Army Indirect Fire Protection System and New Guided Missile Program

[bring_it_on]

Tests begin with interceptors for new base-protection missile shield


Army officials have begun a series of tests to determine the performance of various missiles that could function as interceptors under the service's Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2-Intercept program, the service has announced.

The Army wants to use its existing inventory of munitions as part of the program, developing only a new Multi-Mission Launcher to keep costs down. The effort follows the successful deployment of C-RAM systems -- Counter Rocket, Mortar and Artillery -- to Iraq in previous years. The systems alerted deployed soldiers whenever munitions were flying toward their encampments. Connected to a re-purposed Navy Phalanx gun, the C-RAM setup was able to pulverize munitions in mid-air.

Officials fired a Stinger missile from the MML on March 23, according to a service statement. The test with the man-portable, infrared-homing, surface-to-air missile will be followed by additional shots with other munitions in the coming weeks.

"A variety of other missiles are scheduled to be tested as part of an IFPC Inc 2-I Engineering Demonstration at White Sands Missile Range, NM, in the coming weeks," the Army said.

In addition to the MML, the emerging program will feature connectivity to the Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System, or IBCS. That system is meant as the Army's brains for virtually all air-defense efforts of the future, netting together optimal sensors and shooters in a given engagement, officials have said.

A Sentinel radar will scan the surroundings for threats. Working in concert, the components are designed to provide spherical coverage.

According to the Army, the new launcher is mounted on a medium tactical vehicle and can rotate 360-degrees. It boasts 15 tubes that can be filled with a single large interceptor or multiple smaller ones.

Col. Terrence Howard, project manager for cruise missile defense systems in the Army's program executive office for missiles and space, told Inside the Army last fall that tests were also planned with the Tamir missile, which is the interceptor for Israel's Iron Dome program.

Additionally, officials want to see how the AIM-9X "Sidewinder," the Miniature Hit-to-Kill missile, and the Hellfire would perform in an IFPC program. The AIM-9X serves as the "reference" missile against which all other interceptors will be compared, Howard said in an interview with ITA at the annual convention of the Association of the United States Army last October.

The goal of the ongoing program tests is to see if the various missile variants can be used against aerial threats like drones and cruise missiles. A later increment of the program will aim to shoot down rockets, artillery and mortar shells with kinetic interceptors or lasers.

 

[Rickshaw]

Since cluster bomb warheads are being phased out, an enhanced fragmentation warhead was developed. Doesn't look as effective as a CB warhead. I would think a fail safe fuse coupled with Insensitive Munitions explosives would address the "dud" issue that is cited as the justification for

Despite the name of the treaty (CCM) cluster bombs are not actually banned by it. Just cluster bombs with large numbers of dumb bomblets. Weapons with up to 10 bomblets each weighing more than 4kg and with a combined weight of more than 20kg are allowed. That is if they have an electronic fuse, sensor and self destruct capability. Under these rules it is more than feasble to replace DPICM type shells and CEM type bombs with weapons of at least the same lethality and cost. Especially as the sensor and single target engagement capability can just be the fusing system to detonate the bomblet at the right height to achieve the required distribution of effects to destroy the target.

Did the US actually ever accede to the Oslo Process (the so-called CCM)?

United States policy towards cluster munitions

In May 2008, then-Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs Stephen Mull stated that the U.S. military relies upon cluster munitions as an important part of their defense strategy.

