US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Raytheon Company was awarded a $218,530,196 contract by the Missile Defense Agency to complete the assembly and delivery of 29 Standard Missile-3 Block IB missiles. Launched off U.S. Navy ships, SM-3 interceptors protect the U.S. and its allies by destroying incoming short-, medium-, and intermediate-range ballistic missile threats by colliding with them in space.

Click to expand...

Reduced capability leaves UCLASS vulnerable to budget axe
Print
By: DAVE MAJUMDAR WASHINGTON DC 24 minutes ago Source: Flight global

Concerns have been raised that the capabilities of the US Navy's proposed Unmanned Carrier Launched Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) aircraft have been so watered down from the original concept that the programme is now vulnerable to cancellation by a cash-strapped Pentagon.

"The less-survivable, less-endurance approach, although cheaper, is, to me, not transformational," says retired chief of naval operations Adm Gary Roughead. "With the UCAS [Unmanned Combat Air System] you really do have a transformational weapon system."

The original UCAS concept - championed by Roughead and former under-secretary of the navy Robert Work - called for a very stealthy, carrier-based, long-range bomber with a hefty payload that could be refuelled in-flight.

"The idea [of] a long-dwell, long-range, refuellable, survivable UAV coming off a carrier was extremely important," Roughead says.

By contrast, the current vision is for a modestly stealthy UCLASS that emphasises intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) missions over lightly contested airspace, with a light secondary strike mission.

Roughead says that in a difficult budgetary climate, it is better to "ride a winner" that has a greater chance of surviving a cash crunch than to build a platform that adds little to the fleet's capabilities.

"The UCLASS system will support missions in permissive and low-end contested environments and provide enabling capabilities for high-end denied operations," says the office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV). "The requirements were written to fill a long-standing gap in persistent, sea-based ISR and a review of the overall UAS portfolio."

Roughead is not alone in his criticism, however. "The current UCLASS makes little sense to me," says airpower analyst Rebecca Grant, president of IRIS Independent Research. "A UCLASS as described by [Adm] Roughead would make sense. So would an armed UCAS vehicle if embarked in numbers adequate to provide [enough orbits to be] usable to a joint force commander."

She says that the aircraft's lack of stealth capability and the small number the navy proposes to acquire have eroded its worth.

Sources say that the specifications for the UCLASS were diluted by the vice-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm James "Sandy" Winnefeld, who heads the Pentagon's Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC).

Why Winnefeld would insist on a set of reduced capabilities for the UCLASS is not clear, and his office was unable to respond to requests for comment by press time, but some sources suggested it was at the behest of the White House.

The lower requirements mean many are questioning the necessity of the programme at all. As a result, there are some within the navy who believe UCLASS could be offered as a sacrifice as the Pentagon copes with a reduced budget.

Roughead says that the current approach will not yield an aircraft that will be able to operate in the contested airspace the service will encounter in the future.

Originally, he says, the USN's concept was to evolve the Northrop Grumman X-47B UCAS-demonstrator aircraft into an operational machine. "The whole intent was to take that form, pursue refuellability - you get long endurance - and then use that and move forward on that," Roughead says. "Do it as an evolutionary process."

Among the key requirements that were deleted by the JROC is aerial refuelling. "By not having it refuellable I think it really changes what I would consider a transformational dimension of naval aviation," Roughead says.

Aerial refuelling would have allowed the navy to move unmanned assets from shore bases to a carrier at sea from across the globe, Roughead says. That would allow a carrier strike group commander to either reconfigure the air wing as needed or replenish combat losses. "It gives you a tremendous amount of flexibility," Roughead says.

However, Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) says aerial refuelling capability might be added as a future goal, but it will not be required on the UCLASS initially. "OPNAV is looking to prioritise air refuelling as a future requirement pending early operational capability performance and fleet feedback," NAVAIR says.

But in addition to endurance and range, another key tenet of the USN's original vision was the low observability needed to penetrate into dense anti-access/area-denial environments, Roughead says. However, the stealth requirements have been sharply reduced.

Defence industry officials say the low-observable requirements allow for very wide margins, running from marginal stealth to Lockheed F-35-level signatures; however, the primary driver is low cost. Because stealth costs money, the requirement therefore defaults to a greatly reduced specification.

Likewise, the payload originally envisioned for a naval UCAS was much greater. Northrop officials in 2009 were expecting to develop a UCLASS that resembled a longer X-47B with weapons bays that could hold as many as 24 small diameter bombs, each weighing 113kg (250lb).

