might or might not escape, but even so the maneuver would neatly strip away virtually all armed UAVs, and hence the bureaucratic threat of Army UAVs evolving toward the USAF’s close air support role. Besides, with the USAF re-organizing its ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance & Reconnaissance) assets into their own dedicated function, they can always come back for the rest later under a “unified ISR” claim, once a large portion of UAV acquisition and prioritization are already under their control.

The ER/MP Warrior program is obviously a front-line target in this fight, given its derivation from the MQ-1 Predator UAVs the USAF had already bought in quantity, before switching future orders to the larger MQ-9 Reaper.

Three broad-brush outcomes were possible:

# The US Army and USAF retain separate control of their UAVs, and continue to work out standards et. al. through the established joint centers of excellence; Warrior program unaffected.
# The USAF does NOT acquire executive authority over UAVs, but there is consolidation between the US Army and USAF MQ-1 variants/programs to a common version. This is the current state. The Warrior program survives only if it becomes that common version.
# The USAF acquires executive authority over “medium to high altitude” UAVs. The ER/MP Warrior UAV program is almost certainly canceled, future USMC programs are under threat, and the Navy will have to fight to maintain control of its own programs.

In the end, the answer was solution #1, with a twist. The USAF also switched its future UAV production plans from the Predator to the MQ-9 Reaper, whose high altitude performance and 3,000 pound ordnance load give it dramatically different capabilities.

There’s obviously a larger debate going on here. The Kasserine Pass disaster in World War 2, where commanders in quiet sectors refused to turn over their aircraft to units under fire, provided the impetus for today’s TacAir system, which puts airmen in charge of managing and allocating air assets in response to the needs of the ground commander. At some level, the USAF arguments hark back to that concept, and to the 1948 “Key West Accords,” which ended up turning Army Aviation into a helicopter force. There’s also a procurement angle, as noted during coverage of USAF Chief of Staff Moseley’s testimony on this issue before Congress:

“Without an executive agency, the services will likely continue their separate design and procurement efforts, and the DOD will have forfeited the considerable savings it could have realized. Additionally, DOD will have lost an opportunity to create and harness the interservice synergies that would result from building upon — rather than duplicating — each service’s strengths, General Moseley said.”

On the other hand, the US Army hasn’t always felt well served by the USAF’s procurement priorities, which many feel have tended to emphasize high-end USAF assets at the expense of some key roles (forward observation, light transport, close support) needed by troops on the ground. That fact that UAVs serve in a couple of the roles that have previously received short shrift doesn’t make the Army feel any better. They also worry that a service run by fighter jocks is likely to steer unmanned systems away from anything that might intrude on their established roles, or call high-ticket platforms into question. The last 40 years of organizational and political theory tends to support that worry.

Tim Owings, deputy project manager for the Army’s unmanned aircraft systems:

“From our perspective, consistently what has come out of theater is the need for our commanders to have direct control and ownership of the UAV application. That has played out in every theater that we have been in.”

In 2010, director of the Army Quadrennial Defense Review Timothy Muchmore brought the issue into sharp relief, when he was quoted as saying that:

“The air power provided by our sister services has dominated the third dimension, but the Army is unable to leverage that third dimension… We’ve had two combat outposts overrun by superior forces [during the past year]. Those are losses that we consider unacceptable, because we couldn’t see what was going on around the outposts.”

Anyone who has worked in a large organization can see the shape of the bureaucratic battle here. On one side, you have the staff department, preaching the benefits and savings of centralization and standards, and urging central control over the function. Some of those benefits may be real. Some of the “joint” and “team” rhetoric may also be real. But the real issue is control. On the other hand, you have the front-line business unit managers who want resources that are dedicated to their needs – and under their clear authority, in order to ensure required accountability and service levels. Some of that may be required. Still, the key is not so much the promised dedication as the control that guarantees it. Throw in a central department that has sometimes placed business unit needs lower on the priority scale than their own long term plans, add a dash of politics, and stir.

The US Navy, with a long history of running its own aviation programs, and the qualifying UCAS-D unmanned strike aircraft and BAMS maritime reconnaissance UAV programs underway, will not be watching idly. Nor will the US Marines, who also operate integrated aircraft and have UAV plans of their own.

There’s always a proper balance point in any organization, and points beyond which either central control or local control of key functions can become dysfunctional. The thing is, there’s no set recipe. It’s different in each organization, and depends on the situation, past institutional performance, and (legitimately) on the personalities involved at the time.

Where is that balance point for the US military and UAVs? Because there’s a larger issue a-wing beyond the ER/MP program – and this time, getting the answer right really is a matter of life and death.

• = DID is aware that the US Army Air Corps no longer exists.

Footnotes

fn1. A communication from General Atomics to DID referred to the platform as the “MC-1C”, a designation DID subsequently used in the article. Andreas Parsch of the fine site Designation Systems asked some questions about that, and the investigation revealed that it had been a typo. DID has corrected the article accordingly. Danke schön, Andreas.

Appendix B: Who Controls the UAVs? Readings & Primers

• Associated Press – Rise of the Machines: UAV Use Soars. Very interesting facts and figures concerning UAV use.

• US Army (April 29/10) – Army surpasses 1 million unmanned flight hours

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

• National Defense (February 2010) – Army to Air Force: We Won’t Give Up Our Surveillance Aircraft. They back that up with anecdotes about USAF UAVs leaving enemies to plant land mines, and Army UAVs saving lives.

• National Defense (January 2010) – Air Force to Army: There Are Better Ways to Deploy Surveillance Aircraft. The Army disagrees.

• C4ISR Magazine (Nov 1/09) – Different courses: New-style UAV trainees edge toward combat

• General Atomics (Sept 15/08) – GA-ASI War Fighter Support Reaches Historic Proportions.
  

“Predator-series aircraft have amassed over a half-million flight hours and will soon complete 50,000 total missions, with 85-percent of that time spent in combat… Predator-series aircraft are now flying over 20,000 hours a month supporting U.S. coalition forces in combat and homeland security requirements… In the past year alone, monthly flight hours have doubled. Over 300 Predator-series aircraft have been produced to date”

• DID (Aug 29/08) – UAMS Experiment Brings Deconfliction Closer for Smaller UAVs. If efforts like UAMS succeed, the argument for single-service UAV control suffers a major blow.

• US Army (July 3/08) – Leaders discuss new joint unmanned aerial operations. “Army and Air Force leaders met Monday to discuss developing a new joint unmanned aerial system concept of operations…”

• NY Times (June 22/08) - At Odds With Air Force, Army Adds Its Own Aviation Unit. Project ODIN includes both manned C-12s and UAVs like SkyWarrior. “The work of the new aviation battalion was initially kept secret, but Army officials involved in its planning say it has been exceptionally active, using remotely piloted surveillance aircraft to call in Apache helicopter strikes with missiles and heavy machine gun fire that have killed more than 3,000 adversaries in the last year and led to the capture of almost 150 insurgent leaders.” See also…

• CASR (June 22/08) – Counterinsurgency Legacy – US Army Aviation Supports its Own: US Air Force turns out to be too Tardy to be Tactically Useful. Excerpts and background the NYT article. The US Army is reportedly seeking money to raise a similar unit in Afghanistan by late 2008/early 2009.

• Military.com (March 18/08) – Army Embarks on Ambitious UAV Program. Discusses key tactical and operational differences between the Army and USAF’s use of UAVs.

• US Air Force Association, Air Force Magazine (October 2007) – The Big Squeeze. Describes steps the USAF is taking to improve its ISR capabilities, the challenges, and some of the platforms involved. As recapitalization of major assets is pushed back, UAV/UAS options will grow in popularity.

• Lexington Institute (Sept 5/07) – Army Plans For Reconnaissance Drones Misuse A Vital Asset. Loren Thompson’s analysis explains the drivers at both ends of the UAV controversy without really addressing the implications of each, and without securing some underlying assumptions re: employment. Both sets of drivers and assumptions may even be true as written, and the question then becomes one of priorities:

bq. “Only 34 of the 1,200 drones U.S. forces are using in Southwest Asia can operate beyond the line of sight of ground controllers, so sometimes the wait for access to that handful of planes can be quite lengthy… Under the Army plan, if five divisions were deployed in Iraq (as is presently the case), their combined inventory of 60 Predators would be able to keep 12-15 aloft at any given time. In contrast, the approach used by the Air Force can keep nearly three times as many drones in the air because the availability of the fleet is not tied to rotation patterns and concentrating all the drones at a few sites permits maintenance efficiencies.”

• Air Force Magazine (July 2007) – The Drone War [PDF, see also Greater Synergies Possible for DOD’s Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Systems

• Defense News (May 14/07) – USAF Pushes Plan To Handle Pan-Service UAVs

• USAF Aim Points (April 27/07) – JROC wants Air Force to flesh out its UAV ‘Executive Agent’ proposal

• In From the Cold (April 27/07) – An “Executive Agent” for UAVs?

• Shephard UVOnline (April 21/07) – US Air Force official testifies on UAV executive agent issue

• Shephard UVOnline (April 16/07) – US military officials discuss executive agency for UAVs

• Aviation Week & Space Technology (April 2/07) – U.S. Army faults Air Force in UAV debate

• Defense Tech (Dec 13/06) – So Long, Key West

• DID (March 27/06) – USAF’s 25-Year Take on UAV Operations & Management

• DID (Aug 29/05) – USA’s Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap, 2005-2030. That roadmap is already changing.

Additional Readings

• Defense Update – Warrior ERMP UAV System

• GlobalSecurity.org – ERMP Warrior

• General Atomics Aeronautical Systems – Sky Warrior (MQ-1C ER/MP UAS)

• General Atomics Aeronautical Systems – Predator (MQ-1)

• General Atomics Aeronautical Systems – Predator B (MQ-9 Reaper)

• USAF (Oct 15/07) – Putting a Reaper in the skies over Afghanistan, a chain of successes. The aircraft was fielded 2 years early.

• General Atomics Aeronautical Systems – I-GNAT. The Predator’s predecessor.

• US Air Force Association, Air Force Magazine – UAVs With Bite. Places the Predator family, Reaper, et. al. in a larger context.

• Raytheon – AN/DAS-2 Common Sensor Platform product page | Feature

• Northrop Grumman – AN/ZPY-1 STARLite Small Tactical Radar – Lightweight

• Alter Net (Oct 16/11) – America’s Secret Empire of Drone Bases: Its Full Extent Revealed for the First Time

• US Army (Jan 18/11) – Army expanding UAS fleet, speeding up delivery

• Strategy Page (April 30/09) – Cylons 1, Humans 0. “The army uses automatic landing software for its larger UAVs [including the MQ-1C], while the air force does not [using human pilots instead]. Thus the air force has lost about a third of its UAVs to various equipment problems and operator errors, while the army loss rate was less than half that.”

• Thanks to DID correspondent Trent Telenko for his assistance.

With the collapse of the RAH-66 Comanche program, and rededication of its funding into the Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH) and Light Utility Helicopter (LUH), and other programs, the AH-64 Apache will remain the USA’s primary attack helicopter for several more decades. Apaches also serve with a number of American allies, some of whom have already expressed interest in upgrading or expanding their fleets.

The AH-64E Guardian Block III (AB3) is the helicopter’s next big step forward. It incorporates 26 key new-technology insertions that cover flight performance, maintenance costs, sensors & electronics, and even the ability to control UAVs as part of manned-unmanned teaming (MUT). In July 2006, Boeing and U.S. Army officials signed the initial development contract for Block III upgrades to the current and future Apache fleet, via a virtual signing ceremony. By November 2011, the 1st production helicopter had been delivered. So… how many helicopters will be modified under the AH-64 Block III program, what do these modifications include, how is the program structured, and what has been happening since that 2006 award? The short answer is: a lot, including export interest and sales.

The AH-64 Apache Program: Sunset, Sunrise

(Re) Production: Apache’s History

No sunset yet.
(click to view full)

Work at the Mesa, AZ facility has been running steadily since the AH-64 program’s inception in the early 1980s, but a large share has involved refurbishment and upgrades. The Block III program continues that tradition.

Of the 937 AH-64As ever built, 821 were built for US Army. Over 500 of those were remanufactured to AH-64D status over a 10-year period, under 2 multi-year contracts that ran for 5 years each. Subsequent contracts drew in more AH-64As, and as of April 2012, only 8 AH-64As remained in the US Army.

• 284 helicopters were fielded as AH-64D Block Is. The first multi-year remanufacture contract was for 232 helicopters, and covered Lots I-V. The Lot VI helicopters from the 2nd multi-year contract were also built to the AH-64D Block I standard, which included the “Longbow” radar mast, compatible dual-mode Hellfire II missile capability, updated self-protection suites, and better cockpit displays. These initial AH-64D helicopters received equipment upgrades, and were also rebuilt to “zero flight hours” condition.

• Another 217 helicopters in Lots VII-X built AH-64As to the AH-64D Block II standard, which adds improved electronics and software to include the “Longbow” radar mast, compatible dual-mode Hellfire II missile capability, color cockpit displays including moving digital maps, and even more up to date self-protection suites. All were built during the 2nd multi-year contract period, which covered 269 Block I and Block II helicopters in total.

• The lateness of the JTRS radio program, and other issues, have delayed the future Block III model, and so January 2007 saw a contract to convert another 96 American AH-64As to the AH-64D “Extended Block II” standard, followed by additional contracts for Extended Block II+, where the plus simply indicates that “we’re still producing this model, past our expected schedule”. Boeing has received orders for 278 of these so far: 117 for the Army, 95 for the National Guard, and 66 War Replacement helicopters. In 2013, this production line is expected to switch to Block IIIs.

Observant readers will note that adding up all of the above cohorts makes 779 AH-64Ds produced (284 + 217 + 278) – but that counts the 66 war replacement helicopters twice, so the real total is 713. 713 – 690 = 23 unconverted AH-64Ds for whatever reason, be it unreplaced losses, budgets, or a safety margin to account for future losses and accidents. The Block III program was also supposed to manufacture 56 new-build helicopters as a separate program, but the FY 2014 budget throws the “AB3B” program into doubt. The new-build program may end at just 8-10 helicopters.

AB3 Program: Budgets & Timeline

Excel
download

The US Army aims to upgrade all of the current Block I and II Apaches, their 68 wartime loss replacements, and the additional AH-64 Extended Block II/+ helicopters, to Block III (AH-64E) status by 2020.

The original plan involved a second re-manufacture program at around $16 million per helicopter. That isn’t cheap, but it’s much cheaper than a new-build AH-64E’s price tag of $40 million or so. The Army still needed new-build production of 56 helicopters, however, in order to reach the program goal of 690. Finally, war replacement helicopters bought after FY 2012 will be new-build AH-64E Block IIIs, such as the 2 WRA helicopters in the FY 2013 budget.

According to Boeing, Low-Rate Initial production involves 2 lots, and totals 51 helicopters. LRIP Lot 1 was for 8 helicopters. LRIP Lot 2 was divided up into 3 tranches of 16, 19, and 8 helicopters. Full Rate Production is set to begin in 2014, on the basis of an order expected in FY 2013.

International AH-64E sales are expected to be a combination of re-manufacture and new-build orders, depending on whether the countries in question already field AH-64s, and how large they want their fleet to be. To date, Taiwan is buying 30 new-build Block IIIs, and South Korea intends to buy 36 new-build AH-64Es. Formal DSCA requests have been made for up to 183 more by India (22 new), Indonesia (8 new), Qatar (24 new), Saudi Arabia (70, most new) and the UAE (60 with 30 new).

The AH-64E Apache Guardian

(click for video)

The AH-64E Apache Guardian incorporates 26 new technologies designed to enhance the aircraft’s capabilities.

Flight performance: One set of advances are tied to helicopter’s flight performance. They include enhanced -701D engines with improved digital electronic control (DEC); upgraded drive systems including a split-torque face gear transmission, which increases power throughput by more than 20% (to 3,400 shp) without taking up more room; and a new composite rotor blade. The new composite rotor blades, which successfully completed flight testing in May 2004, work with the improved engines to increase the Apache’s cruise speed, climb rate and payload. Pilots in pre-training have noticed the additional power very quickly.

Overall, the front-line payoff is a higher hover ceiling altitude, at greater gross weight, on a 95F-degree day. That’s very useful in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. The new avionics will also help, by allowing the new Block III helicopters to fly in clouds and inclement weather that would have grounded earlier models.

Sensor performance: Block III upgrades are also designed to extend the Apache’s sensor range in all domains, and may be paired with new extended range weapons like the Joint Common Missile.

The mast-mounted radome that defines the current Apache AH-64D Longbow houses the AN/APG-78 Longbow fire control radar. Its millimeter-wave sensing improves performance under poor visibility conditions, and is less sensitive to ground clutter. The short wavelength also allows a very narrow beam-width, which is more resistant to countermeasures as it’s trying to guide the helicopter’s missiles to their targets. Block III will extend that radar’s range, or give commanders the option of trading it for an Unmanned Aerial Systems Tactical Common Data Link Assembly (UTA) that’s mounted in the same place on the mast.

UAV Synergy: The UTA will provide advanced “Level IV MUM” control of UAVs’ flight, payloads, and even laser designators from inside the helicopter, while streaming their sensor feeds back to the Apache’s displays. That level of control is causing a rewrite of existing tactics, techniques and procedures. U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command capability manager Col. John Lynch offers one example of what can be done when UAV sensor and flight control is added to the Level 2 MUM capabilities on present platforms like the OH-58D:

“For example, with the Block III Apache you might have a UAS that’s overhead looking down into urban canyons; with Manned-Unmanned Teaming you have the ability to designate targets and you can see what is in the area where you are going to operate.”

That would have been highly relevant to operations in Iraq, before the USA’s destruction of Iranian intelligence networks in that country neutralized the shoulder-fired missile threat.

Electronics & displays: Behind those sensors, AH-64D Block IIIs will add open systems architecture electronics to create more standardization and “switchability,” embedded diagnostic sensors to improve maintenance, extended range sensing, wideband network communications for high-bandwidth networking, and high capacity data fusion computers to merge off- and on-board sensor imagery into a single shared picture of the battlefield.

Other electronic systems will be added over time, and will take advantage of the new electronics architecture. A new and improved IHADSS helmet display is one example. The prototype Ground Fire Acquisition System, (GFAS) is another, and will soon undergo a “user evaluation” in theater. GFAS cameras and infrared sensors detect the muzzle flash from ground fire, classify the firing weapon, and move the information through an Aircraft Gateway Processor into the cockpit. Pilots immediately see the enemy icon on their display screen, integrated with Blue Force Tracking maps. GFAS is expected to find its way into the entire US Apache fleet, but the Block III’s open architecture electronics and convenient rebuild status will make it an attractive destination for early installs.

Upgraded versions of the AN/ARC-231 Skyfire system will form the core of its radio capability. SATCOM (Satellite Communications) and Link-16 will supplement those capabilities, and improve the helicopter’s ability to receive or share data. New AMF JTRS radios will not become part of the AB3 communications system, though the Skyfire system will be supplemented at some point by undetermined technologies.

Changes in Production Lots 4-6 will include better embedded diagnostics, APG-78 Longbow radar improvements to add range and over-water capability; and Link-16 to share the same view of enemy and friendly units with participating fighters, ships, air defense systems, etc. A Cognitive Decision Aiding System (CDAS), is a cumbersome name, for a system designed “to help the pilot and the crew with some of those tasks that tend to get a little cumbersome at times.”

Contracts and Key Events

Unless otherwise noted, the Army Aviation and Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL manages these contracts. Note that Longbow LLC is a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman.

Refurb, Step 1
(click to view full)

May 8/13: Saudi. Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives a $26.1 million firm-fixed-price, foreign military sales (FMS) contract modification covering AH-64E training and support in Saudi Arabia.

The Pentagon says that the cumulative total face value of this contract is now $216.2 million, which almost exactly matches the announced $216.5 million total of all contracts with this designation – many of which were unattributed (W58RGZ-12-C-0089, PO 0007). These contracts have now been assigned to Saudi Arabia, and it seems that Saudi AH-64E purchases began in May 2012.

April 24/13: Taiwan. A $19.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, as part of Taiwan’s order for AH-64E helicopters and related support. The Pentagon says that this order brings the total cumulative face value of this contract to $624.4 million, of the maximum $2.532 billion noted in the October 2008 DSCA request.

Oddly, the Pentagon’s notice cites FY 2009 procurement contract funds as the source; presumably, they’re referencing Taiwan’s original order funding. The US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL acts as Taiwan’s FMS agent (W58RGZ-09-C-0147, PO 0022).

April 12/13: Rotors. Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives a $36.6 firm-fixed-price contract modification, buying composite main rotor blades and associated support equipment for the Block III configuration. The performance enhancing composite blades are part of the AH-64E’s efficiency changes. The award uses FY 2012 procurement contract funds (W58RGZ-10-G-0006, 0013).

March 15/13: Support. Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives a $7.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising an option for AH-64E contractor logistics support. Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/14. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0161).

March 5/13: SDD. Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives a $41.1 million cost-plus-fixed-fee modification that adds to the AH-64 Apache Block III’s SDD contract.

Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/14. The original bid was solicited through the Internet, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-05-C-0001).

Jan 17/13: DOT&E testing. The Pentagon releases the FY 2012 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The AH-64E is included, and the news is almost all good. It’s operationally effective, and better than its predecessors. It’s also operationally suitable, surpassing reliability thresholds with statistical confidence and meeting all current maintainability requirements. Survivability is at least as good as the AH-64D, and increased power margins also do their bit to improve flight safety.

Now, the lone piece of bad news: The AH-64E is vulnerable to computer network attack. An Army threat computer network operations team conducted limited penetration testing against the Blue Force Tracker, the Aviation Mission Planning System, and aircraft maintenance ports. Threat team activities were limited to computer network scanning (passive and active) while the AB3 aircraft were on the ground, but they were successful in gaining access to AB3 systems.

Jan 9/13: Lot 4-6 Enhancements. US Army Apache program manager Col. Jeff Hager talks to Flight International about the AH-64E.

Boeing has delivered 28 of 51 low-rate initial production AH-64Es so far, and will start full-rate production in 2013. Changes in Production Lots 4-6 will include better embedded diagnostics, APG-78 Longbow radar improvements to add range and over-water capability; and Link-16 to share the same view of enemy and friendly units with participating fighters, ships, air defense systems, etc. A Cognitive Decision Aiding System (CDAS), is a cumbersome name, for a system designed “to help the pilot and the crew with some of those tasks that tend to get a little cumbersome at times.” Flight International.

Jan 3/13: Taiwan? Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives a $71 million firm-fixed-price contract modification “to procure Apache AH-64D helicopters in support of Foreign Military Sales.” We asked for further details to clarify which customer, but neither Boeing nor the US military will provide those any longer, except through Freedom of Information Act requests. The contract number does match Taiwan’s 30-helicopter order, and the USA seems to be using a different contract number for them, but that conclusion isn’t 100% certain.

Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/17. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0147).

Jan 3/13: Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives a $39.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification. Boeing tells us that this is additional advance procurement funding for the US Army.

Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-12-C-0055).

Jan 3/13: Saudi? Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives an $18.4 million firm-fixed-price contract modification “to procure Apache Block III Aircraft in support of Foreign Military Sales.” We asked for further details to clarify which customer, but neither Boeing nor the US military will provide those any longer, except through Freedom of Information Act requests. AH-64 Foreign Military Sales seem to have different contracts for each country, however, and a subsequent announcement that pegs Saudi Arabia as the customer also offers totals that match the totals for this contract number.

Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ with an estimated completion date of April 30/13. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-12-C-0089).

Nov 1/12: Taiwan? Boeing receives a $66.1 million firm-fixed-price contract modification “to procure Apache Block III aircraft and related support.” We asked about this contract, which turns out to be a Foreign Military Sale order, even though it wasn’t announced as such. Neither Boeing nor the US military will provide those any longer, except through Freedom of Information Act requests. The contract number does match Taiwan’s 30-helicopter order, and the USA seems to be using a different contract number for them, but that conclusion isn’t 100% certain.

Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/17. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0147).

Oct 2/12: ? Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives a $69.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for “Apache Block III aircraft.” Boeing could not provide additional details by the time of publication.

Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ with an estimated completion date of Feb 28/13. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-12-C-0055).

KAI’s new fuselage
(click to view full)

Sept 21/12: Indonesia. The US DSCA announces [PDF] Indonesia’s official request for AH-64D Block III Apache helicopters, ancillary equipment, and weapons. The DSCA says that: “Indonesia will use these APACHE helicopters to defend its borders, conduct counterterrorism and counter-piracy operations, and control the free flow of shipping through the Strait of Malacca.”

The proposed cost is very, very high – up to $1.42 billion for 8 new-build helicopters plus initial support, or about $177.5 million for each operational, fully-equipped helicopter. By comparison, India’s similar DSCA request involved up to $1.4 billion for 22 machines and equipment. The request is somewhat controversial in Indonesia, where the chairman of the House of Representatives Commission overseeing defense and foreign affairs has said that heavy-lift CH-47 Chinook helicopters would be far more helpful. He isn’t against the Apaches per se, just believes that Chinooks would make a bigger difference to one of the military’s main roles, which is distributing relief supplies after natural disasters. He’s right, but that isn’t what they asked for; instead, it’s:

• 8 AH-64D Apache Longbow Block III attack helicopters
  
• 19 T-700-GE-701D Engines (16 installed and 3 spares)
  
• 9 “Arrowhead” MTADS/PNVS night vision and targeting turrets
  
• 24 Integrated Helmet and Display Sight Systems (IHDSS-21), which allow pilots to target missiles by moving their gaze.
  
• 4 AN/APG-78 Longbow Fire Control Radars (FCR) with Radar Electronics Units
  
• 4 AN/APR-48A Radar Frequency Interferometers
  
• 10 AAR-57v3/5 Common Missile Warning Systems (CMWS), with a 5th Sensor and the Improved Countermeasure Dispenser
  
• 10 AN/AVR-2B Laser Detecting Sets
  
• 10 AN/APR-39Av4 Radar Signal Detecting Sets
  
• Identification Friend or Foe transponders
  
• 32 M299A1 Hellfire Missile Launchers
  
• 140 Hellfire AGM-114R3 “universal warhead” missiles
  
• M230 30mm guns and ammunition
  
• Plus helicopter transportation to Indonesia, communication equipment, tools and test equipment, training devices, simulators, generators, associated wheeled vehicles, spare and repair parts, support equipment, personnel training and training equipment, and US government and contractor support services.

Many of the items above are produced by sub-contractors like ATK, BAE, Northrop Grumman, et. al., but the prime contractors will be:

• Boeing in Mesa, AZ (Helicopter)
  
• Lockheed Martin Corporation in Orlando, FL (Hellfire missiles & launchers)
  
• General Electric Company in Cincinnati, OH (Engines)
  
• Lockheed Martin Millimeter Technology in Owego, NY (Longbow radars)
  
• Longbow Limited Liability Corporation in Orlando, Florida (Longbow radars)

Implementation of this proposed sale may require 5 U.S. contractor representatives and 3 U.S. Government representatives in country, full-time, for equipment checkout, fielding, and technical support.

Indonesia request: 8

Sept 6/12: Support. Longbow LLC in Orlando, FL receives a $39 million firm-fixed-price contract to support the helicopter’s Radar Electronic Unit and Unmanned Aerial System Tactical Common Data Link Assembly.

Work will be performed in Orlando, FL until Aug 31/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by US Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-12-C-0049).

Aug 28/12: Support. Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives a $17.7 million firm-fixed-price contract “for the procurement of Apache Block III aircraft and related support.”

Work will be performed in Mesa, with an estimated completion date of Dec 31/15. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-12-C-0113).

Aug 21/12: India. The Times of India quotes a Ministry of defence official, who says that:

“It’s just a matter of time before the contract is inked for the Apaches after final commercial negotiations. Most of the hurdles have been cleared.”

It’s hard to tell whether that means anything. In India, “just a matter of time” can easily be measured in years. Meanwhile, Boeing and Russia will be competing for another Indian contract, pitting Boeing’s CH-47F heavy-lift helicopter against the even larger Mi-26.

July 13/12: Support. An $84.6 million firm-fixed-price contract covers production and support services for the Apache Block III aircraft. Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ with an estimated completion date of Jan 31/13. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-12-C-0055).

July 12/12: Sub-contractors. Boeing announces that they’ve received the first 10 new Block III fuselages from long-time supplier Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI). This milestone paves the way for delivery of the 1st new-build Apache Block III in 2013.

Boeing is a huge customer for KAI, who supplies parts for commercial jets, F-15s, A-10 wings, etc. KAI have been delivering AH-64 fuselages for over a decade from their facility in Sacheon, South Korea, and the Republic of Korea has expressed some interest in buying new AH-64D Block III helicopters of their own (vid. Sept 24/08 entry).

May 29/12: Taiwan. Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives a $97.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification “of an existing contract to procure Block III Apache AH-64D attack helicopters in support of Foreign Military Sales.” Which means Taiwan. Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ, with an estimated completion date of Dec 30/17. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by the U.S. Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL (W58RGZ-09-C-0147).

The contract number does match Taiwan’s 30-helicopter order, and the USA seems to be using a different contract number for them, but that conclusion isn’t 100% certain. If it is Taiwan, it brings total ROC Apache Block III contracts to $624.5 million so far, of the maximum $2.532 billion noted in the October 2008 DSCA request. If air-launched Stinger missiles are included, on the grounds that they were part of Taiwan’s request, the total so far rises to $683.8 million.

March 16/12: RDT&E. Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives a $187 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract, to fund Apache Block III development, integration and testing. Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ, with an estimated completion date of July 31/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-05-C-0001).

Jan 17/12: DOT&E testing. The Pentagon releases the FY 2011 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). Most performance levels looked good as of Sept 30/11, after 1,587 developmental flight test hours, and the new helicopter got good marks for supportability, but formal IOT&E is scheduled for April 2012.

The helicopter meets all thresholds, except for 99% performance in Hover Out of Ground Effect. The new radar met or exceeded 37/44 specification thresholds, and even for the other 7, performance was at or above the existing AH-64D radar. Remaining improvement are mostly focused on 3 key sensors: the IHADSS helmet-mounted display, the MTADS “Arrowhead” sensor turret, and UAV interoperability:

“…the program redesigned the IHADSS helmet to improve its fit and functionality, and has made software corrections to make it easier to adjust radio squelch, provide feedback to the pilot while changing radio frequencies, simplify UAS linkup procedures, and achieve compliance with interoperability standard… M-TADS video vibrates excessively during certain flight regimes. Subsequent testing revealed that the cause of the vibration was the natural frequency of the TADS Electronics Display and Control overlays with the main rotor frequency. The Army is exploring options to correct the problem.”

January 2012: India. India Strategic quotes Raytheon’s Business Development Manager for missile systems Brad Barnard, who says that Raytheon’s FIM-92F Block 1 Stinger ATAS helicopter-mounter anti-aircraft missiles could also be made available for other Indian helicopters, beyond the requested AH-64D Block III buy (vid. Oct 25/11, Dec 27/10).

Missile candidates would include India’s HAL Dhruv helicopters, and HAL’s LCH scout and light attack helicopter.

UTA: UAV mast-er
(click to view full)

Dec 30/11: Mast sensors for Taiwan & US. Longbow Limited Liability Corp. in Orlando, FL receives an announced $64.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, but Longbow LLC pegs its actual value at $181 million, with options to extend performance past 2015, to 2017.

It’s said to include 15 Longbow Block III mast-mounted Fire Control Radar assemblies for Taiwan’s AH-64Ds, marking the Block III version’s 1st export order.

For the US Army, the order includes 14 Block III Radar Electronics Units, which are smaller than their predecessors, and offer lower weight, maintenance and power requirements. The Army is also buying 14 Unmanned Aerial System Tactical Common Data Link Assembly (UTA) systems and spares, which provide a 2-way, high-bandwidth data link that lets the helicopter crew control nearby UAV flight paths, sensors and lasers at long ranges, while receiving high-quality imagery from the UAVs on the helicopters’ own displays.

Work will be performed in Orlando, FL, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/15. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received by US Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL manages the contract, including its work as Taiwan’s FMS agent (W58RGZ-10-C-0005). Lockheed Martin | Northrop Grumman.

Dec 30/11: Training. The US Army discusses AH-64D Block III improvements, as the 1st Attack Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Aviation Regiment, Combat Aviation Brigade, 1st Infantry Division prepares to be the 1st unit in the Army to field a force with only AH-64D Block III machines.

The differences are extensive enough that existing 1-1 pilots are getting a 3-week course at Boeing’s Mesa, AZ facility, including 28 hours of academics, 24 hours in the new simulator, and 8.5 hours flying in the Block III helicopter. Maintenance test pilots get an additional 22 hours of academics and 3 additional hours in the aircraft.

Dec 7/11: Taiwan. Boeing in Mesa, AZ received a $141.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for “services in support of 30 Apache AH-64D attack helicopters for Taiwan.”

Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ, with an estimated completion date of Dec 30/17. One bid was solicited, with one bid received by the U.S. Army Contracting Command in Redstone Arsenal, AL, who is acting as Taiwan’s agent (W58RGZ-09-C-0147).

Dec 7/11: Boeing in Mesa, AZ receives a $7.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for “logistics support services for the AH-64D Apache low rate initial production.” DID is checking, but believes that only Block III is back at the LRIP phase.

Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ, with an estimated completion date of Feb 28/14. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0161).

Oct 25/11: Alone in India. Reports surface that Russia’s Mi-28N Night Hunter has lost the competition for India’s proposed buy of 22 attack helicopters (vid. Dec 27/10 entry). Unnamed sources say that it fell short in 20 technical areas, and that the AH-64D displayed better maneuverability, multi-role capability, and capacity to accept upgrades.

That will be bad news for MBDA & Diehl, as well; their new PARS 3/TRIGAT LR anti-tank missile was reportedly going to be the Mi-28N’s counterpart to Lockheed Martin’s AGM-114 Hellfire missile family on the Apache. The question now is whether the Indian military’s recommendation will be accepted and approved, then turned into a contract. That often takes a long time in India. Economic Times of India | Russia’s Pravda | RIA Novosti | Aviation Week | Monsters & Critics | The Hindu re: PARS 3.

AH-64Ds, Afghanistan
(click to view full)

Aug 30/11: LRIP-1. A $16 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy support for AH-64D Apache Block III Low Rate Initial Production, Lot 1A and 1B. Work will be performed in Mesa, AZ, with an estimated completion date of Feb 28/14. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W58RGZ-09-C-0161).

June 10/11: Taiwan deal? Reports surface that Taiwan has signed a contract for 30 AH-64D Apache Longbow Block III attack helicopters under its Sky Eagle program, making it the type’s 1st export customer. US Army AH-64 project manager Col. Shane Openshaw is quoted as the source for the news, and says that Taiwan’s first new-build helicopter will enter the production line in October 2011 as the very 1st new-build Block III, with deliveries expected in 2012-2013. The signing is consistent with April 2011 reports, but no branch of the US government, or Boeing, has made any public announcement yet; and there have been no media reports in Taiwan. On the other hand, subsequent entries strongly suggest a contract.

Per earlier contracts & requests, Taiwanese AH-64s will include Hellfire Longbow fire-and-forget light strike missiles and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles among its weapon options. In exercises, helicopters have proven to be very challenging opponents for fixed-wing aircraft, and the growing aerial imbalance over the China Strait makes some form of aerial engagement capability a necessity for any Taiwanese attack helicopter. The Dec 3/08 DSCA entry set a maximum estimated price of $2.532 billion for 30 helicopters, all associated equipment and initial support, and requested stocks of Stinger and Hellfire Longbow missiles.

Boeing’ VP attack helicopter programs, David Koopersmith, told Shephard’s Rotorhub that the first 3 remanufactured Block IIIs were on the line, and they still expect to deliver the 1st production remanufactured Block III helicopter to the US Army in October 2011. Once the remaining AH-64D Block II line converts over, Koopersmith believes that Boeing could deliver 7-8 Block III helicopters per month on the 2 lines at Mesa, AZ. The Rotorhub report expects the US Army to eventually request 786 AH-64D Block IIIs, 96 above the current program plan of 690. Flight International | Rotorhub | Asian Skies blog.

April 12/11: Taiwan. Defense News reports that representatives from the U.S. government and Boeing will arrive in Taipei in May 2011, to wrap up the AH-64 Block III Foreign Military Sale deal. Author Wendell Minnick.

March 16/11: UTA. Longbow, LLC in Orlando, FL received a $10 million firm-fixed-price contract for radar electronics units and unmanned aerial system tactical common data link assembly units, in support of the Apache Block III helicopter fire control radar. This equipment set helps the helicopter work with unmanned drones. The Block III’s desired “Level IV” control means the Apache pilots see what the UAV sees, and can control a UAV to do anything except launch itself, or land itself. Boeing has equipped the Block IIIs with basic systems for UAV control in anticipation of the day when the battlefield procedures and software, are deemed ready.

Work will be performed in Orlando, Fla., with an estimated completion date of Sept. 30, 2015. One bid was solicited with one bid received. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Ala., is the contracting activity (W58RGZ-10-C-0005).

Block-III testing
(click to view full)

Jan 13/10: Sub-contractors. Boeing announces that Science Engineering Services Inc. (SES) is joining its Block II industry team. SES will receive U.S. Army Apache helicopters at the SES West Aviation and Integration Facility near Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, AL. They will be disassembled, inspected and repaired as necessary, then components and airframes will be shipped to Boeing in Mesa, AZ, for integration into the AH-64D Apache Block III.

The program will create approximately 70 new positions for aviation and avionics mechanics, structural installers, and aviation quality inspectors within SES.

Nov 23/09: Testing Boeing completes the 1st flight of its AH-64D Apache Block III program structures test aircraft in Mesa, AZ. The tests demonstrate flight characteristics and handling maneuvers, and test technologies including the composite main rotor blade, composite horizontal stabilator, and -701D engines with enhanced digital electronic control. The aircraft also features a split-torque face gear transmission that increases power throughput by more than 20%, without taking up more room.

The Army and Boeing continue to work toward an anticipated US Department of Defense Milestone C decision in April 2010, which would begin production. Boeing release.

June 2008: Testing. Boeing completes the first flight of the AH-64D Apache Block III program’s avionics test helicopter ahead of schedule, at the Yuma Proving Ground, AZ. Source.

Dec 3/08: Sub-contractors. Presagis, a Canadian firm which specializes in providing commercial-off-the shelf (COTS) modeling, simulation and embedded display graphics software, announced that Boeing has selected their Lyra image generator to support the development of the next-generation Apache helicopter simulator. Boeing will use Lyra in its new Block III Apache Engineering Development Simulator (EDS), the virtual simulation of the Apache weapon system. Ottawa Citizen – Defence Watch.

Sept 14/08: South Korea. South Korea’s Yonhap News reports that the USA has offered to sell 36 used Apache attack helicopters to South Korea at less than 60% of the out-of-factory price, with upgrades to Block III status plus include a new frame and engines, resetting their life span to 10,000 flight hours.

The deal, if signed, is expected to be worth around $811 million. Its size is causing hesitation in Korea, which needs to replace its aging fleet of 500MD Defender helicopters and has backed off of its previous plans for an indigenous attack helicopter program. Politics is an uncertain game, and dates are rarely dependable. A government decision was expected by the end of 2008, but remained unmade as 2012 began. Seoul Times article | DID coverage: “US Army Apaches for Auction?”

April 30/08: Award. A team comprised of The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA], the U.S. Army’s Aviation Applied Technology Directorate, AMRDEC Aviation Systems Integration Facility, Harris Corp. and Rockwell Collins receive the American Helicopter Society’s (AHS) 2008 Howard Hughes Award during the AHS International Annual Forum in Montreal, Canada. The AH-64D Block III’s progress figures prominently in that award.

One hopes that the award’s annual winners will have better luck with aircraft development than Howard Hughes. Boeing release.

Jan 17/08: Longbow LLC in Orlando FL received a $15.4 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for Apache Block III radar electronics unit and an unmanned aerial vehicle tactical common data link assembly. The latter item would allow the helicopter’s pilots to share data with UAVs, and could allow full control depending on the technologies used.

Work will be performed in Baltimore, MD and Orlando, FL and is expected to be complete by June 30/09. One bid was solicited on Jan 20/06, and 1 bid was received (W58RGZ-05-C-0239).

AH-64D Longbow
(click to view full)

July 14/06: Development. Boeing and U.S. Army officials sign a $619.3 million development contract for Block III upgrades to the current and future Apache fleet, via a virtual signing ceremony in Washington, DC; Huntsville, AL; and Mesa, AZ.

Those upgrades are described earlier in the article.Boeing release

Block III SDD contract

Jan 25/06: Longbow LLC in Orlando, FL received a $76 million increment as part of a $100 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for Apache Block III Radar Electronics Units.

Work will be performed in Baltimore, MD (50%), and Orlando, FL (50%), and is expected to be complete by Dec 30/08. This was a sole source contract initiated on Jan 11/06 (W58RGZ-05-C-0239).

July 13/05: Longbow LLC in Orlando, FL receives a $15 million increment as part of a $17.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for the Apache Fire Control Radar Electronics Unit.

Work will be performed in Baltimore, MD (50%), and Orlando, FL (50%), and is expected to be complete by Dec 15/05. This was a sole source contract initiated on July 22/04 (W58RGZ-05-C-0239).

Additional Readings

• DID – Boeing Remanufactures AH-64A Apaches to AH-64D Block II. Most, if not all, will eventually become Block IIIs.

• DID – American AH-64D Apache: War Replacement Contracts. These will be new-build Block IIs.

• Aviation Week DTI (Oct 26/12) – US Army Prepares for Full-Rate AH-64E Production

• Aviation Week (June 13/07) – Army and Navy Want to Control UAVs From Choppers

• Inside Defense: Inside the Army (Oct 30/06) – Army Speeds Fielding Of Apache Block III Technologies To Current Fleet. “The Army is working to speed the development of six key technologies slated to be fielded under the Apache Longbow Block III modernization program in an effort to provide the enhanced capabilities to today’s warfighters, according to Col. Derek Paquette, Apache project manager.”

