Patriot PAC-2
(click to view full)

A 2007 US National Intelligence Assessment [redacted NIE summary] believes Iran’s nuclear program has stopped, but others, including the United Nations and Israel are more skeptical. Intelligence is always a very uncertain and ambiguous exercise, and occasionally features assessments like the infamous NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) whose 1962 judgment was that there were no Soviet missiles in Cuba [1]. Uncertainty creates perceptions of risk, and perceptions of risk lead to behaviors aimed at reducing that risk. Iraq is no longer a missile/WMD threat, Iran’s regular and Revolutionary Guards air forces remain relatively weak, and Iran’s ballistic missiles based on North Korean designs lack accuracy. Still, even a lucky conventional missile could create havoc in some Gulf states if it hit important oil-related infrastructure, or hit the larger and more nebulous target of business confidence.

Arms spending is an incomplete but very concrete way of tracking a state’s real assessment of threats and priorities. It’s becoming clear that Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, have stepped up their defense spending in recent years. Those expenditures cover a range of equipment, but anti-ballistic missile capabilities appear to be rising to the top of the priority list.

In June 2008, over $10 billion worth of December 2007 Patriot missile upgrade requests in the UAE and Kuwait shone a spotlight on the region’s new defense priorities. In December 2008, a multi-billion dollar Patriot missile contract from the UAE seemed to lock in that shift, and Kuwait is proceeding with upgrades to its own Patriot systems. Upgrades that have led to recent contracts, and sales requests…

Continue Reading… »

F-35A: incoming…
(click to view full)

The F-35 Lightning II is a major multinational program which is intended to produce an “affordably stealthy” multi-role strike fighter that will have three variants: the F-35A conventional version for the US Air Force et. al.; the F-35B Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing for the US Marines, British Royal Navy, et. al.; and the F-35C conventional carrier-launched version for the US Navy. The aircraft is named after Lockheed’s famous WW2 P-38 Lightning, and the Mach 2, stacked-engine English Electric (now BAE) Lightning jet. System development partners included The USA & Britain (Tier 1), Italy and the Netherlands (Tier 2), and Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Turkey (Tier 3), with Singapore and Israel as “Security Cooperation Partners.” Now the challenge is agreeing on production phase membership and arrangements, to be followed by initial purchase commitments around 2008-2009.

This updated article has expanded to feature more detail regarding the $300 billion F-35 program, including other contracts as well as notable events. New material is highlighted by putting it in green type. Recent news include an investigation by the Fort Worth Star-Telegram into JET’s conclusions regarding program delays, Lockheed Martin’s response, and a Rolls Royce contract for production LiftSystem engine modules…

• The F-35 Family of Aircraft (i.e. “Continue reading…”)
• F-35 Program: Production Timelines & Structure
• F-35 Program: Controversies and Competitions
• F-35 Program: Events & Developments, CY 2009-2010 [updated]
• F-35 Program: System Development & Production Contracts, FY 2009-2010 [updated]
• F-35 Program: Ancillary and Sub-contracts, FY 2009 – 2010 [updated]
• Additional Readings & Sources [updated]
  
  Continue Reading… »

Adm. Gorshkov: Before.
(click to view full)

This free-to-view DID Spotlight article offers an in-depth look at India’s troubled attempt to convert and field a full-size aircraft carrier, before time and wear force it to retire its existing naval aviation and ships.

Right now, there are 2 major concerns in India. One is slipping timelines. INS Viraat was scheduled to retire in 2009. It’s only semi-operational, and nearing the limits of its mechanical life, even as shortages of flyable Sea Harrier fighters are creating issues of their own. Meanwhile, the delivery date for India’s locally-built 37,000t escort carrier project appears to be slipping to 2015 or so. This leaves India’s Navy with a serious scheduling problem, and no significant carrier force.

The other concern involves Vikramaditya’s 3-fold cost increase, including worries that Russia will raise it rates yet again once India is deeper into the commitment trap. The carrier purchase has now become the subject of high level diplomacy, involving a shipyard that can’t even execute on commercial contracts. An agreement in principle reportedly exists, but negotiations that began in 2007 have yet to lead to a revised contract.

Recent Russian demands have continued to raise the price, even as advance work related to India’s new MiG-29K naval fighters continues. The latest news is a report that India is expressing interest in buying one of Britain’s 65,000t CVF carriers, as negotiations with Russia remain stalled…

• Waiting for Gorshkov – A History
• Gorshkov-Vikramaditya: Aerial Complement
• INS Vikramaditya: Updates & Contracts [updated]
• Appendix A: Additional Readings – Equipment Profiles
• Appendix B: Additional Readings – Related Developments
  
  Continue Reading… »

Old as the hills…
(click to view full)

DID’s FOCUS articles cover major weapons acquisition programs – and no program is more important to the USAF than its current bid to replace its aerial tanker fleet. In January 2007, the big question was whether there would be a competition for the USA’s KC-X proposal, which will cover 175 production aircraft and 4 test platforms. The cost for this first phase alone is likely to reach $35+ billion spread over about 20 years, but America’s 40-50 year old aerial tanker fleet demands new planes. Otherwise, unpredictable age or fatigue issues, like the ones its F-15A-D fleet experienced in 2008, could ground its aerial tankers – and with them, a substantial slice of the USA’s total airpower. KC-Y and KC-Z contracts may follow in subsequent decades, in order to replace all 530 KC-135s/ Boeing 707s (195 active; ANG 251; Reserve 84) that were delivered until 1965, as well as the USAF’s 59 larger KC-10 tankers delivered from 1979-1987.