The present UCLASS requirements call for a total payload of 1,360kg, of which only 454kg would consist of air-to-ground weapons. "I would like to see us evolve into something that has greater capability," Roughead says.

Click to expand...

US Navy hopes to increase AIM-9X range by 60%
Print
By: DAVE MAJUMDAR WASHINGTON DC 10:40 18 Jul 2013 Source: Flight global

The US Navy is hoping to increase the range of the new Raytheon AIM-9X Block III by some 60% over current Sidewinder variants due to the unique needs of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) says. The new weapon is scheduled to become operational in 2022.

"The Block III range requirement was in response to Joint Strike Fighter requirements in the 2020+ timeframe," NAVAIR says. "The design is anticipated to increase AIM-9X employment ranges by 60%."

NAVAIR says the current Block II AIM-9X already overlaps some of the range capability of the more powerful Raytheon AIM-120D AMRAAM, however the new Block III variant will increase that overlap. The AIM-9X Block III's increased range will "provide fighter aircraft with increased capacity of BVR [beyond visual range] weapons for tactical flexibility," NAVAIR says.


Lockheed Martin

The need for that added flexibility arises from the proliferation of advanced digital radio frequency memory (DRFM) jammers that many potential adversaries are adding to their fighter fleets. DRFM jammers have the potential to blind the AMRAAM's onboard radar, which makes the AIM-9X's passive imaging infra-red guidance system a useful alternative means to defeat those threats. While a completely new missile would have been ideal, the Pentagon is faced with era of declining budgets and has to take into account the price tag of any new weapon.

"Programme affordability was a primary concern for new missile development," NAVAIR says. "Modifying the existing AIM-9X for increased range provides a highly affordable solution for meeting the performance requirement."

To create the new AIM-9X Block III, the NAVAIR will primarily focus on the missile's rocket motor. "Increased range will be achieved through a combination of increased rocket motor performance and missile power management," NAVAIR says.

In addition to an improved, more energetic, rocket motor, the enhanced weapon will also have a new insensitive munitions warhead, which will be safer to use onboard an aircraft carrier. However, the Block III will "leverage" the current Block II's guidance unit and electronics-including the missile's AMRAAM-derived datalink.

While the Pentagon needs the new Sidewinder to be a supplemental BVR weapon for situations where friendly fighters are faced with electronic attacks that degrade with radar-guided weapons, it will not compromise on the AIM-9X's close in performance. "The requirement and design call for the same WVR [within visual range]/HOBS [high off-boresight] capabilities as those found in the AIM-9X Block II," NAVAIR says.

The Block III is currently scheduled to enter into its engineering and manufacturing development phase in 2016, NAVAIR says. Subsequently, it will go into developmental testing in 2018 with operational tests starting in 2020. If all goes well, an initial operational capability date is expected in 2022. "The Block III development schedule follows the increased number of Joint Strike Fighter aircraft entering service," NAVAIR says.

Click to expand...

Lockheed to offer JMR/FVL avionics package
Print
By: DAVE MAJUMDAR WASHINGTON DC 01:00 6 Aug 2013 Source: Flight global

Lockheed Martin says it will offer a new mission equipment package to meet the requirements for the US Army's nascent Joint Multi-Role/Future Vertical Lift (JMR/FVL) high-speed rotorcraft programme.

"The US Department of Defense and Lockheed Martin have invested billions of dollars to create advanced technology mission equipment packages, such as that in the F-35 Lightning II," says Ed Whalen, the company's rotary wing capture lead. "The JMR programme offers the opportunity for the US Army to leverage this investment and many others in its vertical lift programme through open architectures and Lockheed Martin's advanced avionics, sensors and weapons."


Lockheed says it will incorporate the Pentagon's future airborne capability environment software standards into the aircraft's cockpit and mission systems. Boeing, and possibly other companies, are expected to offer rival sets of avionics for the JMR programme.

AVX, Bell Helicopter and a Boeing/Sikorsky partnership have been awarded contracts to develop and test air vehicle concepts by 2017. The mission systems will be demonstrated in a follow-on phase.

The demonstrations are expected to be followed by a development programme that would eventually lead to replacements for the Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk utility and Boeing AH-64 Apache attack helicopters.

Click to expand...