• edefense Online (Oct 25/05) – “New Tactics for Apache“

The US military calls them Landing Craft, Air Cushion (LCAC). They’re high-speed, fully amphibious hovercraft capable of carrying a 60-ton payload (75 tons in overload) over water and land at speeds in excess of 40 knots and a nominal range of up to 200 nautical miles. Carrying equipment, troops, and/or supplies, the LCAC launches from inside the well deck of an amphibious warship, then travels the waves at high speed, runs right through the surf zone near the beach, and stops at a suitable place on land. Its cargo walks or rolls off. The LCAC returns to the surf to pick up more. Rinse. Agitate. Repeat.

LCAC, ashore
(click to view full)

A total of 91 LCACs were built between 1984-2001, and their design itself dates back to the 1970s. They require regular maintenance, refurbishment, upgrades, and even life extension programs to keep them operational into the future. This free-to-view Spotlight article will covers the program from 2005 forward, tracking contracts and key events.

The LCAC Program and its SLEPpers

LCAC into LPD-9
(click to enlarge)

Many militaries rely on slower and less expensive LCM (Landing Craft, Mechanized) boats, LCUs, and related small landing craft. By using hovercraft, however, the US military gives itself additional options for traversing difficult terrain like marshes, broadens its potential landing zones, and buys fast ferry services that can build up a landing zone more quickly. These same traits make LCACs extremely well-suited to humanitarian missions, as shown after the South Asian tsunami and in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

Contracts for 91 LCACs were approved through FY 1997, with 91 craft delivered to the Fleet by the end of 2000. Of the LCACs in service, the US military’s EXWAR.ORG reports that 7 have reportedly been disassembled for FGE, 10 are in deep Reduced Operation Status (ROS), 2 are held for R&D, and 36 are in use on each coast.

LCAC SLEP extends the expected service life of the LCAC by 50%, from 20 years to 30 years. The program began in late 2000, and includes two sub-programs:

The “C4N” (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Navigation) sub-program replaces the LN-66 radars with modern, high-power P-80 radar systems. The SLEP will also include open-architecture electronics relying on modern commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment, which allows much easier incorporation of precision navigation systems, new communications systems, et. al. LED screens and LED keyboards use less power than the old Cathode Ray Tubes and the bulb-type indicators, and generate less heat. When coupled with the air-conditioning that has been added to the LCAC command modules, the hovercraft’s crew and electronics are given a better environment.

Other improvements are more “hardware-oriented,” and include:

• Engine upgrades to ETF-40B configuration that will provide additional power and lift (especially in environments over 100 degrees), reduced fuel consumption, reduced maintenance needs, and reduced lift footprint.

• Replacement of the LCACs’ “buoyancy box” to solve corrosion problems, incorporate hull improvements, and extend their fatigue-limits.

• A new deep hovercraft skirt to reduce drag, increase the performance envelope over water and land, and reduce maintenance requirements.

LCAC-related Contracts, 2005 – Present

Landed.
(click to view full)

April 1/13: Engines. Vericor Power Systems LLC in Alpharetta, GA receives a $12.1 million contract modification for the manufacture, testing and delivery of 8 LCAC ETF40B Marine gas turbine engines as well as the repair/refurbishment of 8 output group modules for LCAC engines. Each LCAC uses 4 turbines, so this will provide for another 2 overhauled LCACs. That makes 8 hovercraft worth since the February 2012 award that specified 8 SLEPped LCACs. Guess funds are a bit tight with everything going on in Washington.

Work will be performed in Alpharetta, GA (90%), and Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada (10%), and is expected to be completed by February 2014. All funds are committed immediately. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contracts (N00024-12-C-4154).

April 1/13: Engines. Vericor Power Systems LLC in Alpharetta, GA receives a $12.1 million contract modification for the manufacture, testing and delivery of 8 LCAC ETF40B Marine gas turbine engines as well as the repair/refurbishment of 8 output group modules for LCAC engines. Each LCAC uses 4 turbines, so this will provide for 2 overhauled LCACs.

Work will be performed in Alpharetta, GA (90%), and Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada (10%), and is expected to be completed by February 2014. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 Shipbuilding and Conversion budgets. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contracts (N00024-12-C-4154).

May 7/12: Engines. Vericor Power Systems, LLC in Alpharetta, GA receives a $23.6 million firm-fixed-price contract for the manufacture, testing, and delivery of 16 ETF40B marine gas turbine engines in support of the LCAC SLEP program, and the repair/refurbishment of 16 output group modules for LCAC engines. That would cover 4 LCACs.

This contract includes options, which could bring its cumulative value to $60.7 million. Work will be performed in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, and is expected to complete by June 2013 (N00024-12-C-4154).

Feb 27/12: +8 SLEP. L-3 Unidyne, Inc. in Norfolk, VA receives a pair of contracts worth $68.2 million, to SLEP a total of 8 LCACs – 4 on each coast. This brings the number of announced LCAC SLEP orders to 30 hovercraft between April 2005 and the present.

Contract #1 is a $31.4 million modification to SLEP 4 of Assault Craft Unit Four’s hovercraft in Virginia Beach, VA, and is expected to complete by February 2014 (N00024-12-C-2402).

Contract #2 a $26.8 million modification to SLEP 4 of Assault Craft Unit Five’s hovercraft in Camp Pendleton, CA, and is expected to be completed by February 2014 (N00024-12-C-2403).

Sept 26/11: Support. GE Aviation Systems, LLC’s Dowty Propellers in Sterling, VA receives a not-to-exceed $6.7 million unfinalized contractual action against an existing basic ordering agreement to repair marine propellers used aboard LCAC vessels. Work will be performed in Sterling VA (85%), and in the United Kingdom (15%), and is expected to be complete by February 2014.

One company was solicited for the non-competitive requirement, and 1 offer was received. $3.35 million is committed. NAVSUP Weapons System Support in Mechanicsburg, PA manages the contract (N00104-11-G-A004).

Jan 20/11: Engines. Vericor Power Systems LLC announces a firm fixed-price contract for up to 34 of its ETF40B marine gas turbine engines, and overhaul of related hardware for the US Navy’s FY 2010/2011 LCAC Service Life Extension Program (SLEP). This would cover 8 LCACs, plus 2 spares.

The firm adds that they will be offering their TF60B for the US Navy’s new Ship-to-Shore Connector LCAC replacement program. The new engine is based on the TF40/ETF40B, but adds improvements. For instance, its power-producer is mounted to a heavy duty marine inlet module on the craft, which aims to eliminate major alignment and maintenance problems on the LCAC. The TF60B engine test schedule continues, with performance testing slated for spring 2011 at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD.

Nov 15/10: Engines. Vericor Power Systems, LLC in Alpharetta, GA receives a $16.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for 12 of the LCAC’s ETF40B marine gas turbine engines. Work will be performed in Winnipeg, Canada, and is expected to be complete by July 2012. This contract was not competitively procured by US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-11-C-4113).

Nov 4/10: Support. L-3 Services, Inc.’s Unidyne Division in Norfolk, VA wins a $473,469 contract for LCAC 55 Continuous Maintenance Availability (CMAV), including miscellaneous electrical, mechanical, and structural repairs. Work will be performed at a government facility.

It is a good illustration of the fact that the LCAC fleet is also maintained and overhauled using a number of smaller contracts which do not reach DefenseLINK’s $5 million announcement threshold. An Oct 27/10 solicitation for LCAC 51 is similar, but is a small-business set aside. US FedBizOpps.

LCAC in Haiti, 2009
(click to view full)

Sept 29/10: +3 SLEP. L-3 Services, Inc.’s Unidyne Division in Norfolk, VA wins a $14.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for service life extension program on LCACs 63, 72 and 74. This contract includes provisions for over and above work, which could bring its cumulative value to $17.5 million. Work will be performed in Camp Pendleton, CA, and is expected to be complete by August 2012. This contract was competitively procured via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with 5 proposals solicited and 2 offers received. The Southwest Regional Maintenance Center in San Diego, CA manages this contract (N55236-10-C-0012).

Aug 11/09: +3 SLEP. Oceaneering International, Inc.’s Marine Services Division in Chesapeake, VA receives a $13.6 million contract modification to extend the service life of 3 LCACs via repair and upgrade of the buoyancy box, gas turbine engine replacement, installation of a new skirt, installation of an integrated C4N equipment package, craft alterations, and repair work.

Work will be performed in Norfolk, VA, and is expected to complete it by August 2012. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington Navy Yard, Washington, DC manages the contract (N00024-09-C-2240).

May 26/09: +3 SLEP. Oceaneering International’s Marine Services Division in Chesapeake, VA won a $14 million firm-fixed-price contract to extend the service life of 3 LCACs via repair and upgrade of the buoyancy box, gas turbine engine replacement, installation of a new skirt, installation of an integrated C4N equipment package, craft alterations, and repair work. This contract includes options which would bring its cumulative value to $38.9 million.

Oceaneering will perform the work in Norfolk, VA and expects to complete it by November 2012. This contract was competitively procured via FedBizOpps.com, with 4 offers received by the Naval Sea Systems Command at the Washington Navy Yard in Washington, DC (N00024-09-C-2240).

April 20/09: Engines. Vericor Power Systems, LLC, in Alpharetta, GA received a $32.1 million firm-fixed-price modification to a previously awarded contract, exercising an option to build, test, and deliver 24 ETF40B marine gas turbine engines for the FY 2009 LCAC SLEP program. That would equip 6 LCACS. Work will be performed in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, and is expected to be complete by August 2010. The US Naval Sea Systems Command (NVSEA) in Washington, DC issued the contract (N00024-08-C-4117).

Oct 2/08: Support. Gryphon Technologies LC in Greenbelt, MD received a $17.2 million cost-plus fixed fee contract on Sept 30/08, for the procurement of Expeditionary Warfare Program and LCAC maintenance, modification, repair, and trial support engineering support services. The contractor will provide all personnel, materials, equipment, services for the engineering, & technical support required to provide logistics and material support for the LCAC Program.

Work will be performed in Panama City, FL, and is expected to be complete by October 2013. Contract funds in the amount of $300,000 expired at the end of FY 2008, on Sept 30th. This contract was competitively procured and advertised via Navy Electronic Commerce On-line and Federal Business Opportunities website, with one offer received by the Naval Surface Warfare Center Panama City Division in Panama City, FL (N61331-08-D-0021).

LCAC & CH-53 exercise
with FS Tonnerre
(click to view full)

Aug 27/08: Engines. Vericor Power Systems, LLC in Alpharetta, GA received a $20.5 million firm-fixed-price contract to build, test, and deliver 16 ETF40B marine gas turbine engines for the FY 2008 LCAC Service Life Extension Program (SLEP), which would cover 4 LCACs. This contract includes options which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $57.8 million.

Work will be performed in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, and is expected to be complete by October 2009. This contract was not competitively procured, but the solicitation was posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website by the Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington Navy Yard, DC (N00024-08-C-4117).

April 2/07: +3 SLEP. L-3 Communications Titan Corporation’s Unidyne Division in Norfolk, VA received a $22.9 million modification to under previously awarded contract to exercise options for preparation and accomplishment of the FY 2007 Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) availabilities of landing craft air cushions (LCAC) 36, LCAC 50, and LCAC 69, at assault craft unit 4.

Work will be performed in Norfolk, VA and is expected to be complete March 2009. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC issued the contract (N00024-06-C-2203).

March 30/07: +3 SLEP. L-3 Communications Titan Corp’s Unidyne Division in Norfolk, VA received a $22.9 million modification to a previously awarded contract, exercising options for preparation and accomplishment of the FY 2007 Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) availabilities of LCAC 36, LCAC 50, and LCAC 69, at assault craft unit 4.

Work will be performed in Norfolk, VA and is expected to be complete in March 2009. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contract (N00024-06-C-2203).

Feb 20/07: Engines. Vericor Power Systems, LLC in Alpharetta, GA received a $29.6 million firm-fixed-price delivery order to previously awarded contract for the manufacture, testing and delivery of 24 ETF40B marine gas turbine engines, which would equip 6 LCACs. This covers LCAC SLEP requirements for FY 2007.

Work will be performed at Standard Aero Energy in Winnipeg, Canada under a 2005 partnership agreement, and is expected to be complete by November 2008. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC issued the contract (N00024-06-D-4107).

Oct 18/06: The LCAC community holds its annual Fleet Support Conference at Camp Pendleton, CA. Assault Craft Units (ACU) 4 and 5, as well as representatives from Washington, D.C., Little Creek, VA, and Boston Planning Yard discussed maintenance and upgrades, mission planning factors and manning issues, including the training pipeline and detailing. Chief Operations Specialist (SW/AW) David L. Lessenberry:

“During this conference, we look at all the major issues with the functions and operation of LCACs… This year we’re talking about funding, man hours and maintenance because we want to extend [the LCAC's] service life. The LCACs have a service life of 20 years, but we can extend that by 10 years with maintenance and upgrades.”

Incoming…
(click to enlarge)

Aug 21/06: +2 SLEP. L-3 Communications Titan Corporation’s Unidyne Division in Norfolk, VA received a $16.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for the SLEP of LCACs #29 and #32. The LCAC provides heavy lift capability to perform amphibious assaults and operational maneuvers from the sea. This contract includes options for SLEPping LCACs # 31, 48, and 33 as well, which would bring the cumulative value of this contract to 5 craft and $40 million if exercised.

Work will be performed at Assault Craft Unit Five in Camp Pendleton, CA and is expected to be complete by August 2008. This contract was competitively procured via the Federal Business Opportunities website with 29 proposals solicited and two offers received. The Southwest Regional Maintenance Center in San Diego, CA issued the contract (N55236-06-C-0001).

Mar 16/06: Engines. Vericor Power Systems, LLC in Alpharetta, GA received a $28.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for the manufacture, testing and delivery of 20 ETF40B marine gas turbine engines and 4 Pack-Up Kit spare engines for the Landing Craft-Air Cushion Service Life Extension Program.

Work will be performed at Standard Aero Energy in Winnipeg, Canada under a 2005 partnership agreement, and is expected to be complete by December 2008. The contract was not competitively procured by the Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-06-D-4107).

Nov 22/05: +3 SLEP. L-3 Communications Titan Unidyne in Norfolk, VA won an $8.8 million firm-fixed-price contract to upgrade landing craft air cushion (LCAC) hovercraft 62, 64, 65, and 76. Work will be performed in Camp Pendleton, CA and is expected to be complete by October 2006. This contract was competitively procured and advertised via the Internet, with two offers received. The Southwest Regional Maintenance Center in San Diego, CA issued the contract (N55236-06-C-0002).

April 14/05: +5 SLEP. Titan Corp.’s Unidyne Group in Norfolk, VA won a $26.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for 5 Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) hovercraft.

Work will be performed in Camp Pendleton, CA (80%) and Norfolk, VA (20%), and is expected to be complete by August 2007. The contact was competitively awarded and advertised via the Navy Electronic Commerce on Line website, with three offers received. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, DC manages the contract.

Additional Readings

• US Navy Fact File – Landing Craft, Air Cushioned – LCAC

• Textron Marine & Land Systems – LCAC

• Global Security – Landing Craft, Air Cushion

• Vericor – TF Series Gas Turbines

Follow-on Ship to Shore Connector

• DID – Ship to Shore Connector: the USN’s New Hovercraft

Other Fast Landing Options

• Naval Technology – Zubr Class (Pomornik) Air Cushioned Landing Craft, Russia. Included as a point of comparison; the Zubr is a significantly larger craft than LCAC.

• Naval Technology – CNIM. Their L-CAT is the French EDA-R catamaran landing craft: 30m long and 12m wide, and can carry a payload of 80t at a cruise speed of 18 kts. EDA-R is a fast catamaran in transit mode, but features a central elevating deck that makes it become a flat-bottomed ship to beach, or enter an amphibious ship’s well deck.

In late June 2009, the USAF awarded Northrop Grumman Defense Mission Systems Inc., of San Diego, CA an urgent requirement contract for its Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) System. Under current plans, Northrop Grumman will help the USAF deploy BACN in up to 4 “E-11″ Bombardier BD-700 Global Express (see also BACN-modified photo) ultra-long-range business jets, and in up to 4 EQ-4B Global Hawk Block 20 UAVs, for sustained deployment through 2015.

BACN is an airborne communications relay that extends communications ranges, bridges between radio frequencies, and “translates” among incompatible communications systems. That may sound trivial, but on a tactical level, it definitely isn’t.

The BACN System

Global Express
(click to view full)

BACN was developed under a Department of Defense Microelectronic Activity contract (#H94003-04-D-0005), as part of the Interim Gateway Program. It provides a high-speed, Internet protocol (IP)-based airborne network infrastructure that that extends communications ranges, bridges between radio frequencies, and “translates” among incompatible communications systems – including both tactical and civil cellular systems. Using BACN, a Special Forces soldier on the ground could use a civil cell phone to speak to a fighter pilot in the cockpit.

BACN supports seamless movement of imagery, video, voice and digital messages, with support for waveforms that include SINCGARS (single-channel ground and airborne radio system), DAMA (demand assigned multiple access), EPLRS (enhanced position location reporting system), SADL (situation awareness data link), Link 16, and IP-based networking connectivity using TTN (tactical targeting network), TCDL (tactical common data link) technology, CLIP (Common Link Integration Processing), and 802.11b. Northrop Grumman’s joint translator/forwarder (JXF), originally developed for US Joint Forces Command, is to accomplish digital-message transformation.

That kind of system can be especially useful in rugged terrain that block line-of-sight communications, in combined civil/military situations, or when different services or even different countries are operating side by side in the field. Afghanistan meets all of those criteria, an so do some aspects of operations in Iraq.

F-22A: Got BACN?
(click to view full)

There are even reports that BACN may be installed in the F-22 Raptor as a communications gateway that would solve some of that platform’s issues; releases concerning the JEFX 08 exercises were vague on this subject, mentioning only BACN’s ability to receive unique F-22 waveforms.

As of 2006, the Northrop Grumman BACN team included:

• Northrop Grumman’s Defense Mission Systems, Space Technology, Integrated Systems and Information Technology sectors
  
• NASA Johnson Space Center in Houston, TX
  
• Rockwell Collins in Cedar Rapids, IA
  
• Raytheon Solipsys in Laurel, MD
  
• L3 Communications in Salt Lake City, UT
  
• Qualcomm Inc. in San Diego, CA
  
• ViaSat Inc. in Carlsbad, CA

Northrop Grumman and teammate Orion Air Group provide 24/7 operations and support services for BACN on the front lines.

At present, BACN is flying on 3 modified E-11A Global Express long-range business jets (1 leased, 2 USAF-owned), and 3 (soon 4) EQ-4B Global Hawk Block 20 UAV variants. Another E-11 plane has been contracted for integration.

Contracts and Key Events

Unless otherwise specified, contracts are issued and managed by the staffs at Hanscom Air Force Base, MA, and performed by Northrop Grumman. Contracts began with the firm’s Defense Mission Systems, Inc. unit in San Diego, CA, then shifted to Northrop Grumman Systems Corp’s Defense Systems Division in Herndon, VA after 2010, following the firm’s move to Washington, DC. Since then, the contractor’s side had shifted back and forth between Herndon VA and what is now Northrop Grumman Space & Mission Systems Corp. in San Diego, CA.

SmartNode on Firebird
(click to view full)

May 7/13: Northrop Grumman Space and Missile Systems Corp. in San Diego, CA receives a $89.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, extending the FY 2009 BACN payload contract that covers deployment support and operation of the fielded systems.

Work will be performed at San Diego, CA, and abroad at locations where currently deployed until June 22/14. $7.5 million in FY 2013 Operations and Maintenance funds are committed immediately by the USAF Life Cycle Management Center/HNAK at Hanscom AFB, MA (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0076).

Nov 1/12: E-11A. A $48.2 million firm-fixed-price contract for E-11A BACN platform maintenance at Kandahar Air Base, Afghanistan. The contract will run until February 2018. Whether the Afghan regime will run that long is another question (FA8726-13-C-0001).

Sept 7/12: EQ-4B #4. Northrop Grumman delivers the USAF’s 4th EQ-4B Global Hawk 4 months ahead of schedule, in a flight from the Palmdale, CA facility to Grand Forks AFB, ND. It’s the 2nd scheduled delivery from the Dec 28/11 entry.

Briefings with appropriate personnel reveal that it may be the 4th EQ-4B delivered, but it’s only the 3rd one flying for the USAF. The Aug 20/11 crash (added below) explains the discrepancy. NGC release, Oct 23/12.

June 2012: EQ-4B #3. Northrop Grumman delivers the USAF’s 3rd EQ-4B Global Hawk ahead of schedule. It’s the 1st scheduled delivery from the Dec 28/11 entry. Source.

June 21/12: All. A $106.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, to extend the deployment and operation of BACN payloads installed in 3 EA-11A jets and 3 E-Q4B Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicles.

Work will run to June 22/13, and will be performed both within the United States, and outside the USA where currently deployed (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0043).

June 21/12: E-11A. A $50.6 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 8 more months of E-11A Platform Maintenance support for the 3 aircraft: tail numbers 9355, 9358, and 9001. Work will be performed at Kandahar Air Field, Afghanistan until Feb 24/13 (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0053).

May 17/12: SmartNode – BACN Lite. Northrop Grumman completes a series of test flights for its SmartNode Pod, which is based on BACN technology but can be carried by smaller aircraft and UAVs. SmartNode can connect to BACN platforms, ground operational centers or other pods to create encrypted, high-bandwidth digital data and voice connectivity. The project is funded by the firm and by a US military customer, and Northrop Grumman used its own Firebird “optionally manned” plane because the designated platform wasn’t immediately available for testing.

The SmartNode Pod is designed to be a part of the Pentagon’s Joint Aerial Layer Network (JALN), which would link ground, space and airborne communications nodes to offer military forces the bandwidth they require. That had been the goal of the $20-25 billion TSAT satellite program, before it was cancelled; JALN represents a much more diverse and incremental approach to the same problem. Discussions with Northrop Grumman indicate that BACN would sit at the top tier of JALN, while SmartNode is a mid-tier solution that won’t do satellite communications, has fewer message translation options, won’t support as many networks, and won’t support many of the classified American networks. On the other hand, it’s a 250 pound payload that can fly on MALE(Medium Altitude Long Endurance) UAVs like the US Army’s MQ-1C Gray Eagle, IAI’s Heron, etc., providing high-bandwidth relay and a useful subset of technical translations at less cost, in more places. NGC | USAF re: JALN.

March 30/12: E-11A. A $26.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price, time-and-material contract modification exercises options for a 7.5 month extension of E-11A serial number 11-9001 services, in support of Overseas Contingency Operations from April 1/12 through Nov 16/12. Should be painted in a nice military grey by now (vid. Nov 18/11), but the USAF hasn’t bought the jet, yet.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (44%) and Yorktown, VA (56%) – (FA8726-09-C-0010, Modification PO 0050).

Feb 23/12: E-11A. A $34.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification adds a 4-month extension for the continued operations support and maintenance of the USAF’s 2 BACN E-11A jets, and operational support and maintenance of the BACN payloads. Work will take place in San Diego, CA, and the extension runs until June 22/12 (FA8726-09-C-0010 PO 0042).

Nov 18/11: E-11A. A $29.5 million firm-fixed-price contract modification. The modification is for a Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Plan (CAMP) Level 8C inspection of Air Force aircraft E-11A, serial number 11-9001, followed by a 5-month extension of the operation and support of the aircraft. It also provides an option to repaint the aircraft to USAF specifications, and for correction of any faults found during CAMP inspection.

This is the same sort of sequence followed for the other 2 leased jets, just before the USAF bought them. One firm was solicited and one firm submitted a proposal to USAF Materiel Command’s Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom AFB, MA (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0038).

Sept 21/11: E-11A. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp.’s Defense Systems Division in Herndon, VA receives a 5-month, $43 million extension to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to operate and maintain the other 2 E-11A Global Express BACN jets, serial numbers 11-9355 and 11-9358. This contract also provides for the operation and maintenance of the BACN payload by Northrop Grumman, and offers an option to re-paint the 2 BD-700 aircraft to USAF specifications (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0035).

July 8/11: E-11A. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp.’s Defense Systems Division in Herndon, VA receives a 4-month, $20.7 million extension to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for operate and maintain E-11A Global Express BACN jet, serial number 1-900. This contract also provides for the operations and maintenance of the BACN payload (FA8726-09-C-0010, PO 0032).

Dec 13/10: E-11A. A $74.6 million option for continued maintenance and support of the payload installed in 2 of 3 modified BD-700 Global Express aircraft leased from March 2011 through October 2011. Money will be committed as needs arise (FA8726-09-C-0010; P00021).

Nov 30/10: All. A $34.1 million contract modification to extend BACN payload maintenance and support in current theaters of war. At this time, $10 million has been committed (FA8726-09-C-0010; P00020).

RQ-4B Block 20
(click to view full)

Sept 22/10: EQ-4B. Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems Sector in San Diego, CA received a $20 million contract modification which will provide replenishment spares relative to the RQ-4B Global Hawk Block 20 BACN joint urgent operational need effort. WR-ALC/GRCKA at Robins Air Force Base, GA manages this contract (FA8528-09-D-0001; PO 0016).

BACN was originally deployed on board a high altitude NASA WB-57 aircraft. Deployment on board the Global Hawk UAV is the next step beyond its current platform, a modified Bombardier Global Express business jet.

March 11/10: Sub-contractors. ViaSat in Carlsbad, CA receives $21.5 million firm-fixed-price contract and delivery order for MIDS-LVT Link 16 terminals, combining purchases for the USA (68%) and Germany (11%); and for Australia (18%) and South Korea (3%) under the Foreign Military Sales program.

Contract funds in the amount of $1.6 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Work will be performed in Carlsbad, CA (30%) and in various other sites worldwide (70%), and is expected to be complete by Feb 28/12. This contract was competitively procured via the Space and Naval Warfare Systems E-commerce Web site, with 2 offers received, based on a synopsis released via the Federal Business Opportunities Web site (N00039-10-D-0032).

ViaSat’s subsequent release says that this new award includes LVT (1) terminal variants for F/A-18, P-3, and E-2D aircraft; and MH-60R/S helicopters, along with terminals for the BACN program and other U.S. Navy applications. The MIDS-LVT Lot 11 order also includes LVT (2) “ground” terminal variants for various U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force and Joint Forces applications, as well as terminals for Germany, Australia, and Korea.

Feb 22/10: All. Northrop Grumman Defense Mission Systems, Inc. in San Diego, CA, was awarded a $77.9 million contract to maintain and support the Battlefield Airborne Communications Node system “in support of overseas contingency operations” through fiscal year 2010. The award is corrected on Feb 25/10 to add an order number, and say that only $58.4 million has been committed (FA8726-09-C-0010, P00008).

Jan 26/10: Recognition. At the Institute for Defense and Government Advancement’s Network Enabled Operations conference in Arlington, VA, BACN receives the 2010 Network Centric Warfare Award for Outstanding Achievement from a Defense Industry Partner. NGC release.

Sept 14/09: All. A $35.5 million contract to provide the rapid fielding and support of the Battlefield Airborne Communications Node System. At this time no money has been obligated; it will be allocated as needs arise (FA8726-09-C-0010, P00003).

Additional Readings

• Northrop Grumman – Battlefield Airborne Communications Node. See also video [Windows Media].

• Northrop Grumman (March 18/10) – Daniel “Fig” Leaf Addresses Irregular Warfare (IW) Conference. Mentions BACN. Lt. Gen. Dan “Fig” Leaf, U.S. Air Force (ret.) is Northrop Grumman Information Systems’ Vice President, Full Spectrum Initiatives.

• Northrop Grumman (May 13/08) – Northrop Grumman’s Battlefield Airborne Communications Node Enables Unprecedented Real-Time Distribution of F-22 Data to Legacy Aircraft

• Northrop Grumman (Aug 8/06) – BACN Sizzles at JEFX; Northrop Grumman Completes Test of Joint Airborne Network System

• Northrop Grumman (July 19/06) – Northrop Grumman Brings BACN to California Disaster-Recovery Exercise

Maritime surveillance and patrol is becoming more and more important, but the USA’s P-3 Orion turboprop fleet is falling apart. The P-7 Long Range Air ASW (Anti-Submarine Warfare) Capable Aircraft program to create an improved P-3 began in 1988, but cost overruns, slow progress, and interest in opening the competition to commercial designs led to the P-7′s cancellation for default in 1990. The successor MMA program was begun in March 2000, and Boeing beat Lockheed’s “Orion 21″ with a P-8 design based on their ubiquitous 737 passenger jet. US Navy squadrons finally began taking P-8A Poseidon deliveries in 2012, but the long delays haven’t done their existing P-3 fleet any favors.

Filling the P-3 Orion’s shoes is no easy task. What missions will the new P-8A Poseidon face? What do we know about the platform, the project team, and ongoing developments? Will the P-3′s wide global adoption give its successor a comparable level of export opportunities? Australia and India have already signed on, but has the larger market shifted in the interim?

P-8A Poseidon: Platform & Capabilities

P-8A Poseidon: cutaway
(click to view full)

The P-8 will use the same 737 airframe as the U.S. Navy’s C-40 Clipper naval cargo aircraft, the E-737 Wedgetail AWACS aircraft on order by Australia, Turkey, and South Korea; and the U.S. Air Force’s T-43 Navigation trainer. The base model is Boeing’s 737-800 ERX, with “raked” wingtips that improve performance for low-level flight.

That airframe must accomplish a wide range of tasks. It will search for and destroy submarines, monitor sea traffic, launch missile attacks on naval or land targets as required, act as a flying communications relay for friendly forces, and possibly provide and electronic signal intercepts. Like its predecessor, its radar capabilities will make it well suited for land-surveillance missions, when the Navy decides to use it that way.

A plane with that many capabilities will play a role in a number of emerging military doctrines. It will be a key component in the U.S. Navy’s Sea Power 21 doctrine’s Sea Shield concept, by providing an anti-submarine, anti-ship and anti-smuggling platform that can sweep the area, launch sensors or weapons as needed, and remain aloft for many hours. The P-8A MMA will also play a key role in the U.S. Navy’s FORCEnet architecture, via development of the Common Undersea Picture (CUP). As a secondary role, it will support portions of Sea Power 21′s Sea Strike doctrine with its intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities.

Unrefueled range is published as “over 4,000″ nautical miles/ around 7,500 km. A more strenuous flight profile would involve 4 hours on station conducting low-level anti-submarine missions, at a range of more than 1,200 nautical miles/ 2,200 km. A dorsal receptacle allows in-flight refueling if necessary.

P-8: Weapons

P-3 Orion, armed -
note Sidewinder
(click to view full)

The P-8A has 11 weapon hard points: 5 in the rotary weapon bay, 4 under the wings, and 2 under the fuselage. Weapon load can exceed 10t/ 22,000 pounds, and all hard points have digital weapon interfaces.

Given that P-3C Orions have been modified to carry sea-skimming attack missiles like the Harpoon, land attack missiles like the Maverick, and even AIM-9 Sidewinder air-air missiles, it seems reasonable to assume that the Poseidon MMA will be at least as capable. This will involve carrying sonobuoys, torpedoes, depth charges, Harpoon anti-shipping missiles, SLAM or AGM-65 Maverick land attack missiles, and either AIM-9 Sidewinders or NCADE-derived AIM-120 AMRAAMs with heat-seeking heads.

The P-8A’s initially-certified armament is likely to be more modest, however: Mk 54 lightweight torpedoes, depth charges, and some free-fall bombs, plus a built-in triple launcher and accompanying storage for up to 120 sonobuoys – or devices compatible with a sonobuoy launcher, such as Piasecki’s Turais UAV.

Mk 54 lightweight torpedoes equipped with Boeing’s GPS-guided High Altitude Anti-Submarine Warfare Weapon Capability (HAAWC) glide bomb kit promise to extend the plane’s capabilities, by turning the torpedo into a weapon that can be launched from high altitude. That allows the P-8A to remain within its preferred aerodynamic envelope of high-altitude cruise, and reduce the fatigue and corrosion associated with low-level flight. Boeing was issued a development contract in April 2013, but this capability is not expected until P-8A Increment 2, however, with initial operating capability in 2016.

P-8: Sensors

P-8 AGS concept
(click to view full)

Weapons don’t mean much unless an enemy can be found. The P-8 will rely on a combination of radars, day/night surveillance equipment, and probably ESM(Electronic Support Measures) gear designed to pick up and trace the location of radars and other broadcasting electronics.

A canoe-shaped fairing under the plane is expected to house a mission bay that will initially include the Raytheon-Boeing AN/APS-149 Littoral Surveillance Radar System (LSRS), designed to provide targeting-grade tracking of moving targets on land and at sea. It reportedly emerged out of a “black” (classified) program, and details regarding the system remain sketchy. It’s known to be a Boeing-Raytheon AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) MTI(Moving Target Indicator) radar, and has already been deployed on some Navy P-3s (see pictures – scroll down to “NAWC-23 at Dallas Love Field”).

Later in the program, LSRS is slated for replacement by a modernized evolution called the Advanced Airborne Sensor (AAS). It’s rumored to have performance standards that match or exceed the USA’s current 707-based E-8C JSTARS battlefield surveillance aircraft. The long profile of LSRS/AAS is probably why Boeing moved the P-8′s weapons bay to the back of the plane in 2003.

AN/APY-10 set
(click to view full)

The AN/APS-137Dv5 radar used on the USA’s most modern P-3Cs will also form a key part of the P-8A’s radar suite, after a number of upgrades and a new designation. This enhanced nose-mounted system has been referred to as AN/APS-197, but was formally given the AN/APY-10 designation in June 2006. It offers reduced weight, improved MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures), and a color weather display. In the P-8A, it will also feature improvements such as “joint technical architecture” compliance, better performance in track-while-scan and target detection modes, and full integration with the Boeing mission system.

India’s P-8i adds air-to-air surveillance capabilities to its APY-10 International radar, an enhancement that could filter back to the US fleet in future upgrades.

The AN/ALQ-240v1 Electronic Support Measures system will alert the plane to radar and communications emissions, and geolocate them. It complements the Early Warning Self Protection System, and also enables fast offensive counterattacks.

The P-8′s radars and ESM will be supplemented by L-3 Wescam’s MX-20HD long-range optical surveillance turret. This large surveillance turret houses up to 3 day/night imaging sensors, and 3 laser payloads (i.e. rangefinding, marking/pointing, target designation) that can be swapped in and out. L-3 Enhanced Local Area Processing (ELAP) improves imaging clarity on board, extending effective range and image clarity before the images are broadcast elsewhere.

P-8: Upgrades & Variants

Mk54 HAAWC
(click to view full)

Additional modifications and improvements can be expected over the program’s life, as is the case for any major weapon systems. The P-8A was designed to incorporate additional “spiral development” of new weapons and equipment, and the first set is Increment 2. In addition to adding Longshot/HAAWC high altitude weapons capability, Increment 2 will feature acoustic and communications upgrades, including improvements to sonobuoy drops and processing. Increment 2 planes should become operational around 2016.

At the moment, India is the P-8′s only export customer, though Australia has signed an MoU ad paid for joint development. India’s P-8i jets will share a number of systems with the American P-8As, including a version of the AN/APY-10 radar. Other key technologies will be specific to the P-8i, however, owing to technology transfer issues or local choices.

Overland Role?

E-10 M2CA Concept
(click to view full)

With the cancellation of the USAF’s E-10 follow-on to its E-8 JSTARS battlefield surveillance planes, the Navy’s P-8A Poseidon may even be poised to inherit a dual land and sea surveillance role. USN P-3s have already found themselves pressed into overland service, and the much-greater capabilities of the P-8′s LSRS/AAS radars will only make that crossover more attractive. Boeing has already proposed to replace the USAF’s 17-plane JSTARS fleet with an add-on “P-8 AGS” order, as an alternative to upgrading the E-8s with new engines, radars, and electronics.

The push to use P-8 over land will be given added impetus by NATO’s cancellation of its AGS program’s Airbus 321 MCAR battlefield surveillance jet. The A321 MCAR’s demise leaves just 22 battlefield surveillance planes available for global use: the USA’s 707-based JSTARS fleet, and Britain’s newer 5-plane ASTOR Sentinel R1 fleet that’s based on the Global Express business jet.

NATO’s AGS is survived by a 5-UAV program based on the RQ-4B Block 40 Global Hawk, which was originally expected to work with the A321 MCAR as an adjunct. That same 2-tier model survives in the Poseidon program, however, and both tiers of the Navy program will offer land surveillance capabilities. The Poseidon’s Global Hawk UAV companion is called the MQ-4C Triton, developed under a program called BAMS (Broad Area Maritime Surveillance).

The P-8′s BAMS Companion: Kicking It Up a Notch

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

The P-3 fleet’s heavy use in both maritime surveillance and overland roles points up a potential problem with the P-8A. As an expensive but in-demand asset, a wider coverage scope could actually accelerate the problem of high flight hours building up in a small fleet. The problem is that airplane lives are measured in flight hours, and usage intensity. See the Strategic Review article “Brittle Swords: Low-Density, High-Demand Assets” [PDF] for more background on this phenomenon.

The logical response is to pair the P-8s with a lower cost counterpart. Hence the P-8′s companion Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) UAV program, run by NAVAIR’s PMA-263 program management office.

The BAMS competition was widely seen as a fight between Northrop Grumman’s high-flying, jet-powered RQ-4 Global Hawk and General Atomics’ turboprop-powered Mariner (a cousin of its MQ-9 Reaper); but other options were offered as well, including an “optionally manned” business jet.

Northrop Grumman’s RQ-4N Global Hawk eventually won, and will be known as the MQ-4C Triton. The US Navy plans to buy 65 of them, and begin operations in 2015. Like the P-8, the MQ-4C is attracting export interest, which could grow the international fleet past 65 machines.

DID’s BAMS FOCUS Article covers MQ-4C requirements, international dimension, contracts, and developments. Given their expected numbers, the Tritons could easily find themselves joining their P-8 companions in overland surveillance roles.

P-8A Poseidon Program

Program Goal & Competitors

P-3C Orion
(click to view full)

In our opening paragraph, DID discussed the need to replace an aging P-3 Orion fleet that first entered service in 1959 [P-3A], and will serve to 2020 and beyond [P-3C+]. Many people would contend that the P-3 Orion is the greatest maritime patrol aircraft ever flown. These aircraft entered service in 1959, and will continue to serve past 2015. Modifications to their equipment have sharpened their capabilities, and even given them a land-attack and surveillance role. In service with 15 countries, the Orion is a great success – but it’s a very old success.

After the abortive P-3G program, the US Navy began a 2-year requirement study in 1997, and the Defense Acquisition Board initiated a number of concept studies during the 2000 to 2002 period. During a 2-phase Component Advanced Development (CAD) program in 2002-2003, Boeing and Lockheed each received $27.5 million to develop their initial designs.

Lockheed’s Orion21 design was based on the P-3 airframe, with United Technologies subsidiaries Pratt & Whitney (7,000 shp PW150A turboprop engine) and Hamilton-Sundstrand (the same 8-bladed NP2000 propeller being refitted to carrier-based E-2 Hawkeye AWACS and C-2 Greyhound aircraft) as key partners.

As noted above, Boeing’s design was based on its 737, one of the most widely produced passenger jets in the world.

The Controversy: Turboprop, or Turbofan Jet?

P-8A: older concept
(click to view full)

The Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) program’s goal was a modern, highly reliable airframe that could be equipped with the latest sensors, weapons, and links to counterpart systems, creating improved surveillance over water and land, and upgraded attack capabilities. Officials hope this will allow a smaller force to provide worldwide responsiveness, while using a smaller support infrastructure.

While a 737 would appear to meet these criteria in spades, it was, and in some quarters still is, a controversial choice. Passenger jets like the 737 are built for high-altitude cruising, whereas a maritime patrol aircraft often needs to operate for long periods at altitudes of 200 feet or less above the water. On the other hand, if a 737-based aircraft could successfully perform its maritime patrol duties, it would offer many advantages. They would include commonality with the huge civil 737 fleet, commonality with other military platforms that use the 737 airframe, and other cost, support, and recruitment benefits.

Excerpts from Lockheed Martin’s December 2003 and April 2004 press releases summed up the other side of this argument:

“We made a deliberate design decision to select a turboprop engine because it is optimal for the mission profile. It will give our aircraft a 60% shorter takeoff roll… The turboprop engines will give the aircraft 25 percent more power, 60 percent more thrust and burn 27 percent less fuel than a turbofan, while providing 50 percent faster thrust response under key ASW low altitude loiter conditions. These characteristics are important when flying at heavy weights, slow speeds and very low altitudes, which is how the Navy will operate this aircraft… This propulsion system brings a balanced capability to all required missions. MMA will have to be flown high, low, fast and slow and remain on-station for very long periods of time while carrying a variety of weapon and sensor packages.”

P-8A: Sonobuoy drop
(click to view full)

The P-8A isn’t the only maritime patrol aircraft to use a jet as its base. Britain’s Nimrod aircraft, based on the 1950s-era DeHavilland Comet passenger jet, has filled a similar role for decades. Before its cancellation, the new BAE-Boeing Nimrod MRA4 upgrade was set to use a set of Rolls Royce BR710 engines, which can also be found on long-haul business jets like Bombardier’s Global Express. Boeing could also point to its successful 737 Surveiller maritime patrol aircraft program in Indonesia, which had provided maritime patrol and exclusive economic zone surveillance over a critical global waterway since 1993.

In the end, however, Boeing decided that seeing was believing. They took a a 737 that leveraged their Indonesian experience, had 2 functional mission system consoles installed, and toured US Navy bases and Naval Air Stations in Brunswick, ME; Jacksonville, FL; Norfolk, VA; Kaneohe, HI, and Whidbey Island, WA. Navy personnel were allowed to fly the aircraft and sit at the consoles, and Boeing demonstrations reportedly included maximum power take-off and climb to 40,000 ft, manual control with no hydraulics, maximum rate of descent at over 10,000 ft/minute, tactical maneuvers at the not-uncommon maritime patrol altitude of 200 feet, simulated single engine flying, and short-field landing simulations.

Lockheed may have had a point re: sustained turboprop performance, but the thought of plugging into the skills and maintenance base that supports the huge global 737 fleet was very appealing – and the 737 had just demonstrated what the Navy apparently considered “good enough” performance. Its higher cruising speed would also give it faster response time.

Team Boeing won the contract.

