LPD-17 cutaway
(click to view full)

LPD-17 San Antonio class amphibious assault support vessels are a new class of ship which is just entering service with the US Navy. Much like their predecessors, their mission is to embark, transport, land, and support elements of a US Marine Corps Landing Force. What changes are the capabilities and technologies incorporated to perform that mission. This new ship class includes significant internal technology and design upgrades, and is designed to operate accompanying platforms like the V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle amphibious armored personnel carrier.

Between 10-11 scheduled ships of this class are slated to assume the functional duties of up to 41 previous ships, including the USA’s older LSD-36 USS Anchorage class dock landing ships (all decommissioned as of 2004, LSD-36 and LSD-38 transferred to Taiwan) and its LPD-4 USS Austin Class ships (12 built and serving, LPD 14 Trenton now India’s INS Jalashva). The San Antonio class ships may also replace 2 classes of ships currently mothballed and held in reserve status under the Amphibious Lift Enhancement Program (ALEP): the LST-1179 Newport class tank landing ships, and LKA-113 Charleston class amphibious cargo ships.

Welcome to Norfolk…
(click to view full)

Replacing that many existing ships is already a very tall order. While its design incorporates notable advances, the San Antonio Class has also had its share of teething problems. So, too, has the New Orleans shipyard to which most of this contract has been assigned. The number of serious issues encountered in this ship class have been much higher than usual, and more extensive. The initial ships have been criticized for sub-standard workmanship, and it took 2 1/2 years after the initial ship of class was delivered and accepted before any ship of class was sent on an operational cruise. Whereupon the USS San Antonio promptly found itself laid up Bahrain due to oil leaks. Meanwhile, costs are almost twice the originally promised amounts at over $1.7 billion per ship – 2 to 3 times as much as many foreign LPD classes, and more than 10 times as much as Singapore’s 6,600 ton Endeavour Class LPD.

DID’s FOCUS articles offer in-depth, updated looks at significant military programs of record. This is DID’s FOCUS Article for the San Antonio Class, detailing the ships’ unique features and capabilities, its program innovations and issues, ship timelines, and related contracts throughout the program’s history. As has become DID custom, the most recent additions are highlighted in green type. The latest developments include a contract to Raytheon that could be worth over $175 million, and the imminent commissioning of the LPD 21 New York, which contains steel from the destroyed World Trade Center…

• LPD-17 San Antonio Class: Capabilities and Features
• LPD-17 San Antonio Class: Process & Issues
• LPD-17 San Antonio Class: Program, Budgets & Timelines [updated]
• LPD-17 San Antonio Class: Contracts and Events (1996-Present) [updated]
• Appendix A: Additional Readings & Sources – LPD-17 Ship Class
• Appendix B: Additional Readings & Sources – News and Views
  
  Continue Reading… »

[by John MacNeill]
Goo goo g’joob!

In April 2005, “USN, DARPA See Blimps & HULAs Rising”, looked at a range of projects on the drawing board, including the Walrus heavy-transport blimp (that’s “heavy” as in “1-2 million pounds”) which offered the potential for a faster and more versatile sealift substitute.

In this article DID explains the Walrus concept, details the contractors and contracts involved in this initial award (including a few updates), and lays out the program’s structure… or at least, what used to be its structure. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) funded phase 1 contracts, but things seemed to end in 2006. Yet the imperatives driving the need for Walrus, or even for a much smaller version of it, remain. Is the Walrus dead? What about Paul? And could it, or a HULA like like it, rise again?

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 includes noise issues in Norway, varying reactions and estimates in response to the 2009 JET report, 2010 budget results, basing decisions in the USA, and 2 senior appointments within the program teams…

• 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
  
  Continue Reading… »

B-1B: “Power” by Dru Blair
(click to view full)

Boeing received an $84 million order from the US Air Force for upgrades to the B-1B heavy bomber fleet’s avionics software that will enhance the aircraft’s color cockpit displays, data link, radar and navigation systems.

The award (F33657-01-D-2050, SD-21) continues a software-sustainment program that has updated the B-1B’s operational capabilities since the aircraft entered service in 1989. This new contract authorizes Boeing to start work on Sustainment Block 16.

