SBX-1, Pearl Harbor
(click to view full)

As rogue state proliferation by North Korea et. al. made missile defense a growing priority for nations like the USA, Japan, Israel, et. al., the USA began to look at the linchpin of any defense: powerful radars that could both track ballistic missiles, and guide interceptors. The USA has its BMEWS tracking system, but that would not serve. America’s Safeguard ABM system, meanwhile, was dismantled long ago – though Russia still maintains its counterpart System A-135 network around Moscow. Something new would be needed.

Raytheon’s giant XBR radar is a distant relative of the X-band radars used by police to detect speeding drivers, but designed to detect and illuminate incoming missiles instead. It floats on a system resembling an oil drilling platform, and will usually provide long-range mid-course guidance for ballistic missile defense systems. It can also provide earlier guidance if positioned correctly. The Sea-Based X-Band radar (SBX) that uses it was originally planned as a land-based system, but a sea-based system became possible when the George W. Bush administration withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Basing the radar at sea offers numerous advantages. One is the obvious ability to move the radar as threats materialize, allowing much greater coverage with fewer radars. Another is the ability to protect allies, without having to invest in expensive systems whose regional capabilities and value to the USA could be put at risk by the decisions of a single foreign government.

In exchange for this freedom from political interference, of course, the designers must contend with nature’s. This is DID’s FOCUS article for the SBX system, which is linked to Boeing’s land-based GMD missile system but can also operate with other naval and land elements. The radar and system have experienced teething problems, which are not unusual for such new technologies, but the program is now entering a make-or-break phase where it will have to perform. The most recent news is a task order under a wide-ranging new support contract for an array of radars that could be worth almost $2 billion dollars…

• The XBR Radar & SBX Platform
• Contracts & Events
• Additional Readings & Sources
  
  Continue Reading… »

Broadside delivered
(cick for alternative view)

The US Navy’s 313-ship fleet plan has been in question for some time; indeed, the Pentagon Office of Force Transformation was projecting a possible 40% budgetary shortfall through 2022 when it released its “Alternative Fleet Architecture Design study [PDF format, see also related CRS report]” in 2005. Rising costs in several key naval programs, and budget realities, have sharpened those questions. During a recent House Armed Services Seapower & Expeditionary Forces subcommittee hearing, the Navy found itself under fire from both sides of the political aisle, up to and including public and pointed expressions of disbelief in the Navy’s shipbuilding plan.

Rankling minority member Roscoe Bartlett [R-MD]:

“From Fiscal Years 2008 to 2009, the Navy has reduced the number of ships to be procured by approximately 25 percent – one quarter of the ships the Navy planned to build last year are gone. The long term shipbuilding plan still speaks to a 313-ship Navy, as does the Chief of Naval Operations, but it’s time we started facing facts. The Navy will never get there without either top line relief or a significant change in the mix of platforms. The Navy’s shipbuilding plan is based on the assumption that over the next thirty years the shipbuilding account will nearly triple in size. Do our witnesses really think this is realistic? How can you? If it’s not – and I tell you it’s not – then the only other alternative is to look at the mix of platforms.”

Subcommittee chair Rep. Gene Taylor [D-MS] was even sharper in his criticisms:

Continue Reading… »

Before: APG-63 MSA
(click to view full)

F-15C Eagle air superiority fighters have traditionally used APG-63 radars with mechanically steered arrays. While upgrades over the years have improved them, the mechanical steering components are a point of potential failure given the stresses put on them, and better radar technologies have appeared. With cruise missile defense rising in importance, and longer-range detection of threats desired, upgrades are necessary. They may also correct a known air-air weakness that can reputedly be exploited by aircraft like Russia’s SU-30 family, though other reports claim that the mechanically-scanned APG-63v1s have also worked to close that hole. Thus far, 18 USAF F-15Cs have been modified to carry APG-63v2 radars – a misnomer, since the upgrade uses a revolutionary new AESA technology that bears little resemblance to its predecessor.