Program Timeline

In June 2004, Boeing IDS’ 737-based proposal was awarded the $3.9 billion cost-plus-award-fee contract to develop the Navy’s P-8 Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft. The P-8′s system design and development (SDD) contract covers the full range of platform development including all of the on-board mission systems, the modifications to the airframe itself, all of the training systems, and all of the software laboratories required to produce almost 2 million lines of reliable code. It also covers all of the integrated logistics elements, including the trainers, simulators and courseware. Essentially, everything that’s required to get ready to build the production P-8 is part of the SDD contract.

The MMA Program was cleared by a US technical review board to proceed into the design phase, and passed a preliminary design review in September 2005. In January 2007, their entry received the formal US Navy designation of P-8A Poseidon; and in July 2007, Australia made the P-8 an international program by giving their participation “first pass approval.” In December 2008, India became the 1st export, with a customized P-8i design.

The P-8A is scheduled to achieve American Initial Operational Capability (IOC) in 2013. IOC is defined as 1 squadron of 6 aircraft, with personnel who are trained and certified to deploy.

US P-8A Program Budgets

Recent budgets for the P-8A program from FY 2008 to the present have included:

Excel
download

Note that annual budgets also include advance procurement for the next year’s buy, so that key items like engines and other long lead-time equipment are ready to go when it’s time to build the P-8s. For instance, the FY 2012 request included long-lead items for 13 FY 2013 aircraft. The Pentagon says that “aircraft procurements are tightly coupled to the [expected] P-3 retirement rates,” but budget cuts will begin to affect production after 2013.

US Numbers and Basing

The U.S. program began as 108 planes, and formally stands at 117 plus an additional 8 system design & development aircraft (6 flight-test, 2 ground-test). There will actually be 125 airframes, but the 1st developmental test aircraft (“T1″), and 2 the ground-based static and fatigue test planes, aren’t fully configured aircraft. As such, they aren’t included in the official program total. The aircraft procurement phases of the U.S. P-8A MMA program alone are estimated as a $25+ billion effort, and then the total life cycle cost for procurement plus 25 years of life cycle support was estimated to be about $44 billion in FY 2004 dollars. The current American basing plan is for:

• 5 operational squadrons of 6 planes each at NAS Jacksonville, FL (30)
  
• 1 larger “Fleet Readiness” training squadron at NAS Jacksonville, FL (12)
  
• 4 squadrons at NAS Whidbey Island, WA (24)
  
• 3 squadrons in Kaneohe, Hawaii by 2019 (18)
  
• 2 “development squadrons” with 2 aircraft each (4). They will be used for testing and development of standard tactics and procedures, before moving on to operational service at locations to be determined.

• “Pipeline attrition” aircraft that can temporarily replace aircraft that are taken out of action for maintenance, permanently replace crashed aircraft for a squadron, or be inserted as “rotation substitutes” to help keep the fleet’s flying hours more even (20, likely 19 now).

Alternative basing arrangements under consideration could drastically reduce the number of planes in Hawaii, and put many more aircraft in Jacksonville. That seems like an odd arrangement for a Pacific-facing naval strategy, but matching strategies with deployments is not a US Navy strength.

P-8A Industrial Partners

The P-8i program in India has also attracted its own set of industrial partners, due to a combination of Indian insistence on local content, and security/technology transfer concerns from the USA. Industrial partners in India include well known players like Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL), Dynamatic Technologies Ltd., HCL Technologies Ltd., Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL), Larsen and Toubro Ltd. (L&T), Wipro Ltd., as well as a set of less familiar aerospace and electronics players. See full coverage at “P-8i: India’s Navy Picks Its Future High-End Maritime Patrol Aircraft“.

As things currently stand, key P-8A Poseidon partners, and some other sub-contractors, include:

One innovation within this group involves the way the base airframes are built. The traditional approach for military planes derived from passenger jets has been to either have a separate production line, or to take a normal airframe from the existing line and make structural changes to it on the military line, along with equipment installations. For the P-8A, the process is different.

The fuselages arrive from Spirit’s commercial 737 production line in Wichita, KS already strengthened, without windows, and with a weapons bay. No modifications are necessary.

Outfitting is completed in Renton, WA, where all or the P-8′s other unique structural features are added right on the main 737 production line. Aircraft quality and performance acceptance flight testing takes place right at Renton Field.

Final installation and checkout of the mission system and special flight test instrumentation happens at Boeing Field, near Seattle, WA.

P-8A Poseidon: Contracts & Events

Unlike many other military programs, Boeing appears to be handling the sub-contracts for most of the plane’s equipment itself, which leaves production order figures much closer to the plane’s true purchase cost.

Unless otherwise noted, US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contracts. Note that items unique to India’s P-8is will be covered in that article, and not here.

P-8A in Japan
(click to view full)

May 7/13: Support. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $14.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for interim P-8A support. All funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed in Dallas, TX (56%) and Seattle, WA (44%); and is expected to be complete in November 2013 (N00019-09-C-0022, PO 0076).

May 3/13: Basing. Rep. Rick Larsen [D-WA-2] emerged from a meeting about the US Navy strategic plan for 2013 – 2030, and promptly told local media that NAS Whidbey Island would be getting 49 planes (8 squadrons), instead of the 24 aircraft (4 squadrons) based there under the original plan. The first 2 P-8A squadrons arrive at NAS Whidbey in 2015, a 3rd will follow in 2016, Sqadrons #4-6 arrive in 2017, and the 7th and last squadron arrives in 2018.

The Navy had been considering new basing plans (vid. Nov 14/12), and Larsen’s disclosure indicates that they’ve chosen “Alternative 2″: 49 planes in Whidbey Island, WA; 47 in NAS Jacksonville, FL; and just 2 in MCB Hawaii Kaneohe Bay. The big loser is obviously Hawaii, which lost 16 of the 18 P-8s that were supposed to be based there. for wide-ranging coverage of the Pacific.

Whidbey’s P-8s are deployable planes, but the crews’ families will be in Washington State, and so will more advanced maintenance and support. Whidbey News Times.

April 29/13: Training. A $21.5 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to upgrade the Training System Support Center for P-8A LRIP Lot 3, including tooling and data for the Weapons Tactics Trainer. All funds are committed immediately, and $21.1 million will expire at the end of the fiscal year, on Sept 30/13.

Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in August 2016 (N00019-09-C-0022).

April 17/13: P-8i. India’s P-8i completes flight testing, which included dropping Mk.82 500 pound unguided bombs. Printed materials describe them as “depth bombs” (anti-submarine depth charges), but it’s also true that the addition of an inexpensive Boeing kit could convert Mk.82 bombs to GPS-guided JDAMs, or even JDAM-ER glide bombs with extended range. Time will tell whether the P-8 family capabilities expand in this direction. Boeing feature, incl. video | Boeing Frontiers magazine.

April 10/13: FY 2014 Budget. The President releases a proposed budget at last, the latest in modern memory. The Senate and House were already working on budgets in his absence, but the Pentagon’s submission is actually important to proceedings going forward. See ongoing DID coverage.

The US Navy is clearly focused on cash flow rather than total costs, and the P-8A joins other programs that will pay more long-term, in order to pay less per year in the near term. The FY 2014 budget subtracts 9 P-8As from FY 2014-2016, while adding 11 from FY 2017-2018. The procurement difference is around $1.3 billion, but the value of the 2 added planes means the Navy is paying about $800 million more on an even comparison. Assuming the Navy actually sticks to this new plan through 2018, rather than making further cuts.

April 3/13: HAAWC. Boeing in St. Charles, MO wins a $19.2 million combination cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-fixed-price-incentive, firm-fixed-price contract to design and build HAAWC (High Altitude Anti-Submarine Warfare Weapon Capability) kits for lightweight torpedoes. HAAWC is its own effort, but it’s also arguably the most important improvement slated for P-8A Increment 2 aircraft (q.v. Feb 18/13, for changes to the planes). Boeing will build on their experience with JDAM GPS guidance and GBU-39 SDB-I wing kits, in order to create a strap-on kit that adds precision guidance and long glide ranges to existing lightweight torpedoes.

$14.2 million is committed immediately, and $9.8 million of that will expire at the end of the fiscal year, on Sept 30/13. The contract includes options that could raise its value to $47 million.

Work is expected to be completed by April 2016. This contract was competitively procured with proposals solicited via FedBizOpps, and 3 offers were received by US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-13-C-6402). See also Boeing.

March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish. The P-8A is generally proceeding well, and Boeing has come to an agreement over limited release of commercially-sensitive pricing information:

“According to program officials, the P-8A has reduced the unit cost of the aircraft on each of its first three production contracts. To help ensure the price is fair and reasonable, DOD negotiated an agreement with Boeing to provide the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) access to data on select Boeing commercial aircraft procurements. The P-8A airframe has been designated a commercial item, so the contractor is not required to submit cost or pricing data. Officials indicated DCAA did not raise any concerns regarding the reasonableness of aircraft pricing prior to the award of the third production contract.”

March 29/13: #7 delivered. Boeing hands over P-8A #7 to the U.S. Navy on schedule, and it departs for NAS Jacksonville, FL. It’s the 1st delivery from the LRIP-2 order. Boeing.

March 25/13: AAS. Aviation Week reports that Boeing will soon get another fatigue testing contract, this time to test the effects of the canoe-shaped AAS long-range radar fairing. Adding it creates new fatigue stress points, so the S-2 full-scale fatigue-test platform at Boeing will conduct 2 complete AAS mission lifetimes, then a 3rd P-8A mission lifetime without the AAS, followed by a residual-strength test and a tear-down analysis.

This is expected to be a $138 million effort, running through 2017. Boeing has already started flight certification work involving AAS-equipped P-8s (vid. Feb 1/12), and this is a logical next step. The AAS is expected to become operational sometime shortly after P-8A Increment 2, which is expected to be in service around 2016.

March 14/13: Fatigue testing. A $128.4 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification covers engineering labor to perform extended lifetime fatigue testing, teardown, and post-teardown analysis of the P-8A airframe. These tests, and the changes that result, are necessary before the US Navy can set a safe flight hours limit for the airframe. They’re hoping for 150% of the airframe’s specified service life, but the testing will tell. Using a long-serving civilian jet as the base should give the Navy a pretty good starting point, but there are some structural changes in this version, and the usage patterns will be rather different.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (95%), and St. Louis, MO (5%), and is expected to be complete in December 2018. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2013 Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation, Navy contract funds. US NAVAIR in Patuxent River Md., is the contracting activity (N00019-04-C-3146).

March 8/13: Training. A $12.4 million firm-fixed-price contract modification aims to keep the P-8 simulators in sync with produced aircraft. They’ll update 3 systems to the TR-12 software version, and go through Aircraft Program Revision Records from Block 9.2 to TR-12 to see if they need to add anything else.

Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in December 2013. All contract funds are committed immediately, and expire at the end of the current fiscal year on Sept 30/13 (N00019-09-C-0022).

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

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

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

Feb 8/13: HAASW. ERAPSCO Inc. in Columbia City, IN receives a $7.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract modification for engineering and manufacturing development services in support of the High Altitude Anti-Submarine Warfare system. This is actually an Increment 2 upgrade to the new P-8A sea control aircraft. It makes drops more accurate by using a GPS-based algorithm; receives, processes, and stores in-buoy GPS data received from AN/SSQ-53, AN/SSQ-62, and AN/SSQ-101B sonobuoys; and will remotely send commands, and receive and process data from the AN/SSQ-101B’s digital datalink.

Work will be performed in DeLeon Springs, FL (52%) and Columbia City, IN (48%), and is expected to be complete in May 2014. $890,000 in FY 2013 Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation, Navy contract funds are committed immediately. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Patuxent River, MD manages this contract (N00421-11-D-0029). See also Military Aerospace.

Feb 4/13: #6 delivered. Boeing delivers the 6th production P-8A Poseidon aircraft to the US Navy, successfully completing the first group of LRIP aircraft from the January 2011 contract. Recall, too, that 6 ready-to deploy aircraft is the threshold for Initial Operational Capability. The Navy isn’t quite there yet.

P-8As #7-9 are undergoing mission systems installation and checkout at Boeing Field in Seattle, WA, and #7 will be delivered to the USN later this quarter. P-8As #10 and #11 are in final assembly on the 737 production line in Renton, WA. Boeing.

Jan 31/13: Support. Boeing receives a $19.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy additional P-8A equipment adaptors, support equipment, and technical publications.

Work will be performed in Dallas, TX (70.8%); Seattle, WA (15.7%); St. Peters, MO (10.7%); Falls Church, VA (1.2%); Chatsworth, CA (0.6%); Anaheim, CA (0.2%); El Dorado Hills, CA (0.2%); and Berwyn, PA (0.2%); Camden, NJ (0.2%); and New York, NY (0.2%); and is expected to be complete in April 2015. All contract funds are committed immediately from the FY 2011 “2011 Aircraft Procurement, Navy” budget line, and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13 (N00019-09-C-0022).

Dec 20/12: Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $7.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for P-8A training system program and configuration management, engineering, and quality assurance. This modification will bring the hardware platforms of the Weapons Tactics Trainer (WTT) and Operational Flight Trainer (OFT) up to the LRIP Lot 1 Block 8 configuration, so it keeps up with the planes themselves.

Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be completed in June 2014. All contract funds are committed immediately, and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year on Sept 30/13 (N00019-09-C-0022).

Dec 17/12: Upgrades. Boeing in Seattle, WA received a $16.1 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification, covering required engineering and labor to change the cooling medium in the existing P-8A Liquid Air Palletized System (LAPS) from polyalphaolefin, to ethylene glycol and water. They want to ensure compatibility between the LAPS and the Special Mission Cabin Equipment. Once development is done, Boeing will manufacture 3 P-8A conversion A-Kits, for use on the initial aircraft.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (81.6%); Huntsville, AL (8.8%); Mesa AZ (7.6%); and St. Louis, MO (2.0%) and is expected to be complete in December 2014. $14 million is committed immediately, and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year on Sept 30/12 (N00019-04-C-3146).

Dec 11/12: R&D. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $175.5 million cost-plus-award-fee contract modification for engineering, integration, and test work on P-8A changes and upgrades. The work will cover its weapons management, acoustics, and communication subsystems.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (43.3%); Huntington Beach, CA (22.4%); St. Louis, MO (24%); and Baltimore, MD (10.3%). $31.6 million are committed immediately, with the rest available until December 2015 (N00019-04-C-3146).

Dec 4/12: Training. Under a new 5-year, $56 million contract, Boeing will maintain U.S. Navy aircrew training devices for the P-8A, its P-3C predecessor, EP-3 Aries electronic eavesdropping planes, EA-6B Prowler and EA-18G Growler electronic warfare jets, and older SH-60B Seahawk helicopters.

Mark McGraw, Boeing’s VP for Training Systems and Government Services, says the firm is looking to offer these services internationally. It’s a somewhat natural extension for its own products, like the EA-18G. It’s less natural for Lockheed Martin’s P-3s, Northrop Grumman’s EA-6s, and Sikorsky’s SH-60s.

The training devices are located at Naval Air Station (NAS) Jacksonville, FL; Marine Corps Air Station Kaneohe Bay, HI; NAS Whidbey Island, WA; and Kadena Air Base, Japan. Boeing will deliver P-8A training systems to NAS Jacksonville in 2013, and other sites will follow with trainers and all support functions. Boeing.

Nov 26/12: Training. Boeing in Seattle, WA received a $26.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to continue developing the P-8A’s maintenance training curriculum. Materials will include computer-aided instruction for use in a classroom setting, interactive courseware for self-paced in-service training, and practical exercises to be used on various maintenance training devices. This seems like minor stuff, but if it’s done poorly, a multi-billion dollar fleet will suffer from lower readiness rates. Which turns out to be very expensive.

Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in June 2015. All contract funds are committed immediately, and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-09-C-0022).

Nov 14/12: Basing. US Fleet Forces Command announces that they’re considering a number of basing plans for the P-8A, under supplemental environmental impact analyses. Of the 4 plans under consideration, 2 would base just 2 P-8s in Hawaii, instead of having 18 aircraft in 3 squadrons to offer good coverage of the Pacific theater.

The main plan is listed above: 42 planes in NAS Jacksonville, FL; 24 in Whidbey Island, WA; 18 in MCB Hawaii Kaneohe Bay; and 8 unallocated.

“Alternative 2″ would put 47 planes in NAS Jacksonville, FL; 49 in Whidbey Island, WA; and 2 in MCB Hawaii Kaneohe Bay.

“Alternative 5″ would put 47 planes in NAS Jacksonville, FL; 28 in Whidbey Island, WA; and 18 in MCB Hawaii Kaneohe Bay.

“Alternative 7″ would put 54 planes in NAS Jacksonville, FL; 42 in Whidbey Island, WA; and 2 in MCB Hawaii Kaneohe Bay.

Alternatives 2 and 7 would damage the US Navy’s much-hyped “Pacific Pivot,” by having fewer aircraft in good position to offer coverage. Forward basing in Guam and with allies like Japan and Australia may help, but it’s more effective to do that and to base planes in Hawaii. Given the importance of aerial surveillance to anti-submarine warfare, one may also legitimately wonder if just 2 P-8As in Hawaii leaves Pearl Harbor insufficiently defended. The US Navy has often had a problem backing up its proclamations with actual platforms, but this one offers particular cause for scrutiny. Navy EIS site | Pacific Business News.

Oct 18/12: ESM. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives an $8.5 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order issued under basic ordering agreement to update the P-8A’s ESM sensor’s digital measurement unit “to overcome obsolescence issues”.

Work will be performed in Linthicum, MD (86%), and Seattle, WA (14%), and is expected to be complete in April 2015. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-11-G-0001).

Oct 4/12: ESM. Northrop Grumman’s P-8A Electronic Support Measures (ESM) system is officially designated AN/ALQ-240v1. ESM systems use adaptive tuning, precise direction finding and geolocation to detect, identify, and target radars and other electronic threats to the aircraft and Navy vessels.

Northrop Grumman also provides the P-8A platform’s EWSP (early warning self-protection system). ESM isn’t part of that system, but it is complementary. NGC.

Oct 3/12: P-8 AGS advocacy. The Lexington Institute releases a report that recommends replacing all 73 of the USAF’s C-135/ Boeing 707 derived special mission aircraft with 737 derivatives. The E-8C JSTARS fleet of 16 operational planes would be swapped out for a derivative of the P-8A – basically, Boeing’s P-8 AGS concept. Overall, 73 planes would be replaced with 60 aircraft with higher mission-readiness rates, lower operating costs, and the ability to use existing global maintenance networks. It’s a bit of a turnaround for Lexington, who had strongly supported JSTARS re-engining and refurbishment before. Excerpts:

“The Air Force is currently spending so much money to keep its recon planes operational that it may be feasible to develop and field replacements based on commercial derivatives at little additional cost if it can retire aging 707s and C-135s quickly… The cumulative savings of substituting 737s for existing planes would total $100 billion across the life-cycle of the fleet, with annual savings likely to exceed $3 billion once the new planes were fully fielded. Most importantly, the 737 replacement program can be implemented within projected budgets for the ISR fleet… In the process it can eliminate 4,000 support billets and save over 80 million gallons of jet fuel each year, freeing up funding for activities where it can be applied more productively.”

See release | report [PDF].

P-8 drops Mk54
(click to view full)

Sept 27/12: Training. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $13.2 million firm-fixed-price contract modification buys spare parts in support of 10 P-8A operational flight trainers (OFTs), 7 weapons tactics trainers, 3 part task trainers, the training systems support center, and 15 electronic classrooms. Boeing will also buy Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 15 classified parts; manage spare parts and delivery; coordinate orders, quotes, and receive process; support inventory inspection processes; and deliver the spares. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO, and is expected to be complete in June 2014 (N00019-09-C-0022)

Sept 26/12: Spares. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $34.6 million firm-fixed-price modification to a fixed-price-incentive-fee contract, buying additional spares for the 11 LRIP Lot 3 P-8A aircraft.

Work will be performed in Dallas, TX (59%); Greenlawn, N.Y. (13%); Amityville, N.Y. (8%); Seattle, Wash. (7%); Rancho Santa Margarita, CA (6%); Anaheim, CA (4%); Irvine, CA (2%); and El Paso, TX (1%); and is expected to be complete in September 2015 (N00019-09-C-0022).

Sept 26/12: Support. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives an $18.9 million fixed-price-incentive-firm contract modification for equipment maintenance, site activation, and other support of Low Rate Initial Production P-8As. Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (57%); Jacksonville, FL (38%); and Kadena, Japan (5%), and is expected to be complete in November 2013 (N00019-09-C-0022).

Sept 25/12: Part obsolescence. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $15.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order to fix obsolescence issues. They’ll need to replace and integrate suitable hardware and software components in the P-8A’s Multi-Purpose Control Display Unit and Tactical Control Panel that have gone obsolete because those parts aren’t manufactured any more, and the Navy doesn’t have enough inventory to ignore that.

Work will be performed in Grand Rapids, MI (84%), and Seattle, WA (16%); and is expected to be complete in September 2014. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-11-G-0001).

Aug 31/12: FRP-1 lead in. A $244.9 million advance acquisition contract to begin buying long-lead materials for 13 P-8As, with firm-fixed-price line items. That means it’s for the FY 2013 order (LRIP-4? FRP-1?).

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (63.8%); Greenlawn, NY (11.7%); Baltimore, MD (11.0%); North Amityville, NY (8.2%); and McKinney, TX (5.3%); and is expected to be complete in April 2016. This contract was not competitively procured, pursuant to FAR6.302-1 (N00019-12-C-0112).

Aug 28/12: Too big? Boeing is starting to look at options beyond its P-8A, because their customers are saying that they don’t need its full versatility, and find its $200 million price tag prohibitive. Bombardier’s Challenger 600 seems to be the target platform, and the resulting plane would probably sacrifice weapon carrying capability in order to be a specialty surveillance plane.

Boeing aren’t the only ones working on this, of course. Established competitors include EADS’ CN-235 Persuader, C-295 MPA, ATR-42 MP, and ATR-72 ASW turboprops; and Embraer’s P-99 MP jet. Saab has options are in development based on the Saab 2000 regional turboprop and Piaggio P-180 executive turboprop, and Russia has a unique offering in development based on its Beriev Be-200 amphibious aircraft. There is also some talk in Britain of adding maritime patrol capabilities to its Sentinel R1 ground surveillance jets, based on Bombardier’s Challenger.

Among American manufacturers, Lockheed Martin is working on an SC-130J Sea Hercules modification, and the firm says they expect to sign at least one contract “in North Africa.” It’s designed as a $150 million alternative, to be developed in 3 stages. Stage 1 will involve roll-on/ bolt-on radar and electro-optical sensors, and accompanying processing workstations. Stage 2 would add wing-mounted, anti-surface weapons, along with upgraded workstations and weapon control systems. Stage 3 would be a full anti-submarine conversion, including sonobuoys, a magnetic anomaly detector boom, extra fuel pods, and 2 added bays for 6 Harpoon missiles. Defense News.

July 24/12: LRIP-3 lead in. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $107.1 million fixed-price-incentive-firm contract modification to provide additional funding for LRIP-3′s long-lead time materials That means items that need to be in the factory early, so that LRIP Lot 3′s 11 planes can be assembled and delivered on time. See also March 26/12 and Sept 8/11 entries – this brings LRIP-3 long-lead orders to $304 million.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (63.8%); Greenlawn, NY (11.7%); Baltimore, MD (11%); North Amityville, NY (8.2%); and McKinney, TX (5.3%). Work is expected to be complete in May 2015 (N00019-09-C-0022).

July 24/12: Training. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $28.2 million fixed-price-incentive-firm contract for 22 flight management system trainers; 44 mission systems desktop trainers; 2 desktop training environments; updates to the P-8A Air Combat Training Continuum courseware; and all associated spares, support, and tools.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (48.2%); St. Louis, MO (35.8%); Jacksonville, FL (10.9%); Bloomington, IL (3.2%); Anaheim, CA (0.8%); Dallas, TX (0.8%); and Wichita, KS (0.3%). Work is expected to be completed in June 2014. $25.5 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00019-09-C-0022).

July 24/12: Australian sub-contractors. Boeing announces a very minor set of contracts ($1.85 million) to Australian companies Lovitt Technologies Australia and Ferra Engineering, to manufacture parts and assemblies for the P-8A.

Lovitt Technologies in Melbourne already supplies parts for the V-22 and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, and will add mission systems parts and assembly fabrications for the P-8. Ferra Engineering in Brisbane also supplies Super Hornet parts, as well as spares for Boeing’s commercial jets. They’ll add P-8 internal and external airframe parts and assemblies to their roster.

Boeing has a number of programs of interest in Australia, including F/A-18AM/BM Hornet upgrades, new F/A-18F Super Hornets, the E-737 Wedgetail airborne early warning plane, and an expected P-8 buy (vid. May 6/09 entry). Boeing’s Office of Australian Industry Capability (OAIC) works with the Australian Defence Materiel Organisation’s Global Supply Chain Program, to identify and train industrial partners. Over the past 4 years, Boeing says they’ve awarded US$ 230 million in contracts to Australian firms.

July 17/12: #2 delivered. Boeing delivers the 2nd production P-8A to US Naval Air Station Jacksonville, FL for aircrew training.

Meanwhile, 3 more P-8As are undergoing mission systems installation and checkout in Seattle, WA, and 3 are in final assembly in Renton, WA. That covers 8 of the 13 low-rate initial production aircraft ordered so far. The 6 flight-test and 2 ground-test P-8As ordered under the development contract are already delivered, and they’ve completed more than 600 sorties and 2,800 flight hours, mostly at NAS Patuxent River, MD. Boeing.

July 18/12: Training. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives an $11.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for the Block 9.2 software upgrade of the Operational Flight Trainer, the Weapons Tactics Trainer, and the Part Task Trainer in support LRIP Lot 1. This modification also includes the procurement of a Mission System Desktop Trainer. Bottom line: the trainers must have the same software and capabilities as the flying aircraft.

Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (85%), Seattle, WA (12%), and Anaheim, CA (3%), and is expected to be complete in May 2013. $9.9 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year,on Sept 30/12 (N00019-09-C-0022).

July 7/12: P-8i. India’s first P-8i begins flight-testing in Seattle, and all test objectives are met in its initial flight. Boeing test pilots will continue the process at a US Navy test range west of Neah Bay, WA, and at a joint U.S./Canadian test range in the Strait of Georgia. They believe that they are on track to deliver the 1st P-8i to the Indian Navy in 2013. Boeing.

May 12/11: No P-8 JSTARS? Gannett’s Air Force Times reports that that the USAF will hang on to the battlefield surveillance mission, even though it won’t be upgrading its E-8C JSTARS planes. The real story is that the USAF’s F-35, Next-Generation Bomber, and KC-46A aerial tanker projects are sucking all of the budgetary oxygen out of the room. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz:

“I think that [Chief of Naval Operations Adm.] Jon Greenert would tell you that he can’t do both the maritime P-8 mission and the entire GMTI [Ground Moving Target Indicator] overland mission… Based on the analysis of alternatives, the more attractive option is a business-class aircraft with cheek sensors that operates at 40,000-foot plus and at much less of a flying-hour cost… That’s probably the right solution set, but we don’t have the [budgetary] space to pursue it right now.”

A Navy official emphasized that the P-8A’s primary focus is anti-submarine warfare, followed by surveillance in maritime areas. They see overland ISR as a tertiary mission, just as it has been for the P-3C. The long-term question is whether force structure trends will force a change in thinking, if the P-8A becomes the most capable option available. The performance and availability of the USAF’s RQ-4B Global Hawk Block 40 fleet is likely to be the determining factor.

May 11/12: Increment II R&D. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $13.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order modification for P-8A Increment II risk reduction activities. This effort includes acoustic processor technology refresh work, multi-static active coherent Phase I capability, Automatic Identification System prototype development, and high altitude anti-submarine warfare sensor capability. As one might guess, Increment II is the next evolution of the design for the fleet, to be built into new aircraft and retrofitted into delivered planes.

Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA (70%), and Seattle, WA (30%), and is expected to be complete in January 2013 (N00019-05-G-0026).

March 26/12: LRIP-3 long lead. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $30.1 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, buying additional long lead time materials for the FY 2012 Low Rate Initial Production III lot of 11 planes.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (63.8%); Greenlawn, NY (11.7%); Baltimore, MD (11.0%); North Amityville, NY (8.2%); and McKinney, TX (5.3%); and is expected to be complete in May 2015 (N00019-09-C-0022).

March 23/12: Boeing VP and P-8 program manager Chuck Dabundo says that the P-8A is expected to be ready for Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOTE) from June – August 2012. He adds that: “The P-8A full-flight envelope should be cleared to conduct… realistic missions and maneuvering flight profiles during the IOT&E,” addressing one of the concerns from the 2011 DOT&E report (vid. Jan 17/12).

Meanwhile, the 1st operational flight and weapons tactics trainers are completing their set-up in the P-8A Integrated Training Center at NAS Jacksonville, FL. The other LRIP-1 plane is undergoing mission systems installation, with a hand-over to the Navy expected in mid-year. Aviation Week.

March 19/12: Sub-contractors. ITT Exelis touts its compressed air weapon ejection release technology, which successfully launched an MK 54 torpedo from P-8A test aircraft T-3′s weapon bay (vid. Oct 31/11). Many launch systems still use electrically-triggered explosive cartridges for launch separation, which has higher purchase and maintenance costs over time.

ITT was awarded the initial system design and development contract in August 2005, and says that it has received follow-on contracts totaling more than $30 million to date. Work is being performed by the Exelis Electronic Systems division in Amityville, NY.

Feb 13/12: Budget Cuts. The Pentagon submits its FY 2013 funding request. P-8A production will continue to ramp up, to the expected 13 planes, but future buys will be lower than planned, removing 10 planes from the program over the next 4 years. It’s always possible to add them back at the end of the program, but the USA’s current fiscal straits, and long-term entitlements explosions, make that unlikely:

“Due to changing priorities within the Department and funding constraints, the Department deemed that it was a manageable risk to reduce P-8A procurement by 10 aircraft from FY 2013 – FY 2017. Savings total $5.2 billion from FY 2013 – FY 2017.”

Feb 13/12: APY-10 air-air. Raytheon announces that it has delivered the 1st AN/APY-10 International radar to Boeing, for installation in the nose of India’s 1st P-8i. They also confirm that, per rumors reported on Feb 3/10:

“To meet unique requirements for the Indian navy, Raytheon has added an air-to-air mode, which provides the detection and tracking of airborne targets, allowing customers to detect threats in the air as well as at sea. In addition, an interleaved weather and surface search capability has been added to provide the cockpit with up-to-date weather avoidance information while performing surveillance missions.”

Feb 1/12: AAS. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $227 million cost-plus-award-fee modification contract for “interim flight clearance for the P-8A aircraft in the special mission configuration,” using the T-1 and T-3 test aircraft. Later reports confirm that the special configuration involves the P-8′s AAS radar pod.

Boeing tells us that this is about military airworthiness certification, which enables operational use of an aircraft (like a 737) in a special configuration. It’s also the precursor step to full fleet flight clearance. The time and expense involved in such certifications is often overlooked by casual observers, but over the last few years, this step has held up deployment of several big-ticket defense items around the world.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (59%); Baltimore, MD (32%); and St. Louis, MO (9%), and is expected to be complete in August 2016. US Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity(N00019-04-C-3146).

Jan 17/12: DOT&E Report. The Pentagon releases the FY2011 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The P-8A is included, and currently suffers from 2 major sets of issues that need to be fixed. One is mechanical, and involves bank angle limits. The other is software defects:

“The P-8A currently has an operational flight envelope limit that precludes it from flying at a bank angle greater than 48 degrees when maneuvering. In order to fly operationally realistic tactics during anti-submarine warfare missions, the aircraft will have to fly maneuvers that require a bank angle of 53 degrees… Although 92 percent of the priority 1 [DID: can't perform mission-essential capability] and [priority] 2 [DID: impairs mission-essential capability, no onboard workaround] software problems have been closed, the current closure rate is not sufficient to have all the priority 1 and 2 software problems resolved by the start of IOT&E [Initial Operational Test & Evaluation]… There are 369 priority 1 and 2 software problems as of September 21, 2011. Software problems discovered during the later stages of the integrated testing may not be fixed in the software version that is currently planned for IOT&E, and may require additional software upgrades prior to starting IOT&E to ensure the software is production-representative.”

Jan 12/12: Training. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $9.2 million cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification for spares, repairables, trainers, and courseware in support of FY 2011 production of P-8As under LRIP Lot 2 (vid. Nov 3/11 entry). Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (60%), and St. Louis, MO (40%), and is expected to be complete in September 2012 (N00019-09-C-0022).

Dec 19/11: Training. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $19.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy 1 P-8A weapons tactics trainer, 9 of its 10-seat e-classrooms, and 6 of its 20-seat e-classrooms, as part of the FY 2011 LRIP Lot 2 production (vid. Nov 3/11 entry).

Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (75%), and Seattle, WA (25%), and is expected to be complete in March 2014 (N00019-09-C-0022).

Dec 16/11: Training. The 1st full-motion operational flight trainer (OFT) and weapons tactics trainer (WTT) are delivered and placed in NAS Jacksonville’s P-8A Integrated Training Center. The Navy’s VP-30 Sqn. fleet introduction team (FIT) instructors worked with Boeing on the courseware, and had input into the design of the simulators.

P-8As are expected to begin shipping to patrol squadrons beginning in July 2012. US NAVAIR.

Nov 4/11: Increment II. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $10 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order to help plan Increment 2 acoustic processor technology updates for the P-8A. P-8A increment 2 is scheduled for fielding in 2016.

Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA (75%), and Seattle, WA (25%), and is expected to be complete in January 2013. $2 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year (N00019-05-G-0026).

Oct 13/11: Testing. P-8A aircraft T-3 successfully launches its first MK 54 torpedo in the Atlantic Test Range, from 500 feet above water. The test verifies safe separation, with further weapon testing to come. US NAVAIR.

P-8 T1 over Cascades
(click to view full)

Sept 28/11: P-8i 1st flight. Initial flight for the P-8i, which takes off from Renton Field, WA and lands 2:31 later at Boeing Field in Seattle, WA. During the flight, Boeing test pilots performed airborne systems checks including engine accelerations and decelerations and autopilot flight modes, and took the P-8i to a maximum altitude of 41,000 feet. Boeing.

P-8i 1st flight

Sept 26/11: Training. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $32.8 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for 1 P-8A Operational Flight Trainer and 1 P-8A weapons tactics trainer, as part of LRIP Lot 2. Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (75%), and Seattle, WA (25%), and is expected to be complete in April 2014 (N00019-09-C-0022).

Sept 23/11: LRIP-2 ancillaries. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $319.9 million fixed-price incentive-fee contract for P-8A LRIP-2 spare parts, support equipment and tools, logistics support, trainers, and courseware. LRP-2 involves 7 aircraft.

Work will be performed in McKinney, TX (35%); Hazelwood, Mo. (35%); Seattle, WA (14%); Jacksonville, FL (4%); Anaheim, CA (4%); Baltimore, MD (3%); Camden, NJ (3%); and Greenlawn, NY (2%). Work is expected to be complete in March 2014 (N00019-09-C-0022).

Sept 8/11: LRIP-3 lead-in. A $166.8 million fixed-price-incentive contract modification, funding for long lead time materials in support of LRIP Lot 3′s 11 planned P-8As.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (63.80%); Greenlawn, NY (11.69%); Baltimore, MD (10.98%); North Amityville, NY (8.24%) and McKinney, TX (5.29%); and is expected to be complete in May 2015 (N00019-09-C-0022).

Aug 31/11: Training. Jax Air News reports on the coming transition to the P-8A at the VP-30 Fleet Replacement training squadron. According to Commanding Officer (CO) Capt. Mark Stevens, VP-30 will teach both the P-3 and the P-8, until the Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Force community completes its transition to the Poseidon by 2017. Flight Instructor Trainers are completing commercial B-737 type rating school in Seattle, WA, then they train in VX-20′s 4 Poseidon test aircraft at Pax River, MD.

The first P-8A transition squadron to be trained at VP-30 will be the VP-16 ‘War Eagles’ beginning in July of 2012, as they return from deployment to face 6 months of training. VP-30 will also begin training replacement P-8 pilots, NFOs and aircrew in August of 2012, at the new P-8A Integrated Training Center (ITC), which includes classrooms, 10 full-motion operational flight trainers (OFT) for pilots, and 9 mission system trainers for aircrew – each with 5 operator stations.

Aug 19/11: Testing. P-8A T2 returns from Yuma, AZ, where hot environment ground and flight tests took place over 13 days from July 7-20/11. July temperatures at Yuma average 107F/ 42C. Now that T2 is back to Patuxent River, MD, it continues required mission systems testing to include the acoustic system, Sonobuoy Launching System, Sonobuoy Positioning System, and Electro-Optical/Infrared system. US NAVAIR | Maryland’s Bay Net.

July 25/11: LRIP-2 lead in. A $21 million fixed-price-incentive-fee contract modification adds more long lead materials funding for the 7 LRIP Lot 2 production aircraft.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (63.80%); Greenlawn, NY (11.69%); Baltimore, MD (10.98%); North Amityville, NY (8.24%); and McKinney, TX (5.29%). Work is expected to be complete in December 2013 (N00019-09-C-0022).

July 22/11: Testing. US NAVAIR announces that the P-8A completed the clean flutter program in June 2011, including open & closed bay doors, and began loads testing in preparation for Operational Assessment in 2012.

Flutter is described as a vibration that continuously builds in intensity; the team needed to demonstrate that the P-8A remains safe throughout its flight envelope, without weapons. Loads testing verifies that it’s safe with weapons carried.

July 21/11: 737 MAX. American Airlines, which has traditionally been a Boeing/McDonnell Douglas stronghold, splits its $40 billion fleet replacement order between Boeing and Airbus, ordering 460 planes between 2013-2022, with options for more. The new aircraft will replace older MD-80s, as well as larger Boeing 757s and 767s.

Airbus will deliver 260 A319/A320/A321s beginning in 2013, of which half will be A320neo family planes with new geared turbofan engines from Pratt & Whitney (PurePower) or GE/CFM (LEAP-X), beginning in 2017. They also have 365 options with Airbus for additional aircraft. Boeing will deliver 200 737s, beginning in 2013, with options for another 100. Half of those initial 737s, and 60/100 options, will involve 737 MAX planes with LEAP-X engines, but no delivery date is set.

Those re-engined 737 MAX planes will have to be developed and certified, of course, with estimates that place them 1-3 years behind Airbus’ planned 2015 A320neo introduction. The effect is to upset Boeing’s strategy to introduce an entirely new narrowbody jet. Airline interest in the re-engined 737 seems set to delay that planned switchover, and AA’s order alone will keep the 737 in production for at least a decade. This is not good news for Boeing, but it might be good news for military customers of 737 derivatives. The thing is, they now have a choice of their own to make about their future fleets (vid. June 8/11 entry). Using a 737 MAX offers important life-cycle cost reductions, but it also involves modifications to existing designs for 737 specialty aircraft like the P-8. Someone will have to pay for that. American Airlines | Airbus | Boeing | GE/CFM | Seattle Post-Intelligencer | Seattle Times | Forbes.

July 7/11: 1st P-8A flight. The first P-8A Poseidon production aircraft completes its first flight, taking off from Renton Field, WA and landing 3 hours later at Boeing Field in Seattle, WA. This is an LRIP Lot 1 plane, which now leaves final assembly and enters mission system installation and checkout in Seattle. Boeing will deliver it to the Navy next year in 2012.

This production P-8A is the first to include an improved CFM56-7BE engine with high- and low-pressure turbine modifications, that is now standard on all new 737NGs. The design also incorporates drag reduction improvements that Boeing started phasing into 737 production earlier this year, but the expected fuel savings vs. older models are only 2% or so, compared to about 15% for geared turbofan models. Boeing | CFM | Boeing re: new design.

March 9/11: Sub-contractors. BAE Systems announces a Low Rate Initial Production contract from Boeing to provide 6 ruggedized P-8A mission computer systems. No cost figures are released.

March 7/11: Sub-contractors. Spirit AeroSystems delivers the 1st LRIP production P-8A fuselage to Boeing via rail car, whereupon Boeing workers begin final assembly by loading it into a tooling fixture and installing systems, wires and other small parts.

The Poseidon team is using a first-in-industry in-line production process that draws on Boeing’s civilian Next-Generation 737 production system, by making all P-8A military modifications in sequence during fabrication and assembly. The pervasive approach to this point has involved producing a civilian plane, then flying it to another plant for “militarization” work. Boeing.

Feb 2/11: APY-10. Raytheon announces a low rate initial production contract from Boeing to deliver 6 AN/APY-10 radars plus spares as part of LRIP Lot 1 production.

Jan 7/11: Testing. Boeing completes full-scale static testing of the P-8A Poseidon’s airframe, after ground test plane S1 undergoes 154 different tests, with no failure of the primary structure. During 74 of the tests, the airframe was subjected to 150% of the highest expected flight loads.

In September 2011, the Boeing P-8A team will begin refurbishing the S1 plane to prepare it for live-fire testing at Naval Air Warfare Center, China Lake, CA. Boeing will begin fatigue tests on its second ground-test vehicle, S2, later in 2011. Boeing.

Oct 15/10: Testing. NAVAIR’s P-8A test aircraft launches sonobuoys for the first time, as part of P-8 weapons testing. A total of 6 sonobuoys were involved in 3 low altitude launches at the Atlantic Test Range, using the P-8′s rotary launch system.

That system uses 3 three launchers with the capacity to hold 10 sonobuoys each, and it can launch single or multiple shots. The aircraft’s overall sonobuoy storage capacity is 120, fully 50% percent greater than the P-3′s capacity of 80. US NAVAIR.

Oct 4/10: India. India’s navy wants to grow its P-8i fleet to 12 planes, by exercising a $1 billion option for 4 more. Indian sources are telling the media that the prices and offset agreements would be the same as the original $2.1 billion contract for 8 aircraft. The decision follows a recent visit by Indian defense minister Antony and Chief Admiral Nirmal Verma. The proposal will now be sent to India’s Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) for approval, and other steps also remain on the to do list. The Times of India:

“P-8Is are being customised to Indian naval requirements, with communication, electronic warfare and other systems being sourced from India. For instance, defence PSU Bharat Electronics is delivering Data Link-II, a communication system to enable rapid exchange of information among Indian warships, submarines aircraft and shore establishments, for the P-8Is to Boeing. There is, however, the question of India having not yet inked the Communication Interoperability and Security Memorandum Agreement (CISMOA) being pushed by the US as ”a sensitive technology-enabler” for P-8I and other arms procurements.”

