Defence`s Feeds

Key Points Boeing's latest KC-46 tanker type test aircraft flies again The programme is inching closer to delivering aircraft Boeing's newest KC-46 aerial refuelling tanker made its second flight on 2 May after making its first on 29 April, according to a company spokesman. Boeing spokesman

China has reiterated its opposition to US involvement in the disputes over parts of the South China Sea (SCS). "The issue of the South China Sea is between China and some members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations [ASEAN], rather than between China and the entire ASEAN or between

EVENT On 2 May 2017, Moscow Mayor's office published a list of 4,566 residential buildings to be demolished under the citywide Soviet-era housing renovation programme. This includes buildings with about 1.2 million residents in 85 districts of Moscow; similar housing in further 40 districts was

Key Points Cobham reports rights issue gains 98% subscription Targeted revenue generation from issuance to help company's cash balances Embattled aerospace systems and services company Cobham reported on 5 May that it had received acceptances for 98.01% of the rights issue that was launched on 28

Americas

• Boeing has pulled its Harpoon anti-ship missile out of a US Navy contract aimed at procuring an over-the-horizon (OTH) cruise missile for its Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) and frigates. Proposed upgrades to the current Harpoon Block II would have initially extended its range to 150 miles, along with providing a new, more powerful warhead. However, the company stated that changing service requirements “would have to take a lot of capability out of this existing system and really deliver a less-capable weapons system.” Boeing added that they would continue to deliver upgrades for the missile. This leaves the Raytheon/Kongsberg Naval Strike Missile (NSM) and Lockheed Martin Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) as the likely candidates in the OTH effort.

• However, Boeing has reached an important milestone in bringing its KC-46 tanker program closer to serial production, announcing that it now has a total of six units ready for its testing program. The newest, of the planes, which is the second to be produced under a low-rate production order, conducted its first test flight on April 26, and future testing will be largely focus on ensuring that the tanker can stand up to electromagnetic fields—radars and powerful radio towers are capable of scrambling aircraft electronic systems if they are not carefully shielded. Boeing intends to eventually produce as many as 179 KC-46 tankers for the USAF.

• Raytheon has claimed that its Patriot air defense systems have downed more than 100 ballistic missiles in worldwide combat operations since January 1, 2015. Of those 100 or so intercepts, more than 90 involved the low cost Raytheon-made Guidance Enhanced Missile (GEM) family of interceptors. First introduced as an improvement to earlier PAC-2 missiles, early GEMs added a new, faster proximity fused warhead, alongside upgraded seekers to improve performance, and has been subsequently improved into four variants over the last two two decades. The missile operates by flying at extremely high speeds to close in on the threat and then detonating a blast-fragmentation warhead at precisely the right moment.

Middle East & North Africa

• Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) is looking to use its facilities to provide engine sustainment and support for Pratt & Whitney F135 engines used on Israeli F-35i Adir fighter jets. Yosi Melamed, general manager of IAI’s Bedek group subsidiary, believes its engine division is the right place to maintain and overhaul F135 engines, and while Israeli F-35s would be the first receive maintenance, the company suggests that this could be expanded to include overhaul work for other aircraft that utilize the US-made engine, but only once an agreement has been reached with Pratt & Whitney. IAI already manufactures wings for the F-35 as a subcontractor to Lockheed.

Europe

• Russian media has reported that the Sukhoi T-50/PAK-FA stealth fighter will be armed with the upgraded Kh-35UE anti-ship missile. An upgrade of the Kh-35, the integration of the tactical cruise missile will give the fighter an added anti-surface mission capability, and add to the aircraft’s weapons load which includes the Kh-38 air-to-surface missile and Kh-58UShK anti-radiation missile. Nikolai Vasilyev, chief designer of the Kh-35UE at the Korolev-based Tactical Missiles Corporation, said that the missile has already demonstrated itself effectively on the carrier-based variants of the MiG-29K and MiG-29KUBR fighter planes, and on the Ka-52 attack helicopter.

Asia Pacific

• India has conducted two successful tests of the BrahMos Block III land attack cruise missile in the Andaman & Nicobar Islands. Conducted on May 2 and 3, an MoD statement confirmed that both missiles were were in full operational land-to-land configuration and fired from Mobile Autonomous Launchers (MAL). This is the fifth consecutive time that the Block-III version of the munition has been successfully launched against a land-based target in “top-attack” mode. Developed in conjunction with Russia and based on the P-800 Oniks cruise missile, both governments are planning on the development of a BrahMos variant capable of operating in the 600 km-plus range.

• Rheinmetall Defense Australia has picked NOIA as its supplier of ammunition and armament services as part of its bid to win an armored vehicle competition launched by the Australian government. The firm is offering its Boxer CVR armed with a LANCE turret and Northrop Grumman’s C4ISR architecture as a solution to Canberra’s Land 400 Phase 2 program, and faces competition from BAE Systems, who have teamed with Patia to offer the AMV35 Combat Reconnaissance Vehicle (CRV)—a solution that combines Patria’s Armoured ModularVehicle (AMV) and BAE Systems Hägglunds’ E35 turret system. Rheinmetall is also starting a military vehicle center of excellence, creating a program for the design, building and support for its military vehicles in Australia and the Asian region.