"Cluster munitions are available for use by every combat aircraft in the U.S. inventory, they are integral to every Army or Marine maneuver element and in some cases constitute up to 50 percent of tactical indirect fire support. U.S. forces simply cannot fight by design or by doctrine without holding out at least the possibility of using cluster munitions."
— Stephen Mull

U.S. arguments favoring the use of cluster munitions are that their use reduces the number of aircraft and artillery systems needed to support military operations and if they were eliminated, significantly more money would have to be spent on new weapons, ammunition, and logistical resources. Also, militaries would need to increase their use of massed artillery and rocket barrages to get the same coverage, which would destroy or damage more key infrastructures. The U.S. was initially against any CCW negotiations but dropped its opposition in June 2007. Cluster munitions have been determined as needed for ensuring the country's national security interests, but measures are being taken to address humanitarian concerns of their use, as well as pursuing their original suggested alternative to a total ban of pursuing technological fixes to make the weapons no longer viable after the end of a conflict.[89] In July 2012, the U.S. fired at a target area with 36 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) unitary warhead rockets. Analysis indicates that the same effects could have been made by four cluster GMLRS rockets. If cluster weapons cannot be used, the same operation would require using nine times as many rockets, cost nine times as much ($400,000 compared to $3.6 million), and take 40 times as long (30 seconds compared to 20 minutes) to execute.[90] The U.S. suspended operational use of cluster munitions in 2003, and the U.S. Army ceased procurement of GMLRS cluster rockets in December 2008 because of a submunition dud rate as high as 5 percent. Pentagon policy is to have all cluster munitions used after 2018 to have a submunition unexploded ordnance rate of less than 1 percent. To achieve this, the Army has undertaken the Alternative Warhead Program (AWP) to assess and recommend technologies to reduce or eliminate cluster munition failures, as some 80 percent of U.S. military cluster weapons reside in Army artillery stockpiles.[89]

[Source]

 

[marauder2048]

So I guess the answer is no the US did not accede to the CCM Treaty (or the CCW treaty) but has a self-imposed moratorium on the use of cluster munitions with a greater than 1% UXO rate.

 

[marauder2048]

And now on to AIM-9X

http://www.army.mil/article/165134/

 

[bring_it_on]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdVWFXWT8-Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3buvu4hK8oU

 

[Arian]

What happened to this project?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeyIG4v7M5E

 

[marauder2048]

I suspect the decision to go with an active seeker for MHTK killed AI3 since the Army did not want to introduce illuminators which would be required for AI3's (and friends) semi-active front-end.

Speaking of MHTK

Lockheed Martin Mini-Missile Takes Flight in New Demonstration

WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE, N.M., April 5, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- A Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT]-built Miniature Hit-to-Kill (MHTK) interceptor was successfully launched from a Multi-Mission Launcher (MML) in an engineering demonstration on April 4 at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico.

The launch demonstrated the agility and aerodynamic capability of the MHTK missile, which is designed to defeat rocket, artillery and mortar (RAM) targets at ranges greatly exceeding those of current and interim systems. Today's launch advances the program, increasing the level of MHTK integration maturity with the MML.

"Today's global security environment demands agile, close-range solutions that protect soldiers and citizens from enemy rockets, artillery and mortars," said Hal Stuart, Lockheed Martin's MHTK Program Manager. "This test is a critical milestone demonstrating the interceptor's maturity, and we look forward to continuing to build on this success using key data gathered from today's launch."

The MHTK interceptor was designed to be small in size while retaining the range, lethality and reliability of other Hit-to-Kill interceptors. MHTK is just over two feet (61 cm) in length and weighs five pounds (2.2 kg) at launch. The compact footprint of the MHTK allows multiple rounds to be packaged in a single MML tube.

The MML is a key component of the Army's Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2 – Intercept program. The program is designed to provide Army forces protection from cruise missiles, unmanned aircraft systems and RAM threats. The MML is designed to carry and launch a variety of missiles from a single launcher.

The MHTK uses Hit-to-Kill technology, which destroys threats through kinetic energy in body-to-body contact. Hit-to-Kill technology removes the risk of collateral damage seen in traditional blast-fragmentation interceptors. The MHTK interceptor complements other Lockheed Martin Hit-to-Kill missile interceptors by delivering close range lethality with proven success for a true layered defense.

http://lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2016/april/mfc-lockheed-martin-mini-missile-takes-flight-demonstration.html

 

[Arian]

Thanks. That makes sense.