See: India Defence | Times of India | Zee News | China’s Xinhua.

E-8C JSTARS
(click to view full)

Sept 13/10: P-8 AGS? The battle over the E-8 JSTARS fleet’s future is heating up. Boeing is proposing a derivative of its P-8A Poseidon sea control aircraft as a proposed $5.5 billion, 1-for-1 replacement of the current E-8C fleet, instead of paying that estimated amount to upgrade the E-8Cs with new cockpits, sensors, and engines. The Boeing AGS version would include the Raytheon-Boeing Littoral Surveillance Radar System (LSRS), Raytheon’s AN/APY-10 multi-mode radar in the nose, some the same Electronic Support Measures for emissions geo-location that are featured on the E/A?18G Growler electronic attack lane, and an electro-optical surveillance and targeting turret. A P-8 derivative would also give the USAF space and integration for weapons on board, or additional sensors in those spaces.

Northrop Grumman believes the Boeing figure may be a lowball price, and has its own proposal to add 1′ x 8′ array radars on the plane’s cheeks, derived from the firm’s APG-77 and APG-81 AESA radars that equip the F-22 and F-35 stealth fighters. Today, J-Stars operations have to “break track” with a target to collect an image. The cheek fairings would solve that problem, while keeping the existing AN/APY-7, in order to lower the upgrade price to around $2.7 billion: $900M re-engining, $500M new APY-7 receiver and exciters, $1 billion for the cheek array, $300M for avionics upgrade and battle management improvements. This would replace the previous push to replace the APY-7 with their MP-RTIP radar.

Northrop Grumman executives have expressed concern that USAF officials have not showed them the 2009 initial capabilities document that could launch a competition to replace or upgrade the E-8C, something that’s common practice, even though it isn’t a required step. That may be because the USAF is considering even wider options – like putting the focus on “persistent ground looking radar and optical surveillance with high resolution moving target capability,” instead of an E-8C vs. 737 AGS competition. If so, the firms could find themselves competing with other platforms, possibly including derivatives of airship projects like the US Army’s LEMV and others. Aviation Week | Flight International.

Sept 8/10: LRIP-2 lead-in. A $136.6 million contract modification for long-lead materials in support of P-8A LRIP (low-rate initial production) Lot 2 aircraft.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (63.8%); Greenlawn, NY (11.7%); Baltimore, MD (10.9%); North Amityville, NY (8.3%); and McKinney, TX (5.3%), and is expected to be complete in December 2013 (N00019-09-C-0022).

Sept 8/10: Sub-contractors. India’s Economic Times reports that Maini Global Aerospace (MGA) has bagged an outsourcing contract worth up to $10 million to make structural components for the extended range fuel cells of the Boeing P-8A Poseidon multi-mission maritime (MMR) aircraft. These components would be common to the P-8A and P-8i.

July 29/10: Testing. Boeing’s T3 test aircraft successfully completes its first flight test, which is focused on aerodynamics and safety. T3 is the P-8A program’s mission-system and weapon-certification aircraft. T3 will soon fly to join the other 2 test aircraft at NAS Patuxent River, MD. Boeing.

June 2010: BAE Systems completes the mission computer system qualification testing, and flies aboard the program’s 1st mission systems test flight in Seattle. Source.

April 10/10: US Navy Air Test and Evaluation Squadron VX-20′s first P-8A Poseidon test aircraft arrives at NAVAIR Patuxent River, MD facilities. Capt. Mike Moran, Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Aircraft program manager (PMA-290), said that the program continues to meet all performance criteria and is on track for initial operational capability in 2013.

The Poseidon Integrated Test Team includes Navy test squadrons VX-20 and VX-1, and Boeing; they will use this “T1″ aircraft to evaluate the P-8A’s airworthiness and expand its flight envelope. When the production-configured T2 and T3 arrive later in 2010, they will be used for extensive mission systems and weapons system testing. US NAVAIR release | YouTube video.

March 24/10: Just shoot me, redux. Need to speed up testing? Want to shoot a plane full of holes? Fly Southwest! Engineers at NAWCWD’s Weapons Survivability Laboratory (WSL) spent just $200,000 to add a cast-off 737 from Southwest Airlines to the P-8A Poseidon Live-Fire Test and Evaluation (LFTE) Program. NAWCAD WSL vulnerability engineer Paul Gorish found the plane while shopping for individual parts. It came complete with in-flight magazines; and after arriving at China Lake, CA, the engines, auxiliary power unit, avionics and windshield were the only things removed.

LFTE tests involve shooting various sections of the plane with different anti-aircraft rounds that it might encounter in theater, then assessing the damage and using that data to improve the aircraft’s survivability. The first LFTE test will look at how the hydraulics in the tail portion of the aircraft react when hit with a threat. Another test will evaluate how the oxygen bottles will react to a ballistic impact in a fully pressurized cabin.

The original plan called for the ground-test aircraft (S1) to arrive in 2012. Now they can offload some of the tests planned for S1 onto this 737, beginning in summer 2010, and complete all tests within the tight schedule. It’s also expected that Southwest’s former jet will become a source of parts to build-up the incomplete test-plane S1 into a more representative P-8A surrogate. US NAVAIR release.

Feb 4/10: Testing. Boeing successfully completes weapons ground vibration testing on P-8A Poseidon test aircraft T1, after loading 18 different weapons configurations onto the test aircraft over a 1 month period. For each set, external shakers induce vibration of the aircraft’s wings, stabilizer and stores to verify the plane’s structural integrity and reactions, using with more than 100 accelerometers and other external devices.

The effort comes before full flight testing at Pax River, MD, and follows May 2009 ground vibration tests without weapons. Boeing release.

Feb 3/10: India. Flight International reports that Boeing plans to put an additional Raytheon radar on the aft section of India’s P-8is, and is exploring an air-to-air mode for the APY-10. India wanted air-to-air capability and a 360 degree radar, and the AN/APY-10 provides only 240 degree coverage from the P-8′s nose section.

Feb 3/10: Self-inflicted delay. Flight International reports that the US Navy is facing a self-inflicted 6-month program delay. The ferry light to Patuxent River, MD was scheduled for September 2009, but the trip had been delayed to Q1 2010. The first 2 P-8As are in Seattle doing flight tests, and could perform all testing there, but the US Navy wants all testing done at NAVAIR’s east coast facility. Unfortunately, the Navy doesn’t have its designated facility ready to receive the P-8, hence the 6-month delay.

Feb 2/10: FY 2011 budget. The Pentagon releases its FY 2011 budget request, containing $2.92 billion for the P-8A program. That request includes $1.99 billion for 7 more P-8 aircraft, advance procurement for 9 FY 2012 aircraft, plus $929.2 million for Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation. The Pentagon adds that “aircraft procurements are tightly coupled to the P-3 retirement rates.”

Feb 2/10: Sub-contractors. Herley Industries, Inc. of in Lancaster, PA announces a $1.5 million sub-contract for integrated microwave assemblies, to be used in the U.S. Navy’s P-8A aircraft. This is Herley’s first production award under the P-8A program, as opposed to system design & development contracts.

Jan 29/10: Studies. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $16.5 million cost-plus-fixed-fee delivery order against a previously issued Basic Ordering Agreement (N00019-05-G-0026). They will conduct studies and analyses for the acoustic processor technology refresh, and capability analysis planning for the P-8A. In an era where more and more countries are fielding quiet, advanced submarines, and electronics become obsolete every 4-5 years, this kind of ongoing work is necessary.

Work will be performed in Anaheim, CA (83%), and Seattle, WA (17%), and is expected to be complete in July 2011.

Dec 4/09: IOT&E. Boeing in Seattle, WA received a $12.5 million not-to-exceed modification to a previously awarded cost-plus-award-fee contract (N00019-04-C-3146) in support of the P-8A initial operation test and evaluation (IOT&E). Specific efforts include the modification of courseware and training devices and transition, and integration of organic maintenance.

Work will be performed in St. Louis, MO (60%), and Seattle, WA (40%), and is expected to be complete in January 2012. Contract funds in the amount of $1 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

November 2009: APY-10. A Boeing and Raytheon worker formally finish installation of the APY-10 radar in the nose of P-8A test plane T2. T2 is the P-8A program’s primary mission system testbed, and it will enter the U.S. Navy’s flight test program in early 2010, after a follow-on phase of radar installation and additional instrumentation. During flight tests, US Navy and Boeing pilots will verify the performance of all aircraft sensors, including the APY-10. Boeing release.

Oct 24/09: Saudi Arabia. Abu Dhabi newspaper The National reports that Saudi Arabia has expressed interest in buying 6 of Boeing’s P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft, in a deal worth a reported $1.3 billion (about 4.8 billion riyals). The National says the lanes would be part of a larger $20 billion naval modernization:

“They took the steps to say to the US Navy that they are interested,” Ray Figueras, the director of strategic development for the P-8 Poseidon at Boeing Integrated Defense Systems (IDS), said of the Saudi Royal Navy. “We’ve been told there is a need for six.”…Details of the naval overhaul were announced last December when US defence officials said Saudi Arabia wanted to buy the P-8 along with the H-60R Seahawk multimission helicopter built by Sikorsky Aircraft, unmanned Fire Scout helicopters built by Northrop Grumman, and smaller combat ships… The [P-8] aircraft are said to cost $220 million each…”

Saudi Arabia has long coastlines of shallow seas, and a special interest in protecting the Strait of Hormuz and the Arabian/Persian Gulf. Its own topography lends itself well to larger fleets of smaller maritime patrol aircraft, but extending operations out to deal with threats like pirates near Yemen and Somalia would require a long-range aircraft. As always in the Gulf, corporate and political relationships also play a strong role in national choices.

Oct 15/09: Testing. The first US Navy test pilot flies a P-8A, alongside a Boeing test pilot. Initial test flights have centered around Boeing’s Seattle facilities, but the P-8A will move to Patuxent River, MD, in early 2010 for more advanced tests. The Integrated Test Team will include personnel from the Navy’s VX-1 and VX-20 squadrons, and from Boeing. They will spend the next 36 months flying and evaluating 3 aircraft, designated T1, T2 and T3. NAVAIR’s release quotes Lt. Roger Stanton:

“For the baseline P-8, it certainly flies like a 737… The interesting flying for the P-8 really will come when we have to emulate the P-3 mission – high bank angle, low altitude, autopilot integrated into our mission with missiles on the wings. It will get interesting.”

P-8A Rollout
(click to view full)

Sept 4/09: DCK cut off. The Whiting-Turner Contracting Co. in Baltimore, MD receives a $37.4 million firm-fixed-price contract to design and build a P-8A Operational Training Facility at Naval Air Station Jacksonville. The facility will include space for 10 operational flight trainers (OFT), bridge cranes over the OFT devices, 8 weapons tactics trainers, and 4 part task trainers; plus support equipment, computer based training stations, internal and external network communication equipment, training media storage, maintenance support shops, administrative offices, student study rooms, briefing areas, communications closets, and secure compartmented information facilities. The contract also contains an option, which would increase the contract’s value to $37.95 million if exercised. Work will be performed in Jacksonville, FL, and is expected to be complete by June 2011.

If this sounds familiar, it should. The July 2/09 entry describes a similar award to DCK North America. On July 13/09, however, Balfour Beatty Construction files a bid protest with the GAO protesting the US Navy’s award to DCK on multiple grounds. The government review of the protest led them to terminate DCK’s award, and re-evaluate the bids; that removed the basis of the protest, and led to its formal dismissal on Aug 5/09. The Whiting-Turner Contracting Company won the re-evaluation, and the contract previously awarded to DCK will be Terminated for Convenience.

This contract was competitively negotiated via the Navy Electronic Commerce Online website, with 21 proposals received in Phase One and, 7 Phase One offerors selected to proceed to Phase Two. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southeast in Jacksonville, FL will manage this new contract (N69450-09-C-1291).

Aug 27/09: AAS. Boeing in Seattle, WA receives a $25 million not-to-exceed modification to a previously awarded cost-plus-award-fee contract (N00019-04-C-3146). Work will be performed in Seattle, WA and is expected to be complete in February 2010.

The award updates Annex B of the P-8A system specification to include additional requirements associated with the Advanced Airborne Sensor (AAS)/P-8A interface requirement specification (IRS). The IRS refines requirements for the integration of the AAS maritime and littoral intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance radar, and the associated special mission cabin equipment on P-8 aircraft.

July 31/09: AAS/ LSRS. Raytheon announces a multi-year contract authorizing development of the Advanced Airborne Sensor, the follow-on to the canoe-shaped Littoral Surveillance Radar System (LSRS) that equips the most advanced P-3Cs.

As the sensor prime contractor, Raytheon will oversee development, production and installation of the AAS on the P-8A. Raytheon will work closely with its associate prime contractor, Boeing, for engineering, aircraft modifications, integration and flight test.

July 2/09: Infrastructure. DCK North America, LLC in Large, PA wins a $37.9 million firm-fixed-price contract to design and build an Operational Training Facility for P-8A aircraft at Naval Air Station Jacksonville, FL. The facility will include space for 10 Operational Flight Trainers (OFT), 8 Weapons Tactics Trainers, 4 Part Task Trainers, support equipment, bridge cranes over the OFTs, computer based training stations, internal and external network communication equipment, training media storage, maintenance support shops, administrative offices, student study rooms, briefing areas, communications closets, and Secure Compartmented Information Facilities.

Work will be performed in Jacksonville, FL, and is expected to be complete by June 2011. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via the Navy Electronic Commerce Online website, with 21 proposals received in Phase I and 7 Phase I offerors selected to proceed to Phase II. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southeast in Jacksonville, FL manages this contract (N69450-09-C-1257).

The award is subsequently overturned, following a GAO protest and re-compete.

June-July 2009: The US Navy reviews its future needs and decides that the P-8A program needs to grow to 117 operational aircraft, instead of 108.

May 5/09: Boeing rolls P-8 model T-2 out of the paint hangar at its Renton, WA, facility, displaying its U.S. Navy colors. T-2 is actually the 3rd of 5 test aircraft. Aircraft T-1 will be painted in the same gray paint scheme later this summer. Photo release.

May 2/09: Australia. Australia’s Defence White Paper reiterates its interest in 8 long-range maritime patrol aircraft, as part of an A$ 5 billion “AIR 7000, Phase 2″ program. Boeing’s P-8A will be that aircraft, unless something goes very wrong on the path to a final contract.

P-8 #T-1
(click to view full)

April 25/09: 1st flight. Boeing’s P-8A Poseidon test aircraft #T-1 successfully completes its 1st flight, spending 3:31 in the air and reaching a maximum altitude of 25,000 feet. Prior to takeoff, the P-8A team completed a limited series of flight checks, including engine starts and shutdowns. During the flight, test pilots performed airborne systems checks including engine accelerations and decelerations, autopilot flight modes, and auxiliary power unit shutdowns and starts.

After Boeing paints the aircraft, installs more test instrumentation, and conducts further ground tests, the integrated Navy/Boeing team will begin formal flight testing of the P-8A during Q3 2009. Boeing release.

1st flight

April 13/09: LRIP-2 lead-in. Boeing in Seattle, WA received a $109.1 million advance acquisition contract to buy long lead-time materials in support of the P-8A’s low rate initial production (LRIP) Lot I orders, and reserve production line slots in support of P-8A LRIP Lot II.

Work will be performed in Seattle, WA (87%) and Baltimore, MD (13%), and is expected to be complete in December 2013. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR(Federal Acquisition Regulations clause) 6.302-1 (N00019-09-C-0022).

March 12/09: India. In a notice to the US Congress, the State Department has said that it will license the direct commercial sale of P-8i aircraft to India, having factored in “political, military, economic, human rights and arms control considerations.” India’s domain-b.

A DCS buy doesn’t use a US military office as its agent, and is not subject to the same public notice provisions as a Foreign Military Sale buy. Even so, there are still some legal hurdles and agreements that must be present before a DCS item can be delivered to the customer.

Feb 11/09: India & EUMs. Reports surface that standard American provisions around “End Use Monitoring”, and information sharing restrictions that accompany American defense exports, are beginning to become a problem for the P-8i sale. Read “An EUM Bellwether? India/US Arms Deals Facing Crunch Over Conditions.”

Feb 2/09: Indian partners. The Wall Street Journal’s LiveMint reports that Boeing will buy aerospace structures and aviation electronics products worth at least INR 29.41 billion (about $600 million) from Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL), Dynamatic Technologies Ltd, HCL Technologies Ltd, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), Larsen and Toubro Ltd (L&T), Wipro Ltd, and simulator-maker CAE’s subsidiary Macmet Technologies Ltd.

Wipro, HCL, L&T and HAL declined to comment, but a Dynamatics, executive confirmed that the firm had been chosen as a vendor. A BEL executive said the firm had entered into an agreement with Boeing for communication equipment, radars, electronic warfare systems and contract manufacturing, but a contract was yet to be signed. Swati Rangachari, a spokeswoman for Boeing in India:

“Our team is working on the offset strategy and will be in touch with industry partners in a while… We will concentrate in the areas of avionics (aviation electronics) and aerostructures.”

Meanwhile, Flight International takes a deeper look at India’s nascent private aerospace industry, and its challenges, in “Can India’s aerospace manufacturers step up?”

Jan 2/09: Basing. The US Navy formally announces its basing plans. the plan involves 13 squadrons: 1 “fleet replacement” (training) squadron and 5 operational squadrons at Naval Air Station (NAS) Jacksonville, FL; 4 fleet squadrons at NAS Whidbey Island, WA; and 3 fleet squadrons at Marine Corps Base Hawaii in Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, with periodic squadron detachment operations at NAS North Island. Introduction of the P-8A MMA squadrons is projected to begin no later than 2012, and is expected be complete by 2019.

This decision implements the preferred “alternative 5″ identified in the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) for the Introduction of the P-8A Multi-Mission Aircraft into the U.S. Navy Fleet (q.v. Nov 20/08 entry). US Navy.

P-8i concept
(click to view full)

Dec 5/08: India contract. The Indian government announces that it has signed a $2.1 billion deal with Boeing for 8 maritime patrol aircraft in “P-8i” configuration. The $2.1 billion figure is the commonly reported total at the moment; DID cautions readers that exact dollar figures for Indian contracts often take some time to clarify. The contract reportedly includes lifetime maintenance support, and an option for another 8 aircraft. Indian Navy spokesman Commander Nirad Sinha:

“Though we have signed a deal, final clearance is still required from a U.S. authority… The first plane delivery is four years from the final contract signing, so I think it should come in 2013.”

Firm industrial agreements in India and decisions regarding indigenous Indian technologies for the P-8i are expected to follow, and Boeing’s release commits to delivering the 8th aircraft by 2015.

This order makes India the P-8 program’s lead export customer, and 2nd international participant. Australia has joined the program and given the P-8A what’s known as “first pass approval,” but any contract must wait for second pass approval from the government. See: Boeing | India Defence | CNN Money.

8 for India

Dec 29/08: India. The P-8I deal for India appears to be moving closer. India Defence reports that “virtually all the steps” required for the contract to be signed, including tabling of it in the Cabinet Committee on Security for approval, are complete. Reports place the deal at Rs 8,500 crore (about $1.7 billion) for 8 jets, with first delivery coming within 4 years and all deliveries by 2015. India currently flies 8 Tu-142s. India Defence | StrategyPage.

Dec 22/08: Bloomberg News reports that an Oct 31/08 budget memo from Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England approved shifting away as much as $940 million from the P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft program, in order to complete payment for the 3rd DDG-1000 destroyer that Congress partially funded in FY 2009. The Navy proposed getting 2 aircraft instead of 6 in the initial production phases.

Meanwhile, the US Navy faces significant challenges keeping the existing fleet of P-3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft in the air. Almost 1/4 of this aging fleet has been grounded due to safety concerns, and the Navy is forced to retire some aircraft every year. Even though they are in greater demand than ever over key sea lanes, and in overland surveillance roles on the front lines. Early introduction of the P-8A has been touted as critical to maintaining these capabilities, and avoiding both near-term and long-term shortfalls.

Nov 20/08: Basing. The US Navy releases environmental impact statements (EIS), and prepares to go ahead with its initial basing plan for the P-8A fleet. Under a “preferred” basing plan, 84 Poseidons would replace 120 of the older P-3C Orions. Their deployment would involve: 5 squadrons of 6 planes each at at Naval Air Station Jacksonville, FL (30); another 4 squadrons at NAS Whidbey Island, WA (24); and 3 squadrons in Marine Corps Base Hawaii at Kaneohe, Hawaii (18).

The goal would be to begin introducing the planes in 2012, and finish by 2019. The Navy still must issue a “record of decision” for the Poseidon plan.

NAS Brunswick was not considered as a potential home base because all P-3 aircraft and supporting functions are being transferred to NAS Jacksonville per the BRAC 2005 recommendations. The Navy did consider Hickam Air Force Base on Oahu as an alternative Hawaii site, but concluded there wasn’t enough land available at Hickam AFB to support them. US Navy P-8A EIS site | Seattle Post-Intelligencer | Seattle Times | Seattle Times re: Hawaii | Honolulu Advertiser, incl. other Kaneohe changes.

Nov 6/08: Engine cert. CFM International’s announces that its CFM56-7B27A/3 engine model has been jointly certified by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and the European Aviation Safety Agency for the U.S. Navy’s P-8A Poseidon, paving the way for flight tests in 2009 and initial operational capability in 2013. Each engine is rated at 27,300 pounds (121 kN) takeoff thrust, and the type has been subjected to extreme heat and icing conditions ver extended periods of time as part of its certification.

CFM International (CFM) is a 50/50 joint company between Snecma (SAFRAN Group) and General Electric Company. The CFM56-7B family is very widely used in commercial aviation and powers other 737 military derivatives like the Boeing 737 AEW&C “Wedgetail” and the US military’s C-40 transport aircraft. CFM release.

Nov 2/08: Strike over. Boeing’s strike formally ends, after an agreement is reached between Boeing and the IAM.

P-8A: oncoming
(click to view full)

Sept 11/08: India. The Times of India reports on the Harpoon missile sale as just one of several pending buys, and says that:

“…This [Harpoon sale] comes even as India’s biggest-ever defence deal with US – the one to buy eight Boeing P-8i long-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft for Rs 8,500 crore – has been sent for final clearance to the Cabinet Committee on Security after finalisation of commercial negotiations.”

Sept 6/08: Strike! A strike begins at Boeing, shutting down production for any P-8 aircraft that are still in factory assembly. The potential exists for a long and damaging strike at Boeing; DID’s “Boeing Strike Poised to Disrupt Deliveries” covers the key issues and potential impacts.

Aug 12/08: Industrial. Boeing announces that the first P-8A Poseidon for the U.S. Navy has moved from factory assembly to systems integration and pre-flight work. Boeing IDS will now focus on calibrating the flight-test instrumentation on board the aircraft, before moving it to Boeing Field in Seattle early in 2009 for systems integration and additional testing.

Aug 10/08: India. Sindh Today reports that India ‘s contract negotiating committee has completed its report on price negotiations with Boeing, after Boeing won the technical bid and the trials of the product. Negotiations were reportedly stuck due to the end-user agreement, under which Boeing can conduct physical inspections of the aircraft as and when it wants to check if the product is being used for the purpose it has been acquired. This is linked to requirements under American ITAR laws, which regulate sales of military equipment whether they are conducted as FMS or direct commercial sales. India’s defence ministry reportedly separated that set of negotiations from the deal itself, knowing that a signed deal will be significantly harder to cancel, on either side.

The contract will reportedly be a direct commercial agreement between Boeing and the Indian Navy, rather than an announced Foreign Military Sale. The cost is reportedly around $2.2 billion, and that deal will now go to the defence acquisition committee (DAC) and then to the cabinet committee on security (CCS) for approval.

Aug 4/08: LRIP intent. NAVAIR discloses in a FebBizOpps notice that it expects to order 10 P-8A aircraft in fiscal 2010, followed by 12 in FY 2011 and 14 in FY 2012. That would make up the entire set of 36 during Low Rate Initial Production. LRIP is traditionally more expensive than full-rate production, and almost $6.3 billion is budgeted for that phase.

Boeing had said in 2004 that it could accelerate production and move up the first in-service unit by up to a year, from FY 2013 to FY 2012. Now, Flight International reports that “An airframe fatigue crisis facing the Lockheed P-3 Orion fleet has recently forced NAVAIR to publicly consider accepting Boeing’s offer…”

The 10 aircraft projected for FY 2010 would need to receive advance funding for long-lead items in the FY 2009 budget, and should be deliverable by 2012 to stand up one squadron. At the moment, 5 developmental prototypes are in various stages of assembly, with first flight in Q4 2009. As one can see, the timeline for accelerated production hinges strongly on the avoidance of any major engineering or testing issues that delay the P-8A’s progress.

May 20/08: Industrial. P-8 production begins using moving assembly line techniques, which were pioneered with other aircraft. The P-8s will be positioned in a straight-line configuration on the factory floor and stay at a production station for a period of time before advancing to the next station. Standard processes, visual control systems and point-of-use staging are in place, allowing work to flow continuously and quickly. Boeing release.

May 1/08: Industrial. Boeing joins the wing assembly and fuselage of the first P-8A Poseidon in Renton, WA. The next major P-8A assembly milestone will be engine installation this summer. Boeing’s release says that the team remains on track for delivery of the first test aircraft to the Navy in 2009.

April 20/08: India. India’s NDTV reports that:

“India is set to sign a $2.2 billion deal, its biggest with the US, for eight long-range maritime reconnaissance (LRMR) aircraft, even as the Indian Navy chief opposed ”intrusiveness” in the use of military hardware the country purchases.

Negotiations for the purchase of the Boeing-P8I LRMR aircraft are in the final stages and are likely to be wrapped up during Indian Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta’s visit to the US that began Sunday [DID: That did not happen]. The agreement for the purchase under the US Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route will be signed between the two governments in New Delhi later this year, official sources said.”

March 18/08: MX-20 picked. Boeing picks L-3 Communications Wescam to supply its MX-20HD EO/IR multi-spectral sensor turrets as the P-8A’s digital electro-optical and infrared (EO/IR) imaging sensors. L-3 Wescam’s turrets use Enhanced Range Local Area Processing (ELAP) technology to produce real-time image enhancement for EO Day, EO Night & IR video that extends their surveillance range, clarifies the picture, and offers maximum haze penetration.

Deliveries are scheduled to begin in mid-2008. Wescam turrets also serve on Britain’s updated Nimrod MRA4 maritime patrol aircraft. L-3 Wescam release.

Dec 11/07: Sub-contractors. Team Boeing and the US Navy celebrate the start of P-8A fuselage production at Spirit AeroSystems’ Wichita, KS facility, loading the first P-8A fuselage component into a holding fixture on the factory floor. The fuselage assemblies eventually will come together on Spirit’s existing Next-Generation 737 production line. In early 2008, Spirit will ship the first P-8A fuselage to Boeing Commercial Airplanes in Renton, WA for wing assemblies and systems integration. NAVAIR release | Boeing release.

Oct 22/07: Just shoot me. Boeing announces that its P-8A Poseidon team completed the program’s 200th live-fire shot in September 2007, at the U.S. Navy’s Weapons Survivability Laboratory in China Lake, CA. During testing, live ordnance is fired into simulated aircraft sections to replicate a potential threat environment. Dry bays are locations adjacent to fuel that also may contain electrical and hydraulic lines, as well as environmental control systems or engine bleed-air lines. The systems being designed and developed will ensure that dry bay fires are automatically detected and suppressed.

P-8A fire suppression testing began in April 2005, and will continue through 2009. Full-scale live-fire testing is slated for 2012 using the P-8A static test aircraft. Boeing release.

P-8 production
(click to view full)

Aug 9/07: Sub-contractors. Boeing announces that Spirit AeroSystems has joined its P-8A Poseidon industry team. Spirit will build the 737 aircraft’s fuselage and airframe tail sections and struts in Wichita, KS. After completion, Spirit will ship the components to Boeing facilities in Renton, WA for final assembly and introduction of mission-specific systems. Spirit is also part of Boeing’s KC-767 team, and works with Boeing as a partner to produce many of its civilian aircraft.

July 20/07: Australia. Australia grants first pass approval for Phase 2 of its AIR 7000 program, which is the manned aircraft portion. First pass approval allows Australia’s Department of Defence to commence formal negotiations with the United States Navy join the P-8A Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) program; Phase 2 is currently estimated at A$ 4 billion (currently about USD$ 3.52 billion). Australian DoD release.

AIR 7000, Phase 1 involves a Multi-mission Unmanned Aerial System to accompany/ supplement the manned Phase 2 aircraft. Australia gave First Pass Approval to that segment in May 2006, and a final decision and contract regarding participation in the USA’s BAMS program is expected by the end of 2007. These 2 components will replace Australia’s AP-3C Orion aircraft, which are scheduled for retirement in 2018 after over 30 years of service.

July 3/07: India. Defense News reports that Indian officials will be studying Boeing’s P-8A and Airbus A319 aircraft in France, Germany, Spain and the United States as they prepare for a decision re: their maritime patrol aircraft competition.

Don’t get too excited yet; bids were submitted back in April 2006, but that’s only the very beginning. Indian officials will be sending preliminary evaluations go to the MoD by September 2007, which will lead to a short list of bidders. A preliminary decision and price negotiations will begin “within two years,” i.e. by mid-2009. Past experience has demonstrated that such price negotiations can take years themselves – or even sink deals entirely, something that has happened repeatedly during India’s attempts to purchase second-hand Mirage 2000 fighters.

June 18/07: Sub-contractors. United Technologies subsidiary Hamilton Sundstrand, announces that its Kidde Aerospace & Defense unit has been selected to supply Dry Bay Fire Protection Systems for the Boeing P-8A. The non-halon Dry Bay Fire Protection System will detect and suppress fires and explosions in the aircraft’s compartments in case flammable fluids leak in due to ballistic damage or system faults. The potential program value could exceed $100 million for both domestic and international sales over the life of the program.

Hamilton Sundstrand had previously been selected to supply the electric power generating system, power distribution and cooling systems on the P-8A. Hamilton Sundstrand release.

May 17/07: LSRS. Ares blog at Aviation Week Reveals the Littoral Surveillance Radar System (LSRS) that equips a few P-3Cs, and will equip the P-8A.

Bill Sweetman discusses the radar, explains the likely link to a design modification made by Boeing early in the program, and notes the possible convergence of the Navy’s P-8A’s mission with the overland surveillance job done by the USAF’s E-8C JSTARS – though NATO’s Airbus 321-based AGS, with its own UAV companion, would appear to be an even closer comparison.

March 29/07: Infrastructure. Sauer, Inc. in Jacksonville, FL received $14.7 million for task #0001 under previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N62477-04-D-0036) for the Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) Test Facilities supporting the MMA Program at Patuxent River, MD. Work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD, and is expected to be complete March 2009. This contract was competitively procured, with 2 proposals received by The Naval Facilities Engineering Command in Washington, DC.

Jan 9/07: P-8A MMA formally given the designation “Poseidon”.

June 28/06: Infrastructure. John C. Grimberg Co. Inc. in Rockville, MD won a $6.1 million for firm-fixed-price task order 0009 under a previously awarded indefinite-quantity, multiple-award construction contract. The funds cover design and construction of P-8 aircraft test facilities at Naval Air Station Patuxent River. It is the first of two projects that together will support the maintenance testing and instrumentation needs of the P-8 MMA program. This phase will build a new 2-story P-8 MMA test complex building on a wooded site adjacent to Building 1463 and across the street from Hangar 305. The building will include engineering offices, maintenance and telecommunications rooms. Work is expected to be completed by July 2007.

The basic contract was competitively procured via the NAVFAC e-solicitation website, with 17 proposals received and an award made on July 22, 2004. The total contract amount is not to exceed $500 million over the base period and 4 option years, and the 7 approved contractors may compete for task orders under the terms and conditions of the existing contract. Two proposals were received for this task order by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command in Washington, DC.

Weapon separation
wind tunnel tests
(click to view full)

Feb 23/06: Testing. Boeing announces the completion of P-8A weapons separation wind tunnel tests at the Arnold Air Force Base Engineering Development Center in Tullahoma, TN. These help to ensure that explosives-filled weapons won’t blow up the aircraft when dropped. See release.

Nov 21/05: See DID’s article “Boeing Wins $24M for P-8A & BAMS-Related Software Development”

April 18/05: Boeing’s team announces a competition for fire-suppression systems in the P-8′s dry bays adjacent to fuel tanks containing electrical and hydraulic lines, environmental control systems, or engine bleed air lines.

The testing program involves two “iron bird” test fixtures. A gun will fire an explosive projectile to ignite a fire in the bay, while inflicting only moderate damage to the test fixture. Preliminary tests are scheduled for April-May 2005. Development and verification testing of the selected systems will continue through 2009. Full-scale live-fire testing is scheduled for 2012 using the P-8A static test aircraft. There’s more in the full Boeing release.

April 13/05: Boeing’s P-8 team announces the completion of 1,300 hours of high-speed wind-tunnel testing a full week ahead of schedule on March 18, 2005. The team conducted the tests at the NASA Ames Research Center at Moffet Field, CA, using a 6.2 percent scale model in the 11-ft. transonic wind tunnel. Previous low-speed wind tunnel tests in Boeing’s 20 x 20 ft. subsonic wind tunnel facility in Philadelphia, PA looked at a variety of unique features, in addition to the basic stability of the aircraft with weapons bay door open, or flaps down, or landing gear down to simulate takeoff and landing conditions.

Preliminary analysis of test data revealed no major surprises or obvious problems, and the team took measures to improve test productivity that saved 200 hours of the testing time. See Boeing high-speed release | low speed release.

Sept 30/04: The Boeing Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) program successfully passes an in-depth, 3-day System Requirements Review (SRR) by the U.S. Navy. See Boeing release.

Nov 13/03: Boeing Announces Formation of MMA Industry Team.

Appendix A: India's Interest & Broader Export Potential

TU-142M "Bear"

The P-8 replaces the P-3 Orion aircraft currently in service with 15 countries. The question is, will that be enough to ensure market success?

The Indian Navy's interest in joining the P-8 program was communicated in 2005, and some Indian Navy sources believed that a Air India's decision to spend $6 billion on 50 Boeing civil jets would incline Boeing toward a favorable response. Whether or not that purchase was a factor, it's a matter of record that Boeing submitted a bid involving 8 737-derived P-8 aircraft for India's Maritime Patrol Aircraft competition - and won.

The P-8A matches the operational profile currently assigned to the Indian Navy's Russian-made Tupolev-142 "Bear" and Ilyushin-38 "May" long-range reconnaissance, maritime patrol and anti-submarine warfare aircraft. It faced strong competition, and its 2015 delivery schedule was a potential issue the bid; but other factors were also at work, and the plane won.

Discussions concerning the P-8 came in the wake a 2005 visit to India by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, in which the USA expressed its desire to make improvements in their strategic relationship. Given the two nations' shared interest in an arc that stretches from the Staits of Malacca to the coast of East Africa, many analysts see naval cooperation as the likely linchpin of their future military relationship. Washington's initial offer of at least 12 P-3C Orions would have matched India's requirements profile immediately, but participation in the P-8A offered an aircraft with superior performance in all respects, a much longer operational lifespan, plus accompanying strategic, industrial, and prestige benefits. Some analysts considered the request a sort of test by India of its long-term importance to the USA. If so, it appears that the relationship has passed the test.

What about sales beyond India?

P-3/ CP-140 Aurora
(click to view full)

By mid-2005, age had shrunk the global P-3 fleet to something on the order of 225 P-3 type aircraft flying on behalf of 15 countries. Even so, this represents a substantial market. The question is, who will claim it?

Some nations who fly the P-3 already have a natural interest in the P-8, while others like India recognize its obvious usefulness against both the diesel submarine threat and a variety of threats related to the war on terrorism, anti-drug efforts, et. al. As such, the market opportunity for the MMA could be quite substantial. A 2004 story in Aviation Week said that Boeing believes there are opportunities to sell 100 to 150 P-8s abroad.

Subsequent developments have cast doubt on that forecast.

At the end of 2004, Australia, Canada, and Italy were named by the U.S. government as being the most likely partners in the development of the P-8A Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA). Each potential international partner would be expected to contribute approximately $300 million toward the development of the P-8A. The U.S. also approached other allies but according to eDefense they were "less responsive," raising the prospect of a competing European system at some future date based on an Airbus airframe - or even a more complete bifurcation of the maritime surveillance market.

The US Navy entered formal talks with Australia, Canada, and Italy, but did not receive any firm commitments. Australia has since taken strong steps toward participation, but Canada has made no commitments of any kind, and Italy has since taken steps to purchase ATR twin-turboprop maritime patrol aircraft instead.

CN-235MP Persuader
(click to view full)

This lack of interest has to concern Boeing, because the P-3's successor will not be the only game in town. The EU's focus on developing a rival defense industry, and European states' reduced need to patrol long sea lanes in the absence of a global Soviet threat, are creating a number of smaller competitors. These include aircraft like the French Atlantique ATL3, and the EADS/CASA CN-235MP Persuader already ordered by Spain, Indonesia, Ireland, Turkey, UAE, and the US Coast Guard. Italy is exporting ATR-42MP turboprops and flying them in their Coast Guard, while building larger versions based on the popular ATR-72 regional passenger turboprop for Italy's Navy and customers like Turkey. Designs are even appearing for executive jets equipped with maritime surveillance radars and related gear.

During the P-3's era, long over-water patrols of the vital Atlantic sea lanes were an absolute necessity for all NATO members, lest Soviet submarines destroy all hope of reinforcements from America. With the demise of the Soviet Union, that need is gone. European maritime surveillance and attack requirements have shrunk sharply, and many countries see the P-8's range and endurance parameters as unnecessary.

As a result, the global maritime patrol category appears to be bifurcating into a broad class of nations who buy smaller and cheaper aircraft, and an elite few with more extensive requirements who can and will buy aircraft in the P-8A's class.

The USA still faces strategic naval competitors, and its aircraft must still cover long sea lanes. This geographic need is shared to varying degrees by a few other nations like Australia, Britain, Brazil, Canada, China, Chile, Denmark, France, India, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, and Russia. Britain (Nimrod MRA4), France (ATL3, Falcon 50 Surmar bizjet derivative, possibly Airbus 319MPA) and Japan (P-X jet) each have their own programs, Russia will go her own way, and China is not an eligible customer for American or European aircraft. Australia, India, and the USA are on board with the P-8A. Which countries join them likely boils down to how many of the remaining countries (Brazil, Canada, Chile, Denmark, India, New Zealand, Norway), plus rich "prestige buyers" in the Middle East, eventually choose to include aircraft with the P-8's range, equipment, and performance; as opposed to buying fleets that only include smaller and less capable options based on passenger/utility turboprops, business jets, or even long-endurance UAVs.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Boeing - P-8A Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA). See also All Systems Go Magazine, Vol. 2 Issue 1 (2003), with "737 MMA: Boeing Launches New Era".

• GlobalSecurity.org - P-8A Multimission Maritime Aircraft

• Avionics Magazine - B737 Joins the Navy. Excellent treatment of the P-8A's electronics.

• Naval Technology - P-8A - Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA), USA

• Wikipedia - P-8 Multimission Maritime Aircraft

• Nav Log - The P-8: The Adventure Continues. Deeply doubts that the USN will buy the number it plans to buy.

• DID - Kicking it Up a Notch: Poseidon's Unmanned BAMS Companion

• GlobalSecurity.org - P-7 Long Range Air ASW-Capable Aircraft (LRAACA)

• Lexington Institute (Oct 8/10) - P-8A Poseidon: A New Model For Military Procurement. More than slightly over-optimistic about potential export buyers.

• DID (Nov 21/06) - Aging Aircraft Redux: Seapower on US Navy & USMC Fleets

• DID (Aug 24/05) - Follow-Up: Rear Adm. Michael L. Holmes on The USA's P-3C Force. Excellent in-depth interview, which discusses plans for the P-3 fleet, changes underway in the Navy, and the P-8's role.

• Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest (2003; Volume 24, Number 3) - Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft Survivability in Modern Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Missions [PDF format]

• National Defense Magazine (December 2000) – Navy Ponders Options for P-3 Replacement. Good overview of the choices and pressures at hand.

• DID – C-40 Clippers Hitting Their Stride, Despite Past Controversy. Another 737 derivative, in service with the USN, offers some fleet commonality.

• Wikipedia – Wedgetail 737 AEW&CS. Not bought by the USA, but by likely P-8 operator Australia, as well as South Korea and Turkey. Experiencing significant R&D issues.

Additional Readings & Sources: The MP Market & Competitors

• American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics [AIAA], Aerospace America Magazine (April 2002) – Maritime patrol market: Escaping the doldrums. By the Teal Group, an aerospace industry analyst firm. Very good at outlining the contours of the P-8′s market, as well as some of the turboprop vs. jet trade-offs.

Prop-Driven

• GlobalSecurity.org – P-3 Orion

• DID – P-3 Recovery Plan Tries to Keep the Fleet in the Air. Bridging to the P-8A is becoming a challenge, as the P-3s wear out.

• Naval Technology – Atlantique ATL3 – Maritime Patrol Aircraft, France

• ATR – ATR-72 ASW. Size similar to the Dash-8, can be armed. Their smaller ATR-42 has an “ATR Surveyor” maritime surveillance version.

• Naval Technology – AirTech CN-235MP/MPA – Maritime Patrol Aircraft, Spain / Indonesia

• Modified Dash-8 turboprop aircraft are serving as the aerial linchpin of Australia’s billion-dollar public-private Coastwatch program, and have been ordered or leased by other nations as well.

Jets

• CASR – Aurora Alternatives – EADS MPA320 / MPA319. The A319 MPA doesn’t have many other sources. This article explains why – it was originally an A320 MPA, but Spain and Italy chose cheaper alternatives. Changes were made, and India was the launch customer target for the “MPA319-CJ”, but Boeing’s P-8i won instead and that may be the end of the Airbus platform. See also Flight International’s “EADS proposes maritime variant of Airbus A319 with bomb bay doors for India.”