Boeing will update the following B-1B avionics systems:

Continue Reading… »

AIM-120C from F-22A
(click for test missile zoom)

Raytheon’s AMRAAM has become the world market leader for medium range air-to-air missiles. It was designed with the lessons of Vietnam in mind, and of local air combat exercises like ACEVAL and Red Flag.

One of the key lessons learned from Vietnam was that a fighter would be likely to encounter multiple enemies, and would need to launch and guide several missiles at once in order to ensure its survival. This had not been possible with the AIM-7 Sparrow, a “semi-active radar homing” missile which required a constant radar lock on one target. To make matters worse, enemy fighters were capable of launching missiles of their own. Pilots who weren’t free to maneuver after launch would often be forced to “break lock,” or be killed – sometimes even by a short-range missile fired during the last phases of their enemy’s approach. Since fighters that could carry radar-guided missiles like the AIM-7 tended to be larger and more expensive, and the Soviets were known to have far more fighters overall, this was not a good trade.

Enter AMRAAM – the AIM-120 Advanced, Medium-Range Air to Air Missile. This DID FOCUS article covers successive generations of AMRAAM missiles, international contracts and key events from 2006 onward, and even some of its emerging competitors. New materials will be highlighted in green type. The most recent additions involve a contract for development of a new AMRAAM rocket motor…

• Some MRAAM History, and AMRAAM’s Design Approach (ie. Continue reading – updated)
• AMRAAM: Versions & Derivatives
• AMRAAM’s International Competitors
• AMRAAM: Contracts & Key Events, FY 2006-Present [updated]
• Additional Readings & Sources [updated]
  
  Continue Reading… »

Oshkosh M-ATV
(click to view full)

US government FedBizOpps, November 2008:

“The Government plans to acquire an MRAP All-Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV). The M-ATV is a lighter, off-road, and more maneuverable vehicle that incorporates current MRAP level protection. The M-ATV will require effectiveness in an off-road mission profile. The vehicle will include EFP and RPG protection (integral or removable kit). The M-ATV will maximize both protection levels and off-road mobility & maneuverability attributes, and must balance the effects of size and weight while attempting to achieve the stated requirements.”

The current plan expects to spend up to $3.3 billion to order 5,244 M-ATVs for the US Army (2,598), Marine Corps (1,565), Special Operations Command (643), US Air Force (280) and the Navy (65), plus 93 test vehicles. Monthly delivery rates of up to 1,000 vehicles were part of the solicitation. Those requirements, and American requirements around classified data and regulatory compliance, ensured that the only reasonable contenders were firms that already produced MRAPs, trucks, or tactical vehicles for American forces: BAE Systems, General Dynamics, Force Protection, Navistar, and Oshkosh. Oshkosh Defense secured a long-denied MRAP win, and continues to remain ahead of production targets.

The first vehicles have begun arriving on the ground in Afghanistan, support contracts are being signed, and Oshkosh has begun fighting for export orders in Australia…

Continue Reading… »

B-2 drops JDAM
(click to view full)

DID’s FOCUS articles offer in-depth, updated looks at significant military programs of record. The DID FOCUS Article looks at the transformational history of the JDAM GPS-guided bomb program, the ongoing efforts to bring its capabilities up to the level of weapons like Israel’s Spice and Raytheon’s Enhanced Paveway, and the contracts issued under the JDAM program and its derivatives.

Precision bombing has been a significant military goal since the invention of the Norden bomb sight in the 1920s, but its application remained elusive. Over 30 years later, in Vietnam, the destruction of a single target could require 300 bombs, which meant sending an appropriate number of fighters or bombers into harm’s way to deliver them. Even the 1991 Desert Storm war with Iraq featured unguided munitions for the most part; the US Air Force did use some laser and TV-guided weapons like Paveway bombs and Maverick missiles, but they were very expensive and only effective in good weather. If precision bombing was finally to become a reality throughout the Air Force, a new approach would be needed.

The Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) became that alternative, an engine of military transformation that was also a model of procurement transformation. The latest news involves FY 2009-2010 budget updates, plus a $72 million contract for 2,925 JDAM kits…

• JDAM: A History of Transformation (i.e. Continue reading…)
• JDAM: Program & Variants [updated]
• JDAM: Contracts and Key Events, 1996 – Present [updated]
• Additional Readings & Sources
  
  Continue Reading… »

General Dynamics Team
Trimaran LCS Design
(click to enlarge)

Exploit simplicity, numbers, the pace of technology development in electronics and robotics, and fast reconfiguration. That was the US Navy’s idea for the low-end backbone of its future surface combatant fleet. Inspired by successful experiments like Denmark’s Standard Flex ships, the US Navy’s $30+ billion “Littoral Combat Ship” program was intended to create a new generation of affordable surface combatants that could operate in dangerous shallow and near-shore environments, while remaining affordable and capable throughout their lifetimes.