• China’s Hongdu Aviation Industry Group (HAIG) has unveiled a B variant prototype of its L-15A Lead-In Fighter Trainer (LIFT) aircraft. The new model is said to be a more combat capable and better armed version of its predecessor and is being touted as potential competition for Korean Aerospace Industries’ (KAI) FA-50. Additions to the L-15B include two afterburning turbofans with Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC), an extended nose section housing a passive electronically scanned array (PESA) radar with a reported 75 km range, and an electronic systems structure, which is most likely to be a radar warning receiver (RWR), located atop the vertical stabiliser. The jet also has nine weapon hardpoints and attachments for a 3.5-tonne payload, with reports stating that the aircraft’s wingtip mounts are strong enough to carry heavy short-range air-to-air missiles.

Today’s Video

• Indian Army test firing of BrahMos Block III:

German Heckler and Koch HK433 Assault Rifle

The US Navy has launched its future America-class amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli (LHA 7) after completing the transition from land to the dry dock at Huntington Ingalls Industries' (HII) shipyard.

Raytheon Missile Systems has secured a contract modification worth $78.72m for the sustainment of the AIM-9X Sidewinder Block II tactical missiles operated by the US Air Force, US Navy and other foreign militaries.

The SENER engineering and technology group has signed a partnership agreement with the Faculty of Engineering at the University of Rijeka, Croatia, and the Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and Naval Architecture at the Unive…

Science Applications International (SAIC) has received a task order from the US Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center (SSC) Pacific to provide comprehensive cyber support and protection services to the US Marine Corps Forces Cyberspace Comman…

The US Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) in Point Mugu, California, has selected LCR Embedded Systems for the supply of its new 3U VPX solution.

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

Length of video : 150'
You may manually download this video in WMV (1.4Gb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

will take place on Thursday 8 June 2017, 9.00-12:30 in Brussels.

Organisations or interest groups who wish to apply for access to the European Parliament will find the relevant information below.

Further information
watch the meeting live
Access rights for interest group representatives
Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the notorious leader of Hezb-e Islami, returned to Kabul today. After several years of on-and-off talks, between the Afghan government and envoys of the party’s leader-in-hiding, a deal allowing his return was finally signed in September 2016. Several months of negotiations on the finer details of the deal’s implementation followed. An overview of AAN’s past reporting on the winding road that led to the deal provides indispensable background to the questions that still surround Hekmatyar’s return to public life.

For AAN’s most recent analysis on Hekmatyar’s return read this dispatch (3 May 2017):

Charismatic, Absolutist, Divisive: Hekmatyar and the impact of his return

 For analysis on the practical impact of the recent deal – on the UN’s sanctions list and on the situation in Shamshatu refugee camp, long the de facto HQ of Hekmatyar’s Hezb-e Islami – see these two dispatches (11 February 2017 and 14 April 2017):

Hekmatyar taken off UN sanctions list: Paving the way for his return – and Hezb-e Islami’s reunification?

Moving Out of Shamshatu: Hezb-e Islami’s refugee followers between hope of return and doubts about the peace deal

To see how the agreement with Hezb-e Islami features within the larger context of the issues facing Afghanistan this year, see here (27 January 2017):

What to Watch? Key issues to follow in Afghanistan in 2017

For background on why Hekmatyar’s Hezb-e Islami is controversial, and how the past still reverberates today, read this dispatch (14 December 2016):

Afghan War Criminal Zardad Freed: No protection for witnesses

For AAN’s analysis on the importance and impact of the deal, as it was being negotiated and signed, see these two dispatches (21 May 2016 and 29 September 2016):

Almost Signed? The peace agreement with Hezb-e Islami

Peace With Hekmatyar: What does it mean for battlefield and politics?

AAN’s paper on the influence of radical Islamic groups – other than the Taleban – among Afghanistan’s youth, includes an in-depth look the role of the Hezb-e Islami youth, including at Afghanistan’s universities (23 June 2015):

Beyond Jihad and Traditionalism: Afghanistan’s new generation of Islamic activists

The following dispatches trace the emergence and development of the negotiations with Hekmatyar’s Hezb-e Islami, both under president Karzai and president Ghani (most recent first):

19 February 2014:

Bomb and Ballot: The many strands and tactics of Hezb-e Islami

6 May 2013:

Adding the Ballot to the Bullet? Hezb-e Islami in transition

7 June 2012:

Another Hezb-e Islami U-Turn – with more to follow? (amended)

26 April 2012:

The second line of talks: Hezb-e Islami in Kabul

 6 November 2010:

Gulbuddin ante portas – again (2)

22 March 2010:

Gulbuddin ante portas – again (Updated)

Finally, see this dispatch for more background on Afghanistan’s ‘Amnesty Law’ that allows the search for peace to take place through blanket amnesty (22 February 2010):

After two years in legal limbo: A first glance at the approved ‘Amnesty law’

The larger a military operation is in size (Member States, troops, equipment involved), the more sophisticated and complete the medical support tends to be. The military medical support options in Europe used to be designed and optimised for military operations of a larger scale. For some of the current missions conducted in the context of the European Union’s Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP), such as antipiracy or training missions, a far smaller number of personnel has to be deployed than in the operations mentioned above.

Against that background EDA carried out the study “Medical Support to Light Footprint Operations” which involved EDA’s ‘Project Team Medical’ and other Ad Hoc Medical Working Groups. The key issue investigated by the study was to keep the quality of medical support at the highest possible level for missions of smaller scale.

The overarching goal was to provide participating Member States with the analytical means to identify new ways of providing effective medical support to so-called ‘Light Footprint Operations’ (LFO) in the context of CSDP. As LFOs are not formally described in current EU or NATO doctrines, there is no agreed set of principles or best practices to tailor medical support to this type of missions.