Given this picture posted by LM, is MHTK also being considered as a "self-defense" missile for aerial platforms?

 

[bobbymike]

Deleted post was supposed to go somewhere else . :'(

 

[marauder2048]

http://www.army.mil/article/165692/U_S__Army_successfully_fires_miniature_hit_to_kill_missile_from_new_interceptor_launch_platform/

Mentioned above but now with photo.

 

[bobbymike]

Got to be able to carry a hundred or so MHTK vehicles??

 

[marauder2048]

Got to be able to carry a hundred or so MHTK vehicles??

60, IIRC. 4 MHTK canisters/MML launch tube * 15 MML launch tubes/vehicle.

 

[Moose]

That launcher is the smartest thing the Army has cooked up in a long time. Just keep adapting new payloads.

 

[John21]

That launcher is the smartest thing the Army has cooked up in a long time. Just keep adapting new payloads.

Lets just hope it doesn't go the way of NetFires, SLAMRAAM...etc . glad that the Army is at least trying to get back into the Anti-aircraft/Air-defense game.

 

[sferrin]

That launcher is the smartest thing the Army has cooked up in a long time. Just keep adapting new payloads.

They need to buy that MLRS/SDB combo too.

 

[Moose]

That launcher is the smartest thing the Army has cooked up in a long time. Just keep adapting new payloads.

Lets just hope it doesn't go the way of NetFires, SLAMRAAM...etc . glad that the Army is at least trying to get back into the Anti-aircraft/Air-defense game.

I think they've already avoided that by diversifying so well. NetFires boxes and the SLAMRAAM launcher could be used for other payloads but the Army never went out and actually did it. So when their limited payload died, so did the launcher. This MML already has a track record shooting off a variety of weapons with minimal integration issues. Anyone one of those weapons could die but the MML should live on, one hopes anyway.

 

[bobbymike]

http://aviationweek.com/defense/northrop-mems-guide-weapons-when-gps-denied

 

[bobbymike]

http://nextbigfuture.com/2016/04/lockheed-2-foot-long-missiles-for.html

This graphic says 135 missiles/launcher

 

[TomS]

That's NLOS, which isn't the same as MML.

This article says 4 MHTK in each MML launch cell, for a total of 60 per launcher.:

http://defense-update.com/20150328_mml.html

But the picture illustrating that isn't specifically for MML either.

 

[marauder2048]

Prior press release mentions of the "Low Cost Active Seeker" missile being launched from MML but I don't recall seeing an image.

 

[marauder2048]

MHTK launch video


http://www.waaytv.com/videos?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=12359869

 

[fredymac]

I thought I read somewhere that the original semi-active guided MHTK was around $30K each. As "quantity is a quality of its own" so too is cost. I would hope they keep developing this thing.

 

[marauder2048]

I thought I read somewhere that the original semi-active guided MHTK was around $30K each. As "quantity is a quality of its own" so too is cost. I would hope they keep developing this thing.

IIRC, the goal was $16,000 AUPC for the semi-active version. The bump in AUPC for the active version is hopefully offset by the higher Pk i.e. fewer shots per kill.

 

[bring_it_on]

Lockheed Martin evolves MHTK missile design

Lockheed Martin is expected to conduct a controlled test vehicle flight of an enhanced variant of its Miniature Hit-to-Kill (MHTK) missile in July following its successful launch from the US Army-developed Multi-Mission Launcher (MML) on 4 April at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, as part of Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2-Intercept (IFPC Inc 2-I) Engineering Demonstration.

"The MHTK airframe that was launched from the MML in April is slightly different from that we have flown previously, and was a first-step risk-reduction test for a controlled test flight that we will execute in early July this year with the updated airframe - although not out of the MML," Chris Murphy, Lockheed Martin Missiles & Fire Control business development lead for MHTK, told IHS Jane's .

