Recently in Defense With an 'S' Category

Flight International's Canada special was released today. Our cover story is about Canada's military aircraft procurements and focuses on that nation's quest to replace its ageing fleet of 78 Boeing CF-18 Hornet fighters with the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

Read the full story here. You actually will have to register for access to read the whole thing, but it's free and takes less than five minutes.

In recent months, the Canadian government has been saying it will review the program and potentially run a formal competition if need be. Basically, the consensus amongst Canadian defense experts is that any contest will boil down to the F-35 and the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

Anyways, here are some extras that had to be cut from the feature due to space constraints.

The within visual range combat capabilities of fighter aircraft relative to each other anyways draws significant interest on here. So this is what Dan McWilliams, who flew the CF-18 Hornet for 10 years with the Canadian Forces, has to say about the F-35's close in within visual range combat capabilities. The caveat here is that he's basing his opinion on what a military F-35 test pilot said--basically that the jet flies like a clean C-model Hornet.

I would assume the test pilot was comparing close combat performance based on the upgraded F/A-18 engines (EPEs), which produce about 20% more thrust than the CF-18's engines (non-EPE). If so, performing like a clean legacy Hornet puts it in an elite class of fighter, with very good performance. How important this is depends again on the role and the requirements. Some contenders like the Rafale and the Typhoon may have better performance when clean, but they degrade when loaded up with external stores (more drag and weight). Super Hornets are bigger and heavier than legacy Hornets, but some engine upgrades may allow them to perform nearly as well (again, when not loaded with external stores).

There is always a debate about how important this close-in turning performance is. With advanced data links and good teamwork, it becomes less critical, because identification of threats and targeting can be done well before close-in performance becomes necessary. Weapons also make a difference. A good sensor/weapon combination can make turning less important, since it can be launched many degrees off boresight. Imagine, in the fantasy world of James Bond, the ability to launch a weapon at a threat in the rear quarter; turning would become far less important in that theoretical case! Helmet-mounted sights and AESA, paired with other types of sensor, can make a fighter able to launch at threats well off the nose.

Here are McWilliams' thoughts on just how robust an airframe is needed for operations in the Canadian Arctic:

The airframe does not need to be particularly robust for NORAD ops. Missions are quite benign in terms of G loading, and runways are runways. What could matter is how well does the airframe handle icing conditions in cloud. Prolonged flight in icing conditions is not permitted with a CF-18, due to danger of ice ingestion into the engines, causing damage to engine compressor blades. A question for the JSF is how robust is the aircraft skin, especially when dealing with icing and runway contaminants in winter conditions? The recent question of arrestor hook is also germane - sometimes we depended on the cable to stop us when runways were short and icy, which is not likely to change.

Range is one area where the CF-18 is not very good for NORAD missions. Many of the candidates go further and/or have more time on station, thus are better suited to NORAD, as are JSFs. Air refueling support is essential for most NORAD wartime scenarios, and even for some peacetime intercepts. When the Bears are well off shore (as the cruise missile carrier variants are usually), the CF-18 is quite limited in the amount of time it can escort or shadow them before having to turn back to base.

This isn't exactly aviation related, but it is noteworthy. A senior defense official at the Pentagon announced that the US Department of Defense will be allowing women to serve in direct combat. Currently women are not allowed to serve as infantrymen, or Special Forces soldiers and Navy SEALs etc.

"I can confirm media reports that the Secretary and the Chairman are expected to announce the lifting of the direct combat exclusion rule for women in the military.  This policy change will initiate a process whereby the services will develop plans to implement this decision, which was made by the Secretary of Defense upon the recommendation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff," a senior defense official says.

Women have been allowed to fly combat aircraft since the 1990s and have been doing quite well at it. They're also on US Navy surface warships and are being integrated onboard submarines. Women have also de facto been fighting in direct combat in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

It's about time the Pentagon recognized this--fair is fair. If someone is best qualified to do a particular job, then let them have that job--I have zero tolerance for any sort of discrimination. I bid the Defense Department welcome to the 21st Century.

These F-15E Strike Eagles are from the 4th Fighter Wing--commanded by Col Jeannie Leavitt. I can always add an aircraft picture no matter how tangentially related it might be--it's a skill.

The US Air Force has released the draft Key Performance Parameters for the T-X jet trainer it hopes will eventually replace the Northrop T-38C Talon. From the specifications, the USAF is asking for a pretty robust set of capabilities. One of the requirements is that it should be able to take the place of the F-22 bridge course (Eight rides in a two-seat F-16, doing night aerial refueling and making sure the new guys can pull 9Gs while operating the radar and what not) before new pilots head to the Raptor B-course. Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, Alenia Aermacchi and Boeing are expected to bid.

Read the write up here, but below are the USAF's list of KPPs and Key System Attributes that it wants.

Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney's defense team has some interesting ideas for the future of the US Navy...

