Monthly Archives: May 2016

Raytheon (RTN) Secures Aegis Radar Transmitter Contract


Integrated Defense Systems division has won a contract from the U.S. Navy for the production of Aegis Weapon System AN/SPY-1D(V) Radar Transmitter Group, Missile Fire Control System MK 99 equipment, and associated engineering services. The contract is valued at $365.8 million. 

This contract has options which, if exercised, will bring the total contract value to $423 million. The contract falls under the Foreign Military Sales program that includes purchases for South Korea and Japan apart from purchases for the U.S. Navy. Work under this contract is expected to be completed by Oct 2022.

The SPY-1D(V) Transmitter and the MK 99 Fire Control System are an essential part of the Navy’s Aegis missile defense system. Over the past 35 years, these systems have been in continuous production and are in use aboard 108 warships worldwide, comprising 17 ships sailed by foreign nations.

The SPY-1D(V) is a high-powered radar transmitter that supports search, track and missile guidance functions, while the MK99 system communicates with the mission control station to identify and illuminate air targets.

Raytheon is one of the best-positioned, large-cap defense players and will continue to gain traction on the back of its strong fundamentals, focus on technological innovation and improvement of its product offering, which will ensure more contract wins and an enhanced growth trajectory.

The company has been enjoying a steady stream of contracts from several government establishments. As a result, total backlog at the end of the first quarter of 2016 was $34.8 billion, up from $32.5 billion at the end of the year-ago quarter.



The SPY-1D(V) radar system

The SPY-1D(V) radar upgrade is the newest improvement to the SPY-1D. The SPY-lD( V) littoral radar upgrade will supersede the SPY-1D in new-construction ships beginning in FY 1998, and will deploy in DDG 51 Flight IIA ships starting in approximately 2003. The third variant of this radar, known as the Littoral Warfare Radar, will improve the radar’s capability against low-altitude, reduced radar cross-section targets in heavy clutter environments and in the presence of intense electronic countermeasures. The SPY-1D radar system is the multi-function, phased-array, three-dimensional (range, altitude, and bearing) radar which conducts search, automatic detection, and tracking of air and surface targets. The SPY-1D also provides mid-course guidance for the SM-2 missile, and has also demonstrated a capability to track theater ballistic missiles. The AN/SPY-1D(V), under development for installation in some Flight IIA ships, is an improved system with better performance against targets in clutter, additional moving target indicator (MTI) waveforms, and greater ability to counter deceptive Electronic Attack measures. Source

Mk 99 Missile Fire Control System

The Mk 99 MFCS controls the loading and arming of the selected weapon, launches the weapon, and provides terminal guidance for AAW (Anti-Air Warfare) missiles. It also controls the target illumination for the terminal guidance of SM-2.
Radar and weapon systems on an AEGIS class cruiser.

The radar system associated with the Mk 99 MFCS is the missile illuminator AN/SPG-62.



AN/SPG-62 RADAR.-The AN/SPG-62 is I/J­Band fire control radar. The SPY-1 radar system detects and tracks targets and then points the SPG-62 toward the target, which in turn provides illumination for the terminal guidance of SM-2 missiles. Refer to chapter 1 for discussion on the different phases of missile guidance and the way radar is used for missile guidance. Remember that in order to track a target you need a very narrow beam of RF energy. The narrower the beam, the more accurately you can tell if you have one target or multiple targets (this is called radar resolution). This narrow beam radar is normally a second radar that works with a primary search or track radar. The AN/SPG-62 illuminating radar works as a second radar with the AN/SPY-1 series radar.

In addition to the Mk 99 MFCS, the AEGIS SPY 1 series radar works with the Gun Fire Control System. Source


From Tejas & Gripen to missiles under ‘Make in India’: How Saab wants to be the ‘Sahab’ of India’s defence sector

Sweden’s Saab is aggressively eyeing India’s defence sector and is betting big on not only making fighter jets such as Gripen and Tejas, but also missiles.

