Patriot SAM replacement

[marauder2048]

b. Perform required fire control functions in support of the PATRIOT PATRIOT Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) class of missile interceptors at a minimum;

There's a typo in the original FBO RFI: should be PATRIOT/PATRIOT Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3). For a brief second, I thought they were dropping the requirement to support GEM rounds.

As a reference the AN/TPS-80 has an APUC of around $38-$40 Million

Interesting point of comparison but that includes elements beyond the array (comms, power) and the Patriot GaN array that Raytheon
has shown is 40% larger (by area) than the G/ATOR array.

 

[bring_it_on]

True given the nature of the G/ATOR acquisition. The advantage with Raytheon's likely proposal will be that it will leverage the work already done with the configuration 3 upgrade so that would be tough for others to compete against. I guess it all depends upon the other requirements in the accompanying classified document and whether 360 degree capability is sought (couldn't find the March,2015 STAR) as a baseline or as an upgrade.

That 50 million price will be a challenge if they add the two rear arrays as well (together they make up half the front array), if the requirement is for 360 degree capability from the beginning. I guess if the 3delerr holds, it could allow Raytheon the opportunity to lower component cost for GaN.

 

[marauder2048]

True given the nature of the G/ATOR acquisition. The advantage with Raytheon's likely proposal will be that it will leverage the work already done with the configuration 3 upgrade so that would be tough for others to compete against. I guess it all depends upon the other requirements in the accompanying classified document and whether 360 degree capability is sought (couldn't find the March,2015 STAR) as a baseline or as an upgrade.

That 50 million price will be a challenge if they add the two rear arrays as well (together they make up half the front array), if the requirement is for 360 degree capability from the beginning. I guess if the 3delerr holds, it could allow Raytheon the opportunity to lower component cost for GaN.

Agreed. $50 million APUC sounds tight for a new main array and two daughter arrays. I get the impression that there's more an emphasis on exploiting the enhanced range/altitude capability of PAC-3 MSE against the TBM threat so (improved) single sector coverage is sufficient.

At present, IAMD only requires 360 coverage against the non-ballistic threat. If they do in fact bump all of the Sentinels to the AESA configuration you would have a setup where Patriot could "forward pass" to the Sentinels to tackle the 360 ABT threat.

 

[bring_it_on]

I tend to believe this as well, that the IBCS would be the source of the 360 degree capability as opposed to 3 arrays on the primary radar. Although the sentinel cue behind the radar would still require some wizardry in placing a number of radars to cover all possible threats since its still the Patriot radar communicating with the interceptor (unless I have it wrong).

Having said that, I haven't come across the document referenced in the RFI but I'm pretty sure that 360 degree capability (with cruise missiles in mind) has been a desired requirement in a number of documents over the last 10-15 years so it would be strange not to ask for it in this instance (or possessing it not to be a competitive advantage in case competitors show up with that capability). Upgrading the main array to GaN AESA, at least on the sets that have the digital processors and other configuration 3+ changes makes a ton of sense from a cost and timeline perspective. Raytheon can on its own develop the real arrays and market them to those that need that capability. Personally, I'd just buy a smaller number of 3DELRS or G/ATORS to supplement the main array in high stress situations especially when its quite likely that that sensor was designed with Army IBCS in mind.

But from a competition perspective, unless they restrict themselves to the PAC-3 and not the entire family of interceptors this rules out or makes it extremely tough to compete against the legacy radar - upgraded if you are a Lockheed or a Northrop.

 

[bring_it_on]

Army seeks contractor input on Patriot radar successor


The Army is reaching out to industry for a potential upgrade or replacement of its venerable Patriot radar, according to a notice on the Federal Business Opportunities website.

A request for information posted July 6 seeks input on "potential materiel solutions for a Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor (LTAMDS)."

The Army Lower Tier Project Office, within the Program Executive Office Missiles & Space, issued the call for "information on potential materiel solutions that can be utilized to upgrade or replace the Phased Array Tracking Radar to Intercept of Target (PATRIOT) radars fielded by the U.S. Army."

The RFI stipulates a required Technology Readiness Level and Manufacturing Readiness Level of 5, in order to accommodate the Army's planned acquisition strategy. This includes "a Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction (TMRR) phase followed by Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD), production, and fielding phases."

The response date for the RFI is July 28. Submissions will be reviewed on behalf of the LTPO by "a team of subject matter experts from the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research Development and Engineering Center (AMRDEC), Georgia Tech Research Institute (GTRI), University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH), Wyle-CAS, Dynetics and Torch Technologies."