The study commissioned by EDA analysed key elements of LFOs provides recommendations on a way forward on how to tailor and improve medical support for LFOs, namely:

• EU Medical Concept - requirements for medical support for LFOs and best practices for the provision of medical support must be introduced into the current EU Medical Concept;
• Further harmonization of qualification, material and concepts – based on lessons identified in recent CSDP missions, including difficulties and major obstacles, the study describes options for improved interoperability between units providing medical support, including to facilitate harmonisation and standardisation;
• Categorization of Medical Treatment Facilities (MTF) - based on lessons identified in recent CSDP missions, the study analyzed that the concept of allocation roles should be revisited to consider modularization of medical units as a cost-effective way;
• New technologies and research activities - the study indicates opportunities for multinational cooperation in development and research activities for new technologies, that could be used for both reduce the footprint of medical support in LFOs and the improvement of medical care;
• Engagement between military and civilian medical community - the study identified a number of crossovers in the domains of training of medical professionals and the make-up of deployed medical staff, medical practices of information sharing and medical technologies. To address the synergies and concerns, the study suggests that EDA should seek opportunities to serve as a forum to build trust between the consumers of the technology, the developers and the manufacturers.

 

More information:

• Medical support (EDA project page) 
• EDA symposium discusses EU deploy capabilities for CSDP operations (EDA webnews, June 2016)

Length of video : 97'
You may manually download this video in WMV (1Gb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

Length of video : 62'
You may manually download this video in WMV (645Mb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

ROKS Dokdo
(click to view full)

Australia isn’t the only Pacific Rim country looking to modernize its Navy these days. China’s rapid shipbuilding program and work on its aircraft carrier project gets a lot of attention – but just to the east, South Korea is fielding its own AEGIS-equipped “air warfare destroyer,” while picking up new capabilities via a new class of amphibious assault LHD ship. Sound familiar? Hobart and Canberra Class, meet the KDX-III King Sejong Class AEGIS destroyer (launched May 2007) and the new “LPH” Dokdo Class LHD (commissioned July 2007).

The 199-meter, 18,860-ton Dokdo Class officially has the less aggressive designation of LPH (landing platform, helicopter), but its well deck and amphibious assault capabilities place it within the LHD category…

The Dokdo Class/ LPX

Dokdo launches AAV7s
(click to view full)

The Dokdo Class can carry up to 720 troops, plus a mix of helicopters, tanks/armored vehicles, and wheeled vehicles. Transport to shore is accomplished via landing ships or LCAC hovercraft. The Dokdo Class is only 2/3 the size of Australia’s new Canberra Class, and just over 1/3 the size of the USA’s Wasp Class; but Dokdo is the largest ship in the South Korean Navy.

For defense, they will rely on a combat system from the Samsung Thales Corp. joint venture. It will rely on Thales’ SMART-L long range 3 dimension search radar, with a detection and tracking range of 400 km/ 240 miles. For defensive responses, it can coordinate a SeaRAM guided missile system, 2 Thales “Goalkeeper” 30mm CIWS systems, and various decoying systems. Even so, support from Korea’s frigate-sized KDX-II destroyers and new KDX-III King Sejong Class AEGIS destroyers will be essential.

ROKN Goalkeeper
(click to view full)

There has been media speculation that the Dokdo Class is in fact a light aircraft carrier, citing the ability to install a ski jump and operate V/STOL Harriers or STOVL F-35B Lightnings from its deck. America’s 42,000 ton Wasp Class LHDs are used in this manner, and it would be possible from Australia’s Canberra Class LHDs as well.

The smaller size of the Dokdo Class, however, means that using the ship in this way doesn’t make much sense. It would get one very few fighters, while sacrificing most of the ship’s total carrying capacity. Fighter aircraft require a lot of space below-decks, and so does their fuel and weapons storage. South Korea’s prime focus remains North Korea, and aerial cover for amphibious operations a la Inchon can easily be supported from land bases. Meanwhile, international operations featuring Korean LHDs would need Korean helicopters far more than they’d need Korean fighters.

Circumstances can change; but Korea’s Ministry of Defence has stated that they have no plans to operate fighter aircraft from these ships, and military logic makes this a believable assertion. This is not to say that offensive fixed wing aircraft will never operate from Dokdo. It’s just that they’re far more likely to be UAVs akin to the MQ-9 Reaper, rather than supersonic fighters.

LPX: Future Plans for the Class

The Dokdo Class ship ROKS Marado was scheduled to enter service by 2010, but its budget was canceled. That budget was restored in 2012, and recent regional tensions are making high-end ships like LHDs and Aegis destroyers more attractive to Korea. Marado commemorates a small southern island that is commonly thought of as both the ending and beginning point of Korea, depending on one’s perspective.

Up to 4 ships of class were originally planned, but doctrine has shifted toward 2-3 “rapid response fleets,” each built around 1 Dokdo Class ship and a number of destroyers. If there’s a 3rd ship of class, previous plans involved naming it after Baengnyeong Island, which is located in the Yellow Sea near the disputed Northern Limit Line (NLL) with North Korea.

Contracts and Key Events

ROKS Dokdo, docked
(click to view full)

 

May 4/17: South Korea has announced that it has started construction of its second Dokdo-class Landing Platform Helicopter (LPH) amphibious assault ship. The milestone was marked by a keel-laying ceremony at the shipyard of Hanjin Heavy Industries & Construction Co. in Busan, and it is expected that the vessel will be launched in April of next year. It will be delivered to the South Korean Navy in 2020, following sea trials. Seoul’s undertaking in constructing such vessels has been noted as its most major naval transport project in over a decade.