By: | Updated: May 27, 2016 11:09 AM

Sweden’s Saab is aggressively eyeing India’s defence sector and is betting big on not only making fighter jets such as Gripen and Tejas, but also missiles under PM Narendra Modi’s ‘Make in India’ initiative.

Jan Widerström, Country Head and Chairman of Saab India tells FE Online, “Make in India is definitely on our agenda. Our footprint in India is expanding fast. We now have eight Indian partner companies working with us.”

Saab has offered to support HAL for developing sub-systems for the next generation fighter jet Tejas. Talking about Saab’s offer, Widerström says, “HAL has sought responses on specific queries relating to the next generation of the Tejas, and our interactions revolve around deeper discussions for these systems. Our discussions are progressing very well so far.” “We have an excellent working relationship with HAL, which started with the IDAS Electronic Warfare suite that we provide for the Dhruv,” he adds.

Not only Tejas, Saab has time and again offered to manufacture its Gripen fighter aircraft in India. The newly unveiled Gripen E, which is said to have improved avionics system when compared to previous versions of the jet, is also being considered under ‘Make in India’. However, Saab is not the only defence major that is vying to cater to India’s armed forces. Boeing and Lockheed Martin have already shown interest in making their F/A-18 and F-16 aircraft in the country. A final call on which jet will be chosen for the ‘Make in India’ programme will be taken by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar by the end of this fiscal.

Saab is confident that it will benefit immensely by investing in India’s defence sector and has even given its thumbs up to the recently unveiled Defence Procurement Policy (DPP). “We (Saab) believe that DPP 2016 is a strong step in the right direction, towards boosting Make in India and encouraging defence manufacturing. We are looking forward to the remaining appendices now, and are confident that they will further build on this base,” says Widerström.

Missiles are yet another area that Saab is looking for business opportunities. Giving details about its foray into missiles for India Widerström says, “In February this year, we announced plans for a Joint Venture company in India together with Kalyani Strategic Systems, which is the defence arm of the Kalyani Group. The joint venture will handle the main part of production and delivery of air defence systems for VSHORAD (Very Short Range Air Defense Systems) and SRSAM (Short-range surface-to-air missile) programs to the Indian customer.”

“The production in India will comprise of subsystems and systems for SRSAM and VSHORAD with the aim to transfer production as well as development knowledge to India. This of course goes hand in hand with the Make in India programme. Orders of missile parts have already been issued to KSSL and production-readiness reviews are ongoing. Saab and KSSL are planning for technology transfer for different packages within the programmes.” he explains.

What other initiatives is Saab venturing into? Says Widerström, “We have an R&D center in Hyderabad in collaboration with Tech Mahindra, where engineers are working on designing next-generation systems in close cooperation with our teams in Sweden. We have recently announced that we will now be manufacturing self-protection systems for land vehicles in conjunction with Tata Power SED at their facility in Bangalore. We see huge potential for this partnership, which will begin with export of sub-systems from India for our global orders.”



Saab is major contender for the 120 foreign make single engine fighter program as F-16 is out of the running unless Tata can pull a big one!

The 120 twin engine foreign fighter program will be between Rafale and F-18E/F unless F-18 throw in the Advance Super Hornet I doubt Boeing can win!

See F-18E/F vs Rafale comparison posted earlier (below main article): HERE

Kalyani Strategic Systems website: HERE

Related post:


400 more fighter jets in Indian Air Force’s vision 2030

Lockheed Eyes Tata as F-16 Partner for Next Big India Jet Deal

 The Swedes have handed India an irresistible offer

Sweden to customise offer to push Gripen-NG fighter aircraft deal with India

‘Make in India’ pitch to sell Swedish fighter for air force

 Flat Refusal: India Dismisses US Offer of F-16 Jets


New sense of urgency for Canada’s CF-18 fighter replacement

Pakistan, Russia deal on MI-35 attack helicopters likely in two months

Minister says Pakistan to approach other countries if US refuses to deliver F-16 aircraft

By: APP  30-May-16

ISLAMABAD: Minister for Defence Production Rana Tanveer Hussain has said that Pakistan is in negotiations with Russia for procurement of MI-35 attack helicopters, expressing confidence that there would be significant development in two months in this regard.