The LTPO, located in Huntsville, AL, will hold an industry day for LTAMDS on July 19 "to address questions submitted by the contractors."

Congress has taken steps to restrict the Army's expenditures for Patriot modernization. The fiscal year 2017 defense policy bill passed by the House imposes conditions on the service's efforts to modernize its lower-tier air and missile defense.

According to the legislation, of the funds authorized for Patriot, "not more than 50 percent may be obligated or expended until" three criteria are met. The Missile Defense Agency director must certify the interoperability of the modernized Patriot with the ballistic missile defense system and other deployed or planned air and missile defense systems. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff must certify that the modernized systems will meet modularity standards established by the geographic combatant commands, as well as warfighter requirements. Additionally, the Army secretary and chief of staff must notify the defense committee whether the requirements for the lower-tier system "are appropriate for acquisition through the Army Rapid Capabilities Office" and outline the terms of a planned competition for the program.

 

[marauder2048]

I tend to believe this as well, that the IBCS would be the source of the 360 degree capability as opposed to 3 arrays on the primary radar. Although the sentinel cue behind the radar would still require some wizardry in placing a number of radars to cover all possible threats since its still the Patriot radar communicating with the interceptor (unless I have it wrong).

It's more of a "remote fire" scenario; i've found the attached graphic (from Young's "Complex Systems Engineering Applications for Future BMC2") to be useful in keeping track of the various IFC schemes.
Sentinel is in the appropriate band to interact with PAC-3 MSE and the Army puts the Sentinel AESA bump ("Sentinel A4") relatively on-par with the new Patriot sensor.

But a C-band 3DELRR that can produce FCQ tracks would be ideal.

 

[bring_it_on]

Thanks for those graphics..It will be interesting to see what happens once the AOA is completed and the program moves to an RFP. Are there any timelines for the AN/MPQ-64 to switch over to an AESA array? I think ultimately, IBCS opens up the sensor requirements to multiple OEM's and multiple solutions. Lockheed has acknowledge that it itself is working on a new X- Band GaN AESA and could also compete in this space.

..

 

[bring_it_on]

US Army declares IOC for Lockheed Martin's PAC-3 MSE

Lockheed Martin's PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhanced (MSE) successfully intercepted a surrogate tactical fighter aircraft target in the final demonstration of the Post Deployment Build (PDB)-8 Patriot developmental test phase.

The programme will now head into the operational test phase in 2017, which will clear the way for fielding of all the PDB-8 capabilities.

Additionally, in early July, the US Army declared initial operational capability (IOC) for MSE, which means the army now has one unit fully equipped with the MSE capability, Scott Arnold, vice president of PAC-3 programmes for Lockheed Martin missiles and fire control, told IHS Jane's on 11 July.

The latest Patriot Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) system test, which took place 8 July, was the fourth and final event associated with the PDB-8 developmental test phase. As part of this test phase, Lockheed Martin delivered a number of new capabilities to MSE, Arnold said.

The software upgrades included: improved guidance software, upgrades to the inertial measurement unit, MSE's seeker, the datalink, as well as upgrades to the ground equipment software, Arnold said.

He was unable to provide any specific information on the upgrades.

Arnold added, "We put [in] new capabilities to be able to give overmatch capability to the latest threats that we see, both for tactical ballistic missiles, aircraft, or air-breathing targets and cruise missiles."

Lockheed Martin is also upgrading the PAC-3 launcher to the 903 configuration, which will enable the army to shoot the MSE.

In the 8 July test, MSE was flown against a QF-4, which is a remotely piloted, simulated, fixed-wing aircraft target.

"The target was aerodynamically controlled and manoeuvring," Arnold said.

For this test event the equipment was manned by soldiers from the 11th Air Defense Artillery Brigade's 3rd Battalion, 43rd Air Defense Artillery Regiment, making it the first time an army unit has fired an MSE production missile, Arnold added.

"So even though this was developmental testing [the army] brought in a unit early to man the equipment," he said. "They did an excellent job, completed the engagement and defeated the target."

MSE is a hit-to-kill missile destroying threats by the sheer force of a collision.

MSE not only brings an improved launcher but a dual-pulse solid rocket motor, larger control fins, and upgraded support systems. The enhancements will almost double the missile's reach and improve performance, according to Lockheed Martin.

MSE will bring added lethality to the Patriot IAMD. The system will be equipped with the hit-to-kill MSE interceptor as well as the Guidance Enhanced Missile - TBM (GEM-T), which flies close to a threat and explodes. Using a mix of interceptors is not only seen as a cost-effective method for intercepting targets, but it will provide commanders with operational flexibility.