April 13/09: Samsung Thales Corp’s senior vice president, Byun Seung-wan, is quoted by Defense News as saying that Dokdo’s combat system is drawing regional interest:

“Southeast Asian countries have shown interest in one developed for the… Dokdo…. About two years ago, STC completed the five-year Landing Platform Experimental (LPX) combat system, in cooperation with the ADD, based on expertise gathered from its development of combat systems for the South Korean Navy’s KDX-I/II destroyers, frigates and patrol ships…. STC was the prime contractor for the integration and development of the command support and the command and fire-control system.”

The article also traces STC’s growth as a global developer of naval and land combat and battlefield management systems.

July 3/07: The ROKS Dokdo is handed over to the Navy in a ceremony. KOIS report.

Note that the name Dokdo is politically significant, referring to a set of islands whose territorial claim is disputed with Japan. The Korean perspective on Dokdo/Takeshima may be found here. Unsurprisingly, Japan filed a diplomatic protest over the name back in 2005. Asian countries tend to have civilization confidence, however, and the Korean reply was rude.

Additional Readings & Sources

• ROK Navy – Landing Platform, Helicopter (LPH). It certainly sounds more low-key than “LHD amphibious assault ship.” Even if that’s what it is.

• Navy Recognition – Dokdo class LPH – ROK Navy: also known as LPX, Landing Platform Helicopter, Amphibious Assault Ship

• GlobalSecurity.org – LP-X Dokdo (Landing Platform Experimental) Amphibious Ship

• Wikipedia – Dokdo-class amphibious assault ship

• KBS “News in Zoom” – Asia’s Largest Landing Ship-LPX, “Dokdo”

News & Views

• Defense News (April 13/09) – Automating Naval Warfare: Samsung Thales Making Name in Combat Systems [dead link].

• Information Dissemination (April 24/08) – Observing the ROKS Dokdo (LPH 6111)

• ‘Manoeuvre’ in Maritime Asia (April 22/08) – ADD Naval Weapons Arm to Develop UAV’s? [dead link]. They seem to be interested in UAVs that can take off and land in 200m. Which happens to be the size of the Dokdo Class’ flight deck.

DDG-110 Construction
(click to view full)

In April 2009 Bath and Ingalls agreed to the Navy’s surface combatant plans, thus heralding a significant restructuring within the American naval shipbuilding community. Under the agreements, the USA would end production at 3 Graf Spee sized DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class “destroyers,” but shift all production from the Congressionally-mandated joint arrangements to General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Maine, which had already made program-related investments in advanced shipbuilding technologies.

Northrop Grumman (now Huntington Ingalls Industries) would retain its DDG-1000 deckhouse work, but their main exchange was additional orders for DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class destroyers. Their Ingalls yard in Pascagoula, Mississippi would continue building the DDG-51 destroyers, beginning with 2 ordered in FY 2010-2011.

The US Navy’s Revised DDG-51 Plan

DDG-1000
(click to view full)

With the DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class ended at 3 ships, the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class ships will become more important to the future navy. The Navy’s FY 2011 budget also terminated the planned CG (X) cruiser program as unaffordable. Instead, the US Navy would field an updated DDG-51 Flight III version, starting in FY 2016.

That date has been pushed back, owing to technical issues with the Flight III ships. Under the current plan, the DDG-51 Flight IIA Restart version would remain in production from FY 2010-2017, buying 13 ships in total (DDG 113 – 125) under a multi-year buy program. Huntington Ingalls Industries ships ordered to date are both named after Congressional Medal of Honor recipients, and include:

• DDG 113 John Finn
  
• DDG 114 Ralph Johnson

Both Bath Iron Works and HII will continue to build ships of class, but lead yard status for the “DDG-51 restart” ships shifted to Northrop Grumman (now HII) during the restructuring. GD Bath Iron Works is currently contracted to build DDG 115 Rafael Peralta and & DDG 116 Thomas Hudner, as the DDG-51 follow-yard.

Beyond the Flight IIAs, US Navy plans once called for buying an undetermined number of DDG-51 Flight IIIs from FY 2016 through at least FY 2022, and perhaps until FY 2031. The follow-on DDG-51 Flight IIIs are expected to carry a smaller version of the new Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR-S) dual-band active array that was slated for the canceled CG (X), along with the upgraded power and cooling systems required to support it. Other enhancements will be fleshed out as detailed design work on the Flight III commences, reportedly in FY 2012-2013. Unfortunately, there have been early reports that integration of the AMDR radar could prove to be a problem. The new radar will need to have a power draw that the ship can handle, cooling needs that the ship’s design can meet, and a size that can fit within the ship’s available space, all without changing the destroyer’s balance and stability. That is, to put it mildly, a challenge. So, too, are growing cost estimates that are edging the DDG-51 Flight III toward the price of larger and more advanced DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class ships.

Flight III buys now appear set to start no earlier than FY 2018, if indeed they start at all. Current plans do call for an interim step, however, as part of the proposed 2012-2017 multi-year buy.