“I hope we will be able to materialise this project (to buy MI-35 helicopters) in two months,” he said while talking to reporters here. He said that the JF-17 fighter aircraft were capable enough to meet defence requirements of Pakistan. Pakistan had a fleet of state-of-the-art JF-17 Thunder aircraft which carried all specifications of any advanced fighter jet, he said.

Pakistan was at top among 10 countries having JF-17 fleet, he said, adding that the country’s defence was impregnable and had the capability to meet all challenges. Commenting on the country’s defence production quality, he said that the Pakistan Ordnance Factory (POF) was producing and exporting small arms to different countries including US, Britain and Germany.

He said that the Ministry of Defence Production was working day and night to meet requirements of the armed forces, adding that a proposal had been forwarded to the quarters concerned for separate budget of the ministry. Answering a question, Tanveer said Pakistan was in contact with US for delivery of F-16 aircraft, and in case the deal was not materialised, it would approach other countries for the purpose.

To another question, the minister said a protest had been launched with US over the recent drone attack, adding that US ambassador had been called in by the Foreign Office. Both civil and military leadership expressed serious concerns over the attack, he added.



Mi-35M (Hind E): Details

US State Dept Clears FMS of F/A-18 C/D Svc & Support to Kuwait

Congress Urges Air Force to Accelerate JSTARS Recap

, Defense News11:04 a.m. EDT May 27, 2016

WASHINGTON – Despite concern that aircraft modernization will fall through the cracks in a tight budget environment, all four defense congressional committees are urging the Air Force to accelerate the effort to recapitalize its aging ground surveillance fleet.

As Congress negotiates this year’s defense policy and spending bills, all four committees have expressed concern over the continued delay of the Air Force’s planned contract award for a new Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, or JSTARS. The legacy E-8 JSTARS, a militarized Boeing 707-300 airframe produced by Northrop Grumman, provides ground and air commanders critical ground surveillance and battle management capability to support attack operations.

Despite urgency in replacing the legacy fleet, the down select for the JSTARS recap engineering, manufacturing and development, or EMD, contract has slipped to the first quarter of fiscal year 2018, the Air Force recently told Defense News. Meanwhile, initial operational capability for the new fleet, originally planned for FY22, is now optimistically projected in FY24.

The Air Force is currently conducting a study, expected to be completed in March 2017, to determine how much longer the existing E-8 JSTARS aircraft can last. But lawmakers are concerned that a prolonged acquisition of a replacement fleet could lead to a significant capability gap.

“The committee has continually expressed concern that a protracted acquisition program will result in a multiyear capabilities gap, which will leave combatant commanders without an acceptable level of ground moving target indicators and battle management command and control capability,” according to the House Armed Service’s version of the defense policy bill, which the full House approved May 18.

“The committee notes that under the most optimistic scenarios, the Department can expect a shortfall of 10 JSTARS aircraft in its fleet of 16 operational aircraft by late fiscal year 2025.”

The House version fully funds JSTARS at $128.1 million, and encourages the Air Force to develop a plan to accelerate the development and fielding of the new fleet. Lawmakers direct the Air Force to brief the committee no later than Dec. 1 on options to accelerate IOC.

The Senate Armed Service Committee’s markup of the bill, which has yet to pass the full Senate, also requested a briefing on options to accelerate JSTARS IOC, among other issues, by Dec. 1.

In a unique move, the Senate version also limits funding for JSTARS recapitalization unless the EMD contract is firm-fixed price, a contracting structure committee Chairman Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., believes is better to control costs.

“The committee believes a fixed price development and production contract structure is more appropriate for this program than a cost plus/incentive fee contract, as the program’s aim is to integrate mission systems onto a commercial derivative aircraft, similarly to the KC–46A tanker recapitalization program,” according to the legislation.

Meanwhile on the appropriations side, the House Appropriations Committee’s spending bill goes further, limiting funds for pre-award activities like radar technology maturation and risk reduction after Dec. 31, 2017. The committee also recommends the Air Force consider an increase in the number of development aircraft, and incentivize the prime contractor to accelerate delivery and IOC.