The original MHTK variant was just under 27 inches (68.6 cm) in length and 40 mm in diameter, with a launch weight of about 2.5 kg (5.5 lb). Murphy said the new MHTK design - which is intended to deliver greater agility - involves an increase in the length of the missile to just over 28 inches (71.1cm), but with no change in weight, and a slightly sharper, more pointed nose.

Four fins have been added to the rear of the missile - forward of and cropped at 45° to the original four fins - with their trailing edge and the leading edge of the original fins more or less aligned. Both sets of rear fins are aligned with the forward canard assembly.

"These modifications improve by 30-40% MHTK's agility to meet anticipated needs for increased capability beyond what was envisioned at the beginning of the S&T programme," Murphy noted.

MHTK is being developed for the US Army's Extended Area Protection and Survivability Integration Demonstration (EAPS ID) programme, which is a science & technology (S&T) initiative designed to advance the development of critical intercept technologies to meet a US Army future requirement for enhanced protection against rocket, artillery, and mortar (RAM) and unmanned aircraft system (UAS) threats. The results of EAPS ID are expected to inform the Army Cruise Missile Defense Systems (CMDS) Program Office's decision on what technologies to progress the IFPC Inc 2-I Block 2 (C-RAM) requirement.

The Engineering Demonstration at White Sands paves the way for the engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) phase of IFPC Inc 2-I Block 1, which will deliver point protection for CUAS and CM Defence (CMD). Elements of this Block include developing the MML, leveraging the AIM-9X Block 2 as the baseline interceptor, leveraging the existing sensor (Sentinel), and leveraging the existing network (Integrated Battle Command System or IBCS).

Block 2 adds a C-RAM capability and includes leveraging the MML and the IBCS, developing a new sensor or extending the capabilities of an existing sensor to support C-RAM engagements, and developing a C-RAM interceptor - potentially MHTK. Block 3 extends the Block 1 CUAS/CMD capability from point defence to area defence.

Lockheed Martin has, to date, funded three MHTK launches from the MML. In its original configuration, MHTK was initially launched from an MML tube during tests at the Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division, China Lake, California, in October 2014. In March 2015, it was fired from a full MML Launch Demonstration Unit at White Sands Missile Range.

During the March/April IFPC Inc 2-I Engineering Demonstration - which included MML launches of the Raytheon AIM-9X and the Lockheed Martin AGM-114 Longbow Hellfire Missiles at White Sands, and an FIM-92 Stinger at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida - the third launch from a fully networked MML demonstrated the updated MHTK's mechanical, electrical, and software integration with the launcher, and its ability to work as part of an integrated air and missile defence network, Murphy said.

Lockheed expects to wrap up the EAPS ID S&T programme before September - following an MHTK controlled test vehicle flight in July - "At which point we will have an updated airframe that has greater agility and manoeuvrability than our original airframe, and [MHTK] components matured to an advanced TRL [technology readiness level] 6," said Murphy.

Pending an army decision on an IFPC Inc 2-I Block 2 requirement, however, the company will continue investing in the development of the missile, with tests in the laboratory and flight tests to demonstrate the interceptor's maturity, he said. This includes determining and demonstrating the best guidance options to meet the army's requirement.

Murphy said that MHTK was designed to allow integration of different seekers, to complement the operational requirement. The company initially integrated a semi-active (RF) seeker, which was the main focus of the EAPS ID programme, although the army's Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center also funded a feasibility investigation for an active seeker in the same form factor. Lockheed is continuing to mature this on internal investment funding, while in parallel evaluating integration of a semi-active laser (SAL) for use with a third-party designator source, and an imaging infrared seeker in the same form factor.

"The SAL seeker has been matured up to the point that it is ready to be flight tested, but the imaging seeker is not quite as mature yet," Murphy said.