 

[marauder2048]

Thanks for those graphics..It will be interesting to see what happens once the AOA is completed and the program moves to an RFP. Are there any timelines for the AN/MPQ-64 to switch over to an AESA array?

The FBO release has Sentinel A4 Low Rate Initial Production in FY 2023 and Full Rate Production in FY 2025 at ~ 30 arrays/year.

I think ultimately, IBCS opens up the sensor requirements to multiple OEM's and multiple solutions. Lockheed has acknowledge that it itself is working on a new X- Band GaN AESA and could also compete in this space.

Wonder how much of Lockheed's efforts are directed towards risk reduction for AMDR-X?

 

[bring_it_on]

Thanks. Could very well be the case regarding Lockheed's IRAD.

Meanwhile on the never ending 3DELRR saga -

The 3DELRR Program will produce and field the radar system for the United States Air Force (USAF) that meets the Service’s theater battlespace awareness needs in the current and emerging threat environment. 3DELRR will be the principle USAF long-range, ground-based sensor for detecting, identifying, tracking and reporting aerial targets for the Joint Force Air Component Commander (JFACC) through the Theater Air Control System (TACS). It will replace the legacy USAF AN/TSP-75 radar system that is becoming unsupportable. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Theater Battle Control Division, 5 Eglin Street Bldg. 1624, Hanscom AAFB, MA 01731 intends to issue an amendment to solicitation FA8730-13-R-0001 for contract award on a limited competition basis for the Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) Low-Rate-Initial Production (LRIP), Interim Contractor Support (ICS) and Full Rate Production (FRP) of the 3DELRR. The Government anticipates release of the amended solicitation on or about 26th Jul 2016 and contract award in 2nd Quarter FY17.

 

[seruriermarshal]

Raytheon Touts Patriot Anti-Missile Performance in Yemen War

FARNBOROUGH, England — Raytheon has claimed a Patriot anti-missile system used by Saudi Arabia has had a “100 percent success rate” in intercepting missile attacks by Yemeni rebels.

Speaking at the Farnborough Air Show on Tuesday, Ralph Acaba, Raytheon’s vice president for Integrated Air and Missile Defense, said the Raytheon system employed by a Saudi-led coalition had successfully handled “well over a couple of dozen intercepts” of missiles over the last year.

“Every target engaged was destroyed,” he said.

The Saudi-led coalition has been fighting against Shiite Houthi rebels, which are battling Yemen’s recognized government.

There have been numerous reports of the rebels firing ballistic missiles, including Scuds, at coalition or Yemeni government targets. On June 21, the coalition said a ballistic missile fired towards the central Yemeni city of Marib was “destroyed with no damage” by an intercept.

Speaking at Farnborough, Raytheon managers said the firm has meanwhile signed up Poland’s leading state-run defense group PGZ as a local partner on Poland’s expected Patriot acquisition.

The deal is due to be run as an FMS program.

Raytheon has said it will also offer the system to Germany should Germany decide to backtrack on its decision to buy Lockheed Martin’s MEADS system.

It was reported on July 10 that Germany may not finish negotiations over the MEADS system by the end of the year, as was planned.

“A few days ago there was an announcement out of the MoD to parliament that there was a risk that the MEADS contract will not be concluded by the end of this year,” said Acaba. “There continue to be challenges in closing that procurement and we stand ready to support the ministry of defense if and when they need us.”

Wes Kremer, president of Integrated Defense Systems, said operational use of Patriot, including in Yemen, gave the system an advantage over MEADS, which has yet to be deployed.

“Patriot is a great example of the 13 partner nations working together, and for example Patriot has been engaging ballistic missiles in Yemen,” he said.

“And so for each one of those intercepts we learn and we are able to extract data to make our radar algorithms better, and we update our software,” he said. “Each of the partners pays in a share into that fund where we update our algorithms, but then its available to all the partners,” he said.

“Germany has chosen to go a different path, and as we saw Germany set up milestones that have to be met, and the notification in parliament that they may not meet the contracting milestone shows there are challenges,” he added.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/show-daily/farnborough/2016/07/12/raytheon-touts-patriot-anti-missile-performance-yemen-war/86998912/

 

[bring_it_on]

U.S. and Dutch Soldiers set up a MIM-104 Patriot Missile battery at White Sands Missile Range as part of an emergency rapid deployment exercise.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvXfNDE0bAk

 

[bring_it_on]

Lockheed Martin Will Pursue New Army Missile Defense Sensor
Proven radar technology is best match to Army's requirements

BETHESDA, Md., July 15, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) is responding to a U.S. Army request for a Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor (LTAMDS). The industry-wide competition will provide a radar solution that operates in the Army's Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) network and replaces the current Patriot radar.