In the end, it was Team Boeing’s KC-767 Advanced (767-200 derivative) vs. the Team Northrop Grumman KC-30B (Airbus A330-200 derivative), both within the Pentagon and in the halls of Congress. Most observers correctly pointed out that all this lobbying was important, since the financial stakes guaranteed a huge political fight no matter which side won. A fight that ended up sinking, and restarting, the entire program.

Recent additions revolve around the KC-X v2.0 draft RFP’s release, as the canceled competition is on again, with a decision expected by mid-2010. As expected, complaints regarding the structure and process have already begun. The latest additions include a pair of milestones for the Airbus entry, and political battles around the RFP’s chosen selection process…

• KC-X: The Story So Far
• KC-X RFP v2.0: The New Structure [NEW]
• The Contenders and The Cargo Factor: KC-30B, KC-767… KC-777?
• KC-X: Teams & Locations [updated]
• KC-X RFP: Key Developments [updated]
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

FH-77Bs, Kargil War
via Bharat Rakshak
(click to view full)

India’s $2 billion purchase of about 400 new 155mm self-propelled howitzers is intended to supplement India’s dwindling artillery stocks, while out-ranging and out-shooting Pakistan’s self-propelled M109 155mm guns. It seems simple enough, and BAE Systems Bofors had been competing against systems from Israel’s Soltam and Denel of South Africa.

Unfortunately, the competition has mostly served as a cautionary tale, a years-long affair filled with legal drama, accusations of corruption, and more than one re-start. Meanwhile, India’s stock of operational 155mm howitzers has dwindled to around 200. In 2007, a new RFP was issued, and the competition was expanded. Is there an end in sight? Or a potential winner?

No. India’s Byzantine procurement processes have defeated operational needs yet again, as the competition stalls out one more time, and its existing artillery continues to decay…

• Competition Background
• Contracts and Key Events [updated]
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

Barak launch
(click to view full)

Despite a development timeline measured in decades, India’s indigenous “Akash” and “Trishul” programs for surface to air missiles have failed to inspire full confidence. Trishul was eventually cancelled entirely, and Akash is now slated for limited deployment only. India still needed advanced SAMs to equip its navy and army, however, and decided to try to duplicate the success of the Russian partnership that had fielded the excellent PJ-10 BrahMos supersonic cruise missile.

In February 2006, therefore, Israel and India signed a joint development agreement to create a new Barak-NG medium shipborne air defense missile, as an evolution of the Barak-1 system in service with both navies. In July 2007 the counterpart MR-SAM project began moving forward, aiming to develop a medium range SAM for use with India’s land forces. Both missiles would now be called Barak-8. In between, “India to Buy Israeli “SPYDER” Mobile Air Defense System” covered India’s move to begin buying mobile, short-range surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems for its army, based on the Python and Derby air-to-air missiles in service with its air force and naval aircraft.

These projects offer India a way forward to address its critical air defense weaknesses, and upgrade “protection of vital and strategic ground assets and area air defence.” In Israel, the Barak-8 is slated to equip its next-generation frigates, and may find its way to other roles. Beyond those 2 countries, export prospects beckon for a missile that may offer a value-priced alternative to the popular Standard-2 and Aster-15. This DID FOCUS article will cover the Barak-8 pograms in India, Israel, and beyond. The latest development involves additional reports that a firm $1+ billion contract has been signed…

• The Barak, and Barak-8 [NEW]
• India’s Barak Programs [updated]
• Contracts & Key Events [updated]
• Additional Readings & Sources
  
  Continue Reading… »

IAF: Jaguar, Mirage 2000
SU-30K, MiG-27, MiG-21BiS
(click to view full)

“It’s the biggest fighter aircraft deal since the early 1990s,” said Boeing’s Mark Kronenberg, who runs the company’s Asia/Pacific business. DID has offered ongoing coverage of India’s planned multi-billion dollar jet fighter buy, from its early days as a contest between Dassault, Saab, and MiG for a 126 plane order to the entry of American competitors and even EADS’ Eurofighter.

What began as a lightweight fighter competition to replace India’s shrinking MiG-21 interceptor fleet appears to have bifurcated into 2 categories now, and 2 expense tiers. What’s going on? In a word, lots. The participants changed, India’s view of its own needs is changing, and the nature of the order may be changing as well – but with the release of the official $10 billion RFP, the competition can begin at last. DID offers an in-depth look at the MRCA/MMRCA competition’s changes, the RFP, and the competitors; and also offers an updated timeline regarding competitive moves since this article was published in March 2006.