• DID FOCUS Article – Nimrod Was Actually a Good Hunter: Upgrading Britain’s Fleet (updated). Provides an interesting basis of comparison to the P-8A program. Some aircraft in the British Nimrod fleet are being upgraded to MRA4 status, and will serve as Britain’s long-range maritime patrol aircraft. Like the P-8 Poseidon, the Nimrod is also a converted passenger jet – albeit one of 1950s vintage design.

• DID – Japan’s P-X Maritime Patrol Aircraft. Our readers supplied some answers re: Japan’s absence from the list of P-8 partners.

• CASR – Bombardier Challenger 604 MMA. “Since 2003, Challenger 604 Multi-Mission Aircraft of the Royal Danish Air Force (Flyvevabnet) have been flying sovereignty/fisheries enforcement patrols around Greenland and the Faroe Islands. These Canadian-made aircraft are Bombardier Challenger 604 bizjets equipped with quick-change interiors for different roles including VIP transport, medevac, maritime surveillance (for which search radar is fitted), fisheries / EEZ protection, ice reconnaissance, SAR, and environmental protection…”

• Airliners.net – Dassault Falcon 50. “The Surmar is a maritime patrol version of the [Falcon 50EX] ordered by the French navy (fitted with a FLIR and search radar).” See also Dassault’s Multi-Mission Falcon page.

Additional Readings & Sources: News & Updates

• Lexington Institute (Oct 3/12) – Modernizing the Air Force’s Electronic Aircraft Fleet [PDF]. Advocates a P-8 derivative instead of re-engining and maintaining 707-derived E-8C battlefield surveillance planes.

• Indian Defence Review (Vol 23.3, September 2008) – Boeing plans to bring to India a uniquely Indian solution. This interview with Chris Chadwick, President, Boeing Military Aircraft Discusses Boeing’s plans for industrial cooperation et. al. in India.

• Raytheon (August 8/06) – Raytheon Celebrates P-8A Early Delivery To Boeing. They’re referring to key parts of the APY-10 radar.

• Linux Sys-Con (Aug 1/06) – Boeing Selects Wind River Carrier Grade Linux For P-8A MMA System.

• Curtiss-Wright – (July 31/06) – Curtiss-Wright will supply COTS Video Switching Technology [PDF format]. A $2.7 million contract for 19″ air-cooled rack mount VME-based Video Interface Units (VIU) to be integrated into the P-8A’s Mission Computing Display System.

• DID (April 17/06) – India’s Navy Holding Maritime Patrol Aircraft Competition Boeing’s P-8A MMA submitted a bid, which is detailed in our coverage along with the various contenders and India’s growing naval responsibilities.

• DID (Feb 06/06) – ACS Failure Fallout: Boeing to Offer SIGINT 737 (updated). The P-8A team is involved, and the two aircraft would share some common systems. A SIGINT 737 would replace the EP-3 Aries II Orion derivatives currently in service.

• DID (Dec 12/05) – $96.5M to Refine USA’s Main Airborne Maritime Surveillance Radar. This modification continues the refinement of the AN/APS-137D(V)5 maritime radar system, by exercising an option for the development, testing, and incorporation of enhanced precision targeting. DID explains what this radar does. An iteration of this radar will be installed on the P-8A.

• DID (Dec 2/05) – Global Hawk UAV Prepares for Maritime Role (updated). These efforts are relevant to BAMS/PUMAS.

• Stork (Nov 18/05) – Stork Aerospace selected by Boeing for development and management of the P-8A Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) wiring. Stork has a world-class specialty in this area, and are doing the wiring for the F-35 fighter as well. The package includes development of all P-8A Mission System wire bundles, fiber optics, coax and data bus wiring systems and delivery of systems for first three developmental test aircraft, development laboratories and four follow-on optional operational test aircraft. The contract is currently valued at approximately $12 million during a 4 year period.

• Seapower (June 2005) – Boeing Eyes High Flying Torpedo. The High-Altitude ASW Weapon Concept. The HAAWC Mk54 lightweight torpedo would be launched from the P-8A Multimission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) at an altitude of 30,000 feet and glide seven to 10 minutes to the water entry point, where it would shed its wings and activate a parachute to lower the torpedo into the water to begin its run toward the target. This avoids the need to make a time-consuming descent from their surveillance altitudes of 30,000 feet to a release altitude of 300-1,000 feet and release a torpedo, something that saves wear on the P-3C Orion’s wings. Is it also an implicit admission that the 737 is not particularly well suited to long stints at low altitudes?

• Aviation Week Aerospace Daily & Defense Report (Nov 5/04) – U.S. Navy Eyes Three Nations For Possible Role In MMA

• India Express (May 3/05) – Navy Eyes New Boeing, Awaits Signal

• Lockheed-Martin (April 5/04) – Lockheed Martin’s Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft Offers Latest Mission System Technologies For The U.S. Navy

• Lockheed Martin (Dec 16/03) – Lockheed Martin Announces Propulsion Team For Navy’s Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft Competition

• Lockheed Martin (June 9/03) – Lockheed Martin’s Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft Solution Is Right For Many Countries. Apparently not for the USA, however. It was based on the P-3.

• US NAVAIR (Jan 13/03) – Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft: The Future of Maritime Patrol

America’s M1 Abrams tanks come in a number of versions. In addition to the M1A1 that is now standard, the US Army is beginning to field its M1 TUSK for urban warfare. It also operates the M1A2 System Enhancement Program (SEP), currently the most advanced standard variant.

This Spotlight article covers the M1A2 Abrams SEP upgrade program, and will be updated and backfilled as new contracts are issued and key events take place.

M1A2 SEP: Additional Background

Some SEP upgrades
(click to view full)

The M1A2 SEP is builds on the digitized M1A2 platform with an improved armor package of third generation steel-encased depleted uranium armor, a new command and control system, second-generation FLIR thermal sights that include a Commander’s Independent Thermal Viewer (CITV) for “hunter-killer” operation, the Under Armor Auxiliary Power Unit (UAAPU) that lets crews run key electronics without running the engine, and a Thermal Management System (TMS – i.e. air conditioning for crew & electronics). The M1A2 SEP also features enhanced electronics like color maps and displays, improved networked communications, high-density computer memory and increased microprocessing speed, a more user friendly “Soldier Machine Interface (SMI)”, and an open operating computing system that will make future upgrades and additions easier.

The M1A2 SEP’s advanced FLIR/thermal sights are part of the US Army’s Horizontal Technology Integration (HTI) Second Generation Forward Looking Infrared (HTI SGF) sighting systems program, which creates commonality with other vehicles like the M2/M3 Bradley IFVs.

The M1A2 SEP is a formidable upgrade package, but it was missing a small but crucial item. Troops in Iraq and elsewhere are also clamoring for a phone on the outside of the tank that will let them talk to the vehicle crew. This was common as far back as World War 2, and its lack is hampering coordination on the modern battlefield – especially in urban areas. A General Dynamics representative noted that future M1A2 Abrams TUSK (Tank Urban Survivability Kit) vehicles will have this feature, but the SEP v1 tanks did not.

M1A2 SEP Version 2 configuration, which is just beginning to appear, fixes this. It adds improved displays, sights, and power systems compared to earlier SEP versions – plus the tank-infantry phone. Recent orders also added a CROWS-II top-mounted machine gun with advanced sights. The CROWS system can be controlled from inside the tank using a joystick and screen, removing the need to open the hatch and expose the crews to snipers. SEPv2 is the most technologically advanced digital Abrams tank, and is also positioned for future communications and other technology updates.

Recent budgets for M1A1 enhancements, including both M1A1-Situational Awareness and M1A2 tanks, include:

• FY 2010: $278.8 million for 22 tanks ($93.8M RDT&E, $185.0M procurement)
  
• FY 2011: $294.4 million for 21 tanks ($93.6M RDT&E, $182.0M procurement, $18.8M spares)
  
• FY 2012: $583.9 million for 63 tanks ($9.3M RDT&E, $567.4M procurement, $7.2M spares)
  
• FY 2013 Request: $300.8 million, ($97.3M RDT&E, $203.5M procurement) meant to “complete the final [SEP] production, fielding, and training” – 20-24 tanks by some reports.
  
• FY 2014 Request: $297.4 million ($101.3M RDT&E, $178.1M procurement).

M1A2 SEP: Related Contracts

Commander’s Display Unit

The Armor Site notes that:

“A multi-year contract for 307 M1A2 Abrams Systems Enhancement Program (SEP) tanks was awarded in March 2001 with production into 2004. The current Army plan allows for a fleet of 588 M1A2 SEP, 586 M1A2 and 4,393 M1A1 tanks. The potential exits for a retrofit program of 129 M1A2 tanks to the SEP configuration between 2004 and 2005… The US Army decided to cancel future production of the M1A2 SEP from FY2004, but in June 2005 ordered the upgraded of a further 60 M1A2 tanks to SEP configuration.”

That program has now grown very substantially, and a 2007 contract added 435 more more M1A2 SEPs. Orders have continued to come in, and General Dynamics says that the current multi-year award set will complete the modernization of all M1 tanks in the active-duty army to M1A2 SEP standard. By 2014, however, their interest in keeping the facility running led supportive members of Congress to continue spending money on the program, over the Army’s objections.

Unless otherwise specified, all contracts are awarded by The U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) in Warren, MI; and the recipient is General Dynamics Land Systems in Sterling Heights, MI.

April 29/13: Congress is looking to spend funds over and above the Pentagon’s request, in order to keep General Dynamics Land Systems running at a higher rate. The Lima plant is reportedly producing about 5 M1A2S upgrade kits per month for Saudi Arabia, and 4 M1A1M kits per month for Egypt, plus production of Israeli Namer ultra-heavy Infantry Fighting Vehicles. Of the Army’s 2,400 tanks, about 1,500 – 1,600 have reportedly received the $7.5 million MA2SEPv2 upgrade. The US Army had wanted to stop buying tanks until 2017, using funds for R&D to produce an updated M1 variant.

Congress has other ideas, and $468 million is a consistently-used figure for the extra spending, but that isn’t broken down clearly. What is clear is that the US Army has said it doesn’t want or need more M1A2s, and wants to spend the money elsewhere at a time when its reducing training and maintenance. Congress disagrees for a combination of industrial reasons involving the restart costs of drying up the sub-contractor chain (and killing some of their firms), and political reasons involving jobs in a state with powerful representatives and outsize significance in Presidential politics. AP | CS Monitor.

April 10/13: FY 2014 Budget. The President releases a proposed budget at last, the latest in modern memory. The Senate and House were already working on budgets in his absence, but the Pentagon’s submission is actually important to proceedings going forward. See ongoing DID coverage. With respect to the M1 fleet, the budget would spend $279.4 million ($101.3M RDT&E, $178.1M procurement) to:

“…maintain the armor facility at a sustainable level and minimize loss of skilled labor. It also procures numerous approved modifications to fielded M1A2 Abrams tanks, including the Data Distribution Unit (DDU) to enable network interoperability, the Vehicle Health Management System (VHMS), loader tray modification to improve safety and the Commander’s Remote Operating Weapon Station (CROWS).”

April 25/12: General Dynamics Land Systems in Sterling Heights, MI wins a $31.1 million firm-fixed-price contract to create 46 Abrams M1A2 SEPv2 vehicles from existing stocks, by installing the upgrade kits.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH; Scranton, PA; Anniston, AL; and Tallahassee, FL, with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/14. One bid was solicited, with 1 bid received (W56HZV-12-C-0198).

Dec 23/11: A $59.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to buy Abrams M1A2 System Enhancement Packages and CROWS weapon stations. Based on past contracts, this will cover 21 M1A2 SEPv2 kits, and finish funding for the planned 435 tanks under the program, though an installation contract may still be forthcoming.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH; Tallahassee, FL; Anniston, AL; Scranton, PA; and Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/13. One bid was solicited, with one bid received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

March 1/11: A $59.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for up to 21 Abrams M1A2 SEPv2 upgrade tanks. That means full materials and labor for the upgrades.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH; Tallahassee, FL; Anniston, AL; Scranton, PA; and Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/13. One bid was solicited with one bid received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

March 5/10: A $62.1 million firm-fixed-price contract covers Program Year 4, Increment 2 of the Abrams multi-year contract. The Army is buying full materials and labor for 22 M1A2 SEPv2 upgrades.

General Dynamics Land Systems says that before this recent “call-up” of 22 kits, 371 of the 435 total vehicles had been funded. Now, only 42 vehicles require funding, and they expected to be taken care of in the next 2 increments around January 2011 and 2012. These “funding years” are different from “program years”, and PY 4 is expected to cover 39 M1A2 SEPv2s.

Work is to be performed in Lima, OH (75%); Tallahassee, FL (10%); Anniston, AL (9%); Scranton, PA (3%); and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), with an estimated completion date of Nov 30/12. TACOM in Warren, MI issued the contract (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Sept 14/09: An $18.2 million unfinalized Change Order Modification firm-fixed-price multi-year contract to buy up to 370 Commanders Remote Operated Weapons Stations version 2 kits (CROWS II) for M1A2 SEPv2 upgrade vehicles. Work is to be performed in Lima, OH with an estimated completion date of Aug 31/12 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

March 2/09: A $9.8 million firm-fixed-price, firm fixed price level of effort, cost plus fixed fee contract to provide parts for the reset material necessary to allow Anniston Army Depot (ANAD) to reset 5 Battle Damaged M1 SEPv1 tanks to a SEPv2 configuration, with a 100% option to RESET another 5.

Work is to be performed at Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of Aug 31/10 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Feb 24/09: A $32 million firm-fixed-price contract change order issued to RESET 129 of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment’s Abrams SEPv2 tanks.

Work is to be performed at Lima, Ohio, (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/10. One bid was solicited and one bid received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Feb 3/09: A $5.9 million firm fixed price contract change order to buy improved ammunition racks, as part of a RESET program for 90 M1A2 SEPv1 tanks that are being upgraded to SEPv2.

Work is to be performed at Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/10 (W56HZV-06-C-0006).

Jan 27/09: An $80.7 million firm-fixed-price contract for the Abrams Multi-Year Contract’s program year 2, increment 2. This contract buys 24 M1A2 SEPv2 upgrades, and funds 6 more tanks in program year 3, increment 1, for a total of 30.

Work will be performed at Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of June 30/12. One bid was solicited and one bid received (W56HZV-06-G-0006). GDLS release.

Nov 20/08: A $63.7 million firm-fixed-price contract, exercising an option to RESET 180 Abrams M1A2 SEPv1 to SEPv2 tanks. Work will be performed in Tallahassee, FL, Anniston, AL, Scranton, PA, and Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of Sept 30/10. One bid was solicited and one bid was received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

See also Aug 5/08 entry, and the GDLS release.

Aug 29/08: General Dynamics Lands Systems Division in Sterling Heights, MI received a $30.8 million cost-reimbursable contract to procure long-lead-materials. These materials will be bought in as a prelude to upgrading 129 Third Armored Cavalry Regiment Abrams tanks to the M1A2 SEP configuration.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH; Tallahassee, FL; Anniston, AL; Scranton, PA; and Sterling Heights, MI, with an estimated completion date of Oct 31/09. One bid was solicited, and one bid was received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Aug 5/08: A $613.5 million Firm Fixed Price, contract for Award Program Year One increment 2, in a multi-year contract for Abrams M1A2 SEPv2 upgrades. The contract will upgrade 235 M1A1 tanks to this configuration.

The order was made under a multi-year contract (see Feb 7/08 entry) which authorized the modernization of 435 M1A1 tanks that have been in the Army’s inventory for more than 20 years. An additional 180 tanks remain to be upgraded through the program, which will complete the conversion of all tanks in the Army’s active component to the M1A2 SEP V2 configuration.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH; Anniston, AL; Tallahassee, FL; Sterling Heights, MI; and Scranton, PA, and is expected to be complete by Oct 31/11. There was one bid solicited from the manufacturer on Oct 5/07, and one bid was received (W56HZV-06-G-0006). See also GDLS release.

June 3/08: A $19.8 million cost-reimbursable-no-fee contract for the procurement of long lead material to support maintenance of 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment Abrams M1A2 SEP tanks. Work will be performed primarily in Lima, OH and is expected to be complete by Oct 30/09. One bid was solicited on April 29/08 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

April 28/08: A $28.2 million cost-no-fee contract for long lead materials, which will be used in the recapitalization of M1A2 SEPv1 tanks. Work will be performed primarily in Lima, OH and is expected to be complete on Nov 28/08. One bid was solicited on Jan 18/08 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Feb 7/08: Multi-Year SEP contract. A $39.5 million firm-fixed price contract to upgrade 20 Abrams tanks to M1A2 SEPv2 standard. Work will be performed in Anniston, AL; Tallahassee, FL; Sterling Heights, MI; Lima, OH; and Scranton, PA. The upgrade program is expected to be completed by June 30/13. One bid was solicited on Oct 5/07, and 1 bid was received by the U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-06-G-0006). General Dynamics says that this award is in addition to the Jan 15/08 award to fund parts for the upgrades.

General Dynamics announces that this is just the first increment of a $1.5 billion multi-year contract to upgrade 435 M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks to M1A2 SEPv2 configuration. They add that this multi-year procurement contract “will complete the modernization of all remaining M1A1 tanks which have been in the US Army’s inventory for more than 20 years.”

Jan 15/08: A $12.4 million cost-no fee contract “for system enhancement package upgrade vehicles.” Work will be performed in Lima Army Tank Plant, OH, and is expected to be complete by April 30, 2008. One bid was solicited on Oct 5/07, and 1 bid was received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Dec 19/07: General Dynamics Land Systems announces a $257.8 million award for procurement of materials and labor required to RESET 180 Abrams tanks under the Abrams Improved SEP Reset (ISR) program. The program could total more than $320 million if all options are exercised. As part of the Improved Systems Enhancement Package (SEP) Reset program, M1A2 SEP Version 1 tanks are modified to the SEP Version 2 configuration.

Deliveries begin in September 2009, and are expected to be complete by September 2010. Work will be performed by existing employees in Anniston, AL; Tallahassee, FL; Lima, OH; Sterling Heights, MI; and Scranton, PA. There was 1 bid solicited on Feb 13/07, and 1 bid was received (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Nov 19/07: General Dynamics Land Systems received an $88.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for reset of 240 M1A2 Abrams tanks. Work will be performed in Lima, OH and is expected to be complete by Sept. 30, 2009 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

As part of the reset program, M1A2 SEP Version 1 tanks are upgraded to the SEP Version 2 configuration. GDLS release.

Oct 3/07: A $16.5 million delivery order as part of a $24 million firm-fixed-price contract to provide parts for the reset of battle-damaged SEPv1 Tanks to a SEPv2 configuration. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI, and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on May 14, 2007 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Oct 1/07: A delivery order amount of $20.1 million as part of a $510.5 million firm-fixed-price contract for reset of Abrams M1A2 System Enhancement Packages to the M1A2 Tanks. As part of the Improved Systems Enhancement Package (SEP) reset program, M1A2 SEP Version 1 tanks are modified to the SEP Version 2 configuration, which includes improved displays, sights, power, and a tank-infantry phone. It is the most technologically advanced digital Abrams tank and is positioned for future technology insertions for compatibility with the Army’s Future Combat Systems.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), and is expected to be complete by Sept. 30, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on Oct. 20, 2006 (W56HZV-06-G-0006). GD release.

M1A2, getting the range
(click to view full)

Aug 13/07: A delivery order amount of $5.7 million as part of a $6.3 million firm-fixed-price contract for spare parts for the M1A2 System Enhancement Program Tank. Work will be performed in Lima, OH and is expected to be complete by July 31, 2010. This was a sole source contract initiated on May 14, 2007 by the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Rock Island, IL (DAAE20-02-G-0009).

Aug 8/07: The full delivery order amount of $270.6 million as part of a firm-fixed-price contract for system enhancement package for the Abrams M1A2 Tanks. Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), and is expected to be complete by July 31/10. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 16, 2007. The U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command, Warren, Mich., is the contracting activity (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Aug 8/07: The full delivery order amount of $139.3 million for retrofit of M1A2 Vehicles to M1A2 SEP Version 2 configuration. Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), and is expected to be complete by Jan 31/10. This was a sole source contract initiated on Feb. 21/07 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Specific details re: numbers et. al. are usually present in General Dynamics’ follow-on releases; not this time.

April 18/07: The full delivery order amount of $9.1 million as part of a cost contract for long-lead material for RESET for battle damaged M1A2 System Enhancement Package tanks. Work will be performed in Anniston, AL (40%), Lima, OH (20%), Sterling Heights, MI (10%), and Scranton, PA (30%), and is expected to be complete by June 30, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on April 10, 2007 (W56HZV-06-G-0006). GDLS release.

Dec 4/06: A delivery order amount of $305 million as part of a $351 million cost contract for RESET of Abrams M1A2 System Enhancement Package (SEP)v1 to M1A2 SEPv2 tanks, and long lead material for the additional RESET of M1A2 SEPv1 and M1A2 SEPv2 tanks. A GDLS representative confirms that the contact covers 312 tanks returning from Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), and is expected to be complete on Sept. 30, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on Oct. 20, 2006 (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

Nov 27/06: The full $379.8 million delivery order amount of a firm-fixed-price contract to upgrade 180 M1A2 tanks to Abrams M1A2 SEP Version 2 status, along with total packing fielding material for initial fielding. Work will be performed in Lima, Ohio (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%), and is expected to be complete by Nov. 30, 2009. This was a sole source contract initiated on August 29, 2006 (W56HZV-06-G-0006). See also GDLS press release, and a subsequent release which gives the number. A GDLS representative confirmed that the conversions involved M1A2 tanks.

Nov 27/06: GM subsidiary Allison Transmission in Indianapolis, IN received an $11 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for Zero-Timed X1100-3B Transmissions in Support of the System Enhancement Package RESET Program. This would be the RESET maintenance program for M1A2 SEP tanks. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, IN and is expected to be complete by Nov. 30, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on Aug. 22, 2006 (DAAE07-01-C-N040).

Nov 27/06: GM subsidiary Allison Transmission in Indianapolis, IN received a $32.6 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for Zero-Timed X1100-3B Transmissions in Support of the Improved System Enhancement Package RESET Program. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, IN and is expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Sept. 29, 2006 (DAAE07-01-C-N040).

Nov 27/06: GM subsidiary Allison Transmission in Indianapolis, IN received a $24.2 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for Zero-Timed X1100-3B Transmissions in Support of the System Enhancement Package Retrofit Program. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, IN and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Aug. 18, 2006 (DAAE07-01-C-N040).

Nov 27/06: GM subsidiary Allison Transmission in Indianapolis, IN received a $16.1 million modification to a firm-fixed-price contract for Upgraded X1100-3B Transmissions with Refurbished Containers in Support of the System Enhancement Package Program. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, IN and is expected to be complete by April 30, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Jan. 25, 2006 (DAAE07-01-C-N040).

M1A2 Abrams

Aug 4/06: General Dynamics Land Systems in Sterling Heights, MI received the full delivery order amount of $134.7 million as part of a firm-fixed-price contract for Abrams M1A2 SEP (system enhancement package) retrofits to 60 existing M1A2 Abrams tanks, along with total package fielding material for initial fielding. The M1A2 SEP is the latest, most technologically advanced Abrams variant, and the contract also includes a $145 million option to upgrade 60 more M1A2s, bringing the total to $280 million if all options are exercised.

Work on this SEP upgrade contract will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Anniston, AL (9%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Sterling Heights, MI (3%). Delivery of the first 60 vehicles is slated to begin in November 2007 and is expected to be complete by Nov. 30, 2008. Delivery of the 60 option vehicles would begin in November 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on Feb. 1, 2006 by the Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Warren, MI (W56HZV-06-G-0006).

July 8/05: An estimated $7.3 million firm-fixed price contract for 90 commanders display units for the M1A2 Abrams System Enhanced Program (M1A2 SEP) Tank. The work is to be performed at the company’s Tallahassee, FL location and is to be completed Sept. 20, 2007. The Tank-automotive Armament Command in Rock Island, IL issued the contract (DAAE20-02-G-0009 delivery order 0109).

June 20/05: A $141.1 million firm-fixed-price contract for M1A2 Abrams Upgrade Tanks to the System and Continuous Enhancement Program Configurations. Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Imperial Valley, CA (1%), Tallahassee, FL (1%), Sterling Heights, MI (1%), Scranton, PA (3%), and Anniston, AL (9%), and is expected to be complete by Jan. 31, 2008. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 1, 2003 (DAAE07-01-G-N001). See GDLS press release, which places the number of tanks upgraded to M1A2 SEP at 60. It adds that vehicle deliveries to General Dynamics are scheduled for January through October 2007, with vehicle hand-off to the U.S. Army expected in January 2008.

April 29/05: An $8.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee and cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for unique spares for the M1A2 SEP Abrams Tank, and Bradley Fighting Vehicles. Work will be performed in Killeen, TX (85%); Sterling Heights, MI (10%); and Southwest Asia (5%), and is expected to be complete by April 30, 2010. This was a sole source contract initiated on April 14, 2004 by US Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Rock Island, IL (W52H09-05-C-0089). See also GDLS press release.

Sept 2/04: A $22.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for repair and modification to 111 M1A2 SEP Tanks. Work will be performed in Lima, OH and is expected to be complete by July 30, 2005. This was a sole source contract initiated on July 14, 2004 (DAAE07-01-G-N001). A subsequent GDLS press release clarified that this is a contract “to repair and modify 111 M1A2 Abrams System Enhancement Package (SEP) tanks that have recently returned from the war zone.” Work will be performed at the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center in Lima, Ohio, and is expected to be complete by July 30, 2005. The total value for this effort is actually about $70 million, allocated between TACOM ($40 million, to include major component repair by Anniston Army Depot), and GDLS ($29.9 Million).

May 6/04: General Dynamics Land Systems announces a $121 million delivery order as part of a contract valued at $244 million, to retrofit 65 M1A2 Abrams tanks to the M1A2 SEP (System Enhancement Program) configuration. The tanks are being retrofitted to modernize the U.S. Army’s 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment.

Work will be performed with the existing workforce at General Dynamics’ facilities in Lima, OH (74%); Tallahassee, FL (10%); Anniston, AL (9%); Scranton, PA (3%); Imperial Valley, CA. (1%); Muskegon, MI (1%); and Sterling Heights, MI (1%). Work will also be done at Fort Carson, CO (1%).

May 15/03: A delivery order amount of $26,029,150 as part of a $26,055,258 firm-fixed-price contract to retrofit 14 M1A2 Abrams Upgrade Tanks to the M1A2 SEP configuration. Work will be performed in Lima, OH (75%), Imperial Valley, CA (1%), Tallahassee, FL (10%), Sterling Heights, MI (1%), Scranton, PA (3%), Anniston, AL (9%), and Muskegon, IL (1%), and is expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2004. This was a sole source contract initiated on April 29, 2002 (DAAE07-01-G-N001).

Nov 29/02: A delivery order amount of $5.8 million as part of an $8.8 million firm-fixed-price contract for 10 gigabyte solid state removable memory cartridges for retrofit into M1A2 Abrams SEP tanks. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights (0.2%) and Bloomington, MN (99.8%), and is to be complete by Aug. 31, 2003. This was a sole source contract initiated on Nov. 15, 2002 (DAAE07-01-G-N001).

May 16/02: A delivery order amount of $2.9 million as part of a $5.8 million (cumulative total) un-priced contractual action for 9 lines of spare parts in support of the M1A2 SEP Abrams Tank. Work will be performed in Lima, OH (10%); Imperial, CA (40%); Tallahassee, FL (40%), Anniston, AL (10%), and is to be complete by Oct. 30, 2003. This is a sole-source contract initiated on Feb. 14, 2002 by the U. S. Army Tank and Automotive Command in Rock Island, IL (DAAE20-97-G-0002).

Feb 9/01: A $142 million modification to firm-fixed-price, multi-year contract DAAE07-95-C-0292. This procurement is an equitable adjustment to change-order modification P00110, that incorporated the System Enhancement Package (SEP) into 240 M1A2 Abrams Upgrade Tanks. This modification adds first article tests for the SEP into 240 tanks, adds material and testing for Under Armor Auxiliary Power Units that are to be retrofitted onto M1A2 Abrams Upgrade Tanks with the SEP.

Work will be performed in Lima, OH (80%); Scranton, PA (3%); Imperial Valley, CA (1%); Anniston, AL (4%); Tallahassee, FL (10%); Muskegon, MS (1%), and Sterling Heights, MI (1%), and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2001. Of the total contract funds, $97.3 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This is a sole source contract initiated on Jan. 18, 1995.

Jan 16/01: The Research Triangle Institute in Research Triangle Park, NC received a $6 million modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract N61339-95-C-0015, exercising exercise an option for the production of one M1A2 Tank System Enhancement Package and one Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) Maintenance Training System, Trainer Unique Modification Kit.

Work will be performed in Research Triangle Park, NC (60%) and Daytona, FL (40%); and is expected to be complete by September 2001. The Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division in Orlando, FL issued the contract.

Feb 10/2000: The Research Triangle Institute in Research Triangle Park, NC received a $5 million modification to previously awarded contract N61339-95-C-0015 for the design, refurbishment, documentation, fabrication, integration, testing, manufacture, delivery and installation of the M1A2 system enhancement package maintenance training systems. Work will be performed in Research Triangle Park, NC (60%) and Daytona, FL (40%), and is expected to be complete by November 2000. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division in Orlando, FL issued the contract.

Dec 22/99: A $24.9 million modification to cost-plus-fixed-fee contract DAAE07-96-C-X195, to exercise the option for system technical support for the Abrams Tank Program, a system enhancement package M1A2 retrofit for the Abrams Tank. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI and is expected to be complete by July 30, 2001. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This is a sole source contract initiated on May 2, 1996.

Nov 23/99: A $5 modification to cost-plus-fixed-fee contract DAAE07-96-C-X195, to exercise priced options for system technical support for the Abrams Tank Program, the M1A2 retrofit System Enhancement Package. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI and is expected to be complete by Aug. 30, 2001. This is a sole source contract initiated on May 2, 1996.

May 4/98: A $9.1 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for various spares in support of fielding of the System Enhancement Package (SEP) of the M1A2 upgrade tank. Work will be performed in Tallahassee, FL (75%); Lima, OH (10%); Imperial Valley, CA (10%); and Scranton, OH (5%), and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2000. This is a sole source contract initiated on Dec. 8, 1997 by the U.S. Army Tank-automotive & Armaments Command at Rock Island, IL (DAAE20-97-G-0002/0008).

Sept 26/97: A $7.3 million increment of a $24.3 million modification to a $127.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for research and development for the Abrams System Enhancement Package (ASEP) that will be incorporated into the M1A2 Abrams Tank. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI and is expected to be complete by Feb. 28, 1999. Of the total contract funds, $14,757 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This is a sole source contract initiated on Nov. 23, 1994 (DAAE07-94-C-0727).

Aug 8/96: A $10 million modification to a cost plus fixed fee contract for two Heavy Assault Bridge Pre-Low Rate Initial Production Pilot/Test vehicles in Abrams M1A2 System Enhancement Package (SEP) configuration. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI and is expected to be complete by February 28, 1998. This is a sole source contract initiated on May 29, 1996 (DAAE07-94-C-0727).

Additional Readings & Sources

• The Armor Site – M1A1/2 Abrams. Simply the best Abrams tank reference.

• NBC News (July 28/12) – The M1 Abrams: The Army tank that could not be stopped

• US Army – (Feb 19/08) – Modified M1-A2 Abrams Tanks Improve Safety, Precision. Describes the TUSK modifications.

• US Army Logistics Management College, ALOG Magazine (Jan-Feb 1996) – Keeping M1A1′s in Action. A new way to employ the Army’s M1A1 full-up power pack (FUPP) saves time and money and helps ensure a combat-ready tank unit. A FUPP consists of a Honeywell AGT-1500 turbine engine, which contains four modules, and an Allison X1100-3B transmission.

The US Coast Guard’s massive $25 billion Deepwater meta-program (really Deepwater-II given post-9/11 changes) has endured more than its share of ups and downs. Nevertheless, Congressional support has remained strong, and efforts are being made to restructure the program and get it back on track. Yet the USCG’s Island Class cutter modification program, and the Deepwater Fast Response Cutter supposed to replace it, have faced many difficulties.

The Legend Class National Security Cutters are the largest ships in the Deepwater program, and represent the program’s flagship in more ways than one. The 418 foot, 4,400 ton ships will be frigate-sized vessels with a 21 foot draughts [1], and are rather larger than the 379 foot, 3,250 ton Hamilton Class High Endurance Cutters (HECs) they will replace. Controversies regarding durability and potential hull fatigue, as well as significant cost overruns, have shadowed the new cutter’s construction. Nevertheless, the program appears to be moving forward. This DID FOCUS Article covers the Legend Class cutters’ specifications, program history, and key events.

Quick Background: The Deepwater Program

(click to view full)

The US Coast Guard is currently operating vessels that date from the 1950s and 1960s, and a fleet-wide recapitalization had become an urgent priority given its new domestic security responsibilities. That effort is being handled as an integrated, multi-year $25 billion meta-project called Deepwater that encompasses everything from long-range patrol aircraft and UAVs, to new communications and computing backbones, to new ship designs.

Deepwater has been fraught with difficulties since the program’s inception. The Coast Guard was guaranteed a rough ride due to the issues with its existing fleet, and lower status than the military services. In fairness, the events of 9/11 changed the Coast Guard’s perceived role, leading to widespread re-evaluation of designs and specifications that have complicated several programs, and raised Deepwater’s overall cost from $17 billion to over $25 billion. With that said, the Coast Guard’s choice of program structure has also received negative reviews (as well as some official reports of improvement) for some time, culminating in a series of failures and scandals that have deeply wounded the overall program. Integrated Coast Guard Systems (ICGS), a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, has been serving as the program’s overall system-of-systems integrator but will be replaced in that role by US Coast Guard personnel. See “US Coast Guard’s Deepwater Effort Hits More Rough Sailing” for more in-depth background.

The National Security Cutters are built by Northrop Grumman Ship Systems in Pascagoula, MS. Lockheed Martin is building and integrating the command, control, communications, computer, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems.

The Legend Class National Security Cutters

WMSL 750 Bertholf,
Sea trials
(click to view full)

More akin to a full-fledged warship than a Coast Guard cutter, the 418-foot NSC is designed to be the USCG’s flagship vessel, capable of meeting all maritime national security needs. It will routinely carry a small boat and will be outfitted with an aviation detachment, whose composition will depend on individual mission requirements. The Legend Class cutters will displace 4,400 tons fully loaded, with a 21 foot draught and a crew of 110.

The NSC is powered by a combined diesel and gas turbine power propulsion plant known as Combined Diesel and Gas Turbine (CODAG). A pair of 9,925 hp medium speed MTU 20V 1163 TB93 diesel engines will provide regular propulsion, with GE’s ubiquitous LM2500 gas turbine available to offer 29,500 hp for high speed and intercept operations. The ship’s 14 foot controllable pitch propellers will turn at 231 rpm, and can drive the ship to a sustained top speed of 29 knots. A trio of 1360 Kw Ship Service Diesel Generator Sets will also be on board, to power the ship’s electrical and communications systems. With all three engines working together the total combined output of the plant is 36,800 kW (49,350 hp). The propulsion plant and its auxiliaries are all controlled and monitored by an MTU provided automation system. When operating at most efficient speed, the ships will have a range of up to 12,000 nautical miles.

Onboard sensors will include surface search & navigation radars in X & S Band, EADS’ TRS-3D Air Search Radar and the SPQ-9B Fire Control Radar, complemented by a Mk46 Electro-Optical Infrared Sensor for long-range passive surveillance. Legend Class ships will also use an advanced Deepwater communications suite that will allow Legend Class ships act as a flagship and command vessels, HF, VHF & UHF Communications, a radio direction finder, and multiple sensors on board for intelligence collection and sharing. A Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) aboard ship makes it easy to process and receive data in place.

Given the kinds of industrial accidents and terrorist aftermaths the Coast Guard is tasked to deal with, it isn’t surprising that sensors to detect chemical, biological and radiological attacks will also be included in the NSC’s package, and a Collective Protection System (CPS) will serve to keep such contaminants out of the ship’s interior. As a greatly appreciated side benefit, CPS systems provide excellent air conditioning.

Mk 110 MOD 0 concept
(click to view full)

Legend Class ships will carry several weapons systems, including BAE Systems’ 57mm Mk 110 naval gun. The Mk110 also outfits the Navy’s new Littoral Combat Ship, and will equip its DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class destroyers and the Coast Guard’s smaller Offshore Patrol Cutters. Its 6-mode programmable ammunition can be used against air threats as well as surface targets, and its offensive and defensive punch will be complemented by the same Mk15 Phalanx Block 1B 20mm gatling gun that offers US Navy ships their last-ditch defense against anti-ship missiles. The Phalanx Block 1B model adds the ability to destroy surface targets as well; its 4,500-7,000 rpm firing rate should give fast attack boats pause. Ancillary .50 cal machine gun mounts and/or remotely-operated weapons can also be expected. A “Slick 32″ AN/SLQ-32 system provides electronic jamming, just as it does for the US Navy’s high-end destroyers, and the US-Australian Mk53 Nukla automated decoy system rounds out the NSC’s protective fittings.

A series of ancillary systems will enhance the NSC cutter’s capabilities over its lifetime. The ships are eventually expected to deploy with a multi-mission MH-65 Dolphin helicopter (2 slots each) and 2 vertical unmanned aerial vehicles (1 slot each), though different mixes are possible. The H-60 family of helicopters can also be embarked.

Eventually, the ships are expected to carry aerial UAVs and sea-going UUV/USV unmanned craft. The Deepwater program specified Bell Textron’s tilt-rotor Eagle Eye as the full-size UAV of choice, but that program died without a replacement. The Navy MQ-8B Fire Scout helicopter UAV could easily step into that role, but the Coast Guard is in no rush to make a decision. Smaller UAVs like Boeing’s ScanEagle/ Integrator families should also be expected on board eventually.

The NSC cutter’s Stern Launch Ramp for small boats is a vital part of any large Coast Guard ship. The Legend Class can carry up to 2 rigid hull inflatable boats (RHIBs): The Deepwater Short-Range Prosecutor (7m RHIB, speed up to 33 knots) and Long-Range Interceptor (11m RHIB, speed up to 45 knots, can be armed) are currently forecast as typical load-outs, and a starboard davit also exists for the SRP. These slots could also be occupied by future Unmanned Surface Vessels, some of which are based on existing RHIB hulls.

Ships of class include:

• WMSL 750 – USCGC Bertholf
  
• WMSL 751 – USCGC Waesche
  
• WMSL 752 – USCGC Stratton
  
• WMSL 753 – Hamilton
  
• WMSL 754 – James
  
• WMSL 755 – Munro

The Legend Class Program: Contracts & Key Events

Waesche, Java Sea
(click to view full)

May 1/13: Huntington Ingalls Industries receives a $487 million, fixed-price-incentive-fee contract to build the 6th National Security Cutter, WMSL 755 Munro. Construction is expected to begin in October, and this could be the last ship of class.

WMSL 753 Hamilton, is currently 40% complete, with launch scheduled for this summer and christening in October. WMSL 754 James is just 17% complete, and will have its keel laid on May 17/13. Launch isn’t expected until spring 2014. HII.

NSC 6 order

Feb 2/13: Commandant of the Coast Guard Adm. Bob Papp is joined by Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. James Amos and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert to discuss maritime strategic issues during the WEST 2013 Luncheon Town Hall Address in San Diego, CA. Papp makes this point about the NSC fleet:

“Many years ago the Coast Guard rebalanced its high endurance cutter fleet to the Pacific due to the longer transit distances and harsher weather. But the 12 high endurance cutters are slated to be replaced by only eight national security cutters. “Regardless of how advanced those eight ships are, they can’t be in all the same places that 12 could be, so I’m very hopeful we can continue the construction of all eight and then get into acquisition of our offshore patrol cutters because we need those as well. The Pacific is a big part of what we do.”

Fewer of its largest ships combined with an expanding mission space in the Arctic is making it more challenging for the Coast Guard…”

Well, yes. The program may even end at 6 ships. Wouldn’t the time to think of this sort of thing be before the program begins? US Coast Guard Compass.

Bertholf & Waesche
(click to view full)

Sept 26/12: #3 accepted. The USCG announces formal acceptance of USCGC Stratton. The ship had already been commissioned, but some defects were found during the shakedown period.

Sept 17/12: Arctic. USCGC Bertholf crosses the Arctic Circle, in the class’ first patrol excursion into the Arctic waters. The waters around Alaska are famously treacherous, and operations in this region face a number of unique challenges as well. USCG.

Sept 5/12: #4 keel. HII and the USCG lay the keel for WMSL 753, the future Coast Guard Cutter Hamilton, at Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, MS. USCG.

May 8/12: Holy Stratton! Gannett’s Navy Times reports that:

“Capt. Charles Cashin… called in engineers last month when his crew discovered a trio of ‘pinholes’ and a fourth hole ‘slightly smaller than a golf ball’ in the ship’s hull [...] in mid-April while the ship was working off the coast of Los Angeles [...] patched for now but the Stratton soon will head to a dry dock… The intent is to get out of the water [...] We are literally just waiting for a contract.”

The Coast Guard has reportedly concluded that it’s not a design problem, since Bertholf and Weasche haven’t had this issue. Estimated time for dry-dock repairs is 4-6 weeks.

April 1/12: Rescue me. CGC Bertholf rescues a pair of sailors 250 miles off the California coast, after their yacht got in trouble during an around-the-world race. Bertholf’s executive officer, Cmdr. Dave Ramassini, offers some insight into the Legend Class’ differences from previous HECs:

“All that lay between us and the distressed sailing vessel was about 300 nautical miles and a low pressure system harboring 40 to 50-knot winds and 20 to 30-foot seas… Bertholf landed a Jayhawk helicopter out of Air Station San Diego and then proceeded overnight into the next day directly into the heart of the storm. While unthinkable in our nearly 50-year-old high endurance cutters the national security cutters are replacing, we proceeded with a medium range helicopter secure on our large flight deck making full speed dead into the 20-foot seas… The Bertholf, in this case, proved an extreme endurance cutter giving us the ability to travel twice as fast in howling gale while carrying a larger helicopter that could fly twice as far…”

March 30/12: #6 long-lead. HII’s Ingalls yard receives a $76 million fixed-price contract to buy long-lead materials for a 6th National Security Cutter. If recent budget submissions come to pass, this would be the last. WMSL 755 will be built at the company’s Pascagoula, MS facility, and a 2nd second phase of this advance buy contract could bring the overall value to $87.9 million. The US Coast Guard touts the fact that they saved $1.7 million by executing the contract within 1 year of that for the 5th National Security Cutter, Joshua James. The increased value of the U.S. dollar to the euro also helped.