The Army's stated objective for the LTAMDS acquisition program is to upgrade or replace the current Patriot radar to improve the operational effectiveness against the emerging threat while reducing sustainment cost associated with the current radar. The new sensor also is required to meet mobility and transportability requirements, and improve reliability, availability and maintainability at a defined cost target.

"With this request for information, the Army recognizes that a new radar is required to meet the current and emerging air and missile defense threats. This is an important milestone, another clear indication that the Army recognizes the aging Patriot weapon system is insufficient to meet modern air and missile defense operational requirements," said Tim Cahill, vice president, Air and Missile Defense. "We welcome the opportunity to provide state-of-the-art radar technology that will address the operational and logistic deficiencies of the Patriot."

Lockheed Martin is the only company producing active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars for the Army and is the only U.S. company producing and exporting gallium nitride (GaN)-based AESA radars. Lockheed Martin will leverage the $3 billion of investments in radar technology programs such as Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS), Space Fence, Long Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR), 3D Expeditionary Long Range Radar (3DELRR), AN/TPQ-53 and Aegis.

"Leveraging our existing technology, a multi-function, 360-degree IAMD radar can be developed to exceed the LTAMDS requirement on a better schedule than a costly Patriot upgrade solution," said retired Rear Adm. Brad Hicks, vice president, Mission Systems and Training. "Our radar solution will meet the Army's specific requirements and extend our strong collaboration within the missile defense community."

For additional information, visit our website: www.lockheedmartin.com/us/what-we-do/aerospace-defense/radar.html.

 

[bring_it_on]

Poland Intends To Finalize Patriot Sale Agreement by Year’s End

WASHINGTON — The Polish government intends to finalize an agreement with the US government by the end of the year to buy the Raytheon-made Patriot air and missile defense system, the Polish defense minister said.

The initial agreement will cover the sale of two Patriot systems, Antoni Macierewicz told Defense News in a exclusive July 22 interview. And Poland will get more than 50 percent of the work share to build Patriot, something the country was adamant about when defining its terms.

Poland’s leading state-run defense group PGZ signed a letter of intent with Raytheon to cooperate on Wisla — Poland's new missile defense program — paving the way for the country's acquisition of Patriot missiles, PGZ said in a statement earlier this month.

PGZ was set up in 2013 to consolidate Poland's fragmented, state-owned defense industry. The Polish Ministry of Treasury remains the main shareholder of PGZ, but the group is subordinated to the country’s Ministry of Defence.Over the past year, Poland has gone back and forth on its decision to procure a medium-range air-and-missile defense system that would provide 360-degree protection.

Poland announced in the spring of 2015 that it chose the Patriot system for Wisla. The plan was to buy two Patriot systems in the current configuration, followed by next-generation systems that include the AESA GaN radar and an open architecture that would allow a variety of interceptors to plug into the system. The two initial Patriot systems would then be retrofitted with next-generation capabilities.

Also in the Wisla competition were Lockheed Martin’s Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS), Israel’s David’s Sling and a French consortium’s offering. MEADS and David’s Sling were taken out of the running because they are still in development. However Germany plans to sign an agreement with Lockheed and MBDA Deutschland to finish MEADS' development.

However, elections last November ushered in a new government, which decided to review all of the recent acquisition decisions of the previous government, including on Patriot. And the government has, all along, hinted that it would consider capabilities for its next-generation system outside of the two Patriot batteries it would initially procure.

Poland’s new conservative government called into question the previous liberal cabinet’s choice of Patriot — estimated to be €5 billion (US $5.5 billion) deal.

This gave hope to the other companies with offerings in the Wisla competition. Poland reopened discussions with Lockheed Martin, for instance.Macierewicz said last November during a parliamentary defense commission meeting that the conditions of the potential contract to buy US missiles “have changed a lot since the public announcement.” He said he wasn’t happy with the price or the potential delivery timeline.

Through a translator, Macierewicz told Defense News that a letter of intent with Raytheon was recently signed following conversations that were held during the last six months after his party came to power. The conversations “changed their shape, and if the negotiated commitments by Raytheon will be signed and applied then we are interested in such an agreement,” the translator said.

Macierewicz also indicated that while the agreement will cover the sale of two Patriots there is potential for Poland to order more batteries in the future.