PRESS RELEASEAugust 7, 2013, 8:35 a.m. ET
US Army, US Air Force intercept cruise missile for first time with JLENS-guided AMRAAM
Multiple Raytheon systems seamlessly integrate to counter cruise missiles

UTAH TEST AND TRAINING RANGE, Utah, Aug. 7, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- The U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force intercepted for the first time an anti-ship cruise missile surrogate using Raytheon Company's (NYSE: RTN) Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) cued by JLENS. An affordable, elevated, persistent over-the-horizon sensor system, JLENS uses a powerful integrated radar system to detect, track and target a variety of threats.

"Integrating JLENS' precision detection and targeting information with the combat-proven AMRAAM gives our military a new way to defend the fleet and our allies from anti-ship cruise missiles that threaten vital waterways and critical chokepoints," said Dave Gulla, vice president of Global Integrated Sensors for Raytheon's Integrated Defense Systems business.

During the July 17 test, the Army's JLENS acquired and tracked an anti-ship cruise missile surrogate and passed targeting data to an Air Force F-15E via Link 16, enabling the fighter pilot to fire an AIM-120C7 AMRAAM, culminating in the weapon intercepting the target, meeting all test objectives.

"JLENS has proven it can defend and extend the battlespace by integrating with Patriot, Standard Missile-6, and now AMRAAM," said Dean Barten, the U.S. Army's JLENS product manager. "This test enhances the cruise missile defense umbrella, and when this capability is deployed, it will help save lives."

"Integrating AMRAAM with JLENS enables the world's most capable air-to-air missile to engage targets at the weapon's maximum kinematic range," said Harry Schulte, vice president of Raytheon Missile Systems' Air Warfare Systems. "This test further demonstrates AMRAAM's operational flexibility and provides today's warfighter with enhanced operational capability, cost effectiveness and future growth solutions."

About JLENS

JLENS consists of an integrated surveillance and fire-control radar on two tethered, 74-meter aerostats, which fly at altitudes of 10,000 feet above sea level and remain aloft and operational for 30 days. This capability better enables commanders to defend against threats including hostile cruise missiles, low-flying manned and unmanned aircraft, and moving surface vehicles such as boats, mobile missile launchers, automobiles, trucks and tanks. JLENS also provides ascent phase detection of tactical ballistic missiles and large-caliber rockets.

About AMRAAM

AMRAAM is a combat-proven missile that has demonstrated operational flexibility in both air-to-air and surface-launch engagement scenarios and provides today's warfighter with enhanced operational capability, cost effectiveness and future growth options and solutions. Procured by 36 countries, the combat-proven AMRAAM has been operational and integrated on the F-16, F-15, F/A-18, F-22, Typhoon, Gripen, Tornado, Harrier and F-4, and integration is ongoing in the Joint Strike Fighter aircraft. It is also the baseline missile for the NATO-approved National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System.

About Raytheon

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

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and follow us on Twitter @raytheon.

Click to expand...

navyreco said:

Raytheon's new SM-3 Block IB on track for operational deployment in 2015

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

PanAsian said:

I would like to put all the blame on this arsonist, stop there and be blissfully ignorant but I get the sense that he is just one domino to fall in a chain reaction of how mental health is handled, how workers are compensated, how contracting is done with public money on public works, etc.

Click to expand...

Lawmakers skeptical of global spec ops plan
By Paul McLeary
Staff writer Military times
WASHINGTON — Sometime next month, the heads of the US military’s global combatant commands will convene at the Tampa, Fla., headquarters of U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) to be briefed on an ambitious and controversial plan to revamp the way special operators deploy around the globe.

The concept is the brainchild of Adm. William McRaven, who has been working toward fully unveiling the plan since taking command of SOCOM in 2011. The idea is to establish a formal framework in which U.S. special operations forces (SOF), interagency partners and foreign allies join an alliance that promotes the sharing of intelligence, partner engagement, training and, if necessary, direct action.

McRaven has been on the stump actively promoting the idea for well over a year now while taking great pains to assure skeptical military officials that he isn’t trying to usurp their power by setting up a new global command structure. Despite his efforts, however, lawmakers on Capitol Hill and at least one combatant commander have expressed concern over the proposal, called the “Global SOF Network.”

The move comes at a heady time for a defense bureaucracy stressed by simultaneously wrapping up a war and planning for a new era with smaller budgets. These stressors are particularly acute at SOCOM headquarters, where the moment also represents a rapidly closing window of opportunity to solidify gains in manpower, budget and prestige it has won since 2001.