The contract will buy critical main propulsion and navigation systems, generators, electrical switchboards, and major castings, using $75.9 million in FY 2012 funds appropriated for this purpose. Two sub-contract line item numbers will be established for valves ($2.8 million) and Ships Integrated Control System ($9.1 million). Funding requested in the president’s FY 2013 budget request supports this remaining $12 million, unless funding is made available sooner. USCG | HII.

Feb 20/12: Just 6? The US Department of Homeland Security’s FY 2013 budget documents ask for $658 million to build a 6th National Security Cutter, but they also show an intent to end the program at 6 ships, instead of 8. Congress will decide whether or not they wish to agree to this. Defense Daily Network | Washington Post.

Jan 30/12: Frigate derivatives. HII unveils a pair of Navy patrol frigate designs, derived from the Legend Class. This is a concept the firm has been considering for some time, but the possible early end of the NSC program adds additional motivation. Even so, positioning and sales will be challenging.

Patrol Frigate 4501 are very similar to current NSC ships, though they would displace 4,600 tons instead of 4,400. They are better suited to nations who want long-range coast guard type ships, but may be challenged to compete against sales of used USCG High Endurance Cutters (vid. recent Philippines transfers), or nearly-free transfers of used US Navy FFG-7 Oliver Hazard Perry frigates (vid. Pakistan’s “Almagir Class”).

Patrol Frigate 4921 adds improved anti-aircraft, anti-submarine, anti-surface and mine-warfare capabilities. The 57mm gun becomes a 76-mm gun, a 12-cell vertical launch system is added to hold a wide variety of missiles and ASROC torpedoes, an anti-ship missile launcher and torpedo tubes give it naval strike punch, a sonar dome helps it detect submarines, and models have shown it with an improved CEAFAR active array radar system. The overall package is reasonable, but the NSC’s base price will place them head to head against high-end frigate options like the Franco-Italian FREMM, Britain’s Type 26, the modular Dutch Sigma Class, etc. All are highly capable ships, built by shipyards whose technology levels make it challenging to compete with them on price. See also Defense Media Network.

Stratton sea trials
(click to view full)

Sept 9/11: #5 ordered. The US Coast Guard formally awards the rest of the contract for the 5th NSC ship, to be named the Joshua James [WMSL 754]. Huntington Ingalls receives a $482.8 million fixed-price incentive contract, raising totals so far to $576.8 million (vid. Jan 17/11 entry). This is the 2nd NSC production contract awarded outside of the original “Deepwater” project’s Lead Systems Integrator framework, under direct management by the USCG’s Acquisition Directorate. Construction and delivery will be performed at HII’s Pascagoula, MS shipyard. The official “start of fabrication” milestone is expected in Q2 2012, with delivery expected in mid-2015.

Captain Joshua James (1826-1902), served in the USCG’s predecessor service, the U.S. Life Saving Service, for nearly 60 years. During his career in Massachusetts, James was credited with saving more than 600 people. USCG | USCG Compass re: Joshua Jones | HII.

NSC 5 order

Sept 2/11: Stratton delivered. Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. delivers USCGC Stratton [WMSL 752] to the U.S. Coast Guard, via a shipboard transfer of ownership ceremony. She is the 3rd ship of class to be transferred to the USCG. HII.

Aug 30/11: #4. Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. marks the official “start of fabrication” for the 4th NSC ship, Hamilton [WMSL 753]. The shipbuilding milestone signifies that 100 tons of steel have been cut and fabricated at Ingalls’ steel fabrication complex, using a robotic plasma arc cutting machine.

Ingalls only received the contract for this 4th National Security Cutter in November 2010, and says that the ship isn’t scheduled for delivery to the U.S. Coast Guard until the fall of 2014. That’s about 3 years after the 3rd ship of class, Stratton. HII.

Aug 12/11: #3 INSURV. Stratton [WMSL 752], returns to her Pascagoula shipyard after successfully completing INSURV acceptance sea trials in the Gulf of Mexico. She received just 2 “starred card” issues, compared to 8 for Bertholf, and 3 for Waesche. USCG | HII.

July 1/11: Testing. Northrop Grumman spinoff Huntington Ingalls Industries announces that the 3rd NSC ship, Stratton [WMSL 752], has successfully completed 3 days of builder’s sea trials in the Gulf of Mexico, testing basic operations and electronic systems.

Jan 17/11: #5 long-lead. An $89 million long-lead materials contract for WMSL 754, the 5th National Security Cutter. The contract is actually an option that was part of the Nov 30/10 contract for WMSL 753, and this firm fixed-price contract has options of its own that would increase its potential value to $94 million. US Coast Guard | Northrop Grumman

Jan 12/11: C4ISR for #4. Lockheed Martin announces a $66 million contract from Northrop Grumman to provide the Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) system for the 4th National Security Cutter, WMSL 753.

Lockheed Martin also provides the C4ISR systems for the Coast Guard’s HC-130J Hercules and HC-144A Ocean Sentry aircraft, which will work with the cutters.

Bertholf & HC-144
(click to view full)

July 23/10: #3 christened. First Lady Michelle Obama christens the Stratton [WMSL 752]. Stratton is the 3rd NSC ship, and is named in honor of Captain Dorothy C. Stratton (1899-2006), the U.S. Coast Guard’s first female commissioned officer and director of the SPARS (“Semper Paratus – Always Ready”), Women’s Reserve during World War II. SPARS mainly replaced men in shore stations, but as the war progressed SPARS began to work in jobs like parachute riggers, aviation machinists’ mates and air control tower operators. NGC.

April 30/10: SCIF secures secrets. USCGC Bertholf’s Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) gets Authority To Operate. That makes it the service’s 1st onboard SCIF, and indeed the 1st SCIF certified outside of the US military. As the Coast Guard puts it:

“The events of Sept. 11, 2001, caused the nation, as well as the Coast Guard, to dramatically review its security posture. As a result, Coast Guard leadership took a close look at the intelligence capabilities of the yet-to-be-constructed first National Security Cutter (NSC).

Leadership recognized the imperativeness of reserving a space with electrical and air conditioning requirements on the NSC for the [SCIF]. Knowing the requirements and funding for this new initiative were still being developed, it was recognized that the SCIF installation would occur post-delivery of the first NSC, the USCGC Bertholf. The addition of SCIF technology would require a dramatic increase in Coast Guard communications technology…

In September 2009, Bertholf began the last phase of the rigorous installation and testing of the SCIF and its dependent system… including both visual and instrumented Tempest inspections. On April 8, 2010, Certification, Test and Evaluation approval was granted by the Department of Homeland Security. This enabled the Bertholf to have a one-year authority to operate the SCIF’s core capabilities, known as Ship’s Signals Exploitation Equipment (SEEE) and the Sensitive Compartmented Information network systems. By next March, 2011, SEEE upgrades will enable Bertholf’s SCIF authority to operate to be upgraded to a three-year approval.”

mid-January 2010: #2 C4ISR. USCG Waesche is granted Authority to Operate its Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence and Surveillance (C4ISR) systems, which lets it share communications and data with other local and federal law enforcement agencies, U.S. Coast Guard ships, air and shore stations, and the Department of Defense (DoD), including the U.S. Navy. USCG Director of Acquisition Programs Rear Adm. John H. Korn says that “In nearly all aspects, Waesche is far ahead of where Bertholf was at the same point in time.” Waesche’s ATO authorization was accomplished in just over 2 months after preliminary acceptance, whereas Bertholf, took a year to obtain ATO certification. USCG.

Nov 12/09: #2 INSURV. Gannett’s Navy Times reports that the Waesche [WMSL 751] received only 3 “starred cards” (deficiencies that could affect mission performance) during Navy/Coast Guard INSURV acceptance trials, vs. 8 for the CGC Bertholf. Coast Guard acquisition directorate chief Rear Adm. Ron Rabago told reporters that almost every system showed improvement, saying that the quality of the workmanship has improved, and lessons learned from WMSL 750 are being incorporated. The report adds that:

“Work to complete and certify for operation the new cutter’s complex command-and-control suite, known as TEMPEST assurance, also will be finished significantly sooner than on the Bertholf. That work, which includes requirements for the Navy to install and certify equipment, took about 18 months on the Bertholf. That same work will be done in about eight months on the Waesche… The third ship in the class, the Stratton, is nearly 30 percent complete, Rabago said, with that ship’s christening by First Lady Michelle Obama set for next summer.”

Oct 1/09: Testing. Waesche [WMSL 751] completes a successful Coast Guard acceptance trial, paving the way for her delivery in early November 2009. NGC release.

WMSL 751 Waesche, trials
(click to view full)

Aug 17/09: Testing. Waesche [WMSL 751] completes successful Builder’s Trials, after undergoing rigorous testing in the Gulf of Mexico. The trials featured extensive testing of propulsion, electrical, damage control, and combat systems. The ship will return to sea in September 2009 for her acceptance trials, and will be delivered to the Coast Guard in 2009.

Waesche’s keel was laid Sept 11/06, and she was christened on July 26/08. NGC release.

June 2/09: Lawsuit. Deepwater whistleblower and former Lockheed Martin engineer Michael DeKort files a qui tam False Claims Act lawsuit against Integrated Coast Guard Systems, a joint venture of Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman Corp. He claims that a series of known deficiencies by the contractors, and acquiescence in the deficiencies of other contractors, has led to major safety, security and national security problems with the entire Deepwater acquisition program. This includes the critical area of communications security, which reportedly extends to the new National Security Cutters due to system re-use. Read “US Coast Guard’s Deepwater Effort Hits More Rough Sailing” for more.

April 2009: Costs. In this month’s issue of the US Naval Institute’s Seapower Magazine, “Economic Realities” reports that the National Security Cutters will cost an addition $60-90 million per ship over their baseline cost, which was expected to be $500 million. High commodity costs in 2008, when materials were purchased, are blamed for the 12-18% increase.

As an example, the Deepwater program appropriated $357.3 million for NSC 4 Hamilton, but actual costs are expected to come in at $560-590 million, leaving the service over $200 million short. Instead of beginning in FY 2009, therefore, an additional FY 2010 funding request will be required in order to begin construction.

The Coast Guard’s HC-144 Ocean Sentry, an EADS-CASA CN-235MPA variant, is also facing sharp cost hikes. That aircraft has been affected by a weakening US dollar exchange rate versus the Euro, and the $1.7 billion program for 36 planes looks set to rise to $2.2 billion. The plane contains 65% American-made parts, but all parts are bought by EADS-CASA, and final assembly takes place in Spain.

March 4/09: USCG Bertholf [WMSL 750] returns to her Alameda, CA homeport, after a successful 8-week underway period that included Combat System Ship Qualification Trials (CSSQT). The crew tested the ship’s weapon systems’ ability to engage surface and aerial targets, as well as delivering warning shots and disabling fire on target vessels. They also ran full power trials of the propulsion system, and performed the ship class’ first fueling at sea and towing exercises. US Coast Guard, incl. CSSQT YouTube videos.

Nov 16/08: 1st patrol. USCG Bertholf returns to its homeport in Alameda, CA, marking the completion of the cutter’s first operational patrol. Bertholf’s crew conducted a shakedown of the ship’s systems and carried out flight operations, small-boat operations and weapons testing. US Coast Guard.

Bertholf & HH-65, Miami
(click to view full)

Aug 15/08: Radars. EADS Defence & Security (DS) announces a follow-on order from Lockheed Martin MS2 for its TRS-3D radars, bringing the number employed in the Deepwater program to 5. So far, 3 radars have been delivered on time, with 2 more deliveries planned for end of 2008 and summer 2009.

The TRS-3D is a 3-dimensional multimode naval radar for air and sea surveillance, and can correlate target information with the MSSR 2000 I identification system for automatic identification of vessels and aircraft. With this order, the radar has sold 50 units worldwide for ships including the new K130 corvettes of the German Navy, the “Squadron 2000″ patrol boats of the Finnish Navy and the Norwegian Coast Guard “Nordkapp” and “Svalbard” icebreakers.

July 26/08: Waesche christened. Christening of the Waesche [WMSL 751]. Waesche is named for Adm. Russell R. Waesche, who was the first Coast Guard commandant to achieve the rank of admiral. He led the Coast Guard from 1936 to 1946, which is the longest tenure of any USCG commandant. NGC release.

Meanwhile, Bertholf is undertaking a publicity tour along the eastern seaboard.

May 8/08: “Preliminary Acceptance.” The U.S. Coast Guard accepts delivery of the National Security Cutter Bertholf [WMSL 750], via “preliminary acceptance”. USCG Brief [PDF] | NGC release | Defense News’ article “New U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Delivered” includes a detailed list of key issues remaining, and proposed measures.

April 2008: Bertholf INSURV. A Navy Board of Inspection and Survey team (INSURV), went aboard the Bertholf to give the cutter a top-to-bottom assessment. InSurv identified 2,816 points on the ship, listed as “trial cards,” that were incomplete or needed attention; that’s actually a pretty good number for a first-in-class ship. INSURV also highlighted 8 major systems that needed improvement, but reported that overall, Bertholf “was found to be a unique and very capable platform with great potential for future service.”

One issue worth noting is a computer software problem with its Wonderware system, which has forced the ship to rely on backup station control for the main engines, auxiliaries and pumps’ primary controls. Wonderware has been dismissed, and a new contractor, Matrikon, is working to fix the situation by end of May 2008.

The key unresolved issue remains the security of the Bertholf’s command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance suite, commonly known as C4ISR. Much of the information systems gear was not yet installed when INSURV came onboard. The Navy says this issue will be fixed after the ship moves to its homeport of Alameda, CA. Navy Times | Defense News.

March 11/08: GAO on Deepwater. The US Government Accountability Office releases report# GAO-08-270R: “Status of Selected Aspects of the Coast Guard’s Deepwater Program” [Report page | Plain text | PDF, 20 pages]. Key passages related to the NSC program include a very useful cost growth table (reproduced above), and:

Changes to the NSC have had cost, schedule, and performance ramifications. The estimated costs for the first three ships have generally doubled from the initial projected costs due to a number of contributing factors, including requirements changes as a result of September 11, Hurricane Katrina damages, and some program management actions by the Coast Guard. Delivery of the ship could be delayed. An aggressive trial schedule leaves little time for dealing with the unexpected, and most certifications have yet to be completed. Coast Guard officials expect the ship to meet all performance parameters, but will not know for certain until the ship undergoes trials. Further, Coast Guard engineers have concerns that most of the ship’s available weight margin has been consumed during construction, meaning that subsequent changes to the ship will require additional redesign and engineering to offset the additional weight. We have closed two of the five open recommendations from our previous report… Coast Guard has taken actions on the three recommendations that remain open… at this time, the actions are not sufficient to allow us to close them.

…Of the 987 certification standards, ICGS was to submit documentation on 892 for review and acceptance by the Coast Guard Technical Authority. Almost all remain outstanding… Coast Guard officials told us that they requested the [TEMPEST-related] test be done earlier than usual so that issues could be identified and corrected sooner… Coast Guard officials noted, however, that a mitigation strategy is in place and adjustments are being made that will increase the service life weight margin.”

March 11/08: Bertholf issues. In a telephone news conference, USCG Chief Acquiistion Officer Rear Adm. Gary Blore, assistant commandant for acquisition, and Program Execurtive Officer Rear Adm. Ronald Rabago discuss allegations rearding the Bertholf. [vid. Federal computer Weekly | Gannett's Navy Times]. Key contentions include:

• The Bertholf was preliminarily scheduled for acceptance at the end of February 2008 [DID: originally 2006, revised twice to get to Feb 2008, see above] but the date was pushed back to late April or early May due primarily to problems with launch-and-recovery apparatus and safety equipment, not C4ISR.

• It is routine for the Coast Guard to accept delivery of a ship and then take several weeks or months to test for and correct, C4ISR-related problems before granting the ship certification for full mission capability [DID: our sources agree re: Navy ships as well].

• Contractors have fixed 80 percent of the problems discovered to date, and final certification of the C4ISR suite is expected “within weeks or months” after the ship is accepted in late April or early May 2008.

• C4ISR certification is unlikely to cause further delays [DID: note that full operational status, which is the only thing TEMPEST could delay, is not planned until March 2010]

• The C4SIR electronics systems on the Bertholf are different from those on the patrol boats. [DID: doesn't really answer, absent specifics explaining the lack of commonality with the flawed systems in question].

March 3/08: Deepwater choices. After receiving the service’s formal “Deepwater alternatives analysis” in February 2008, USCG Chief Acquisition Officer Rear Adm. Gary Blore forwards recommendations to Coast Guard senior leadership in a formal decision memorandum. Commandant Adm. Thad Allen is expected to approve Blore’s decision in the near future – which includes approval of the way forward for the NSC ships. Part of the Deepwater AoA report, however, suggests that if the Coast Guard can buy more capability in Deepwater’s smaller Offshore Patrol Cutters, it might consider reducing the number of National Security Cutters by 2. Inside the Navy’s March 10/08 report [PDF] offers more details, see also Gannett’s Navy Times.

March 3/08: Systemic problems? Writing in World Politics Review, defense journalist David Axe says in “Cutter Delay is Latest Evidence of Systemic Problems with Coast Guard Ships” that:

“…last week at the Bertholf’s scheduled acceptance, the Coast Guard declined to sign the “DD250″ forms that accompany any handover of major defense items from the manufacturer. The refusal to sign is apparently related to the discovery that Bertholf’s electronics are, as predicted by critics, vulnerable to leaks. This was a problem originally identified on the 123-foot boats by Lockheed whistleblower Mike DeKort and initially denied by the Coast Guard, then later acknowledged in the course of congressional and internal investigations… Ron Porter, a civilian Coast Guard employee, four years ago issued waivers to paper over known network problems with the 123-foot boats, according to [April 2007] Senate testimony by Jim Atkinson, a senior engineer with Massachusetts-based consulting firm Granite Island Group. Atkinson is one of the handful of engineers trained to inspect electronics equipment for compliance with the National Security Agency’s “Tempest” emissions standards. Tempest ensures that enemy snoopers can’t tap into U.S. communications…”He waived – accepted – systems with critical security failures that were pointed out by the Navy,” DeKort said of Porter. “Since this is a system of systems design, that meant the NSC had to use common designs, systems and equipment as the 123s. The 123s set the pattern.”… Atkinson likewise told World Politics Review. “As the Coast Guard accepted the flaws in the 123s, the contractor feels that they do not have to resolve the problem that the Coast Guard has already accepted and certified.”

Coast Guard spokeswoman Laura Williams said the Navy will return to do a 3-week inspection on Bertholf before its rescheduled acceptance in April 2008.

Feb 25/08: C4ISR security. USCG Assistant Commandant and Technical Authority for C4IT Rear Adm. David T. Glenn, and Capt. Leonard L. Ritter Jr. from the Office of Cyber Security & Telecommunications, post to the Coast Guard Journal blog re: Bertholf info-security certifications [see also Gannett's Navy Times article]:

“Before the BERTHOLF becomes part of the Coast Guard’s fleet it must go through a standardized Information Assurance (IA) process based on Federal and Department of Defense (DOD) policies, wherein delivered equipment and installation procedures are certified for compliance by the Coast Guard. This process includes such activities as TEMPEST [DID: Telecommunications Electromagnetic Performance and Emission Standards] testing and inspections of emission security requirements… initial approval is called an Interim Authority to Operate (IATO), which is a “qualified” certification to operate designated C4&IT systems. As Technical Authority, we anticipate authorizing BERTHOLF a limited authority to operate some or all of its systems prior to its special commissioning status to facilitate the vessel’s transit to its new homeport in Alameda, CA.

While the Coast Guard is eager to deploy with the new technological capabilities of the NSC class of vessels, they recognized early on that as a “first in class” they would need to pay close attention to IA issues… began testing and evaluating the systems as early as possible, often before installations were even complete… Full instrumented TEMPEST surveys along with IA scans of the BERTHOLF’s networks and systems will be performed after Acceptance Trials (AT) with TEMPEST and IA status highlighted and documented on our acceptance agreement with the shipbuilder (DD250)… Similar to the process undertaken by the U.S. Navy for its own ships of comparable size and complexity, the Coast Guard has formed a dedicated government-industry working group to resolve or mitigate IA discrepancies aboard BERTHOLF.”

Dec 14/07: Weapons. BAE Systems in Minneapolis, MN received a $7.7 million firm-fixed-price modification under previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5117), exercising an option for a 57mm MK 110 MOD 0 gun system. Its primary mission is to deliver high rates of fire, with extreme accuracy, against surface, airborne and shore-based threats with proven effective six-mode programmable, 57-mm Mk 295 ammunition.

Work will be performed in Louisville, KY (78%); Karlskoga, Sweden (21%); and Minneapolis, MN (1%), and is expected to be completed by December 2009. Contract funds in the amount of $88,898, will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington Navy Yard, D.C., issued the contract.

Dec 4/07: Testing. The first-of-class National Security Cutter Bertholf [WMSL 750] sails away from Northrop Grumman’s Pascagoula, MS facility under its own power for the first time, to begin its sea trials in the Gulf of Mexico. Initial reports from the first 2 days are positive.

The ship will complete 3 sets of trials, including these initial Machinery Trials which will last for about a week. Builder’s Trials are scheduled for early 2008, and Bertholf is scheduled to be delivered to the Coast Guard following Acceptance Trials in spring 2008. NGC release.

WMSL-750 Bertholf,
final fitting
(click to view full)

Sept 11/07: Northrop Grumman announces the completion of a pair of construction-related milestones. On Bertholf [WMSL 750], which stands at 90% complete, the two main propulsion diesel engines completed a successful light-off. Following this accomplishment, the stern assembly was erected onto Waesche [WMSL 751], which now stands at 33% complete. NGC release.

Sept 3/07: Costs. A Defense News report mentions both the Bertholf’s expected delivery date, and its final cost. The new delivery date is Feb 26/08; it was set as part of the major program agreement with the Coast Guard announced Aug 8/07. The contract also fixed the total price for the new ship at $641 million – a figure that includes $441 million to build the ship, money to buy government-furnished equipment such as weapons, and future costs for structural improvements and modifications.

See “USCG National Security Cutters: Bad News, Good News” for further details regarding ongoing process improvements, and an explanation of the connections between the two releases.

Turbine Light-Off
(click to view full)

Aug 7/07: Testing. The Coast Guard fires up the USCGC(US Coast Guard Cutter) Bertholf’s General Electric LM 2500 gas turbine engines for the first time, as Coast Guard Chief Warrant Officer 3 Walt Probst presses the switch. The procedure was an initial operational test of the ship’s combined diesel and gas (CODAG) turbine propulsion system, and the next test will be a diesel engine light-off. NGC release | ICGS Deepwater release | Gannett Navy Times article.

July 19/07: Mast stepping. Northrop Grumman Corporation observes a traditional naval custom known as “mast stepping” during the construction of the U.S. Coast Guard National Security Cutter Bertholf (WMSL 750). “Stepping the Mast” is an ancient custom of placing coins under the step or bottom of a ship’s mast during construction that dates back to Greek mythology. It was thought that if the ship wrecked at sea, the coins would help the sailors pay the wages for their return home. Northrop Grumman and Coast Guard officials permanently affixed $7.50 in coins – to represent the hull number of Bertholf – under the mast. Each coin commemorated a significant date in the life of this ship and its namesake, the USCG’s first Commodore Ellsworth Bertholf.

Other activities related to the Bertholf included removing and re-installing the LM2500 gas turbine engine to demonstrate that those activities could be accomplished within 48 hours, and installation of a Mk15, Block 1B Phalanx 20mm Close-In Weapon System (CIWS) that can target incoming missiles, helicopters, or even surface boats. NGC’s release adds that Bertholf is 86% complete, with Main Engine Light-Off as the next major test.

March 14/07: Infrastructure. The U.S. Coast Guard today formally opens its new Deepwater shipboard operations training facility at Coast Guard Training Center Petaluma. The $26 million facility was equipped by Lockheed Martin with state-of-the-art simulators, radars and electronics equipment to train Coast Guard crews assigned to the new Legend Class National Security Cutters.

In addition to National Security Cutter crews, the facility will train U.S. Navy crews to operate and maintain the TRS-3D air search radar. In exchange, the Navy will train Coast Guard crews to operate the 57mm medium caliber deck gun. Lockheed Martin release, via GlobalSecurity.org.

Feb 14/07: Report. The US House of Representatives Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation holds its “Oversight Hearing on Recent Setbacks to the Coast Guard Deepwater Program.” The NSC is discussed.

Jan 23/07: Report. The US Department of Homeland Security, Inspector General’s Office releases its report: Acquisition of the National Security Cutter, US Coast Guard.

Bertholf construction
(click to view full)

Sept 22/06: #1 launch. Northrop Grumman Ship Systems launches the U.S. Coast Guard’s first National Security Cutter, Bertholf [WMSL 750]. NGC release.

Sept 11/06: #2 keel. Keel laying for the NSC 2 Waesche [WMSL 751] takes place.

Nov 11/06: #1 christened. The first Legend Class ship, Bertholf, is christened. Rep. Gene Taylor [D-MS] reminds all present that it will take more than technology:

“In the course of your career, you are going to have some tough times… see another Hurricane Katrina… and generals and admirals have convinced me that you are going to see a major attack on the heartland of America – and you are going to be called upon to respond… So it is fitting that our nation is providing you with a great ship and great training, but at the end of the day it’s going to take the great people that you are, to make those things work.”

Nov 22/05: Naming. NGC relays the U.S. Coast Guard’s announcement that the first Deepwater National Security Cutter (NSC) will be named Bertholf in honor of the organization’s first Commandant, Ellsworth Price Bertholf (1866-1921). NGC release.

Footnotes

fn1. A ship’s draught measures how deep the water must be for the ship to float, rather than resting on the bottom. Return

fn2. Hurricane Katrina caused considerable damage to the shipyard, but more important, it caused an exodus of experienced workers, forcing contractors to use more overtime hours and disrupting the traditional learning curve. [Return]

Appendix A: The Pitfalls of Being a Legend – NSC Issues & Action

Boutwell HEC in
Iraqi waters, OIF
(click to view full)

The Legend Class National Security Cutter’s transition from drawing board into service was not smooth, and matters eventually reached a point that put the entire program in doubt. With the passage of legislative bill HR 2722 in July 2007, however, the US Congress decided to move forward with the Legend Class cutters. in exchange, they demanded more stringent monitoring and certification procedures. Barring further difficulties, it appears that the 8 planned NSC ships will in fact be built.

The question is, “at what cost and timeline”?

First-of-class ships are often more expensive, post 9/11 changes did add 1,000 of the final design’s 4,300 tons, and the NSC program compares favorably in many respects with past programs like the US Navy’s current core of AEGIS DDG-51 destroyers and CG-47 cruisers. Even so, that National Security Cutter’s $641 million per ship price tag begins to place the Bertholf Class in the same realm as the new Fridtjof Nansen Class AEGIS air defense frigates that form the high end core of Norway’s navy. In every respect, this is a very high-end ship.

Price tags often decline as more ships are built, but there are also cases like the LPD-17 San Antonio Class, whose $1.7 billion cost and 100% overrun on the first ship appear to have perpetuated throughout the build cycle. The Coast Guard’s existing High Endurance Cutters (HECs) are wearing out, which only adds urgency to the key question: which example will this new NSC ship class follow?

A table from the GAO’s March 11/08 report is instructive. Note that all figures are in millions, that “Economic changes” include, for example, escalation of material/labor following the departure of many shipyard workers post-Katrina, and some costs associated with settling the REA. “Other GFE” includes certifications, tests, and training, and also additional government oversight for NSC 3:

Timing is also important. The original 2006 delivery date for the first-of-class USCGC Bertholf [WMSL 750] slipped. Post-9/11 design changes pushed the date back to August 2007, then a revised 2007 program agreement moved the timeline back to February 2008. Bertholf was delivered via a “preliminary acceptance” procedure in August 2008. The second ship, Waesche [WMSL 751], was commissioned in May 2010.

That’s a long gap, and there’s a reason for that. First-of-class ships often have issues that require fixing before full operational certification is granted, and sea trials frequently last a year or more. After acceptance of WMSL 750, the Coast Guard planned to conduct operational testing at sea for approximately 2 years; March 2010 became the target date for full operational status, but key features like the SCIF only received Authority to Operate in April 2010, and some capabilities like UAVs remain works in progress.

Speculations concerning further progress, or regress, need to consider the program’s history.

As far back as 2002, technical experts for the Coast Guard raised doubts about the ship’s hull, contending that significant flaws exist in its structural design. In 2004, assistant commandant Rear Adm. Errol Brown sent a memo detailing more than 5 design deficiencies to Rear Adm. Patrick Stillman, urging the program officer to resolve any disputes over engineering before proceeding with construction of the first cutter. That apparently did not happen; a 2007 Office of the Inspector General report revealed that hull fatigue was still a concern, and that some USCG specifications still had not been met, even as the ship’s cost had increased by more than 33% since the Deepwater program began.

Worse revelations followed. In 2007, Rep. Henry A. Waxman [D-CA, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee], was quoted in the Washington Post saying that a Navy engineering report in December 2005 included “bottom-line” warnings. Red ink on a pair of Navy engineering briefing slides concluded the cutters would not last the required 30 years. But the warnings were allegedly deleted in a copy of the report given by Coast Guard officials to Department of Homeland Security auditors, and altered in an edited version included in a wider briefing. See “Additional Readings & Sources” for more documents and reporting.

In 2007 testimony to the US Congress, the US Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General said that:

“On the NSC acquisition, the cutter’s performance specifications were so poorly worded that there were major disagreements within the Coast Guard as to what the NSC’s performance capabilities should actually be… The cost of NSCs 1 and 2 is expected to increase well beyond the current $775 million estimate, as this figure does not include a $302 million Request for Equitable Adjustment (REA) submitted to the Coast Guard by ICGS on November 21, 2005 [DID: this and other REAs were resolved in July 2007]. The REA represents ICGS’s re-pricing of all work associated with the production and deployment of NSCs 1 and 2 caused by adjustments to the cutters’ respective implementation schedules as of January 31, 2005… The current $775 million estimate also does not include the cost of structural modifications to be made to the NSC as a result of its known design deficiencies. In addition, future REAs and the cost of modifications to correct or mitigate the cutter’s existing design deficiencies could add hundreds of millions of dollars to the total NSC acquisition cost…

The NSC, as designed and constructed, will not meet performance specifications described in the original Deepwater contract. Specifically, due to design deficiencies, the NSC’s structure provides insufficient fatigue strength to achieve a 30-year service life under Caribbean (General Atlantic) and Gulf of Alaska (North Pacific) sea conditions… The Coast Guard’s technical experts first identified and presented their concerns about the NSC’s structural design to senior Deepwater Program management in December 2002, but this did not dissuade the Coast Guard from authorizing production of the NSC in June 2004 or from its May 2006 decision to award the systems integrator a contract extension. Due to a lack of adequate documentation, we were unable to ascertain the basis for the decision to proceed with the production of the first two cutters, knowing that there were design flaws…”

NSC-class Cutter Concept
(click pic to view full)

In response, Northrop Grumman Ship Systems President Philip Teel outlined the issues as NGSS saw them:

“The NSC is designed to meet a 30 year service life and many of the structural items raised by the Coast Guard have been addressed and were incorporated in the Bertholf and Waesche (NSC 1 and 2) prior to production. For example, upgraded steel, thicker steel, modifications to Fashion Plates and Re-entrant Corners, and the addition of 2 longitudinal Hovgaard bulkheads to provide increased stiffness at the stern were incorporated into the design.

With regard to NSC fatigue life, even the best engineers will have different opinions. Analysis has been performed on the NSC utilizing a relatively new model developed by Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division (Carderock) utilizing two different approaches. The difference in the two approaches is whether or not the model is benchmarked by calculating the fatigue strength of proven ship designs with similar operational characteristics and hull form that has been at sea for the desired time. This enables the calculation of permissible stress levels that can be applied to test the new design. The results of these two analyses have generated a responsible dialog between the engineers which will lead to final agreement about enhancements to fatigue structure… The American Bureau of Shipbuilding (ABS) certified 14 Systems Level drawings, including structural design drawings. ABS will also certify 35 ship systems during this acceptance process… During the design process, there will be a total of 46 independent third party certifications prior to or as part of the USCGC Bertholf (NSC 1) delivery process… The US Navy’s Board of Inspection and Survey (INSURV) will conduct the Ship’s Acceptance Trials (AT) when the cutter gets underway later this year.

Cost growth has also been mentioned in the media. Two elements have led to the majority of cost growth on the NSC – increased post 9/11 requirements and the impact of Hurricane Katrina. The NSC that will be delivered to the Coast Guard this year is not the same ship that was first proposed in 1998. Today’s NSC has greatly improved operational capabilities that address post 9/11 requirements including Chemical, Biological & Radiation (CBR) protection, a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) and more robust aviation installations so that the NSC, in addition to its normal embarked Coast Guard aviation complement, will be able to launch, recover and operate US Navy, US Government Agency and partner nation manned and unmanned rotary wing aircraft. These enhancements have added approximately 1000 tons to the displacement, including a one third increase in electrical power systems, a tripling of air conditioning and ventilation capacity (HVAC), the addition of 25 antennas and a 26% growth in the size of the berthing spaces.

It is true that Katrina delayed the delivery of Bertholf by several months and added cost to the program… Even taking into account Katrina, Bertholf continues to set new lead ship standards in quality and efficiency with, higher performance to standards than both the first or second Arleigh Burke Class (DDG 51) destroyer and labor utilization measures that routinely out perform other programs in our shipyard. Much of what has been done on the NSC program is being transitioned to the rest of the shipyard to other construction programs. In addition to the specific actions as they relate to the NSC program, we are investing $57.3 million dollars of our own money in a new suite of management tools that will increase our visibility, work sequencing capability, material and engineering modeling and capacity and resource planning. These tools will enable the reduction in the number of units we construct to build the NSC. Currently we build the vessel in 45 units and integrate these sub assemblies into 29 erection lifts on the ship. The new tool set will allow us to plan and construct the vessel in less lifts, our target is 16, and as we know the less number of lifts the less cost. We are investing in our human capital, process improvement, and our facilities to reduce the cost associated with building future ships.”

WMSL-751 Waesche
(click to view full)

As that last sentence notes, NGSS is taking action to improve the ships over time, as part of a structured improvements process. As each milestone is met, personnel involved in the ship’s construction meet to discuss “lessons learned.” Good practices, as well as opportunities for improvement, are noted and applied to the construction process of the next ship in the series. Through lessons learned on Bertholf, work on the Waesche improved significantly, moving thousands of hours of work out of the integration area where ship sections are joined, and into the shop areas. This allows work to be accomplished earlier in the process, more efficiently, and at a reduced cost to the Coast Guard. As an example, the engine and propulsion install took 8 days on Bertholf, but just 1.5 days on Waesche.

These kinds of lessons and improvements are typical in ship-building programs.

In addition, the Bertholf is the first ship to be constructed using a new shipyard configuration in Pascagoula. The Bertholf and the Waesche were built side by side, making it easy for personnel to access both ships for comparison and/or referencing activities. The new shipyard configuration also allows tests and trials to be conducted on the ships without relocating them. Over time, Northrop Grumman also aims to reduce the number of “block lift” sections required to finish the ship, by improving each block’s level of final readiness and avoiding tricky post-lift installs that may force rework, or encounter difficulties because it’s harder to get access to key areas.

The success of the process improvements outlines above, and resolution of outstanding design issues, will play a large role in determining whether the coast guard’s flagship cutters can make the next transition. A transition from ‘rescued program,’ to a good program that delivers acknowledged value, and begins to place the troubled $25 billion Deepwater modernization program back on track.

Appendix B: Additional Readings

• US Coast Guard – Integrated Deepwater System

• Integrated Coast Guard Systems (ICGS), the Lockheed/N-G partnership that served as Deepwater’s systems integrator until the USCG announced that it was taking back control of the program.

• ICGS Deepwater – National Security Cutter (NSC) Spec Sheet [PDF format]

• ICGS Deepwater – Long-Range Interceptor (LRI) and Short Range Prosecutor (SRP) Spec Sheet [PDF format]

• DID (updated) – US Coast Guard’s Deepwater Effort Hits More Rough Sailing. Describes recent issues with the program, and includes a wealth of external resources and reports.

• IBM Center for the Business of Government – The Challenge of Contracting for Large Complex Projects: A Case Study of the Coast Guard’s Deepwater Program. This report was also discussed in USCG Rear ADM. Blore’s Dec 31/08 blog post. The report rates the National Security Cutter program as a “mixed” success/ failure.

• USCG Compass (Feb 2/13) – Adm. Papp discusses maritime strategic issues with Adm. Greenert and Gen. Amos.

• Plant Automation (Feb 14/08) – MTU Powers Deepwater National Security Cutter. Offers details re: the propulsion system.

• Washington Post (Feb 9/07) – Waxman Sees Potential Coverup in Ship Contract

• NY Times (Dec 14/06) – Lawmakers Say Coast Guard Withheld Warning of Flaws in Cutter Design

Official Reports & Testimony

• US Congressional Government Accountability Office (#GAO-08-270R March 11/08) – Status of Selected Aspects of the Coast Guard’s Deepwater Program

• Inside the Navy, via USCG Acquisitions Directorate (March 10/08) – Re-Analysis Validates Coast Guard’s Way Ahead With Deepwater [PDF]

• US House of Representatives Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation; Oversight Hearing on Recent Setbacks to the Coast Guard Deepwater Program (Feb 14/07) – Statement of DHS Inspector General Mr. Richard L. Skinner. See also Statement of Phillip Teel, President of Northrop Grumman Ship Systems for their position re: the NSC; and statements made by other invitees.

• Committee On Oversight And Government Affairs, US House Of Representatives (Feb 8/07) – Statement Of Admiral Thad W. Allen, Commandant, On The Procurement Practices Of The Department Of Homeland Security: Integrated Deepwater Systems [PDF format]. This is a key document regarding the future of Deepwater, and of USCG acquisitions. An almost identical submission was made to the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation on February 14, 2007.

• USCG, Admiral Thaad Allen (?) – Commandant’s All Hands Message – National Security Cutter Update

• US Department of Homeland Security, Inspector General’s Office (Jan 23/07) – Acquisition of the National Security Cutter, US Coast Guard. [Full report, PDF]

• Gannett’s Navy Times (Feb 1/07) – IG report shows early concerns over cutter

• US Congressional Government Accountability Office (#GAO-06-546, April 28/06) – Coast Guard: Changes to Deepwater Plan Appear Sound, and Program Management Has Improved, but Continued Monitoring Is Warranted

• US Congressional Government Accountability Office (#GAO-05-757, July 22/05) – Coast Guard: Progress Being Made on Addressing Deepwater Legacy Asset Condition Issues and Program Management, but Acquisition Challenges Remain

The US Army’s Heavy Brigade Combat Teams have relied on BAE’s 30+ ton Bradley family of M2/3/6/7 vehicles for a variety of combat functions, from armed infantry carrier and cavalry scout roles, to specialized tasks like calling artillery fire and even short-range air defense. The Bradley first entered US Army service in 1981, however, and the fleet has served through several wars. Even ongoing RESET, modernizations, and remanufacturing cannot keep them going indefinitely.

The Army’s problem is that replacing them has been a ton of trouble. Future Combat Systems’ MGV-IFV was terminated, along with the other MGV variants, by the 2010 budget. A proposal to replace it with a “Ground Combat Vehicle” (GCV) program raised concerns that the Army’s wish list would create an even less affordable solution. Now a revised GCV program is underway. Can it deliver a vehicle that will be effective on the battlefield? Just as important, can it deliver a vehicle that the US Army can afford to buy and maintain, in the midst of major national budgetary problems and swelling entitlement programs?

GCV: Concept & Requirements

GCV concept
(click to view larger)

The GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle is not a simple competition among existing vehicle types, though the global armored vehicle industry could easily have offered that. Instead, it was decided to run GCV as a clean sheet design for a new armored vehicle that would incorporate all of the lessons learned in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.

“All” can be a dangerous goal for a military that needs on-time, on-budget, reasonably priced solutions. The initial GCV RFP resulted in design submissions that were reportedly in the 60-70 ton range. That’s almost double the weight of a 33 ton Bradley family vehicle, or of new designs like Korea’s K-21 KNIFV; and 50% higher than even heavy IFVs like Germany’s Puma and Britain’s FRES-SV. Indeed, it’s equivalent to a heavy main battle tank like the M1 Abrams.

The August 2010 GCV RFP cancellation resulted in a new RFP that emphasized use of “mature” technologies, but didn’t change some of the key requirements driving issues like weight, size and cost. Nor did it change the Army’s insistence on big performance increases in a number of areas.

Under the terms of its revised RFP, the GCV Program is driven to achieve a set of primary imperatives called the “Big Four”. These “Big Four” imperatives are defined as follows:

• Force Protection: Including protection against IED land mines. This is not a traditional strength of tracked vehicles lighter than main battle tanks, due to their flat bottoms.

• Capacity: vehicle crew and a fully-equipped 9 soldier Infantry squad. That’s relatively large. The Bradley carries just 6, and survivability needs and “space under armor” are the 2 requirement sets that do the most to determine vehicle size and weight. Which in turn affect costs.

• Full Spectrum: “A versatile platform able to adapt and/or enhance capabilities through configuration changes of armor and network while providing for growth over time in terms of size, weight, power and cooling.” This has been a steady trend in current IFVs over time, including the Bradley.

• Timing: A design that can have the 1st production vehicle delivered and accepted within 7 years of the TD phase contract award.