Murphy said the company has tested each of these seeker types but will focus on the semi-active RF seeker guidance for MHTK in the near term. "We had an intercept flight test with the semi-active RF seeker back in July 2014, and we learned a lot from that. We will conduct a second company-funded intercept flight test with the semi-active RF seeker in November against a RAM target, while we complete development of the active seeker."

While the army's prospective IFPC Inc 2-I Block 2 requirement is the principal mechanism to advance MHTK into a programme of record, the improved agility of the missile and seeker options available offer the potential for other battlefield applications, including equipping UAS, helicopters, or light aircraft, or as a shoulder-launched capability for operations in urban terrain.

"To do a C-RAM job is a lot different from launching from an air platform, but if you take that same airframe, and for the most part the same components, and simply change the seeker, that's something that a lot of people are interested in," Murphy said.

"There is already interest in other applications - including shoulder launched - and we have responded to interest from the aviation community to launch [MHTK] off army aviation platforms. We are working with the army to understand what they would like to see in terms of capability. I think we will continue to see interest not just from the army, but other services, as we progress the missile design and testing."

 

[Arian]

So has MHTK actually engaged any targets in tests yet?

 

[bring_it_on]

Israeli Interceptor Launched From US System Destroys Target

WASHINGTON — The US Army has launched a number of different types of missiles from its new Multi-Mission Launcher (MML), developed entirely by the service, but last week marks the first time a foreign interceptor was tested with the system.

An Israeli Tamir interceptor was fired from the MML on April 14 at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, and destroyed an unmanned aircraft system target as part of a bigger effort to demonstrate Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2-Intercept (IFPC Inc. 2-I), according to an Army statement released Wednesday.

The IFPC Inc. 2-I is intended to defeat UAS, cruise missiles, rockets, artillery and mortars.

The Tamir missile is the interceptor for the Israel-US-developed Iron Dome air defense system that is deployed in Israel and is used to protect the country from incoming rockets, artillery and mortars.

The Israeli and US governments have a co-development and production agreement to produce parts for Iron Dome and build the interceptors. Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Raytheon are the co-producers for the program. About 55 percent of the work is done in the US while the remaining work is done in Israel.While the US does not use the Tamir missile in any of its own systems, proving its functionality with a US launcher signals potential consideration for its use by the US military down the road.

The Army has also successfully launched Lockheed Martin's Longbow Hellfire, as well as Raytheon's AIM-9X Sidewinder, Stinger and miniature hit-to-kill missiles.The MML, mounted on a medium tactical vehicle, is being developed internally by the Army and represents the first development of a major program by the government industrial base in more than 30 years, the service said.

The Army spent $119 million to build the prototypes, which includes owning the technical data rights. The cost of developing the system outside of the Army would have been about three times as much, according to information obtained during a tour with the acting Army secretary last month of the Aviation & Missile Research Development & Engineering Command (AMRDEC) at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, where one of the MMLs was on display.

The launcher, which consists of 15 tubes, which can hold either a single large interceptor or multiple smaller interceptors, can rotate 360 degrees and elevate from zero to 90 degrees, according to the Army.

The launcher’s open-system architecture allows it to interface with the Army’s air and missile defense Integrated Battle Command System (IBCS) Engagement Operations Center to support and coordinate target engagements. IBCS will be “the brains” of the service’s future air and missile defense system with the capability of stitching a variety of radars, launchers and interceptors together.

The IFPC Inc 2-I is a joint effort between AMRDEC and the Army’s Program Executive Office for Cruise Missile Defense Systems' (CMDS) project office.

The Army plans to build six more MMLs in the engineering and manufacturing development phase at Letterkenny Army Depot in Pennsylvania.

 

[bobbymike]

Army is tasked to weigh new missiles forbidden under U.S.-Russia treaty

April 21, 2016

Lawmakers have adopted legislation tasking the Army to envision fielding new missile types currently banned under a landmark disarmament treaty with Russia.

Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) introduced an amendment to that effect to the fiscal year 2017 defense authorization bill during an April 21 meeting of the House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee. Members approved the measure by voice vote. The subcommittee's mark now stands to be approved at an April 27 full committee hearing.

Forbes wants the ground service's Training and Doctrine Command to study the “potential military benefits” of conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. Such weapons are prohibited under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, signed in 1987 by the then-leaders of the Cold War foes, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev.

Before the agreement, the Army had nuclear-tipped Pershing II missiles stationed in West Germany. This sort of weapon came to symbolize the hair-trigger tensions between the superpowers, as their use would have given each side little to no warning.

Training and Doctrine Command is where the Army typically studies new warfighting concepts. Its officials have been involved in developing ideas toward what former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel dubbed a new kind of “coastal artillery” that could be deployed to U.S.-friendly nations in the Asia-Pacific region to keep China in check.

One new Army weapon still in the conceptual stage, the Long-Range Precision Fires missile, has a self-imposed range cap of 499 kilometers, as Army officials have repeatedly emphasized.

The Virginia congressman's amendment text cites Cold War-era precedents of U.S. intermediate-range weapons, including the Pershing II and the Air Force's Gryphon cruise missile, a tactical nuclear strike weapon based on the Navy's ship-launched Tomahawk.

While the United States has stuck to the INF Treaty and dismantled the arms, Forbes argues, the State Department has deemed Russia in violation because of a ground-launched cruise missile with prohibited performance characteristics. China is not party to the agreement at all.

“As was the case in previous years, in 2015, the United States again raised concerns with Russia on repeated occasions in an effort to resolve U.S. concerns,” reads the State Department's 2016 report on international compliance with various arms control agreements. “The United States will continue to pursue resolution of U.S. concerns with Russia.”

In a back-and-forth with Rep. John Garamendi (D-CA) during the markup hearing, Forbes played up the Russian noncompliance and framed his amendment as preparation for a time when the treaty is no longer honored by either side. Merely studying the issue would “send a message to the Russians,” Forbes argued.

“The committee is interested in ascertaining whether conventional land-based surface-to-surface missiles would have military value to the United States, or to its allies, as a means of promptly striking time-sensitive and other high-value targets, as well as denying enemy use of adjacent waters,” the amendment text reads.

The committee's position, it adds, is that such weapons could help improve the U.S. position in “potential long-term military competitions.” That verbiage is typically code for the new arms race with Russia and China.

Notably, the Forbes amendment wants the Army study to be “resource-unconstrained.” Still, the report, due to Congress by April 1, 2017, must include information about cost estimates.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Even Congress has realised that the INF treaty is dead and buried, though they are still a trifle reluctant to just come out and say it. The State Department on the other hand, well denial is still a river in Egypt in so far as they are concerned...

 

[bobbymike]

Even Congress has realised that the INF treaty is dead and buried, though they are still a trifle reluctant to just come out and say it. The State Department on the other hand, well denial is still a river in so far as they are concerned...

Especially in the SCS where Chinese MRBM and IRBM out number us hundreds to zero. US should declare or re-negotiate the treaty for non-nuclear systems.

 

[sferrin]

Even Congress has realised that the INF treaty is dead and buried, though they are still a trifle reluctant to just come out and say it. The State Department on the other hand, well denial is still a river in so far as they are concerned...

Especially in the SCS where Chinese MRBM and IRBM out number us hundreds to zero. US should declare or re-negotiate the treaty for non-nuclear systems.

Without bringing the rest of the world into it we'd just be tying our own hands (not that we haven't been dumb enough to do that in the past). China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Russia, India. . .

 

[Rickshaw]

Even Congress has realised that the INF treaty is dead and buried, though they are still a trifle reluctant to just come out and say it. The State Department on the other hand, well denial is still a river in so far as they are concerned...

Especially in the SCS where Chinese MRBM and IRBM out number us hundreds to zero. US should declare or re-negotiate the treaty for non-nuclear systems.