Active Electronically-Scanned Array (AESA) radars are made of hundreds or thousands of small transmitter/receiver (TR) elements. Moving parts are eliminated; instead, subsets of their array elements are used to focus on each task very quickly and precisely, without having to move them physically, and with little signal “leakage” outside of its focused beams. This makes them more reliable, more powerful, and able to operate in multiple modes at once. There’s also a maintenance advantage. A partial failure in previous radars renders them unfit for use, but AESA radars only suffer a slight performance drop if some of their TR modules fail. The fighter can still fly as it awaits a fix, enjoying all of the radar’s simul-mode, range, focusing, low “leakage,” and communications benefits. AESA radars have taken a while to enter widespread service on fighter aircraft because the cost of each array had to come down to an affordable level, but once that happened their advantages become compelling.

The USAF is discussing a retrofit set that would turn the F-15Cs into multi-role fighters; an AESA radar would be part of that, and the program to equip select F-15C units with AESA radars as an air-air improvement continues. They will now be joined by the USAF’s entire 2-seat, multi-role F-15E Strike Eagle fleet, and the F-15C program is underway despite ongoing concerns about that fleet’s durability…

• The F-15’s Radars
• Contracts & Key Events
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

RAAF C-130J-30, flares
(click to view full)

The C-130J “Super Hercules” Hercules program has been the focus of a great deal of controversy – and recently, of a full program restructuring. Most American planes rely on the US market as their base, and then seek exports, but the privately-developed C-130J was different. Australia, Britain, Denmark, and Italy were all ahead of the curve, and have been operating the privately-developed C-130J for several years. By the time the plane finally reached “initial operating capability” for the US military late in 2006, these faster-moving foreign customers were already banding together to create a common upgrade set for their serving fleets. A number of variants are currently flying in transport (C-130J), stretched transport (C-130J-30), aerial broadcaster (EC-130J), coast guard patrol (HC-130J), aerial tanker (KC-130J), and even hurricane hunter weather aircraft (WC-130J).

Canada, India and Norway recently moved to join the global C-130J customer base. In America, meanwhile, some momentum is building. C-130J purchases are taking place under both annual budgets and supplemental wartime funding, in order to replace a US tactical transport fleet that’s flying old aircraft and in dire need of major repairs.

Despite early concerns from critics, the C-130J has demonstrated in-theater performance on the front lines that represents a major improvement over its C-130E/H predecessors. The key question is, does it break the key limitations that have hobbled a number of US Army programs? This DID FOCUS Article describes the C-130J, examines that issue, covers global developments for the C-130J program, and makes note of present and emerging competitors. The latest news includes a $100+ million order to kick-start FY 2009 purchases…

• The (Private) Labors of Hercules: the C-130J
• The C-130J and the 20-ton Bottleneck
• Turbulent Flight: The C-130J Program
• Contracts and Key Events [updated]
• Additional Readings & Sources, incl. emerging competitors & SOF requirements
  
  Continue Reading… »

C-130J Hercules
(click to view full)

In May 2006, India Defence quoted Air Chief S.P. Tyagi saying that “the IAF is planning to buy C-130J planes” for its special forces and Border Security Forces. Reports indicate that the IAF is particularly attracted to the C-130J’s ability to land and take off even in improvised or short airfields, and without lights. Those characteristics have served the Hercules well in other anti-terrorism scenarios like Operation Yonatan in Entebbe, and are now more routine maneuvers thanks to the C-130J Hercules’ modern avionics and increased engine power. DID has also noted the ‘J’ model’s good performance in “hot and high” conditions, which can reduce the useful load of older Hercules or similar transport aircraft by 50-60%.

The new planes will be bracketed by India’s larger Ilyushin IL-76 jet transports on the high end, and on the lower end by twin-engine Antonov AN-32 turboprops. India’s interest in the Hercules is quite specific to the Special Forces at the moment; but the plane’s capacity for additional specialty operations like aerial refueling both enhances those operations, and gives the IAF a number of additional employment options. The AN-32s are currently undergoing mid-life refurbishment, and a joint project with Russia’s Irkut looks set to develop a Hercules competitor in time for the AN-32’s replacement cycle.