My former colleague at Defense News, Chris Cavas--probably the best naval reporter in here in Washington DC--has written up this interview with John Lehman, one of Romney's chief advisors on defense. Yes, that John Lehman from the Reagan Administration--the architect of the 600-ship Navy.

Should Romney win, Lehman says that a potential new administration would create an 11^th carrier air wing--one each for the 11 carriers in the fleet. The additional unit would form a fully modernized reserve air wing that could be surged as needed.  Plans would also keep the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet in production, but would also retain the Lockheed Martin F-35C. The exact mix hasn't been determined just yet.

A Romney Administration would also continue to add new amphibious assault ship to fill out the US Marine Corps requirement of 39 ships.  So, probably that means more F-35Bs...

One thing though, Lehman didn't really say how Romney would pay for all this...

Anyways, read it for yourself here.

The US Air Force has spelled out its plans to upgrade 300 of its newest Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcon fighters. The USAF considers the upgrade program a stopgap measure resulting from delays to the stealthy Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

Read the full story here

Nonetheless, the modified F-16 will be a capable warplane--the USAF wants a new active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, a new center display and it's adding an ALQ-213 electronic warfare system. The service hasn't picked which AESA set just yet--it'll be a toss-up between the Raytheon Advanced Combat Radar and the Northrop Grumman Scalable Agile Beam Radar. A competition is expected soon...

All this was previously known, but we'd only really heard it from potential contractors. The USAF is going to stick with original equipment manufacturer Lockheed Martin for the prime integration contract, which might be a disappointment to BAE Systems and Boeing.

BAE was recently picked for the South Korean F-16 upgrade contract for 130 jets. It also previously had some success in upgrading Turkish Vipers and older USAF Air National Guard F-16s.

Next up, comes the battle to supply upgrades to Taiwan's 146 F-16A Block 20 jets reportedly worth around $3.7 billion. BAE and Lockheed will duke it out for that contract at some point in the relatively near future. Lockheed already has a leg up on that competition...

In July, the Taiwanese state-owned Aerospace Industrial Development Corporation signed an agreement with Lockheed to help facilitate the F-16 upgrade program. The USAF's decision to stick with Lockheed can only help the company's case...

And then there is still the outside chance Taiwan may yet be allowed to buy 66 new F-16s...

The USAF is modernizing its Boeing F-15 fleet--that includes both the C/D air superiority fighters and the multirole F-15E Strike Eagle.

The USAF is adding active electronically scanned array radar, new electronic warfare systems, and adding a new display computer to the jets amongst a host of other upgrades. The modifications are probably the first in a series of upgrades because the venerable fighter is going to be serving into the 2030s. Which is quite impressive considering the first F-15A prototype first flew on 27 July, 1972.

But pilots are saying that while the USAF is improving the F-15's sensors, it is neglecting the displays that those operators would need to fully exploit the capabilities of the upgraded systems. One suspects that the USAF's next step will be to add those improved displays.

Read the full article here.

The US Navy is planning on adding multi-sensor integration capabilities to its Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets. That could entail adding information systems to the jet that resemble those found on the Lockheed Martin F-22 and F-35. In fact, the USN is looking at both those aircraft for inspiration, but they're also looking at Boeing's proposed large area display amongst a host of other options.

Read the full article here

Perhaps the USAF will eventually come around and do something similar with their F-15s.

The USAF, in earlier years, had neglected upgrades to the F-15 largely due to their belief that the aircraft would be replaced by the Raptor. But with the Raptor's production capped at 187, and an operational fleet that numbers only 185 due to attrition, the USAF is now resigned to operating the Eagle into the 2030s. The focus is now on integrating the F-15s with the Raptors to maximize the capabilities of both jets--and by all accounts (from people who actually fly them)--they're proving to be one hell of a combo.

50 years ago today, the US Army received its first CH-47A Chinook tandem-rotor helicopter. It's probably not likely that anyone that day could have foreseen that exact same helicopter would not only be flying, but also receiving upgrades so that it can continue to fly for the foreseeable future. Moreover, it's entirely possible that the Chinook could still be flying for another 50 years...  I'd put money down on it.

Here is my retrospective on the Chinook.

Here is Flight's editorial from the 14 August issue.

Boeing's CH-47 Chinook might become the first rotorcraft to fly for a century. Its success is due to innovative design and prodigious power margins.

It is fast, agile and has outstanding high altitude performance. It can also be quickly and easily upgraded - and will continue to evolve for the foreseeable future.

But the Chinook's success and longevity also highlights a quandary in the helicopter design world.

Since the introduction of gas turbine engines, there had not been a real technological breakthrough until the advent of Sikorsky's X-2 compound helicopter prototype. But while the X-2 shattered speed records - thumbing its nose at retreating blade stall - it is unclear if it will ever find a buyer.

Nor is it clear if Eurocopter's X3 high-speed compound helicopter is on any better a footing.

Meanwhile, tilt-rotor technology increasingly looks to be an evolutionary dead end. The compromises to hover performances imposed by that design do not appear to be acceptable to most potential customers. Nor is the high price of such aircraft something many customers are willing to pay.

The bottom line is that while speed is always nice to have, the market does not appear to be willing to pay a premium for that added performance. This means that aircraft like the Chinook will probably soldier on decade after decade.

The new leadership team is in place at US Air Force headquarters. Gen Mark Welsh has officially taken office as the Chief of Staff of the USAF as of this past Friday, 10 August. His biggest challenge will be the budget during his time in office, no doubt.

Meanwhile, over in the Pacific, Gen Herbert "Hawk" Carlisle has taken command of PACAF as of 3 August. The command is increasing in importance given the renewed US emphasis on the Pacific.  Bombers and fighters like the B-2 and F-22 will continue to rotate to bases in the region as the US hopes to reassure allies that it will be there to counterbalance the rising influence of China.

In the future, the USAF hopes to build a Long Range Strike-Bomber to counter some of the anti-access/area denial capabilities emerging in the Western Pacific. But the service also needs a new stealthier unmanned aircraft to replace its fleet of Predators and Reapers in the mid-2020s, Maj Gen James Poss, assistant deputy chief of staff for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance told an audience at AUVSI's North America show last week.

Unfortunately, the service does not have the money to build that replacement aircraft. It will, however, piggyback onto the US Navy's Unmanned Carrier Launched Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) program.

The USN, meanwhile, is putting the final touches onto the key performance parameters for the UCLASS. When there is a RFP issued--relatively soon, there will be multiple contracts awarded with a down select to one in 2016. If all goes well thereafter, the Navy will have a more or less operational aircraft on the decks of its carriers by 2020.Read that story here.

In the meantime, space, cyber and fifth-generation fighters will have to fill that ISR void.

Right now, the 1^st Fighter Wing's 27^th Fighter Squadron--the service's first F-22 squadron--is in Kadena, Japan. There the unit will operate alongside the 18^th Wing's F-15Cs, tankers and AWACS. The 18^th Wing--which has operational control of the Raptors--will focus on integrating the stealthy, supercruising Raptors with their active electronically scanned array (AESA) enhanced Eagle brethren. Together, the fighters will prowl around the region showing the US flag.

The rest of the 1^st FW is deployed to Savannah, Georgia, as Langley's runway is in need of repair.

 In other news, the Boeing CH-47 Chinook will celebrate its 50^th anniversary in service this week on 16 August.

The Northrop Grumman X-47B made its first flight out of the US Navy's flight test center at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland, yesterday.

Here is a Naval Air Systems Command video of the event.

My colleagues Flight reporter Zach Rosenberg and Stephen Trimble--the original creator of this blog-- are at the base today for its media day. The Navy is showing off its various unmanned aircraft and conducting various briefings on various programs. I was supposed to be there, but instead I'll be at the Pentagon for the US Air Force's F-22 briefing.

The success of the X-47B, which was developed as part of the Navy's Unmanned Combat Air System-Demonstrator (UCLAS-D) program, is critical to the success of the follow-on Unmanned Carrier Launched Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) aircraft. The UCLASS will harvest much of the technology developed as part of the UCAS-D, the Navy's UCLASS program manager Charlie Nava told me earlier in the year. Every potential contractor will have access to the technology, he said.

Next year, the Navy will conduct carrier take-offs and landings onboard the USS Harry S. Truman... What makes that possible is a new ship-relative GPS that generates extremely precise positional data. That technology will also be used for when X-47B conducts aerial refueling demonstrations with both the USAF boom system and the Navy's probe-and-drogue system.

The US Air Force is asking industry for information on how to increase the Bell UH-1N's endurance, range, speed, all-weather capability, survivability and equip it with modernized communication and navigation system capabilities. The USAF wants that requirement filled in fiscal years 2014 to 2018.

Given that laundry list, it sure sounds like the USAF basically wants to recreate the US Marine Corps' new Bell UH-1Y Venom--sans sensor ball. The Yankee has all of the characteristics that the USAF lists in its new Request for Information...

The Marines are buying new-build "Yankees," but had originally wanted to remanufacture their old Novembers.

Incidentally, the USAF is already taking on some of the Marines' cast off UH-1Ns... 

This new Air Force endeavor basically replaces the service's Common Vertical Lift Support Platform (CVLSP) effort that was killed in the fiscal year 2013 budget proposal.

But the Air Force still has its Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH) program, which it is working on... However, it does have a long and storied history of bungling helicopter acquisitions (And pretty much everything else too--LAS anyone? The KC-46 looks hopeful--for now).

So place your bets... will the Air Force drop the ball yet again on the CRH, or is it quadrillionth time lucky?