“We do want to develop an anti-missile defense together with the US, US industry and US Army,” Macierewicz said through his translator. “We assume that Raytheon, what Raytheon proposes will then be the basis of equipment for the US Army and our financial capabilities will also be significant. We are perfectly aware of the fact modernization of the system carried out by Raytheon will be, to a huge extent, be done by Polish money and it will serve the Polish Army and the US Army as well.”Macierewicz said Poland’s plans to procure a new short-range air and missile defense system — the Narew program — through a competition is also separately underway.

 

[fredymac]

I wonder if the Army did a cost analysis and decided it was cheaper overall to use Patriots for both air and missile defense rather retaining a less expensive (ie, land based Amraam/Sidewinder) system. Each shot costs a lot more but then you don’t have all the procurement/logistics/training involved for a totally different set of hardware. Somewhere along the line they will need to add a THAAD launch to these IBCS tests.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo06xd6_ziM

 

[sferrin]

I wonder if the Army did a cost analysis and decided it was cheaper overall to use Patriots for both air and missile defense rather retaining a less expensive (ie, land based Amraam/Sidewinder) system.

It's not just about the target but how much area you want to protect, with how many systems. Even if you wanted a cheap, relatively incapable system, of Amraam/Sidewinders for air-defense you'd still need Patriot for missiles defense. On top of that the cheap system isn't even good against high altitude aircraft. So do you use one Patriot battery, with a few more launchers, or a Patriot battery and the dozens of less capable Amraam/Sidewinder systems you'd need to replicate it?

 

[marauder2048]

I wonder if the Army did a cost analysis and decided it was cheaper overall to use Patriots for both air and missile defense rather retaining a less expensive (ie, land based Amraam/Sidewinder) system. Each shot costs a lot more but then you don’t have all the procurement/logistics/training involved for a totally different set of hardware. Somewhere along the line they will need to add a THAAD launch to these IBCS tests.

IFPC is Sidewinder based; NG shows the Multi-Mission Launcher several times in that video.

 

[bring_it_on]

THAAD IBCS interoperability is probably an IOC+2-3 year thing for IBCS. There is SHORAAD requirement beyond the IFPC but I don't think they are seriously looking at how to fund it. They'd probably like to go to future IFPC increments (mobility) first. One good thing is that there is some IRAD already happening with the AMRAAM-ER etc that they can leverage. On the USMC side of things they will obviously like the G/ATOR to eventually support that. I'm just curious as to why reduction in the manpower for the patriot system isnt a priority when everyone loves to talk about stressfull the job is. Sfferin brought up the launchres, I guess that would be a good place to start.

 

[bring_it_on]

Lockheed makes case for Patriot radar replacement


As the Army works to craft an either upgrade or replacement for its venerable Patriot radar system, one contractor aims to convince the service to take the latter course.

During an Aug. 15 media briefing ahead of the Space and Missile Defense Symposium in Huntsville, AL, a company official acknowledged that Lockheed Martin has responded to an Army solicitation for "potential materiel solutions for a Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor (LTAMDS)."

Brad Hicks, vice president of business development for integrated warfare systems & sensors, told reporters his company believes the Army should seize the opportunity to craft an entirely new radar to meet its requirements.

"It's the right time to do it," Hicks said, citing two key reasons. First, holding a competition "would be very hard because the Army doesn't own all the rights," he said. Second, an upgrade effort could face limitations because it involves "architecting an older radar and trying to upgrade it."

By contrast, he explained, a "clean sheet" approach would help to generate a radar that endures and is "upgradable and scalable for the next 30 or 40 years." Hicks cited the problem of high operations and sustainment costs for the existing system -- "because of its age and architecture, it's very expensive."

In a solicitation posted July 6 on the Federal Business Opportunities website, the Army seeks "information on potential materiel solutions that can be utilized to upgrade or replace the Phased Array Tracking Radar to Intercept of Target (PATRIOT) radars fielded by the U.S. Army."

"It's our hope that the Army refines the requirements that they're seeking to lay out for the radar, that will better inform industry," Hicks said. "We're hoping that they'll be collaborative in that process, so . . . all the competing companies can bring their best ideas to the table so the Army can take advantage of that as they look at the requirements and the risk they want to take, and the investment they want to make."

Hicks acknowledged that the contractor would leverage some of the "technology building blocks" of its Medium Extended Air Defense System, a collaborative effort among the United States, Germany and Italy that the Defense Department previously envisioned as a potential replacement for Patriot. However, he noted that the MEADS architecture was "driven by the original requirements back in '94," rather than the Army's current stated requirement for LTAMDS. Still, "that foundational technology, that growth, that engineering base helps feed the technology."

 

[bring_it_on]

GAO report on Patriot Modernization (Aug. 25,2016)

https://www.scribd.com/document/322233749/Patriot-Modernization-GAO

 

[marauder2048]

Thanks for the link. Some interesting nuggets there:

The PAC-3 MSE, [...] is an upgrade to the predecessor PAC-3 missile by providing better lethality and a longer range— flying approximately 50 percent higher in altitude and 100 percent farther downrange.

Emphasis mine.

and

While the PAC-3 MSE missile has an expanded battlespace over the PAC-3 missile, the radar is not able to sense and support the full range and capabilities of PAC-3 MSE.

 

[bring_it_on]

Poland wants the IBCS as part of the initial 2 Patriot Units, by 2019 :

oland Wants Patriot With Different Battle Command System]=http://www.defensenews.com/articles/poland-wants-patriot-with-different-battle-command-system]oland Wants Patriot With Different Battle Command System

WASHINGTON — Polish Defence Minister Antoni Macierewicz said he had formally authorized a letter of request be sent to the US government to buy the US Army’s Patriot air-and-missile defense system, during a large press briefing at a military conference in the country on Tuesday.

The announcement came as a surprise to those tracking Poland’s missile defense procurement decision.

While this further solidifies Poland’s intent to procure an air-and-missile defense system, the Polish media — and confirmed by other sources — is reporting the Polish government wants eight of Raytheon’s Patriot systems, but the first two would not have Raytheon’s battle command system but Northrop Grumman’s future Integrated Battle Command System . The next six would have a 360-degree radar to detect and defeat incoming threats, something the current Patriot system doesn’t have either.

In a sense, Poland is asking for a hybrid Patriot that doesn’t exist yet.

The IBCS won’t reach initial operational capability as part of the US Army’s air-and-missile defense architecture until 2019.
And Poland wants IBCS, according to reports, in the first two systems by 2019, which would make the country the first to receive a Patriot system with the IBCS architecture and would put it in front of the US Army’s fielding of the capability.

The US Army is also many years from replacing Patriot’s radar with one that provides 360-degree protection. The service recently put out a request for information to gauge industry capability and analyze whether the current radar should be upgraded or whether it should fully replace the radar. Poland would want the remaining six systems beginning in 2020, according to reports.

Over the past year, Poland has gone back and forth on its decision to procure a medium-range air-and-missile defense system that would provide 360-degree protection. Poland announced in the spring of 2015 that it chose the Patriot system with a plan to buy two Patriots in the current configuration, followed by next-generation systems that include the Gallium Nitride (GaN) Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar and an open architecture that would allow a variety of interceptors to plug into the system.

Poland conducted a competition where Lockheed Martin’s Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS), Israel’s David’s Sling and a French consortium’s offering were in the running. MEADS and David’s Sling were taken out of the competition because they are still in development and Poland decided it needed a system already fielded. However, Germany plans to develop MEADS and procure it, and Italy is expected to follow suit.

Poland backtracked on its decision to buy Patriot following elections in November that ushered in a new government, which decided to review all of the recent acquisition decisions of the previous government.

Macierewicz told Defense News in a July interview that Poland’s initial agreement with the US government would be finalized by the end of the year to buy Patriot and that the sale would cover two systems. Poland would also get over 50 percent of the workshare to build Patriot. According to sources and news reports in Poland, a recent US Government Accountability Office report alarmed defense officials. One source thought the country’s decision to request Patriot with IBCS could have been influenced, in part, by the GAO report’s findings.

The GAO report found the US Army’s plans to improve the Patriot system — expected to remain in operation until at least 2050 — lacks oversight mechanisms as the Army carries out its strategy in the coming years.

And former Polish defense procurement minister, retired Lt. Gen. Waldemar Skrzypczak, wrote in an op-ed in a top Polish newspaper over the weekend that, according to the GAO report, “the system in its current shape does not meet the war fighter's requirements.”

The report “indicates to unreliable radar, lacking ability for all-around surveillance, and problems with the software. It stresses that the system does not meet requirements on working without a so-called critical failure,” a translation of Skrzypczak’s article stated. “The requirement is for 20 hours, while the Patriot can work without failure approximately 11 hours. Seventy percent of failures are due to the radar. The time for repair leaves the protected assets without defense.” But while many questions still surround Poland’s plan to buy Patriot, Raytheon sees Poland’s formal request as “an important milestone toward becoming the sixth NATO Patriot country and the 14th Patriot partner nation,” Wes Kremer, president of Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems, said in a release issued Tuesday following the announcement.

Raytheon said it will “continue supporting” the US and Polish governments through the Foreign Military Sales process and is working to finalize industrial participation plans that include eight already-signed contracts and more than 30 letters of intent with Polish industry, according to the statement.

 

[Grey Havoc]

On a related note, via Tantalwz88 over at Tank-Net:

 

[marauder2048]

On a related note, via Tantalwz88 over at Tank-Net:

Not news at all; Stunner has been part of Raytheon's pitch to Poland since day one.

 

[sferrin]

They even tried to pitch it as "PAC-4" at one point.

 

[bring_it_on]

While the Stunner offers good missile and cruise missile defense interceptor given the performance and cost, it will be strained when confronting hight rend air breathing threats and longer ranged Ballistic Missiles. It can obviously not cover the BM threat the PAC3 and MSE.

 

[marauder2048]

While the Stunner offers good missile and cruise missile defense interceptor given the performance and cost, it will be strained when confronting hight rend air breathing threats and longer ranged Ballistic Missiles. It can obviously not cover the BM threat the PAC3 and MSE.

I think it's more about workshare and Raytheon not being at Lockheed's mercy for interceptor pricing.

 

[marauder2048]

Space and Missile Defense Symposium 2016 slides have been posted:

https://smdsymposium.org/speaker-presentations/

From the DeFatta preso

 

[bring_it_on]

https://www.scribd.com/document/325796907/Maintaining-an-Edge-US-Land-based-Radar-Developments?secret_password=8cnZnvmkBR2mNjulk3uK

 

[bring_it_on]

US approves SkyCeptor LCI for Poland

 

[bring_it_on]

Lockheed and MBDA submitted their proposal to germany for the MEADS. The current version lacks the Lockheed LFS altogether and relies solely on the MFCR.

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/story/1628220-army-patriot-missile-sharpens-target-tracking

 

[marauder2048]

There's hope yet for some persistent, OTH sensor support.

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=64d77bef93baa0d78a6bc39328fef74b&tab=core&_cview=0

Added: Nov 29, 2016 11:52 am

Request for Information (RFI) for sustainment level maintenance for the Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System (JLENS)


Distribution A - Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ONLY.

The US Army Program Executive Office (PEO) Missiles and Space, Cruise Missile Defense Systems (CMDS) Project Office is conducting market research to determine if there are potential sources that have the capability to provide sustainment level maintenance for two JLENS orbits stored at Aberdeen Proving Grounds (APG), MD and Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR). This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes; it does not constitute a Request for Proposal (RFP) or a promise to issue an RFP in the future. This RFI does not commit the United States Government (USG) to contract for any supply or service whatsoever. The USG will not pay for any information received in response to this request for information nor will the USG compensate the respondent for any cost incurred in developing the information for the USG. The contractor will be responsible for the sustainment and repair while in storage in order to extend the operational life of the JLENS systems and availability to support future deployments, if required. Support to be provided by this requirement includes supply management, integrated logistics support, and documentation of equipment conditions.

 

[bring_it_on]

Raytheon wins $225m contract for increased Patriot missile defense capability

ANDOVER, Mass., Nov. 28, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- An undisclosed member of the 13-nation group that owns the combat-proven Patriot Integrated Air and Missile Defense System has awarded Raytheon Company [NYSE: RTN] a $225 million direct commercial sales contract for additional capability. The contract was awarded on Oct 19.

 

[bring_it_on]

Connected to the IAMD and IBCS mission/capability areas so posting it here. Possibly a Gallium Nitride Antenna upgrade to the Sentinel as has been discussed for a while now.

Request for Information-Sentinel A4, for the AN/MPQ-64A3 (Sentinel A3) short range Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) Radar-W31P4Q-16-R-0104---Sentinel A4 Development Notification of Industry Day

SENTINEL A4 REQUIREMENTS.

Respondents to this Request for Information (RFI) must satisfactorily address the following requirements in their response:
1. The Sentinel A4 must meet or exceed all current Sentinel A3 requirements contained in the Draft Revised Sentinel A3 Requirements Document. The Sentinel Product Office will make this Requirements Document (DRAFT, classified SECRET) available to potential respondents to this RFI.


2. To counter the new threat, the Sentinel A4 must exceed selected A3 threshold performance requirements. The Sentinel A4 requires a greater than 75% increase in range performance, three times the search volume, and twice the track loading capability. A greater than two times increase in track accuracy is required. Performance is required while operating under very stressing radar environments (e.g., electronic attack; anti-radiation weapons; direction finding sensors; mountain, sea, and urban clutter; biological fliers; etc.). While increasing range performance also increases search area, the Government is also interested in any increased elevation performance that a new antenna design may provide.