Without bringing the rest of the world into it we'd just be tying our own hands (not that we haven't been dumb enough to do that in the past). China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Russia, India. . .

Two of those nations are at least nominal allies of the USA the last time I checked... :

 

[jsport]

Even Congress has realised that the INF treaty is dead and buried, though they are still a trifle reluctant to just come out and say it. The State Department on the other hand, well denial is still a river in so far as they are concerned...

Especially in the SCS where Chinese MRBM and IRBM out number us hundreds to zero. US should declare or re-negotiate the treaty for non-nuclear systems.

Without bringing the rest of the world into it we'd just be tying our own hands (not that we haven't been dumb enough to do that in the past). China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Russia, India. . .

Two of those nations are at least nominal allies of the USA the last time I checked... :

Point taken, as we welcome the age of succinct yes but no and no but yes answers amoung frenemies

 

[marauder2048]

Counter-Drone Prototype Put to Test at Army NIE

Jen Judson, Defense News

FORT BLISS, Texas — A prototype to counter unmanned aircraft systems (C-UAS) using capabilities already in the Army inventory is
now being put to the test at the service’s Network Integration Evaluation (NIE).

The NIE is a soldier-led evaluation that assesses how to integrate programs of record into and progress the Army’s tactical network.
The evaluation, set to take place at Fort Bliss, Texas, over two weeks starting at the beginning of May, includes testing how well the
C-UAS Mobile Integrated Capability (CMIC) works within the network and how it fares in the hands of soldiers.

The Army acknowledges the UAS threat will only grow as the systems become increasingly affordable and can be obtained through
a few simple clicks on the Internet.

“We see that as kind of a poor man’s air force,” Michael Cochran, the Fires liaison officer at Fort Bliss, told Defense News April 26 as
the NIE prepared to kick off.

Using the C-UAS CMIC, "we can put a capability in soldiers’ hands using existing equipment that they have, so really what we are doing is we
are taking existing programs of record and repurposing it to give the ability to counter those UAS,” he said.

To make its prototype, the Army selected a vehicle already used by the service’s fire support teams, the Q-53 Counterfire Target Acquisition Radar System and
the Lightweight Laser Designator Rangefinder (LLDR).

The only piece of new equipment is Northrop Grumman’s Venom mast, which transmits Q-53 radar information and supports the LLDR.

The Army added the capability to track air vehicle threats to the Q-53 radar, which traditionally tracks rockets, artillery and mortars.

The radar will detect a threat, send a signal to the vehicle — through the mast, up to the LLDR — which will slew on the target.
The system is connected to the Army’s command and control systems. A soldier can then decide how to take out the target, according to Cochran.

The Army’s C-UAS CMIC system is an example of what Pentagon officials and members of Congress alike want to see more —
using what it has in innovative ways and taking the initiative to rapidly develop prototypes.



Thornberry Markup Promotes Prototyping, Experimentation

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Mac Thornberry’s fiscal 2017 markup of the defense policy bill proposes giving each service
the ability through dedicated funding to experiment more with prototypes and rapidly deploy weapon system components and other technologies
without requiring those programs to be tied to existing major programs.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/show-daily/aaaa/2016/04/28/counter-uas-prototype-put-test-nie/83638706/

Cool that they (re)activated Q-53's air vehicle tracking capability. LLDR could be used to guide the SAL version of MHTK, Hellfire Romeo, JAGM etc.

 

[marauder2048]

And the above article has been updated to reflect the Q-50 rather than Q-53.

 

[fredymac]

Video of Tamir launch. Looks like a case of more missile than box.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeDfoUscJdQ

 

[fredymac]

Summary report of test status.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGatEpNVU9g

 

[bobbymike]

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/revealed-us-armys-shield-against-missiles-rockets-mortars-16505

 

[bring_it_on]

Army taps Raytheon, Baylor University to develop elements for Next-Generation Radar


The Army has awarded a pair of grants for advance research on technologies for its planned next-generation radar, tapping Raytheon and Baylor University to develop modular building blocks that could be easily plugged into a future sensor system that is not yet a program of record but the service envisions fielding around 2030.