The RFP responses were submitted in April 2008, and the IAF is beginning the competitive fly-off. France’s Rafale has climbed back into the race, but the breakdown of negotiations to upgrade the IAF’s Mirage 2000s may damage its chances, even as it increases the MMRCA order…

• India’s MRCA (Multi-Role Combat Aircraft): Changes (i.e. “Continue reading…”)
• MMRCA: The RFP, Please…
• The Competitors: Analysis
• MMRCA: Updates and Developments [updated]
• Appendix A – MMRCA: The Naval Angle
• Appendix B – Dassault’s Move: Au Revoir, Mirage
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

A400M rollout, Seville
(click to view full)

Airbus’ A400M is a EUR 20+ billion program that aimed to repeat Airbus’ civilian successes in the military market. A series of smart design decisions were made around capacity (35-37 tonnes/ 38-40 US tons, large enough for survivable armored vehicles), extensive use of modern materials, multi-role capability as a refueling tanker, and a multinational industrial program; all of which leave the aircraft well positioned to take overall market share from Lockheed Martin’s C-130 Hercules. If the USA’s C-17 is allowed to go out of production, the A400M would also have a strong position in the strategic transport market, with only Russian IL-76 and AN-124 aircraft as competition. To date, 184 orders have been placed by Germany (60), France (50), Spain (27), Britain (25), Turkey (10), South Africa (8), Belgium (7), Malaysia (4), and Luxembourg (1); and Chile has expressed an unfinalized interest in 3 planes.

Right now, the firm’s biggest issue is timing. In November 2007, “Airbus A400M Program Delayed 6-12 Months” covered ongoing issues with Airbus’ new military transport. Those issues escalated, and project is currently under moratorium as all parties decide what to do. Cancellation is not a realistic contractual option for most customers, but late deliveries can be refused, giving both Airbus and its customers negotiating leverage in talks.

This DID Spotlight article covers the latest developments as the A400M project slides toward production. A key multinational agreement has now extended the program’s moratorium, but South Africa has pulled out, and Malaysia is announcing major delays…

• The A400M Program: A Snapshot
• The A400M Program: Airbus’ Dilemmas
• Updates & Key Events [updated]
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

C-17 Globemaster III
(click to view full)

Defense News reports that India is negotiating to buy 10 C-17A Globemaster III heavy transports for its air force, and claims that a $1.7 billion deal is likely to be finalized “by early 2010.” The report adds that:

“The C-17’s advantages include its easier handling (compared with the IL-76) and ability to operate from short and rough airstrips, added the sources…. The Indian military needs to do three things: augment its ability to quickly lift larger numbers of troops as it views possible threats on its border with China; strengthen its presence on the Pakistani border; and fight terrorism and low-intensity warfare, said a senior Defence Ministry official. India needs to triple its lift capacity, said the official.”

IAF IL-76MD
(click to view full)

The article correctly notes that C-17 costs would be about 300% of the Russian IL-76, which India already operates as transport, aerial refueling (IL-78), and AWACS (IL-76/A-50 Phalcon) aircraft. Purchases by countries like Jordan indicate that a stretched IL-76MF with westernized avionics would sell in the $50-75 million range, and the aircraft does have some rough field capability. In contrast, the C-17’s price tends to hover near a modern 747’s, at around $200-250 million. Australia spent about $1.4 billion, and Canada about $1.6 billion, to buy and induct 4 C-17As into their respective air forces; the USA, who does not have the extra expenses that accompany any new fleet aircraft type, was set to spend $2.5 billion for 10 C-17s in the Senate’s FY 2010 defense budget. A $1.7 billion budget might buy India 5 operational C-17s, but it’s very difficult to see how it could buy 10.

F-16B & X-35
(click to view full)

In an exclusive June 2006 interview, Israeli Air Force (IAF) chief procurement officer Brigadier-General Ze’ev Snir told Israel’s Globes publication that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was a key part of their IAF recapitalization plans, and that Israel intends to buy over 100 of the fighters to replace their F-16s over time. A 100-plane deal would have cost at least $5 billion under Israel’s original estimates, and would involve the F-35A conventional take-off Air Force version. Snir added that:

“The IAF would be happy to equip itself with 24 F-22s but the problem at this time is the US refusal to sell the plane, and its $200 million price tag.”

Unfortunately, Israel’s September 2008 request for its first 75 F-35s would end up costing them an estimated $15 billion – or about $200 million per plane. All in return for a fighter with poorer air-to-air performance than the F-22, and less stealth. The necessary contract must deal with that sticker shock, and with issues like the incorporation of Israeli technologies, before it can be signed. The latest news is that Israel may forego its own weapons and technologies, in order to curtail a $130 million price tag – and may decide to delay its F-35 purchase by 2 years…

• F-35 for Israel: Key Issues
• Contracts and Key Events [updated]
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »