Patriot SAM replacement

[Leftync]

US Army plan to replace Patriot interceptors gets a jolt in FY23 budget request

The Army is getting serious about a future interceptor for its next-generation Integrated Air-and-Missile Defense System that is more capable of defeating complex threats like hypersonic weapons, according to a review of FY23 budget documents.

www.defensenews.com

Isreali Stunner missiles are 1/10th price of MSE. The Tamir is 1/30th. The MSE is amazing capability but the cost is staggering.
I don't think SM6 is the answer to Armys air defense issues. at $6 mill a piece, its size making it extremely immobile and they can only produce 125 a year. The USN needs every one of those. And this does not even take into account foreign sales. It has does not have a very good record against anything but SRBM. Probably a lot of this is it not being HTK. With the low cost of ballistic missiles a $6 million SM6 or $4 mill MSE just puts you on the wrong side of cost. You can lose a war many different ways. Going broke or being unable to produce missiles fast enough are two of them.

 

[Moose]

They're not having problems with the radar itself, at least not that have been reported to date, and TPY-4 is less mobile than LTAMDS. I think they're still having trouble getting the smaller "secondary" arrays, which give each trailer 360 degree coverage, integrated in a satisfactory way. I imagine the worst-case for this system is to delete those, or place them on a secondary trailer, and work around the problems that creates.

Wouldn't that kinda defeat the purpose of a new radar? I thought the 360 degree coverage was one of the main reasons for it?

Ghost Eye is an GaN AESA, Multiband, mutli-mode radar designed specifically to plug into IBCS. It's going to be a hell of an upgrade whichever way the secondary panels go.

 

[Cordy]

They're not having problems with the radar itself, at least not that have been reported to date, and TPY-4 is less mobile than LTAMDS. I think they're still having trouble getting the smaller "secondary" arrays, which give each trailer 360 degree coverage, integrated in a satisfactory way. I imagine the worst-case for this system is to delete those, or place them on a secondary trailer, and work around the problems that creates.

Wouldn't that kinda defeat the purpose of a new radar? I thought the 360 degree coverage was one of the main reasons for it?

Ghost Eye is an GaN AESA, Multiband, mutli-mode radar designed specifically to plug into IBCS. It's going to be a hell of an upgrade whichever way the secondary panels go.

Mobility think the opposite TPY-4 is more mobile than the LTAMDS, brochure says it can be transported by a C-130 whereas as far as know no similar claim is made for the LTAMDS and from pic it looks too large to fit inside a C-130?

Problems with the LTAMDS, the only report have seen by Jen Judson Mar 17 Defense News

- The Army’s LTAMDS has also struggled through development and has seen several schedule slips. Raytheon Technologies ran into problems building its first prototypes designed to replace the Patriot air defense radars. The LTAMDS program had to adjust the schedule based on system integration challenges and supply chain issues caused by the coronavirus pandemic. As of last fall, the service was still aiming to deliver four of them by the end of 2023.

As far as know Ghost Eye/LTAMDS is not a multiband radar, purely S-band using the same 2 foot cubic S-band RMA building blocks as used in the various SPY-6 radars.

 

[totallyaverage]

LTAMDS is a C-band radar.

 

[Forest Green]

 

[Moose]

LTAMDS uses primarily C-band for search and track, but communicates to it's missiles with X & S-band from the same panel.

 

[DrRansom]

Has there been any move to include tactical mobility for the Patriot-replacement? Aka shoot and scoot?

 

[Forest Green]

Has there been any move to include tactical mobility for the Patriot-replacement? Aka shoot and scoot?

It's already towable, so if it's hooked up, that's shoot and scoot.

 

[Spinmaster]

US Army plan to replace Patriot interceptors gets a jolt in FY23 budget request

The Army is getting serious about a future interceptor for its next-generation Integrated Air-and-Missile Defense System that is more capable of defeating complex threats like hypersonic weapons, according to a review of FY23 budget documents.

www.defensenews.com

Isreali Stunner missiles are 1/10th price of MSE. The Tamir is 1/30th. The MSE is amazing capability but the cost is staggering.
I don't think SM6 is the answer to Armys air defense issues. at $6 mill a piece, its size making it extremely immobile and they can only produce 125 a year. The USN needs every one of those. And this does not even take into account foreign sales. It has does not have a very good record against anything but SRBM. Probably a lot of this is it not being HTK. With the low cost of ballistic missiles a $6 million SM6 or $4 mill MSE just puts you on the wrong side of cost. You can lose a war many different ways. Going broke or being unable to produce missiles fast enough are two of them.

Quite some problems here, to start with the army has never claimed that it plans to use the sm-6 in its air defence role. And as multiple MDA test shots has proven, wirh the latest just took place in April, it has a impressive capability against at least MRBMs, with the only failure took place in 2021 when two were fired simultaneously, each at a separate MRBM. Secondly I doubt the price number you have given for sm-6. According to 2019 pentagon budgetary request the price was below 4 million per shot. Furthermore, there will be a major ramp up in production rate of sm-6 in fy2024, cost for the expansion of its production facility is included in procurement cost. So number of sm-6s produced a year will no longer be 125. And finally I have seen no evidence that Raytheon outproduces pac-3 with their stunners. Pac-3 missile charges abt 2m$ per shot while an arrow-2 costs you only 1m$ with capability comparable to that of the THAAD. So I'm afraid that's simply how Israeli systems are sold.

 

[NMaude]

Something that I've wondered about from time to time is why the MIM-104 box-type launch canisters when originally back in the early 1970s the early flight-test prototypes were fired from cylindrical launch-canisters? You can see it in copies of "Jane's All the World aircraft" books back then.

 

[Forest Green]

PAC-2 GEM-T shot Kinzhal down?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1656021067129921547

View: https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1656021067129921547?s=20

https://twitter.com/x/status/1656289377129988096

View: https://twitter.com/ronzheimer/status/1656289377129988096?s=20

 

[Cordy]

US Army plan to replace Patriot interceptors gets a jolt in FY23 budget request

The Army is getting serious about a future interceptor for its next-generation Integrated Air-and-Missile Defense System that is more capable of defeating complex threats like hypersonic weapons, according to a review of FY23 budget documents.

www.defensenews.com

Isreali Stunner missiles are 1/10th price of MSE. The Tamir is 1/30th. The MSE is amazing capability but the cost is staggering.
I don't think SM6 is the answer to Armys air defense issues. at $6 mill a piece, its size making it extremely immobile and they can only produce 125 a year. The USN needs every one of those. And this does not even take into account foreign sales. It has does not have a very good record against anything but SRBM. Probably a lot of this is it not being HTK. With the low cost of ballistic missiles a $6 million SM6 or $4 mill MSE just puts you on the wrong side of cost. You can lose a war many different ways. Going broke or being unable to produce missiles fast enough are two of them.

Quite some problems here, to start with the army has never claimed that it plans to use the sm-6 in its air defence role. And as multiple MDA test shots has proven, wirh the latest just took place in April, it has a impressive capability against at least MRBMs, with the only failure took place in 2021 when two were fired simultaneously, each at a separate MRBM. Secondly I doubt the price number you have given for sm-6. According to 2019 pentagon budgetary request the price was below 4 million per shot. Furthermore, there will be a major ramp up in production rate of sm-6 in fy2024, cost for the expansion of its production facility is included in procurement cost. So number of sm-6s produced a year will no longer be 125. And finally I have seen no evidence that Raytheon outproduces pac-3 with their stunners. Pac-3 missile charges abt 2m$ per shot while an arrow-2 costs you only 1m$ with capability comparable to that of the THAAD. So I'm afraid that's simply how Israeli systems are sold.

FWIW the Army FY24 Justification Book for missile procurement quotes for Patriot MSE quotes Gross/Weapon System Unit Cost as $5.3 million for 230 an increase from FY23 figure of $4.1 million and drops back to $4.2 million in FY25.

The March '23 FY24 Navy Justification Book for SM-6 Blk 1A/1B quotes Gross/Weapon System Unit Cost as $7.8 million for 125, a large increase from FY23 figure of $4.6 million, presuming cost of funding increasing production capacity to 300 per year by FY28, the FY 2023 included the final funding investment required to increase the SM-6 Block IA production capacity rate up to 200 missiles by FY 2026.

 

[bring_it_on]

Isreali Stunner missiles are 1/10th price of MSE.

Point to an actual source with verifiable data. I recall all the media claims of the Tamir cost before it was sold anywhere where the numbers could be documented. When it was sold, it turned out that the actual unit cost was 3-4 times what was being claimed. Once we have transparent cost data on it we can then go into demonstrable claims on performance relative to the MSE. Interceptors are built to a requirement. The Army transitioned from a $2MM CRI to $3.8MM MSE because it needed that additional capability of a faster more agile missile capable of defeating MRBM level threats at far greater keep out distances.

and they can only produce 125 a year.