Under the current multi-year proposal, 1 of 2 FY 2016 ships (DDG 123), and both FY 2017 ships (DDG 124-125), will “incorporate Flight III capability,” but not the new radars themselves. The addition of the AMDR-S radar and other associated systems would be funded as an engineering change proposal (ECP), so it doesn’t look like it’s affecting multi-year pricing. Otherwise, the Navy wouldn’t be able to show enough savings [1] to justify a multi-year buy under US laws. The Flight III ECP won’t be awarded until the Flight III Milestone Decision Authority approves the configuration, and the greatest risk would be changes that involve significant retrofits of DDG 123-125, beyond adding the AMDR radar. Those kinds of changes are always much more expensive than installing systems during ship construction.

Contracts & Key Events

Article coverage essentially terminated in FY 2013, as the USA moved to a multi-year block-buy from both shipyards to finance remaining Flight IIA destroyers, and the initial Flight III ships.

One thing to notice while reading these is that ship construction contracts do not include important equipment like guns, radar, combat systems, missile launchers, etc. Those are bought independently as “Government Furnished Equipment,” though ship construction contracts do pay to have that equipment installed in the ships. Many of those contracts are not publicly announced, or not broken out specifically by ship. As such, any ancillary contracts covered here are suggestive and informative, not comprehensive. Indeed, those “ancillary” contracts make up the largest portion of the ship’s total cost.

FY 2013 – 2017

May 4/17: Raytheon has received a $327.1 million US Navy contract for the low-rate production of the Air and Missile Defense Radar system. Known as the AMDR or AN/SPY-6(V) , the order calls for the procurement of three initial systems, including the equipment and engineering systems needed to produce, and will be mounted on Flight III Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers. The Air and Missile Defense Radar is part of the ship’s AEGIS system, and is 30 times more sensitive than the search radars on the Flight II Arleigh Burkes. Work is expected to be completed by October 2020.

February 23/17: Huntington Ingalls Industries has marked a production milestone for the USS Frank E. Petersen during a keel authentication ceremony. The company was contracted by the Navy in March 2016 to produce the Arleigh Burke-class Flight IIA guided missile destroyer which is named after Frank Emmanuel Petersen Jr., who served as the USMC’s first African-American pilot and general officer. During the ceremony, Petersen’s window, Dr. Alicia Petersen said, “He wasn’t a man who wanted a lot of praise or recognition; however, if he could see this great ship being built for other young men and young women to see and look up to, he would be very proud.”

July 22/15: The Chief of Naval Operation Adm. Jonathan Greenert wants to buy ten Arleigh Burke-class destroyers (DDGS) to the tune of two a year, according to his Navigation Plan announced this week. This will bring the total number to be procured by 2020 to seventy-two. The Plan also calls for the procurement of the Navy’s Small Surface Combatant frigates by 2019, as well as investment in deterrent and attack submarines. The latter would involve boosting the fleet of Virginia-class boats to twenty-two within five years, in addition to the maintenance of the Ohio-class ballistic missile boats, with a replacement eyed for 2031.

April 15/15: The future Flight III Arleigh-Burke Class destroyers are making good progress, with an order scheduled for 2019. The Navy recently told Congress that the program would take the shape of a ten-ship multi-year procurement contract.

Nov 4/13: DDG 113. HII officially lays the keel for DDG 113 John Finn. She’s the 1st ship of the DDG 51 program restart, and will become the 29th Arleigh Burke Class ship built by HII. Sources: US NAVSEA, “Keel Laid for Future USS John Finn”.

Sept 12/13: DDG 114. The Navy marked the start of fabrication for DDG 114, the future USS Ralph Johnson. Keel laying won’t take place until Q3 2014. Sources: US NAVSEA, “Future USS Ralph Johnson starts fabrication”.

FY 2012

 

Mk 45 firing
(click to view full)

June 7/12: Lead vs. Follow Yard. Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS receives a $17.3 million cost-plus-award-fee/ cost-plus-fixed-fee contract with performance incentives, for DDG 51 class follow yard services. The firm explained that they remain the follow-yard behind General Dynamics’ Bath Iron Works for previous Arleigh Burke Class destroyers in the US Fleet (DDGs 51-112).

As the follow yard, they offer many of the same services as the lead yard, when required. That includes engineering, technical, material procurement and production support; configuration; class flight upgrades and new technology support; data and logistics management; lessons learned analysis; acceptance trials; post delivery test and trials; post shakedown availability support; reliability and maintainability; system safety program support; material and fleet turnover support; shipyard engineering teams; crew training, design tool/ design standardization, detail design development, and other technical and engineering analyses for the purpose of supporting DDG 51 class ship construction and test and trials.

In addition, DDG 51 class follow-yard services may provide design, engineering, procurement and manufacturing/ production services to support design feasibility studies and analyses that modify DDG 51 class destroyers for Foreign Military Sales programs. Japan’s Kongou Class, and South Korea’s KDX-III destroyers, are both examples of that phenomenon.

Work on this contract will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (98%), and Washington, DC (2%), and is expected to be complete by February 2013. This contract was not competitively procured by US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC, as these relationships were set a long time ago (N00024-12-C-2312).

Feb 15/12: Naming. The US Navy names DDG 113-115.

DDG 113: John Finn, who retired as a lieutenant, received the Medal of Honor from Adm. Chester Nimitz for displaying “magnificent courage in the face of almost certain death” during the Japanese attack on military installations in Hawaii during Pearl Harbor.

DDG 114: Marine Corps Pfc. Ralph Henry Johnson was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor for shouting a warning to his fellow Marines and hurling himself on an explosive device, saving the life of one Marine and preventing the enemy from penetrating his sector of the patrol’s perimeter during the Vietnam War.