The Army Research Laboratory has formed collaborative alliances with Raytheon -- a major supplier of U.S. military radar systems -- and Baylor University’s School of Engineering and Computer Science to fabricate and demonstrate modular building blocks for a next-generation radar system. The system will be a multimode air-defense sensor.

"The research to be performed under this action will tap into external high-risk, high-payoff approaches that will enhance our in-house multimode scalable investigation for Air Defense and Counter Rocket And Mortar (C-RAM) applications," according to the Army Research Laboratory.

The Army has tapped Raytheon to develop a module dubbed SAMFET -- Scalable, Agile, Multimode, Front End Technology -- as part of the 24-month cooperate research project.

"NGR will enhance radar-reliant Air Defense and Counter Rocket and Mortar system performance, particularly in portable configurations such as hand-held, vehicle-mounted and airborne deployments," Raytheon said in a July 11 announcement of the project. "Raytheon will work with ARL to explore new approaches for the design and fabrication of modular components that will fit into NGR's open architecture, offering processing flexibility, agility and efficiency across radar bands."

Raytheon plans to leverage its work on gallium nitride (GaN) semiconductor technology -- which allows for higher-power density than previous semiconductors -- such as the new Air and Missile Defense Radar the company is developing for the Navy's next variant of the Arleigh-Burke class guided missile destroyers.

Raytheon's work to ready GaN for military production earned the defense contractor high marks from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, according to the company.

GaN can efficiently amplify high-power signals at microwave frequencies, enabling radars "to operate up to five times more powerfully than they would with older semiconductor technology, and without overheating," according to a company statement.

As part of this project, the Army has awarded Baylor University an $850,000 grant for work on electrical and computer engineering, particularly its work on micro-electrical mechanical systems (MEMS), devices that allow circuitry to change quickly. The circuits will use algorithms developed at Baylor, according to the university.

"Unlike conventional radar, next-generation radar transmitters coexist with wireless communication devices using the same airwaves and can adjust themselves on the fly and allow for adaptation to battlefield conditions," Charles Baylis, associate professor of electrical and computer engineering and director of the Wireless and Microwave Circuits and Systems Program at Baylor, said in a statement.

The Baylor research will consider current radar broadcast bands, which scientists say are both contested and congested. "Next-generation radar will come from a much smaller, more flexible device that is able to run operational rings around today’s radar and will help make cellular devices and radar best friends forever," said Robert Marks, a Baylor electrical and computer engineering processor.

This effort is funded through applied research in the Army's sensors and electronic survivability projects portfolio. The Multi-Mode Air Defense Radar research "supports the current and future technical challenges associated with air defense radar technology" including "analyzing current and emerging RF spoofing, RF jamming, and RF signature management technologies to determine their impact on the performance of air defense radars," according to the Army's FY-17 budget request.

Additional projects include electromagnetic modeling, RF measurements, experiments to identify mitigation techniques for spoofing and jamming, and identifying useful signature management technologies, according to the budget request. "This will also include research in electronic devices, sub-assembly design, and laboratory experiments to advance the state-of-the-art of air defense radars operating in contested electronic environments," the

 

[fredymac]

MTHK Flight Test

"WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE, N.M., Aug. 2, 2016 –Lockheed Martin’s (NYSE: LMT) Miniature Hit-to-Kill (MHTK) interceptor was successfully launched in an engineering demonstration at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. The demonstration on Friday, July 29, was part of the U.S. Army’s Aviation and Missile Research Development and Engineering Center’s (AMRDEC) Extended Area Protection and Survivability (EAPS) program."

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2016/august/mfc-080216-lockheed-martin-mighty-mini-missile-completes--flight-test.html

 

[bring_it_on]

....