The Senate Appropriations Committee’s version of the spending bill, approved May 26, also fences some funding for JSTARS radar risk reduction, and directs the Air Force and acquisition officials to brief the congressional defense committees on plans to accelerate IOC and fielding of the new platform.

Both the Senate and House spending legislation still need to go to the floor before approval.

Three industry teams are currently on contract with the Air Force for pre-EMD JSTARS recap activities. Northrop Grumman, which builds the existing aircraft, is teamed with Gulfstream and its G550 business jet, with L-3 helping with integration. Lockheed Martin is working with Bombardier on a proposal based on the Canadian company’s Global 6000 business jet. Meanwhile, Boeing is offering a modified version of its 737-700 commercial airliner.

The Air Force has also awarded Northrop and Raytheon separate contracts to mature radar designs for the new fleet.

Original post


Raytheon Makes Radar Available for JStars Contenders

“Raytheon’s “Skynet” radar proposed for the JStars main sensor is based on a previously classified system the Navy is flying on the P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft.”

“The “sensor derivative baseline” for the JStars ground surveillance radar that Raytheon proposes is the Navy’s Advanced Aerial Sensor (AAS). Details of that electronically scanned array radar, under development by Raytheon since 2007, remain classified. However, in June the Naval Air Systems Command announced that an AAS-configured P-8A Poseidon, which is based on the Boeing 737-800 airliner, had completed its first flight on May 20. Designated APS-154, the radar will replace the APS-149 littoral surveillance radar system fitted on specially modified P-3C Orions.”

AAS-configured P-8A Poseidon testing with APS-154 radar

“Rather than siding with one industry team, Raytheon has made the radar available to all comers. On the Northrop Grumman team proposing the Gulfstream G550 business jet as a host platform, Raytheon would provide just the radar sensor “and a little BMC2 software” to control it.” Full article

See related post:

Spy plane contract to be awarded in fiscal 2018: U.S. Air Force – See details of E-8C Joint Star

Advanced Airborne Sensor flies on P-8A –  IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly

America’s Doomed China Strategy

May 26, 2016

Two developments in the past month indicate that Washington’s mixed policy of engagement and containment (or “congagement”) toward China has begun to tilt more toward containment. The first development was the visit of Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter to India in mid-April and the signing of a bilateral cooperation agreement on military logistics. The other episode is President Obama’s just-completed trip to Vietnam and the announced lifting of the long-standing arms embargo on that country. As usual, American officials insist that the marked change in U.S. policy toward Hanoi is not in any way directed against China. But such statements strain credulity, especially when viewed in the larger context of U.S. warships conducting “freedom of navigation” patrols in the South China Sea and bluntly reminding Beijing of America’s security obligations to the Philippines under a bilateral defense treaty.

The containment side of U.S. policy has gone from merely assembling some of the necessary components, to be activated at a later date if necessary (first gear), to the initial phase of activation (second gear). More emphasis is likely to be placed on China as a serious strategic competitor, if not an outright adversary. But developing any kind of a containment policy against China is almost certain to prove hopelessly difficult. Despite the sometimes inflammatory rhetoric coming from Donald Trump and some other China bashers, the bilateral economic relationship remains quite extensive and crucial. China is America’s second largest trading partner. In 2015, the United States exported $116 billion in goods to China while importing $482 billion. Disrupting that relationship would be extremely costly and painful for both countries.

That point underscores one key reason why reviving anything even faintly resembling the Cold War–era containment policy that worked against the Soviet Union is a hopeless quest. America’s economic relations with the USSR were minuscule, so there was little sacrifice on that front in taking a hardline stance against Moscow. That is clearly not the case today regarding America’s economic connections to China.