They cannot only produce 125 a year. They can produce as many as we want a year as long as we facilitaize for that rate. Which is exactly what they are doing with a ramp to 300 / year. You can increase that, or increase the pace of the ramp if you have the demand. As mentioned by others, SM-6 in the Army will not be used for Air Defense but for maritime strike. Most of those Mid range capability will be with the Tomahawk. The Lower Tier Future Interceptor, and not the SM-6 will eventually replace the MSE missile in Army budgets probably around the turn of the decade or early 2030s..

With the low cost of ballistic missiles a $6 million SM6 or $4 mill MSE just puts you on the wrong side of cost.

Trading MSE for 10 Tamir does the exact same. The Tamir is useless for that role, and the Stunner probably lacks in several areas as well. Yes there is a cost imposition with theater ballistic missiles..but it isn't as simple as a salvo exchange. It is a combination of that, and your tactics and other capabilties that help out. ADA forces will not simply sit and play catch all day for us to use a very simplistic model of exchange ratios and costs. And it may well be worth the cost in some cases to keep an air-base open by having a 2 or 3 to one cost ratio because the alternatives cost even more. You are not going to go out and be able to field a sub $400K interceptor that can shoot down a medium ranged ballistic missile with the envelopes and performance the Army or Navy are interested in for their systems.

 

[bring_it_on]

They're not having problems with the radar itself, at least not that have been reported to date, and TPY-4 is less mobile than LTAMDS. I think they're still having trouble getting the smaller "secondary" arrays, which give each trailer 360 degree coverage, integrated in a satisfactory way. I imagine the worst-case for this system is to delete those, or place them on a secondary trailer, and work around the problems that creates.

They will not delete those and I believe those problems are delay causing but not show stoppers. The Army still plans to get through those and start an OA soon.

 

[Cordy]

Re LTAMDS FY2024 Justification Book shows funding for first buy of four is FY2025 at $136.5 million each, presuming first delivery FY2026?

 

[bring_it_on]

Re LTAMDS FY2024 Justification Book shows funding for first buy of four is FY2025 at $136.5 million each, presuming first delivery FY2026?

Thats through procurement accounts. The Army has been buying LTAMDS through R&D for a couple of years consistent with its MTA path for the program. That's how they have the first radar in hand with Raytheon delivering, I think, three more this year with some of those three possibly having been delivered already (Raytheon had 1 with the Army and 3 in testing or build completion at their facility as of last year). Those will be with the 3-43 and is and will continue to participate in testing culminating with two Operational assessments /live fires in FY-2024 and 25 and then will transition to EOC with 3-43 sometime in the 2024-2026 timeframe.

Further, in FY-2024, the Army has asked for five additional sensors, three destined for Guam Defense, and 2 to enter IOT&E. Funding for hardware then transitions to procurement accounts. Those will likely deliver closer to FY26 supporting timelines for building out the capability at Guam. The FY25 procurement radars will likely be delivered in FY27.

The first radar is at WSMR, being put through its paces with its primary antenna. Army recently shot a TBM target as well to support its testing.

I wouldn't take the cost of initial LTAMDS (operational prototypes) as the cost over the program. They should be in the $80-$90 million range once they open the program up and are producing closer to the 1 radar a month that the original program was capable of producing at the MA facility. I think we can expect to reach those unit costs around FY-2028-2030 timeframe when Army and FMS orders will allow for those volumes.

SMDC launches economical target for radar tests

The Economical Target-2 is a ballistic missile target designed to fly a ballistic flight path and demonstrate defensive protection capability, launched from White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, April 26. The purpose of the flight was to serve as a search track for the Lower Tier Air and...

www.dvidshub.net

 

[NMaude]

The article said the ET-2 rockets are made from demilitarised army rocket-motors but it doesn't say what the rocket-motors are from, does anyone know what missile they're from?

 

[TomS]

The article said the ET-2 rockets are made from demilitarised army rocket-motors but it doesn't say what the rocket-motors are from, does anyone know what missile they're from?

Pretty sure they're surplus Patriots. ET-2 appears to be SMDC's name for Improved Malemute sounding rocket.

improved Malemute rocket motor

improved Malemute rocket motor

forum.nasaspaceflight.com

Malemute

Gunter's Space Page - Information on Launch vehicles, Satellites, Space Shuttle and Astronautics

space.skyrocket.de

 

[NMaude]

Surplus MIM-104 rocket-motors? Then the ET-2 will be coming off the launch rail with a LOT of acceleration.

 

[Cordy]

Re LTAMDS FY2024 Justification Book shows funding for first buy of four is FY2025 at $136.5 million each, presuming first delivery FY2026?

I wouldn't take the cost of initial LTAMDS (operational prototypes) as the cost over the program. They should be in the $80-$90 million range once they open the program up and are producing closer to the 1 radar a month that the original program was capable of producing at the MA facility. I think we can expect to reach those unit costs around FY-2028-2030 timeframe when Army and FMS orders will allow for those volumes.