In explaining the need for more SOF-led coordination across the US military’s regional commands, McRaven told an audience at an SOF convention in May that “there is no such thing as a local problem any more. If you have a problem in Mali, it will manifest itself in Europe. And that problem in Europe will manifest itself in the Far East. Then the problem in the Far East will manifest itself in the Middle East.

“The world is linked, and therefore we need to be linked,” he said. “We have to build a network to defeat the enemy network.”

But what that network would look like, who it would report to, how it would interact with established command structures, how it would be funded and how the 66,000 — soon to be 72,000 — members of SOCOM would fit into it are all questions that have yet to be fully answered.

Officials at SOCOM did not reply to multiple phone and email requests for comment.

According to multiple sources, these issues came to a head this summer, when the chief of U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), Marine Corps Gen. John Kelly, rejected a key part of the plan after he was briefed on the idea of building a “regional SOF coordination center” in Colombia.

The center is a cornerstone of McRaven’s plan, as it would serve as a place where military and civilian agencies can coordinate efforts while advising host nation forces.

The problem with the site in Colombia was that representatives from SOCOM began discussions with Colombian officials about building the $15 million facility without working through SOUTHCOM first, according to several sources with knowledge of the situation.

“SOUTHCOM is saying no way, and SOUTHCOM has the trump card on that,” one former SOF officer said.

In a statement, Kelly took issue with reports of his opposition, saying that “I am absolutely for this concept and I talk with Bill McRaven all the time. There are things we need to work out with the State Department, but the more for this area of the world, the better.”

“I think there are concerns about redundancy in an era of fiscal austerity and perhaps a lingering sense of SOF going off on its own,” said Linda Robinson, whose book, “One Hundred Victories: Special Ops and the Future of American Warfare,” comes out this fall.

“Those concerns may not be well founded but they have not yet been sufficiently addressed” by SOCOM leadership, she added.

SOCOM is also running into some skepticism on Capitol Hill.

Some staff members “don’t think SOCOM is being transparent and is not being a team player, and that SOF is getting too big for its britches,” one former operator said. “What I’ve heard from staffers is that every time they’re asked how they’re going to deal with sequestration, [SOCOM] asks for more money.”

Lawmakers also have raised questions about the idea. The House Armed Services Committee’s version of the fiscal 2014 defense authorization bill proposed gutting the $10 million SOCOM request to establish a Washington office to coordinate the interagency process. It also would slash the $15 million requested to create the regional SOF coordination centers in Colombia and Hawaii.

Concerns also exist on the other side of the Capitol, with senior GOP and Democratic Senate Armed Services Committee members making clear McRaven has work to do.

“There’s a lot of questions to be answered before we just go into it. I’m not rejecting it — don’t get me wrong,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told Defense News July 31. “But it’s going to take a lot of hard work before something like that would become reality.

“I think the brakes ought to be put on that until we get really briefed as to what that entails,” he said. “Right now, the American people are very suspicious about what we’re doing around the world. So we’ve got to ensure there’s transparency as much as possible.”

McCain and other committee members said McRaven has yet to explain to lawmakers how the Pentagon will ensure the proposed “Global SOF” entity will not operate willy-nilly around the globe — potentially stoking embers Washington would prefer remain untouched.

“I think we have to take a hard look at the organization of that. My first reaction is, I don’t want to do anything until we ensure there’s accountability and oversight in place,” another Armed Services Committee member, Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., said during an Aug. 1 interview.

“When you spread out a command like that across the globe,” she said, “it makes the accountability piece harder.”

Senators also worry about creating another Defense Department organization just as budgets are shrinking and Pentagon leaders want to pare staff sizes.

“We’ve got to ensure it’s not encroaching on the mission of another command,” McCain said. “Are we just creating another command, only one that’s global?”

The Senate Armed Services Committee, in its version of the 2014 authorization legislation, also placed restrictions on SOCOM’s envisioned regional centers and Washington office.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif., explained his panel’s proposed cut at a SOF conference in June by saying, “We have limited resources, and some people don’t understand what he’s trying to do where he can build up commands.”

Still, pro-Pentagon lawmakers are not totally resistant to McRaven’s proposal.

“I think it’s something that we need to have hearings on. Maybe that’s something that you need to have in the 21st century,” a Senate Armed Services Committee member, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Defense News Aug 1. “But I think it’d be worth our time and effort to look at it deeper — that makes sense to me.”