Nov 16/11: Jane’s Navy International is reporting that DDG-51 flight III destroyers with the new AMDR radar and hybrid propulsion drives could cost $3-4 billion each.

If that’s true, it’s about the same cost as a DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class ship, in return for less performance, more vulnerability, and less future upgrade space. AMDR isn’t a final design yet, so it’s still worthwhile to ask what it could cost to give the Flight IIIs’ radar and combat systems ballistic missile defense capabilities – R&D for the function doesn’t go away when it’s rolled into a separate program. Indeed, if the Flight III cost estimate is true, it raises the question of why that would be a worthwhile use of funds, and re-opens the issue of whether continuing DDG-1000 production and upgrades might make more sense. DoD Buzz.

FY 2011

 

Sept 26/11: The US Navy releases the totals for the June 15/11 contract: $783.6 million in shipbuilding costs for DDG 113. Note that this is just the shipbuilder’s share. It excludes key items like radars, electronics, weapons, and other “government-furnished equipment.” For the recent DDG 1001/1002 contract, Bath Iron Works’ shipbuilding costs were a bit more than $2 billion for 2 ships, each of which is expected to cost a bit less than $3 billion when all is said and done. The actual cost of DDG 113/114 would work out to around $2 billion each at a similar ratio. Equipment for an Arleigh Burke Flight IIA ship has a long production history, is less sophisticated in some ways than DDG 1000’s, and does not include extras from other shipbuilders – like the Zumwalt’s composite deckhouse from HII. As such, DDG 113’s furnished equipment is very likely to be less expensive in absolute terms. The question is, would it be more than 30% less expensive, which is required in order to be lower relative to shipbuilding costs?

The Navy also announces a $697.6 million fixed-price-incentive contract for DDG 114 construction. For DDG 114 construction, significant amounts of work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS; Cincinnati, OH; Walpole, MA; York, PA; Charlottesville, VA; Erie, PA; and Burns Harbor, IN; and is expected to be complete by July 2018. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was procured via a limited competition between Huntington Ingalls and Bath Iron Works, run by US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-11-C-2305). See also HII.

August 17/11: Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors, Moorestown, NJ, is awarded a $6,986,478 option exercise modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-03-C-5115) for management and engineering services to maintain and modify the design of DDG 51-class combat system compartments and topside arrangements. Required services include program management and operation support, quality assurance, configuration management, ship design integration, fleet lifecycle engineering support, installation support, firmware maintenance, combat system test and evaluation, Navy-furnished material support, special studies, and future-ship integration studies.

Work will be performed in Moorestown, N.J. (37%); Bath, ME (25%); Pascagoula, MO (22%); San Diego, Calif. (6%); Washington, DC (5%); Norfolk, VA (3M); Port Hueneme, CA (1%); and Syracuse, NY (1%). Work is expected to be completed by September 2012. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington Navy Yard, DC, is the contracting activity.

June 15/11: Huntington Ingalls, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS receives a fixed-price-incentive contract for DDG 113 construction, engineering change proposals, and design budgeting – in other words, the main ship contract. The US Navy just won’t tell anyone what the cost is. They’ll only say that “significant work” will be performed in Pascagoula, MS; Cincinnati, OH; Walpole, MA; Burns Harbor, IN; York, PA; and Charlottesville, VA. Work is expected to be complete by July 2017. This contract was not competitively procured by US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-11-C-2309). And yet:

“As this award represents the first DDG 51 class ship to be awarded for the continuation of the DDG 51 class program, and there is a competitive solicitation for [3] additional DDG 51 class ships, the contract award amount and percentages of work to be performed in each location for DDG 113 are considered source selection information (see 41 U.S.C. 2101, et seq., FAR 2.101 and FAR 3.104) and will not be made public at this time.”

We’ve seen a similar pattern recently in the Littoral Combat Ship program, and the net effect is to obscure the program’s major costs from public view. Depending on how long the Navy decides to define the program as competitively solicited, and it has been built in 2 shipyards for a long time now, this could obscure costs for many years. All for a critical component of the American fleet. See also H.I.I. release.

June 15/11: Defense News reports that Saudi Arabia may be shifting their focus away from a fully armed variant of the Littoral Combat Ship, carrying the smaller AN/SPY-1F radar and AEGIS combat system. In its place, they received May 2011 briefings concerning full DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class destroyers displacing about 3 times the tonnage, with ballistic missile defense capability upgrades. The cost trade-off would be about 4-6 modified LCS ships, in exchange for about 2 DDG-51 Flight IIA BMD ships.

The unspoken threat here is, of course, Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs. The unspoken concern is the security of a top-level defense technology, which is critical to defending the USA and its allies, in Saudi hands.

To date, the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke class has never been exported per se, though their AEGIS combat system and accompanying AN/SPY-1D radars have. Japan is the only foreign country with full AEGIS BMD systems, on board their natively produced Kongo Class destroyers. Spanish F100 frigates have participated in US missile defense tests, and are eligible for the full BMD upgrade; Australia’s forthcoming Hobart Class “destroyers” are a close derivative. South Korea’s large KDX-III destroyers could be upgraded to add BMD capabilities, but the smaller SPY-1F radars on Norway’s Fridjhof Nansen Class frigates don’t have that same upgrade path available.

Another possible option for Saudi Arabia would be used US Navy DDG-51 Flight I ships, upgraded with AEGIS BMD. That would allow the Saudis to field more ships for the same money, if an agreement was reached. The costs would lie in questions about hull life and length of service, and the Flight Is’ lack of a helicopter hangar. Helicopters have been shown to be essential defenses against speedboat threats, of the kind that Iran fields in the Persian/Arabian Gulf. Defense News | Information Dissemination.