Under the revised September 2010 RFP, some requirements were “Tier 1″: specifically defined, and must be met. Tier 2 and Tier 3 requirements must be addressed, but the vendors are responsible for making tradeoffs among them. Vendors that DID talked to believe this left the Army with better solutions than they would otherwise have received.

GCV: Controversies & Comparisons

Armor Evolution & GCV
(click to view full)

Intelligent tradeoffs within the RFP may have resulted in better design choices, but they won’t necessarily ensure a successful program. If the original requirements end up as major obstacles to fielding an affordable, tactically-relevant vehicle on time, as was the case with the recently-canceled USMC Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle IFV, there are no competition rule changes that can fix it.

The key question for the program is whether the GCV fits that category.

The initial GCV RFP resulted in design submissions that were reportedly in the 60-70 ton range, and that has continued. The Army has retained the key specifications driving it toward that weight class.

That level of size certainly ensures the versatility that comes with added space and heft, as Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Chiarelli explained in 2010:

“It is important to note that within the RFP you are not going to see a weight requirement. What you will see and what we are emphasizing is the Ground Combat Vehicle has to be a versatile vehicle. This will probably be one of the most versatile vehicles that the Army has ever designed. If you look at survivability or armor protection, we are going to have a modular design, meaning we can have scalable armor kits so the commander can decide how protected that vehicle needs to be for the mission… We are giving commanders the capability to tailor survivability for a given situation.”

If “versatility” means only tailorable armor kits, that is well underway in current American vehicle fleets, and in new offerings like KMW’s Puma IFV. On the other hand, if one is talking about functions and requirements, “versatility” has traditionally led American programs to very high cost solutions, and in some cases to program failure. The Marines’ Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle IFV is just the most recent cautionary example.

Puma IFV, Modular armor
(click to view full)

Beyond purchase and operating costs, which both increase in tandem with size and complexity, there is also a penalty in supporting costs. A C-17 airlifter can carry 2 Bradley vehicles, but looks likely to handle just 1 GCV. That doubles the time for crisis response using airlift. Higher fuel and operating costs also mean a longer, larger logistics tail behind, which must be paid for.

South Korea controlled requirements for its 28 ton K-21 KNIFV. They appear to have a vehicle with some performance improvements and some tradeoffs vs. the Bradley, at a cost of under $5 million per vehicle. Germany’s new 36-46 ton Puma IFV, which is considered to be a top-end system, is much closer to the GCV’s target price, at around EUR 7.65 million ($11 million) each under Germany’s July 2009 contract for 405 vehicles.

Namer
(click to view full)

Israel has a vehicle in the GCV’s weight class: its 60 tonne Namer APC/IFV, built on the hull of their Merkava 4 tank. The difference is that the Israelis aren’t looking for the same level of strategic mobility, and pursued much more of a ‘quick and dirty’ approach in order to keep costs down. The Israeli MoD is hired General Dynamics to produce some of their Namer vehicles in the USA, in order to take advantage of US aid dollars.

With the GCV, the USA appears to be hoping to deliver a much larger IFV than the Puma, with more sophisticated capabilities and systems than the Puma or Namer, at about the same or less cost than either alternative. Skepticism may well be warranted.

GCV: Program

At present, the US Army intends to order 1,874 GCVs, plus 30 test vehicles. The government’s average Unit Manufacturing Cost target for the GCV IFV Program is now $9 – $10.5 million per unit in FY 2010 constant dollars, which means that actual purchase costs will be higher due to inflation etc. That’s far lower than the original competition, whose limit was over $20 million. The targeted Operation & Sustainment cost is FY10$ 200 per mile, which is about 2x higher than the current Bradley family.

In a coming era of military budget cuts, both of those prices risk creating problems, even if the winning contractor meets the Army’s targets. If there are overruns, in either area, they are likely to cause budget and political problems in short order. Unfortunately, analysis done by the Pentagon’s own CAPE (Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation) office is closer to $16 – $17 million per unit, and examination of comparable vehicles and their costs gives credence to that view.

Planned Schedule

Meanwhile, the GCV Technology Development (TD) phase began issuing contracts in August 2011, and so began collecting political constituencies with a vested interest in continuing the program.

The TD Phase has 3 stated goals: 1. Create a basic vehicle design; 2. Refine and test key protective designs; and 3. Ensure a smooth handover for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase. Contractors are responsible for 100% of TD Phase overruns, but can keep 20% of any unspent contract monies.

Once a basic design is created, protective designs to be submitted and tested include the a Mine Blast Subsystem Prototype Test Article, and a Rocket Propelled Grenade Protection Subsystem Prototype.

The TD Phase’s key milestone is the Preliminary Design Review (PDR), to be held by February 2013. Upon completion of the PDR, TD phase contractors will continue to work on their designs, while refining the Unit Manufacturing Cost (UMC) estimates.

In preparation for EMD, TD Phase contractors will submit an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) that contains planning packages through delivery of the Early Prototype vehicle, 12 months from award of the EMD contract. they also submit an Integrated Master Plan (IMP) through delivery of the First Full-Up Prototype Vehicle, which happens 30 months from winning the EMD contract.

The 4 year EMD Phase was planned to be solicited in FY 2013. It will focus on completing the detailed design, building integrated GCV IFV prototypes, and conducting key tests including Production Qualification Testing (PQT), a Limited User Test, and ballistic survivability testing. The original plan was to pick up to 2 contractors based upon price, schedule and technical performance, with awards going to both TD participants. Instead, a January 2013 change shifted the competition to a single winner, with the Army still waiting to decide whether it will be an entirely new design, or a modification of an existing vehicle.

GCV: Competing Teams

Team BAE

CV90, urban camo
(click to view full)

The GCV competition attracted 3 teams of competitors, but the Army took an important step to level the playing field. The cancelled FCS Manned Ground Vehicle (MGV) program data, referred to as the MGV Body of Knowledge, was made available to all qualified TD Phase bidders.

One team is led by Bradley IFV manufacturer BAE Systems, who also makes the popular CV90 IFV, and had a major role in Future Combat Systems’ MGV. They are partnered with:

• Northrop Grumman – C4ISR (command, control, communications, computing, intelligence, surveillance & reconnaissance) integrator.
  
• iRobot – Integration of the SUGV ground robot, and other robotics, into the vehicle. SUGV is one of the few survivors of the Future Combat Systems program. Longer term contribution may include GCV autonomous driving capability.
  
• MTU/ Tognum America – Power pack (MTU engine, transmission & generator – Series 880?). Parent firm Tognum AG is in the process of being controlled by Daimler AG and Rolls Royce plc.
  
• QinetiQ North America – E-X-Drive electric drive propulsion system. Same partnership as MGV.
  
• Saft – Hybrid drive’s energy storage system. Same partnership as MGV.

The firm has conducted tests with Artis downward-firing Iron Curtain active protection system. Technically, the GCV doesn’t require an APS. In practice, the Congressional Research Service says that both qualifying teams are including APS systems on their designs.

Team BAE’s design has an extraordinary 70-ton base weight, which can rise to 84 tons with all add-on kits. By comparison, an M1A2 Abrams tank is 68 tons. Beyond the 360-degree protection levels and personnel carriage requirements that drove much of the GCV’s weight, BAE personnel told DID that the Army’s change of direction to emphasize mature technology, while requiring more than incremental increases in performance, was the key push behind their own design. Those requirements are forcing a very heavy system – but could BAE draw on experience with a wide variety of armored combat vehicle programs, including SEP and FCS MGV, to match mature best-of-breed technologies and give the Army what it wanted?

BAE’s most visible and daring choice involved a diesel-electric hybrid drive. It pays off in some weight savings, in superior power export capabilities, and especially in survivability and space under armor. A diesel-electric drive can mechanically decouple the drive shafts from the engine, creating tremendous layout flexibility for protective features like v-hulls, and better arrangement of internal space. The team touts its design as having better blast resistance than existing Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles like its RG-31 and RG-33.

The flip side of a hybrid drive involves technical risk and reliability, but in conversations with DID, BAE personnel explained why they didn’t see that as much of a risk. Civilian heavy equipment in industries like mining etc. is already using hybrid drive technology as a matter of routine, offering both a mature technical base, and a known path for scaling these systems up for very heavy vehicles. BAE provides hybrid drives for some civilian vehicles, and felt that their experience with MGV, SEP, etc. gave them a solid base to work from.

On the electronics side, Northrop Grumman has been working with the US Army’s “VICTORY (Vehicular Integration for c4isr/electronic warfare inTerOpeRabilitY) Architecture” of standards and specifications, in order to deliver a suite of internal electronics and sensors that can be upgraded easily over time.

Team General Dynamics

ASCOD-2 Scout
(click to view full)

The 2nd team is led by General Dynamics, who 40-45t ASCOD 2 was picked in 2010 as Britain’s forthcoming FRES-SV infantry fighting/ scout vehicle. They’re also producing Israel’s 60t Namer IFV, in order to take advantage of US military aid dollars that must be spent in the USA. General Dynamics Land Systems is the prime contractor, with GD C4 systems responsible for network integration, communications, computing and information assurance.

The GDLS design for GCV is only marginally lighter than BAE’s, at 64 tons for the base vehicle (still a ton heavier than an M1A1 Abrams main battle tank), and 74 tons when all of the optional protection packages are added. Major subcontractors include:

• Lockheed Martin – Turret, lethal and non-lethal effects and embedded training. This is broadly the same partnership as FRES, though it may not be the same turret.
  
• Raytheon – RPG protection system, indirect-vision systems, and sensor integration. Raytheon’s “HTK” system received development contracts as the Active Protection System for FCS MGV.
  
• MTU/Tognum America – Power pack (MTU engine, transmission & generator – Series 890?). Parent firm Tognum AG is in the process of being controlled by Daimler AG and Rolls Royce plc.

Out? Germany’s Puma

Puma IFV
(click to view full)

A 3rd team, which did not receive an award, was led by Future Combat Systems’ Lead Integrator SAIC. It was explicitly based on Germany’s new Puma IFV, which weighs about 33 tons for the base vehicle, and 42 tons if all add-on protection kits are included. Their team included SAIC, plus:

• KMW and Rheinmetall – Puma IFV
  
• Boeing – C4ISR integrator. SAIC’s fellow FCS Lead Integrator.

Assembly in America was the team’s big capability gap, but the team proposed to fill it with small and medium sized manufacturing firms. SAIC’s GAO protest failed, but the Puma will get a 2nd look.

Contracts & Key Events

CSIS event
click for video

April 29/13: APS. Defense Update reports that BAE’s GCV team has successfully tested Artis’ downward-firing Iron Curtain active protection system (APS), defeating all threats fired against the substitute M-ATV wheeled vehicle. Iron Curtain coiples their high-speed processor to an optical sensor, downward-firing “bars” arranged around the vehicle’s perimeter, and a DARPA-developed radar by Mustang Technology Group in Plano, TX. Firing its projectiles downward makes the system safer for accompanying troops.

Technically, the GCV doesn’t require an APS. In practice, The US Congressional Research Service says that both teams are incorporating them into their design.

April 23/13: TD. A pair of contracts to extend the GCV Technology Development phase by 6 months, using FY 2013 Army RDT&E funding. US TACOM Army Contracting Command in Warren, MI manages the contracts.

BAE Systems Land and Armaments LP in Sterling Heights, MI receives $159.5 million more under their fixed-price-incentive contract (W56HZV-11-C-C001, PO 0019).

General Dynamic Land Systems Inc. in Sterling Heights, MI receives $180.4 million more under their fixed-price-incentive contract (W56HZV-11-C-C002, PO 0019).

TD Phase extended

April 17/13: CRS Report. The US Congressional Research Service issues its latest version of R41597: “The Army’s Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) Program: Background and Issues for Congress.” DID’s Google Drive service has the latest version. FAS [PDF] | OpenCRS (currently behind).

April 10/13: FY 2014 Budget. The President releases a proposed budget at last, the latest in modern memory. The Senate and House were already working on budgets in his absence, but the Pentagon’s submission is actually important to proceedings going forward. For the GCV, the FY 2014 budget announces the restructuring terms, and requests $592.2 million, with plans to move into the EMD system development phase in Q3 2013. To get a sense of the changes, the FY 2012 justification expected program spending of $1.963 billion in FY 2014.

Previous GCV budgets have included $435 million in 2012, and a request for $639.9 million in 2013. All funds to date have been for Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation.

Under the new arrangements, GCV’s Technology Development (TD) and Engineering, Manufacturing, and Development (EMD) phases will be stretched by 12 months. See also DoD Buzz | DID budget coverage.

March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish. With respect to the GCV, their 1-page quick briefing says that the Analysis of Alternatives is due by March 2013, with a Preliminary Design Review for the TD Phase designs by June 2013:

“….at that point, according to an Army official, should be ready to determine whether GCV will be an entirely new vehicle or a modified existing vehicle. The Army plans to begin procuring GCV while also procuring other new and costly combat vehicle programs such as the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle and the Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle.”

Total program: $37,923.5 million
RDT&E: $7,025.6 million
Procurement: $25,365.8 million
GCVs: 1,904 = 30 development + 1,874 procurement

March 20/13: Army expectations. CSIS runs the “Ground Forces Dialogue: Major General H.R. McMaster /Ground Force Maneuver: Why It Still Matters” event with the US Army Maneuver Center of Excellence’s commander. He mentioned the advantages and limitations of existing M2 Bradleys, and some of the expectations for the GCV. Among them, it should be able to carry a squad of 9 (not 11 cut down to 6). See: Event video | Army doctrine documents.

Feb 15/13: EMD draft. The US Army’s Contracting Command-Warren publishes draft documents for the Ground Combat Vehicle Infantry Fighting Vehicle (GCV IFV) Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase, including a draft Capability Development Document (CDD). Access is restricted with export controls and other conditions. They expect feedback from industry by March 13. The date for the GCV EMD RFP is not set yet.

November 2012: The Congressional Budget Office releases Working Paper 2012-15: “Technical Challenges of the U.S. Army’s Ground Combat Vehicle Program.” From the rationale for full squad carriage of 9 dismounts, to the key issues faced in defending against various kinds of threats from EFP mines to anti-tank missiles, this paper’s explanations are lucid, clear, and enhanced by informative illustrations. It also deals with the GCV’s key tradeoffs, especially around weight and cost. Highly recommended.

Mobility compared
(click to view full)

May 8/12: DoD’s Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) FY11 report [PDF] dates from February but was only released publicly today. Though the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is exempt from DFARS regulations, CAPE has started independently assessing the cost of their programs. They have focused so far on regular major programs (MDAPs) while they have worked mostly on the IT programs (MAIS) deemed to be in the worst shape. Also of note:

“There were two notable pioneering cases (the Ohio Replacement and the Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV)) where CAPE prepared independent cost estimates early in the program development as part of the Materiel Solution Analysis phase leading to a Milestone A DAB review. The Materiel Solution Analysis phase presents the first substantial opportunity to influence design through trade-off studies that balance requirements, performance, technology choices, schedule, and cost considerations. The CAPE independent cost estimate is now an important element of this process.”

CAPE is estimating a cost per vehicle around $15-16 million.

March 1/12: New entrants? Aviation Week Ares reports that the Army is using some of its technology development phase funds to invite more competitors to test at White Sands, NM. They include BAE’s existing M2 Bradley (A3 and turretless) and its popular CV90-035; and General Dynamics’ Namer (partnership with Israel) and new wheeled, v-hulled Stryker DVH. SAIC’s GAO protest was rejected, but its Puma will also get another look. Just not at White Sands. In addition:

“The Army has also confirmed to AvWeek that it is looking to conduct assessments of two other tracked European vehicles: the BMP, made by the Russian company JSC Kurganmashzavod; and the VBCI infantry fighting vehicle, produced by France’s Nexter [DID: which is wheeled, not tracked]… The Army requested $640 million in fiscal year 2013 to continue work on the technology development phase… the GCV program has been ordered to work two separate analyses of alternatives along with an additional non-developmental evaluation, all while BAE Systems and General Dynamics continue to refine their designs.”

The betting odds are that this is more of a “data to back our claim that existing gear isn’t good enough for us” exercise, rather than an effort to really rethink the direction of this program. Aviation Week later strengthens that belief by reporting on March 12/12 that:

“An official at the GCV office tells DTI that the data gathered during the NIE [exercise with the various platforms] will be used to validate existing capabilities against the planned capabilities of the GCV – especially potential capability trade-offs as the program drives toward Milestone B. Ultimately, an award is expected by the end of 2013.”

Aug 26/11: Protest. The SAIC team is launching a bid protest with the Congressional Government Accountability Office. That protest puts the release of contracted funding on hold, until it is resolved, which must happen within 100 days. AOL Defense:

“We believe the government relied on evaluation criteria outside its published request for proposal,” Koskovich said. “We also believe several aspects of the bid may have been discounted because of a lack of familiarity with their non-American origins.”

They didn’t win.

Aug 24/11: Sub-contractors. Tognum America announces that its Series 880 (880 – 2,016 kW) and Series 890 (410 – 920 KW) engines will be used in the BAE and GDLS designs. They do not say which engine is in which design, but BAE’s use of a hybrid drive strongly suggests that they’re the ones using the higher capacity V12 Series 880.

June 30/11: DAB Review coming. Defense News reports that GCV program will receive another Defense Acquisition Board Review on July 21/11, adding that even the cost target drop from $24 million (original RFP) to $10.5 million (current RFP) may not save GCV from budget issues.

March 9/11: Hard questions. U.S. Rep. Roscoe Bartlett [R-MD], the Chairman of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces, releases a statement for the subcommittee’s hearing on the Administration’s FY 2012 budget request for the equipment modernization programs for the U.S. Army. Excerpts:

“In terms of this year’s budget request, the Army’s top two modernization priorities are the tactical network and the Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) programs… the committee has and continues to support the Army’s goal of pursuing a modernized combat vehicle. However, the committee needs to understand the rationale as to why the Ground Combat Vehicle should proceed as scheduled… How do we know that the GCV is the full spectrum vehicle that the Army needs? Why did the Army not complete an analysis of alternatives before it issued the original requests for proposals as this committee had encouraged? Can the Army afford to launch another program that could cost up to $30 billion to procure a vehicle that carries a squad of nine instead of the current six? Why not consider as an alternative option, continuing to upgrade Abrams, Bradleys and Strykers; focus on the network and take part of the funds and apply it to lightening the load of the soldier?… To be clear, I am not saying that I don’t support the GCV program… However, as was the case with the FCS program, it is this committee’s responsibility to ask the hard questions now, so that we don’t learn in five years that the Army can’t afford the GCV or that it is based on ‘exquisite’ requirements.”

Jan 21/11: Bids in. The BAE/NGC team submits its RFP bid. Major sub-contractors include iRobot, MTU, QinetiQ North America, Saft.

MTU, now known as Tognum America, is also supplying the engine for General Dynamics’ team, which evidently submitted its own proposal.

SAIC’s “Team Full Spectrum” submits a Puma-derived design again. Boeing, Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall Defence will be the key subcontractors. BAE Systems | Boeing.

Jan 18/11: ADVS out. Advanced Defense Vehicle Systems (ADVS) announces that it will withdraw as a competitor for the Army’s Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) Program:

“Under the current program, the contracting efforts have been divided into three stages. The first stage will not require producing a prototype demonstration vehicle and, in fact, the Army will wait a total of seven years to field a weapon system… While ADVS supports the Army’s concept, they encourage the U.S. Department of Defense to review the ADVS strategies and past performance and consider ways of developing and fielding vehicles quicker and more economically. Such a rapid process is counter to the current GCV strategy; though supportive of the philosophy of Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates.”

Dec 3/10: Costs. Aviation Week quotes Gen. Cartwright says the US military must begin to value scale and numbers, not just capabilities. Even as the proposed GCV to replace the M2/M3 Bradleys has an expected price of up to $10.5 million per GCV – and a target of twice the Bradley’s per-mile operating cost.

Nov 30/10: TD competition. The US Army releases modified rules [PDF] for the GCV-IFV competition. Army GCV Program Manager Colonel Andrew DiMarco is quoted as saying that the Army expects to award up to 3 technology-development contracts, under a fixed-price model with incentives, in April 2011. Companies would get 20% of any money saved if they beat their budget.

Current plans call for eventual construction of 1,874 of the new vehicles, beginning in 7 years. Reuters.

Oct 26/10: BAE. The BAE/NGC team adds iRobot Corp:

“iRobot Corporation will serve as the unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) integrator and enhance the capability to detect pedestrians and obstacles of interest with growth towards an autonomous driving capability for the GCV. iRobot will also be responsible for integration of the U.S. Army’s Brigade Combat Team modernization program Small Unmanned Ground Vehicle (SUGV) robotic platform so that it can be operated from inside the GCV.”

Oct 1/10: The US Army holds its GCV Industry Day. FBO.gov.

RFP v1.0 plan
(click to view full)

Sept 22/10: The US Army issues Solicitation # W56HZV-11-R-0001: “10–Ground Combat Vehicle Technology Development Phase Solicitation.” This is a renewed RFP, following the cancellation of the Feb 25/10 issue. See also US Army TACOM page. Bottom line?

“The solicitation will seek to award up to three cost reimbursement contracts for the TD phase focusing on mature technologies in order to reduce significant developmental risk over a seven year schedule culminating with the first GCV production vehicle.”

GCV RFP v2.0

July 26/10: The BAE/NGC team adds QinetiQ and Saft. QinetiQ North America will provide the E-X-Drive electric drive propulsion system, while Saft will provide the energy storage system. BAE Systems.

May 24/10: Puma bid. Future Combat Systems’ two Lead Systems Integrators, Boeing and SAIC, team with KMW in a bid for the US Army’s next-generation IFV: The Ground Combat Vehicle program. Boeing’s release states that:

“The team’s offering draws from the experience gained from the Manned Ground Vehicle and the Puma programs and will be built in the United States with a team of experienced American small and mid-tier supplier businesses.”

May 21/10: Bids. The BAE/NGC team, and the GD/Raytheon team, submit their bids for the GCV Technology Development phase. BAE Systems | GDLS.

March 10/10: BAE Systems teams up with Northrop Grumman Corporation, who will be the C4ISR systems integrator for their GCV team. They have a similar relationship with respect to the JLTV program to replace existing HMMWV jeeps. BAE Systems.

Oct 19/09: After the Pentagon terminates Future Combat Systems’ Manned Ground Vehicle program, the US Army releases solicitation #W56HZV-GCV-Spec_CDD: “Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) Draft Specification/CDD”

Additional Readings

The GCV

• US Army TACOM – W56HZV-11-R-0001 Ground Combat Vehicle. Competition/ RFP site.

• US Army Stand To! (April 12/10) – Army’s Ground Combat Vehicle

• US Army Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Command (TARDEC) – Vehicle Electronics and Architecture

• BAE – Ground Combat Vehicle. 70+ tons. This is progress?

Other News & Background

• CSIS (March 20/13) – Ground Forces Dialogue: Major General H.R. McMaster /Ground Force Maneuver: Why It Still Matters. The commander of the US Army’s Maneuver Center of Excellence.

• COTS Journal (May 2011) – Open Standards and Phased Approach Benefit Ground Vehicle Modernization

• Defense Systems (2010) – PEO C3T Program Review & Vision Guide: VICTORY Over “Bolt-On” Integration

• DID – I Beg to Differ: The US GAO’s Bid Protest Process

Official Reports

• US CRS, via OpenCRS (#R41597, last update April 17/13) – The Army’s Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) Program: Background and Issues for Congress.

• US CBO (April 2/13) – The Army’s Ground Combat Vehicle Program and Alternatives

• US CBO (Nov 6/12) – Technical Challenges of the U.S. Army’s Ground Combat Vehicle Program. Outstanding: accessible, clear, and informative.

• US GAO (June 16/11, #GAO-11-502) – DOD Weapon Systems: Missed Trade-off Opportunities During Requirements Reviews

• US GAO (March 9/11, #GAO-11-425T) – Key Questions Confront the Army’s Ground Force Modernization Initiatives

• US GAO (April 15/10, #GAO-10-603T) – Defense Acquisitions: Opportunities and Challenges for Army Ground Force Modernization Efforts

Under the SEA 4000 Air Warfare Destroyer program, Australia plans to replace its retired air defense destroyers with a modern system that can provide significantly better protection from air attack, integrate with the US Navy and other Coalition partners, offer long-range air warfare defense for Royal Australian Navy task groups, and help provide a coordinated air picture for fighter and surveillance aircraft. Despite their name and focus, the ships are multi-role designs with a “sea control” mission that also includes advanced anti-submarine and surface warfare capabilities.

The Royal Australian Navy took a pair of giant steps in June 2007, when it selected winning designs for its keystone naval programs: Canberra Class LHD amphibious operations vessels, and Hobart Class “air warfare destroyers.” Spain’s Navantia made an A$ 11 billion clean sweep, winning both the A$ 3 billion Canberra Class LHD and the A$ 8 billion Hobart Class Air Warfare Destroyer contracts. The new AWD ships were scheduled to begin entering service with the Royal Australian Navy in 2013, but that date has now slipped to 2016 or so.

SEA 4000: The Program

AWD Concept
(click to view full)

The estimated total program cost for the Hobart Class has grown from A$ 6 billion to A$ 8 billion, from the time project funding began in 2004 to the announcement of the winning design and contract in 2007.

That’s alarming. On the other hand, it’s likely to be less expensive than blindly accepting lowball estimates, then having to make changes part-way through the build stage. The latter situation is normal in places like the USA, but Australia has undertaken some major defense reforms intended to surface problems, and their likely costs, before the build contracts are placed. That seems to have paid off, as A$ 8 billion remains the project’s quoted figure as of September 2012.

The first of these “Air Warfare Destroyers,” HMAS Hobart, was to be delivered in late 2014, but the current schedule has been pushed back to March 2016.

HMAS Brisbane was supposed to enter service in early 2016, but its delivery date in now November 2017.

HMAS Sydney was planned for delivery in mid-2017, but its current date is now March 2019.

There was an option for a 4th ship, but it was declined by the government. See Appendix B for more details concerning the SEA 4000 project’s phasing and timelines.

The Hobart Class

The AWD is needed because Australia’s ANZAC Class (Meko 200 derivative) and Adelaide Class (FFG-7 Oliver Hazard Perry Class) frigates have limited air defense capabilities, and would be hard-pressed to survive against modern anti-ship missiles.

Planned ANZAC upgrades will deliver a big leap ahead in capability, but their capabilities will not make them suitable for protecting an entire task force by themselves in high threat areas. Nor will they have the potential to grow into ballistic missile defense roles, which are acquiring new urgency in the 21st century.

Australia’s approach began with a decision about the radar and combat system they wanted, and they chose America’s AEGIS radar and combat system combination. It wasn’t the most modern choice, but it has a very strong foothold in the Pacific Rim, with a clear path to BMD capabilities, and a mature trump card called Co-operative Engagement Capability. Australia’s ships will have full interoperability with the US Navy’s most advanced ships, and CEC even offers them the ability to fire from another ship’s target cue. Even if the Australian ship cannot yet see that target.

Beyond the US Navy, Japan’s Kongo Class AEGIS destroyers have already proven themselves to be BMD capable, and their newer Atago Class derivative may follow suit. Korea’s cruiser-size KDX-III AEGIS destroyers face a missile-armed North Korea, and may yet see similar upgrades. If those navies also adopt CEC technology, the result will be a powerful pool of interoperable, top-tier air defense ships around the Pacific Rim.

For purposes of comparison, however, it’s worth looking beyond the Pacific Rim, in order to assess a number of non-AEGIS designs as well:

SEA 4000: The Process

The AWD was meant to be the product of several competitions – not just one. Rather than taking the conventional approach of securing a prime contractor and having them do the integration and deliver the ship, the Australian government broke up the process into a series of contracts, with each subsequent decision building on the previous ones.

Australia calls the proposed acquisition strategy a “Design Driven” approach, where it contracts separately for design and construction. A designer is contracted to produce a ship design to meet specified requirements, and that design was competed among several shipbuilders offering their platforms as a base, plus one contracted ship design based on the American DDG-51. A winner is chosen, and then a shipbuilder is contracted to build that design.

In theory, the potential contracting strengths of the “Design Driven” strategy include:

• The potential to design to a budget;
  
• Greater assurance that the final product will meet the user expectations;
  
• Maximized competition in equipment supply and construction;
  
• More standardization across future shipbuilding projects by having the government instead of the contractor set the key standards;
  
• Maintain a long-term relationship to ensure that through life support considerations are taken into account, and vet this before making a design choice.

Navantia’s modified F100 Alvaro de Bazan Class AEGIS frigate won the competition, beating Blohm + Voss’ F124 frigate, and an “Evolved Design” based on the larger American DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class destroyer. See Appendix A for more details concerning that competition, and the offered platforms.

SEA 4000: Industrial

AWD Project management will be performed by the Air Warfare Destroyer Project Office, located in Canberra, Australia. They are using structured project management methodologies and input from an Integrated Product Team (IPT) drawn from the Defence Materiel Organisation, Capability Systems, DSTO and the Royal Australian Navy.

The Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance includes these entities plus ASC Pty Ltd. in Adelaide as the lead Australian shipbuilder, and Raytheon Australia as the combat system integrator. BAE Australia (formerly Tenix) in Melbourne and Forgacs in Newcastle are major shipbuilding sub-contractors within the program. After consultation with Australia’s DoD, we are able to provide the following modified work summary for the 93 blocks involved in all 3 ships:

• Navantia: 8 blocks… 3 sonar block assemblies, 5 reallocated blocks for Brisbane (expected cost: A$ 40 million)
  
• ASC: 25 blocks… 9 Hobart, 8 for Brisbane & Sydney.
  
• BAE: 7 blocks… 7 Hobart.
  
• Forgacs: 40 blocks… 14 Hobart, 13 for Brisbane & Sydney.

BAE will complete the structural steel and initial outfitting work on the 7 Hobart blocks currently in its yard. Up to 13 BAE blocks (6 construction, 7 blast/ paint/ advanced outfitting) from Hobart & Brisbane are to be reallocated “among the 3 Australian shipyards,” but this is likely to mean ASC & Forgacs in practice. At least 2 have already been shifted. A decision on BAE blocks for HMAS Sydney (implicitly: 2) will be made later in the AWD project.

BAE will, however, keep all 14 ship blocks for the 2 Canberra Class amphibious ships’ superstructure and integration work.

Key component and weapon providers include:

• BAE Systems – Mk. 45 MOD 4 127/62 mm gun; Mk.41 VLS components; Mk.53 Nulka missile decoy.
  
• Boeing – RGM-84 Harpoon Block II anti-ship and land attack missiles, with GPS/radar guidance.
  
• Curtiss-Wright – ASIST helicopter handling systems and modular lightweight tracks, for use in rough seas.
  
• GE – LM2500 gas turbines, 2 per ship.
  
• ITT-EDO Reconnaissance Surveillance Systems – Electronic warfare systems, incl. ESM.
  
• L-3 Communications Nautronix Ltd. – L-3 X-Band Navigation Radar; DEBEG 4300 Voyage Data Recorder; and Protec-S Automatic Identification System.
  
• Lockheed Martin – AEGIS combat system; AN/SPY-1D(V) S-band fire control radar; Mk.41 Vertical Launch System (48 cells per ship, Baseline 7 configuration); MH-60R mission systems integrator.
  
• Northrop Grumman – AN/SPQ-9B search radar.
  
• RAFAEL – Typhoon Mark 25 Mod 2: 25mm, stabilized, remotely-operated gun and optics.
  
• Raytheon – “Australianize” the combat system around the AEGIS Baseline 7, Phase I core; Cooperative Engagement Capability; MK99 MCFS, incl. AN/SPG-62 I/J-Band illuminators for terminal missile guidance; Mk.15 Phalanx Block 1B 20mm CIWS; SM-6 air defense missiles; RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow air defense missiles.
  
• Sagem DS – VAMPIR IRST long range passive day/night surveillance system.
  
• Sikorsky – MH-60R naval helicopter.
  
• ST Production Systems – AN/ALQ-25 Nixie towed torpedo decoy.
  
• Terma A/S – Counter Measure Launcher for chaff etc.
  
• Thales Australia – SATCOM equipment integrator.

SEA 4000: Contracts & Key Events

Unless otherwise specified, US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contracts, on behalf of their Foreign Military Sale client.

RAN AWD Concept
(click to view full)

April 19/13: Weapons. Raytheon announces that they’ve delivered the 2nd Phalanx Block 1B CIWS system for last-ditch, close-in defense on board the future HMAS Brisbane. The first Phalanx 1B was delivered for Hobart in late 2012, and Sydney’s system will be delivered and installed in 2014.

April 2/13: Sub-contractors. MG Engineering loads Hobart’s 22m mast on a barge, and floats it up the Port River to Techport Australia. See also July 4/12 entry. Adelaide Now.

Jan 17-20/13: Industrial. BAE ships its 8th and 9th keel blocks to ASC, who accepts them. This completes all of BAE’s blocks for Hobart and Brisbane. Block 415 is a 117t hull block, while Block 111 is a 112t keel block.

BAE’s release emphasizes their focus on securing future work, which has been in jeopardy every since the yard’s high-profile workmanship problems in 2010. Unsurprisingly, the rest of the release spends time discussing improved processes for work planning, welding quality, dimensional control, and inspection and acceptance. BAE Systems.

Oct 30/12: Torpedoes. Australia’s government announces that Hobart’s triple-tube Mk32 MOD 9 torpedo launchers successfully completed testing in June 2012, and Brisbane’s launchers successfully completed their own test with an MU90 torpedo mockup.

July 4/12: Sub-contractors. The Australian government awards an A$ 3.25 million contract to MG Engineering in Adelaide. Over the next 2 years, the firm will build 25 tonne, 22 meter long central masts for all 3 Air Warfare Destroyers.

The masts have to be built in 6 sections, joined together on a jig, then transported by barge to Techport. MG engineering will hire another 10 staff to do this work, raising their total to 40 people. AWD Alliance.

July 4/12: AEGIS. The first 2 radar faces for Hobart’s AN/SPY-1D (V) phased array radar arrive in Australia. Each SPY-1D radar has 3 “faces” to offer radar coverage all around the ship. Australian DoD.

MH-60R Seahawk
click for video

Oct 18/11: Sub-contractors. The Australian government awards Hunter subsidiary Forgacs another 2 AWD blocks (1 each for Hobart and Brisbane), worth around $80 million. This brings their total to 40, up from 29 when the project started.

The work will create about 150 more jobs, and Forgacs will open another shipyard line at Carrington, which currently employs 50 people. Another 450 are working on the AWD at Tomago. Work has already begun on all 14 Hobart blocks, and 2/13 Brisbane blocks. The new hires will bring Forgacs to its envisioned maximum of 650 people working on AWD, across both shipyards. Australian DoD.

Aug 12-15/11: BAE Systems ships the first Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD) block to the ASC facility at Osborne in South Australia. This first block weighs around 180 tonnes, and is 18 x 16 x 5 meters. In light of past problems at the Williamstown shipyard, BAE Systems Director of Maritime, Harry Bradford, tried to reassure by saying that:

“We are now at a stage where we have the right people and the right skills to meet the challenges this project will bring. As an international shipbuilder BAE Systems also has the added advantage of global reachback and can draw on our experiences in other markets.”

Aug 6/11: Guns delivered. The AWD Alliance announces the arrival of 6 RAFAEL Typhoon Mark 25 Mod 2 guns, which will equip 3 Hobart Class destroyers at a cost of around A$ 15 million. These 25mm, stabilized guns are operated from within the ship using a joystick and screen, with imagery provided by the Typhoons advanced Toplite day/night optics. Each AWD will be equipped with 2 Typhoon guns, located on the Port and Starboard Bridge wings of each ship.

The guns will be stored in a secure Adelaide warehouse until they are installed on HMAS Hobart, Brisbane and Sydney during construction.

July 27/11: Guns delivered. The AWD Alliance has taken delivery of the Hobart Class’ 3 Mk.54 MOD 4 gun mounts, which include the 127/62 mm gun, turret, and associated below-decks systems for handling ammunition. The BAE Systems gun mounts were manufactured in the United States, per the Sept 17/08 contract, and are valued at A$ 80 million (conversion rose from USD $63.5 – $88 million in the interim). They will be placed into a controlled storage facility in Adelaide, until they are installed in their respective ships. Australian MoD.

May 27-31/11: Shipbuilding issues. BAE Australia doesn’t react officially, but reports begin to surface in the Australian press that suggest problems with the AWD Alliance as the root cause, via poor quality drawings and incorrect specifications. The claim is that more than 2,400 faults have been discovered in the data, said to include wrong dimensions for the hull shapes, inconsistent assembly instructions, missing measurements, and faulty welding guides. It has reached the point that BAE has rejected the ASC’s design pack for Brisbane, the 2nd ship of class. The ASC has rejected BAE’s criticism, and refused to agree to BAE’s request for an improved design package.

There’s also controversy over reports that the Gillard government was warned of these problems in February 2011, and was very slow to act.

The Australian government eventually fires back. While they agree that there have been thousands of technical queries, and that lead shipbuilder ASC and BAE are in dispute over the designs, they note that the other 2 contractors, and Navantia haven’t had the same problems. DMO chief executive Dr Stephen Gumley tells an Australian Senate committee that experts will look into the drawings issue, but adds that BAE may have taken on more work than it had skilled personnel to handle, and did not inform the DMO about problems in a timely way. The state of AWD industrial team relations seems poor, at best. The Australian, re: drawings dispute, re: Government notice | Adelaide Now re: DMO testimony.

May 15/11: Infrastructure. ASC in Adelaide invites the public to its shipyard from 12noon -3:00pm, to tour progress on the construction of Hobart Class Air Warfare Destroyers (AWD). The event is jointly hosted with the AWD Alliance, and is the 1st time ASC’s shipyard has ever been open to the public.

This week also marked the start of blast and paint work at a new A$ 8 million facility at ASC’s Shipyard to paint steel blocks under construction. ASC.

April 27/11: AEGIS. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems & Sensors in Moorestown, NJ receives an $18.3 million not-to-exceed contract modification for command team trainer efforts to build the Aegis Weapon System baseline for Australia’s Hobart Class. The firm will provide necessary combat systems engineering, computer program development, ship integration and test, logistics technical services, technical manuals and staging support.

Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (89%); Clearwater, FL (9%); and Adelaide, Australia (2%). Work is expected to be complete by December 2014 (N00024-10-C-5125, FMS case AT-P-LCQ).

April 1/11: Shipbuilding issues. Lead yard ASC hands Forgacs in Newcastle, Australia a new A$ 40 million contract from ASC for another 3 hull blocks, as a result of problems with work at BAE systems (formerly Tenix) in Victoria, Australia.

The contracts comes on top of Forgacs’ original A$ 150 million contract, and the firm is set to employ an extra 70 workers, but they’re having trouble recruiting enough skilled tradespeople at the Tomago shipyard. They’ve already gone from about 15 people at Tomago to around 300, and adding the additional boilermakers, welders, riggers, dogmen and scaffolders s proving to be a challenge. Australia Broadcasting Corp.

Spain’s F101, 2005
(click to view full)

Dec 20/10: AWD Alliance. The Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance officially appoints acting CEO Mr. Rod Equid, BE (Electrical), M.Sc Engg (Aerosystems) as its new CEO. Before his step up to acting CEO in April 2010, he had been the alliance’s General Manager Business. His previous background includes 15 years as a RAAF engineer officer, 5 years as a senior Defence public servant, and nearly 14 years with Raytheon Australia.

“Mr Equid said hull construction is in the start-up phase on the way to peak production. Block production is currently underway in three shipyards, ASC in Adelaide, BAE Systems in Melbourne and Forgacs in Newcastle. “The combat system production is well advanced, combat system integration is on track and the AWD Alliance has signed contracts for nearly all major equipment and material,” Mr Equid said.”

Oct 27/10: Shipbuilding issues. The Australian reports that ASC has asked shipping experts from Lloyd’s Register Asia to visit BAE’s Williamstown shipyards, in order to “ensure the blocks are being built to internationally recognised standards.”

“ASC is believed to have asked Lloyd’s to become involved about four weeks ago when it became aware of the gravity of the keel bungle. The Lloyd’s advisers are likely to visit the shipyards once a week for at least the next six months to help oversee the construction. Spokespeople from ASC and Lloyd’s declined to comment yesterday.”

Oct 8/10: We’re hiring! The AWD Alliance announces a national recruitment drive to fill up to 60 vacancies in skilled positions.

The current focus on hull fabrication is leading to a demand for more welders at all three shipyards, as well as sheet metal workers, stores and warehouse positions, schedulers, procurement specialists and business analysts, pipe fitters, and boilermakers. In total, the 3 shipyards will also employ about 200 apprentices.

The Combat System team is moving to the management and test phase, creating demand for production engineers, integrated logistics support (ILS), systems engineers, and operations managers.

Sept 17/10: AEGIS. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems & Sensors in Moorestown, NJ receives a $197.5 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, contract with performance incentives, for post-Critical Design Review (CDR) Aegis Combat Systems Engineering to finalize and implement the Aegis Weapon System baseline for the Government of Australia. This contract includes options which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $211.4 million.

Naval Sea Systems Command contract N00024-09-C-5104 supported these efforts through Aegis Combat System Critical Design Review, but a new contract is needed for post-CDR efforts. Work will include the necessary combat systems engineering, computer program development, ship integration and test, logistics technical services, technical manuals and staging support.

The AWD AWS baseline will be derived from a technology refreshed variant of the U.S. Navy’s AWS Baseline 7, Phase I.

Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (86%), and Adelaide, Australia (14%), and is expected to be complete by December 2014. There’s only one Aegis supplier, so this contract was not competitively procured (N00024-10-C-5125 for FMS case AT-P-LCQ.

June 16/10: Block transport. The AWD Alliance signs a A$ 25 million contract with Toll North Pty Ltd. The firm will make 23 trips of a barge towed by a tug boat, in order to move 66 destroyer hull blocks by sea from BAE Systems in Newcastle (15 trips) and Forgacs in Melbourne (8 trips), to ASC in Adelaide. Each destroyer is composed of 31 hull blocks, which are assembled at the AWD Alliance’s Techport site in Adelaide.

Minister Combet adds that the SEA 4000 project is currently on track to deliver HMAS Hobart in December 2014. HMAS Brisbane is scheduled for delivery in March 2016, and HMAS Sydney in June 2017. Australia DoD.