There is also the matter of assembling a reliable alliance against Beijing. Conducting a containment policy against the Soviet Union during the Cold War was feasible because (at least during the crucial formative stages) neither the United States nor its key allies had much of a political or economic relationship to lose with Moscow. The costs, therefore, of shunning Moscow were minimal. That is clearly not the case with China. Most of the East Asian countries, including close U.S. allies Japan and South Korea, already have extensive economic links with Beijing. Indeed, China is Japan’s largest trading partner, accounting for one-fifth of that country’s total trade. It would not be easy for those countries to jeopardize such stakes to support a confrontational, U.S.-led containment policy aimed at Beijing. Tokyo undoubtedly has concerns about China’s behavior in the East China Sea (and about overall Chinese ambitions), but it would still be a reluctant recruit in a hostile containment strategy.

Indeed, as time passed during the Cold War, even the containment strategy directed against the Soviet Union proved increasingly difficult for U.S. leaders. That was especially true after the early 1970s, when West Germany’s policy ofOstpolitik sought better relations with communist East Germany, and indirectly with Moscow and the rest of the Soviet bloc. As connections deepened between democratic Europe and the USSR, support for hard-line U.S. policies began to fade. That point became evident in the 1980s, when U.S. leaders attempted to persuade their European allies to reject the proposal for a natural gas pipeline from the Soviet Union to Western Europe, fearing that it would give Moscow an unhealthy degree of policy leverage. Much to Washington’s frustration, key European allies rejected the advice.

If the United States attempts to mobilize regional support for a containment policy against China, it will start out operating in an environment even less conducive than the policy environment regarding the Soviet Union in the 1980s. Washington’s courtship might be welcomed by very small countries, such as the Philippines, that are already on extremely bad terms with Beijing. Larger powers, though, are more likely to see what benefits they can entice and extract from Washington, without making firm commitments that would antagonize China and jeopardize their own important ties to that county.

There is a final reason why an overt containment policy against China would be a poor option for the United States. Several troublesome global or regional issues will be difficult to address without substantial input and cooperation from China. It is nearly impossible, for example, to imagine progress being made on the difficult and complex issue of North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs without China’s extensive involvement.

The United States needs to lower, not increase, its level of confrontation toward China. That also means restoring respect for the concept of spheres of influence. In attempting to preserve U.S. primacy in East Asia and the western Pacific, U.S. leaders are intruding into the South China Sea and other areas that logically matter far more to China than to America. Such a strategy is likely to result either in a humiliating U.S. retreat under pressure or a disastrous military collision. A containment strategy is a feeble attempt to evade that reality.

Ted Galen Carpenter is a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor at the National Interest. He is the author of ten books and more than six hundred articles on international affairs.

Original post



I would say this article is probably true as China trade with the whole world and China have invested heavily in Africa and Pakistan so that corridor is very hard for the US to shut.  The building of rail network running from China to Europe and the future network that would run through Thailand, Malaysia and into Singapore is another route……..


It may be the fact that suddenly USA have become interested in Africa and have redeployed back into Libya. The sudden generosity of providing free weapons to some African nations is also another indicator……….

US ‘Stirring up Trouble’ in South China Sea: HERE


I doubt Vietnam, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan or India for that matter would want a conflict with China. Vietnam and India share a common border with China so it is unwise to consider any conflict.  

India and the South Asian Neighbourhood: HERE

There seems to be a rush into SE Asia,  India look East as I perceive India tries to increase her influence as seen by the road linking Myanmar and Thailand soon to be opened…….


See related post:

South China Sea Controversy: Beijing To Send Nuclear Weapons To Disputed Region Amid US Military Tensions

G7 agrees need strong message on South China Sea; China says don’t ‘hype’ – Reuters

Dire US Ignorance of China’s Advanced Strategic Nuclear Submarines – By  Author of Tiananmen’s Tremendous Achievements, freelance Chinese/English translator

China isn’t the only one building islands in the South China Sea

China Building Missiles to Strike Guam

Set red line for US to avoid military clash in S.China Sea

China Deploys YJ-62 Subsonic Anti-Ship Cruise Missile To South China Sea’s Woody Island

This interactive map of China’s power in the South China Sea is a wake-up call to us all

China sends surface-to-air missiles to contested island in provocative move

Conflicting parties in the SC Sea and Naval power comparison – Non US

Chinese Submarine Fires 2 Nuclear JL-2 Missiles off American Coastline near Oregon