The FY2024 Army Justification Book shows following procurement numbers and costs for LTAMDS out to 2028 for total of 22
'24 - 0 $6.6 M for Interim Contractor Support
'25 - 4 $136.5 M ea.
'26 - 5 $127.6 M ea.
'27 - 5 $127.7 M ea.
'28 - 8 $134.8 M ea.

 

[bring_it_on]

The radar has still not transitioned to production (its being executed as a MTA) so don't take the FYDP data too seriously. Once it does that, we will know a little bit more and once they do begin reaching the sort of rate production numbers needed to begin replacing the PATRIOT installed base, we should see it in the price range I predicted earlier. These are early days for the program, and unless there are alternatives for the global PATRIOT radar installed base, RTX would need to go to something like a radar a month production rate. With that, the cost should become a lot less than the current cost of operational prototypes produced at a rate of about a radar a quarter or even less. Even then, it will still likely cost 2-3 times that of a rotating medium ranged radars of similar vintage given its performance, three arrays etc but it should be a lot less than what the prototypes cost which is too be expected given where the program is at this stage.

 

[Cordy]

Anyone know anything about ALPS, being a passive sensor it seems too good to be true, planned as part of Guam Air Defense System
"Army Long-Range Persistent Surveillance (ALPS) is a passive sensor that provides long range surveillance against Cruise Missile (CM), Fixed Wing (FW), Rotary Wing (RW), and Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) threats."
PE 0604741A / Air Defense Command, Control and Intelligence - Eng Dev

 

[NASA]

Anyone know anything about ALPS, being a passive sensor it seems too good to be true, planned as part of Guam Air Defense System
"Army Long-Range Persistent Surveillance (ALPS) is a passive sensor that provides long range surveillance against Cruise Missile (CM), Fixed Wing (FW), Rotary Wing (RW), and Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) threats."
PE 0604741A / Air Defense Command, Control, and Intelligence - Eng Dev

There's some info on it within this thread, you can search for it. It is still hard to make out what exactly the ALPS system is, the pictures we have of it are blurry as hell. My best guess is that it is an EO/IR turret that can be extended pretty high (60 meters perhaps).

 

[bring_it_on]

ALPS is a passive set of sensors focusing on Cruise Missile defense deployed already in at least two COCOM theaters.

 

[Forest Green]

But how can you passively detect a cruise missile?

 

[TomS]

But how can you passively detect a cruise missile?

Lots of techniques, some of which might even be unclassified.

 

[Firefinder]

But how can you passively detect a cruise missile?

Lots of techniques, some of which might even be unclassified.

Get easier if the thing has any active pinger for say terrian following.

And there is always the fighter IRST type set up as well using passive sensor, like thermal and optical systems.

 

[Cordy]

Breaking Defense June 08 write up of the June '23 GAO Weapon Systems Assessment report on LTAMDS, RDT&E exceeding 5 years limit of MTA rapid prototyping contracts​

For LTAMDS, Cascading Delays​

Like ERCA, the GAO pointed out that the service plans to field six representative LTAMDS radar prototypes by the end of the MTA effort, but development speed bumps mean it will not simply move into a rapid fielding initiative.

The Army “now expects to transition to the major capability acquisition pathway at production,” the GAO wrote.

“Officials cited prototype delivery delays, which drove flight testing delays, as the cause for completing the MTA effort later than planned,” the GAO later added. “Specifically, program officials delayed the delivery of the second prototype due to integration problems with the first prototype. The later delivery delayed all three flight tests in addition to contractor verification, qualification, and ground testing.”

Service leaders signed off on this new acquisition strategy and earlier this year discussed “transition options.” The plan is now to move between the two designations in the first quarter of FY24.

Raytheon is currently producing the LTAMDS, one of the Army’s top 35 modernization priorities. The system poised to replace the Patriot radar system

 

[bring_it_on]

This has been known for at least the last six or so months to those who track the program. There are now finally two LTAMDS at WSMR and the plan is to pick up the pace in CVT and transition to developmental testing this year. 2 to 3 of the remaining four are at Raytheon's test facility with the last couple awaiting modifications. A completely clean sheet sensor within the OTA window was always going to be extremely difficult if not outright impossible. Lockheed saw that and walked away from the ARES and chose an existing Israeli radar derivative. Raytheon pursued and will ultimately field a much better sensor..not to mention leverage the fairly significant investment made through the SPY-6/AMDR effort in the facility, production and sustainment of LTAMDS. It will just take 1-2 years longer which is still years ahead of the original plan had them taking to field something like this..