June 12/11: Looking ahead, Aviation Week reports that DDG-51 Flight III may be hitting design growth problems. Power, cooling, and weight distribution have always been seen as the most likely stumbling blocks to fitting next-generation radars like AMDR on the DDG-51 hull, and:

“As the possible requirements and expectations continue to grow for the proposed DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class Flight III destroyers, so is the concern among defense analysts and contractors that the U.S. Navy may once again be trying to pack too much into one ship… And yet it is the need to field [AMDR] that is driving some of the additional requirements for the Flight IIIs… “Sometimes we get caught up in the glamour of the high technology,” Huntington Ingalls Industries CEO Mike Petters says. “The radars get bounced around. They get changed. Their missions get changed. The technology changes. The challenge is if you let the radars drive the ships, you might not get any ships built.”

June 3/11: BAE Systems Land & Armaments, LP in Minneapolis, MN wins a $54.6 million firm-fixed-price sole-source contract for MK 41 Vertical Launching System mechanical modules and related equipment and services. This contract includes options which, if exercised, would bring its cumulative value to $55.5 million.

A June 22/11 BAE release reveals that the equipment will be installed in HII’s DDG 113 & 114, and Bath Iron Works’ DDG-115. Each ship will receive 2 sets, for a total of 6. Production on the missile launchers will begin in June 2011 and run through 2013, though the contract runs to September 2015. Work will be performed in Aberdeen, SD (45%); Aiken, SC (25%); York, PA (20%); Louisville, KY (5%); and Fridley, MN (5%). Work is expected to be complete by September 2015 (N00024-11-C-5301).

June 2/11: Northrop Grumman spinoff Huntington Ingalls Industries in Pascagoula, MS receives a $25.3 million not-to-exceed contract modification for DDG 113 long lead time materials, which must be bought early to keep the ship on schedule.

Work will be performed in Cincinnati, OH (60%), and Pascagoula, MS (40%), and is expected to be complete by June 2011 (N00024-10-C-2308).

Feb 25/11: Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ receives a $26.7 million contract modification, exercising an option for DDG 114’s Aegis weapon system, including a multi-mission signal processor, and associated special tooling and special test equipment.

Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (87%), and Clearwater, FL (13%), and is expected to be complete by November 2013. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contract.

Dec 20/10: Raytheon Co. in Sudbury, MA receives a $45.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, exercising options for the production of 2 AN/SPY-1Dv transmitter groups and 2 MK 99 Mod 8 fire control systems, for installation on DDG 114 (Northrop Grumman) and DDG 115 (GD). See also May 3/10.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA (88%), and Sudbury, MA (12%), and is expected to be complete by April 2013. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington Navy Yard, DC manages the contract (N00024-09-C-5111).

Oct 14/10: Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ received a $97 million contract modification t finalize production of the DDG 113 Aegis weapon system (including a multi-mission signal processor [MMSP]); plus an additional MMSP for the Surface Combat System Center on Wallops Island, VA; DDG 114-115 advanced procurement efforts; and associated technical services. Note that DDG 115 is being built by General Dynamics Bath Iron Works.

Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (87%), and Clearwater, FL (13%), and is expected to be complete by October 2014 (N00024-09-C-5110).

FY 2010

 

Sept 29/10: BAE Systems in Louisville, KY receives a $7.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for engineering services and supplies to convert and upgrade one 5-inch/ 127mm MK 45 MOD 4 gun mount for the future guided missile destroyer DDG 113.

Work will be performed in Louisville, KY (80%), and Minneapolis, MN (20%), and is expected to be complete by February 2013. $282,340 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/10. The contract was not competitively procured by the Naval Surface Warfare Center’s Port Hueneme Division in Port Hueneme, CA (N00024-07-G-5438).

Aug 23/10: Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Sudbury, MA received a $46.9 million firm-fixed-price contract modification, finalizing a deal to produce an AN/SPY-1D-V radar transmitter group, MK 99 Mod 8 fire control system, and other engineering services in support of DDG 113’s Aegis weapons systems ship set.

Work will be performed in Andover, MA (88%), and Sudbury, MA (12%), and is expected to be complete by February 2014. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington Navy Yard, DC manages these contracts (N00024-09-C-5111).

June 21/10: Philadelphia Gear Corp. announces an $80 million contract to provide main reduction gears for 3 new Arleigh Burke Class destroyers (DDG 113, 114, and 115). Options for additional ships could bring the contract’s eventual total to more than $425 million.

Philadelphia Gear has supplied supplied gears, sprockets and transmissions for US Navy ships since the First World War, and the firm now specializes in the design and manufacture of Main Reduction Gears (MRGs) for front line combat and support vessels. Main reduction gears are used to turn the very fast rotational speed of an engine, such as a DDG-51 type destroyers’ LM2500 turbines, into efficient slower speed rotation of the ships’ propellers. The entire assembly weighs over 100,000 pounds, is rated at at 51,550 shp, and uses a reduction ratio of 21.3746 to 1.

Note that this contract will supply both Northrop Grumman (DDG 113/114) and Bath Iron Works (DDG 115). Earlier this year, Philadelphia Gear announced plans to move its West Coast operations from Lynwood, CA to a renovated facility in Santa Fe Springs, near Los Angeles. The new 120,000 square foot facility is slated to open in Q3 2010, and will house all assembly and test, plus more than 80% of the manufacturing work for the US Navy’s DDG program. Philadelphia Gear Corp. | FedBizOpps solicitation, which explains the exact structure of these main reduction gears.