April 23/10: AWD Alliance. CEO John Gallacher retires as chief executive of ASC Shipbuilding and the Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance, returning to Western Australia after 5 years as the head of the company. Adelaide Now.

April 15/10: Update. Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD) Alliance CEO John Gallacher offers some updates, as the AWD Alliance holds a formal ceremony to launch the project’s construction phase:

“At ASC in Adelaide work is well advanced on two blocks including decking and superstructure components a total of 35 metres long and weighing a total of more than 200 tonnes.

At BAE Williamstown, Victoria work is underway on building the four main ‘keel’ blocks that, when consolidated at ASC, will be 69 metres long and weigh a total of 450 tonnes; and

At FORGACS Newcastle, New South Wales work is underway on three central blocks, including super structure, with a total length of 36 metres and weighing a total of more than 200 tonnes… At the three shipyards some 500 people are now working directly on building the blocks with the total workforce on the project of 1000.”

AWD Alliance | Adelaide Now

April 1/10: Radars. Northrop Grumman Systems, Inc. in Garden City, N.Y., is being awarded a $41.5 million modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-10-C-5343) for the delivery of AN/SPQ-9B radar sets and combat interface kits for use on U.S. Navy ships. Work will be performed in Melville, NY (91.2%); Norwalk, CT (5.5%); and Baltimore, MD (3.3%), and is expected to be complete by April 2011. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages this contract.

A subsequent corporate release confirms that this purchase covers 6 radar shipsets, including the 3rd radar of a 3-system order for the Royal Australian Navy’s Hobart Class Air Warfare Destroyers; and 3 antenna groups. The follow-on order is part of a five-year $281.5 million contract awarded in October 2009. See also May 5/08, July 9/08, and Oct 30/09 entries in this FOCUS article, as well as the free-to-view article: “NGC Contracted for USN/RAN SPQ-9B Radars & Support”

March 10/10: Infrastructure. The AWD announces contracts worth more than A$ 4 million for the fit-out of the new Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD) Systems Centre at Techport Australia, Adelaide, South Australia. The new AWD headquarters will have a 5 Star Green Star rating from the Green Building Council of Australia, and will accommodate 300 staff including personnel from the Commonwealth, ASC, Raytheon Australia, Navantia, Bath Iron Works, Lockheed Martin and the US Navy. Move-in is expected later in 2010.

Member firm ASC signed a contract with the ISSI property services group, for infrastructure, equipment and services in the Systems Centre. This includes work stations; custom joinery; electrical, mechanical, hydraulic and fire protection services; graphics and interior design; equipment; and project management.

Member firm Raytheon Australia signed a contract with Synergy for work audio visual systems (including interactive whiteboards, LCD screens, projectors and audio systems), video conference systems and a voice telephony system. Many of the audio-visual items will be provided by Adelaide’s Leedall Presentation Systems.

Woods Bagot, designers of the fit-out, will provide expert consultancy services to the AWD Alliance. More than 1,300 pieces of loose furniture have been ordered from 6 Adelaide office furniture suppliers, including Living Edge and Schiavello.

RGM-84 Harpoon launch
(click to view full)

Dec 8/09: Harpoon Block II. Minister for Defence Personnel, Materiel and Science Greg Combet provides an update regarding the AWD program, and notes both Lockheed Martin’s “pull the plug” ceremony, and an A$ 20 million (currently $18.3 million) contract with Boeing for the Advanced Harpoon Weapon Control System.

Its accompanying missiles, expected to be RGM-84 Harpoon Block IIs with dual radar/GPS guidance “…will allow our three Air Warfare Destroyers to engage surface and land targets at ranges well beyond the horizon.”

Dec 1/09: Testing. Lockheed Martin hosts a “pull-the-plug” ceremony at its Moorestown, NJ facility, marking the end of acceptance tests for the 1st Australian AEGIS system. The AWD-1 system is now ready for installation on Hobart, it will now be packed and shipped to ASC Shipyard in Adelaide, South Australia. The ship is still scheduled for delivery as HMAS Hobart in 2014. Lockheed Martin.

Oct 30/09: Radar. A $26.6 million firm-fixed-price contract for 4 AN/SPQ-9B radar sets combines purchases for the US Navy (56%) and the government of Australia (44%) under the Foreign Military Sales Program. They will deliver 2 horizon search AN/SPQ-9B radar sets to each customer, including above and below deck hardware, and combat interface kits.

This contract includes options which would bring the duration to 5 years, and the cumulative value of this contract to $281.5 million. Those options encompass U.S. Nimitz Class aircraft carriers, Ticonderoga Class cruisers and amphibious assault ships; as well as the U.S. Coast Guard’s Bertholf Class National Security Cutters and the Australian Navy’s Hobart Class.

Northrop Grumman will perform the work in Melville, NY (91.2%); Norwalk, CT (5.5%); Baltimore, MD (3.3%), and expects to complete it by April 2011. This contract was not competitively procured. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC, is the contracting activity (N00024-10-C-5343). See also NGC release.

Oct 30/09: Radar. A $7.9 million cost- plus-fixed fee contract for continued design agent and technical engineering support to AN/SPQ-9B radars during installation, integration, testing, and refurbishment. This contract includes options which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value to $39.3 million. It combines purchases for the US Navy (71.8%) and the government of Australia (28.2%) under the Foreign Military Sales Program.

Work will be performed in Melville, NY (96.9%); Baltimore, MD (2.4%); Norwalk, CT (0.7%), and is expected to be completed by October 2010. This contract was not competitively procured by the Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, D.C. (N00024-10-C-5341).

Oct 20/09: Update. The Rudd government’s Minister for Defence Personnel, Materiel and Science, Greg Combet, provides some updates regarding the program and recently-awarded contracts.

• ASC in Adelaide has begun work on the “pilot block”, one of its 27 assigned 200-tonne ship sections.
  
• Similar fabrication of blocks will begin at BAE’s facilities in Williamstown, Victoria in November 2009.
  
• Similar fabrication of blocks will begin at The FORGACS Group’s facilities in Newcastle, NSW in December 2009.
  
• South Australia’s Ferrocut has successfully tested its steel plate cutting capabilities.
  
• The AWD Alliance signed an A$ 12 million (about EUR 7.4 million) contract with Eurotorp to provide 3 shipsets of torpedo launch systems.

The AWD Alliance also signed 6 contracts worth approximately A$ 18 million (about $16.7 million) with Australian companies:

• Scientific Management Associates has won a contract initially worth A$ 13 million to supply a range of integrated logistic support services to the project.
  
• Ottoway Engineering in Adelaide, has won a contract potentially worth up to $3.7 million.
  
• United Fasteners, Priority Engineering Services, Century Products and Whyalla Fabrications have also won work on the AWD project to provide a range of materials and services.

Aug 20/09: Sub-contractors. The Australian government announces a pair of AWD contracts worth about A$ 39 million.

Taylor Bros Slipway and Engineering in Tasmania won a tendered contract worth “more than $25 million” to deliver parts for sailor accommodation, including cabin and sanitary modules, on-board furniture and galley, pantry and scullery equipment. This contract will create 20 new jobs.

The AWD Alliance has also signed a contract to provide Australia’s biggest crane, which will help with construction of ship “blocks” weighing up to 250 tonnes. Manitowoc Crane Group Australia will supply the 900+ tonne capacity crane under an A$ 14 million contract. Minister’s announcement | AWD Alliance.

Aug 13/09: Testing. The AEGIS Weapon System destined for HMAS Hobart begins a 4 month testing program at Lockheed Martin’s Aegis Production Test Center. The center replicates a ship’s superstructure, and allows for initial integration of the SPY-1D(V) radar, illuminators, all computing hardware, and the cabling that will be used in the final ship installation. Once testing is complete, the system will be shipped to ASC Shipyard in Adelaide, Australia for installation. Lockheed Martin release.

June 30/09: AEGIS. Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ received a $44.9 million cost-plus award/ fixed-fee contract for combat systems engineering to support the government of Australia’s Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD) Program. Under Foreign Military Sales Program – Case AT-P-LCQ, LM MS2 will support efforts through AEGIS Combat System critical design review (CDR).

LM MS2 will provide the necessary combat systems engineering, computer program development, ship integration and test logistics technical services, NSCC/CSEDS equipment, and staging support to design and build an AEGIS Weapon System (AWS) baseline for the program, derived from a technology refreshed variant of the US Navy’s AEGIS baseline 7 Phase I.

Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (97%) and Australia (3%), and is expected to be complete by June 2010. This contract was not competitively procured, under the authority of 10 U.S.C. (c)(4), International Agreement. As such, this procurement was not synopsized in Federal Business Opportunities (N00024-09-C-5104).

May 11/09: ASIST. Curtiss-Wright Corporation announces a “multi-million dollar contract” from ASC AWD Shipbuilder Pty. Ltd. to supply Aircraft Ship Integrated Secure and Traverse (ASIST) helicopter handling systems and modular lightweight tracks for 3 Hobart class ships. The contract contains an option for a 4th shipset of equipment, with a potential award in 2009. The total contract value, including all follow-on options, is expected to be in excess of $15 million.

Curtiss-Wright Flow Control will perform the work at its facility in Ontario, Canada, with initial deliveries scheduled to begin in late 2009.

The ASIST system is a state-of-the-art deck handling solution for shipboard helicopter operations that allows all deck handling operations to be accomplished without the need for personnel on the flight deck. The ASIST system uses advanced positioning data and displays inside the helicopter to help achieve safe helicopter handling in all operational weather and sea conditions. The system will initially operate with the Australian Navy legacy S-70B helicopters, and will be compatible with future helicopter designs.

March 30/09: AEGIS. Lockheed Martin announces that 4 antennas destined for HMAS Hobart were recently installed in the firm’s Aegis Production Test Center. Testing on the first Air Warfare Destroyer Aegis shipset will begin in early May 2009, and complete in November 2009. When testing concludes, the
entire AEGIS System will be shipped to ASC Shipyard in Adelaide, Australia, for installation.

March 6/09: Engines. India’s Business Times reports that an overzealous US State Department bureaucrat appears to have created a 3-4 month delay in the Project 17 program, after ordering GE to stop work on the LM2500 turbines it was supplying for India’s Shivalik Class frigates. The given reason? A 3-4 month internal State Department review of American relationships with other countries. The article reports that “GE has been told to stop work even with close US allies like the UK and Australia.”

As the Feb 25/09 entry notes, GE’s LM2500s also power the Hobart Class. Read “US State Dept. Throws A Wrench Into Exports, Allied Shipbuilding” for more.

Feb 15/09: Adelaide newspaper The Advertiser reports that the current draft of Australia’s Defence White Paper will recommend against building a 4th Hobart Class destroyer, and also includes plans to mothball 1-2 of the RAN’s Collins Class submarines. When asked for comment, Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon refused to discuss any recommendations until the White Paper’s recommendations could be approved and released.

Those submarines are currently inactive anyway, due to recruitment difficulties that have left the RAN short on submarine crews. A decision to build only 3 Hobart Class destroyers has larger industrial implications, however, because the 4th ship was expected to form a bridge of work to the next-generation submarine that would replace the Adelaide-built Collins Class. That project may be headed for big political trouble of its own, however, which would force some very difficult industrial decisions by the Australian government.

Mk.45 MOD 4 Naval Gun

Dec 2/08: Sub-contracts. The Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD) Alliance announces contracts for 3 more component sets within the Hobart class ships, totaling about USD$ 20 million.

$10 million will go to SAFRAN Group’s Sagem Defense Securite Australasia for its VAMPIR NG (Veille Air-Mer Panoramique Infrarouge Nouvelle Generation/ New Generation Infrared Panoramic Air-Sea Surveillance) infrared surveillance systems. VAMPIR NG offers high-resolution panoramic images in visible light and/or infrared, providing short range surveillance and warning of incoming UAVs, fast boats, or even missiles – without creating traceable radar emissions. It calls on state-of-the-art image processing technology, and deploys 3rd-generation gyrostabilized infrared sensors for maximum efficiency. VAMPIR NG will be integrated with the ships’ combat system, and an also be used as a helicopter landing aid. It is already present on Australia’s upgraded ANZAC-ASMD Class frigates, and had been chosen for the Canberra class LHDs, giving it a huge advantage in this selection process. Sagem’s VAMPIR NG data sheet [PDF].

$5 million will go to Terma A/S of Lystrp, Denmark for the ships’ Counter Measure Launcher system, which fires decoys in automated sequences that are designed to confuse inbound anti-ship missiles and acoustic-homing torpedoes. The system includes 4 deck mounted MK-137 130 mm decoy launchers, a launch control computer, and a launcher interface unit. The system will support both passive and active decoys, and is prepared for further DL-6T upgrade if required. The system can be operated from the dedicated control units, or via the Australian Tactical Interface (ATI). Terma decoy systems equip Australia’s upgraded Adelaide Class frigates, the USA’s Littoral combat Ships, and vessels of the Danish, Dutch, Norwegian, and Romanian navies. Terma release.

$3 million will go to L-3 Communications Nautronix Limited in Fremantle, Australia for the ships’ Navigation Radar, Voyage Data Recorder, and Automatic Identification System. the ships will use L-3 X-Band Navigation Radar, the DEBEG 4300 Voyage Data Recorder, and Protec-S AIS. L-3 SAM Electronics of Germany and L-3 Communications Aviation Recorders Division of the USA will act as sub-contractors.

These follow contracts earlier this year for the Australian Tactical Interface Phase One (A$ 4 million), sonar (A$ 85 million) and the MK 45 5-inch gun (A$ 80 million). Australian Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Procurement Greg Combet adds that further contracts worth a total value of more than A$ 100 million are also likely to be signed by the end of the year. The Alliance intends to complete a number of purchases by the end of the year, including the RGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship missile launcher and control system, the Very Short Range Defence capability, torpedo launch system and tubes, and satellite communications antennas. AWD Alliance | Australian DoD.

Sept 15/08: AWD Alliance. Australia’s Minister for Defence announces his appointment Mr Michael Roche as the new Chair of the Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance Principals’ Council. Other members include Dr Stephen Gumley, CEO of the DoD’s Defence Materiel Organisation; Vice Admiral Matt Tripovich of the RAN; Mr John Prescott, Chairman of ASC Pty Ltd; and Mr Dan Smith, President of Raytheon Company.

Mr Roche is a former Under Secretary for Defence Materiel in the Department of Defence and, before that Deputy CEO of the Australian Customs Service with responsibilities for Border Control, Intelligence, Information and Communications Technology and Internal Affairs.

“I have discussed the Air Warfare Destroyer project with Mr Roche, and made it clear that I expect him to closely monitor the progress of the project and the AWD Alliance… to ensure that it is kept on track.”

Sept 10/08: 4th ship? The Liberal Party of Australia, now Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition in Australia, issues a public call for Australia to build a 4th Hobart Class destroyer:

“If Mr Rudd wants a naval build-up, he should immediately order a fourth air warfare destroyer. The contract option for a fourth AWD expires in October but we have heard no word from the Government on that option being extended. “

The release follows a Sept 9/08 speech by Labor Party Prime Minister Rudd at Australia’s Returned Veteran and Services League’s national congress.

July 29/08: AEGIS. Lockheed Martin announces that it has completed production of 2 of the 4 SPY-1D-V radar arrays for Australia’s first Hobart-class Air Warfare Destroyer. These updated S-band radars perform a number of tasks including long-range volume search, fire control-quality tracking and ballistic missile defense. They will be paired with the new Aegis Open Architecture (OA) combat system.

March 7/08: Infrastructure. Construction on the $100 million upgrade of ASC’s Osborne shipyard begins with the explosive demolition of an outdated amenities building, and a traditional soil-turning next to Techport Australia’s Common User Facility.

See June 27/07 entry; the upgrade will include state-of-the-art AWD production facilities, new office accommodation for 400 employees and a wharf support building with office space and workshops. ASC release.

Jan 31/08: Training. ASC announces that it will be offering a number of its employees spaces in a new Master of Project Management program, to be delivered through the University of South Australia and funded by the Australian Defence Materiel Organisation’s “Skilling Australias Defence Industry” (SADI) program. Courses will take place at the South Australian Government’s new Maritime Skills Centre, which is part of the Techport Australia precinct at Osborne where the Hobart Class will be built.

AN/SPY-1 emitter

November 2007: New government. Australia’s general election results in a change of government. Howard’s Liberal Party is eclipsed by Rudd’s Labor Party. Dr. Brendan Nelson becomes the Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition.

Oct 4/07: 4th ship? In a “doorstop interview,” Minister for Defence Dr. Brendan Nelson discusses the option for a 4th AWD ship, and hints that it may be a pre-election announcement:

“More than 3,000 Australians will get jobs from this. More than 1,000 contractors throughout Australia will be undertaking work to help build the ships. More than $4 billion of that will be invested directly in Australia… Well I certainly am disposed to seeing a fourth destroyer being built. Obviously we have kept the option open. We will need to make that decision before the end of next year. But we’d be talking about [A$] 1.5 billion, which is a lot of money… We’ve kept the option open… the decision as to whether we do have a fourth Air Warfare Destroyer… does not have to be made until the end of next year, because Raytheon, which [inaudible] Aegis combat system, which is the fighting part of the ship, will have a production line going until then.”

Raytheon Australia is the overall electronic systems integrator on the Hobart Class, which includes integrating the AEGIS system. Properly speaking, however, Lockheed Martin makes the AEGIS radar & combat system. The USA is reaching the end of DDG-51 class production, and has no other ships under construction that will carry AEGIS systems. They are also producing AEGIS systems for South Korea’s KDX-III destroyers, Spain’s F100 frigates, Norway’s Nansen Class frigates, and any future Japanese Kongo Class destroyers, though the volume of these orders is not large.

June 27/07: Infrastructure. ASC Ltd Pty announces that it has awarded its first major AWD contract for construction of the Program’s A$ 100 million shipyard. Work will include the development of dedicated AWD production facilities, new office accommodation for 400 employees, a wharf support building with office space and workshops, and a significant upgrade to existing facilities. South Australian firm Hansen Yuncken has been selected to design and construct the shipyard.

These facilities will be located adjacent to Techport Australia’s Common User Facility in Osborne. ASC will work in an alliance with Hansen Yuncken to develop the infrastructure master plan, design and manage the entire construction. Final designs are scheduled to be completed in September 2007, with construction to commence in October 2007 and be completed by October 2009. Upon satisfactory completion of the design phase, Hansen Yuncken will again be contracted to perform the associated shipyard construction.

John Gallacher, Chief Executive Officer of ASC Shipbuilding, said development of the shipyard held unique challenges not often found in local construction programs:

“Our shipyard production facilities and infrastructure will need to be capable of handling and transporting ship components weighing up to 1,200 tonnes each – this is no common development project.”

June 13/07: AEGIS. General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products in Burlington, VT received an $8 million firm-fixed-price modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-07-C-5103) for production, assembly and testing of 8 sets of AEGIS MK 82 Mod 0 Guided Missile Directors and MK 200 Mod 0 Director Controllers, major components of the AEGIS Weapons Systems. This modification supports the governments of Australia (75%, 6 sets for AWD) and Spain (25%, 2 sets for F105) under the Foreign Military Sales program. Work will be performed in Burlington, VT and is expected to be completed by February 2013.

The MK82 mounts the antenna assembly on an elevation-over-train pedestal and provides space stabilization for the AN/SPY-1 radar’s line of sight (LOS). The assembly is capable of motion on two axes, train and elevation (parallel to and normal to the base plane of the director), and is unmanned with start, stop and reset controls remotely located. The director, which is not limited in train or traverse positioning, supplies train and elevation position data and radar LOS rates in traverse and elevation for use by the fire control system computer.

May 30/07: Infrastructure. Defence Minister the Hon Dr Brendan Nelson and South Australian Deputy Premier Kevin Foley gave the official green light to construction of the Maritime Skills Centre. The $6 million purpose-built facility will support the Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance as a centre of excellence in maritime construction training. The Maritime Skills Centre will be located adjacent to ASC Shipbuilding at Techport Australia. Construction will commence in the June-July 2007 and conclude in February 2008, in readiness for the AWD Alliance to commence training at the facility from March 2008.

Techport Australia will not only build the state-of-the-art AWDs but also attract other shipbuilding and repair opportunities. Their investment includes:

• Common user shipbuilding facilities, including wharf, transfer system and Australia’s largest shiplift
  
• More than 35 hectares for suppliers to establish operations, and
  
• The future home of the high tech AWD Systems Centre – headquarters for the AWD program.

“Where capacity permits, the Skills Centre will also be able to be used for training to benefit wider industry,” Mr Foley said. The South Australian Government has invested over $20 million in workforce development programs to support the skill growth required by modern shipbuilding, and is investing over $250 million to develop Techport Australia as a world-class shipbuilding precinct at Osborne, with approximately $60 million worth of contracts awarded to date. These developments are part of the South Australian state government’s plan to double the contribution of the defense industry to their economy, and increase defense industry employment to 28,000 people by 2013. Official Australian DoD announcement.

March 28/07: AEGIS. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Sudbury MA received a $184.9 million firm-fixed-price definitization modification for production of 4 AEGIS Transmitter Groups. AWS is the primary anti-air warfare defensive weapons system onboard surface ship combatants. The transmitter group is part of the AN/SPY-1D radar; 3 of the transmitter groups are for the Commonwealth of Australia’s Hobart Class Air Warfare Destroyer shipbuilding program, with one designated for the Government of Spain’s next Alvaro de Bazan Class frigate, designated F105. The so-called “definitized” contract reflects the fully negotiated firm-fixed-price, and includes an increase in funding over the original $72 million contract awarded June 26/06.

Under this Foreign Military Sales contract, Raytheon IDS will manufacture, integrate and test AN/SPY-1 D(V) system transmitters and MK99 Fire Control Systems for the AWD program and F105. Each ship will mount 3 SPY-1 transmitter plates, and 2 MK99 illuminators. Work is expected to be complete by April 2010, and will be performed at Raytheon IDS’ Surveillance and Sensors Center in Sudbury, MA; the Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA; and the Maritime Mission Center in Portsmouth, RI. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N00024-06-C-5118). See also Raytheon’s April 24/07 release.

AEGIS Combat Control
(click to view full)

March 27/07: AEGIS. Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ received a $260.4 million fixed-price incentive modification under previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-5120) for production of 4 AEGIS Weapon Systems (AWS).

This contract modification specifies AWS Long Lead Material requirements, and modifies a June 30/06 award of $85 million for Australia’s AWD long lead material items. It combines support of the Commonwealth of Australia (75%) and the Government of Spain (25%) under the Foreign Military Sales Program. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ, and is expected to be complete by February 2013.

The heart of the AWS is Lockheed Martin’s AN/SPY-1D Radar System, a 3-dimensional, air/surface search and tracking radar; there is also a software combat system component. The 4 will be next-generation Aegis Weapon Systems – among the first to include 100% commercial off-the-shelf hardware and a fully open architecture computing environment. Lockheed Martin will synchronize production of the systems for Australia and Spain with the U.S. Navy’s AEGIS modernization program, which calls for delivery of the first fully open architecture Aegis Weapon System to the USS Bunker Hill [GC 52, Ticonderoga Class cruiser] in 2008.

March 13/07: MK-41. Lockheed Martin Corp. Maritime System and Sensors – Marine Systems in Baltimore, MD received a $16.1 million firm-fixed-price contract modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-98-C-5363) to provide MK 41 Baseline VII Vertical Launching System launcher ship sets for 3 Royal Australian Navy Air Warfare Destroyer Class (Project SEA 4000) ships and Spain’s new F100 Alvaro de Bazan Class frigate [F105, unnnamed at present] under the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Program.

The modification combines purchases for the governments of Australia (73%) and Spain (27%), and includes the labor associated with production of installation and checkout (INCO) spares, INCO special tools and test equipment, onboard repair parts and other ancillary equipment. Work will be performed in Baltimore, MD and is expected to be completed by December 2009.

Jan 30/07: MK-41. Lockheed Martin in Baltimore, MD received a $5.6 million cost-plus-award-fee modification under previously awarded contract (N00024-04-C-5453). It exercises options for technical engineering services in support of MK 41 Vertical Launching System Integration for the Governments of Spain (60%); Australia (37%); Germany (2%); and Korea (1%) under the Foreign Military Sales Program. Work will be performed in Baltimore, MD (80%) and Ventura, CA (20%), and is expected to be complete by October 2008.

Jan 11/07: AEGIS. General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products in Burlington, VT received a not to exceed $9.9 million firm-fixed-price letter contract for long lead material items to support assembly and testing of the AEGIS MK 82 Mod 0 Guided Missile Directors and MK 200 Mod 0 Director Controllers in support of Australian Foreign Military Sales case AT-P-LCQ for the amount of $3.7 million (75%) and Spanish Foreign Military Sales case SP-P-LGB for the amount of $1,237,500 (25%). The actual AEGIS equipment being assembled and tested will be installed at a later date aboard the Australian Air Warfare Destroyer and the Spanish F100 Frigate Class F105. Work will be performed in Burlington, VT, and is expected to be complete by January 2009. This contract was not competitively procured by the Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-07-C-5103).

The MK82 mounts the antenna assembly on an elevation-over-train pedestal and provides space stabilization for the radar line of sight (LOS). The assembly is capable of motion on two axes, train and elevation (parallel to and normal to the base plane of the director), and is unmanned with start, stop and reset controls remotely located. The director, which is not limited in train or traverse positioning, supplies train and elevation position data and radar LOS rates in traverse and elevation for use by the fire control system computer.

MK 41 VLS
(click to view full)

Nov 9/06: MK-41. Lockheed Martin Maritime System and Sensors/ Littoral Ships and Systems in Baltimore, MD received a $60.7 million firm-fixed-price modification under previously awarded contract (N00024-98-C-5363) for procurement of 4 MK 41, MOD 15 Baseline VII, Vertical Launcher Ship (VLS) Sets. This work is taking place on behalf the Governments of Australia (73.2%) and Spain (26.8%) under the Foreign Military Sales Program.

Lockheed will also provide launcher support equipment and the associated labor for establishing material requisitions, program scheduling requirements, and establishment of purchase orders with suppliers and performance of necessary business and production operations. Work will be performed in Baltimore, MD (52.7%), Minneapolis, MN (22%), Aberdeen, SD (8%), Aiken, SC (7%), Ft. Totten, ND (5.2%), and East Elmhurst, NY (5.1%), and is expected to be complete by December 2008.

July 12/06: AEGIS. Raytheon announces a $72.8 million U.S. Navy contract for the advanced procurement of radar equipment for the Royal Australian Navy’s Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD). Under the contract, Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems (IDS) will provide system transmitters, associated hardware and spares for AN/SPY-1D(V) radar for the first three Australian ships. Work will be performed at IDS’ Surveillance and Sensors Center in Sudbury, MA the Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, MA and the Maritime Mission Center in Portsmouth, RI.

June 30/06: AEGIS. Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Sensors, Moorestown, NJ receives an $85.3 million fixed-price letter contract for long-lead material items and critical work center efforts to support the production of 3 AEGIS Weapon Systems (AWS) for the Commonwealth of Australia’s Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD) Shipbuilding Program. The AWS comprises the core command and control system, the phased array radar, and missile launch system. See March 27/07 entry for the final cost figure.

Award of this contract is designed to eliminate the risk and increased costs associated with a break in production, and minimize the risk of delay in the 2013 delivery date for the first Air Warfare Destroyer. This award is for Australia (100%) under the Foreign Military Sales Program. $64.6 million will be obligated at time of award. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ, and is expected to be complete by March 2012. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured by the Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington DC (N00024-06-C-5120).

June 26/06: AEGIS. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Sudbury, MA receives a $72.8 million firm-fixed-price letter contract for long-lead material items and Critical Work Center efforts in support of SPY-1D (V) AEGIS Weapon Systems (AWS) Transmitter Group production for the Government of Australia (GOA) Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD) Program. This contract supports the GOA under the Foreign Military Sales program. Long lead-time items will, at a future date, be used by contractor to manufacture key components of the AWS for Australia’s $6 billion AWD shipbuilding project.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA (80%), and Sudbury, MA (20%), and is expected to be complete by February 2009. The contract was not competitively procured by the Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-06-C-5118). See also May 23/05 DSCA announcement, and also the March 28/07 entry, which represents the final figure for this work.

Early DoD concept
(click to expand)

October 11/05: Infrastructure. South Australia will be home to the new headquarters of the Air Warfare Destroyer project, creating up to 200 additional jobs there, as well as generating specialized design work for contractors throughout Australia. Australian DoD announcement.

Aug 16/05: Evolved. The Australian government chooses Gibbs & Cox as the preferred designer for the AWD Evolved Design, which will be based on the USA’s DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class destroyers. This concludes Phase 1C of the SEA 4000 project. See DID coverage.

May 2005: Existing. The Spanish firm Navantia is chosen as the preferred designer for the AWD Existing Design. It will be based on a version of the 5,800t F100 Alvaro de Bazan Class AEGIS frigate, with Australian systems replacing some of the original equipment.

Dec 23/04: Bids to Build Air Warfare Destroyers Announced. Proposals were received from ASC Shipbuilding, Northrop Grumman Ship Systems and Tenix Defence. At this stage, Australia’s DoD is evaluating the 3 ship designer proposals from Blohm +Voss, Gibbs &Cox, and Izar; and responses from BAE Systems, Raytheon Australia and Saab Systems for the Combat System-System Engineer.

Appendix A: The SEA 4000 Design Competition

Sachsen Class
(click to view full)

The biggest influence on the SEA 4000 program sits below the surface, in more ways than one.

The difficult Collins Class submarine project delivered some of the world’s most advanced conventional submarines – and something extra, besides. The submarines were late, significantly over budget, and are still receiving electronic refits to replace the original combat systems. In response, the Australian Government’s Defence Procurement (Kinnaird) Review strongly recommended spending more money and time on up front design activities, in order to reduce overall project risk. This would be more expensive in the short term, with the hope of making large overruns or schedule issues less likely later on.

That philosophy was implemented in the SEA 4000 program, which moved from a 3-platform shortlist, to detailed design of 2 different options, to the final selection. After a long campaign, the somewhat surprising winner was an ‘Australianized’ F100 AEGIS frigate.

One of the contenders was ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems’ F124 Sachsen Class air defense frigate, currently one of the world’s few operational ship classes with an X-band Active Phased Array naval radar. Its thousands of electronically-focused emitters offer improved performance and phenomenal multitasking ability, giving it exceptional capabilities against a sudden saturation missile attack with supersonic cruise missiles. This design was eliminated from the shortlist, however, by Australia’s stated requirement for the AEGIS naval air defense system. While AEGIS’ AN/SPY-1D is a previous generation passive phased array radar, the AEGIS combat system software and the potential for cooperative engagement capability proved decisive.

That left an “Existing Design” based on Spain’s in-service F100 Alvaro de Bazan Class AEGIS frigates, which would compete against a larger “Evolved Design” option from naval architects Gibbs & Cox. The latter would be a new ship design, albeit based on the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class AEGIS destroyers they had designed for the US Navy.

AWD Evolved Design
(click to view full)

The first images of the Evolved Design for Australia’s Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD) project were unveiled on August 3/06 by Minister of Defence Brendan Nelson at the opening of the new AWD Systems Centre in Adelaide. At 7,370t/8,100t full load, they would have been much closer in size to the 8,300t full load DDG-51 Flight I ships than the 9,200t tons full load Flight IIA ships, with 64 vertical launch missile cells (vs. 90-96 cells for DDG-51 variants), 2 Phalanx close-in defense weapons, 2 helicopter hangars, extended range, and good future growth capabilities. As an additional basis for comparison, Britain’s forthcoming Type 45 Daring Class anti-air warfare destroyers reportedly weigh in at 8,000t full load.

The F100 frigates, in contrast, are smaller ships, weighing in at only 5,800t. This places it somewhere between the boundaries of in-service destroyers and frigates, a boundary that has become fuzzier due to evolving designs, and European reluctance to label ships as destroyers. Regardless, the size difference requires sacrifices in armament and growth capability. Key differences between the contenders included 64 VLS missile cells for the Evolved Design vs. 48 for the F100 frigates, 2 Phalanx-type close-in defense weapons instead of 1 for the F100s, and a hangar for 2 naval helicopters instead of 1. In Australia’s case, it will be the MH-60R.

Australian government Q&A sessions immediately after the selection, however, said that in their opinion, the overall operational capability, maximum speed, range and endurance were all “very similar.” Their evaluation was that the 2 designs had “basically the same” surface warfare, undersea warfare, communications, and electronic warfare capabilities, and both also shared a growth path to ballistic missile defense (via the AEGIS BMD system), and strategic land strike capability (via Mk 41 vertical launchers that can accommodate BGM-109 Tomahawk Cruise missiles). In exchange for the Evolved Design’s size advantages, detailed analysis by the AWD Alliance showed that the Evolved Design would cost A$ 1 billion more over 3 ships, offer less certainty regarding schedule and cost, and deliver the first ship at least 4 years later.

Spain’s F100 Frigate
(click to view full)

Others had seen this coming earlier. Back in April 2007, Forecast International cited internal sources to say that Navantia had won, and said:

“Common wisdom has often suggested that the Navantia bid was simply a stalking horse for Gibbs and Cox… the information we were receiving from Australia from the start of the project was consistently that the F100 was the preferred candidate and that the Gibbs and Cox design was a back-up in case the F100 class hit serious problems on its trials. This did not happen, the Alvaro de Bazan proved to be a great success and this eliminated the DDG-51 derivatives last hope of winning this contract.

It may well be that the appointment of Gibbs and Cox as preferred designer in 2005 was not a sign of preference for their design but the group’s last chance to make its case.

A key handicap for Gibbs and Cox was that its proposed warship existed only in its preliminary design phase, increasing the technical risk for a local builder. Australia’s experiences with new and untried designs has been disappointing…”

They also said:

“Although supporters of the Gibbs and Cox-designed DDG-51 derivative promoted the greater weapons carrying capacity of their design, including 64 rather than 48 vertical launch tubes and two rather than one helicopters, the advantages of the F100 were so strong that a debate between supporters of the two designs was a complete wipeout according to one senior Australian defense source.

The financial benefits resulting from the selection of the F100 are so great that they will go a long way towards funding (some estimates are that they will almost completely accommodate) a fourth Air Warfare Destroyer. The Australian Cabinet’s National Security Committee will consider an option to buy a fourth F100 destroyer when it makes a final decision on a go-ahead for the project in June.”

Those hopes proved to be unfounded, but the comments remain illustrative of the thinking behind Australia’s decision.

Appendix B: SEA 4000 Program Phase Organization

SEA 4000 is managed as a period of preliminary studies, plus 4 distinct phases. These phases are; Phase 1 (Project Definition), Phase 2 (Design), Phase 3 (Build) and Phase 4 (Test and Acceptance).

Phase 0: Preliminary Design Studies

Phase 0 was used to conduct a series of higher order studies leading to the Preliminary Capability Options Document (PCOD).

Phase 1: Project Definition

The aim of the Project Definition Phase is to quantify performance, schedule, cost and risks for capability options. Ran July 2002 to late 2005. Key outcomes were development of detailed operational requirements specifications; whole-of-ship, costed concept designs; decision on combat system architecture and selection of alliance industry participants. Total cost about A$ 43 million.

Once selected, the shipbuilding entity would be engaged in later stages of Phase 1 to assist the Commonwealth with the assessment of other responses and to prepare for the later construction phases.

Phase 1 is further broken down into four sub-phases which are described below:

Phase 1A: Non Design Related Studies. Involves the development of the Capability Definition Documents (CDD), including the Operational Concept Document (OCD), the Function and Performance Specification (FPS) and the Test Concept Document (TCD);

Phase 1B: Combat System Design Studies. involves the development of combat system architecture options, including risk reduction work. In April 2005, Raytheon Australia Pty Ltd. was chosen as the prime integrator for the ship’s combat systems, beating rivals BAE systems and Saab systems to become the Project Combat System-System Engineer. This made them part of the AWD Alliance with the DMO.

Phase 1C – Whole of Ship Design Studies . involves the identification of whole-of-ship concept options for presentation to Government. Whole-of-ship options will be developed through the consideration of an Existing Design currently in-service with another navy and through an Evolved Design Study.

Shipbbuilder candidates included ASC Shipbuilder (who had built the new Collins Class submarines for the RAN), Northrop Grumman Ship Systems, and Tenix Defence (who had built the joint Australia/ New Zealand Anzac Class frigate). ASC was unanimously chosen in May 2005 by the selection board, and joined the AWD Alliance with Raytheon and Australia’s DMO procurement agency.

Navantia was selected as the Existing Design partner in May 2005. Gibbs & Cox was chosen to undertake the Evolved Design in August 2005.

Phase 1D: Combat System Integration and Risk Reduction Study – A follow-on from Phase 1B. Overall, the combat system design team comprises Defence (DMO, Capability Development and DSTO), the US Navy and their AEGIS Combat System Engineering Agent, as well as the Australian AWDCSSE. Phase 1D produced detailed information about combat system design options to support First Pass Approval, and moved the design forward towards the joint ADO-USN Combat System Design Review (SDR).

To that end, Raytheon designed integration processes and strategies for the non-AEGIS elements of the Combat System, and developed complete ship and integrated support systems with the Platform Systems Designers (Navantia, and Gibbs & Cox, Inc.) and the Shipbuilder (ASC AWD Shipbuilder Pty Ltd).

Phase 2 – Design

The aim of the Design Phase was to develop Acquisition Business Cases for Government consideration at Second Pass for the Evolved Design and Existing Design capability options. The approved budget was A$ 455 million.

This phase began in mid-2005 and finished with Government approval of the Navantia design as their final choice in June 2007.

Phase 3 – Build

This phase has now begun, and will finish with delivery of the final ship. The aim of the Build Phase is to deliver AWD ships and shore support facilities from the contract design data produced in Phase 2.

The ships will be consolidated at ASC’s shipyard in Adelaide, with major hull “blocks” built in other shipyards around Australia. Australian industry will also design and build various sub-systems and equipment for the AWD’s combat system, which will lay the foundations for long-term support. The government’s release adds that Australian Industry will deliver products and services worth around:

“…[55% of the A$ 6.6 billion AWD Program] over the next 15 years, which will be followed by high value through life support contracts into the middle of the century. While Adelaide based ASC will conduct the final assembly of the AWDs, around 70 per cent of the ship modules will be built at other shipbuilding sites around Australia, potentially including sites in Western Australia, Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania. The AWD Programme will eventually employ around 3,000 Australians in a variety of engineering and related fields working for a range of companies and suppliers throughout Australia.”

The shipbuilding, electronics and engineering industries will engage more than 1,500 shipbuilding jobs in South Australia, and another 1,500 jobs will be created throughout Australia with the outsourcing of approximately 70% of hull block and module fabrication. The ships will require the assembly of approximately 500,000 components. About 1,000 suppliers will be required to complete the shipbuilding task, which will take more than 3 million man-hours to complete each ship.

The first of these “Air Warfare Destroyers” will be delivered in late 2014 (originally supposed to be 2013), followed by the second and third ships in early-2016 and mid-2017 respectively.

Phase 4 -Test and Acceptance

This phase will begin in parallel with the build phase, culminating with the operational release of the third ship once the government has verified that the ships satisfy operational requirements, including supportability. The Phase 4 deliverable is the ships and shore facilities being formally accepted into naval service.

Full Operational Release of the lead ship has always been scheduled for 2015, with subsequent ships accepted in 2016 and 2017. These dates may still be achievable, but the year’s delay in delivery of the first ship will put pressure on them.

Additional Readings & Sources

• Australia Defence Materiel Organisation – SEA 4000 Air Warfare Destroyer: Official Program Site and MoD page.

• Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance web site. The AWD Alliance is a collaborative set of arrangements between the Commonwealth of Australia, Raytheon Australia Pty Ltd and ASC subsidiary ASC AWD Shipbuilder Pty Ltd. See especially the AWD Roadshow, which covers aspects like the combat system, shipbuilding, et. al. in more depth.

• ASC Pty Ltd – Air Warfare Destroyers

• ASC Pty Ltd – Multimedia page. Includes Flash format videos depicting the AWD in action within an envisaged scenario [Windows Media, 2 MB], and the process of building an AWD depicted week by week [Windows Media, 5.6 MB].

• Lockheed Martin – AWD Air Warfare Destroyer

• Lockheed Martin – AWD Air Warfare Destroyer – Industrial Cooperation

• Naval-Technology.com – F100 Alvaro De Bazan Multi-Purpose Frigate, Spain

• Sea Power Centre Australia – Navy Contribution to Australian Maritime Operations

• DID – MH-60R Wins Australia’s Maritime Helicopter Competition. And will serve on the Hobart Class.

• DID – Australia and USA Collaborating on New Small-Ship Radars. They won’t serve on the Hobarts, but the smaller active-array CEAFAR/CEAMOUNT radars are a generation ahead of the SPY-1/SPQ-9B combination, giving upgraded ANZAC-ASMD frigates some impressive radar capabilities of their own.

• DID – Australia’s Hazard(ous) Frigate Upgrade. Their FFG-7 Oliver Hazard Perry Class ships were a nightmare to upgrade. This 4-ship fleet is the tier below the ANZACs.

• Royal Australian Navy’s Navy News (June 28/07) – A great day for Navy. Includes preliminary information about the 2 ship classes.

• Australian Ministerial Release (Aug 4/06) – The Hon. Dr Brendan Nelson, Minister for Defence – Doorstop Interview: Air Warfare Destroyer Systems Centre, Adelaide.

• Australian Defence Association, Defender Magazine (Autumn 2005) – Going Down to the Sea in Big Enough Ships [PDF format]. Includes considerable discussion of the “jointness” angle, which they believe has received insufficient attention in public debates. The ADA is generally seen as an organization of defense system reformists oriented toward the conservative side of the political spectrum.

• Australian DoD (Aug 17/04) – Delivering the Defence Capability Plan – Hobart briefing.

• Australia Defence Today (June 2004) – SEA 4000 – The Air Warfare Destroyer. Notes the growth of anti-ship missiles in the region and the potential to face saturation attacks from supersonic anti-ship missiles launched and flown below the radar horizon. If the key threat is multiple supersonic missiles that pop up on radar only within 25 miles (line of horizon), the article argues in favor of the most modern AESA ship radars instead of the AEGIS’ SPY-1, and explains why.