SOCOM won a pretty big prize in February, when then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta signed an order that placed the theater special operations commands (TSOCs) under SOCOM — which means Tampa now staffs and funds the regional offices that oversee deployed SOF.

The TSOC remains under the operational control of the relevant combatant commander, however.

The proposed regional centers, Robinson said, are “only one part of the global SOF network” and as such are not as important as continuing to reform the TSOCs, which “can do a lot of the ‘networking’ and many countries with SOF that are maturing can also spearhead — and, yes, fund — some of this collaboration.”

The former SOF commander said that while the larger global plan “should be embraced” by the combatant commanders, they “will fight everything tooth and nail ... a lot of this comes down to perception, and the [combatant commanders] don’t want to be told that ‘We’re from SOCOM, and we’re here to help.’ ”

In essence, McRaven is trying to emulate a program he led as head of Special Operations Command-Europe between 2006 and 2008, when he established a training program for NATO special operators heading to Afghanistan.

In 2007, NATO’s SOF headquarters had just 19 staffers — 18 Americans and a Norwegian. But by 2012, that number had swelled to 220, and a high-tech NATO SOF center was completed in December to house the command.

The number of NATO SOF deployed to Afghanistan rose from 300 to 2,500 under McRaven’s watch, while Combined Joint Special Operations Task Force-Afghanistan, which encompasses all NATO and Afghan SOF under one divisional command, was established in 2012.

John T. Bennett contributed to this report.

Click to expand...

Suspected U.S. drone strike kills 2 in Yemen
By Ahmed Al-Haj
The Associated Press
SANAA, YEMEN — A suspected U.S. drone strike killed two alleged al-Qaida militants in southern Yemen on Saturday, military officials said, making it the ninth such strike in just two weeks.

The strike in Lahj province wounded two other militants, one of them seriously, the officials said. The four had been traveling in a car in the area of el-Askariya. The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media, said it was the first time a U.S. drone fired on this area of Lahj.

In total, there have been nine suspected U.S. drone strikes in Yemen since July 27. The drone attacks in that two-week period have killed a total of 38 suspected militants in Yemen, which is the Arab world’s most impoverished country.

While the U.S. acknowledges its drone program in Yemen, it does not usually talk about individual strikes. The program is run by the Pentagon’s Joint Special Operations Command and the CIA, with the military flying its drones out of Djibouti, and the CIA out of a base in Saudi Arabia.

An accelerated use of drone strikes in Yemen under President Barack Obama and a U.S.-backed offensive last year drove militants from territory they had seized a year earlier, during Yemen’s political turmoil amid the Arab Spring.

Washington recently flew diplomatic staff out of Yemen’s capital over fears of a terrorist attack. The U.S., which is set to reopen diplomatic posts that were temporarily closed this week throughout parts of Africa and the Middle East amid a major terror alert, will keep its embassy in Yemen closed.

Yemeni Defense Minister Maj. Gen. Mohammed Nasser Ahmed met on Saturday with Deputy U.S. Ambassador Karen Sasahara and two American security officials based in Yemen to discuss the security situation.

In a statement, the defense minister said he expressed appreciation during the meeting for U.S. logistical and technical support to the Yemeni armed forces in their fight against al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. Washington considers the group as the most dangerous al-Qaida branch to threaten U.S. interests.

Earlier this month, Yemeni President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi met Obama in Washington. The two discussed the recent al-Qaida threats.

Click to expand...

FORBIN said:

Very nice scheme.

This ship is AEGIS ? and for these AA missiles i have see he would carry only ESSM ?

Now we know its staffing in missiles ?

Click to expand...

Navy Times said:

INDIANAPOLIS — The Navy intends to name a new combat ship the USS Indianapolis, honoring the crew of the cruiser of the same name whose sinking in the final weeks or World War II was the military branch’s worst single loss of life at sea.

Rear Adm. Rick Williamson, the Navy’s Midwest Region commander, read a letter from Navy Secretary Ray Mabus on notifying Congress of the name selection to survivors of the sinking during a reunion banquet Saturday night.

“Once again the name Indianapolis will put to sea on the stern of the U.S. Navy warship, carrying on the tradition of service that you and your shipmates have forever associated with the name,” said the letter dated July 29. “You should be very proud of the legacy which you leave for our Navy and our nation.”

Click to expand...