3. Candidate technical solutions to this RFI must currently be at a demonstrated Technology Readiness Level of six or higher (TRL 6).


4. To support a modification of the current Sentinel A3 to a Sentinel A4 capability, the Sentinel Product Office plans to make available a defined interface to the existing Sentinel A3 Signal Data Processor (SDP) and software, to which a new antenna assembly can be added. This antenna assembly would include advanced technologies (e.g., Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) technology) and interface to the existing SDP. A new antenna assembly will also require new equipment solutions or modifications to the platform, power systems, cooling systems, rotational assembly, and beam steering. The Sentinel Product Office will consider changes to the SDP or a new SDP hardware solution to support a new antenna assembly design. We encourage respondents to suggest alternatives to this approach.


5. Additional Information: The Government is not asking for a fully new radar system. The following information is provided so that potential respondents can consider how their new antenna subsystem can best be designed and integrated into the existing Sentinel system to meet desired performance.


a.) Classified appendix numbers are for the current radar unless specifically identified as IFPC requirements. The Sentinel A4 Radar requirements are still in development but are expected to be at least 1.75 times the current specification values.


b.) The current antenna with all accoutrements weights approximately 600 pounds. A Sentinel A4 Radar is expected to be heavier and will require a new drive and mounting system.


c.) The current Sentinel power requirement is 6.5KW 400HZ 3 phase 115V L-N. This power is currently supplied by a 10 KW generator. In addition to the Sentinel load, an additional 2KW load is required for additional systems mounted on Sentinel for a total of 8.5KW. Standard MEP 30 and 60KW (or greater) generators will be provided as GFE dependent on Sentinel A4 Radar power requirements.


d.) The IFF output power is currently 200W and a new antenna will be required to increase the IFF range so that it matches the radar maximum range. A new IFF antenna will need to be part of the Sentinel A4 Radar effort.


e.) The Sentinel A4 Radar will require an entirely new search, track, and classification balance scheme. The current Sentinel A3 Radar scheme would not be valid for the Sentinel A4 Radar.


f.) Currently, there are two X-band waveguides that pass through the rotary joint, and the rotary joint also supports several digital control lines and IFF data. An exciter, power amplifier and receiver are below the rotary joint and the IFF connects to an A/D converter located on a daughter board in the signal data processor. There are control lines from the SDP through a transmitted control unit that control the PAMs and Receiver/Exciter. The IFF must function in a Stop and Stare configuration and needs to be steerable (either electronically or mechanically) over the Sentinel A4 Radar antenna field of view. The comprehensive interface document is being developed but is not available at this time. The interface documentation will be provided upon request with the release of the Final RFI, planned for next year.


6. Candidate technical solutions must be ready to enter Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD as defined in DoD Instruction 5000.02), without a prior Government funded technology demonstration, in Fiscal Year (FY) 2019. Should an award be made, the selected contractor must be ready to hold a Preliminary Design Review in FY 2020 and must have prototype hardware ready for developmental testing, to include qualification and performance testing, in FY 2021 (28 months following EMD contract award).


7. Candidate technical solutions must address the ability and risks to enter Low Rate Initial Production in FY 2023 and Full Rate Production in FY 2025.


8. Candidate technical solutions must be supported by production facilities and proven processes to deliver up to 30 Sentinel A4 antenna assemblies per year. The Government plans to procure 199 antenna assemblies through FY 2032.


9. Candidate technical solutions must include a cost-effective 20-year sustainment plan for the 199 radars that includes Government organic support.


10. The desired Sentinel A4 technology is primarily for United States employment but must have a variant that can be approved for Foreign Military Sales (FMS) to existing and new Sentinel FMS customers.


11. Candidate technical solutions must be supported by current demonstrated company experience with advanced X-Band radars.


12. Candidate technical solutions must demonstrate that the resulting Sentinel A4 can be produced and sustained in a cost-effective manner.

 

[bring_it_on]

US Army strategy to acquire Patriot radar replacement expected soon

 

[bring_it_on]

New Army missile-defense chief faces pressure to deploy and modernize

 

[bring_it_on]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMr4SP4u4FQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k99-2VPVAM

 

[bring_it_on]

PATRIOT WARS Automation and the Patriot Air and Missile Defense System - CNAS

 

[bring_it_on]

...