 

[bring_it_on]

How the U.S. Patriot Missile Became a Hero of Ukraine War

The air-defense system is doing what it was designed for—40 years after it was brought into service.

www.wsj.com

 

[NMaude]

How the U.S. Patriot Missile Became a Hero of Ukraine War

The air-defense system is doing what it was designed for—40 years after it was brought into service.

www.wsj.com

That article is behind a paywall.

 

[bobbymike]

This link works for me

How the U.S. Patriot Missile Became a Hero of Ukraine War

The air-defense system is doing what it was designed for—40 years after it was brought into service.

www.wsj.com

 

[flateric]

"Also known as the Kh-47, the Kinzhal" oh my

 

[NMaude]

"Also known as the Kh-47, the Kinzhal" oh my

I think maybe they meant the NATO designation AS-24 Killjoy.

 

[bring_it_on]

Based on the company’s Army Long Range Persistent Surveillance (ALPS) system, Becker’s team, working with the Leidos Innovations Center, is developing the new Marine Expeditionary Long-range Persistent Surveillance (MELPS) system, a 360-degree field of view sensor that combines digitized antennas and receivers with sophisticated signal processing techniques to provide a persistent, high-quality air picture with no detectable electromagnetic footprint.

Becker said systems like MELPS also address the limitations of current systems because they’re easily transportable and rapidly deployable.

Background: Becker said the underlying technology and hardware designs for ALPS and MELPS have developed over many years on various iterations and prototypes.

• “This new class of sensors is powered by emerging technology like GPU-based high-performance computing that allows them to process a significant workload while minimizing latency, as well as algorithmic advances to process large amounts of sensor data in real time,” he said. “They provide excellent, wide-area surveillance coverage for all classes of air-breathing targets. They perform their missions well in operational environments, and we’ve received very good feedback from our customers and system users.”

Becker, an electrical engineer with a focus on signal processing, said it’s been personally gratifying to see this advanced science become operational in mission settings.

The U.S. Army is currently fielding the ALPS passive sensor overseas in support of air and missile defense, he said.

• “As we speak, we’ve got a dozen systems out there across the world actively feeding the air picture into command-and-control nodes and helping troops stay safe,” he said. “There have been several world events in which our systems have played an important role, including recent events in Eastern Europe.”

The U.S. Army currently has more than 20 systems pending deployment for various Combatant Commands (COCOMs). Leidos systems are also currently supporting the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

• “This technology really matters on a day-to-day basis to our government and military end users,” Becker said. “That’s the whole idea behind a lot of the research and development we do as a company, and to see that come to fruition has certainly been a highlight of my career.”

Leidos is building advanced air defense sensors for the Marines

The Leidos Dynetics Group is developing advanced sensors for the U.S. Marine Corps to detect airborne threats like enemy planes, cruise missiles and unmanned aircraft.

www.leidos.com

 

[Cordy]

How similar is the Hensoldt Twinvis passive radar to ALPS / MELPS, Twinvis mention of 250 km range, do wonder how effectiveit it would be in Guam as it relies on other transmitters to operate which expect limited over the sea.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7Zx7jqszWo&ab_channel=HENSOLDT

 

[bring_it_on]

The Army and MDA have included ALPS as one of the systems integral to the defense of Guam. Its already deployed in PACOM. That should answer any questions as to its performance in the relevant part of the world and conditions. As to how it compares to other systems, no one can answer that question without knowing the exact characteristics and performance of the system. From the looks of it it does appear to be a fairly large fixed/semi-fixed site setup unlike some of the smaller more portable passive systems of Europe.

 

[Forest Green]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1665110773931331584

View: https://twitter.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/1665110773931331584?s=20

 

[jsport]

Neutral nations Austria and Switzerland agree to join European Sky Shield Initiative - Breaking Defense

Switzerland made clear that it will “examine” areas where co-operation can be strengthened, with a plan to specifically address information exchange and training for the US-made Patriot air defense system, of which it ordered five units in June 2021.

breakingdefense.com

 

[Maro.Kyo]

Neutral nations Austria and Switzerland agree to join European Sky Shield Initiative - Breaking Defense

Switzerland made clear that it will “examine” areas where co-operation can be strengthened, with a plan to specifically address information exchange and training for the US-made Patriot air defense system, of which it ordered five units in June 2021.

breakingdefense.com

There were quite a few criticism about ESSI for the lack of actual goal or framework given how grandiose the scheme was supposed to be, but nevertheless it seems like it's going somewhere, at least. Hopefully they can get Italy and France on board as well but that might be too hard with SAMP/T.