It hasn’t worked that way. In practice, what the Navy wanted, the capabilities needed to perform primary naval missions, and what could be delivered for the sums available, have proven nearly irreconcilable. The LCS program has changed its fundamental acquisition plan several times since 2005, and canceled contracts with both competing teams, without escaping any of its fundamental issues.

The latest additions include completion of LCS-2 builder tests, and plans to deploy LCS-1 ahead of schedule…

• LCS: Concept & Needs
• LCS: The Competing Teams
• LCS Solution = Standard Equipment + Mission Modules
• LCS: Controversies & Cautions
• LCS: Budgets and Program Structure
• LCS: Export Potential
• LCS: Contracts & Key Events [updated]
• LCS Ancillaries: Mission Module & Weapon Contracts & Key Events
• Additional Readings & Sources [updated]
  
  Continue Reading… »

A400M: The real target?
(click to view full)

From “C-130J Acquisition Program Restructured”:

”[The C-130J Hercules] has since been deployed into theater by the USAF, where its vastly improved performance in “hot and high” environments has come in very handy. Unlike the pending Airbus A400M, however, the C-130J doesn’t solve the sub-survivable 20-ton armored vehicle limit that has stymied multiple US armored vehicle programs from the Stryker IAV to Future Combat Systems. As such, it represents an improvement that fails to address US tactical airlift’s key bottleneck limitation.”

Something called the Advanced Composite Cargo Aircraft (ACCA) may – or may not – represent a first step toward addressing that issue. It may also represent a US aerospace effort to avoid a looming future in which the Airbus A400M would be the only available tactical transport for survivable armored personnel carriers. With the light transport JCA made up of entirely foreign designs, the 20-ton transport market beginning to crowd, and the heavy-lift C-17 production line headed toward shutdown, the US aerospace industry risks a slip from a 1980-1990s position of market dominance in the military transport space to a position of fighting for its competitive life by 2020.

So where does ACAA fit in? How is it connected to the Composite Affordability Initiative, and the notional Advanced Joint Air Combat System (AJACS) program?

• From CAI to ACAA
• The AMC-X/ AJACS Program: Intent and Issues
• Contracts and Key Events
• Additional Readings & Sources
  
  Continue Reading… »

NH90: TTH & NFH
(click to view full)

The NH90 emerged from a requirement that created a NATO helicopter development and procurement agency in 1992 and, at almost the same time, established NHIndustries (62.5% EADS Eurocopter, 32.5% AugustaWestland, and 5% Stork Fokker) to build the hardware. The NATO Frigate Helicopter was originally developed to fit between light naval helicopters like AW’s Lynx or Eurocopter’s Panther, and medium-heavy naval helicopters like the European EH101. A quick look at the NFH design showed definite possibilities as a troop transport helicopter, however, and soon the NH90 project had branched into 2 versions, with more to follow. The nearest equivalent would be Sikorsky’s popular H-60 Seahawk/ Black Hawk family, but the NH90 includes a set of innovative features that give it some distinguishing selling points.

While battlefield damage to composite airframes can be more difficult to repair in the field, the combination of corrosion-proofing, lower maintenance, greater troop or load capacity, and the flexibility offered by that rear ramp have made the NH90 a popular global competitor. As many business people discover the hard way, however, success can be almost as dangerous as failure. NH Industries has had great difficulty ramping up production fast enough to meet promised deliveries, which has left several buyers upset. Orders currently stand at 507 machines, on behalf of 14 nations.

This is DID’s FOCUS Article, offering an in-depth look at the multi-national NH90 program, its customers, and its chronology from 1995 to the present day. The most recent additions cover developments, timelines, and controversies in Australia, the Netherlands, Norway, and Germany since January 2009…

• The NH90 Platform(s)
• The NH90 Production Program
• Contracts & Key Events, 1995-present [updated]
• Additional Readings & Sources
  
  Continue Reading… »