Nevertheless, this deal is still a major inroad into the Indian market for Lockheed Martin – one that could develop further on a number of fronts. The government has now confirmed that a Letter of Agreement has been signed, and gives exact figures…

Continue Reading… »

F/A-18F over CV-63
(click to view full)

DID has covered the recent controversies over Australia’s involvement in the F-35 Lightning II program, amid criticisms that the F-35A will be unable to compete with proliferating SU-30 family aircraft in the region, lacks the required range or response time, and will either be extremely expensive at $100+ million per aircraft in early (2013-2016) production, or will not be available until 2018 or later. The accelerated retirement of Australia’s 22 long-range F-111s in 2010 has sharpened the timing debate in particular, with a recently retired Air Vice-Marshal and the opposition (now governing) Labor Party both weighing in with criticisms and alternative force proposals.

In December 2006, The Australian reported that Defence Minister Brendan Nelson was discussing an A$ 3 billion (about $2.36 billion) purchase of 24 F/A-18F Block II Super Hornet aircraft around 2009-2010. A move that came as “a surprise to senior defence officials on Russell Hill”; but is now an official purchase as requests and contracts work their way through.

The latest items include the new Labor government’s decision to keep the Super Hornet purchase – though they may not all be F/A-18Fs…

• RAAF Super Hornets: Variants and Variances
• Contracts & Key Events
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

K-707, F/A-18, EA-6B

Aerial tankers are essential when moving large quantities of men and materials long distances, or stretching the range and length of fighter combat air patrols. Most are government-owned, but a segment of semi-privatized services may be set to grow alongside existing military fleets. Could DID readers find themselves flying to an Azores vacation on a chartered aerial tanker during its “spare hours”? If Britain’s proposed FSTA public-private aerial tanker partnership comes to fruition, that’s exactly what could happen.

The USA’s KC-45 competition will buy up to 179 aircraft for the USAF’s fleet instead, but even here some outsourcing is going on. Enter Omega Refueling Services, Inc…

Continue Reading… »

Water tower etc.,
Times Beach
(click to view full)

Most people never see services like wastewater management and water distribution, maintenance of the electric grid, et. al. The cost is built into their taxes and utility bills, or into initial subdivision fees. Military bases have to deal with these sorts of issues, just as homeowners and developer do – but on a much larger scale. The preference in the US military seems to be shifting toward very long term (about 50 year) term fixed-price or regulated tariff contracts, which are often coupled with partial privatization or conveyance of assets to make the contractor 100% responsible for the utility.

This Spotlight article covers recent contracts that fall under this format, totaling over $4.3 billion…

Continue Reading… »

US M114s, Kir Kush
(click to view full)

“RESET of the US Army’s Vehicle Fleet Continues” covers the USA’s HMMWV RECAP program, while noting that the extra weight of the add-on armor was wearing out Hummers to the point where even RESET/RECAP programs may not be able to extend their life much. One solution is to turn them over to Iraqi forces, who are often driving unarmored pickup trucks.

On Jan 17/08, a ceremony in Taji, Iraq marked the beginning of a program to refurbish and transfer more than 4,244 up-armored Humvees from US inventory to the government of Iraq by the end of 2008, and reach more than 8,000 Hummers transferred by the end of 2009…

Continue Reading… »

AEDC at work: X-29
(click to view full)

The Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC), named for U.S. Air Force pioneer Gen. Henry “Hap” Arnold, bills itself as “The World’s Premier Flight Simulation Test Facility.” Nearly half of the AEDC’s 58 test facilities are unique in the U.S., and 14 are unique in the world.

These specialized test facilities have played a crucial role in the development and sustainment of virtually every high performance aircraft, air-to-air and air-to-ground weapon, missile, and space system in use by all four of the U.S. military services today. The Center has also been involved in the development of every NASA manned space system, many satellites, and numerous commercial aircraft and spacecraft systems.

In 2003, the Air Force consolidated the test operations contract and the base services contract into a single contract for operations, maintenance, information management, and base support…

Continue Reading… »