May 3/10: “Government-Furnished Equipment” remains a substantial share of any warship’s cost. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ receives a $91.3 million firm-fixed-price not-to-exceed modification to a previously awarded contract for advance procurement of the consolidated bill of material and associated labor to support beryllium oxide resistors, phase shifters, surface mount work center production and engineering services support of production of the DDG 114 and 115’s Aegis weapon system.

Aegis refers to both the SPY-1 radars that equip these ships, and the combat system that integrates the ship’s radar and weapons into a single coordinated defensive system. It is so integral to this and related ship classes that they are frequently described in common parlance as “Aegis destroyers/ cruisers/ frigates.”

Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (85%), and Clearwater, FL (15%), and is expected to be complete by December 2011. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington Navy Yard, D.C. manages these contracts (N00024-09-C-5110).

April 22/10: Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS receives an $114 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-10-C-2308), exercising an option for long lead time materials. This includes propulsion gas turbines, generators, controllable pitch propeller, and other components to support construction of DDG 114, the firm’s 30th DDG-51 destroyer.

Work will performed in Cincinnati, OH (32%); Walpole, MA (30%); Charlottesville, VA (11%); Erie, PA (7%); Anaheim, CA (7%); Warminster, PA (2%); and various locations (11%). The effort is anticipated to start immediately, with a base period of performance ending 37 months after contract award. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington Navy Yard, DC manages the contracts. See also Northrop Grumman release.

Dec 2/09: Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS receives a not-to-exceed $170.7 million letter contract for DDG 113 long lead time materials under the DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Class destroyer program. Funds will be used to buy things like propulsion gas turbines, generators, air conditioning systems, controllable pitch propeller and other components, so they’ll be ready in time when construction of DDG 113 begins.

Work is expected to be performed in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Alabama, Indiana, Louisiana., Mississippi, New York, Texas, Virginia and Washington, to be completed by January 2013. This contract was not competitively procured by The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington Navy Yard, DC, since Northrop Grumman had already been picked to build the ship (N00024-10-C-2308).

The formal award of the DDG 113’s main construction contract is expected in 2010. See also Northrop Grumman release.

FY 2009

 

April 7/09: Rep. Gene Taylor [D-MS, Seapower subcommittee chair] announces that the Pentagon has reached agreements with General Dynamics’ Bath Iron Works in Maine, and with Northrop Grumman’s Ingalls Shipyard in Mississippi. Read “Bath, Ingalls Agree to Navy’s Surface Combatant Plans” for details of the arrangements.

April 6/09: US Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates announces his recommendations for the FY 2010 defense budget:

“…in this request, we will include funds to complete the buy of two navy destroyers in FY10. These plans depend on being able to work out contracts to allow the Navy to efficiently build all three DDG-1000 class ships at Bath Iron Works in Maine and to smoothly restart the DDG-51 Aegis Destroyer program at Northrop Grumman’s Ingalls shipyard in Mississippi. Even if these arrangements work out, the DDG-1000 program would end with the third ship and the DDG-51 would continue to be built in both yards.

If our efforts with industry are unsuccessful, the department will likely build only a single prototype DDG-1000 at Bath and then review our options for restarting production of the DDG-51.”

Additional Readings

• US Congressional Research Service (Feb 26/10 update) – Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress

• DID – AMDR Competition: The USA’s Next Dual-Band Radar

• DID – US Destroyers Get a HED: More Power to Them! Hybrid-Electric drive modifications might solve the class’ power problems.

• DII – Serious Dollars for AEGIS Ballistic Missile Defense Modifications (BMD)

• USNI Proceedings Magazine (May 2008) – Where Are the Ballistic-Missile-Defense Cruisers?. The DDG-51s, which would have been called cruisers in a previous age, are becoming that answer. Is that a good response? it could cost to give the Flight IIIs’ radar and combat systems ballistic missile defense capabilities – R&D for the function doesn’t go away when it’s rolled into a separate program. Indeed, if the Flight III cost estimate is true, it raises the question of why that would be a worthwhile use of funds, and re-opens the issue of whether continuing DDG-1000 production and upgrades might make more sense. DoD Buzz.

Additional Readings

• US Congressional Research Service (Feb 26/10 update) – Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress

• DID – AMDR Competition: The USA’s Next Dual-Band Radar

• DID – US Destroyers Get a HED: More Power to Them! Hybrid-Electric drive modifications might solve the class’ power problems.

• DII – Serious Dollars for AEGIS Ballistic Missile Defense Modifications (BMD)

• USNI Proceedings Magazine (May 2008) – Where Are the Ballistic-Missile-Defense Cruisers?. The DDG-51s, which would have been called cruisers in a previous age, are becoming that answer. Is that a good response?

• Naval Technnology – Arleigh Burke Class destroyers

FOOTNOTES

fn1. The FY 2013 budget’s multi-year buy proposal estimates total savings of $1.538 billion, or 8.7% savings over buying the 9 ships with annual contracts. Current destroyers have a hardware cost of $250-350 million each for their Aegis radars and weapons systems, of which “major hardware” is an overwhelming percentage. Even if we use the low-end estimate for current systems, and assume no cost for retrofitting, 3 x $250 million would cut the projected total savings in half, dropping the proposed multi-year buy below the 5% savings threshold. [return]